Theresa M. Hicks & Wes Taukchiray, South Carolina Indians, Indian Traders, and Other Ethnic Connections, Beginning in 1670 - Thomas Andrews, Peppercorn Publications, Inc; Reprint Co., Publishers; Spartanburg, SC; 1998; permission to copy by Theresa Hicks 2002.
Page 83
NS = New Style. The first date given, unless otherwise noted, was for a Bond for a License. Other dates without data noted were also for Bonds for Licenses.
Sources: Journals of the Commissioners of the Indian trade Sept. 20, 1710 - Aug 29 1718 and Documents Relating to Indian Affairs 1750-1754 and 1754-1765. Most dates of 1760 taken from South Carolina Newspapers 1760, Warren. See Carolina Connections, Hicks for additional data on the early colonial commissioners.
When problems developed with the Indian trade in South Carolina because of encroachments by traders from other colonies or traders within the territories of other traders, South Carolina began requiring a license for the Indian Traders to conduct business with various tribes.
These regulations resulted in a bureaucracy on the local and colonial-wide/nationallevels which came to include Commissioners'. Agents, and Superintendents, and in time, Special Commissioners, Investigators, Inquirers, and Lawyers.
Since the Indian trade produced the primary exports from the
colbny in the early period-animal skins and furs and Indian slaves-
its importance is obvious.
In 1680, the commission appointed to mediate differences beween the Christians and the Indians and otherwise regulate the trade consisted of: Joseph West, Andrew Percival, Maurice Mathews, William Puller, John Smith, Jonathan Pitch, and John Boone. After two years, the Proprietors revoked their authority because they were oppressing rather than protecting the Indians.
In 1707, an Act was passed requiring "those persons that trade among the Indians in amity with this government. ...Now must take out licenses . . ." In 1711, the South Carolina Traders were complaining about traders coming from Virginia and other colonies and not having licenses. In 1718, Joseph Boon, Stephen Godin, Samuel Barons, merchants of London, complained of the Indian Trade mo-
nopoly in South Carolina.
Generally, exceptions were made for licenses required to trade with the Settlement Indians.
The fact that Indians usually had three different names during their lifetime-one when they were young; one in their middle life; and one in their old age-may result in some confusion in identification.
Governor Johnson's report of 1719 / 20 mentions that prior to the 1715 War, there were almost 200 English Indian traders employed as factors by the merchants of Carolina.
Lachlan McGillivray, Indian Trader, Edward J. Cashin, is an excellent source for the Indian Trade and background of Clan Chattan, the Clan of the Cat, in Scotland, and those who fought for Prince Charles in 1746 at Culloden. This source covers migrations to Georgia (Darien, New Inverness District) and South Carolina of some of the Indian Traders. It also includes data on the various Partnerships formed by the Traders.
N.H.: In the following entries, additional data from wills and other
sources containing a name identical to the subject of the entry is not
conclusive that this was the same person. These are offered as pos-
sible clues for further research. Many of the Charleston merchants
were involved in some manner with the Indian trade. They, in turn,
had connections with merchants in other areas.
This does not purport to be a complete list of all Commissioners, Agents, or Traders, but it is a good sampling. Other references will be found in Memorial Letters to England in 1782 from the Indian Traders and Federal Government Records in 1850 for the settlement of the Patriot Indian Traders re: ceded lands
in 1772.
TMH
