The royal gazette — [Charleston] S.C., 1782-02-09 00:00:00, page 1

To the Printers of the Royal Gazette.
Gentlemen,.
THE inhabitants of the British Colonies in North-America
having laid claim, in a very early period of their prelent
contest with the Mother Country, to the Title and Rights of an
Independent People, it was naturally expected that they would
also have regulated their publick conduct by the laws oi that
Grand Society of Nation s into which they were so anxious
ly desirous of being admitted. Nor did this expectation appear
the less reasonable, when the mode of carrying on the war against
them, which Great-Britain had adopted, was examined ; tnat
being invariably the fame, as if her armies were invading the
territories of a foreign and universally acknowledged indtfeen
dent nation, not a part of her own dominions, who^ inhabi
tants, though indebted to her foftering care and protection for
every advantage they poffefled, now ungratefully revolted from
her lawful authority.' But, have events fully juftified the pro
priety of relying thus far on the honour of Rebels ? Have they,
in every instance and situation, ftri&ly adhered to those maxims
of warfare, which haye been established by the uniform prac
tice of civilized nations ? Have they, in their connexions with
the British Army, which the events of the war gave rife to,
conftantly.regarded a military parole as binding, or a civil oath
as sacred, when interest or even some trivial convenience was
to be given up by observing them ? And mighZ it not have been
forefeen, that a set of people, whom neither gratitude nor
allegiance could bind, would disregard every lesser obligation .
An impartial history of the whole war would furnifh the
most fatisfaftory answers which can be given to these interesting
questions. I mean not, however, to attempt it. 'I he under
taking is too considerable for one of my llender abilities, and
of too extensive a nature to come within the limits of a letter in
anewfpaper. But I trust that feme person will hereafter be
found possessing fufficient capacity and information for this ne
ce'ffary talk, that the World, hitherto grossly deceived with
nfpect to every thing that relates to Am rica, may be made
acquainted with the ti ue cause of Britain's being folongfoijed
in her attempts to reduce her revolted commies. Then it will
be known, that frequent opportunities h^e been given up of
putting an immediate end to the rebellion, because the mea
sures that led to that definable objeCt were thoughtfeOete ; and
that the only returns which have been nr.de by the Americans
for such lenity, are instances without number of the most fla
grant perfidy and basest treachery.
Leaving then this ample harvest of historical glory to be ga
thered by some more fortunate person, I Shaft content myfelf,
in this letter, with examining how far the actions of my coun
trymen in particular, have been agreeable to, the universally
received notions of integrity and honour. In discussing this
fubjeft, I Shall allow them the very ground they have been
fo'long labouring to get poffeffiori of; I Shall suppose them for
a moment, felly inverted .with the rights and privileges of a
Sovereign People; and yet, I flatter myfelf I Shall be able to
demonstrate, that their conduct, if judged of by the Standard
ofthe Law of Nations, has begi base and infamous. To do
this, I have only to exhibit a levies of unadorned fads, be
'ginning with the invasion of this Province, in the year 1780.
Immediately after the arrival of the British Army, a pro
clamation was issued, to inform the inhabitants, that if they
remained peaceably at their homes, no injury Should be offered
to them, either in their persons of properties. Their, assistance
was not demanded in reducing this garrison, or in forwarding
aty other military operation; and this was evidently done
with the view of exposing no one to the resentment of his coun
trymen, Should the siege have proved unfuccefsful. By means
of its surrender some time after, and the success which every
where attended the exertions of the Armyin the country, the
whole Province became compleatly reduced, and there was
scarcely a person in it, Who was.hot cithcra prisoner, or a
volunteer with the British Troops. In this situation of affairs,
no retrofped was ever had to' the past behaviour of the firft
promoters and abettors of rebellion. No punishment was ever
inflicted, or even threatened, except against those who had been
principally concerned in depriving , many persons of life, whose
only crime was an inviolable attachment to the interests of their
Sovereign. The Militia Prisoners were Offered to remain at
their own bodies, and to follow th-ir usual occupations. Such
of them as were taken in the country, and who, from the cir-
Otmftahce of not being concerned in the defence of this place,
were considered in general as less attached to the cause of
rebellion, were in a short time released from their paroles, and
^°* of ,them immediately, and with but little ceremony, re
admitted to the enjoyment of the privileges of a British fub
)«h Others, however, of a less innocent character, and those
who were comprehended in the capitulation of Charleftown,
were forced, in order to obtain the fame end, to go through
filch a variety of distressing forms to a man of spirit, as were
thought would effectually prevent any person from making ap
/plication who did not bDcerely delire to return to his allegi
ance. It was h^ld to be a matter of grace and favour for one
who had been a Rebel, to be admitted to a participation of the
privileges of a constitution, long the glory of Britain, and the
envy of the World. Such therefore as were desirous of being
included in the number of her fubieCts, firft presented their
humble petitions to the commanding officer of this garrison,
excelling their detestation of the former measures, and their
ardent wishes again to enjoy the benefits of the British Confti
-4 tution, which they were now determined to support at the
(expence ot their lives and fortunes. This was the general pur
- Iport oi the petitions, specimens of which, faithfully copied from
I the originals in the registry of the Board of Police, I shall fub
^°, to this letter. It did not however entirely depend on the
id of petitioning to become a fubje&, The petitions, I believe,
Messrs. WELLS & SON,
Gentlemen,
THE Commandant has directed me to fignify to you, his.
high approbation of a Letter, which appeared in your Gazette
of the 9th instant, Signed 6 ‘ A Carolina Loyalist," both,
as it contains a true Representation of the Conduct of many of
the Inhabitants of this Province, since the Capitulation of
Charleftown, and, as it points out the Treatment which those
tieferve, who have violated their Paroles, Oaths, and Decla
rations of Allegiance to the Britify Government; and to request
you will continue the fame in your Paper, for a Fortnight from
this Date, in Order to render the Contents thereof more ge
nerally known. Jam, Gentlemen, your molt obedient Servant,,
February 13th, 1782'. C. FRASER, lown-Major.
From SATURDAY, February 9,
ROYAL
Vol. It
SOUTH-CAROLINA: Printed by R. WELLS & SON, Printers to the King's Most Excellent Majesty.
of every one, were referred by the Commandant either to the
consideration of the Board of Police, or of a number of pri
vate gentlemen of known integrity and loyalty; and on their
determination the fate of the applications rested. Many of
them were readily granted; others with great difficulty,
after much interest being employed, and vouchers brought for
the future behaviour of those who presented them ; and, some
tew were altogether rejected. In the last place, each person,
before he received a certificate of his being a fubje&, was
obliged to Sign a declaration of allegiance, in the presence of
an Intendant of the Police. The form ofthe declaration com
monly used, I Shall annex to the copies ofthe petitions.
tfoThe whole inhabitants were in this, manner divided into two
'c^ra^Qc one of Prisoners on Parole, and the other of Volun
tary SutyeCts. Any person therefore, acquainted with the duties
which are performed in Europe by each of these descriptions
of men, would havq thought, that as there was now no military
force within the Province opposed to the British Government,
nothing could Shake it but a formidable army invading it from,
the other Colonies in rebellion. But conclusions drawn from
the,general practice of European nations, will Seldom hold
good when applied to the Virtuous Sons of America. Their
favourite maxim has always been, that the end justifies the
means. What therefore could be blame-worthy, which in any
degree contributed to the gaining of that pious and laudable
object, the Independency of their Country ? Had net Congress
already declared it to be as fixed as Fate, and wouldit not have
been impious ,to disregard the intentions of Providence, Fo
clearly communicated to this new band of prophets ? Such may
be the reasoning of an American ; and on the justice of it 1 leave
the World to decides The fact is however, that no hostile
army hhs ever entered this Province since its conquest, equal,
even in numbers, to the British Forces in it, and yet, from
the time of Gates's appearing upon our frontiers to this period,
such numbers, both of Prisoners on Parole and New Subjects,
have gone off to the Rebels, that they now constitute by far
the greater number ofthe men who are in arms in this country
against the British Government*.
What person is there, difintcrefted in the event of the war,
and poffefling the generous fadings which do honour to hu
manity, that will not exc aim on reading this narrative, If
these things be true, no punishments are too Severe for such
mongers of ingratitude and perfidy ? If the authenticity of the
facts related, be made the tch of the propriety of punishment in
general, I appeal to the inhabitants of this place, and demand
in what point I have erred? But with refpett to the degree of
punishment, I dare not presume to give any opinion of my
own. I leave it to be determined by the Law of Reason and ot
Nations. Let us therefore enquire into what Reason dictates,
and what Nations do, respecting these 'matters. —And first,
with regard to a breach of a military parole.
In the rudest dates of society, when a whole nation compri
ses but a few individuals, wars are commonly entered into from
motives of peifonal revenge. The combatants fight with no
intention but that of destroying their enemies. The few pri
soners therefore that may be taken by each party, are either
immediately killed, or are referred for death by torture. When
manners somewhat refine, and States, from conquest or other
circumstances, have become more considerable, war is fre
quently begun from views of national interest, or ambition.
The soldier has no private resentment to gratify ; if the battle
is won, he rightly conceives he has done his duty. He
obeys the voice of Humanity, which calls on him not need
lessly to destroy the lives of his fellow creatures; but he
at the fame time thinks himfelf fully intitled to the perpetual
Services of the person whom he has thus saved from death.
The prisoner therefore becomes a Slave. This was the general
practice of those nations of antiquity, the Greeks and Romans,
whom we regard as highly polished and civilized. In modern
Europe, a prisoner was also, for a considerable time, so far
accounted the property ofthe captor, that a price was set on his
liberty, and that not fixed by any general rule; nor in any pro
portion to his rank in the army, but as great as it was thought
he could possibly give. As in all wars, however, each of the
contending parties muff fuller, though perhaps not equally,
it at length became customary for nations to ute their prisoners
with tenderness and humanity, in expectation that their coun
trymen would receive the like treatment when in captivity, and
also to eftabliSh a general rule for the mutual exchange ofthe pri
soners each party had made. Though this practice appears ex
ceedingly natural to us, it was either so little known to the An
cients, or so little used by them, that in all their history we read
of only one cartel. The last refinement on the treatment of
prisoners, was the invention of paroles; a circumstance that
affords the most honourable testimony that can be given, of the
superior integrity and good faith of the Moderns, with whom it
has been found, that a Simple promise affords greater security,
than the most rigid confinement.
I have been thus particular in marking the different modes of
treating prisoners, in the different stales of society, in order
to Shew, that what is now used, is neither commanded by ttie
Law of Nature, which authorizes the putting to death of out
enemies, by every fair means, wherever we can find them ; nor
by what is generally accounted the Law of Nations, which
veftsin the captor an absolute property in his prifriner. A pa
role therefore can never be demanded as a matter of right,
but may be given or not, agreeably to the opinion which is
entertained of the integrity of the prisoner. If this confidence
be found to have been in any instance misplaced, and what was
meant as a humane indulgence, be converted into a Source of
injury, the more dangerous as unexpected and unguarded a
gainst, Reason dictates, that the offender, be treated agree
ably to the fewereft rights of war, which, as I have said
before, authorize the death of all persons taken in battle.
Custom and consent of nations support this conclusion; partly
for the fame reason, and partly with a view of deterring others
from attempting to defifoy, as far as their Examples can have
influence, that confidence in the honour of Mankind, on which
this most generous and benevolent custom is founded. Such
therefore is the treatment those persons in this country, who
have broken their paroles to the Britiih Army, have aright, by
the Law of Reason and Nations to expert.
* The World ^vill fcartely believe, that the Legislature of any
people, the leaf civilized, could make it criminal in their fabjefts
to adhere to a military parole. This, however, has been done by the
Rebel Assembly of North-Carolina ; and Mr. Burke, their Governour,
coho vsas lately brought hither a prisoner, has Jhevon, by violating
his parole, how far bo intends to put that law into execution.
§#^^t#l.
s<^w^^
TH^
to WEDNESDAY, February 13, 1782.
r A 7ETTF
Little need be said concerning the ppnifnment which those
deserve, who have violated their oaths, or declarations of alle
giance. We have only to appeal to the practice of the Arne-"
ricahs themselves, and we will find, that tranfgremons of fh'at
nature, are by them always puniffied with death. Scarcely
a newspaper is btouglit to us from the northern provinces,
which does not contain an account of the publick execution
°f f° m e person accused of holding correfpondepce }vith the
British army, or of being attached to its interests. Many.in f
deed have been deprived of life on bare suspicion, anil that
too by the regular forms of their courts of law. They surely
therefore cannot deny us a right, which they exercise with
Such freedom themfclres, except perhaps on this plea, tbat a$
protection arid allegiance are reciprocal, the British Govern
ment could have no pretensions to the allegiance of the inha
bitants of the country, when, by withdrawing th^ troops,
they ceased to give them protection. Not to mention the ab
surd confcquences this doctrine would lead to,jf carried to its
fulleft extent, which would even hate juftified the inhabitants
of the city of London, in erecting thcmfelves jnto a state, in
dependent of the Empire of Great-Britain, when, during the
late riots, the protection of Government was with-held from
them during the Space of three days; it will be proper, on
this head, to demand, of what is the protection of Govern
inent corapofed ? Is it not of the united efforts of all the indi
viduals, directed by the supreme power of the date, as occa
sions may demand ? I<it not therefore atajcahli to . the order,
of things, that the fubjeCts Should lend their assistance to Go
vernment, before Government is jn a situation to afford this
protection ? But did' the New Subjects of Britain.in this gountry
afford that support to its government, /which they solemnly
bound themselves to do? Did they even remain in.a State of
neutrality ? Did not, on the contrary, many of them join the
Rebels, before the Troops were withdrawn from the country ?
And was not this the principal caufe' of, thft even? taking
place ?—lf these questions be gnfwered in the affirmative, and.
I think no one can be absurd enough to do otnerwife, most of.
the revolted fubjeds' may find, that the dale excuft; derived
from the doctrine of the reciprocality of allegiance ' and pro
tection, will no longer screen them from the vengeance of U
injured and insulted Government.
The importance of the fubjeCts I have treated, will form the
best excuse I can offer for my feeble attempts to do them
justice. The undertaking seemed to me to belfighly neceflary,
as many persons in this country are so ignorant ofthe cuftdms
and rights of nations, as to fappofe, that though they f&dve
violated their military paroles, or their oaths and declarations
of allegiance, they will ffi:l be considered as prisoners of war.
Should they be taken in arms against the British Government.
Could I awaken but one of my countrymen to a due sense of
the crimes he' may have unwittingly, or from tvil counsel,
committed, it would be to me a fodrcqof never-ceasing plea
sure and delight. But with respect to those who hav^.^usu
deluded a people, and who cannot be fuppofedignorant of
what they violate by system. and rule, I am bold enough to fay<
That forgiveness would be a crime, and mercy but an
other name for injustice. ? ..
A CAROLINA LOYALIST.
CbarleJlown, February 4th, ij%%. ,
COPIES of PETITIONS.
To NISBET BALFOUR, Colonel of bis Majesty's twenty*
Third Regiment, and Commandant of Cburlefl&n.
The humble PETITION of Jonathan Lawrence.
SHEWETH,:'.
THAT Since the reduction of Charleflown your Petitioner,
has been on parole.
That your petitioner is now desirous of returning to his
allegiance, and to be confideredtas a peaceable futject and in--
habitant, of Charleftown.
Your petitioner is therefore humbly constrained to implore
your Honour will take his cafejuto Qnfideration, admit hint
as a fubjedt, and indulge him with the privileges enjoyed by
such ; and your petitioner, as in duty-bound, will ever pray.
(Signed) : JONn. LAWRENCE.^
Charleflown, June astb, 1781. :
SOUTH-CAROLINA.
To the Honourable Lieut. Col. NISBET BALFOUR, of EQ.
Majfly's Forces, and Coplandant of Charlflown.f.
The humble PETITION of Richard Ellis 6
SHEWETH,
THAT when the inhabitants of Charleflown were Signing
an address to the Commanders iri Chief, congratulating
them on their success, and manifesting a desire of returning to
their allegiance, from which they had been deluded by the'
artifices and ambitious deigns of a few men, who endeavoured
to aggrandize themselves on the ruins, of their country, your
petitioner took that early opportunity of Shewing his attach
ment to his most gracious Sovereign, by likewise Signing ' the
said address.-
That your petitioner thought himfelf thereby entitled to the
rights arid privileges of a British fiibje&, and when he called,
a few days ago to receive his protection, was much surprised
to find that his name was not inrollcd among those of the
other faithful fubjedts.
Your petitioner apprehends, that this mistake was entirely
owing to his being absent from town, at the time - when an
amendment was proposed to the said address; and which your'
petitioner had not an opportunity of Signing, as he lived in
the country.
Your petitioner therefore humbly prays your Honour will
allow him to become a fubjeCtto his' most gracious Sovereign/
whom he will ever after serve with the most inviolable fidelity,
and whose government he will always maintain and defend
with his life and fortune. And your petitioner will priy.
(Signed) RICHu. ELLIS.
12tb October, 1780. ~
SOUTH-CAROLINA. .
To Lieut. Col. NISBET BALFOUR, Commo^EE^t
Cbarlefran,kfc. &^.
The Humble PETITION of James Smiths '
THAT your peffifyfe'r dreading ¥he variety of ranguihar,'
laws, enacted during the late feene of tyranny and usur
pation, against those whp rtfufed, from a sense of their duty
Numb, rod.