Biographical Sketch of Thomas Fletchall by E. Alfred Jones of London, England

An excellent biographical sketch of Thomas Fletchall was published in The Ohio State University Bulletin, Volume XXVI, Number 4, October 30, 1921, pages 66-72, entitled The Journal of Alexander Chesney, a South Carolina Loyalist in the Revolution and After, Edited by E. Alfred Jones of London England, with an Introduction by Professor Wilbur H. Siebert.  Professor Wilbur Henry Siebert describes Mr. Jones in the following words:

It is scarcely necessary to speak of the special qualifications of Mr. E. Alfred Jones for the task of editing The Journal of Alexander Chesney, since the admirable results of his labors are manifest in this volume. The present writer can not, however, deny himself the pleasure of saying that Mr. Jones has long been familiar with the abundant materials relating to the American loyalists that are to be found in the Public Record Office, the British Museum, and other collections in London. Nor can he forbear to add that the Editor has greatly increased the value of this volume by his copious annotations, many of which contain information not easily available and some, information not accessible at all in print. Mr. Jones found Chesney's Journal in the British Museum (Additional MSS., 32627).

Sketch of Thomas Fletchall

Colonel Thomas Fletchall was probably born in South Carolina, where he was the owner of a large plantation in the district of Ninety-Six. He was already a justice of the peace and a coroner when in the year 1769 he accepted the appointment of colonel of a militia regiment of over 2,000 men, from the governor, Lord Charles Greville Montagu.

Sabine in his Loyalists of the American Revolution states that Colonel Fletchall was of much consideration in the Colony before the war and that he was regarded as undecided in his political views, though the Whig party made him a member of an important com­mittee, raised to carry out the views of the Continental Congress (Moultrie, Memoirs, Vol. I.). Colonel Fletchall, however, describes himself as a loyalist from the outbreak of the Revolutionary troubles in South Carolina, a description which is confirmed by his letter of 19 July 1775, to Lord William Campbell, the governor, assuring him of the loyalty of about 4000 men in his district. In this letter Colonel Fletchall informs the governor of the seizure of Fort Charlotte on the Savannah river by the “rebels,” as he calls them, Major James Mayson, Captain John Caldwell and others, and of the subsequent capture of the leaders by the loyalists. In this same letter he suggests that the frontiers should be protected from in­cursions not only from the “rebels” but also from the Indians, thus anticipating William Henry Drayton's alleged attempt to secure the services of the Cherokee Indians for the Revolutionary party. This letter brought forth a reply, 1 August following, expressing the governor's appreciation of the capture of the rebels at Fort Charlotte, authorizing Fletchall to fortify that fort by militia and requesting him to avoid giving offence to the in­habitants of his district and generally to preserve peace (Hist. MSS. Comm., Report on the MSS. of the Earl of Dartmouth, Vol. II, p. 355). The seizure of Fort Charlotte by order of the Council of Safety, on 12 July 1775, was the first overt act in the Revolutionary war in South Carolina. An important omission from Colonel Fletchall's letter was that one of the officers who had participated in this seizure was Captain Moses Kirkland, who was soon to turn over to the loyalist side. While alluding in this letter to the capture of Major Mayson and others, who had proceeded with the powder and stores from Fort Charlotte to Ninety-Six Court House, he concealed the fact that Kirkland, who is stated to have had an old grudge against Mayson, had now joined Colonel Fletchall and had disclosed a scheme for capturing Mayson and the stores. Fletchall, on the authority of an enemy (Drayton, Memoirs, Vol. I, pp. 321-3) is said to have declined to appear publicly as a supporter of Kirkland's scheme, but those more active loyalists, Robert and Patrick Cunningham and Joseph Robinson, joined by Major Terry (a deserter from the Revolutionary party who afterwards recanted and became animated in the American cause, rode off with 200 mounted men to Ninety-Six. Here they took Major Mayson prisoner on 17 July and committed him to jail on a charge of robbing the king's fort, but after some hours confinement admitted him to bail.

Colonel Thomas Fletchall claims, in support of his loyalty, to have impeded with the help of Robert Cunningham and Joseph Robinson, the raising of the levies of American horse in the backcountry of South Carolina and to have influenced many waverers against signing the association of the Revolutionary party. The articles of this association were read, 13 July 1775, by Major Terry at Fletchall's plantation to the men of his regiment by his orders, but not one would sign it, a decision of which he approved. His men then agreed to sign an association of their own, expressing loyalty to the king, which had been drawn up by Major Joseph Robinson, and which was generally signed from Broad to Savannah Rivers. (Drayton, Memoirs, Vol. 1, p. 312; Hist. Mss. Comm. Report on the MSS. of the Earl of Dartmouth, Vol. II, pp. 341, 351.)

At this psychological moment Lord William Campbell, the governor, had he been a man of greater initiative and of a more adventurous spirit, would have seized the opportunity to support Colonel Fletchall and the loyalists, by his personal presence among them. The exercise of his high position and influence would have assured the raising of a strong armed force, which he could have employed in what would probably have been the overthrow of the proceedings of the Provincial Congress. (E. McCrady, The Hist. of South Carolina in the Revolution, 1775-1780, pp. 38-39).

Colonel Thomas Fletchall came into conflict with two ardent spirits of the Revolutionary party on 17 August, 1775, in the persons of William Henry Drayton and Rev. William Tennent, the Congregational minister and member of the committee of the Provincial Congress, who in private conversation with him for nearly three hours, humored him, laughed with him, remonstrated and entreated him to join his country, America, against the mother coun­try, without shaking his loyalty in the slightest. The entreaties of Drayton and Tennent were met by this influential loyalist with the answer that he “would never take up arms against his King or his countrymen and that the proceedings of the Congress at Phila­delphia were impolitic, disrespectful and irritating to the King.” (Ibid., pp. 44-46; Force, American Archives, Series. IV, Vol. II, pp. 214-2.17.)

Drayton, having failed to win Fletchall over to his side, pro­ceeded to march out in the following month at the head of about 400 mounted men and 800 foot to disarm the loyalists of Ninety-Six district, especially those in Fletchall's regiment. Colonel Fletchall met this threat by ordering out his regiment and marching to meet Drayton, who on the 11th had written somewhat confidently to the Council of Safety that Colonel Fletchall, Colonel Thomas Brown, and Captain Robert Cunningham were still endeavoring to assem­ble men, but had no force embodied, and assuring the Council of the declining political influence of these three prominent loyalists and of the terrified state of their adherents, adding that they had no intention to fight in view of the expected help promised them by the governor. (Drayton, Memoirs, Vol. 1, p. 388.) Drayton, however, in his letter of the 17 September, in a less confident tone, esti­mates Fletchall’s force at over 1200, while his own barely reached 1000, which is 200 less than Fletchall's figure for Drayton's force. In this letter Drayton alleges that while his own men were anxious to fight, he wished to avoid bloodshed, insinuating that the loyalists would not hold long together because of their lack of discipline and of supplies. (Ibid., p. 389.) A different version comes from a loyal­ist source, David Fanning, who maintains that the “rebels,” finding themselves not strong enough for an attack, sent an express to

Fletchall, inviting him to treat with them. (Colonel David Fanning, “Narrative,” ed. by A. W. Savary, Canadian Magazine, 1908.) This version is supported by Fletchall's unpublished memorial, in which he says that on advancing within six miles of Drayton's camp, de­termined to support Government, Drayton offered terms of accommodation. (A.O. 12/52, fos. 127-141.) A treaty was now made by which hostilities between the two parties should be avoided, Fletchall stating that each party agreed to return home and “remain peaceable.” This treaty was signed, 16 September 1775, by Dray­ton of the one part and by Fletchall, Captains John Ford, Evan McLaurin, Thomas Greer, and Benjamin Wofford of the other part. (Drayton, Memoirs, Vol. I., pp. 399-403; Force, American Archives, Series IV. Vol. 3, pp. 720-1.)

Captain (afterwards Brigadier-General) Robert Cunningham declined in his letter of 6 October to Drayton, in the most vigorous terms to be bound by this treaty, which he characterized as false and disgraceful and as having been devised to take advantage of men “half scared out of their senses at the sight of liberty caps and sound of cannon” (Force, American Archives, Series IV, Vol. 3, p. 755). Cunningham's repudiation of a treaty, made in his opinion without authority, and his determination not to disband his men, was supported by other stalwart loyalists. (McCrady, The Hist. of South Carolina in the Revolution, 1775.1780, pp. 51-52.)

Thomas Fletchall carried out the terms of the treaty both in the letter and the spirit and forthwith disbanded his regi­ment, while Drayton and his followers tacitly ignored it. To Fletchall's chagrin, information reached him in November, within a few weeks of making the treaty, that the “rebels” had been re­armed. He instantly embodied his regiment on the 17th and ordered an attack to be made on the fort of Ninety-Six. Meanwhile, Cap­tain Robert Cunningham was arrested by a party disguised as In­dians, under orders from Major Andrew Williamson upon an affi­davit of Captain John Caldwell, charging him with sedition, and was committed to Charleston jail, 1 November. As an uncompromising loyalist, Cunningham did not deny the use of the seditious words, but though he did not consider himself bound by the Fletchall-Drayton treaty, he had since behaved himself as peaceably as any man. He had, however, retained his political opinions, though he had not expressed them unless asked to do so. (McCrady, ibid., p. 86).

Colonel Fletchall's militia force, numbering 2400, now besieged the fort, in accordance with orders mentioned above. The com­mand of the loyalists had been given to Major Joseph Robinson because Fletchall, who was too heavy in weight for active service (Fanning, "Narrative"), while the defenders to the number of 562 were com­manded by Majors Andrew Williamson and James Mayson. On the second day of the siege, which lasted from the 18th to the 21st of November, the loyalists, represented by Majors Joseph Robinson and Evan McLaurin and Captain Patrick Cunningham, had a con­ference with Major Mayson and Captain Bowie regarding the loyalists’ demand for the surrender of Williamson and his force. While Williamson was considering this demand, two of his men are said to have been seized and the attempt to rescue them brought about the first bloodshed of the revolutionary war. On the 20th, however, the ammunition of both sides was almost exhausted and by agreement hostilities ceased for twenty days (Drayton, Memoirs, Vol. II, pp. 117-122; Force, American Archives, Series IV, Vol. 3, p. 1606; Vol. 4, p. 216), while the messengers of each party were allowed to proceed to Charleston to inform the governor and the Council of Safety of the terms of the treaty.  Major Robinson's loyalist force was allowed to return home. The signatories to this treaty were Majors Andrew Williamson, James Mayson, and Joseph Robinson, Captains Patrick Cunningham, Richard Pearis, Joseph Pickens, and John Bowie. (A. S. Salley, Jr., Hist. of Orangeburg County, 1898, pp. 308-312.)

Thus ended the inglorious siege and conflict of Ninety-Six, a conflict largely brought on by the fear of the loyalists that the Indians were about to attack them at the instigation of the Americans. (McCrady, The Hist. of South Carolina in the Revolution, 1775-1780, pp. 90-93.) The loyalists were without a capable leader. Robinson, the nominal commander, appears to have been ignored and the virtual command devolved upon Pearis, who declared his opposition to making the treaty, though it bears his signature.

For the second time the Revolutionary party violated a solemn treaty by the refusal of Colonel Richard Richardson and his army to be bound by it, despite the stipulation of Majors Williamson and Mayson that any reinforcements which might arrive should regard the treaty as binding equally upon them. Richardson, under the government presided over by Drayton, disregarded the treaty and marched upon the loyalists, who on the faith of this same solemn covenant had been disbanded. Colonel Fletchall, despite the suspicion of his secret encouragement of further military activity by the loyalists, was scrupulously observing the treaty, and to his astonishment and mortification, he was taken prisoner, 12 December with other loyalists of the “first magnitude,” including Captains Richard Pearis, Jacob Fry, and George Shuberg, who were sent Charleston four days later. (McCrady, ibid., pp. 89-96; Salley, ibid., p. 323). Drayton, in commenting on the capture of these loyalists, avoids any reference to the violation of the treaty and stigmatizes Fletchall's capture as dishonorable to his military talents, concealing the fact that Fletchall had returned to his plantation and discharged his force, in agreement with the spirit of the treaty, while Colonel Richardson now had an army of about 3000 men. (Drayton, ibid., Vol. II, p. 129.) Colonel Thomas Fletchall's capture was accomplished at his own house, which was surrounded by 400 mounted men detached from Richardson's main body. He was sent as a prisoner to Charleston and there kept in close con­finement until 10 July 1776, when he appears to have set forth for his plantation which had in the meantime been plundered and ruined. Nothing more is recorded of any further military service by Colonel Fletchall. The corpulence for which he was conspicu­ous as well as his age, may have been a deterrent factor. In July 1780, he was visited at his old home by the well-known loyalist, Lieutenant Anthony Allaire, who records in his Diary his interesting examination of the Fletchall mill, a curiosity such as he had never seen before. ("Diary," in Draper's King's Mountain and its Heroes). The worthy colonel was not allowed to remain at home in tranquility, for on 10 October in the same year he was obliged to escape, with his wife, Leah, and five children, from threatened violence and to seek sanctuary at Charleston, then in possession of the British. Here they remained until 1 December, when at the age of 62 he left South Carolina for ever, accompanied by his wife, two sons and two daughters, in the transport, Milford (John May, mas­ter), for the West Indies, where he settled on the land of Ralph Montagu in the parish of St. James in Cornwall county, Jamaica. Here also settled two other loyalist refugees from South Carolina, namely, Colonel Thomas Edgehill and Lieutenant-Colonel James Vernon. Mrs. Fletchall's sister, Anne Brown, was the second wife of Colonel Ambrose Mills, of North Carolina.

A long list of the debtors of Colonel Thomas Fletchall in South Carolina and a list of the grants of land made to him there are in the Public Record Office. (A. 0. 13/128).

In July 1787, Colonel Fletchall was proposing to make the voyage to England to prosecute his claim on the British Government for compensation for the loss of his property in South Carolina, but was prevented by illness from leaving Jamaica. His claim of £2,181 was met by a grant of £1,400 (A. O. 12/109). Colonel Fletchall died in 1789, apparently in Jamaica, leaving a widow Leah. Joseph Fletchall, a planter, of St. James's parish, Jamaica, who had lived from infancy in the district of Ninety-Six in South Carolina, was probably his son. (A. O. 12/52, fos. 127-141; A. O. 13/128; South Carolina Hist. and Gen. Mag., Vol. XVIII, pp. 44-51).

Transcript of the Official Claim Submitted by Thomas Fletchall

The following record was produced from a microfilm copy reviewed at the South Carolina State Archives in Columbia SC, entitled American Loyalists Transcripts, Volume 57, pages 223-239.

To the Commissioners appointed by Act of Parliament for Inquiring into the Losses and Services of the American Loyalists:

The Memorial of Thomas Fletchall of Jamaica, formerly of 96 District, South Carolina sheweth that he was appointed in the said District of Ninety-Six between Broad and Saludy Rivers consisting of upwards of 2,000 men by Commission from Lord Charles Grenville Montague, Governor of South Carolina in the year 1769 and continued in the said Commission under his successor Lord William Campbell.

That in June or July 1775 he received Orders from Lord William Campbell to hold himself and his regiment in readiness to support any disturbances offered to Government with instructions to apply to Mr. Alexander Cameron then Superintendent to the Creek and Cherokee Indians for assistance in case it was required.

That in the Month of September 1775 William Henry Drayton collected a body of about 400 light Horse and 800 foot, with intent as was given out, to disarm the Loyalists of 96 generally, but particularly those of the Regiment under the command of the Memorialist, whereon the Memorialist immediately ordered his Regiment under Arms and marched with about 1500 Men to meet and oppose Drayton’s party.  That Drayton finding the Memorialist advanced within six miles of his camp and determined to support Government offered terms of accommodation and each party agreed to return home and remain peaceable.

That about the 14^th or 15^th of November following, the Memorialist again embodied his Regiment on being informed that the discontented party were arming and had raised a fort at Ninety-Six mounted with swivel guns which he ordered to be attacked and taken,  And it was effected the 17^th of the same month with the loss of some Men killed and several wounded on each side.

That on the 9^th of December following, his House was surrounded by about 400 Horse, who took him prisoner and sent him to Charles Town Gaol, where the Memorialist was detained in confinement until the 10^th July 1776.

That on the 10^th October 1780, the Memorialist was obliged to make his escape from his Home and go to Charles Town for refuge, with his wife, 5 children and 14 slaves; where he continued at a great expense until the 1^st December 1782, when he embarked with his Family on board the ship Milford, John May Master, a transport provided by the Government for Jamaica, where they arrived in company with the rest of the Fleet about the 15^th of January 1783.

That he lost by adhering to Government the following properties, viz.

Besides a very great expense which the Memorialist has been at since he left his House and Home until his Settlement in Jamaica.

/S/ Thomas Fletchall, Jamaica Island

Thomas Fletchall of the Parish of St. James in the Island aforesaid, Planter, being duly sworn, Deposeth and saith that the several circumstances set forth in the foregoing Memorial respecting his confinement and Loss on account of his attachment to the British Government are true, and that the Value set on the several Articles that he has lost, is rather under than overrated.  This Deponent further saith that he is upwards of 62 years old and being very corpulent (upwards of 280 weight) is very unwieldy and inactive and therefore unable to work.  The Deponent further saith that he is not now possessed of any property except 4 grown slaves and 3 children slaves with whom he finds great difficulty to provide for, a wife now advanced in years, and 2 sons and 2 daughters who are unable at present to provide for themselves and therefore cannot undertake a Voyage to attend the Honorable Commissioners appointed to review and examine the Claims of American Loyalists without considerable danger of his life and probable ruin to his distressed family.  His personal attention is absolutely required to a Rented plantation so as to render it sufficiently productive to enable him to pay the Rent and maintain his family.  This Deponent further saith that he had a very good title in Fee Simple to all the Real or Landed property mentioned in his Annexed Memorial at the time he was possessed of it, and that it was free of all Charges and encumbrances without any suit or disposition being depending for any part of the said property, or subject to any Sale, Mortgage or Debt whatsoever.  And this Deponent further saith that he has no prospect of now or hereafter receiving or repossessing or deriving any benefit or advantage whatsoever, directly or indirectly, by himself or through any other person or persons, from any part of his property so lost; he’s been informed & verily believes he was particularly proscribed by the Legislature of the State of South Carolina and all his property confiscated and sold, but this Deponent does not know to whom or for what amount. And lastly this Deponent further says that he was [not] indebted at the commencement of or during the late unhappy dissentions in America to any person or persons resident of or belonging to the late Colonies (now States) of North America in any sum or sums whatever.

/S/  Thomas Fletchall

Sworn before me this 16^th day of July 1787.

/S/  J. Palmer (Seal)

15 April 1788 – Evidence on the Foregoing Memorial of Thomas Fletchall:

William Vaughan Sworn.

Memorial and Affidavit of the Claimant read.

Mr. Vaughan produces a power of Attorney to him from the Claimant, dated 28 November 1783.

Certificates to loyalty from:

Colonel Balfour

J. Burke, Secretary to the Commission

C. Fraser, Town Mayor

J. Morrison

            Letter from Governor Bull to the Lords of the Treasury, dated 27^th November 1784 – says Claimant is now a resident in Jamaica.

            Mr. Vaughan says he is totally unacquainted with the property mentioned in the Schedule but refers to the Affidavits of Colonel Thomas Edghill and Mr. William Gist, viz.

I Thomas Edghill, Colonel of the South Carolina Militia during the late War, being duly sworn before us the Commissioners of American Claims depose that he has been for many years personally and well acquainted with Colonel Thomas Fletchall by living near him at the District of Ninety-Six, That he was an active Magistrate, Coroner for the country and a Colonel in the South Carolina Militia and had great weight in the District.  That he was firmly attached to the British Government and at different times took a very active part in the late War, this deponent serving with him in the said Corps.  That Col Thomas Fletchall was taken Prisoner and sent to Charles Town Jail where he remained some months.  After the reduction of that town made further vigorous in behalf of the British Government.

This Deponent adds further that Col Fletchall was possessed of large tracts of Land in South Carolina as well as other property and verily believes that his Memorial and Schedule of his Losses as delivered unto the Commissioners is a fair statement and the Valuation greatly within Bounds.

This Deponent recollects particularly that Col Thomas Fletchall was possessed of 500 acres of land at Sandy River, 250 acres at Fairforest and a Grist Mill, 100 acres of Land at Bush River which were all improved good lands and fairly worth more than valued in the Schedule.

That he was also possessed of some Negroes and particularly a very valuable one, a Sawyer, among others lost in consequence of the War, who was killed and in this Deponent’s opinion would have fairly sold for £100.  That Col Thomas Fletchall was also possessed of a large stock of Cattle, Hogs & his house was well furnished, and that the greatest part of his property must have been lost by his being driven from his settlements and his Country.

This Deponent further represents that he embarked in the same ship from Charles Town with Col Thomas Fletchall for Jamaica in December 1782, who took with him his wife, children and 4 Negroes that Col Fletchall is aged about 62 or 63, is very corpulent, infirm and utterly incapable from his health, bodily strength and circumstances of undertaking or paying the expenses of a voyage to England or elsewhere.  That this Deponent was well acquainted with him in January 1787 when his Situation was very indigent, depending on his and [his] Family’s support from the labor of 4 or 5 Negroes.

This Deponent left Jamaica the 3^rd July 1787, when he informed him that he was making up and sending to his Attorney, Mr. William Vaughan of London, further Accounts and Documents as required by the printed regulations of the American Commissioners to those who could not embark for England.

/S/  Thomas Edghill

Sworn before the Commissioners of American Claims at this Office, Lincoln Inn Fields, 5^th November 1787.

/S/  Richard Lee, Clerk

I William Gist, late Surveyor in South Carolina being duly sworn before the Commissioners of the Examination of American Claims, Depose and Declare that I was intimately and well acquainted with Col Thomas Fletchall in the year 1767 and lived a neighbor with him until the year 1775, when the Rebellion broke out in South Carolina.  That Col Thomas Fletchall was a Justice of the Peace, Coroner for the Country and Col in the South Carolina Militia.  And that he took a very active part for the British Government and raised large bodies of men for its cause and support.  That he was defeated in 1775, taken prisoner and confined for some months in Charles Town Jail.  On the Reduction of Charles Town, he came forth again with all the force he could collect for the support of his Sovereign and after the Defeat of Major Ferguson at Kings Mountain, was obliged to leave his House and the property he had, which was very considerable, to preserve his life.  This Deponent, from his situation of Surveyor and Neighbor, is well acquainted with Col Fletchall’s property, which was very considerable.  That he was possessed of between 1600 and 1700 Acres of Land, all of which had great improvements, and that the Deponent, as a Surveyor in that County, at different times run it over for him and to the best of his Judgment, it was estimated with its improvements in the Schedule under the real value.

That the Stock and other things mentioned in the Schedule this Deponent knew to have been taken by the Rebels, he having frequently passed through that part of the Country for intelligence after Col Fletchall had been driven from his home.  This Deponent further adds that Col Fletchall lost many Negroes that died through fatigue and hardship previous to his embarkation for Jamaica in December 1782, which are not mentioned in the Schedule.  That he frequently saw him in Charles Town before his embarkation and that he was reduced greatly in his Circumstances which from his age, infirmity and corpulency must have greatly strained his means of supporting himself, Wife and family.

/S/ William Gist

Sworn before the Commissioners of American Claims at their Office, Lincolns Inn Fields, 5^th November 1787.

/S/ Richard Lee, Clerk

James Simpson Esq. Sworn:

Claimant was well known o him before and after the rebellion.  He lived in a very remote part of the Country, in 96 District and was Col of the Militia.  He took a very early part in favor of the Government and was very active.  Claimant raised a number of Men.  He was taken prisoner by the Americans on account of his Loyalty.

Mr. Simpson can’t speak to the property but has heard Claimant was in possession of Lands.  He used to ride good Horses when he came to Charles Town, which was a proof of his being in good circumstances.

William Turner Sworn:

Says he has frequently been at Claimant’s House and was well acquainted with him.  He was a very Loyal Man.  Says he knows he was possessed of a great deal of property; has heard Mr. Gist say he has undervalued his Lands very much; Mr. Gist surveyed his land. Knows he had a Grist Mill.  Says he was a person considered of such eminence that he was the first person who was applied to sign the Association.