Sunday, February 2, 2014

Missing 1768 Immigrant?

By Wally Waits[1]
©2014

The “Waight Emigrant Family Analysis” article is not the only way of looking at the data created when the Waight immigrants arrived in Charlestown in 1768.  Some may count the way the land was warranted as a true indication of the number of immigrants who walked off the St. Helena.  I believe this second view is invalid for reasons described below, but this theory needs to be aired in case other researchers raise questions.

John Waight and an extended family debarked from the St. Helena in early February.  As arriving Protestants, they were eligible for land grants offered by the Colony of South Carolina. 

The colony was using land donation to attract new settlers.  These immigrants were urged to build homes and farms in the Up Country.  They were to become a “buffer” between the Low Land plantations and the Native Americans because Indian raids posed a threat to the plantations.

On February 13th, the colonial Council Journals recorded the following requests for Warrants of Survey.  These warrants show how the colonial government ranked the arriving immigrants. 
                   John Waight, Sr.          250 acres
                   John Waight, Jr.           100 acres
                   Samuel Waight            100 acres
                   Sarah Waight               100 acres


The St. Helena sailed from Bristol, England and is not known to traffic in slaves.  So, it is doubtful that there were any slaves debarking with the Waight cluster. 

The possibility that an indentured servant traveled on the St. Helena can also be eliminated.  This person would be listed as an immigrating passenger by the St. Helena captain, George Arthur. Since all identified passengers received warrants, there were no indentured people immigrating at this time.  The absence of slaves and indentured servants simplifies the problem of counting the immigrants. 

John Sr., John Jr., Samuel and Sarah Waight each received 100 acres because they were thought to be over 15 years of age.  The elder John was thought of as the “head of the household.”  As such, he could be given 50-acre allotments for a wife and for each minor child over the age of two years. 

John’s 250 acres, minus his own 100 acres, leaves 150 acres for additional passengers.  Dividing 150 acres by the 50-acre allotment allowed means that there were three wives and minor children who are the only ones not listed by name in the land granting.

These three are logically a wife and two children.  Had there been two wives under consideration, they would be the mates of John Sr. and John Jr.  This is not possible because the 50 acres for the wife of John Jr. would have been added to grant raising his amount from 100 to 150 acres.

A mate for Mary Waight would have also raised her amount to 150 acres as well.  Since the total allotted to John Jr. and Mary only equaled 100 acres, neither were accompanied by a mate.

According to the land warrants issued that day, there were a total of four adults, a wife and two minor children.  These seven people claimed to be eligible for 550 acres.

Infants under two years of age were not deemed worthy of counting by the colonial government.  It likely was a reflection of the belief that the mortality rate was higher in this young age group.

There is a second listing of passengers that can be used to double check this list of passengers.  This list of names and ages was used by the colony to pay out money for covering basic expenses such as paying for a surveyor to measure out the land the immigrant was obtaining.

This list passengers included the following:
                   John Waight                          60
                   Mary Waight                          52
                   John Waight                          19
                   Samuel Waight                      15
                   Benjamin Waight                   13
                   Sarah Waight                           8

I wrote in the previous article, “Waight Emigrant Family Analysis,” that this group would have only obtained 400 acres if this was a nuclear family.  Because of their ages and presumed relationships, Warrants for Survey would look like this:
John Waight, Sr.          300 acres
          John Waight, Jr.          100 acres

John Waight, Senior would have been eligible for 100 acres in his own right.  He was also given 50 acres for a wife.  Lastly, there was another 150 acres added for the three minor children.  John Sr.’s total would have been 300 acres. 

John Jr. was eligible for receiving a 100-acre allotment because was over 16 years of age.  A total of 400 acres was reached by his 100 acres being added with his presumed father’s 300 acres in a presumed nuclear family situation.

But, that is not what allotted for this emigrants cluster.  Warrants for Survey were issued the following individuals and for the corresponding amounts:
John Waight, Sr.          250 acres
                   John Waight, Jr.           100 acres
                   Samuel Waight            100 acres
                   Sarah Waight               100 acres

Here is how one counts heads in this list.  John Waight, Sr. is again allowed 100 acres for himself.  Then, add another three people who upped John’s total another 150 acres.  This makes a total of four people.

John Waight, Jr., Samuel Waight and Sarah Waight, who each are listed as eligible for 100 acres, are an additional three adults said to have arrived in 1768.  These three, plus the four mentioned just above, makes a group of seven getting off the boat.

Seven Waight individuals do not match the list of those seeking money for expenses.  Who is missing and who can be counted for?

These names appear as people who are receiving land.  Their ages are shown for identification purposes.
John Waight                          60
                   John Waight                          19
                   Samuel Waight                      15
                   Sarah Waight                           8
These four are two adults and two minor children.  Remember, however, that each of these were counted as adults when the colony issued warrants.

Those who are not counted in the Expenses List are:
                   Mary Waight                          52
                   Benjamin Waight                  13
These are likely listed with John Waight, Sr., who has three more people added to his land allotment.  Three unnamed immigrants minus the two who are named leaves one unidentified traveler.  Who could that person be?

That person logically would not likely be another wife.  That role is probably filled by the adult woman named Mary.  There is no other person recorded in any records who might be John’s wife.

If the missing immigrant was older than Samuel Waight’s 15 years, he/she would be eligible for requesting a 100 acres in their own name.  If this was the case, their name would appear as another adult requesting a Warrant for Survey.  However, there is no other request for a person who might be an older immigrant.

Therefore, it is possible that the missing person is a child over two and under 16 years of age.  A person with this age would cause an additional fifty acres to be added to the 100 acres allowed to John Waight, Sr.  By adding fifty acres each for Mary and Benjamin, John’s total rises to 250 acres. 

John Waight, Senior requested a warrant for the same 250 amount now calculated.  It would seem that the problem is now resolved.

The only problem with this conclusion crops up in the analysis of the land records.  This is where the truth becomes apparent.

First of all, Mary Waight had 100 acres surveyed in her own name.  Her deeding the same land to her son, Benjamin, years later confirms that the allotment was hers, not someone else’s.  This is despite the fact that no warrant was issued in her name.

At the same time, no land was surveyed for a person named Sarah.  One possibility is that Sarah died suddenly and was not able to follow up by having the warrant surveyed and platted.    This seems unlikely for the following reasons.

Sarah is described as young girl of eight years of age.  Her age would prevent a warrant from being surveyed and platted.  The deputy surveyor was not allowed to “give” government land to a minor without a warrant.[2]

The same situation existed for a 100 acre warrant being issued to Samuel Waight.  With an age listed as 15, he was just months under the age of eligibility for receiving land in his own name.  No survey was conducted in his name either.

Recapping the situation, there were two warrants that were not surveyed in the names of Samuel and Sarah.  Yet, one was surveyed in Mary Waight’s name for 100 acres.

Samuel and Sarah Waight’s names, when added to Benjamin’s, exactly total the number of children who each would receive fifty acre allotments.  This 150 acres was added to the amount allotted to John Waight, Sr.’s 100 acres.  This addition makes John’s total the 250 acres which was surveyed in his name.

Finally, there is young John’s warrant and allotment.  However, there was nothing that raised questions about John Waight, Jr.’s warrant and platting.  He was warranted 100 acres and that is how much was platted by the surveyor.

The land allotment process is the ultimate test of who arrived on the St. Helena.  Land was warranted for seven people.  However, the surveyor staked land for only six immigrants.  The conclusion is that there is no missing immigrant.







[1] 4404 Fondulac Street, Muskogee, OK 74401-1533, wwaits@gmail.com.
[2] If a settler possessed enough money, he could have purchased additional land from the colonial government.  Then the buyer would hire a surveyor to survey the desired acreage.  Homesteading, or “squatting,” did not convey ownership.

No comments:

Post a Comment