#Anne Cleland Kinloch

[john-laurens]

Left: a painting of Anne Kinloch with a bird

Right: a painting of a red-winged blackbird from the Ethelind Pope Brown collection, potentially painted by John Laurens

[vive-la-revolution]

OKAY TIME TO NERD OUT ABOUT FRANCIS KINLOCH

francis kinloch had brown hair and brown eyes. how did i come to this conclusion, you ask?

there is only one surviving picture of francis’ mother, ann isabella cleland. after running it through multiple colorizers, they all came back with a similar product.

thus implying that she had black hair. there are no portraits of his father, so the majority of what comes next is guesswork.

we all know That One Portrait of francis. however, it is the only one in survival.

because his hair is powdered, the colorizers didn’t help me much with that, but i did get a great peek at his eyes.

they are clearly brown.

the only one of his children with a portrait was his daughter, eliza. colorized, we can guess she looked something like this:

brown hair, brown eyes.

his wife, however, did not have these exact features, but no problem whatsoever.

as one can tell, his wife martha had blonde-reddish hair and blue eyes.

our saving grace? all of those genes are recessive. brown hair is the most dominant gene, along with brown eyes and curly hair (one of which can be seen as inherited from her mother, although it’s hard to tell without record of francis’ father.)

going back to francis and his mother; black hair is recessive only to brown, so one can assume that his father had at least one brown hair gene, in order for francis to pass the allele down to his daughter. off of implication, the punnet square would’ve looked something like this, with B standing for the brown gene, and b for black:

because there was no clear idea of what francis’ father carried, i used the black gene as an example. either way, the brown hair still would’ve come up dominant.

as for his eyes, that would be a little harder to tell had brown eyes not been the most dominant eye color allele. francis’ nephew, however, had green eyes. green is an in-the-middle color, as it is recessive to brown yet dominant to blue. since there are no surviving portraits of his nephew’s parents, we’ll assume that the green-eye gene came from his mother, francis’ sister.

in this square, B represents brown and g for green, going off the assumption that both parents carried the green gene:

no matter what combination you put in this square, whether brown and green, brown and blue, brown and brown, the brown eyes would have always come up as dominant.

i’m conclusion, francis kinloch most likely had a combination of brown hair and brown eyes.

[scotianostra]

June 22nd 1679 saw the Battle of Bothwell Bridge.

Two of my previous posts tie in with this one.

More Royalty and religion and needless loss of life in this battle, or not so much the battle itself, but the aftermath during a shameful period of our history known as the 'killing time',

Following his restoration to the throne, King Charles II gradually imposed strict controls on the religions practised throughout his kingdoms. In particular the Presbyterian Covenanters of Scotland were singled out and persecuted for their beliefs.

If you remember my post on June 1st about the Battle of Drumclog when the Covenanters had a surprise victory against the experienced campaigner John Graham, Bonnie Dundee, this was a direct reply from the Government, the Covenanters spent the next few weeks building their strength, as did the government. Charles’ son James, Duke of Monmouth was sent north to take command, and the militia were raised.

The Covenanters had established their camp on the south bank of the Clyde, north of Hamilton. The rebels numbered  around 6000 men, but were poorly disciplined and deeply divided by religious disagreements. They had few competent commanders, being nominally led by Robert Hamilton of Preston, although his rigid stance against the Indulged ministers only encouraged division. 

The preacher Donald Cargill and William Cleland, the victor of Drumclog, were present, as were David Hackston of Rathillet and John Balfour of Kinloch, known as Burley, who were among the group who murdered Archbishop Sharp,(see my May 3rd post for details of this). The government army numbered around 5000 regular troops and militia, and was commanded by Monmouth, supported by Claverhouse and the Earl of Linlithgow.

Battle centred around the narrow bridge across the Clyde, the passage of which Monmouth was required to force in order to come at the Covenanters. Hackston led the defence of the bridge for them, but his men lacked artillery and ammunition, and were forced to withdraw after around an hour. Once Monmouth’s men were across the bridge, the Covenanters were quickly routed. Many fled into the parks of nearby Hamilton Palace, seat of Duchess Anne, who was sympathetic to the Presbyterian cause. Around 600 Covenanters were killed, while some 1200 were taken prisoner.

The prisoners were taken to Edinburgh and held on land beside Greyfriars Kirkyard, an area now known as the Covenanters’ Prison. Many remained there for several months, those who didn't die there were transported to the colonies in November. 

Around 300 were marched to Leith and crammed into the hold of a ship. In the cramped and airless conditions below decks, it is unlikely that many of them would have survived the voyage, but the ship did not get far. It was wrecked off the coast of Orkney and most of the prisoners drowned.

[john-laurens]

Patriot Mother vs. Loyalist Son: Anne Kinloch's Attempts to Change Francis Kinloch's Political Beliefs

Francis Kinloch's transition from a loyalist receiving an education in England to a (reluctant) patriot fighting in the American military is one that has long intrigued me. In this post, I'll explore how Francis's relationship with his mother contributed to his change of heart. As a preview of the information contained below, please enjoy this (questionably historically accurate) meme:

For those interested in the John Laurens-Francis Kinloch relationship, it is well known that Francis Kinloch was a loyalist at the outset of the American Revolutionary War, much to the detriment of his personal relationships. His loyalist beliefs and preference for a monarchy are conveyed in his letters to John, particularly when they engaged in their political debate throughout the year 1776 (the letters can be found here). Francis's political views may have in part been due to the fact that he was placed under the guardianship of Thomas Boone, a staunch loyalist, after his father's death. Under Boone's direction, Francis was educated in England during 1768-1774 and again during 1777-1778. Despite this, Francis would return to the colonies in 1778 and fight on the American side. This post will address but one of the various factors that contributed to this decision.

Francis's loyalist views were not shared by others in his family. His mother Anne Cleland Kinloch and sister Mary Esther Kinloch Huger remained in South Carolina and supported the patriot cause. Being located in the colonies for the entirety of the war, the two certainly had a much greater exposure to the ongoing conflict. While Francis was abroad, Mary Esther married Major Benjamin Huger, who served in the 5th South Carolina Regiment. Mary Esther unfortunately lost her husband to the war, as Benjamin was killed in a friendly fire incident in Charleston in 1779.

Anne and Francis exchanged letters while Francis was in Europe, and Francis must have made his loyalist beliefs apparent to his mother. A recurring theme in their correspondence is Anne encouraging her son to rethink his views and to return home while Francis wonders how to respond to his mother's exhortations. The collection "Kinloch family history and genealogy research files" in the South Carolina Historical Society archives contains transcripts of parts of letters from Anne to Francis during the American Revolutionary War period. While the following paragraphs were written in different sections across the collection, they all appear to be from the March 10, 1776 letter from Anne to Francis. Any x's are directly copied from the transcripts and may indicate a skipped portion of the transcribed letter. Any ellipses are my own.

"this will be sent to you by an Officer in our Continl [Continental] Troops, who has promised to see you xx who is besides an intimate friend & acquaintance of ours. xx shall show Capt. Gillon & c xx I hope before he leaves you, you may perhaps be able to congratulate yourself on being the subject of a free and great Empire, that may in future times vie with ancient Greece or Rome xx"

"this will be sent you from a Sea port in France by an Officer in our Continental troops who has promised to see you; I have assured him you will with pleasure go to him, as he will be 4 or 5 days ride from you, he says he will meet you half way & perhaps return with you as he will have little else to do but to travel about xxx I have taken the liberty to give him an invitation to your house_ I tell him I am sure you will do everything in your power to make agreeable to him & suppose that tho' tis Bachellor's Hall that you have a spare bed for a friend. We shall all be much obliged to you for any civilities You, or thro' your means your friends shall shew Capt. Gillon whom you will find a agreeable sensible obliging intelligent man & who can give you a very good account of the unhappy differences between our unnatural Parent & us xxx I have had for some time very little of my amiable worthy Huger's company, he being obliged to be on duty in Town in the Service of his Country & has lately been made a major of a Company of Riflemen ... Your old friend Mr Baird is again our neighbour but quite different & an imperious young wife & young children bawling about his ears & for heavens sake my dear Francy if you don't take a wife when you are young, never marry at all & to ad to poor Archie's troubles he cannot be prevailed upon to sign the association so that no person can buy from him, his situation is truly Deplorable, looked at unkindly by his old friends & stigmatized with the detested name of Tory xxx"

"... cause I am hopes to send you a book wrote by a native American, whose arguments will I hope convince you, we are right & which I assure you it will give me great pleasure to hear. … you'll please not to mention to Mr Boone, your going to meet this Gentn [Gentleman], till his return to America, as I suppose you sometimes make little excursions with out his leave, then you may if you please make an apology. At the same time this present situation of our affairs, renders this caution necessary, you'll please likewise to introduce him as coming from America, to none of your English friends. As he is not an American nor an English Man, & speaks many different languages, you may converse in which you please."

Anne appears to have sent both literature and people engaged in the American cause to convince her son to support the side of the colonies. Captain Gillon is likely Alexander Gillon, who was a merchant in Charleston, captain of the German Fusiliers of Charleston, and later Commodore of the South Carolina Navy. He was born in the Dutch Republic, which explains Anne's comments about him being neither American nor English. Anne made her opinions of the British Empire and the revolutionary American colonies clear in her letters. She describes the British Empire as an "unnatural parent" and hopes that her son will one day be proud to call himself a free citizen of America, a soon-to-be formed country that she believes will rival ancient empires. She also clearly realizes that Thomas Boone would be unhappy to know that Francis is associating with members of the American military, and she cautions Francis to avoid mentioning his meeting with Captain Gillon to his guardian. I do not know what role Anne played in naming Boone as the guardian of her children (I assume her late husband Francis was likely the one who made this decision), but it is interesting to see her strive to counteract Boone's influence on her son.

Captain Gillon may not have been the only person who helped Anne get through to her son. According to the "Kinloch family history and genealogy research files," Anne may have worked with John Laurens to persuade Francis to join the American side. As described above, John debated the merits of monarchism and republicanism with Francis in 1776, and the Kinloch family collections suggest that Anne may have been involved in this exchange. There are some brief mentions of John that describe his potential partnership with Anne. These descriptions, to my understanding, are written by descendants of the Kinlochs who compiled biographical information about the family:

"When 21 and travelling in France the American War was beginning and his [Francis's] mother [Anne] wrote to him to return and sent his friend John Laurens & Com. Gillon to urge his doing so."

Another anecdote mentions John without directly connecting him to Anne:

"He [Francis] was [loathe] to abandon England, his allegiance, career, & hopes there and the influence of his guardian & protestations of his friends & relations there detained him But his Mother's earnest solicitations brought him back to Carolina (I have one of her letters to him & his dear friend John Laurens alludes to his position in a letter to his father [Henry Laurens])."

I see two possibilities for these potential interactions between Anne, Francis, and John.

The Kinloch family has correspondence between Anne and John or other documents that indicate the two directly communicated and jointly endeavored to change Francis's political views. These documents, if they exist, do not appear to be present in the "Kinloch family history and genealogy research files."

The Kinloch family read some of John's letters to Francis in 1776 and assumed that Anne encouraged John to send these letters. This assumption may have been false, as there are no surviving letters (or at least no publicly available letters) between Anne and John that suggest they worked together or otherwise interacted. The families certainly knew each other, but we do not know the extent of their interactions outside of Francis Kinloch, Sr. and Henry Laurens engaging in business with one another. I do think it's hilarious that the Kinloch descendants potentially read John's scathing letters to Francis and went "Wow, Anne Kinloch must have asked him to send such blistering letters. Why else would John have been so highly motivated to criticize Francis's beliefs?" When in reality...John was a very passionate person who was Just Like That.

Francis was not immediately receptive to the arguments of his mother and friends, but his mother's criticism did eventually wear him down. He repeatedly wrote to Johannes von Müller about his mother and the conflict he felt between pursuing a career in England and returning home to South Carolina:

"My Mother, I hear, has suffered very much with a pain in her face. This has broke her health so much that She is scarce to be Known again, I hope in God that She may have got rid of it by this time, but the bane idea of her suffering at this very moment perhaps, added to all She must feel on my account, this wrings my very soul_ In the middle of my dreams of Ambition, the thought of Her shoots like lightning across my mind, I see her pale emaciated face, I see Her beckon to me, I hear her tell me how many times She has watched the live long night at my bedside, & Nature stirs within Me._ What can I do, my Muller, You Know, as well as I do, what I owe to My Guardian, You & every one must see the propriety of the plans that he has lay’d for my future welfare, & there is now every probability of their succeeding, on the other hand_" – Francis Kinloch to Johannes von Müller, April 4 [or 14], 1777

"some times I think of living in Switzerland, but then I am afraid of getting too much dishabituated to the World, & particularly to the English world, nor do I Know how soon the sources of my money may be dry, at others I have thought of serving a Campaign as a volunteer with General Howe, but that idea my Guardian has already smothered by objecting that it would immediately be attributed to Him, besides, I should draw down the curses of an angry mother, of a Mother whom I love too, upon my head. What remains then to do? An Idle life I neither can nor will lead_" – Francis Kinloch to Johannes von Müller, July 30, 1777

"Born to a fortune as ample as was necessary to render me independent, for upon moderate Computation My Brother & I would have been worth a thousand a year each, I find myself reduced to thank a Merchant for allowing me what I can just live upon for one year, burning with Ambition & preferring a military life, I am prevented from entering the field of Glory now opened to All corners in my Native Country, & am daily agitated by the sense of what I owe my Mother, whose solicitations should melt a heart much harder than mine, joined to the reflection of the numerous obligations I have received from Mr Boone._" – Francis Kinloch to Johannes von Müller, August 3, 1777

"If a man who is deprived of his fortune, who is cut off from his country, who is daily incurring the displeasure of His Mother, & who sees no probability of being provided for but by wading through the Chaos of an interested, laborious, sedentary, profession should utter some complaints, why clothe them with the appellation of ennuie, & cut off his only resource_" – Francis Kinloch to Johannes von Müller, August 14, 1777

After much contemplation, Kinloch would ultimately leave Europe and return to America in 1778. One can only imagine how Anne felt to finally be reunited with a son she had not seen for 10 years - a son who had left a boy and returned a man, a son who defied her pleadings for so long but ultimately heeded his mother's call.

[john-laurens]

Francis Kinloch's Obituary

"It has become my duty publicly to record the irreparable loss of an inestimable parent. Francis Kinloch was born in the year 1756, and in Charleston, the Capital, at that time, of South Carolina. At the early age of nine he embarked for England, where, under the care and patronage of the excellent Mr. Boone, he was placed at Eton School, and in that splendid institution of a noble country laid the foundation of solid, useful and brilliant acquirements. Arrived at the age of manhood, he crossed over to the continent, and during the residence of a few years at Geneva, was honored with the esteem and kindness of Müller, of Prevost, and of Bonnet. About this period the clouds of [dissension] between the mother country and the colonies began to overspread the political firmament, and the time had come at which every one interested in the cause of America was called upon to decide, and if he valued his character, to decide promptly. My father did not hesitate one moment. Honored with the friendship and esteem of Lord North (whose son he had the [happiness] of rescuing from a watery grave, and who amidst all his political sins was a man of singularly amiable character) he might have remained in England, and with talents and acquirements like his, wealth and power lay before him. He did not, however, hesitate -- Columbia called upon her sons to rally around the sacred banner, and the call promptly obeyed by many a noble spirit. My father, among others, obeyed the call without asking any omen but his country's cause; drew his sword and offered it to the [gallant] Moultrie, by whom it was gladly accepted; and at the attack on the Savannah lines, as well as on other occasions, he cheerfully sealed with his blood his devotion to the welfare and honor of America. The contest over, he was honored with the political confidence of his fellow-citizens, and though not blest with a talent for public eloquence, took an active part in the councils of the nation, and afterwards in those of his native State. Retiring soon after to the peaceful and delightful scenes of rural quiet, he passed his time in teaching the young idea how to shoot, and in imparting, as far as in him laid, happiness and comfort to all around him -- and when forced by circumstances of a painful nature to depart from such scenes, gave up without a sigh the contemplation of that [splendid] foliage and of those beautiful plantations, which he had nourished up with so much pride and pleasure, of which the melancholy cypress alone [has] followed to the tomb its venerable master. My father died in this city -- sustained in his last moments by the best medical skill that Charleston could afford, and soothed and comforted by all the attention that filial piety could offer. He has [descended honored] and wept into the unconscious earth, and has died worthy [of] the regret of all good men -- of none more so than of Frederick Kinloch."

The obituary was written by Francis's son Frederick Kinloch and published in the the Charleston Courier on February 13, 1826. I transcribed the obituary from a typed copy in the collection "Kinloch family history and genealogy research files" in the South Carolina Historical Society archives. Minor grammatical/spelling corrections are indicated by brackets.

I do find it interesting that Frederick repeatedly emphasized that his father did not hesitate to take up arms and fight for American independence. Based on Francis's actual actions and writings around 1776-1778, we know that this could not be further from the truth. Francis was a professed loyalist at the start of the American Revolutionary War and had monarchical leanings throughout his life. He repeatedly tried to become employed in the English civil service before eventually returning to America in 1778 due to a lack of prospects in England, the repeated exhortations of his patriot mother, and a need to settle his estate and prevent it from being additionally taxed/amerced. So why did Frederick write about his father in such a positive light? Did Francis gloss over his loyalist past when telling his children about his involvement in the revolution, leading them to believe he was an ardent patriot from the start? I wouldn't put it past Kinloch to claim that he was on the side of the victors from the outset of the war. Or was Frederick aware of his father's less-than-fervent support of the revolution? Did Frederick knowingly write a false history in order to protect the reputation of his father and his family? The obituary does acknowledge and refute the idea that Francis hesitated to join the war, which could mean that Francis's initial wavering was a well-known part of his legacy (and possibly a sore point).

It should be noted that there are a couple other inaccuracies in regards to years/ages. While several sources in the "Kinloch family history and genealogy files" suggest a birth year of 1756 or note an uncertainty around the birth year (1755 or 1756), my understanding is that Francis was born in 1755. In the "Kinloch family history and genealogy files," there is a copy of a letter from Anne Kinloch to Francis dated March 10, 1776 in which Anne writes, "Give me leave my dearest much loved Francy to congratulate you on your entrance into your 21st year." This would place Francis's birth year as 1755. Additionally, Francis went to Europe in 1768 at the age of 13 (not 9).

Additionally, I have noticed that some sources give Francis's death date as February 8, 1826 while others give it as February 13, 1826. I think this confusion likely arose from the date of publication of the above obituary. The obituary was published on February 13, 1826, but it is unlikely that the obituary was published on the same day that Francis died. There are other notes in the "Kinloch family history and genealogy files" that also give credence to the February 8th death date. A note at the bottom of the obituary copy reads, "See paper of Thursday Feb. 9th for invitation to his funeral at the residence of his daughter Mrs Keating Lewis Simons' on Orange St." The invitation in the paper (Charleston Courier, February 9, 1826) was as follows:

The Friends and Acquaintances of the late FRANCIS KINLOCH, Esq. are invited to attend his Funeral This Day, at 11 o'clock, at the house of his Daughter, Mrs. Keating Lewis Simons, in Orange-street, without further invitation.

Mrs. Keating Lewis Simons was Anne Cleland Kinloch, Francis's first daughter with his second wife Martha Rutledge. Another source in the "Kinloch family history and genealogy files" collection states, "Mr. Kinloch died in Charleston Feb. 8, 1826, aged 69 years and eleven months. And his funeral was next day, from the house of his daughter, Mrs. Keating Lewis Simons, in George Street. He was buried in St. Michael's church yard (in the Rutledge lot near the Meeting Street wall)." Based on these various sources, I believe the February 8, 1826 death date to be the correct one.

On a lighter note, I do find it hilarious that Frederick essentially called out his father as a bad public speaker ("though not blest with a talent for public eloquence").

[john-laurens]

The Wealth of the Kinloch Family

Because the Kinlochs are not as widely known as the Laurenses, Rutledges, and other southern elite families of the 18th century, the extent of their wealth may not be readily apparent. In this post, I'll provide context for the level of wealth possessed by the Kinlochs, focusing primarily on Francis Kinloch Sr. (1720-1767) and his two sons Francis Jr. (1755-1826) and Cleland. tl;dr: The Kinlochs were obscenely wealthy due to the use of slave labor, and Francis Jr. was bad at managing his finances.

To begin, it is helpful to understand a bit of the Kinloch family history. I have a post here that discusses the hereditary titles held by members of the extended Kinloch family. While Francis Sr. was not in possession of such a title, he was closely related to a family of high social status in their ancestral home of Scotland. Francis Sr. would marry Anne Isabella Cleland, the only daughter of another prominent South Carolinian family with Scottish ancestry. Their union - including the merging of their extensive properties - is described in Africans in the Old South: Mapping Exceptional Lives across the Atlantic World by Randy J. Sparks (p. 24):

John Cleland, a native of Scotland and a relative of William Cleveland, moved to South Carolina in 1735 with his wife, Mary Perry, who had inherited considerable property in the colony, including the site of Georgetown. Cleland quickly rose to prominence and became a member of the Royal Council in 1740 and served until his death in 1760. The couple's only daughter, Anne Isabella, married the only surviving son of James Kinloch, another prominent South Carolinian, a native of Scotland, and member of the Royal Council from 1720 to 1757. That union made the couple almost unimaginably rich; both Anne and Francis inherited vast properties, and they owned a number of the Lowcountry's finest rice plantations including the Rice Hope, Kensington, Rosemont, Willow Bank, Winyah, Weehaw, and Boone Hall plantations and property in Charleston.

Francis Sr. went on to become one of the foremost indigo planters in the colonies. In The Papers of Henry Laurens collection (TPHL), there are several references to Henry Laurens working with Francis Sr. on planting indigo and deferring to Francis's expertise:

"The Barrel of Indigo Seed is directed to Francis Kinloch, Esquire. (Footnote: Francis Kinloch died at Rice Hope plantation on the Santee on June 2, 1767. He was so successful as an indigo planter that the London Daily Advertiser, Aug. 18, 1767, noted his death by quoting from the Gazette, June 15, that he was 'one of the most considerable and successful Indico planters in this province.'" - Henry Laurens to Peter Horlbeck, April 18, 1765 (TPHL vol. 4) "I send you by Sam two Hoes contrived by Mr. John Cuthberth & therefore called Cuthberth's Hoes which I find are getting much into Vogue for Clay & hard new Land. Mr. Kinloch assures me that they are abundantly better than narrow Hoes and almost equal to a plough. Try these & if they answer the character given of them I shall get some more of the sort." - Henry Laurens to John Smith, February 27, 1766 (TPHL vol. 5) "I want Iron work for an Indigo Pump Machine which one Mr. Dicky is going to build for me at Mepkin, & am told by him that nobody can serve me so well as Mr. Kinloch's Smith near George Town who is used to such work." - Henry Laurens to Joseph Brown, May 10, 1766 (TPHL vol. 5) "I do think that Money may be made on that [St. Johns] River by Lumber & Shingles of Cypress & my expectations of Rice are very sanguine but the success of Mr. Kinloch, Mr. Gray, & your self will confirm or blast them." - Henry Laurens to William Bartram, September 17, 1766 (TPHL vol. 5) "I return Your Excellency many thanks for the offer of £2,000 Sterling in Bills of Exchange upon loan. If we were flush in the African Trade such a proposition would be extremely agreeable & I could dispose of the Money to advantage at present I have no occasion to borrow. But I shall look about & if I can find such hands as Mr. Kinloch would not have refused I shall recommend them to Your Excellency." - Henry Laurens to James Grant, January 28, 1768 (TPHL vol. 5)

A summary of Francis Sr.'s wealth at the time of his death is given in The History of Georgetown County, South Carolina by George C. Rogers, Jr. (5th printing, pp. 100-101):

At the time of his death in 1767 his personal estate was valued at £133,131.5.6 currency, which included 338 slaves and a mansion house in Charleston. His home in Charleston was filled with marble tables, glass lanthorns, and mahogany furniture. There were twenty-one table cloths, twelve pair pillow cases, five "pavillions" (mosquito nets), two flower china vases worth £40, prints worth £70, and in his stables a £600 chariot, a £150 phaeton, and £60 chair, besides plate on his sideboard valued at £1,148.14. ... He died at Rice Hope on June 2, 1767, "one of the most considerable and successful Indico planters in this province."

Based on this currency converter from The National Archives of the United Kingdom, £133,131.5.6 in the 1760s would be worth approximately £13,640,936.64 in 2017. I am not sure if this accurately reflects the inflation/exchange rates for pounds in the American colonies, but it gives a general idea of the wealth possessed by the Kinloch family. It should be noted that the Kinlochs' ability to attain such an obscene level of wealth was due to their use of slave labor across their many plantations. While Francis Sr. is credited as being perhaps the most successful indigo planter in the colonies, the true credit should be attributed to the enslaved people who actively planted, tended, and harvested this crop.

For the remainder of this post, much of the information will be taken from documents I accessed from the "Kinloch family history and genealogy research files" in the South Carolina Historical Society archives. Any quoted sections attributed to Anne Kinloch or a Kinloch descendant are from this collection. Letters between Francis Jr. and Johannes von Müller are transcribed from the microfilm held by the American Philosophical Society. I will note additional sources when used.

The will of Francis Sr. stipulated that the Kensington and Weehaw plantations would go to his sons Francis Jr. and Cleland. His daughter Mary Esther would "receive 1,000 English guineas if she would sign away her share in the plantations … She would also receive an annuity of £150 S.C. currency plus the rent from two tenements in Charleston" (footnote #2 for the letter from Henry Laurens to John Hopton dated February 23, 1771, TPHL vol. 7). The estate of Francis Sr. would not be fully divided among the sons until 1784 when Francis Jr. and Cleland were both of age and were both back in South Carolina after receiving their educations in Europe. Francis Jr. received Kensington while Cleland received Weehaw.

While abroad in Europe, Francis Jr. and his family would make several references to their finances. In a March 10, 1776 letter to her son Francis Jr., Anne Cleland Kinloch noted that her son Cleland "was so obliging as to send you [Francis Jr.] a £1000 pounds Ster, from Philadelphia, & a thousand in indigo from hence, you must be frugall my dear, as I dont know when you'll get any more, unless it can be sent by way of France or Holland to you, which is at present both uncertain, & unsafe." In a letter to Johannes von Müller dated August 3, 1777, Francis Jr. wrote that he was "Born to a fortune as ample as was necessary to render me independent, for upon moderate Computation My Brother & I would have been worth a thousand a year each, I find myself reduced to thank a Merchant for allowing me what I can just live upon for one year." In a later letter to Müller (February 21, 1778), Francis Jr. wrote, "My merchant who like Mr Boone sticks to me in these times of universal distress, has promised me two hundred Pounds more, but adds, nor do I wonder at it, that it will be out of his power to supply me with any more, so that I must make my two hundred pounds last as long as possible, & return to Carolina at the end of it should Nothing happen in the Mean time." While the ongoing American Revolutionary War impacted the security of their income and their ability to safely send money across the Atlantic Ocean, the Kinloch family was certainly not wanting for money, as evidenced by the fact that Francis Jr. was able to receive £1,000 and additional saleable indigo from his family and several hundred pounds from his merchant. Based on the currency converter linked above, £1,000 in the 1770s would be worth approximately £87,255.30 in 2017.

Like his father before him, Francis Jr. (and the rest of his family) relied on slave labor to make their fortune. Müller noted in a 1775 letter to his sister that "One of these Kinlochs [Francis Jr.] now commands 1200 negroes." This number is in contrast to the 338 slaves noted to be owned by Francis Sr. at the time of his death (see above). It is possible that Müller had an incorrect number for the number of slaves owned by Francis Jr. and his family, or it is possible that the 338 number referred to the number of slaves present at only one plantation. Francis Jr. also discussed with Müller, both while they lived together in Geneva and in their written correspondence, his plans for managing his slaves and plantations: "You used to laugh at me in our Walks at Genthod, when I amused myself with sketching [out] plans for the [regulation] of my Negroes in Carolina, but alas, my Muller, my ambition has now no other resource, for as to the Law, I execrate, & detest it, & as to the more pleasant walks of ambition, my ill fortune, or if you please, my pride & indolence have cut me off from them, happy alone in not having been deluded for any considerable time._" (November 13, 1777).

The Kinlochs were flush with blood money, and Francis Jr. lived lavishly and with little financial discretion. A Kinloch descendant who gathered biographical information on Francis Jr. noted that "He being the eldest Son was brought up to expensive habits and ran through all his property." Throughout his letters to Müller, Francis Jr. made several references to his spending habits, which often focused on sex workers and other pleasures:

"Though not œconomical, I am far from extravagant, & yet my money does not hold out._" - Francis Kinloch Jr. to Johannes von Müller, July 10, 1777 "I hate London from my soul in summer time, & then ones chastity is in danger at every step._ I am acquainted with a sweet, pretty girl, with black eyes, & a sensible look; but it Cost Me as much to pass one night with her, as it would to purchase all the Maidenheads that remain Within 30 miles of Berne_" - Francis Kinloch Jr. to Johannes von Müller, September 5, 1777 "You ask, I see it by your countenance, what I have done with 830* Pounds, spent since I have been in England, Why faith! I should be puzzled to give You a good account of it, All I can say is that my expectations, & my ignorance made Me less œconomical at first, that I have been obliged to have Clothes made, that Magninac [Francis’s valet] & Wit [Francis’s dog] have run away with near fifty Pounds between them, that Coming fresh from Italy it was some time before I could reconcile Myself to the Changes in my manner of life, & to crown all, that this town abounds With the Prettyest women in the World, Who are to be had for money; nor am I, You Know, insensible. Whilst I lived With You, & my Mind Was perpetually taken up, I was satisfied With the fortuitous enjoyment of a Savoyard girl, or a not-ugly beggar Woman_ But far different has been the case here_" - Francis Kinloch Jr. to Johannes von Müller, February 2, 1778 *This number could potentially be 330, but either way, this is a very large sum of money. £330 in the 1770s would be worth approximately £28,794.25 in 2017, and £830 in the 1770s would be worth approximately £76,784.66 in 2017. "There is no living Cheap in this Place of temptations" - Francis Kinloch Jr. to Johannes von Müller, February 21, 1778 "Who Knows, but What, if I had enjoyed my estate from my coming of age, I might have contracted a habitude of debauchery & expense, which would have made me more Miserable than it is in the Power of fortune to do." - Francis Kinloch Jr. to Johannes von Müller, February 21, 1778

It is interesting that Francis Jr. believed his lifestyle to be "not extravagant" and that he had avoided living a life "of debauchery & expense" despite the hundreds to thousands of pounds he was spending each year.

Finances and the security of his estate played a large part in Francis Jr. deciding to return to America and take up arms against England. In a letter to Müller dated November 13, 1777, Francis Jr. acknowledged that accepting a position in the English civil service would likely have resulted in his estate being confiscated: "Suppose L[ord] N[orth] had had it in his power to gratify my ambition with some residency abroad; the most it could have been worth to Me would have been 8 or 9 hundred a Year, now see What the Consequences would have been_ The Americans have too many spies in England for this matter to have remained a Secret in Carolina, where it would have been Known in two or three months, & I have not the least doubt but what my estate would have immediately confiscated, an irreparable loss, as My Negroes who form the most valuable part would soon be scattered over the whole province." Francis Jr.'s lack of participation in the war could also have been taken as a loyalist stance and thus could have resulted in his property being confiscated. Francis Jr.'s property was also subject to additional taxation if he did not return to America, as "a South Carolina act passed March 28, 1778 ... included a provision to double tax all absentees who had reached the age of twenty-one" (footnote #5 for the letter from Henry Laurens to John Laurens dated September 17, 1778, TPHL vol. 14). Francis Jr. had turned 21 in 1776 and would have been subject to this tax. However, Francis Jr. sailed for America in April 1778, so it is unclear if he knew about the implementation of this act. He would arrive in America in September 1778 and would serve as an aide to various officers in the American military.

Francis Jr.'s fears of property confiscation and/or taxation were not unfounded. Cleland remained abroad during the war and did not return until 1783. Cleland's property was amerced, as described in The History of Georgetown County, South Carolina by George C. Rogers, Jr. (5th printing, pp. 160-161):

"The Kinlochs did suffer for their failure to embrace the patriot cause with sufficient fervor. But even they only suffered in that Cleland Kinloch was amerced 12 percent of his estate; he did not lose his plantations. Francis and Cleland Kinloch had been in school in England and Switzerland* when the Revolution broke out. Their estates were administered for them by Thomas Boone, former Royal Governor of South Carolina. Francis returned home in the summer of 1778, was elected to the Continental Congress, and took up arms on the patriot side; Cleland did not. After Cleland's estate had been amerced, Francis petitioned the Senate of South Carolina in his brother's behalf, explaining that his brother had been sent by the executor of his father's will to England at an early age for his education." *While Francis was educated in England and Switzerland, Cleland was educated in England, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany.

Despite this setback, Cleland appears to have been a better businessman than his brother. According to a descendant, Cleland pursued an education in the Low Countries of Europe with a desire for "mercantile life & learning business and languages." In a letter to Francis Jr. dated March 10, 1776, Anne Cleland Kinloch wrote that Cleland "intends to be a merchant. Your Sister is highly pleased with the notion and says he shall bring up all her sons, Cleland you know was ever the most saving of the two & seems not to have lost the industrious spirit he ever had." A descendant described Cleland's success in cultivating his plantation:

Cleland was an able and efficient man, of fine judgment & charming disposition and manners, and his life in Scotland & the Low Countries had made him business like and œconomical besides. Having received Wehaw plantation, and his portion of his fathers estate and negroes, he proceeded to improve and enlarge the plantation (long cultivated and partly watered under the system of large reservoirs) over the river swamp, and islands, and extend the cultivation under the new tidal system. And he erected there, on Mr. Lucas' plans, one of the first improved rice mills in Carolina, and operated by tidal water power, like the tide mills of Bourdeaux & Holland. His education & residence in the Low Countries facilitated this and he became an extensive and successful planter and made Wehaw on[e] of the finest & best managed plantations in the Country. Note: "Some of these machines (Rice Mills) have been lately improved by Mr. Lucas, his Son, & Mr Cleland Kinloch, of Georgetown, to such an extent that from the beating out of the grain to the packing it in barrels for market the whole & every part is particularly the same impelling power" (Ramsey Hist: S. Carolina 11. p. 257? 207). He also extended the employment of animal power, using many oxen, and draugh[t] animals and in 1784 and afterwards added to Wehaw large tracts of pine forest lands, which increased the place to about 5000 acres. Also when opportunity allowed he improved the grounds by planting trees and establishing gardens under the supervision of the new Scotch gardiner sent from Gilmerton.

In contrast, Francis Jr. struggled with his finances and the management of his property throughout his life. Francis Jr.'s granddaughter Sarah Lewis Simons Lesesne wrote that "Grandpapa from Carelessness about Receipts and expenditures[,] Security debts and dishonest agents, found himself when over 70 compelled to give up his old Family home adorned with beautiful trees of his own planting and resign himself to comparative poverty." "Kinloch of South Carolina" by H. D. Bull (The South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, vol. 46, no. 2, p. 67) describes that, after Francis Jr. and his family returned from a multi-year trip to Europe in the early 1800s, "he found himself much reduced in fortune and was obliged to part with all of his property except Kensington. There he made his home until 1824 when the place was sold to Henry August Middleton for the sum of $40,000 which finally enabled him to discharge his debts." Henry August Middleton was married to Harriett Kinloch, the daughter of Cleland and therefore Francis Jr.'s niece. After this, Francis Jr. seems to have lived with his daughter Anne Cleland Kinloch Simons and her family in Charleston. Anne's daughter Sarah recalled her grandfather "with no taste for luxury in any form, with the simplest tastes and habits, a small bed in the corner of the Library his peculiar choice, a bowl of gruel often his breakfast." This description provides a stark contrast to the extravagance of Francis Jr.'s youth. Francis Jr. died in 1826, and his funeral was held at his daughter Anne's house.

[john-laurens]

Captn Gillon will deliver you £50 sterling which your Sister & myself intreat the favour of you to lay out for us the articles you'll see in the enclosed memorandum if it should be the least inconvenient to you do it, be so kind as to write out the mem. fair & give it to Gillon, who will get them, but you must be much altered indeed if you don't love still to serve the Ladies, the knitting thread is for my own work As I am grow So old I can't see to do any other, any old woman of your acquaintance will get that for you the paper & quills you must send or expect no more letters from America both being at present being very scarce here, Gillon is a very good judge of all the things sent for & you may if you please take his advice, if you remember how you used to wear & tare your own cloaths, & can get any thing that you think will be strong & dark coloured to make Breeches, for just such a graceless raking fellow as you was once, send a piece, we should be glad of one of the then same colour & of a lighter of any french cloth whatever to make Bens coats.

Anne Cleland Kinloch to her son Francis Kinloch, in a letter from 1776

From “Kinloch family history and genealogy research files” from the South Carolina Historical Society Archives

I do enjoy reading Anne's letters to Francis - they have a common theme of being simultaneously endearing and patronizing. I find it funny that she called young Francis a "raking fellow." Given the context, I assume she meant it in a "constantly getting scraped up" kind of way, but I think it's fair to say that Francis grew up to become a rake in the "promiscuous degenerate" kind of way.

I also wonder if Francis fulfilled his mother's requests. The Ben referred to in the letter is likely Benjamin Huger, who was the husband of Mary Esther Kinloch (Francis's sister). Given their starkly different political opinions, Francis hated Benjamin and even wanted to write Benjamin out of his will at one point.

[john-laurens]

Give me leave my dearest much loved Francy to congratulate you on your entrance into your 21st year

Anne Cleland Kinloch to her son Francis Kinloch, March 10, 1776

Francis had just turned 21 on March 7, 1776

[john-laurens]

Adding to my Anne Kinloch vs. Francis Kinloch post, I am intrigued by this line from the July 30, 1777 letter from Francis Kinloch to Johannes von Müller:

I have thought of serving a Campaign as a volunteer with General Howe, but that idea my Guardian has already smothered by objecting that it would immediately be attributed to Him, besides, I should draw down the curses of an angry mother, of a Mother whom I love too, upon my head.

While there were various other reasons for Thomas Boone to dissuade Francis from joining the British Army, I find it interesting that Francis focuses on the fact that if he were to join the army, this decision would be attributed to Boone, even though Boone was not the one to suggest it. And it's clear here that Boone does not want to be associated with this idea, even though he's a loyalist. The implication seems to be that Francis's mother Anne would attribute the decision to Boone, and Boone does not want to face her wrath. This is further supported by Francis noting that joining the British Army would also "drawn down the curses of an angry mother...upon [his own] head." During a time period when the contributions of women were often overlooked or discounted, I find it interesting that Anne Kinloch, through the threat of her anger, seems to have had considerable influence over her adult son and other men in her life.

As a side note, I do enjoy imagining the potential interactions between Anne Kinloch and John Laurens, even if they may not have actually interacted in the manner suggested by the Kinloch descendants. It's fun to picture Laurens sailing home from England, storming over to the Kinloch household, telling Anne, "We need to talk about your son," and Anne exasperatedly responding, "What did this bitch do now?"

[john-laurens]

Francis Kinloch's Path from Monarchist to SC Militiaman, Summarized

John Laurens: Monarchy is trash, republicanism is the way, join me on the side of America Francis Kinloch: You're wrong, and I'm completely willing to destroy our relationship over this Anne Kinloch: My son, why do you hold such beliefs against your country? Will you please consider changing them? You know how it upsets me. Francis Kinloch: Sorry mama :( I will come home right now and fight for America

[john-laurens]

We now prepared to set off on our return to Geneva, the ladies with the nurse rode in the charabanc as when they came, but I had prepared a better conveyance for Caroline. A guide of Chamouny, who, without one atom of superfluous flesh, was as big a man as your neighbour Mr. T—, and as surefooted as a mule, bore her in his arms over all the bad road, which lasted nearly twenty miles.

Letter from Francis Kinloch to Eliza Kinloch Nelson, contained in Letters from Geneva and France, Vol. 1

The imagery created by this paragraph is just too good. Here's the context:

Francis Kinloch traveled to Europe with his wife Martha and his children Anne and Frederick in 1803-1806. While in Europe, Francis and Martha's third child Caroline was born on June 15, 1804. (Complete speculation, but I like to imagine that they named her Caroline after their home state of South Carolina.) Sometime after her birth, the family visited the Bossons Glacier/Mont Blanc. The letter does not give a date for their visit, but Francis does mention that it was "a warm day in August." Based on a letter from Francis to Johannes von Müller dated August 7, 1804, it appears that this trip was undertaken when Caroline was only two months old. It is sweet to see that Francis cared about his young daughter's safety on the journey, and I just love the idea of him trying to hire the biggest, buffest, most skilled mountain climber in town for the important purpose of Carry Baby Down Mountain. (But also - why are you taking your newborn child up a mountain in the first place?)

Here's some additional description about the roads they traveled on and the charabanc the other family members used:

The Charabanc, as you will perceive by the drawing near you, is a kind of rude sopha upon four low wheels, and with short axles trees; it is easily taken to pieces, and two men convey all the parts of it over a narrow bridge in four turns. *The sort of charabanc here described is used only in mountain roads, which are very narrow. There is another sort of charabanc for better roads, and this last seems to have been the model of what we calla Dearborn waggon.

[john-laurens]

Top row: Ann/Anne Isabella Kinloch, née Cleland (mother of Francis Kinloch, Jr.; 1735-1802; left, right)

Middle row: Martha Kinloch, née Rutledge (second wife of Francis Kinloch, Jr.; 1764-1816)

Bottom row: Anne Cleland Simons, née Kinloch (eldest daughter of Francis Kinloch, Jr. and Martha Rutledge Kinloch; 1789-1857)

There is an inscription on the back of the portrait of Martha Rutledge Kinloch (text from the Gibbes Museum of Art):

written in pen, "Martha Rutledge/daughter of Gov. John Rutledge and Eliza Grimke his wife/married Francis Kinloch/taken at age 15" above this statement, "This is mamas writing -EFD"; Two labels affixed to wood board behind portrait, "St. Caecilia" and label advertising, "J. Harris/Map Chart & Printfeller/N. 3 Sweetings Alley Cornhill/London"; on brown backing paper

To clarify, the portrait of Martha Rutledge Kinloch was done when she was 15, but she married Francis Kinloch when she was 21. (Not to be confused with Mildred Walker, who did marry Francis Kinloch at the age of 15.)

Additionally, the right portrait of Anne Kinloch appears to be a colorized version of the black and white portrait - the colors may not be true to life.

[john-laurens]

Pink Pony Club is a Francis Kinloch and Anne Cleland Kinloch song. Send tweet.

[scotianostra]

June 22nd 1679 saw the Battle of Bothwell Bridge.

Two of my previous posts tie in with this one.

More Royalty and religion and needless loss of life in this battle, or not so match the battle itself, but the aftermath during a shameful period of our history known as the 'killing time',

Following his restoration to the throne, King Charles II gradually imposed strict controls on the religions practiced throughout his kingdoms. In particular the Presbyterian Covenanters of Scotland were singled out and persecuted for their beliefs.

If you remember my post on June 1st about the Battle of Drumclog when the Covenanters had a surprise victory against the experienced campaigner John Graham, Bonnie Dundee, this was a direct reply from the Government, the Covenanters spent the next few weeks building their strength, as did the government. Charles’ son James, Duke of Monmouth was sent north to take command, and the militia were raised.

The Covenanters had established their camp on the south bank of the Clyde, north of Hamilton. The rebels numbered around 6000 men, but were poorly disciplined and deeply divided by religious disagreements. They had few competent commanders, being nominally led by Robert Hamilton of Preston, although his rigid stance against the Indulged ministers only encouraged division. The preacher Donald Cargill and William Cleland, the victor of Drumclog, were present, as were David Hackston of Rathillet and John Balfour of Kinloch, known as Burley, who were among the group who murdered Archbishop Sharp,(see my May 3rd post for details of this). The government army numbered around 5000 regular troops and militia, and was commanded by Monmouth, supported by Claverhouse and the Earl of Linlithgow.

Battle centred around the narrow bridge across the Clyde, the passage of which Monmouth was required to force in order to come at the Covenanters. Hackston led the defence of the bridge, but his men lacked artillery and ammunition, and were forced to withdraw after around an hour. Once Monmouth’s men were across the bridge, the Covenanters were quickly routed. Many fled into the parks of nearby Hamilton Palace, seat of Duchess Anne, who was sympathetic to the Presbyterian cause. Around 600 Covenanters were killed, while some 1200 were taken prisoner.

The prisoners were taken to Edinburgh and held on land beside Greyfriars Kirkyard, an area now known as the Covenanters’ Prison. Many remained there for several months, those who didn't die there were transported to the colonies in November. Around 300 were marched to Leith and crammed into the hold of a ship. In the cramped and airless conditions below decks, it is unlikely that many of them would have survived the voyage, but the ship did not get far. It was wrecked off the coast of Orkney and most of the prisoners drowned.

[my-deer-friend]

Studies of animals like the ones John painted were often done from taxidermy models. So while John may not have painted the one in Anne's portrait, it could still very plausibly be the same bird – perhaps borrowed from the local naturalist's display cabinet!

Left: a painting of Anne Kinloch with a bird

Right: a painting of a red-winged blackbird from the Ethelind Pope Brown collection, potentially painted by John Laurens