PETER BUCKALEW



PETER BUCKLIOU (Bukelewe) (1) first known ancestor of this name in America, was an emigrant to Staten Island, Richmond, New York, in the late 1600's. He is later found in Perth Amboy, Middlesex, New Jersey.



The "Buckalew Family," manuscript in the Helen Gearhart Collection, Pennsylvania Archives, Pennsylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia, says that this Peter Buckliou was son of William "Bucklow" or "Boreklo" who was born circa 1620, and had children Peter, John Willemsen of Gravesend, Kings county, Long Island, New York, and William Willemsen of Flatlands, Kings County. However, research has not confirmed that this Peter and he of Staten Island are one and the same. A letter dated 11 August 1965, from James Buckelew Helme, M.D. (7 White Bridge Rd., Nashville, Tenn. 37205) to Mrs. Kenneth A. Erman assigns a Scottish origin to the family, with Frederick Buckalew asserted to be the emigrant ancestor, from Invernesshire, Scotland, in 1775. This definitely is in error as this Frederick is a son of Peter who was the original immigrant to Staten Island in the late 1600s.



PETER BUKLIOU (1) of Staten Island married Anetjie Fredericks about 1673. She was christened 18 December 1646, in the Dutch Colony in Brazil, daughter of Frederick Janss and Greitjen Janss (see JANSS). Fredericks was, of course, her patronymic. (1)



"A Patent for a Parcel of Land on Staten Island Granted to Mr. Robert Rider," dated 30 December 1680, mentions his land as adjoining the land of Peter "Burklow". (2) See Staten Island Map (Fig. A). Peter's home near Great Kills has been found and is preserved as a historical landmark today,(1992). (Fig. B)



A deed dated 28 December 1688 shows Peter "Buckaliew" bought of widow, Maria Lambert, 100 acres on Chesequakes Creek in Middlesex County, New Jersey. He sold his Staten Island property 8 December 1692, to Teunis Egberts.



His cattle mark was described as a "marke with a cross on the left ear & a slit in the under side of each ear," and his name is spelled "Bukljou". (Richmond County, N.Y. Records)



He evidently died intestate in Middlesex County, New Jersey, as a will has not been found and on 8 April 1695 administration on his estate was granted to his son Peter (2). Peter (1) is called "Peter Bucklew Senior of Perth Amboy" (3) His son Peter (2) was also bondsman on the estate.

Children: surname BUCKALEW

i. Peter Jr., (2) born about 1674, administered his father's estate. No further record. He died 1716 as his estate inventory was dated 30 March 1716. (4) He married three times and had 5 children; (1) Helena Winters; (2) Lydia ----, (3) Mary ----.

Children, surname BUCKALEW: by first wife,

i. Anna, christened 15 April 1694;

ii. Peter, christened 21 November 1697 in the Dutch Reformed Church on Staten Island

By second & third wives:

iii. Margaret;

iv. Mary;

v. Lydia.

ii. Frederick, see further.

iii. Mary, claimed to be a daughter, married Francis Letts, son of William Letts (5) His will was dated 15 September 1742, and probated 29 November 1742, mentioning wife Mary. William's will dated 27 February 1739/40 and probated 16 April 1740, names his children and his "Cousin" Peter Buckalew (2). Francis Letts and Mary had

Children, surname LETTS:

i. John;

ii. Abraham;

iii. Peter;

iv. Francis;

v. William, called deceased in his father's will.



iv: Annetje, christened 23 October 1678 Dutch Reformed Church of Staten Island. No more is known of her.

v. Margaret, no more is known of her.

vi. Isaac, no more is known.

vii. Francis, no more is known.



FREDERICK BUCKELEW

(Second Generation)

FREDRICK BUCKELEW (2) son of Peter (1) was christened 30 August 1676, in the Dutch Reformed Church, (6) Staten Island, New York, and married (1) Mary____, who is believed to be the mother of his children. He married (2) Mary, widow of Timothy Rose 17 February 1759. They had no issue.



A deed dated 23 July 1725, and recorded 4 July 1749, calls Frederick a carpenter (See Appendix B) of Perth Amboy, East New Jersey, and who grants land to his son, George Buckalew, Husbandman. (7) (Fig. D, E) A deed recorded next to this one is from James "Buckalow" to Peter Buckalew and mentions James's mother Sarah Buckalew, widow of George. On the first deed, Frederick and his wife Mary signed by mark. His mark is a capital "F" laid face down, and her mark a crude capital "M". (Fig. C)



On 25 June 1750 he and Peter Gordon made inventory on the estate of Ebenezer Hayward. (8) On 25 February 1754 he owed a debt to the estate of Jonathan Ketchum. (9) It is not known if either of these were related to Frederick or his wives.



His will (See Appendix B) was dated 22 October 1753 and probated 31 October 1754, calling him "Phredrick Buckalew of Perth Amboy" and "Yeoman being sick and weak in Body." He mentions his eldest son William as deceased but leaving children "Phredrick" and Abraham, and "the four Langtons" Susannah, Ann, Rebecca, and Priscilla, presumably grandchildren, as well as his sons Frederick, George, John, Peter, Thomas, daughter Ann and her children (unnamed), to Mary wife of John "Bokelew" who is identified as "Peter's Sun" and to her daughter Jeane Jones. He appoints his sons Frederick and Thomas as executors. (10)

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. William, (3) - married Elizabeth Everson, daughter of Nicholas Everson, whose will says "William Buckalew, father of Elizabeth's children, to have no part of said lands" that were bequeathed to Elizabeth. He died before the date of his father's will, 22 October 1753. (Mr. Alfred Stokes, Buckelew Historian and New Jersey researcher says William's wife name is not known.)

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. Frederick;

ii. Abraham;

iii. Susannah;

iv. Ann;

v. Rebeccca;

vi. Priscilla.



ii. Frederick, executor of friend Henry Disbrow's will, 12 August 1749 (11) married (1) name not known, (2) Mercy, who is mentioned in his will as his second wife. His will was dated 30 July 1776 and probated 29 March 1777, leaving bequest to his wife Mercy and his children, all named and identified as children of first, unnamed, wife, or second wife Mercy. Bequests to his brother Thomas and Thomas' sons David and Thomas, and daughters Effy and Mary. His executor is Abraham Buckalew, son of Peter.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. William;

ii. John;

iii. Margaret, married Josiah Clawson;

iv. Joseph;

v. Rachel, married 5 April 1764, Richard Clawson;

By second wife:

vi. Elizabeth;

vii. Ann, perhaps she who married 9 September 1754, Perth Amboy, Barney Carney;

viii. Sarah.

iii. George, see further.

iv. John, Yeoman, Christened 1705, married 25 December 1731, Isabel Dove (12) daughter of Alexander Dove and wife Jane (13) and witnessed the will of his father-in-law. His will was dated 5 June 1775 probated 6 September 1787 (14) and calls him a yeoman of Middlesex County, New Jersey. His children are identified in the will.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. Thomas;

ii. Samuel, said to be of Shrewsbury, New York, and married (1) not known, (2) Esther (Henry) Burroughs;

iii. Frederick, married Margaret Dunn;

iv. Priscilla, married 24 December 1757, John Roberts of South Amboy;

v. Jane, probably married 24 September 1753, Isaac Sutphen of Freehold;

vi. Isabel;

vii. Mary, deceased at the date of her father's will, but left three unnamed children.

viii. John, was the executor of father's estate;

ix. Abraham;

x. James.



v. Peter, is identified by his father's will as having a son John Buckalew, who has a wife Mary with a daughter named Jeane Jones. He married 2 February 1749 Mary Beers. He died 1800.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. Edward;

ii. John, married Mary ----;

iii. Frederick;

iv. William;



vi. Ann, identified as married and having children in her father's will. Perhaps she was the mother of the four Langtons mentioned in the will, if so

Children: surname LANGTON:

i. Susannah;

ii. Ann;

iii. Rebecca;

iv. Priscilla;



vii. Thomas, married Mary ----. His will was probated 1771.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. Thomas;

ii. David;

iii. Effie;

iv. Mary;

v. John;

vi. Margaret. (15)









GEORGE BUCKELEW

(Second Generation)



GEORGE BUCKELEW, (3) son of Frederick (2), Peter (1), was a Husbandman (farmer) according to his father and was an overseer in 1724. (16) He is mentioned in the will of his father as having received a legacy by deed, "given 23 July 1725 a tract of land and meadow on Chesequaks Creek for consideration of Love, goodwill and affection which is born toward said son." (17) This was recorded 4 July 1749. (See Appendix B) The name of his wife was Sarah and she is identified in 1749 as widow of George and mother of James. (18)



George Buckalew's will (Appendix B) calls him Yeoman (a freeholder below the gentry) of Perth Amboy and mentions his eldest son Richard (4) to have land on Back Creek, his son "Jeams" and three sons George, Jonathan and William ten pounds each, wife Sarah "Bokelow" and three daughters Presillah, Susanna and Sary and also leaves to his son Richard four head of cattle and a sorrel mare. His wife Sarah and brother William are to be executors. The will was dated 10 November 1739 and probated 3 December 1739. He signed his own name to his will, as "george Buckallw". (19) (Fig. C)



On 8 Jan 1748 James Bokelew of Middlesex County with the advice and consent of his mother Sarah Bokelew, widow of George Bokelew of Middlesex County to Peter Bokelew Sr. Yeoman, of the same place for 69 pounds 8 shillings sells a 98 acre tract. It was land lying on the north side of Chesequaks Creek and on the eastern most side of land belonging to Phredrick Bokelew Sr., it began at a stake at the edge of the creek..... (20)



In 1748 in the Freeholders list of "First Settlers of Ye Plantation 1664-1714":357,358, the following Buckalews are listed: Francis, Frederick, John, George, Peter and William. We know it was not George of Frederick and Mary though it might have been his son.

Children:surname BUCKALEW:

i. Richard, see further,

ii. James,

iii. George,

iv. Jonathan,

v. William,

vi. Priscilla,

vii. Susanna,

viii. Sarah









RICHARD BUCKALEW

(Fourth Generation)



RICHARD BUCKALEW (4) son of George (3), is first mentioned in his father's will, dated 10 November 1739. On 14 August 1744 we find him listed among those who owed a debt to the estate of John Gifford. As of 27 January 1745/6 the Administrators list the debt as paid. (21) After that he seems to disappear. We feel confident in identifying him with that Richard Buckalew who was in Fairfax County, Virginia, (Fig I) at least as early as 1749 and through 1756. A thorough search of all Buckalew data in New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia shows him no where else and his children significantly include a George, John, and Frederick.

On 26 December 1749 in Fairfax County he is given 100# for an old wolf. (22) In 1752 he along with Francis Hogue and Jacob Janney make the inventory of the Estate of Nicholas Parker.

In the 1752 Monthly Meeting of the Fairfax Quackers a Mary Bucklew is named as being received on 29 August and as going to Wateree Monthly Meeting, South Carolina, 26 October 1765. (23) Whether this Mary is of Richard or of his son George or of Jonathon it is not known as all their wives were named Mary, but it does indicate a migration pattern, which is also collaborated by the Revolutionary Pension application of Richard's son, John, wherein he states that he was born 1756 (age 78 - 1834) in Loudoun County, Virginia, then he went next to North Carolina and following that to South Carolina. The latter being the place from which he first enlisted. (24)

Richard is in and out of court in Loudoun County for various suits over the next couple of years. On the 23 March 1753 Benjamin Grayson brings suit against Richard and at which Richard failed to appear, but which was terminated in 1755 with Richard paying the charges. On 18 July a suit is filed by William Ramsay, Gentleman, against Richard for trespass. Another trespass case was filed against him on 21 February 1755 but was delayed.

In 1758 Richard Buckalew was listed as one of the tithables by Frances Peyton in the Cameron Parish (Fig. J) in Loudoun County. On 15 August 1759 we find "George Bucklew an infant [i.e., under 21 years of age] by Richard Bucklew his father.." (25) In 1762 the Titheable List of Lee Massey lists Richard, George and Garrett.

A Lease, dated 8 March 1763, from Thomas Lord Fairfax of Frederick County specifically identifies Richard as father of Frederick and John Buckalew. (26) This lease was for 200 acres on the Blue Ridge on the west side of Jeffery Branch. (Fig. J) It was land formerly surveyed for John Hough. The lease was given for the lifetime of Richard and his sons. Lord Fairfax retained the right of access to the property during the first three years. The Buckalew were to deliver "one good fat turkey or capon" to the mansion, build a dwelling at least 20 feet long and 16 feet wide, build "other such houses as his way of husbandry may require" and keep them in repair. He also had to plant 100 good apple trees at least 30 feet apart, keep them pruned and fenced and replace any that died. After three years he was to pay 40 shilling on or before the first of May annually for each 100 acres. James Hamilton and John Hough, Quacked, were witnesses.

On the 1764 Cameron Parish Tithable List, Richard, George, Garrett and Samuel Bucklew are taxed for 4 and Jonathon for l. The 1765 Laden County Tithable List show Richard Buckalew and Garrett Buckalew were taxed for 2 (Fig. K) and very likely they were in the same household. We feel this is one of the important clues in establishing Garrett as a son. George Buckalew is listed separately on this list. (27) That year Richard and his wife Mary sign a deed and are in a court record. These court records are the only evidences we have found for the name of Richard's wife. Her surname has not been indicated on any record thus far examined.

During 1765-6 there was a suit pending in court between Jonathon Buckalew and Alice Butcher who was under age of 21 with charges of trespass, assault and battery where Richard and wife Mary are surety for him. On 13 May 1768 the suit was arbitrated and dismissed; the defendant to pay the costs to the plaintiff. But by that time they seem to have been long gone from the state.



Richard Bucklew conveyed on 14 October 1765 the 1763 Lease from Fairfax to John Oldacre late of Hampshire County, Virginia for 120 pounds. (28)

(See Appendix A for further details on land acquisition in Virginia for those times)

By the late 1765 or early 1766 this family is on its way south and west as we next find them in North Carolina where on 7 June 1766 Richard "Bucklue" was a foot soldier in the Mecklenburg County Militia Company under the command of Captain Adam Alexander. (Fig. L) Jonathon, George, James, John and Garrett are also serving in this Militia. Jonathon could be a brother or possibly a son of Richard. By 1767 Richard and Jonathon have purchased land from Henry McCulloch in that county. (29) There seems to be suits in Equity Courts concerning both of these purchases which were still appearing on the books in 1798 between the University of North Carolina versus Richard and Jonathon. Jonathon had a mortgage for 160 acres of land on McAlpins Creek (Fig. M) for which he was to pay 87 pounds 7 shilling by Oct 1798 or the property would be foreclosed. Richard had purchased 465 acres for which 232 pounds 10 shillings was to be paid by 3 October 1798 or that too would be foreclosed. (30)Jonathon seemed to have remained in North Carolina while Richard migrated on south into South Carolina. (Fig. N)

On 12 November 1767 Richard had 100 acres in Fredericksburg Township of Craven County on the east side of the Wateree River. On 29 March 1768 he was granted 450 acres of land in Berkeley County on the Sandy Run. On the 14 and 15 December 1768 he had a Deed of Lease from Samuel Frazier and wife, Elizabeth, of Charleston on 150 acres situated on a small branch of Rocky Creek in Old Craven County (now Chester). This was recorded 4 January 1769. (31) He conveyed this to Joseph Milligan 23 & 25 February 1774. We have not found further information on the Craven and Berkeley County land transaction. (Fig. O) They do not figure in the estate at Richard's death either. He likely failed to meet all the requirements or found richer pickings elsewhere.

By 1771 he had land in Edgefield where Garrett Buckalew bordered him on one side with 100 acres. (Fig. P) He was witness to Garrett's deed. In 1772 the Memorial Tax returns reads "a return for 100 acres land on a branch of Stephens Creek of Savannah River by the lands of Richard Buckalew and Garret Buckalew vacant land." Richard was given 500 acres of land next to Garrett's in 1772. On 17 January 1772 he was granted 500 acres of land in Colleton County, South Carolina. This is undoubtedly the same as the 500 acres next to Garrett. Old Colleton was discontinued, evidently this part became part of Edgefield County as that is the only land heired by eldest son George at Richard's death.

Requirements concerning this 500 acre grant to Richard were that he or his heirs were to pay to the Receiver General on 25 March of every year, the equivalent of 3/4 shillings proclamation money for every 100 acres, beginning two years from the date of the grant. In addition, Richard was required, annually, to clear and cultivate 3 acres out of every 100. The grant would not be valid if the stipulations were not met.

"Grant qualifications in colonial South Carolina did change through the years - but it's almost 100% positive that both Garrett and Richard qualified for a headright grant. That particular kind of grant was only given to people who were citizens of the colonies, and allowed 100 acres for each head of the family, plus 50 acres for each person in the family under 16 years, or a slave." (32) Wives did add to the allotment just as did the children. "While Garrett only qualified for the minimum, Richard, on the other hand, was eligible for a pretty good sized tract, which should have meant he had a wife and seven or eight children." (33) (Fig. R, S, T)

Richard was called to serve on the Petit Jury in the Orangeburg District in November 1774 but made default and did not appear. (34) Between 1778 and 1779 Richard and Garrett served as Petit Jurymen at the Ninety Six District Courthouse. (Fig. U) Richard also served on the Grand Jury there at that time.

It is of interest to note that whatever business transactions such as legal, land or whatever that had to be done during this time, were transacted in far away Charleston. Because of the considerable distance involved it was a major undertaking to take care of some of these matters which could be simply done today at our nearby County Courthouses. For instance "Richard made the long trip down to Charleston in June 1772 to attend to some of these business matters. He needed to arrange to have a survey conducted for his land on Little Stevens Creek, and Garrett's levy for his grant needed to be taken care of." (35)

Of great interest for those of us whose ancestors lived at this time in South Carolina is that the first major battle of the Revolution was fought in 1775 at the site of the Old Ninety-Six Courthouse. (Fig. U) This was the area in which our Buckalew families lived. The family seemed to have been divided between the Patriot and Loyalist causes, however. Garret, George, Richard Sr. and Jr., John, Frederick and William all gave service time in one or the other.

As an example, for service rendered in the Loyalists cause from 13 June to 14 December 1780, Private Richard Buckleigh, Sr. received 6 months pay for duty under Colonel John Cotton's Regiment and Lieutenant John H. Crugar's Company of the Stevenson (Stevens) Creek Militia, 96 Brigade, at the evacuation of Ninety Six when they went to Orangeburg. (36)

Yet again Private Richard Buckleigh Sr. was issued payment for service of 172 days from 12 Oct 1781 to 1 Apr 1782 under Lieutenant Colonel Baily Cheney's Regiment of the 96 Militia and for which Richard Jr. received the pay as the elder Richard was deceased. It, therefore, seems it was in this very campaign that Richard Sr. lost his life. That fact is further evidenced by the issuance on 1 April 1782 to William Bryson a coffin from James Donaldson, the coffin maker, in Charleston, for Richard Buckelen. (37) (Buckelew)

John Buckalew, is the only southern Buckalew who made application for a pension for Revolutionary War Service from the south that I am aware of. He states that his father (i.e., Richard Buckalew) died in the war. The date is not definitely known, but from the above we can assume he was deceased in 1782. Land records confirm that he was surely dead by 17 January 1784, when his eldest son, George Buckalew, was selling land that had belonged to his father, Richard, and was heired by him as the eldest son. A deed of 3 January 1785 specifically calls George a son of deceased Richard, and mentions land that is bounded by the land of James Buckalew and Garrett Buckalew.

Remember also that the court record in Laden County, Virginia had established this relationship between Richard and George.

It has been suggested that Richards wife's maiden name was Garrett as they gave a son that name but no evidence has been found to support that idea. There are Garretts in the same area in Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina but no ties have been found to these families.

One other item of note is that no record examined thus far in our research would indicate that any of the Carolina Buckalew families were slave owners during their sojourn in that area even though several of the New Jersey families did own slaves.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

i. George, proven to be the a son of Richard as early as 1758 according to Laden County Order Book A:269 and as the eldest he is the heir to his father's estate as proven by land records dated 3 June 1785. (Edgefied County, South Carolina Deeds 7:45). He married Mary---, as shown by the latter record. In the Ninety Six District 1790 Census the family consists of one male over 16, two males under 16 and three females. He was a Juror 13 October 1788 (Court of Common Pleas, Edgefield County) and had been a foot soldier 7 June 1766 in North Carolina and like his father had served with the Loyalist Militia from the Stevens Creek area. He served with the 96 Brigade from 13 January - 14 December 1780; 61 days from 24 April - 24 June 1781 in Captain Alexander Wylly's Co. of Kings Rangers (Loyalists) of Augusta, Georgia. Then again for another 61 days from 24 October - 24 December 1781 with the same group from Savannah, Georgia. (38) A deed of 15 December 1791 in Edgefield mentions his son Moses.

Known child: surname BUCKALEW:

i. Moses, married Ann ---, of Garrard County Kentucky, according to the 15 June 1808 Edgefield County Deeds 11:314.

ii. Son;

iii. Daughter;

iv. Daughter;

v. Daughter.



ii. Garrett, see further.



iii. John, proven already to be a son, volunteered to serve as a soldier at the age of 16 for the first raising of troops for the nation in South Carolina, serving under Captain Purvis in a region commanded by General Andrew Williamson. Captain Purvis was promoted to Colonel and John Minton succeeded as Captain. John Buckalew went with the troops to St. Augustine where they remained, then marched to Midway Meeting House near the Oguchy River in Georgia. From there the troops were disbanded and John returned home. Three months later he again volunteered to serve in the Rifle Company under Captain Jefferson Williams and was attached to the regiment commanded by Colonel Purvis under General Williamson again. They marched from Edgefield District to the neighborhood of Orangeburg, South Carolilna where they were engaged in frequent skirmishes - after three months service around Orangeburg the troops were again disbanded. The third time he enlisted he was stationed at Liberty Hill in South Carolina and was engaged in scouting parties across the Savannah river into Georgia where his Major was killed. At the termination of his three months John again returned home. After several days home he went to Mecklenburg County North Carolina and volunteered in a Horse Company in 1778. He served in the battles of Guilford, Hanging Rock, (Fig. V) the Tools on the Catamba River finally joining up with General Green. He served a total of two years. He lived in Edgefield County after the war until 1801 where he was a land owner. He was in the Edgefield Court of Common Pleas January 1790 suing William Robinson. In 1790 Census for Ninetysix District his family consisted of one male over sixteen, one male under sixteen and one female. His Revolutionary War Pension Application was first suspended but later granted after he was over 78 years of age. From Edgefield County he went to Christian County, Kentucky where he lived for 4 years, then on to Pike County, Mississippi where they lived for 7 years, then to Clark County, Alabama for one year and then finally settling for the remainder of his life in Marengo County, Alabama. We have not found a mention of his wife's name on any record we have examined, though he was married and had children.

Probable children, surname BUCKALEW:

i. Ezekiel, born circa 1770, South Carolina (70-1850, 1850 Census Marengo County), farmer, married Rachel Green of Edgefield County. Other children are not known. The name Garrett appears among Buckalew descendants in Alabama lending further credence to the fact that indeed Garrret of S.C. is of the same family.



iv. Jonathan, foot soldier in 1766 in Mecklenburg, North Carolina came from Laden County, Virginia, where he was in a lawsuit with Mary Butcher 1765. He may be a brother of Richard instead of a son. (39) He died intestate in his middle age it seems. His estate in Mecklenburg County was administered in July 1776 with George Buckalew and his wife, Mary, as administrators. He had served as constable and on the Petit Jury in that county. (40) Their home was on Old Lawyer's Road. Children have not been identified. (Fig. N) There seems to be some relationship between he and Tunis Hoagland of Mecklenburg such as a daughter Mary being his wife. This George Buckalew of Burke County, North Carolina who married Catherine Smith may also be a son.

v. James, in Mecklenburg County, 1773, but called of Edgefield, South Carolina. His wife was Rachel. (41) In the 1790 Census he was in Edgefield with one male over sixteen, four males under sixteen, and three females. On 24 April 1812 land that had been granted to Richard Buckalew and inherited by George Buckalew was sold to James. (42) He was called "James Buckalew Senior" at the administration of his estate 18 December 1819 (43) and is believed to have had at least one child, James Jr. who administered James Sr's estate in 1819.



vi. Frederick, as per deeds of Laden County, Virginia. (44) On 5 June 1786 he witnessed a deed of Samuel Lewis regarding land originally granted to Garrett Buckalew. It is probably he who went off with the Tories and was in Georgia for a time. He also served with the Loyalists 182 days in the same company with Garrett in Colonel John Cotton's Regiment of the 96 Brigade. (45)



vii. William, probably a son, mentioned 9 July 1785 in Revolutionary War Claims. He witnessed a bill of sale of James Buckalew, Senior's estate settlement 1819, if the same man.



viii. Ephama, may be a daughter. On 3 January 1785 when George Buckalew sold 50 Acres of Richard's original grant on Little Stevens Creek to William Green she was one of the witnesses. She married John McCreless. She purchased most of the household goods at the property sale of the estate of James McCreless her father-in-law on 14 December 1799. George Buckalew was also one of the purchasers. (46)



ix. Richard Jr., who purchased land in Lancaster County and served also with the Loyalists for 182 days from the 14 June until 13 December 1780 in Colonel John Phillips Regiment of the Jackson's Creek Militia from Camden District, a part of Captain James Millar's Company. (47)



At this point I would refer the reader to the following:



APPENDIX B: Wills of Frederick Buckalew, George Buckalew, and Garrett Buckalew and the Deed of Frederick Buckalew to George Buckalew.



APPENDIX C: gives some observations by Mary's People on the Virginia Buckalews.



APPENDIX D: gives some important historical background for the North and South Carolina Buckalew families. It is an aid in better understanding the environment in which our families lived. It also helps us know of some of the struggles they faced. This material is from "Buckalew Traces" #5 pages 34-44, February 1985, by Gerry Green of Texas which is presented here with her permission. It is entitled, "The Carolinas & The Revolution".



GARRETT BUCKALEW

(Fifth Generation)

GARRETT BUCKALEW (5) was first mentioned in the 1762 & 64 tax rolls of Cameron Parish, Laden County, Virginia, as being in the same household as Richard Buckalew. While no direct evidence exists that he was son of Richard, we believe the circumstantial evidence is sufficient in substantiating this claim. He, along with Richard, move from Laden County, Virginia, to Mecklenburg County, North Carolina thence to Edgefield County, South Carolina. Another fact that bears this out is that the name Garrett is perpetuated in John Buckalew's family descendant's in Alabama. We have proof that John is a son of Richard.



George, Frederick and John, all known sons of Richard were along on these moves from Loudoun County, Virginia to Mecklenburg County. North Carolina. Garrett and Richard not only owned land adjacent to each other, and witnessed each others deeds in South Carolina but Richard is also doing some of the legal work on certifying Garrett's land.



Garrett Buckalew is the first known ancestor to be pulled into the skein drawn by the Mormon practice of vicarious work for the dead which included baptisms, endowments and sealings, and he, his wife, and all of his children are mentioned in the "Mormon" baptismal records for the dead in the 19th century. (Fig. W) His wife is there called Mary or Polly NEWTON, It is suggested in one source that she was a daughter of John Newton, but that point is not yet established. She is also believed to be a sister of Joseph Newton who took up land next to that of Garrett in South Carolina. On 7 September 1793 Joseph was selling about 100 acres of land that had been originally granted to Garret 11 April 1798. He also went to Christian County, Kentucky, about the same time as did the Buckalews so it seems quite possible he and Polly are of the same family.



As has already been previously stated in 1766 Garrett was listed as a foot soldier for Mecklenburg County, North Carolina as was his presumed father and several of his presumed brothers.



We find him next in South Carolina receiving a Royal Land Grant along with Richard. In that state when a Royal Grant was issued, a Survey or Plat was made and certified, the Grant was issued, then a Memorial Tax was exhibited, all at different times. (Fig. X)



In the South Carolina Archives, Pre-Revolutionary Plats, 9:370 and 9:923-24 in 1770, Garrett Buckalew is shown having a plantation of 100 acres on Little Stephens Creek surveyed. It stated: "bounded southwest by Richard Bucklew, and southeast by said Bucklew, all other sides by vacant lands." This would seem to indicate that Garrett had other land previous to this but no record has been found of it. If this is his first land then he seems to have been single for he only gets 100 acres. He was under the same stipulations as has been previously described for Richard concerning his land in order to make it secure for himself. In 1772 he and Richard Buckalew were taxed for their lands on Stephens Creek. Richard is the one who makes the long trip to Charleston to take care of his and Garrett's business.



He served a tenure of time at the 96 Courthouse on the Petit Jury during 1778-9.



From 14 June 1780 until 13 December he served 172 days with the British Militia from "Stephensons" Creek in Captain Denis Nolan's Company being part of the Colonel John Cotton's 96 Brigade. (48) This should be Steven's Creek not Stephenson's. Frederick was also in this company which was directly under Major Ferguson.



He serves as a witness to a deed of his brother, George, who is selling part of Richard's land, which, as eldest son, he heired, to Alexander Bean.



A 150 acre tract of land on a creek of Savannah River is surveyed for him 18 February 1786 in what was then Abbeville County (49) but the land is today in Edgefield County. (Fig. Y)



In 1786 Garrett was sued or suing John Rainsford in Edgefield County. (50) A suit between him and Samuel Ramsey was dismissed in April 1787.

He is again purchasing 150 acres of land in 1788 on the South Fork of the Edisto River in the old Winton or now Barnwell County. On l August of this same year he bought 100 acres on Mactier Creek in Orangeburg District for 80# sterling which was on the same river course. This probably is the same land. (51) By October of this year his land on Little Stevens Creek was owned by Ansel Beardon. His probable brother, Frederick Buckalew is witness to this. (52)

In 1789 he was serving as a Juror, (53) and again in Barnwell County in 1790. For full list of Jury Duty by Buckalews in S.C. see (Fig. Ya)



The 1790 Census of the Ninety Six District lists him with the following in his household: one male over 16, one male under 16 and six females, making a family of eight.



In 1793 Joseph Newton buys 500 acres on branch of Little Stephens bounding land of Garrett. Garrett is called Planter of Edgefield 26 March 1795 when he sells to John Sloan part of his 269 acre tract on Long Branch on south side of the Edisto for 100# sterling. (54)



On 30 January 1797 he is witness to deed of George in Edgefield County. (55)



On 11 April 1798, Joseph Newton, believed to be his brother-in-law, sold land to James Eddins on Little Stephens Creek, land that had originally been granted to Garrett Buckalew. (56)



It is interesting that between 1770 when Garrett first appears in South Carolina until 1795 a period of 20-25 years he is on record dealing in a total of 619 acres of land in this state.



Eliab Buckalew, only son of Garrett, is witness to the selling of land owned by Joseph Newton which bounded that of Garrett in Edgefield County on 13 January 1800. Both father and son and their families seem to be on their way to the south western Kentucky in 1801 or soon there about. They appear on the tax lists of Christian County from 1803 through 1808. Both are listed living separately on 200 and 400 acres of land on the Muddy Fork and Little River and with one to three horses each. (Fig. Za)



Garrett travels west to the adjacent Livingston County where he signs, giving permission for his daughter Anna to marry William Bean 20 January 1803. (57) On 28 November of that same year daughter, Sarah, is married to Charles Hughes back in their home county of Christian. (58) Two years later on 27 December 1805 daughter, Mary, is married to Jesse Hughes, probable brother to Charles in the same county. (59) The next year on 22 March daughter, Dempsey, is married to Henry Young. So their move to this county and state was providential in that several of his daughters found their mates here.



In the late summer or early fall (September or October) of 1809 Garrett Buckalew, his wife, four of his sons-in-law and their families, along with the rest of his children, move to eastern Missouri, then known as the St. Charles District, (Fig. Zb) making a total wagon train of seven or eight families. "All of whom were poor in the things of this world, for they all together were only able to fit out one wagon," recalled Garrett's grandson and namesake, Garrett Bean. It is not even certain the wagon was drawn by four horses, and a portion of their effects were transported on pack horses. They crossed the Mississippi near Idton and eventually settled in what was then St. Charles District, now Pike County, Missouri. It is in this area that the rest of the daughters find companions and marry. Elizabeth married Samuel Groshong; Lydia married (1) John Spears (2) George Myers; Celia married Joseph McCoy 2 Jun 1808; and Temperance

married Daniel W. McHugh about 1809.



On 16 December 1811 southeast Missouri had a violent earthquake which was followed by 8 more during the following year. (60) Frequent Indian attacks also complicated their lives during this time. Several families such as the William McHughs (Daniel's parents) and the O'Neals lost members of their family in these attacks. It was necessary at such times to withdraw from their land and homes to the protection of the nearest Forts.



Jesse Hughes, Garrett's son-in-law, in 1814, settled four miles south west of Clarksville. His brother, John, settled next to him three years later in 1817. Jesse had a smithy and plow factory on the creek bank. He made the prairie plows (spelled "ploughs" on his bills of account) that were used by the first settlers to break up the stubborn bottom prairies there and around Bayville, Pike County, Illinois. (61) At the settlement of his estate in 1855 his property is valued at over $2000. He did have a male and female slave.



In 1815 Garrett purchased 100 acres of land from David and Eleanore Dulaney of St. Charles County, and later deeded part of that property to his son Eliab. Still later in 1824, 22 May, he sold 79 acres of land on Ramsey's Creek in Pike County to his son-in-law, Henry Young. (62) (Fig. Zc)



His son-in-law, Henry Young, preceded him in death, as did also daughters Lydia Myers, Sally Hughes and Elizabeth Grosjean.

Little is known of Garrett's last years, but he did leave a will dated 13 May 1824 and probated in 1828, at Bowling Green, Pike County, Missouri. His wife, Polly, seems to have preceded him in death as she is not mentioned in the will. The legal heirs were not named in the will but were identified on 31 December 1834 in its Administration (Fig. Zd, Ze). (63)

Children: surname BUCKALEW - absolute dates for the birth of Garrett and Polly's children have not been located except for one or two, therefore they are estimated and are subject to change when new information is found. The children's order in the family is also subject to change when exact birth dates are known.

i. Eliab, born 1770-73 Edgefield County, South Carolina, married Rebecca-- probably in South Carolina; he died 26 February 1844, at Pleasant Hill near Bayville, Pike, Illinois, in his own hewn log cabin near where the Bay Creek breaks through the bluffs.

Children: surname BUCKALEW:

I. John, married in Pike County, Illinois (1) 26 October 1834 Margaret Collard, she died 1835. He married (2) 26 May 1836, Lucinda Elizabeth Firman, died 7/8 June 1838;

ii. Eliza, born about 1805, married Harrison Spears, probably a cousin, died before 1850. He died 27 March 1853 Pike County, Illinois;

iii. Garrett, born 1810-15, married 25 April 1839, married Julia McCoy daughter of Joseph.

iv. Mahala, born 1815-1818, married 1 January 1835 James Pruitt, she was deceased by February 1849;

v. A daughter, married cousin, Henry Young;

vi. Celia Ann, married 9 March 1843 Pike County, Illinois, Jonathan C. Turnbaugh, she died before 1850;

vii. Joseph, born about 1818/9 died 16 November 1847 Clackamas County, Oregon;

viii. Lydia, born April 1818, married 19 July 1836, Samuel P. Zumwalt (Fig. Zf) born 22 July 1810 in St. Charles County, Missouri. She died 13 October 1853 leaving seven children - four boys and three girls - aged one to fifteen. He died, age almost 90, 22 April 1900 and is buried by his wife Lydia in the Burbridge Cemetery in Pike County, Illinois. (Marie Bryant, 5315 Halsey, Shawnee, Kansas 66216 is a descendant of Eliab and collected much of the information concerning his family.) See also APPENDIX - E for short sketch of Samuel's life.

ii. Dempsey, born 12 March 1780, married 22 March 1806, Henry Young, at Christian County, Kentucky, he was deceased by 6 November 1844, Bowling Green.

Children: surname YOUNG:

I. Hiram H., married 10 March 1830, Edna Thornhill;

ii. William;

iii. Henry, married ---Buckalew, his cousin;

iv. John, married 2 January 1840, Ann Hughes, his cousin;

v. Garrett;

vi. Mary, married Nathaniel Triplett, died before November 1844;

vii. Celia, married a cousin, Eliab Hughes;

viii. Dempsey, married ___Alexander;

ix. Priscilla, married ---Summers;

x. Amos;

xi. Sarah, married 23 February 1837, Israel Farr;

xii. Elizabeth.

iii. Sarah or Sally, married 28 November 1803, Christian County, Kentucky, Charles Hughes. She is deceased by 1835. No more is known of this family.



iv. Lydia, married (1) John Spears, (2) George Myers. She is deceased by 1835. No more is known of this family.



v. Elizabeth, born 1782, married Samuel Groshong, about 1810. She was deceased by 1835. Samuel and Elizabeth first held land in St. Charles District, Missouri, where a daughter, Mary, was born to them. He taught school there before the War of 1812. An account is given of his riding out one day near one of the forts perhaps Clark's when he was charged by some Indians, one of whom shot him in the shoulder. He then spurred his horse and ran for his life, when about 300 yards from the fort his horse fell dead. His comrades in the fort ran out and carried him into the fort to safety. (64) They went to Ursa Township, Adams County, Illinois in 1823 where he built the first log cabin there.

Children: surname GROSHONG:

i. Mary, married George Campbell, 18 August 1825. Mary and George had one child, a son, A. J. Campbell, who was the first white child born in that township, 12 August 1827.



vi. ANNA, born 25 October 1784, some say Burke County, North Carolina, (though I question the place), married (1) 20 June 1803, William Bean; and (2) 16 July 1810, Andrew Edwards, who died 4 March 1846, St. Charles District, Missouri. She had four children by Bean and nine by Edwards. See William Bean for further information.



vii. Celia, born 1786, married Joseph McCoy, 2 June 1808, St. Charles District, Missouri. He is deceased by 20 October 1841, Bowling Green, Pike County, Missouri.

Children, surname McCOY: as identified in Probate Record (65):

I. Dempsey, married 21 October 1834 Alexander McNair;

ii. Robbins, born. circa 1815, married 13 December 1830, Elizabeth Ames;

iii. Tempe[rence] married 10 October 1833, Rolly or Romelis Dickson;

iv. Anna, born circa 1818, m. 25 February 1836, William B. Mulherrin;

v. James, b. circa 1820, m. Emily J.---;

vi. John;

vii. Isaac;

viii. William Miller, m. 26 December 1839, Mrs. Elizabeth (- --) Dwaab;

ix. Martha Jane.



viii. Mary (Polly), aged 63-1850, aged 77-1860, born 1783/87,

(1850, 1860 Pike County, Missouri Census), South Carolina. She died Calumet, Pike, Missouri. Married 27 December 1805, Christian County, Kentucky, Jesse Hughes,(65-1850), born 1785, North Carolina, he is deceased by 5 June 1855, at Calumet, Missouri. She is living with daughter Sarah Woodruff in 1860. Mary/Polly was referred to by both names on the deed records examined.

Children: surname HUGHES:

i. Polly, married 29 November 1832 William Morrow, lived in Hopkins County, Texas;

ii. Celia, married 6 November 1844 Isaac Linn, lived in Parker and Jackson Counties, Texas;

iii. Jane, married 7 April 1836 William McDowell;

iv. Sarah, born 1820, married 1850-60, Tipton Woodraugh [Woodruff]:

v. Ann, married 2 January 1840, cousin John Young;

vi. John, married Mary----, lived in Platt County, Missouri;

vii. Lucinda Dempsey, married about 1823 Jonas F. Denny. She died 2 October 1884 at age 78 Arcata, California;

viii. Eliab, married cousin Celia Young;

ix. Andrew, born 1810, married Mary----;

x. Jesse Jr., born 1824, married 12 September 1844 Mary Bailey. Moved to Hopkins County, Texas.



ix. Temperance, aged 52-1850, born 1798 Kentucky, married Daniel McHugh, St. Charles District, Missouri. He (53-1850) was born 1797, died 11 September 1854, Van Buren County, Iowa. They were residents of Village Township and he was a Blacksmith. He was a son of William McHugh who lost 3 of their 8 children in an Indian ambush.

Children: surname McHUGH or McCue:

i.. Sarah - born about 1824 married John/Jesse Pritchard. She died before 11 September 1854 when her father died. Her husband was living with Daniel and Temperance in 1850. They had two daughters:

i. Lucinda, born 1840 married 19 August 1860, W. L. Marshall, in Van Buren County, Iowa;

ii. Temperance, born 1841 married 17 November 1867, John T. Jackson.

iii. John, 21-1850, born 1829, Missouri, married Mary, 22-1850 born 1830, Ohio.





(Fig. Zg) shows the Migration Pattern of the Buckalew Family from New York, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky and Missouri.

APPENDIX - D



"The Carolinas & The Revolution"



If the Buckalew migrated southward in a quest for relief from the domination of the eastern Virginia counties over the more western counties - their migration was in vain. Neither of the Carolinas was a bit better than Virginia had been in that respect! It would eventually become the site, in the latter part of the 1760s, for the violent confrontations between the "yeoman Regulators" and the "privileged class and its agents."



If they had gone south seeking a spot where they had no large land owners like Lord Fairfax to deal with, they went to the wrong place. Way back in 1745, yet another "generous" King of England, George II, granted sixteen 12,500 acre tracts to John Selwyn. Eight of the tracts became known as Tract One, and the other eight were lumped together into Tract Three. If I am interpreting the old, hard to read document correctly, under the terms of the grant - Selwyn was given ten years to settle one white person on every 200 acres. At the end of that time, Selwyn was to pay His Majesty annual quit rents of four shillings for every 100 acres settled. Any land not settled was subject to forfeiture.



Sometime during that decade, John Selwyn died, and the land passed into the hands of his son, George Augustus Selwyn. In 1756, the King and his Council were "pleased" to continue the exemption of quit rents and terms of settlement until March 1760. The Governor of North Carolina was ordered not to try to reclaim any of the unsettled land until after that date. It appears that the deadline came and went without any action being taken. Not surprising on King George's part - he either died, or was overthrown, or something in 1760, and the throne was taken over by George III. Seemingly, the 200,000 acres were, also, out of the sight and mind of Selwyn, living in England thousands of miles from his holdings in the New World.



However, the new King George would have had to focus his attention on his American colonies rather quickly. After all, he was the one who declared, in 1763, that there could be no expansion beyond the mountains because of Indian trouble. Once the official business had been attended to, he should have had time to review his personal business holdings. He probably would have noted the 1745 grant, the original 10 year grace period for the payment of quit rents, and that the extension until 1760 had long since expired.



Apparently something similar really did happen, because, in 1763, Selwyn gave his power of attorney to Henry McCulloh of Great Britain, and McCulloh's son, Henry Eustace McCulloh, of North Carolina. They were to act on his behalf with regard to the forfeiture clause, and the King's rights to collect quit rents. George A. Selwyn may have trusted Henry E., - but I don't! Deed records show very little activity on Tracts One and Three through 1766. Perhaps the younger Henry was more interested in developing his father's 1.2 million acres than Selwyn's 2 million?



Seventeen sixty-six (1766) was also the same year the Buckalew are positively known to have been in Mecklenburg County. At that time, each colony could regulate its own militia. Most required mandatory service of all males, free and physically fit, who were between the ages of sixteen and sixty. North Carolina had a minimum age of 21, but that was not necessarily a hard and fast rule. Five Buckelew men with very familiar names served as privates that year: Richard, Jonathan, George, James and Garrett. That means they lived in the county, were not indentured servants, were in reasonably good health, and had likely been born between 1706 and 1745 (say 1750, to be on the safe side). The names were the same, but were they the same people who were in Virginia? I don't know. [Arlene's note: I strongly believe they were for they disappear from Virginia and reappear here.]



Meanwhile, back in England, King George would, again, be concerned with problems in the colonies. The Stamp Act had caused such an uproar, Parliament repealed it in March 1766, but tried to hold onto its authority by stating England retained the right to pass laws and acts in the colonies. He may have noticed six whole years had passed in which he, George III, did not collect quit rents. That would have been about 2400 pounds - past due! The King was in his counting house, counting out his money. The Queen was in her parlor, looking for bread and honey. "Geo-rge!! We're out of food! If those deadbeats would pay their quit rents, we'd have something to eat!" With that, the King probably sent a strongly worded directive to George Augustus Selwyn - who, in turn, probably sent a much stronger letter to his agent, Henry Eustace McCulloh, "Get on the stick over there! The King is about to seize my property - and I'm going to hold you responsible!!!"



A Royal message seems to have been sent across the Atlantic, as well. In November of 1766, the Governor of North Carolina appointed William Frohock and Nathaniel Alexander to conduct a survey as to the number of white people living on Tracts One and Three as of March 1760. Their report was delivered the latter part of January and the first part of February 1767. The results stated that 18 white persons had settled on Tract One by 1760, and 240 on Tract Three.



The history of Selwyn's land grant as told in the old deed, shows he surrendered a large percentage of the original grant. However, he withheld 50,774 acres which had been conveyed by deed to settlers, or surveyed for himself and John Frohock (both of whom got big chunks!) The document then goes on to name the settler and the date the deeds were executed. Even though almost every deed was dated in the early part of 1767 - the implication is there that those people had resided on the land in March 1760. As if to confirm this, the names of about 18 settlers are on the deed list for Tract One, and approx- mately 225 are on Tract Three list. Granted, the possibility exists that Selwyn, McCulloh and Frohock were simple trying to save their own skins, by "causing" the King to assume that all of those people had lived on the land on the day the extension expired. What really happened is extremely important if the Buckalew are ever to be sorted out, because Jonathan and Richard Buckelew's names appear on that list.



In the opinion of some of those who have studied Mecklenburg County history extensively, many people had settled, or "squatted" on the land during the years it was in "limbo". Seeing the handwriting on the wall, and under pressure from Selwyn - McCulloh, and his cohort, John Frolock told the settlers to pay up or get out! Most of those who remained, were forced to mortgage their property in order to pay for it. This, naturally, would have angered the settlers, and was thought to have contributed to the attitudes which later resulted in the Meckelenburg Declaration of Independence.



However, looking at the other side of the coin, there is something else to consider. The Colonial Carolinas had a "lease and release" clause in effect at the time. This law required a prospective buyer to have actual possession of the land, as a lessor, prior to buying it. There were, of course, loopholes!! A residency of only one day had to be established before the tract could be bought. This could mean the Buckalew really didn't get there until 1766.....



The family appeared to be all together when the five men met for the Mecklenburg County Militia muster. That's the first and last time Garrett's name has been found (so far) in North Carolina.



It has always been assumed that Richard leased, then mortgaged, in early 1767, his 465 acres on McAlpine's Creek - then abandoned it for greener grass in South Carolina. .....The third Buckelew name mentioned on the militia list was James. A James bought 200 acres on McAlpine's Creek in 1773 from good old Henry E. McCulloh - and was in Mecklenburg County as late as 1781.



Jonathon, the fourth Buckelew name on the militia roster, leased and mortgaged 163 acres of land on McAlpine's Creek at the same time Richard did - January of 1767. Jonathon did pay his mortgage off in 1772, and continued to buy land there. After his death, some of the property was sold by a George Buckelew, who may or may not have been a son (or brother). Jonathon's name is mentioned over and over again in the Mecklenburg minutes. He seems to have been the only Jonathon there. If so, he apparently had put his roots down deep in North Carolina.



Well, those are the five men of Mecklenburg: Garrett, Richard, James, Jonathon and George - and life could not have been easy for them. Even though the hated Stamp Act had been repealed, England was not about to loosen her control over her colonies. In 1767, the Revenue Act (better known as the Townshend Acts) went into effect. Although tempered in harshness, the seeds of the American Revolution had already sprouted. It's already known the Buckalew who remained in Mecklenburg had their lives complicated by the "business practices" of Selwyn, McCulloh and Frohock, so they would have had many things to contend with.



The family members probably would have had a great deal of sympathy for their neighbors to their north who lived in the old counties of Orange and Anson. Those people were under the domination of one of the last proprietors of colonial agents - who appear in the records to have been anything but fine, upstanding, honest citizens!



Apparently totally frustrated by the proprietary system, its agents and the continued control of the eastern-most counties over their lives - the more middle-classed folks began to meet to discuss their grievances. By 1768 they were known as the "Regulators," and set out to "right the wrongs" they had endured. Although conceived in Anson and Orange Counties, and remaining strongest there - the Regulator Movement spread to other counties, as well. However well intentioned they may have been, they acted like a mob. Jails were raided and prisoners were released. The court sytem was interfered with, and officials and agents had their homes and offices attacked. Not surprisingly, John Frohock was among those targeted by the Regulators. The Buckalew do not appear to have had any reason to like Frohock, so I guess I'll always wonder if any of them were part of the Regulator raids.



Those Buckelew families would have had to endure far more than the back breaking labor required just to survive. I would think the very future of the family would have looked extremely dim to them, then. Uncertainty and violence seems to have marked the days of their lives - and the situation was to become worse before it started getting better.



In March of 1770 the now famous Boston Massacre took place - the event that is often credited with being the true start of the Revolution. Who could forget the Boston Massacre? I couldn't -but neither could I remember all the details. .......



The above may not have mattered much down in North Carolina, though. Things were still in an uproar, because, with each "success," the Regulator's mob movement seemed to grow stronger and bolder. Until - they threatened the Assembly in New Bern (the then seat of government). That was when Governor Tyron sent the provincial militia to battle it out with the Regulators. The militia won the skirmish at Almanac Creek in May of 1771. The Regulators also lost their cause - their original grievances were to go unheeded until a quarter of the next century had passed.



Two Buckelew men were very unlikely to have been at Almanac Creek. Those with the name of Garrett and Richard have the distinction of being the very first Buckalew to officially turn up in South Carolina. Others could have been there first, but their last names are still in question. In November of 1770, the "Powers that Be" ordered a survey for a tract of land for Garrett. It took the surveyor almost three months to get around to platting the 100 acres of land in Old Colleton County. Even though Richard, apparently, had done nothing to legalize his land claim, he was shown on the plat as having land adjoining Garrett's. They were out on the edge of civilization, just like the Buckalew before them - surrounded by vacant land. When Richard's survey was conducted for his 500 acre tract, they were still the only ones next to each other. ......................



Meanwhile, back to the rest of the colonies, the repeal of the Townsend Acts really had not resolved the problems between Mother England and her American colonies, although surface relations appeared to be fairly good. Independence had been in the wind for more than a short time. Many of those settlers had several generations of colonial life behind them, and they, and their ancestors would have learned they had to depend on their own resources, rather then Britain's, for survival. The children colonies had grown up, and wanted to make their own decisions, rather than be shackled by the rules of a parent country thousands of miles away from the day-to-day problems that life on the frontier presented. War was probably inevitable, and was drawn even closer with the formation of the Committees of Correspondence in 1772 in Massachusetts. The original purpose of the organization was to form a coalition within the colonies to deal with the problems between England and her New World citizens.



Perhaps the Buckalew in Mecklenburg County, and by this time, in Edgefield County were scarcely even aware of the meetings taking place so far away. The more heavily populated towns, especially ports, would have been more aware of what was going on because of better communication, and would have "felt" the impact of England's laws more strongly that the more self-sustained rural frontiersmen in the south. However, an incident here, and an incident there, eventually caused Virginia to form its own Committee of Correspondence. The Committees did not help heal the relations with England, but they did form a basis for unity within the colonies, which became important later.



Things were going from bad to worse, and really went downhill fast when Parliament passed the Tea Act in 1773. That, of course, resulted in the Boston Tea Part, followed by rebellion in Annapolis and Charleston. The "Tea Party" was apparently the most flagrant, so England retaliated by closing the Port of Boston to all ships until the cost of the tea was recovered. That wasn't all - Britain, apparently sensing they were losing control, over-reacted by imposing a series of other acts designed to bring the wayward colonies to their "senses". Needless to say, their tactics didn't work.



In today's world, we are all aware of decisions effecting the entire world, or a portion of it, have to be made in seconds, or a few minutes, at the very most. Such was not the case in pre-Revolutionary America. It was not until September of 1774 that the First Continental Congress met in Philadelphia. It took the delegates a while to formulate the position of the colonies, but they eventually came up with a Declaration of Rights and Resolves, which appears to me to have expressed the thoughts behind what eventually became the Declaration of Independence.



Although far removed from the events taking place in the northern colonies, the Buckalew were swept along with the tide of war. England considered the colonists as rebels, and the majority of the colonists considered the English as tyrants. Diplomacy did not triumph in this case. The Minute Men gathered arms and supplies, and when the English got wind of it, sent troops to Concord, Massachusetts to squash the rebellion. Paul Revere made his famous ride in April of 1774, but some Minute Men lost their lives, killed at nearby Lexington.



The Second Continental Congress met in May, and created the Continental Army to defend the colonies with. Apparently, in a last ditch attempt to resolve differences peacefully, John Dickinson drafted what was known as the Olive Branch Petition. It was adopted by the Congress and sent to good old King George III. If the truth be known, maybe it was fear that prompted the message of reconciliation - after all, the colonial militia had lost the battle at Bunker Hill [originally Breeds Hill] in June. And maybe it was that victory that prompted George III to turn thumbs-down on the Olive Branch Petition in November of 1775. Regardless, the Revolution was on!!!



Of all the "famous" statesmen who drafted all of those "famous" resolutions, and of all those "famous" militiamen who fought the British in those "famous" battles - only two southern Buckelew names have been found (William and John). Does that mean they were not a contributing force in the creation of this country? No!! Even the presence of at least one Loyalist Buckelew does not take away from the fact that it took the support of the little known-people to give those "famous" resolutions impact. And it took the efforts and lives of unknown soldiers fighting little-known battles to, finally, win the independence. It wasn't even wrong to be a Loyalist, that was simply a difference of political opinion.

The first major battle of the Revolution in the south was little known to me until recently. Probably, nobody living in the general area of the Ninety Six Courthouse in South Carolina (not far from the Little Stevens Creek land of Richard and Garrett Buckalew) even knew the King had rejected the Olive Branch Petition. Not that it mattered! Tempers apparently were high in the district, which had a large segment of people who remained loyal to England, and who were pitted against the newly formed patriots.



The Ninety Six grand jury adopted resolutions favorable to the patriot position. Then, it's my understanding, the colonists, acting upon only God knows whose authority, arrested one of the loyalist leaders, Robert Cunninghan, and then proceeded to build a ramshackle fort near the Ninety Six Courthouse. The shanty-town structure, manned by less than 600 patriots, was attacked by almost 2,000 loyalists on November 19, 1775. Neither side won the three-day battle, which ended in a truce. However, a patriot campaign the next month destroyed the loyal resistance in South Carolina for a while. This could have been when Frederick Buckelew went "off with the Tories". .......



One thing is certain - regardless of their political leanings, the Buckelew men and their families were deeply and dramatically effected by the Revolutionary War in the south. It doesn't matter if they were in Mecklenburg County or Edgefield county - or wherever. For almost six years, battles raged all around their homes, and perhaps, even on the fields and pastures which comprised their land. The sounds of cannons, and musket fire, frontier rifle shots and marching feet were all too familiar to the women and children. They would have been faced with the uncertainty of ever seeing their husbands, fathers or sons alive again. And every knock on their door could mark the arrival of bad news about a loved one on the front - or even worse, the arrival of the enemy troops who would demand food, supplies and we don't want to know what else.



The Buckalew men who fought during the Revolution would have worried about what was happening to their families back home - plus, what was happening to them. At best, camp life for the colonial militia was nothing short of horrible. Supplies, food and salaries were never plentiful. In Memoirs of Major Joseph McJunkin, he, remembering the conditions in the Carolinas said, "Provisions were obtained with great difficulty, for the want of current funds, so that their [the soldier's] fare often consisted of barley meal with meat, salt or any other seasoning, and scarce at that. All the powder which could be obtained was collected. The good ladies in the region round about gave up their pewter vessels to be moulded into bullets. Implements of husbandry were converted into swords."



The British were using every means at their disposal to bring the "wayward" colonists to their knees. One tactic was to stir up the Indians along the frontier to keep the militia busy fighting the Redskins rather than the English troops. Up in Mecklenburg County, a campaign was launched to suppress the Cherokee Indian uprising. Jonathan Buckelew was a member of Captain Charles Polk's Company, in turn under the command of Griffith Rutherford. The company was mustered into service on March 12, 1776, and the men who served quickly found themselves involved in militant and bloody battles where many were killed. The possibility exists that Jonathan could have been among the dead, because his widow, Mary, was granted Letters of Administration on the 3rd Tuesday in July 1776. If so, he was not the last Buckelew to be killed by Indians. Even if he had only been wounded, his chances of survival were likely to have been slim. In that year, only 5% of the doctors had any sort of a "medical" degree at all! That was just after the adoption by Congress of the Declaration of Independence. Sadly, he never got to live under those tenants that he, in his own way, had helped to bring about.



So, the only alternative is speculation. There may not be a way to know what happened to the Buckalew, personally, but the battles of the Revolutionary War help understand what was going on all around the family. A British naval attack on Charles Town [later called Charleston], South Carolina in June of 1776 had failed - but the naval forces, in late December 1778, attacked the Georgia's capital, Savannah, and won. This victory marked the opening of English efforts to squash the south, where loyalist support still remained strong. Then, on January 29, 1779, Augusta, Georgia, fell. If the Buckalew were not actually participating in the struggle (and Richard and Garrett apparently were not participating while they served on the jury for the Below Ninety Six Courthouse) - those living on little Stevens Creek in Edgefield County were only about 30 miles from Augusta. Without telephones, radios or TVs and having to rely upon word of mouth for news or warnings - those Buckalew were definitely too close for comfort!



By the time the calender marked the beginning of the new year of 1780 - the colonial cause was not in very good shape. Up north, Washington's army was holed up at Morristown, New Jersey, where conditions were worse than those the men had faced during the more famous winter ordeal at Valley Forge. In the south, almost all of Georgia was under British control. Not only did the southern forces have to contend with a lack of strong leadership - supplies and food were often pilfered off while passing through other states, and never reached the front. The worst was yet to come. The men garrisoned at Fort Moultrie near Charles Town, looked out at the Atlantic on February 1st to discover a large British fleet at anchor. I don't know what they were doing out there - but they didn't attack until April 8th, the same day General Washington dispatched reinforcement troops from Delaware and Maryland to the Carolinas.



They didn't arrive in time to prevent Fort Moultrie, guardian of Charles Town's harbor, from falling on the 6th of May. The city surrendered six days later, and it was a "bad day at Black Rock" for the colonists. The South Carolina navy was virtually wiped out with the loss of four ships; 5,000 men were lost, as were 300 cannons and other supplies.



Things were no better in Washington's camp up in New Jersey - later in May, mutiny became a reality when armed men demanded food and salaries. That rebellion ended when two leaders of the extremist troops found themselves on the wrong end of the rope. A few days later, a regiment of Virginians was wiped out in a battle in South Carolina. In early June, England's head honcho in the south, General Clinton, left Charles Town for New York - leaving Cornwallis in command. By the time the reinforcements sent by Washington arrived in the Carolinas on June 22, they probably had cause to wonder why they were ever sent in the first place. The patriot's prospects for victory were looking dimmer and dimmer with each day that passed, and the fort at Ninety Six Courthouse became a British recruiting strong hold for those who had loyalist sentiments. The officer in charge was Patrick Ferguson.



John Buckelew's pension application of later years states he enlisted for the last time in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina about 1778. What made him go back to Mecklenburg County, North Carolina from Edgefield County, South Carolina? Family ties would be the only logical (but not necessarily, accurate) explanation or could it have been because most of the family in S.C. were Loyalists? Jonathan had died, but his widow still lived on Old Lawyers Road (I), and James and Richard were still landowners there, according to the county records.



Regardless, John said that during his service of over two and a half years, his company marched to near Camden [South Carolina]. He did fight in the Battle of Hanging Rock on August 8, 1780, and I wonder if he was involved in the Battle of Camden eight days later, when General Gates was defeated by Cornwallis? The accounts of that battle remind me of scenes from old, nameless movies depicting "endless" lines of redcoats, marching to the beat of a drum, stopping to fire muskets, reloading and advancing once more. Apparently, that is just exactly what the Americans saw that day, near Camden, with the dawn's early light. Before everything was over, the colonial troops fled the battle site, but not before 800 of them were killed, and around a thousand were captured. If John Buckelew was there that day, he was lucky he ever had the opportunity to apply for a pension!



Perhaps the entire course of history would have been changed if Cornwallis had chosen to pursue the tattered, fleeing men - but it seems that he did not break camp at Camden until September 8th. Perhaps he was basking in the glory of the victory (and doing some celebrating to boot?), or maybe, he simply believed the British had broken the resistance of the patriots with the added victory at Camden. Whatever - the delay gave the rag-tag colonial army the time it needed to regroup and reinforce itself.



Finally on the move again to the next target some 70 miles away, the English troops were so harassed by what I would call sniper attacks (sneak up, fire a few volleys, then disappear back into the bushes) that it took 17 days for Cornwallis to reach Charlotte, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. On October 3rd, Cornwallis, in effect, received a "key to the city" through Governor Martin's flowery and premature proclamation regarding the return of royal rule because of the victory over the rebellious colonies.



Cornwallis may have enjoyed all of the hoopla - but it didn't take him more than a week to figure out that Charlotte was "a damned hornet's nest" of rebellion and , furthermore, he thought it was "an agreeable village but in a damned rebellious country". And he was right, by damn! According to Virginia - A History. "He was in a hotbed of Scotch=Irish Presbyterians who had long memories of the English who had driven their fathers from their pleasant homes in Ulster."



It's too bad for the British that the trusted officer, Patrick Ferguson, did not learn the lessons Cornwallis did. Ferguson, and his men had left the battlefield in Camden behind. They were responsible for protecting the western=most flanks from attack. On the march that would eventually take them to Kings Mountain, Ferguson's troops made camp in five different locations. And each time, according the McJunkins Memoirs, "His [Ferguson's] horses were turned loose into any field of grain that might be convenient and foraging parties dispersed abroad. The cattle round about were driven to his camp and slaughtered or shot down in the woods and left. Every house was searched from time to time for provisions and plundered for every article of value. As many Whigs as could be found were apprehended, not even excepting those who had taken protection. A few had done this rather than forsake their families, but they were soon sent to Ninety Six and incarcerated in a loathsome prison and almost perished for want of food." These actions, obviously, did not make Ferguson a very popular man with the folks in the countryside. And it's almost a sure bet that he had done the same thing when he was stationed at Ninety Six. The nearby Buckalew, almost certainly, had suffered under the heavy hand of Ferguson.



Adding insult to injury, Ferguson sent a message which, basically, told the colonial militia to go home and quit fighting, or he would, in words of Virginia, "...cross the mountains, hang their leaders, and destroy their settlements by fire and sword." Ferguson's words and deeds helped create unity among the under-supplied, unpaid and often defeated patriots. Rallying their tattered troops, the mountain-men, reinforced by militiamen from North Carolina and Virginia, met the redcoats on October 7, 1780 at Kings Mountain, southwest of Charlotte, and barely inside the South Carolina border. The British leader felt like the camp on the side of the hill was an easy place to defend, and overconfidently said, "all the rebels in hell could not drive him away." The battle was short - an hour after it had begun, Ferguson lay dead, and over 900 of his men were lost.



That victory, and the appointment of Nathaniel Greene to head the southern troops may have been just the shot in the arm the patriots needed. The colonial army was reorganized, and the troops were divided into two groups. Greene was in charge of one, and Daniel Morgan headed the other. The plan was to harass Cornwallis, and draw him as far away from his supplies in South Carolina as possible.



It worked! General Morgan's men were pursued by redcoats under the command of Colonel Tarleton. Morgan made his stand at Cowpens in mid-January 1781, fairly close to present day Spartanburg, South Carolina. The British were again soundly defeated when another 900 men were killed, captured or wounded. The tide was finally turning!



Cornwallis was finally lured into North Carolina by Greene and Morgan. The battlesite was the Guilford County Courthouse. John Buckelew was there. He's not my ancestor, but it's good to know the family had somebody there. On March 18, Cornwallis technically won the battle, but in effect, lost the war. His victory had been at the expense of heavy casualties to his men - thus, his only option was to march to Wilmington, North Carolina and wait for reinforcements.



With Cornwallis out of the way, Nathaniel Green turned his attention to the remaining British outposts in South Carolina. In the latter part of May, his troops unsuccessfully tried to retake Ninety Six, the last British stronghold, and retreated towards Charlotte. It was subsequently evacuated, and the troops and loyalist refugees took off for Charleston. For the first time in almost six years, the Buckalew and their neighbors were relatively free from the daily reminders of war!!!!



Cornwallis eventually met his "Waterloo" at Yorktown, Virginia -surrendering there on October 19, 1791. For all practical purposes, the American Revolution was over, even though fighting continued in other parts of the country for almost a year. A Peace Treaty was signed to officially end the war in September 1783. At first glance it would seem that life was beginning to return to normal - in that same month of October mentioned above James Buckalew served as constable for the October session of the Mecklenburg County court.



Life should have been wonderful without the troops around - but it wasn't. The withdrawal of the armies left the door wide open for gangs of armed men to enter, and for almost a year, large sections of both of the Carolinas were terrorized by the likes of William "Bloody Bill" Cunningham and David Fanning. I don't know if any of the Buckalew were victims of the predecessors of Quantril's Raiders (of post-Civil War infamy) or not - but if the gangs were anywhere around, the families would not have slept well at night!



Henry McCulloh and others like him would not have slept well at night either - but for different reasons. The vast tracts of land granted to British subjects had been confiscated during the Revolution. Many Loyalists returned to England, and some fled to Canada. The common, pro-England colonists who chose to remain in their old communities would, likely, have had to deal with prejudice. It had not been a mere political election - it had been a Revolution! I guess I'll always wonder what happened to Frederick Buckelew, the Loyalist from Edgefield County. Perhaps he is the most intriguing southern Buckelew of all. I'm glad his side didn't win - but I'm proud of him for standing up for what he thought was right.



And what happened to the rest of the Buckalew after the war? Well, as the new nation grew in population and expanded its borders, the Buckelew family followed suit - they were fruitful and multiplied (did they ever!), and continued the established migration pattern. Most of the Buckalew descendants in the south, and some elsewhere, are able to trace their roots back to the men in the Colonial South.





APPENDIX - E



From SLC Family History Library 929.273 Z85r Zumwalt Family Vol. 1:79 (1964) - Paul L. Reed



"Samuel P. Zumwalt, the eldest son of Andrew (3) and Susanna Coonce Zumwalt was born 22 July 1810 in St. Charles County, Missouri. As a young man he went to Martinsburg Township, Pike County, Illinois. As a pioneer settler he took a land grant (#13455) on 5 May 1836. He built a cabin for his bride Lydia Buckaloo to whom he was married 7 July of the same year. Lydia was a daughter of Eliab Buckaloo of Pleasant Hill.



"Later the same year he was able to buy additional land adjacent to his first grant.



"Here he and Lydia lived with their growing family until 1847, when they sold their land grant of over 200 acres to Andrew (3), Samuel's father. Samuel P.'s father, then 68, came to live close to both children and grandchildren.



"Lydia died in 1853 leaving seven children - four boys and three girls - aged one to fifteen. Samuel P. needed help with his brood and on 6 August 1854 he married Mrs. Margaret Aiken. five children - three girls and two boys - were born of this union.



"Samuel P. left Pike County, Illinois. Just when and where he went is obscure. At times the family is known to have lived near Carthage, Hancock, Illinois; at Colma, Illinois and across the river in Missouri at various times.



"Margaret Aiken Zumwalt died 9 June 1872, her brood aged nine to sixteen. Samuel P. married a third time 1 Apr 1873 to asecond time widow, Mrs. Nancy E. Browning (Westboro). (Fig. If) Two children were born of this marriage.



"Nancy E. died of pneumonia in 1892. Samuel P., old and not well, came back to Pike County, Illinois with his youngest daughter Emma Belle. In the spring of 1900, when only three months short of ninety, death came to him. He was buried in the Burbridge Cemetery in Pike County beside his first wife Lydia."

1. C. J. Wasch - Doopregister der Hollanders in Brazilie 1633-1654

2. Staten Island, New York, Book of Patents No. 5 p. 28

3. New Jersey Archives, Vol. 23 p. 69

4. New Jersey Archives, Vol. 23 p. 68

5. Archives of New Jersey, Vol. 23 p. 29

6. Research Letter dated 28 December 1972 to Arlene Meservy, 313 E. 2020 N. Provo, Utah 84604, from Kenn Stryker-Rodda, New York researcher specializing in Early Dutch Records of New York

7. Secretary of State's Office, Trenton, New Jersey, Liber G-2 pp. 163-l65

8. New Jersey Archives, Vol. 32 p. 51

9. IBID Vol. 30 p. 280

10. IBID Vol. 32 p. 46

11. New Jersey Archives, Vol. 30 p. 144

12. IBID, Vol. 22 p. 36

13. IBID, Vol. 30 p. 49

14. IBID, Vol. 35 p. 63

15. From corrections on chart sent Mr. Alfred Stokes, Buckalew Historian & Researcher in New Jersey by Arlene B. Meservy, 313 E. 2020 N. Provo, Utah, 84604

16. First Settlers of Ye Plantation, 1664-1714 p. 345

17. Secretary of State's Office, Trenton, New Jersey, Liber G-2 pp. 163-165

18. Middlesex County, New Jersey, Deeds, Liber G-2 p. 165

19. Archives of New Jersey, Vol. 30 p. 72

20. Secretary of State's Office, Trenton, New Jersey, Liber G-2 p. 165

21. New Jersey Archives, Vol. 1730-50 p. 197

22. Fairfax County, Virginia, Court Order Book, 1749-1754 p. 91

23. Willian W. Hinshaw, Encyclopedia of Quaker Genealogy, Virginia p. 478

24. U.S. National Archives, Washington, D.C. - Pension Application of John Buckaloe or Buckalew, S. C., Number R1391

25. Loudoun County, Virginia, Court Order Book A p. 269

26. Salt Lake City, Ut. Family History Library, Film #032347, Deeds Laden County, Virginia, Book C pp. 521-524

27. Salt Lake City, Ut., Family History Lib. Film #031052, Laden County, Virginia. Tithables Lists

28. Salt Lake City, Ut., Family History Lib. Film #032348, Laden County, Virginia, Deed Book D pp. 59, 622-623

29. South Carolina Archives, Columbia, S.C. Vol. 9 p. 412; Vol. 13 p. 411

30. Salt Lake City, Ut., Family History Lib. Film #019816, Equity Court Records, Rowan County, North Carolina, pp. 105, 120, 121, 151, 205, 228

31. South Carolina Deed Abstracts, 1719-1772 p. 32

32. Gerry Green, Buckalew Traces, February 1988, #5 p. 38 Privately published

33. Gerry Green, (1985) Mary's People - The Buckalews p. 38, Privately published

34. Salley - History of Orangeburg County, South Carolina, p. 230

35. Gerry Green, privately published 1985, Mary's People - The Buckalews, p. 38

36. Murtie June Clark, 1981, Loyalist In The Southern Campaign, Vol. 1 pp. 238, 243

37. IBID, Vol. 1 p. 547

38. Murtie June Clark, 1981, Loyalists In The Southern Campaign, Vol. 1 pp. 82, 83, 238, 243

39. Laden County, Virgina, Court Record Book C pp. 3-4

40. Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, Minutes of Court of Common Pleas

41. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Probate Record Vol. 2 p. 208, dated 26 November 1787

42. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Deed Book 31 pp. 112-113

43. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Probate Record

44. Loudoun County, Virginia, Deeds pt. 5 Book C p. 521

45. Murtie June Clark, 1982, Loyalist In The Southern Campaign, Vol. 1 p. 247

46. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Record Book A p. 87, 1800

47. Murtie June Clark, 1981, Loyalists In The Southern Campaign, Vol. 1 pp. 161, 162

48. Murtie June Clark, 1981, Loyalists In The Southern Campaign, Vol. 1 p. 251

49. Abbeville County, South Carolina, Probate Court Book B p. 486

50. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Court of Common Pleas Record

51. Barnwell County, South Carolina, Deed Book 1-A p. 307

52. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Deed Book 5 p. 170

53. IBID, same vol., same page

54. IBID Book 20 pp.28-32

55. Edgefield County, South Carolina, Deed Book L p. 543

56. IBID, Deed Book 15 p. 474

57. Annie Walker Burns, Kentucky Marriage Record

58. Salt Lake City, Ut. Family History Lib. Film #464807, Christian County, Kentucky, Marriage License Book A-2, 1797

59. Salt Lake City, Ut., Family History Lib. Film #465562, Christian County, Kentucky, Marriage Bonds, 1797-1817, p. 10

60. James Trager, 1979, People's Chronology p. 380

61. Jesse M. Thompson, Pike County, Illinois, History, p. 510

62. Pike County, Missouri, Deed Book 6 pp. 592-593

63. IBID, Book 2 p. 32

64. History of Missouri, p. 457

65. Pike County, Missouri, Probate Record Book 3 p. 31