c\3.3 l,sn Bk.^ 
 
 Trinity College Historical 
 Society Collection 
 
 Trinity College Library 
 [Hirham, N. C. 
 
 \j 
 
BULLETIN OF THE 
 Pnifrrrsitg of jioutl] Carolina 
 
 NOTES ON 
 
 Labor Organizations in South 
 Carolina, 1 742- 1 86 1 
 
 YATES SNOWDEN 
 
 ISSUED QUARTERLY 
 BY THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 No. 38 
 Part IV 
 July, 1914 
 
 COLUMBIA, S. C. 
 
 Second-Class Mail Matter 
 
/nV2 ^ 
 
 NOTES ON 
 
 Labor Organizations in South 
 Carolina, 1 7 42- 1 86 1 
 
 BY 
 
 YATES SNOWDEN 
 
 ay 
 
 bo 
 
 X 
 
 rl 
 
 \ 
 
 p* 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 COLUMBIA. S. C. 
 1914 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 https://archive.org/details/notesonlabororga01snow 
 
PREFATORY NOTE. 
 
 This tentative sketch of ‘ ‘Labor Organizations in South 
 Carolina”— perhaps, “Early Trade Associations,” or 
 “Labor Combinations,” would be a more correct title— is 
 largely based upon a paper read before the Kosmos Club 
 of Columbia, in 1913, and a series of articles which 
 appeared in The Charleston Review, August 23d to Novem- 
 ber 29th, 1913. If this sketch shall whet the curiosity of 
 some careful investigator for an exhaustive study of the 
 files of the Gazettes in the Charleston Library Society, and 
 an examination of State papers and documents in the office 
 of the South Carolina Historical Commission, Columbia, 
 the writer will consider himself amply repaid for this 
 introductory and superficial study. 
 
 Yates Snowden. 
 
 University of South Carolina, August, 1914. 
 
NOTES ON LABOR ORGANIZATIONS IN SOUTH 
 CAROLINA, 1742-1861. 
 
 It is impossible, from the crude and meagre data so far 
 collected— and it may be questioned whether satisfactory 
 information can ever be gathered— to ascertain the date 
 of the first organization of laboring men, artisans and 
 mechanics, in this State, with the intent to fix wages. 
 
 Apart from the fact that little appeared in the public 
 prints anywhere about organizations of workingmen, and 
 that their constitutions, price lists, minute books and other 
 papers have been lost, it should be remembered that the 
 investigator of economic conditions in this State, more 
 than in any one of the Old Thirteen, finds the larger 
 majority of laborers negro slaves. Recent tentative 
 studies prove that a larger number of these negroes and 
 mulattoes— some of whom gained their freedom— were 
 skilled mechanics than has generally been supposed. 
 
 The First Grievance. 
 
 As early as 1742 we find the grand jury of th gjEmwjfl ge 
 tf South Carolina declaring : “We present as a grievance 
 
 the want of a law to prevent the hiring out of negro 
 tradesmen, to the great discouragement of the white 
 workmen coming into this Province.” The presentment 
 of the grand jury was apparently barren of results, as 
 shown by the petition of fifteen white shipwrights, 
 in January, 1744, for which I am indebted to that 
 enthusiastic scholar, Mr. Gilbert P. Voigt. 
 
 This significant proceeding casts so bright a light on 
 economic conditions in Charles Town nearly 170 years ago 
 that it is here given almost in full. 
 
 From Journal of Council, January 18, 1744, Vol. XI, p. 53: 
 “Read the Petition of Andrew Ruck, et al. 
 
 ‘ ‘That there being such a Great number of Negroe men 
 chiefly employed in mending repairing and caulking of 
 
 
6 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Ships, Vessels, and boats, and working at the Shipwrights 
 Trade and business in this Town, Harbour and other 
 Places near the same, that the Petitioners who are white 
 Persons and have served their times to the Trade of a 
 Shipwright can meet with little or no Work to do, and 
 them and their Familys are reduced to poverty and must 
 be obliged to leave the Province, or run the risque of 
 starving, if they are not relieved or meet with any 
 encouragement to settle or get any Work. 
 
 “Wherefore the Petitioners most humbly prayed that 
 his Excellency would be pleased to take their case into 
 Consideration and Grant relief to them as his Excellency 
 in his Great Wisdom shall think meet and the Peti’rs as 
 ever in duty bound would ever pray. 
 
 (Sgd.) Andrew Ruck, John Smith, William Smith, 
 Gidon Norton, etc.” (About 14 other subscribers, ship 
 carpenters. ) 
 
 There was nothing approximating a labor union then in 
 Charles Town, so the Council, after due consideration, 
 ordered “That as several of the most Emenent Ship- 
 wrights in Town had not signed the said Petition, That 
 the other Shipwrights who had not signed it, be sum- 
 moned to attend the Council before anything be concluded 
 therein.” Several days later these “emenent ship- 
 wrights,” John Yarworth, John Daniell and others 
 applied for a copy of the petition of Ruck and the other 
 complainants, which was duly furnished by the clerk 
 of council. 
 
 Yarworth, et al, make a lengthy statement in reply, 
 claiming that they had employed their own slaves, and 
 that they had in no wise thereby “glutted the labor 
 market, but that the Complainants are wanting in noth- 
 ing to maintain themselves and their familys with as 
 much Credit as we have done, but Industry, and a more 
 frugal Way of Life.” 
 
 They cite several instances to prove that the complain- 
 ants had refused to work except for “exorbitant wages.” 
 For instance : ‘ ‘On the 1st day of December, 1739, Mr. 
 Benjamin Godin had immediate occasion to bring his Crop 
 to Market, and for that purpose wanted his boat new bot- 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 7 
 
 tomed. These Ship Carpenters finding his urgent neces- 
 sity refused to work at less than 50 Shill’s per diem, w’ch 
 he was obliged to give them. From all which it is evident 
 that these men had no ground of Complaint for want of 
 work. That many times they have Refused to work at 
 all, or if obliged to it by necessity only on extravagant 
 Wages.” * * * “And we are fully Convinced that 
 there is business in this place sufficient for three times the 
 Ship Carpenters, and that the Complaints that have been 
 made to your Excellency and to your Honors as aforesaid 
 is with no other view than to engross the whole trade into 
 their own hands, and thereby to have it in their power 
 to make their own prices, all which is most humbly 
 submitted, etc. 
 
 “John Daniell, John Yarworth, John Scott, David 
 Brown, George Hesket.” 
 
 A little over three years later, in that great storehouse 
 of information regarding the German settlers in South 
 Carolina, the Urlsperger Nachrichten (Vol. Ill, page 216, 
 entry of July 25, 1747), we find the following note (trans- 
 lated), showing that Ruck and the ship carpenters were 
 not the only settlers that found slave labor a menace: 
 
 “Held has removed to Carolina with his wife, with the 
 hope of supporting himself better there with his weaver’s 
 trade than here with farming and cattle raising. His 
 service in Carolina will last probably no longer than until 
 the two negro slaves shall have learned the weaver’s trade 
 from him, and can weave themselves. So it goes through 
 all Carolina; the negroes are made to learn all the trades, 
 and are used for all kinds of businesses. For this reason 
 white people have difficulty in earning their bread there: 
 unless they become slave-overseers, or provide themselves 
 with slaves.” 
 
 The complaint as to possible competition from negro 
 weavers was not well founded, for though in after times 
 negroes wove rough fabrics for use on the plantations of 
 their masters, such products were never put on the mar- 
 ket, and as early as 1749, Governor James Glen, in his 
 “Answers” to the “Lords Commissioners for Trade and 
 Plantations” reports that some “Irish Linnen is being 
 
8 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 made by the ‘Irish township of Williamsburgh’. ” As a 
 matter of fact, in spite of the threat of George McDuffie, 
 in Congress, eighty years later, the negro has never been 
 a successful textile worker in South Carolina. The costly 
 experiment was made on a large scale by a cotton mill in 
 Charleston twelve or thirteen years ago, and as a result the 
 factory soon closed and its looms and machinery were sold 
 to a corporation in northern Georgia. 
 
 Later Competition With Negro Slaves. 
 
 Prof. Ulrich B. Phillips, who investigated conditions in 
 Charleston and tidewater South Carolina at a later period 
 (see “Slave Labor Problem in the Charleston District”), 
 draws some conclusions which apply more or less to the 
 first half of the eighteenth century. 
 
 He says: “There appeared two interests favoring the 
 restriction of negro opportunity. The white laboring man 
 wanted to keep the slaves out of the skilled trades as far 
 as possible, and to that end opposed any broadening of 
 negroes’ range of personal freedom as increasing the dan- 
 ger of demoralization and revolt. The white artisans, it 
 seems, had not enough political strength to get their will 
 enacted into law, and the statutes prohibiting the hiring 
 of their time by slaves were not sufficiently supported by 
 public opinion to secure their enforcement. Like most 
 other provisions of the slave code, this rule was generally 
 disregarded when the interest or inclination of master 
 and slave agreed in favor of its violation. In many cases 
 the law, if enforced, would have seriously hampered 
 industry and commerce. In the city, for example, steve- 
 dores, boat hands, messengers, carpenters and day laborers 
 in general, were needed often for immediate service, and 
 the employer could not submit to the delay and formality 
 of seeking out and making contracts with the owners of 
 the slaves whose labor he desired. For the sake of a 
 flexible labor supply, some device like that of slaves hiring 
 their own time was essential, and that being the case, the 
 laws prohibiting this arrangement could not, of course, 
 secure general observance. In quiet times, indeed, the 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 9 
 
 citizens fell generally into easy-going practices, each 
 following his own interest in managing his slaves (or 
 letting them manage him), and thinking little of the 
 provisions for public control.” 
 
 After the Revolution, one of the leaders in the Con- 
 stitutional Convention held in Charleston in 1788, said 
 that “cheap negro labor was steadily undermining the 
 white artisan class in South Carolina.” That the presence 
 of these skilled colored workmen was resented by white 
 mechanics, and worked to their disadvantage, is proven 
 by a cursory examination of the Journals of the Legisla- 
 ture. Take, for example, this extract from the Journals 
 of the Senate of South Carolina for 1794 (p. 211). 
 
 May 7. “Read the Memorial and Remonstrance of the 
 Mechanics of the City of Charleston, presented by Col. 
 Thomson, Praying 
 
 “That this Honourable House would be pleased to pass 
 a Law for regulating the exercise of Mechanic trades by 
 slaves in the City of Charleston.” 
 
 It would be interesting to read the debates on this 
 vexed problem. It is evident, however, from this entry 
 in the Journal of the Senate for 1794, that no relief was 
 granted, for we read on 
 
 December 12. “Read a second time, the Bill for the 
 Regulation of Slaves, and more especially mechanic slaves, 
 in the exercise of their respective trades in the City of 
 Charleston and in Georgetown.” 
 
 The vote on this bill was 11 yeas to 16 nays— and it 
 was lost. 
 
 A Post-Revolutionary Labor Controversy. 
 
 The following notes from one of the Charleston news- 
 papers in the Fall of 1783, for which I am largely indebted 
 to Prof. Charles A. Hull, of Cornell University, cast an 
 interesting side-light on wages and labor combinations in 
 post- Re volutionary Charleston, and may serve as a sort of 
 index to the student making an exhaustive study. In 
 Mills’s Statistics of South Carolina (pp. 427-8), published 
 in 1826, is a schedule of the price of labor for ship carpen- 
 ters, blacksmiths, block and pump makers, ship joiners, 
 
10 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 riggers, painters, turners, and coopers — white and black — 
 by comparison with which it would appear that the 
 mechanics of 1783 received very fair wages. 
 
 The charge against carpenters of a combination to raise 
 the price of labor, in October, 1783, is significant, as well 
 as the replies of “House Carpenter” and “A Mechanic”, 
 branding the statement as “infamous,” “false,” and a 
 “palpable lie!” 
 
 In the South Carolina Gazette (Miller’s), October 18, 
 1783, “Another Patriot” comments upon the need of 
 rebuilding Charleston, after the devastation of the Revo- 
 lution. But, the price of labor amounts to a prohibition. 
 Though the cost of living is less than in England, carpen- 
 ters ask four times as much per day. He suggests invit- 
 ing down carpenters, brick-makers and brick-layers from 
 the North, who, while their homes are wrapped in ice and 
 snow, could make a little fortune; also giving bounties to 
 encourage the immigration of artisans. Bricks are now 
 £2, 3s 6d at Charleston; stone, slates and tiles not to be 
 procured. Suggests that they might be brought as ballast. 
 Carpenters are paid $2 per day (9s 4d sterling) ; ship car- 
 penters 12s for whites and 8s for blacks, and both sorts 
 found in food and drink. 
 
 South Carolina Gazette (Miller’s), October 21, “Another 
 Patriot” having received a note that several of the house 
 carpenters demand and receive $3 per day, and that “ they 
 have entered into an agreement not to work under such a 
 price ” (italics mine), comments that by the same prin- 
 ciple that now binds our workmen, and which has grown 
 into an unsupportable combination, they fancy they may 
 advance their prices to any given sum. This delusion, he 
 trusts, will not last long. The Corporation, no doubt, 
 will exert the powers vested in it for the remedy of so 
 oppressive an evil. 
 
 Hotly Denies any Combination of Carpenters. 
 
 South Carolina Gazette (Miller’s), October 28, “A House 
 Carpenter” (apparently a real one), replies to “Another 
 Patriot.” He suffered by depreciating currency and must 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 11 
 
 recoup. The report of the $3 combination is most daring, 
 infamous and false. Let him produce the man that 
 demands $3, since the Evacuation (by the British), for a 
 simple day’s work. For information he states the enor- 
 mous profits of a master carpenter. In 1773-4 a journey- 
 man could be had for £35, currency, per month, say 27s 8d 
 per day, and the master’s charge was 45s. Now, the most 
 ordinary journeyman cannot be obtained under 'E&, ster- 
 ling, say 49s, currency, per day. A master will have to 
 ask $2, or 9s, 4d, sterling, or 65s, which is 16s profit, or 
 Is, 4d less than we had. Don’t tell our brethren in the 
 North about making a winter-time fortune here. Some 
 have been here many winters and made no fortune yet. 
 
 South Carolina Gazette, November 4. “A Mechanic” 
 answers. The accusation that the carpenters have extor- 
 tionately doubled their wages is a palpable lie. Their 
 advance is only one-half and the most moderate demanded 
 by any set of men in the State. Many of the planters 
 came into this country thirty to fifty years past, emigrants 
 from the lowest classes of mankind in Europe; their indi- 
 gence so great as made it difficult for them to procure an 
 overseer’s place, and meeting with great indulgence from 
 the merchants, became opulent, etc., etc. 
 
 South Carolina Gazette, November 8. ‘ ‘Another Patriot” 
 did not assert that there was a combination for $3, but 
 only for present wages (unspecified), and that some got $3. 
 He cannot supply “Mechanic” with understanding, etc. 
 
 The above fragmentary notes are based on several 
 columns of print, and a careful examination, not only of 
 Miller’s Gazette, about 1783, but also of Timothy’s (all 
 newspapers were then called “Gazettes”), would show 
 much other interesting data as to labor conditions. 
 
 Mechanics Organize in 1794. 
 
 The mechanics of Charleston, in 1794, were evidently 
 men of high character and ability, for in February of that 
 year the “Charleston Mechanic Society” was organized 
 with seventy-four members and the following officers : 
 Anthony Toomer, president ; J. C. Folker, vice president ; 
 
12 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Samuel Stent, senior warden ; Jacob Sass, junior warden ; 
 Basil Lanneau, treasurer ; William Rouse, secretary ; Benj. 
 DuPre, James Allison, Robert Vardell and John Johnson, 
 stewards. This society existed certainly until 1883. Its 
 aim and history will be considered later. 
 
 From the Senate Journals, December 6, 1811, it appears 
 that Charleston mechanics were again seeking special legis- 
 lation, Though it is not clear that the negro labor problem 
 of that day was necessarily involved. Here is the record : 
 
 “Captain Kennedy, from the committee to whom was 
 referred the petition of the mechanics of the City of 
 Charleston, praying that a law may be passed the more 
 effectually to secure them a compensation for their labours, 
 submitted a report. 
 
 “Ordered that the report lie on the table.” 
 
 The consideration of the effect of negro slavery and 
 negro mechanics upon the number and wages of white 
 mechanics is important and might be considerably 
 extended, even with the meagre data available, but it 
 does not properly come within the scope of this paper. It 
 is to be hoped that the Hon. Theodore D. Jervey, of 
 Charleston, who has made an exhaustive study of the 
 negro of South Carolina, will embody his researches in 
 book form. It would be an invaluable work, worthy to 
 rank with Bruce’s Economic History of Virginia. 
 
 Apprentices Organized in 1841. 
 
 Before dismissing the ante-bellum negro mechanic prob- 
 lem, it is interesting to note that the scholarly Dr. Samuel 
 Henry Dickson, as late as 1841, in an address before the 
 Apprentices’ Library Society, of Charleston, claims that 
 the presence of the negro slave is a positive advantage to 
 the white mechanic. No physician in South Carolina, 
 probably none in the South, surpassed him in his knowl- 
 edge of man’s physical nature, but of man in his economic 
 and collective capacity he knew much less, and the signifi- 
 cance of these protests against skilled negro labor in this 
 State (beginning, perhaps, even earlier than 1742) was 
 lost upon him. He says: “Nor ought I to omit * * * 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 13 
 
 to dwell upon certain special advantages which belong to 
 the Southern operative and apprentice, arising from, and 
 inseparably connected with, our peculiar institutions, social 
 and domestic. The African, of whom it is the literal and 
 unquestioned truth to say that he is less fitted by nature 
 for mental and moral culture, and more particularly suited 
 to a life of mere animal effort, than the white man, occu- 
 pies here a place which it is always irksome to a race 
 better organized to fill. * * * The sons of Ham are 
 
 made for the useful position which they are destined to fill 
 among us. They are created ‘hewers of wood and drawers 
 of water.’ ” 
 
 And yet, perhaps, at the very time Dr. Dickson spoke, 
 certainly a few years later, two mulatto families, the 
 Ellisons, of Stateburg, and the Westons, of Georgetown, 
 were making, respectively, the best cotton gins and rice 
 mills in South Carolina. 
 
 It is only fair to the great and good physician, who was 
 anything but a “negro-hater,” to quote his afterthought: 
 
 “I do not mean to leave myself liable to the imputation 
 of a wish to inflict ignorance or intellectual imbecility upon 
 any human creature. It is not now the occasion to enter 
 into the question of how and what it may be right and 
 proper to teach the slave ; but it is certain that the gifts 
 of Providence are as unequally distributed to the races of 
 men as they are to the individuals of these several races.” 
 
 Printers Among The First. 
 
 As will be shown later, the printers of South Carolina 
 had probably organized under something like “union 
 principles,” as early as 1834, but their action and pur- 
 poses could not have been widely known, for Dr. Dickson 
 tells the apprentices of Charleston, in 1840, “we of the 
 South need no ‘ten-hour’ bill” to protect our little ones 
 from the exhaustion of protected toil. We require no 
 “trades unions” to guard the journeyman from the tyr- 
 anny and avarice of his master ; no “Conspiracy Laws” to 
 secure the wealthy capitalist or contractor from destructive 
 combinations of his operators.” There were, however, 
 
14 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 organizations of workingmen for patriotic, social and 
 charitable purposes in this State certainly as early as 
 1768, and probably much earlier. Primarily, there is no 
 evidence that they intended to set a standard or control 
 labor or frame a scale of wages, but to promote brotherly 
 love and to raise funds “for the relief of such of us as 
 may, by misfortune, be reduced to indigence and distress.” 
 It was the mechanics with the active cooperation and 
 under the leadership of such ardent patriots as Christopher 
 Gadsden, and, in a lesser degree, William Henry Drayton, 
 who furnished the backbone to the Revolutionary move- 
 ment, certainly in Charles Town. They, rather than the 
 cultured graduates of Oxford and Cambridge, and the 
 brilliant young lawyers of Lincoln’s Inn and the Middle 
 Temple, took the initiative in that first and successful 
 Rebellion. 
 
 Mechanics Gather. 
 
 “liberty tree” 
 
 The following letter, from Charles Town, dated Octo- 
 ber 1, 1768, and published thirty days later in the Boston 
 Chronicle, tells the story of the first South Carolina 
 “Liberty Tree.” 
 
 “A number of the leading mechanics of this city assem- 
 bled under some trees in a field adjacent to the ropewalk in 
 order to select six gentlemen to represent the inhabitants 
 of Charles Town in the ensuing General Assembly, which 
 being concluded upon, they then partook of a delightful 
 entertainment, which had been provided for the occasion. 
 At five o’clock in the afternoon they moved to a large live 
 oak tree in Mr. Mazyck’s pasture adjoining to Christopher 
 Gadsden, Esq,, at the north end of the city, which they 
 consecrated by the name of the ‘Tree of Liberty.’ 
 
 “At eight o’clock in the evening the company marched 
 back to the city with forty-five of their number in advance, 
 each bearing a lighted candle. They stopped at the houses 
 of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor to give toasts, 
 praising the Massachusetts Resolves of the ninety-two 
 members. Then they repaired to the long room in Dillon’s 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 15 
 
 Tavern, and used ninety-two glasses in drinking ninety 
 two ‘loyal and representable toasts,’ and at ten o’clock 
 they broke up, having spent the day and concluded the 
 evening without the least irregularity happening.” 
 
 General Edward McCrady, in his invaluable history of 
 South Carolina, gives the names of these protagonists of 
 freedom, the Liberty Tree men, and well he might, for 
 in his veins flowed the blood of one of them, William 
 Johnson, the blacksmith. Dr. Joseph Johnson, author of 
 the ‘‘Traditions of the Revolution,” and one of the organ- 
 izers and for many years president of the Apprentices’ 
 Library Society, and the late Major John Johnson, C. S. A., 
 chief engineer at Fort Sumter, and afterward for many 
 years the beloved Rector of St. Phillip’s Church, Charles- 
 ton, were justly proud of their descent from that noble 
 mechanic. 
 
 Carpenters’ Early Organization. 
 
 The newspaper files of the Charleston papers, running 
 back to the first issue in 1732, and the almanacs and direc- 
 tories published in the closing years of the 18th and during 
 the 19th century, as well as the Statutes at Large of the 
 State, give, practically, all the information available as to 
 these organizations. Here are several such items. 
 
 There was a ‘‘Carpenters’ Society” in 1809 ; John Mun- 
 crieff, president ; and it certainly was in existence in 1826, 
 for on May 29th of that year the funeral of one of its 
 members is announced in the Gazette, as follows : 
 
 ‘‘The Members of the Carpenters’ Society are requested 
 to attend the funeral of Mr. Matthews ( ) this morning 
 
 at ten o’clock, from his late residence, No. Tradd 
 
 Street. 
 
 ‘‘Abraham P. Reeves, Secretary.” 
 
 Charleston’s First Clerks’ Union. 
 
 The Gazette of June 6, 1825, has the following notice, 
 which would seem to indicate that at that early date the 
 clerks in Charleston stores were organized : 
 
16 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 “An adjourned meeting of the Clerks will take place 
 this evening at Mr. Seyle’s Room, King Street, at 8 o’clock, 
 to receive the report of the committee, appointed at the 
 last meeting, and transact other business of importance. 
 
 “N. B.— A general attendance is requested. 
 
 “T. J. Horsey, Secretary.” 
 
 The people of South Carolina, during the first four 
 decades of the nineteenth century, were almost wholly 
 agricultural, and the majority of them did not care for an 
 industrial revolution. Ninety per cent., perhaps, of the 
 work on the plantations was slave labor, and in much of 
 the low country, then, as now, only negroes could work 
 the whole year round. Mr. Calhoun, whom the majority 
 of the Carolinians regarded as almost infallible, thought 
 that the South’s prosperity was bound up in agriculture, 
 and George McDuffie thought so too, though at one time 
 he had threatened to rival the Northern manufacturers by 
 running cotton mills with negro labor. 
 
 Robert Y. Hayne always maintained that the negro 
 never could be a successful cotton-mill operative, and held 
 that “wherever free labor is put in full and successful 
 operation, slave labor ceases to be profitable,” and McDuf- 
 fie finally concurred with Hayne as to the unfitness of the 
 negro for work in cotton mills. 
 
 Many mechanics unquestionably flourished in this State 
 during that period, but the presence of negro mechanics, 
 and the passion, so to speak, for agriculture, would seem 
 to account for the following plea for support of white 
 workmen, which you may read in the Gazette of March 4, 
 1828, in a letter signed “Charleston”: 
 
 “It is to us a matter of astonishment that such an apa- 
 thy should pervade our community against the encourage- 
 ment of mechanics generally. Persons frequently send to 
 the North for what they could get cheaper at home, and 
 better. Were they for a moment to reflect, they would 
 find that by supporting our own mechanics, they would 
 keep at home that money, which, on the other hand, 
 ‘enriches our neighbor, but makes us poor indeed.’ Let 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 17 
 
 those who are in the habit of doing this reflect for a 
 moment, and we are persuaded our remarks will not be 
 thrown away.” 
 
 In Hrabowski’s Directory for 1809, appears the title and 
 list of officers of the ‘‘South Carolina Society for the Pro- 
 motion of Domestic Arts and Manufactories.” It probably 
 could not live up to its long name, though it had for its 
 president, David Ramsay, the historian ; vice president, 
 Col. William Rouse ; treasurer, William Hasell Gibbes, an 
 eminent lawyer; and secretary, Andrew Bay. Its ‘‘cor- 
 responding committee” included an artist, a printer, sev- 
 eral leading lawyers, three doctors and several mechanics. 
 It could scarcely be called a laboring man’s society, for the 
 names of three of its officers appear the same year on the 
 directorate of the ‘‘South Carolina Homespun Company,” 
 of which the versatile Dr. John L. E. W. Shecut was the 
 president. 
 
 If the Homespun Company lasted so long, Dr. Shecut 
 may have inserted this advertisement, which may be seen 
 in the Gazette, March 11, 1826 : 
 
 ‘‘Weavers Wanted— A few good weavers, accustomed 
 to the manufacturing of cotton goods. To such, liberal 
 wages and steady employment will be given, on producing 
 certificates of character, etc. Apply at No. 384, King 
 Street.” 
 
 The Early Labor Press. 
 
 The publication of labor papers is fairly good evidence 
 of the existence of organized labor, and there is a strong 
 presumption of an effort to raise or fix wages. Professor 
 John R. Commons, of the University of Wisconsin, in a 
 tentative list of 130 labor papers published in the United 
 States from 1825 to 1867, gives the Southern Free Press, 
 of Charleston, among the ten papers published as early as 
 1829. 
 
 For the reason presented, perhaps with tiresome itera- 
 tion in this article, viz : that the then leading slave State 
 would probably be the last to have organized labor— the 
 writer hesitates to claim for South Carolina’s metropolis 
 
18 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 the honor of having, possibly, the first labor paper in the 
 Union, but as early as 1809 the city directory contains the 
 following item : 
 
 “Sargent, John H— — , printer and proprietor of the 
 Strength of the People, 113 Queen Street.” 
 
 In the large collection of broadsides of the Massachu- 
 setts Historical Society, at Boston, is one entitled : 
 
 “The Philometer, 
 the Guage 
 of 
 
 His Majesty’s Love Towards the 
 Americans.” 
 
 It is composed of four newspaper columns of matter, 
 made up in a one-page form, under the above head, and 
 with a sort of colophon in the corner stating that The Ark, 
 a newspaper, is about to be published by John H. Sargent, 
 at Charleston, S. C. It would be interesting to know if 
 The Ark was ever floated ; if so, it must have been some- 
 time in 1810-11-12. The only other reference to Sargent, 
 known to the writer, is in Cardozo’s “Reminiscences of 
 Charleston,” where, referring to newspapers in 1812, the 
 veteran economist and journalist says : “It was about this 
 period that a paper called the Brazen Nose was published 
 by a Mr. Sargent, but of too puerile a character to merit 
 further notice.” This could hardly have been a labor 
 paper, and one wonders where the amazing title came 
 from, for no Oxonian would publish “a paper of puerile 
 character.” 
 
 The Strength of the People may or may not have been a 
 labor paper, though the title is suggestive. It is highly 
 probable that there is not a copy of the paper in existence, 
 nor of Sargent’s other ventures, The Ark and the Brazen 
 Nose. 
 
 When we come to the Southern Free Press we are upon 
 surer ground. It is mentioned by McMaster in the chapter 
 on labor conditions, in Vol. 5, of his “History of the People 
 of the United States.” It was also advertised in the Free 
 Inquirer, of New York, on December 26, 1829, where it is 
 stated that the paper is addressed to “Mechanics and 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 19 
 
 operatives.” That there was such a paper cannot be 
 questioned, for the erratic Mrs. Anne Royall, who visited 
 Charleston on her Southern tour, in the second series of 
 her “Black Book” (Washington, 1831), says : “The editor 
 of the Southern Free Press called on me, and from his 
 appearance and conversation, I should suppose that he 
 received very little encouragement. Freedom, or rather, 
 liberty, is dead in the United States, particularly in the 
 Middle and Southern States which seem enamored with 
 slavery, and that of the most despotic kind, too.” 
 
 Those “New South” Southerners, who speak of their 
 slave-holding ancestors with bated breath should, however, 
 note Mrs. Royall’s conclusion : 
 
 “I am no advocate of slavery, but as to the cruelty, so 
 much talked of, of masters to slaves, I saw no instance of 
 it ; so far from it, they are ten times better fed and better 
 clothed than the poor white people of Philadelphia and 
 New York, and particularly Washington city.” 
 
 It is a notable fact that the distinguished Roman Catholic 
 Bishop England used almost the same language, mutatis 
 mutandis, in an open letter to the great Irish statesman, 
 Daniel O’Connell, who was almost as much agitated over 
 the alleged condition of slaves in the Southern States, as 
 over the sufferings of his beloved countrymen. 
 
 Miss Helen L. Sumner, a recognized authority on early 
 labor conditions in the United States, says of the Free 
 Press: “We have not succeeded in locating a single copy, 
 and very probably the paper was short lived.” Diligent 
 inquiry among the old printers of Charleston five or six 
 years ago failed to discover any recollection, not to say 
 copy, of the Free Press. The late Thomas C. Neville, then 
 the “dean” of the Typographical Corps of South Carolina, 
 had never heard of it, saying in a letter to the writer, in 
 November, 1905: “I am unable to give any information 
 that concerns Trade Unions, or organs advocating labor, 
 back of 1845.” 
 
 In the (Augusta) Southern Banner, of November 19, 
 1836, (for a copy of which, as for other notes, I am 
 indebted to that accomplished Georgian, Prof. U. B. Phil- 
 lips), appears an article headed “Augusta Typographical 
 
20 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Society.” It relates mainly to Gen. Duff Green’s “Liter- 
 ary Society,” and to the novel Machiavellian schemes of 
 that well-known journalist and publisher, whose schemes 
 created a furore among the printers of the early thirties 
 in Washington and several Southern States. This article 
 will especially interest Columbians, some of whom may 
 learn from old letters or diaries what became of the 
 “Literary Society.” If the Augusta typos judged Green 
 fairly, “Literary Society” was as much a misnomer as 
 was the “Charleston Charitable Association,” a nefarious 
 lottery conducted by eminent Republicans during the era 
 of good stealing. 
 
 Duff Green will be remembered as a prominent politician 
 and editor of The United States Telegraph, a leading 
 Washington paper in 1830. His eldest daughter, Margaret, 
 married John C. Calhoun’s eldest son, Andrew, and his 
 newspaper was a powerful factor in Democratic political 
 circles for many years. 
 
 Here is the article from the Banner; the first four 
 paragraphs relate solely to Georgia printers, but are of 
 interest because of their early organization : 
 
 “At a meeting of the journeymen printers of Augusta, 
 held on Saturday evening, November 5, Mr. Sidney S. 
 Browne was called to the chair and Mr. James McCafferty 
 appointed secretary. The object of the meeting being 
 explained by the chairman, the following resolutions were 
 submitted by Mr. J. T. Blain and unanimously adopted : 
 “ ‘ Resolved , That we form ourselves into an association 
 under the title of the Typographical Society of Augusta, 
 Georgia, deeming it highly expedient for the benefit of 
 this class. 
 
 ‘ 4 4 Resolved , That a committee be appointed to draft a 
 constitution and by-laws for the government of the same, 
 and that this meeting, considering the society duly formed, 
 enter into an election of officers.’ ” 
 
 “The following officers were thereupon elected : George 
 Robertson, president ; Sidney S. Browne, vice president ; 
 James McCafferty, secretary and treasurer ; Edmund 
 McGowan, steward ; J. T. Blain, T. J. Echols and W. H. 
 Goodman, standing committee. 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 21 
 
 The election of officers having been completed, Mr. 
 Echols offered the following preamble and resolutions, 
 which were unanimously adopted : 
 
 “ ‘Whereas, The efforts of Gen. Duff Green, of Washing- 
 ton City, to carry his Literary Society into effect in 
 Columbia, South Carolina, is likely so far to succeed ; and 
 ‘ ‘ ‘ Whereas, We conceive it our bounden duty to remon- 
 strate against the establishment of a system as projected 
 in Washington City, and which produced effects in opposing 
 it, that are regretted by all ; Be it therefore 
 
 “ ‘ Resolved , That we disapprove of Gen. Green’s inten- 
 tion to establish a society sufficiently termed the ‘ ‘Literary 
 Society of South Carolina,” which has been incorporated 
 by the Legislature of said State. 
 
 “ ‘ Resolved , That we consider it an attempt to monopo- 
 lize the printing of the State aforesaid by underworking 
 resident printers, whose conduct and deportment have 
 always insured the respect of our class and the citizens of 
 the community in which they live. 
 
 “ ‘Resolved, That we solicit and recommend to the jour- 
 neyman printers of Columbia, S. C., to form a society and 
 establish a scale of prices to be suited to their expenses, 
 and that we will expect every one to belong to our class, 
 and who considers himself a man of principle to abide by 
 those rates and to assist in the maintenance of the same. 
 
 “ ‘ Resolved , That this is the opinion of this meeting, 
 that no journeyman could consistently with principles of 
 honor work in any office conducted in such a manner. 
 
 “ ‘ Resolved , That we disclaim any intention of injuring 
 Gen. Green in the opinion of the South, but this design in 
 Washington City has led us to anticipate a similar attempt 
 here.’ ” 
 
 ‘‘On motion of Mr. J. T. Watson, ‘ Resolved , That the 
 proceedings of this meeting be published, and that the 
 papers throughout the South be requested to copy them., 
 ‘‘Sidney S. Browne, Chairman. 
 ‘‘James McCafferty, Secretary.” 
 
22 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Duff Green, the Printers’ Banquo. 
 
 The explanation of the foregoing remonstrance of the 
 Augusta printers against the machinations of Gen. Duff 
 Green is to be found in Ethelbert Stewart’s documentary 
 history of “The Early Organizations of Printers.” Green, 
 in 1834, was editor of The United States Telegraph, and 
 also printer to the National Senate, and formulated a plan 
 to settle the apprentice question which was bitterly 
 opposed by the Columbia Typographical Society of Wash- 
 ington. “The apprentice question had been a source of 
 infinite trouble to the societies from the very first. From 
 time to time the term of apprenticeship had been length- 
 ened by various societies increasing it from three to four, 
 then from four to five years, in the vain hope of reducing 
 the competition from that source. But there was no 
 effective means of preventing apprentices from running 
 away, and the longer apprenticeship only increased the 
 temptation to do so, hence made matters worse. * * * 
 
 The fact that a runaway apprentice could and would be so 
 employed, at rates higher, to say the least, than his 
 apprentice rates, also operated to put a premium on run- 
 ning away. * * * In 1833, however, Gen. Green began 
 employing ‘two-thirders’ on his paper, The United States 
 Telegraph, and later introduced a large number of boys as 
 apprentices in doing the Government printing. He now 
 proposed (1834) to establish what he called the Washing- 
 ton Institute, but which was termed by printers a manual 
 labor school. In this institution he proposed to take 200 
 boys each year and teach them the printing trade, allowing 
 them $2 a week each for their work, which $2 was not, 
 however, to be paid to them, but kept as a trust fund and 
 invested by their employer for such of them as should 
 remain with him the full period.” 
 
 As a consequence, the Columbia (D. C.) Typographical 
 Society held a number of meetings, declared that “we look 
 upon the proposed measure of Duff Green, editor of The 
 United States Telegraph, as visionary in its final results, 
 subversive of our rights as journeymen printers, and 
 destructive of the profession to which we belong;” and 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 23 
 
 after unsuccessful conferences with Green, sent a protest 
 to every printers’ society, and even to unorganized printers 
 throughout the United States. 
 
 Among other responses that came were two from the 
 typographical societies of Louisville, Ky., and Charleston, 
 S. C., approving the protest against the Duff Green school 
 for printers. Stewart says this is the first reference found 
 to these societies, and it is thus clear that the printers of 
 Charleston were formally organized so early as 1834 ; how 
 much earlier it is now perhaps impossible to ascertain. 
 
 According to Ethelbert Stewart, printers had organized 
 in Washington in 1815 (“the oldest existing union of 
 printers, if not the oldest union of any trade in the United 
 States ! ”) ; in New Orleans in 1830; in Richmond, Charles- 
 ton and Louisville in 1834; in Nashville in 1835; in Mobile, 
 Augusta, Ga., and Columbia, S. C., in 1836, and in Savan- 
 nah in 1850. All of these organizations, after varying 
 terms of years, became moribund and died; but were evi- 
 dently reorganized; New Orleans, for instance, having had 
 two societies before the organization of the present union 
 in 1852. 
 
 An important indirect result of the Duff Green schemes 
 was the organization of the National Typographical Society 
 in Washington in 1836; neither Charleston nor Columbia, 
 however, were among the six cities sending delegations 
 thereto. 
 
 The indomitable Green, “the printers’ Banquo, ” after 
 leaving Washington, attempted to organize “The American 
 Literary Company” (chartered in this State, as has been 
 shown, as the “Literary Society of South Carolina”), with 
 headquarters at Columbia, ‘ ‘his plan still being to employ 
 boys under the guise of teaching them a trade,” but it was 
 doubtless opposed by the South Carolina printers, who had 
 been warned against Green by the craft in Augusta. 
 
 Columbia Printers and Mechanics. 
 
 Mention has been made of the existence of a typograph- 
 ical society in Columbia in 1836, which in 1842 sent out a 
 “rat list,” and which, Stewart thinks, went down in a 
 strike that year. In The Columbia Telegraph, of Novem- 
 
24 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 ber 8, 1847, appears a notice of “The Mechanics’ Associa- 
 tion.” It was probably of a social and charitable charac- 
 ter. The late Julian A. Selby, the venerable printer and 
 publisher, claimed that there was no organization of work- 
 men in Columbia before 1861, for other than social and 
 charitable purposes, except the typographical union; but 
 he could give no facts or dates bearing on the subject. 
 
 Following is the roll of officers of “The Mechanics’ 
 Association” of Columbia, in November, 1847 : President, 
 Joel Stevenson ; first vice president, Charles Beck ; second 
 vice president, J. S. Boatwright ; recording secretary, 
 J. Lomas ; corresponding secretary, E. A. Young ; treas- 
 urer, J. M. Miller. In that year the association attempted, 
 and with some degree of success, to raise funds for a 
 library and reading room, the committee on organization 
 consisting of Charles Beck, John Davis, George W. Wright, 
 Levi Root, George Shields, William Beard, H. P. Dougal, 
 J. N. Scofield, Eli Killian, J. S. Boatwright and J. Brown, 
 with David Shepherd as chairman. How large a library was 
 assembled is not known, but the writer has a book label 
 bearing the legend: “Mechanics’ Association Library, 
 
 Columbia. No. 47.” 
 
 In the Columbia Telegraph of March 31, 1851, is a notice 
 of the organization of the Columbia Typographical Society, 
 stating that “At a meeting of the Journeymen Printers of 
 the city * * * on Saturday evening, 1st of March inst., 
 
 the committee appointed at a previous meeting reported a 
 constitution which, after some very slight modifications, 
 was adopted and signed by the following members of the 
 fraternity: 
 
 Louis M. Jones, J. L. Pennington, 
 
 T. F. Greneker, 
 W. Taylor Smith, 
 E. A. Bronson, 
 
 V. Little, 
 
 H. McCollom, 
 
 M. Stafford, 
 
 R. McKnight, 
 
 W. D. Lane, 
 
 John P. DeGraaf, 
 
 C. C. Sower, 
 Jos. S. Bean, 
 
 E. G. McKnight, 
 Conn O’Neill, 
 
 J. P. M. Calvo, 
 
 E. Johnson, 
 
 A. Cummings, 
 T. H. Walsh, 
 A. A. Haight. 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 25 
 
 The following members were respectively nominated 
 and elected officers for the ensuing year: President, L. M. 
 Jones; vice president, T. F. Greneker; secretary and 
 treasurer, A. A. Haight; standing committee, J. P. M. 
 Calvo, E. A. Bronson, and Robert McCollom. 
 
 The society adjourned to meet the first Saturday in 
 April. 
 
 Another Labor Paper. 
 
 The Columbia Daily Telegraph, November, 1847, gives 
 the following chilling notice (it does not even “damn” 
 with “faint praise”) of what appears to be another effort, 
 before 1862, to establish a labor paper in Charleston: 
 
 “mechanics’ advocate.” 
 
 “The above is the title of a small sheet published in 
 Charleston, under the editorial management of James 
 M. A. Henderson, at $2 per annum, the first number of 
 which is now before us. We would prefer a longer 
 acquaintance before expressing ourselves as to its merits. 
 Mr. L. P. Ashby, at Mr. A. S. Johnston’s book store, is 
 agent for Columbia.” 
 
 Union Minute Book, 1859-1862. 
 
 By a lucky chance the writer discovered under a pile of 
 rubbish, fifteen or more years ago, in the Elliott Street 
 storeroom of The News and Courier, the last ante-bellum 
 minute book of “Charleston Typographical Union No. 43,” 
 and “Southern Typographical Union No. 1.” The last 
 person who had the book in charge was so careless or 
 ignorant of its value that he used it largely for a scrap- 
 book, pasting newspaper clippings and pictures over nearly 
 twenty pages of the minutes. This book records the min- 
 utes from August 27, 1859, to January 16, 1862. Although 
 three pages of these first minutes can only be partly deci- 
 phered, owing to the news clippings, it appears that this 
 meeting was the first held after that for preliminary 
 organization— or reorganization, “for Mr. R. A. Britton, 
 chairman of the committee appointed to transcribe the 
 constitution and by-laws in a book for the purpose of 
 
26 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 receiving the signatures of members, reported that the 
 committee had performed their duty to the best of their 
 ability.” Among other resolutions adopted, indicating 
 that this Union had just organized, are those authorizing 
 the secretary ‘‘to apply to the National Typographical 
 Union for a charter providing for ‘‘printing the consti- 
 tution and by-laws and making permanent arrangements 
 for a place of meeting.” An important item is the pro- 
 posal to appoint “a committee to report a scale of prices 
 for the government of this Union.” This provoked con- 
 siderable discussion ; ' but it is pleasant to read this last 
 paragraph in the minutes of the first regular meeting of 
 ‘‘Charleston Typographical Union No. 43:” ‘‘Mr. R. A. 
 
 Britton begged the attention of his brother printers for a 
 few minutes. He was, he said, perfectly aware that this 
 was a secret association— a Trade Union— and that its 
 business was not properly to be discussed on the street ; 
 but, he had been asked by parties not belonging to this 
 Union questions relating to it, which he had answered. 
 He had been asked : ‘Was this Union the preliminary of 
 
 a strike?’ He had said: ‘No.’ He had told them this 
 Union was formed under peaceful auspices, at a time 
 when all were satisfied with the present scale (of prices?) ; 
 when peace and harmony pervaded the circles of employer 
 and employed. He had told them that the Union had 
 been formed not to redress any grievance or to take 
 measures to strengthen a strike, but to unite themselves 
 with the fraternities of other cities.” The officers selected 
 at this, the first regular meeting, were : President, C. A. D. 
 Church ; vice president, John F. Britton (Mr. William 
 Estill, Jr., declining the nomination); secretary, Joseph 
 S. Bean ; treasurer, T. C. Neville ; door-keeper, James 
 G. Lynch. 
 
 Scale of Prices, I860. 
 
 Routine proceedings mainly fill the pages of the book, 
 until the meeting of March 3, 1860, when a special com- 
 mittee reported the Scale of Prices. The report is too 
 long for insertion here, but would doubtless be interest- 
 ing for comparison with present prices. The charge for 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 27 
 
 “plain matter in the English language” is “38 cents per 
 1000 ems, for manuscript or printed copy, on all letters 
 from Pica to Agate, inclusive.” The general subdivisions 
 are “Newspapers,” morning and evening ; “Book and Job 
 work,” and “Press work.” The report was adopted, the 
 scale to go into operation on the first of May following, 
 and a committee was appointed “to confer with the pro- 
 prietors and inform them of the action of the Union.” 
 The committee consisted of R. A. Britton for The Mercury ; 
 J. G. Lynch, Evening News; Oran Bassett, The Courier ; 
 William Estill for Walker, Evans & Cogswell Co.; E. G. 
 Murden for Harper & Calvo. 
 
 On May 26, 1860, the Union, after much discussion, by 
 a vote of 15 to 13, “ Resolved , That on and after 1st of 
 September next, no member of this Union shall be allowed 
 to work in any office where hands are employed not mem- 
 bers of this Union ;” but on June 30th next, on motion of 
 Mr. T. C. Neville, that resolution was “expunged from 
 the minutes.” The meetings of June 23d and 30th are 
 largely devoted to the discussion and attempted settlement 
 of a “difference that had occurred in the office of Walker, 
 Evans & Cogswell Co. in reference to blank pages,” the 
 printer and the Union claiming that payment should be 
 made for three pages, while the firm claimed that the 
 “phat take” should be limited to one page. 
 
 On July 28, 1860, “communications were read from Cin- 
 cinnati Union No. 3, containing a list of rats, and from 
 New Orleans Union No. 17, containing a list of delinquents, 
 which was received as information.” 
 
 The officers elected on August 25, 1860, the last anniver- 
 sary meeting under the old political regime, were: Presi- 
 dent, John F. Britton; vice president, James Martin; 
 secretary, Jonas Howe; treasurer, William Estill, Jr.; 
 doorkeeper, J. G. Lynch. 
 
 A Costly Banquet, or None. 
 
 As early as the March meeting, and several times there- 
 after, the matter of celebrating the anniversary by a ban- 
 quet had been discussed. At the monthly meeting in May 
 
28 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Mr. R. A. Britton had reported for the committee, that he 
 had ‘ ‘conferred with several caterers and that it could not 
 be procured for less than $5 per member, ’ ’ and, on motion 
 of Mr. H. P. Cooke, the committee was discharged from 
 further consideration; eminently wise action in view of the 
 fact that the total receipts of the Union for the month had 
 been $24. But the banquet question was not finally settled 
 until August, when a caterer submitted the following esti- 
 mate: “I will furnish you a good supper for forty members 
 for $2.50 for each member, with liquors and segars. Or I 
 will furnish you with a cold collation, with two bowls of 
 punch and one bowl of Sherry cobbler, for $1.50 for each 
 member.” This offer was not accepted, and there is no 
 record in the minutes of any banquet at the anniversary 
 meeting; possibly the high livers insisted upon ‘‘$5 per 
 member” or nothing. 
 
 At the annual meeting Treasurer Neville reported the 
 expenditure of $103.88, leaving a balance on hand (July 
 28, 1860) and in bank, of $92.88. 
 
 During the year the applications for membership by 
 letter were sixty-seven; by card, thirty-five; withdrawal 
 cards were issued to thirty-six applicants, five forfeited 
 membership and five resigned from the Union, having 
 ‘‘retired from business.” The above figures are valuable 
 for comparison with latter-day conditions, but more inter- 
 esting still, perhaps, was the ‘‘disciplining” of C. E. 
 Chichester, a recalcitrant printer. This was no other than 
 the young northern printer who became captain of the 
 Charleston Zouaves, who distinguished himself as an artil- 
 lery officer at Battery Wagner and throughout the war; 
 afterward studied theology and became a Presbyterian 
 minister, and whose bones now lie, by his own request, 
 in the Confederate lot in Magnolia among the 500 or more 
 soldiers who died in defence of Charleston. There were 
 as gallant soldiers as Mr. Chichester in Union No. 43, 
 but none of its members, perhaps, attained so high dis- 
 tinction in arts and arms as their brother printer from 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 29 
 
 Chichester Disciplined. 
 
 It appears that Mr. Chichester and five other members 
 of the Union were employed by Walker, Evans & Cogs- 
 well; that the Union claimed that such printers were 
 entitled to payment for three blank pages in “jobs” of a 
 certain character, while the firm allowed payment for only 
 one blank page; that when complaint was made to the firm 
 by its union printers all of them except Chichester signed 
 it, he claiming “that he could not conscientiously sign the 
 paper, not believing that the men were entitled to such 
 blanks.” There were two reports to the Union, the 
 majority of the committee merely stating the facts and 
 making no recommendation; the minority making a 
 lengthy detailed report, concluding with the following 
 recommendations : 
 
 “That Mr. C. E. Chichester be summoned by the secre- 
 tary in writing to appear before this Union, and that the 
 president publicly reprimand him, and warn him that if 
 he be guilty of the same conduct again, his name will be 
 published as a ‘rat’. 
 
 “That in case he refuses to come forward at the next 
 regular meeting, he will be published as a ‘rat’.” 
 
 The Majority Must Rule. 
 
 The report of the minority, signed by H. P. Cooke, chair- 
 man, was adopted by the Union, and is, unfortunately, too 
 long for insertion here. “He knew,” said the minority, 
 “it was the order of the Union for him to sign a letter 
 addressed to his employer, and, consequently, his action 
 was that of defiance. * * * Divine law teaches us that 
 
 those who are not for us are against us. * * * There 
 were others who did not think we were entitled to the 
 blanks, but who abided by the decision of the Union, and 
 accordingly signed the letter to the employers, claiming 
 the blanks.” 
 
 Chairman Cooke Says: “Why should we allow a person 
 to remain a member of this Union, when he not only dis- 
 regards our action, but takes ground against us?” and 
 later on he quotes, “as very good authority, indeed,” the 
 
30 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 philosopher Paley, who says: “Where there is a right, 
 there must be a corresponding obligation,” and adds, 
 “now if he had a right to oppose us, please inform your 
 committee where our obligation abides. 
 
 “Your action tonight will settle great points that will 
 arise at some future period. Perhaps when our clay has 
 returned to clay and another generation has taken our 
 places, this same question may arise, and remember, gen- 
 tlemen, you this night make a precedent. * * * If you 
 
 sustain this gentleman tonight and tomorrow you strike, 
 you cannot call on me to cooperate with you; for, if it does 
 not suit my interest to strike, bear in mind, I claim this 
 precedent to sustain me in not striking.” 
 
 In conclusion, the committee disapproves of any nominal 
 fine, such as twenty-five cents, or suspension for a short 
 time, but recommends the public reprimand and warning 
 already mentioned. The grand finale of the whole matter 
 is found in the following paragraph in the minutes of the 
 next meeting: “Mr. C. E. Chichester having appeared 
 before the Union, the president administered to him a 
 reprimand for his conduct in the late misunderstanding at 
 Walker, Evans & Cogswell Co.” 
 
 Whatever may have been thought of Mr. Chichester’s 
 course in this matter, he afterwards regained his former 
 prestige, and became president of the Union. 
 
 A Very Interesting Episode. 
 
 The last quarter of the year 1860 was enlivened by 
 troubles between the Union and the Evening News and 
 The Courier, over the employment of apprentices and the 
 pay of the deputy foreman, respectively. Space does not 
 permit full details, but the remarks of Col. John Cuning- 
 ham, editor of the Evening News, and of Mr. John Francis 
 Britton, president of the Union, and his brother, R. A. 
 Britton, as reported in the minutes, are so characteristic 
 of the three men, and cast such a light on conditions at 
 that time, that an unusually long citation is warranted. 
 
 Colonel Cuningham had been invited to appear before 
 the Union practically to show cause why the Evening 
 News should not “be declared a ‘Rat Shop’.” According 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 31 
 
 to the minutes: “The president (Mr. John F. Britton) 
 
 informed Colonel Cuningham that at the last meeting of 
 this Union a resolution had been adopted not allowing 
 apprentices to work in competition with compositors by 
 the piece, or on time ; that the system was alike injurious 
 to the employer and employed ; that there were matters 
 connected with printing of which he (Cuningham) knew 
 nothing, and that the journeymen wished to have the 
 right of governing the internal arrangements of a printing 
 office ; that all the other offices had agreed to the resolu- 
 tion except his,” and concluded by hoping that he would 
 “also concede this request to the employees.” 
 
 Colonel Cuningham’s Speech Hissed. 
 
 “Colonel Cuningham said he had been waited upon a 
 few minutes previous to attend this meeting ; he did not 
 come to intrude, and hoped he would not be considered as 
 doing so. It was not his desire to inquire about resolu- 
 tions ; all had met here to consult each other's interests 
 as brothers ; but this issue the Union had forced upon 
 themselves. It was his right to govern the internal affairs 
 of his office, and no one should question that right; the 
 work that his apprentices had done had been refused by 
 journeymen, and he had paid his apprentices full price for 
 doing it. If his workmen were not paid sufficient wages, 
 they should have said so ; he was willing to concede to a 
 just demand. Was it justice to act as they had done? His 
 business had been neglected by this action ; there was a 
 law in this State under which they could be prosecuted 
 for conspiring [hisses], but he assured the Union on his 
 honor as a man and a gentleman that he would do nothing 
 of the kind; their interests were at stake and he regarded 
 them too much to sacrifice them for this fault. He con- 
 sidered the resolution presented to him as dictation, in 
 whatever language they might couch it; it was an infringe- 
 ment on the rights of the employers, and could in no way 
 benefit the employee. Capital has the means in its power 
 of resisting the demands of the workman, but when these 
 demands were just they should be conceded.” 
 
32 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 “Wherever strikes had taken place they resulted in ruin 
 to all engaged ; starvation and misery must and would be 
 the inevitable result. In Lynn and Europe the strikers 
 had suffered to on unheard-of extent, and all their efforts 
 had scarcely resulted in any benefit to themselves. 
 
 “A body of men so intelligent and enlightened as those 
 who summoned him he had seldom met. They had formed 
 themselves into an association from which they excluded 
 the employer, not giving him an opportunity to vindicate 
 the position which he held, but compelling him to submit 
 to whatever they chose to demand, Why should the 
 employer (not) be allowed to join the society? His inter- 
 ests were theirs ; their interests were his ; this, surely, 
 was not the manner in which the employers should have 
 been treated. He concluded by still persisting that the 
 resolution was dictating, and that he never would submit 
 to it ; he would resist by all means in his power, and 
 declared ‘not a cent for tribute, millons for defence!’ He 
 appealed to his brethren of the printing pursuit to consider 
 well the step they had taken, and to recede from the posi- 
 tion they now held ; to act with fairness to themselves 
 and employers, and leave him and his little household to 
 pursue the even tenor of their way.” 
 
 Mr. Britton’s Rejoinder. 
 
 Mr. R. A. Britton, after expressing regret that he had 
 not the ability of the gentleman who had just preceded 
 him, proceeded at some length to review Colonel Cuning- 
 ham’s remarks. He showed that the request made by the 
 Union, of the employers, was one of justice, and could not 
 be regarded as dictation. “Itw'as not an infringement on 
 the rights of the employers.” He referred to the strike 
 of 1852, and pointed out the course pursued by one of the 
 present proprietors of The News during that difficulty. 
 He concluded by urging the Union to stand firm in the 
 position it had assumed, believing that if no steps backward 
 were ta.ken our point would be attained. 
 
 The minutes for that day concluded with this line : 
 “After some further discussion, the meeting, on motion, 
 adjourned.” 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 33 
 
 How much, if any, report of these unusual proceed- 
 ings— a newspaper editor and proprietor addressing Union 
 printers in their own hall— ever appeared in the daily press 
 at the time the writer does not know, but, if it was his 
 own, Mr. Jonas Howe, the secretary of the Union, appa- 
 rently made an excellent “strike report” of the proceed- 
 ings. Colonel Cuningham was a bold, aggressive speaker, 
 politician and editor, and a leading authority at that time 
 in the Code Duello. His claim that he might, if he would, 
 prosecute the Union for “conspiracy,” which the printers 
 received with hisses, reminds one of certain charges of 
 “government by injunction” in our own day; but even 
 in 1860 the claim that newspaper proprietors should be 
 allowed to join the printers’ unions must have provoked 
 a smile ; now-a-days it would be received with ‘ ‘loud 
 Olympian laughter. ’ ’ 
 
 The Strike of 1852. 
 
 Mr. Britton’s reference to the strike of 1852 whets the 
 appetite for full information of that, perhaps, earliest 
 strike by Charleston printers. The craft throughout the 
 United States, notably in the more populous (white) 
 North, had begun to feel its strength, had become “class 
 conscious,” as Socialists would say; the first convention 
 of the “National Typographical Society” had met in 
 Washington in 1836 ; this organization, after many ups 
 and downs, had evolved by 1851 into the “National Typo- 
 graphical Union;” the year before (1850) the “National 
 Convention of Journeymen Printers in the United States” 
 had been outspoken against the apprentice system, the 
 New York delegates declaring, “the system is prolific of 
 ‘rats’. Let apprentices be limited and journeymen would 
 be in demand. The price of labor would be increased and 
 placed in a position which would enable it to compete suc- 
 cessfully with the power of capital.” The Journeymen’s 
 Convention of 1850 adopted a resolution “limiting the 
 number of apprentices, as a defence against what had 
 amounted to child labor.” Probably the newspapers of 
 the time, it being against their interests, do not give full, 
 
34 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 perhaps any, data regarding the strike of 1852 in Charles- 
 ton, and there are no minutes of that day extant. It is 
 highly probable that “the strike of 1852,” like the diffi- 
 culty between the union printers of 1860 and Colonel 
 Cuningham and The News, was over the ever-recurring 
 “apprentice system.” 
 
 The minutes of several successive meetings contain 
 strong arguments, pro and con, upon the apprentice and 
 deputy-foreman matters, and it appears from a careful 
 reading of the minute book, that both difficulties were 
 finally compromised. 
 
 Printers Hesitate to Secede. 
 
 The next burning question before the Union was no less 
 than a proposal to secede from the National Typographical 
 Union. The State of South Carolina had seceded from the 
 Federal Union on December 20, 1860, and nine days later, 
 at its first regular meeting thereafter, Mr. Chichester 
 moved the following resolution : 
 
 “Whereas, The people of the State of South Carolina, in 
 convention assembled, having solemnly and unanimously 
 declared themselves free and independent, and having 
 severed the ties which have hitherto united them with the 
 confederacy known as the United States of America, and 
 
 “ Whereas , This action of the people rendering it inex- 
 pedient that this typographical union should longer retain 
 its connection with the national union of the United 
 States ; therefore be it 
 
 “ Resolved : That from and after the 1st day of January, 
 1861, all connection heretofore existing between the Char- 
 leston Union No. 43, and the national union, be dissolved, 
 and all acts of this union bearing upon said connection be, 
 and they are hereby, revoked. 
 
 “ Resolved : That the secretary be instructed to trans- 
 mit immediately to the proper officers of the national 
 union the charter of this union, with a copy of the above 
 resolutions of dissolution. 
 
 “Resolved: That the secretary be instructed further, to 
 notify all subordinate unions in this State, and all subor- 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 35 
 
 dinate unions in other states which may follow South 
 Carolina in her present patriotic movement, of the action 
 of this union, accompanied by a request that arrangements 
 be made at an early day for the assembling of a conven- 
 tion of delegates from each subordinate union, to organ- 
 ize a new national typographical union for the Southern 
 Confederacy.” 
 
 Knowing the wild enthusiasm for secession, it is hard to 
 understand why Mr. Chichester’s resolutions were lost, as 
 the minutes briefly record. Possibly the presence of some 
 northern printers ; probably the idea that the North would 
 make overtures and that the states would soon be re-united. 
 At any rate, Jonas Howe, secretary, lost an opportunity to 
 get his name into the histories. He had given a full report 
 of the squabble with Col. Cuningham over apprentices, but 
 not a line of the red-hot discussion that must have followed 
 Mr. Chichester’s drastic resolution. All that Howe wrote 
 thereon was the following significant sentence : “On the 
 
 announcement to the meeting that the motion had been 
 lost, J. F. Britton vacated his chair as president and left 
 the room.” Disappointment or disgust probably overcome 
 that ardent South Carolinian, who was later to become a 
 gallant soldier of the Confederacy. 
 
 As will be seen, the Union later carried out the policy 
 outlined by Mr. Chichester. Whether or not it ever for- 
 mally adopted the resolutions cannot be ascertained, as no 
 meetings are recorded in the minute book, except one 
 short meeting on January 19th, between December 29th, 
 1860, and May 25, 1861. 
 
 Between those dates Fort Sumter had been bombarded 
 and had surrendered (April 12-13), and there had been a 
 complete political revolution in South Carolina ; men, 
 women, and even children, had been excited to fever 
 heat, and it is not remarkable that the printers, some of 
 whom had doubtless already volunteered, had neither 
 heart nor time to attend meetings of the Union. 
 
36 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 First Union in The Confederacy. 
 
 At the head of the minutes of June 29th, 1861, appears 
 the legend “Hall of Typographical Union No. 1.” At 
 this meeting, on motion of Mr. Ashby, it was resolved 
 that “a committee be appointed to nominate delegates to 
 attend a proposed meeting for the formation of a Southern 
 National Typographical Union, and that this Union request 
 of all unions in the Confederate States the appointment of 
 two delegates to meet in the city of Charleston on the 25th 
 of October next.” 
 
 At the August meeting, the proposed meeting for organ- 
 izing a southern national union was postponed until May 
 1st, 1862, “provided the state of the country would admit 
 of its being held,” and the various unions throughout the 
 South were notified of the change of date. 
 
 That there was inter-communicaton between the South- 
 ern unions, e. g., from New Orleans, Atlanta, Raleigh, 
 Columbia and elsewhere, is shown by a glance over the 
 minutes, but though the matter is referred to more than 
 once, it is clear that no meeting was ever held in Charles- 
 ton to federate the Southern unions. Possibly, but improb- 
 ably, some such general meeting was held at some interior 
 city of the South, where the original suggestion of Mr. 
 Chichester was put into effect. 
 
 The Old Union’s Last Strike. 
 
 A special meeting of “Southern Typographical Union 
 No. 1” was called for September 14, 1861. In the absence 
 of President R. A. Britton, vice president Milton Clark 
 presided, and called upon Mr. Maurice Tracy, foreman of 
 the Charleston Mercury, to state the object of the meet- 
 ing. Mr. Tracy thereupon said that the proprietors of the 
 morning newspapers had entered into an agreement to 
 reduce the price of composition in their offices to 35 cents 
 per thousand ems, and submitted the following transcript : 
 
 “We, the undersigned, in consideration of the difficul- 
 ties of the times and the great falling off in advertising, 
 the most lucrative portion of our business, hereby propose 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 37 
 
 and agree to reduce the price of composition in The 
 Mercury and Courier offices from 38 cents to 35 cents, 
 and return to the old rate as soon as the war is over. 
 
 “R. B. Rhett, Jr.” 
 
 ‘‘A. S. WlLLINGTON & CO.” 
 
 There was considerable discussion as to whether the 
 paper could be regarded as a proposition to the Union or a 
 mere agreement between the proprietors, and the Union 
 “Resolved itself into committee of the whole on the state 
 of the craft,” with L. P. Ashby in the chair. Mr. R. A. 
 Britton declared that “none would be readier than he to 
 extend to the proprietors all the courtesies and concessions 
 of the craft when appealed to and solicited directly.” 
 This view seemed to meet with general acquiesence and it 
 appeared for a while as if the Union was standing on its 
 dignity and only demanded proper recognition from the 
 proprietors, but such was not the case. 
 
 It is impossible, with the lapse of time, to arrive at the 
 truth in the matter. There can be no question that the 
 war then raging had cut off from the newspapers much 
 lucrative business, notably the advertising coming from 
 north of the Potomac, but whether that decrease warranted 
 a reduction of three cents per thousand ems for composi- 
 tion so early in the struggle, will never be known. 
 
 What the printers thought is shown by the adoption, by 
 a vote of 24 to 3, of the following resolution introduced by 
 Mr. J. F. Britton: 
 
 “ Resolved , That this Union deems it inadvisable to 
 reduce the price of labor and that it cannot agree to the 
 proposed reduction by the proprietors.” 
 
 To give an idea of the personnel of the Union in the fall 
 of 1861, the yeas and nays are here printed: 
 
 Yeas : A. Eiland, J. F. Hershman, J. Martin Egan, G. W. 
 Nickerson, T. C. Neville, Albert Roberts, Michael Papey, 
 Clarke, J. F. White, James Ronan, C. F. B. Bremer, V. L. 
 Clayton, Adams, H. L. Bohler, G. H. Spencer, L. P. Ashby, 
 J. F. Britton, R. A. Britton, Miles McSwiney, Quinn, H. P. 
 Cooke, P. Murray, T. Murray. 
 
 Nays : Maurice Tracy, John F. White, P. Walsh. 
 
38 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 A committee consisting of R. A. Britton, T. C. Neville 
 and P. Walsh was appointed to confer with the proprietors 
 and report the action of the Union. 
 
 The Strike Well On. 
 
 There were six more meetings of the Union recorded in 
 this book, and every one of them has more or less refer- 
 ence to the strike which evidently followed the announce- 
 ment of reduction of rates by the morning papers. On 
 September 22, the treasurer is instructed ‘ ‘to turn over all 
 funds in his hands to Mr. T. C. Neville, the treasurer of 
 the Printers’ Association, for the purpose of starting The 
 Confederate, a newspaper intended to carry out the objects 
 contemplated by the Union.” It would be interesting to 
 know how far this ambitious scheme of the Charleston 
 printers to establish a newspaper of their own in war 
 times progressed. 
 
 On September 28, the special committee appointed to 
 confer with the proprietors of The Mercury and The 
 Courier reported that those gentlemen ‘‘had treated them 
 in the most contemptuous manner, and not even vouchsafed 
 a reply to a letter couched in very respectful language.” 
 On October 11, Mr. Bassett moved that the Union accept 
 35 cents per thousand ems ‘‘during the present war.” 
 This was rejected by the very close vote of 10 to 9. The 
 ten votes were in the affirmative, but a two-thirds majority 
 was required. 
 
 At the meeting on October 12, a contribution of $5.50 is 
 reported from printers employed by Evans & Cogswell 
 ‘‘towards relieving the necessities of those members of the 
 Union who were still on strike.” 
 
 On motion of Mr. Walsh it was “ Resolved , That all who 
 worked at the case during the strike without distinction 
 * * * be published as ‘rats’.” 
 
 Mr. Neville reported that the New Orleans Union had 
 appropriated $50 for the benefit of this Union, and the sec- 
 retary was instructed to inform the Nashville and Mobile 
 Unions of our affairs and ask their aid. 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 39 
 
 On October 26, the president reported that the chairman 
 of the finance committee, a very important official at that 
 time, had been expelled for ratting. Mr. J. F. Britton 
 moved that the secretary forward to the various unions in 
 the Confederate States a printed list of the members in 
 good standing; of those suspended and those expelled, 
 stating the causes of expulsion. This was carried and 
 immediately thereafter, on motion, Oran Bassett, J. Ronan 
 J. F. Quinn, M. Davis, H. T. Ryan and Criminger were 
 expelled for ratting. 
 
 Indicative of the convictions of the Charleston printers 
 regarding Secession, is an announcement in The Southern 
 Episcopalian, a magazine which reduced its pages from 
 56 to 16, in December, 1861. Any idea of “Labor Union, ” 
 or strike, is, apparently, forgotten. The editor says: 
 “The invader is upon our soil and all the energies of our 
 “people are put forth to meet him. The ordinary business 
 “of the city is, in great measure, suspended, and every 
 “man who is able to bear arms goes forth to defend our 
 “homes from an enemy who has set at defiance the rules 
 “of civilized warfare and seeks to carry ruin and devasta- 
 tion in his train. * * * The call upon our printers to 
 
 “take the field, and the failure of some of our subscribers 
 “to pay their dues, with the scarceness of paper and the 
 “general stagnation of business, makes it necessary that 
 “we should abridge our periodical to its present very 
 “narrow dimensions.” 
 
 The strike seems to have weakened, as no meeting is 
 recorded until December 21st, when both Vice President 
 Milton Clark and Secretary Bremer were reported for 
 “ratting,” and on motion, expelled. 
 
 Union’s Last Meeting in War Time. 
 
 For several reasons the minutes of the last meeting of 
 the Union, of which there is any record, are of peculiar 
 interest, and are, therefore, published in full: 
 
40 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 “ Southern Typographical Union No. 1. 
 
 “ Charleston , S. C., January 16, 1861. 
 
 “An extra meeting of the Union was held this evening, 
 the President, R. A. Britton, in the chair. 
 
 “Mr. Crawford was reported for “ratting,” and on 
 motion, expelled. 
 
 “Mr. G. A. Moore, vice president, moved that the con- 
 stitution be amended so as to make the price of composi- 
 tion on morning papers 35 cents per thousand ems. Motion 
 seconded by Mr. Clayton. 
 
 “Mr. John F. Britton offered the following as a substi- 
 tute : ‘That the Union be dissolved ; that the money for- 
 
 warded by the New Orleans Typographical Union be 
 transmitted to said Union, accompanied by the thanks of 
 this body, and that each of the members of this Union be 
 furnished with a copy for future use. ’ 
 
 “The ayes and nays were ordered on the substitute, 
 and are as follows : 
 
 “Ayes: Roberts, Lyons, Hamlin— 3. 
 
 “Nays : J. F. Britton, Gilbert McIntosh, Moore, Clayton, 
 R. A. Britton— 6. 
 
 “So the substitute was lost. 
 
 “The original motion coming up, the ayes and nays 
 were ordered, and are as follows : 
 
 “Ayes: J. F. Britton, Hamlin, McIntosh, Roberts— 4. 
 
 “Nays: R. A. Britton, Clayton, Gilbert, Lyons, Moose— 5. 
 
 “So the original motion was lost. 
 
 “Mr. Lyons moved ‘that the constitution be suspended 
 during the present war,’ and, on taking the vote, it was 
 found to be unanimously in the affirmative. 
 
 “On motion of Mr. Roberts, all arrearages up to the 
 last regular meeting, were suspended. 
 
 “On motion (no further business appearing), the Union 
 adjourned subject to the call of the president. 
 
 “V. L. A. Clayton, Secretary.” 
 
 It will be noted that the Union which had, during the 
 year 1859-60, numbered 112, owing to the strike and to the 
 State’s call to arms, had dwindled to nine members. Mr. 
 R. A. Britton and four others of “the old guard” opposed 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 41 
 
 to the last any proposition to lower the price of composi- 
 tion, and preferred to suspend the operation of the Union 
 until the war was over. 
 
 The proposition of the nine Charleston printers “that 
 the constitution be suspended during the war” was not 
 original with them. Although President Lincoln and his 
 advisers in the cabinet and congress never passed any 
 such formal resolution, they too, and their successors, 
 suspended the constitution of a greater Union during the 
 war and for many years thereafter. 
 
 Distinguished Printers of the ’60s— And After. 
 
 On the roll of the Charleston Typographical Union are 
 doubtless many soldiers of the Confederacy. The writer 
 recalls several who served gallantly — notably Capt. C. E. 
 Chichester, the Messrs. Britton, C. A. D. Church, of the 
 LaFayette Artillery, its color bearer, and John A. Prince. 
 Mr. Prince is, in all probability, the last Confederate 
 veteran now a compositor in the newspaper press of 
 Charleston. He is as modest as he was brave, and a brief 
 sketch of his services will be of interest to his friends, 
 however surprised he may be to see it in print. When the 
 war began he was an apprentice, aged 17 years, on the 
 Charleston Evening News, and a member of the Beaure- 
 gard Light Infantry. After the reorganization that com- 
 pany was finally merged into Company E, 25th Regiment, 
 Hagood’s Brigade. Mr. Prince was wounded while on 
 duty in Fort Sumter, and again wounded at Drewry’s 
 Bluff, Virginia, May 16, 1864. He was taken prisoner at 
 the fall of Fort Fisher, and so remained until the end of 
 the war. In Hagood’s “Memoirs of the War of Seces- 
 sion,” Mr. Prince’s name appears on the Regimental Roll 
 as Second Lientenant, his commission dating from Novem- 
 ber 22, 1864, “the brave days when he was twenty-one.” 
 
 Although the writer never learned to “stick type,” for 
 nearly eighteen of the happiest years of his life he was in 
 daily — or rather nightly — association with the venerable 
 Oran Bassett, T. C. Neville, James Ronan and the Messrs. 
 Britton. South Carolina had no more patriotic citizens, 
 
42 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 though none of them rose so high in civic life as did two of 
 their fellows, Patrick Walsh, editor and proprietor of The 
 Augusta Chronicle, and sometime United States Senator 
 from Georgia, and Col. J. H. Estill, proprietor of The 
 Savannah Morning News, a leading capitalist of that city, 
 and prominent candidate for Governor of Georgia. 
 
 There can be found in one of the collections of war 
 poetry of the South, some graceful verses by another ante- 
 bellum Charleston printer, Capt. Edgar G. Murden, whose 
 name frequently appears in the minute book. 
 
 Two other names on the old rolls attract attention — V. 
 Stanton and Miles McSweeney — one of them the father of 
 Miles B. McSweeney, Governor of South Carolina, 1899- 
 1903; and the other the father of Frank L. Stanton, now 
 of Georgia, the gifted poet and journalist, once a printer- 
 boy on the Charleston newspaper press, whose first well- 
 remembered “swallow flights of song” appeared in the 
 Journal of Commerce. 
 
 This collection of notes on early labor organizations in 
 South Carolina, through the chance possession of the 
 Union's minute book covering the years 1859-1862, has 
 caused, perhaps, too much space to be devoted to that 
 later and most eventful period in our State’s history. 
 
 According to The Charleston Review, the official organ 
 of Central Labor Union of Charleston, the date of the 
 present charter is April, 1886, and it appears that the 
 national organization allowed the Charleston Typograph- 
 ical Union, in spite of its secession in 1861, to resume its 
 former number, “43.” 
 
 There has always been a close bond among “the craft” 
 the world over, and the printers of South Carolina, who 
 organized the first labor union in the State, were not slow 
 in getting back to the Restored Union — political and typo- 
 graphical — a consummation which certainly two of the 
 great branches of the Christian church have not as yet 
 effected. 
 
5.C, -A cfo> 4 tfijfe 
 
 IvU«t| 3. 2,1 Pee. }7^q 
 R««X-w.& . if £>ec Igo 3 
 
 | trtXL- • Vvt> 
 
 . 1 3 D«es 1 $ > / 
 
 THE CHARLESTON MECHANIC SOCIETY. 
 
 Reference has been made in the foregoing paper to the 
 ‘ ‘Charleston Mechanic Society, ’ ’ The last available printed 
 record of this ancient and honorable organization — apart 
 from notices and advertisements in the newspapers — is a 
 now rare pamphlet of forty-four pages entitled: “The Con- 
 stitution of the Charleston Mechanic Society, instituted at 
 Charleston, South Carolina, 1794.” 
 
 [Here appears an engraving of the seal of the society, 
 with an upraised muscular arm wielding a hammer, with 
 the legend, in the exergue, “Industry produceth wealth, 
 1794.”] 
 
 “Revised, and amended and ratified, June 7th, 1858. 
 Charleston, S. C. James & Williams, Printers, 16 State 
 Street, 1858.” 
 
 The preamble sets forth the purpose and aim of the 
 society, and reads as follows: 
 
 “We, mechanics, manufacturers, and handicraftsmen of 
 “the City of Charleston, actuated by principles of philan- 
 “throphy, anxious to promote the interests of the me- 
 chanic, and desirous that brotherly union may generally 
 
44 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 “prevail, being persuaded that we cannot better facilitate 
 “so desirable an object than by associating for that pur- 
 “pose; and, as the raising of a fund for the relief of such 
 “of us as may, by misfortune, be reduced to indigence, is 
 “essential thereto, conceiving the following rules to be 
 “best calculated for those ministrations, we do hereby 
 “subscribe to them as the Constitution and Rules for a 
 “Society.” 
 
 The preamble to the first act of incorporation, dated 
 December 21, 1798, reads: 
 
 “Whereas, John Casper Folker, president; Peter Smith, 
 “vice president; David Haig, senior warden; John John- 
 “son, junior warden of the same, have petitioned the Leg- 
 islature to incorporate the said society, stating that from 
 “the nature of their employment, and the smallness of 
 ‘ ‘their capital, they are more exposed than any other class 
 “of citizens to the inconveniences and distresses arising 
 “from sickness, and such other unavoidable accidents as 
 “may deprive themselves and families of the benefit of 
 “their exertions; and that they have united into a society 
 “for the purpose of raising a fund, by means of which 
 “such of them as are successful in the world, will be 
 “enabled, without inconvenience, to afford relief to the 
 “unfortunate.” etc., etc., etc. 
 
 As the preambles to the charter and constitution would 
 indicate, there is nothing in either suggesting anything 
 approximating a trade union, nor any reference to wages; 
 it is solely a benevolent and social organization, and the 
 constitution follows the conventional type of other societies 
 of the kind of that day. 
 
 Income and Outgo. 
 
 The fee for admission, except for the sons of members, 
 is $10, and the annual dues are $8 each for all members. 
 Whenever the treasurer shall report a balance of $150 in 
 his hands, after payment of all expenses, that sum, or 
 more, shall be converted into the permanent fund of the 
 society and shall be invested in certain specified city and 
 State securities. The interest or income only, accruing 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 45 
 
 from the invested funds, could be appropriated to the 
 relief of distressed members, or for the relief of the 
 widow or children of deceased members; “ Provided , That 
 the ages of the children do not exceed of the males four- 
 teen years, and females twelve years; at which age the 
 bounty of the society towards them shall be discontinued.” 
 This discrimination against “females twelve years” is 
 hard to understand. One would suppose they would be in 
 greater need than lads of fourteen years. In case of the 
 death of any member in indigence the president is author- 
 ized to pay as much as fifty dollars for the funeral 
 expenses. The Committee on Charity, “when the urgent 
 necessity of the case shall require immediate relief,” may 
 draw on the treasurer for any sum “not exceeding $20.” 
 
 Rule XII provided for the annual dinner of the society. 
 Unfortunately it does not prescribe any details of the 
 menu; but that it was ‘toothsome’ cannot be questioned, 
 for there is a provision that “the entire expenses, to be 
 paid out of the funds of the society, shall not exceed five 
 dollars per head for those dining.” The days of “four 
 bottle men” were happily over, and we cannot believe 
 that these “mechanics” emulated their predecessors of 
 1768 — of Charleston “Liberty Tree” fame — in drinking 
 forty-nine toasts in one evening; but it is exceedingly 
 probable that they rivalled the Typographical Union of 
 1860, who laid on the table the proposition of Mr. W. B. 
 Thompson to furnish only “two bowls of punch and one 
 bowl of sherry cobbler” for each member. 
 
 Here is a notice of one of the anniversary meetings 
 taken, at random, from The City Gazette of January 28, 
 1826: 
 
 “charleston mechanic society. 
 
 “The anniversary meeting of this Society will be held 
 on Monday, 6th February next, at 12 o’clock, at Seyle’s 
 Room, on King Street. The members are requested to be 
 punctual in their attendance, to transact the usual business 
 of the Society before dinner, which will be served up at 3 
 o’clock. 
 
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 “Those members who intend not to dine are requested 
 to give notice of such intention on or before Tuesday, 31st 
 inst. By order, 
 
 “January 24.” “F. A. Beckman, Secretary.” 
 
 In June, 1858, the society had eighty-one members, and 
 the report of Treasurer Jacob F. Schirmer showed stocks 
 and bonds to the value of $21,051.86, with a total annual 
 income of $1,312.45. So far as we know the society pub- 
 lished no later pamphlet giving lists of members, assets, 
 etc. The Charleston Courier of February 3, 1880, reports 
 the eighty-sixth annual meeting, held at Masonic Hall the 
 day before, and reports the election of the following offi- 
 cers: David A. Walker, president; J. W. Sawner, vice 
 president; C. C. Trumbo, senior warden; P. P. Toale, 
 junior warden; William Kirkwood, treasurer; Thomas H. 
 Dillingham, secretary; John H. Seyle and M. W. Cross, 
 stewards. 
 
 The Charleston City Directory for 1882, and 1883, gives 
 the same list of officers as in 1880; but no notice of the 
 society or its meetings, so far as the writer knows, appears 
 in the Charleston press after February, 1880. During the 
 presidency of Mr. David A. Walker the society dissolved, 
 and what was left of the funds, sadly depleted by the War 
 of Secession, is said to have been turned over to some 
 charitable organization. 
 
 It does not come within the scope of this paper to 
 present a complete history of the Charleston Mechanic 
 Society; but it may be questioned whether any other 
 organization of mechanics in the South — perhaps in the 
 United States — organized so early as 1794, lasted eighty- 
 six years. The subject is well worth a special monograph, 
 and the student who undertakes the task will find inter- 
 esting data by referring to the Charleston Courier of the 
 following dates: February 7, 1859; February 6, 1860; and 
 February 6, 1861. 
 
 Then, owing to the siege of Charleston by the Federal 
 army and navy, the meetings ceased; the mechanics were 
 busy building gunboats and making cannon and small 
 arms, under Eason and Henerey and Dotterer and others; 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 47 
 
 but on February 6, 1865, thirteen days before the evacua- 
 tion of the city, they met for the last time under “the 
 falling flag,” at the residence of Mr. Edward Fogartie, on 
 Calhoun Street (outside the range of Gillmore’s guns), and 
 The Courier of February 9th gives a good report of the 
 meeting and of the election of officers. 
 
 On February 5, 1867, the society celebrated its seventy- 
 third anniversary— “with all the honors”— by a business 
 meeting in the morning and a banquet in the evening. 
 On February 4, 1868, the anniversary meeting was held, 
 but apparently no officers were elected; and then there is 
 another period of suspended animation, until February 7, 
 1870. The mechanics, apparently, did not meet again 
 until February, 1874; and then another “break” until Feb- 
 ruary 4, 1878. This eighty-fourth anniversary— judging 
 by the newspaper report— was a notable event; it was the 
 grand finale of the ancient and honorable organization, for 
 the meeting on February 2, 1880, was apparently formal, 
 and the paper records nothing save the election of officers. 
 
 If the minute books of this society are still extant, they 
 should not be kept in private hands; they constitute a 
 unique record of economic conditions under the slavery 
 regime, and should be deposited for safe keeping, or pre- 
 sented to the Historical Society, or the Charleston Library, 
 or the library of the College of Charleston, or to the State 
 Historical Commission, in Columbia. 
 
 Some Representative Mechanics. 
 
 To the student of Sociology, Eugenics, or local history, 
 the value of this pamphlet is not so much the three acts 
 of incorporation, or the constitution and rules, or the 
 “schedule of stocks,” etc.; but the twenty closely printed 
 pages of the appendix, containing “a list of the present 
 and deceased officers and members of the Mechanic 
 Society,” from 1794 to 1858. 
 
 A cursory examination of the list, with occasional com- 
 ment, may be of interest: 
 
 Samuel Axson (sometimes spelled “Axon”), who joined 
 in 1812, is near kin (probably brother), of Judge Axson, 
 
48 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 and is of the family of that name in Georgia, one of whose 
 daughters is the wife of Woodrow Wilson, President of the 
 United States. 
 
 Thomas Bennett, who joined in 1802; in 1817, as Speaker 
 of the House of Representatives, signed the third act of 
 incorporation, and afterward became Governor of South 
 Carolina. 
 
 John G. Chalk, who joined in 1856, died within the last 
 decade, and was one of the few survivors of the 462 mem- 
 bers whose names were published in 1858. 
 
 Thomas D. Dotterer, the eminent iron founder and con- 
 tractor, joined in 1854, and is affectionately remembered 
 by hundreds of Charlestonians today. 
 
 James M. Eason, (1854), was one of the most notable 
 iron founders of the South; the constructor of the iron-clad 
 gunboat “Chicora”; the “Charleston”, a larger and more 
 powerful vessel, and other craft. 
 
 Charles W. Graves (1848), was a leading contractor and 
 builder, whose grandson was a member of the United 
 States Congress. 
 
 Henry Horlbeck was one of a family of house builders, 
 much of whose work has withstood cyclone, bombardment 
 and earthquake. His father had built what is known as 
 the “old postoffice,” and the Laurens house, on East Bay, 
 before the Revolution. They were built to last, and are 
 still there. Henry Horlbeck, succeeding David Haig, was 
 elected president in 1808, and served four terms. 
 
 Basil Lanneau, (1794), of French-Acadian extraction; 
 the ancestor of the well-known family of that name which 
 has furnished so many Presbyterian clergymen and emi- 
 nent citizens. He was the grandfather of Basil Lanneau 
 Gildersleeve, who was born in Charleston, passed his boy- 
 hood there, is now professor at Johns Hopkins Uuiversity, 
 and, by general consent, is acknowledged the leading 
 Greek scholar in the United States. Clarum et venerabile 
 nomen! 
 
 Fleetwood Lanneau, (1852), was a leading Charlestonian 
 of ante-bellum days; who delivered a valuable historical 
 address at the semi-centennial of the Second (Flinn’s) Pres- 
 byterian Church, and was president of the society in 1858. 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 49 
 
 Robert Lebby, (1794) , was the first of four of the name 
 to join the society. He was the ancestor of two eminent 
 physicians of the same name, father and son, both distin- 
 guished surgeons in the Confederate army, still well 
 remembered and honored in Charleston and tidewater 
 South Carolina. 
 
 Benjamin Lucas, (1851), was a well-known contractor 
 and builder, whose work and character were held in high 
 repute. 
 
 William Laidler, (1853), was for many years business 
 manager of The Charleston Courier. 
 
 William Mills, (1794), a tailor by trade, was father of 
 Robert Mills, author, architect and engineer of distinction. 
 Mr. Mills declared that he was “the first native American 
 that entered on the study of architecture and engineering 
 in the United States.” He designed the Washington 
 Monument and the Treasury buildings at the national 
 capital, and near Philadelphia he designed and constructed 
 a bridge with the, then, greatest span of arch in the world. 
 His “Statistics of South Carolina” was an invaluable pub- 
 lication for that time (1826), and was meant to serve as 
 an appendix to the monumental “Mills’s Atlas of South 
 Carolina.” The name of Mills has died out in the male 
 line, but the brilliant family of Dimitry, of New Orleans, 
 is descended from the eminent South Carolina architect. 
 
 Jacob F. Mintzing, (1816), was, in 1840-41, mayor of 
 Charleston. 
 
 J. J. McCarter, a well-known publisher and bookseller. 
 
 Paul Pritchard, (1801), a planter and ship carpenter on 
 Daniel’s Island, where he had extensive shipyards, one of 
 the ancestors of two of the proudest families in South 
 Carolina. 
 
 Nicholas Poulnot, (1811), was the first of that name to 
 join the society. His grandson is now postmaster of 
 Charleston. 
 
 William Rouse, (1794), an officer in the Revolution, and 
 sometime Intendant of Charleston. 
 
 Jacob Sass, (1794), stood high in the councils of the 
 Lutheran Church, and was the warm friend of the great 
 naturalist and divine, John Bachman. 
 
50 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Jacob, (1795), and Lewis Strobel, (1809), are of the 
 well-known family which has furnished ministers to the 
 Lutheran Church; the historian of the Georgia Salzbur- 
 gers, and in a later generation, the distinguished civilian, 
 Edward H. Strobel, of Chester, S. C., whose death, while 
 diplomatic advisor to the King of Siam, several years ago, 
 was so generally deplored on two continents. 
 
 William Simms, (1812), was that storekeeper on King 
 street, whose son, William Gilmore Simms, was to become 
 South Carolina’s greatest novelist and historian; indeed, 
 Fenimore Cooper and Charles Brockden Brown are prob- 
 ably the only Americans of that day whose romances can 
 be compared with those of Simms. 
 
 John E. Schirmer, (1805), was the first, of three of the 
 name, to join the society. This well-known family was 
 afterward to furnish several leading wholesale merchants 
 on “the Bay”. 
 
 Edward Sebring, (1845), later in life was a leading citi- 
 zen and banker on Broad street. 
 
 Whitefoord Smith, Jr., (1805), bears the same name and 
 was the father of one of the ablest and most eloquent 
 divines of the Methodist Church; the son was a graduate 
 of South Carolina College in 1830. 
 
 John H. Steinmeyer, (1846), like his gallant son and 
 successor, was for many years proprietor of one of the 
 largest lumber plants in this State, 
 
 Anthony Toomer, president of the society in 1794, 
 belonged to a family distinguished in the social and his- 
 torical annals of the “low country” of South Carolina. 
 
 Stephen Thomas, (1794), was that belated Huguenot 
 who has numerous descendants in this and other Southern 
 States, and whose unusually large tombstone, with a nota- 
 ble epitaph, may be seen in the southeastern corner of the 
 French Protestant churchyard in Charleston. 
 
 Theodore Trezevant, (1795), “did most of the tailoring 
 for the revolutionary government of South Carolina. Sub- 
 sequent to the Revolution he was for several years presi- 
 dent of the Master Tailors’ Society in Charleston,” all of 
 which, with many interesting details, may be found in 
 Mr. A. S. Salley’s genealogical sketch of the Trezevant 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 51 
 
 family. This master tailor was the father of Judge Lewis 
 Trezevant, and one of his sons, Peter, through his wife 
 (Farquahar), became heir to an enormous estate in Eng- 
 land. He moved from Stoll’s alley, Charleston, to an 
 elegant home in London, where he took great pleasure, 
 in after years, in entertaining any old friends from 
 Carolina. 
 
 W. H. Timrod, (1813), the book-binder poet; who pub- 
 lished only one little volume of verse, but whose brilliant 
 son, Henry Timrod, was considered by Richard Henry 
 Stoddard “the best of Southern poets”, and who has given 
 undying fame to his native city and State. 
 
 Thomas A. Vardell, (1825), member of a family notable 
 in the Presbyterian Church and pulpit, and, in our own 
 day, as educators. 
 
 Daniel G. Wayne, (1850), the well-known contractor and 
 builder, who long survived the War of Secession, and 
 whose son, D. G. Wayne, is probably the ablest ornitholo- 
 gist in the South. 
 
 David Rogerson Williams, (1802), perhaps the most dis- 
 tinguished of these “mechanics” in the political and eco- 
 nomic life of the State and Union. He was a newspaper 
 proprietor, possibly a printer, in Charleston, afterward a 
 Brigadier General in the regular army, who resigned his 
 commission to become a member of Congress in 1811-12, 
 where he was an ardent follower of the school of Jeffer- 
 son. In 1811 he was elected Governor of South Carolina. 
 He constructed the first cotton mill in the Pee Dee section 
 of this State, was the first planter thereabout to protect 
 his fields from overflow by river freshets, and was proba- 
 bly the first planter to crush cotton seed for the manufac- 
 ture of oil — altogether, in public and private life, a man 
 far ahead of his time. The first biography of Governor 
 Williams, the work of Professor H. T. Cooke, of Furman 
 University, is now nearing completion, and will fitly com- 
 memorate his life and services. 
 
 Aaron Smith Willington, (1820), was among the living 
 members enrolled in 1858. He became head of the firm of 
 A. S. Willington & Co., which owned and conducted The 
 
52 
 
 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 Charleston Courier for over fifty years. He came to 
 Charleston in 1802, a journeyman printer, from Weyland, 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 Peter Wyatt, (1794), one of three of the name, members 
 of the society. In the Charleston directory for 1809 is the 
 item: “Wyatt, Peter; lumber merchant; mills, Lynch 
 street.” This was probably the builder and owner of the 
 windmill at the foot of Beaufain street, which was once 
 the wonder of the town. 
 
 Seth Yates, (1799), a ship carpenter, several of whose 
 family, including the writer’s great grandfather, followed 
 the same trade. 
 
 The foregoing notes on prominent Charleston mechanics, 
 made largely from memory, might be indefinitely extended; 
 they are given to furnish some idea of the personnel of 
 the society, perhaps the oldest and longest lived organiza- 
 tion of its kind in the Southern States. There are other 
 names in the printed roll which challenge attention, 
 because of their position in the economic and social life of 
 Charleston. Here are some of them: Ralph Atmar, (1794) ; 
 Samuel Bonsall, (1794) ; William Bell, (1814) ; E. Bull, 
 (1846) ; Louis J. Barbot, (1852) ; A. 0. Barbot, (1857) ; 
 Thomas Carew, (1800) ; John Caldwell, (1801) ; Edward 
 Carew, (1813) ; Samuel Corrie, (1813) ; George Creitzberg, 
 (1824) ; Henry B. Cross, (1853) ; Benjamin DuPre, (1794) ; 
 C. R. Elliott, (1802) ; Albert Elfe, (1831) ; Thomas D. Fell, 
 (1816); Alex. Fairchild, (1819); George Gibbs, (1795); 
 W. Gregg, (1844); David Haig, (1794); Richard Howard, 
 (1801); John T. Henerey, (1854); William, and John John- 
 son, Jr., (1784); William Kirkwood, (1833); A. V. Kana- 
 peaux, (1856) ; David Lopez, (1836) ; Julius R. Lachicotte, 
 (1853); John H. Magart, (1805); Robert Munro, (1813); 
 J. Ward Motte, (1847) ; Thomas M. Matthewes, (1853) ; 
 Benjamin Phillips, (1814); A. H. Petsch, (1854); Samuel 
 Rivers, (1794) ; F. Richards, (1843) ; Charles Steedman, 
 (1794) ; John Strohecker, (1801) ; Jeremiah Shrewsbury, 
 (1806); Robert Stewart, (1836); F. P. Seignious, (1851); 
 T. Ogier Smith, (1854); Henry Tovey, (1802); Thomas Ten- 
 
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 53 
 
 nent, (1816); Cornelius Vanderhorst, (1804); Joseph Whil- 
 den, (1802); E. B. White, (1842); W. E. Wightman, (1843); 
 Walter H. Witsell, (1854). 
 
 In the published roll from 1794, and in the preceding 
 lists, with and without comment, are men who were 
 bakers, blacksmiths, bookbinders, butchers, bricklayers 
 cabinet makers, carpenters, clerks, coopers, engravers, 
 grocers, gold and silver smiths, gunsmiths, harness 
 makers, iron workers, millwrights, painters, printers, 
 publishers, pressmen, riggers, ropemakers, saddlers, shoe- 
 makers, stonecutters, tailors, tanners, tinners, (or, as then 
 called, “tinmen”), undertakers, watchmakers, wheel- 
 wrights, and a half-dozen other trades and avocations. 
 
 As Good as the Best. 
 
 Charleston, the home of these “mechanics”, was, before 
 1794, and up to 1861, regarded as the most caste-loving, 
 aristocracy-cursed city in this republic; the whole system 
 being based on a real or alleged slave-holding oligarchy. 
 Yet, if it were possible to compile a list of the social “four 
 hundred” from 1820 to 1860, over a hundred of the names 
 of these mechanics, in the first and second generations, 
 would be found thereon. They had read or heard— some 
 of them had been taught in the Episcopal Church cate- 
 chism— “To order myself, lowly and reverently, to all my 
 betters. * * * And to do my duty in that state of life 
 unto which it shall please God to call me.” But, happily, 
 they did not believe those pious promises, or injunctions, 
 and were blessed with what a modern economist calls ‘ ‘a 
 divine discontent.” They believed— with Thomas Jeffer- 
 son and John Adams— “that there is a natural aristocracy 
 among men, the grounds of which are virtue and talents,” 
 and that it was the duty of every thoughtful, self-respect- 
 ing Carolinian not to be satisfied “in that state of life” in 
 which adverse circumstances had placed him; and so hun- 
 dreds of them worked out their “social salvation. ” I mean 
 that they reached the same standard of living as the so- 
 called “slave-holding oligarchy”; and that, I take it, is 
 the real difference between the upper and lower crust in 
 
54 LABOR ORGANIZATIONS IN SOUTH CAROLINA. 
 
 society; it is not blood relationship; it is not altogether 
 wealth; it is the standard of living that makes one class 
 hold itself socially above other classes. With all its narrow 
 limitations and anachronisms, the check book, and large 
 landed estate have never constituted the open sesame to 
 the highest society in Charleston; brains and character 
 almost always had precedence, and that is the reason why 
 so many of the “mechanic” class entered it. 
 
 Professor Cooley, of the University of Michigan, says: 
 “Throughout English history, we are told the salvation of 
 its society has been its comparative openness, the fact that 
 ability could percolate into it, instead of rising up behind 
 it like water behind a dam, as was the case in pre-revolu- 
 tionary France”; and so, I am inclined to believe, was the 
 case in old Charleston, perhaps the most English of Amer- 
 ican cities. What the future has in store, with, what 
 socialists call, “capitalism” in control, no one can tell — 
 I deal here only with the dead past. 
 
 Y. S. 
 

Date Due 
 
P12128 
 
 331.87 .37263 1914 
 
 
■?; 
 
 i