Kaminkow, Marion and Jack, compilers. Mariners of the American Revolution, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing, Co., Inc., 1993.)
Lewis, James A. Neptune's Militia: The Frigate South Carolina during the American Revolution, (Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1999.)
Moss, Bobby Gilmer. Roster of South Carolina Patriots in the American Revolution, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co,. Inc., 1983.)
South Carolina Audited Accounts Relating to William Thomas SC713
South Carolina Audited Accounts Relating to John Bowden SC714
As with the two men addressed in the immediately previous post, the writer of this blog has chosen to tell the tale of two men together at the same time and in the same post. Again, there are several similarities between these two men as with the two men cited in the previous post. Yet, there is a stark discrepancy between these two latter men and the former men addressed in the previous post. First for the similarities. First, as with the two men in the previous post, these two men - John Bowden and William Thomas - appear to have been on the first voyage to the frigate South Carolina due to neither of their names being cited on any of the three prisoners of war list of the three Royal Navy men-of-war that captured the patriot frigate and took her captured crew and marines into New York City harbor for their imprisonment. Second, both these men of this post are referred to as "sailors" or "seamen" to be exact from the text of their audited accounts. Third, these two men received their stub indents as a result of their accounts being audited by the State of South Carolina. Fourth, and like to two men cited in the previous post, these two men received their audited accounts document of payment on the same date - November 18, 1808. Fifth, and finally, as with the two men of the previous post, these two men these two men evidently owed debts to other people of their society and their newly gained funds were officially delegated to be given to another individual, one Joseph Winthrop, Esquire. But, the glaring discrepancy is that neither of the two men cited in this post - John Bowden and William Thomas - were alive at the date of their receiving their back wages "...due them on the Portage pay book.". They had died earlier and their widows - May Bowden and Martha Thomas - petitioned the State of South Carolina for their husband's back wages to pay off debts that had survived their husband's demise.
First, and in danger of becoming redundant, neither of these two men's names appear on any of the three prisoner of war lists of captured Americans being transported into New York City harbor after the capture of the frigate South Carolina on December 21, 1782 by the three British men-of-war off the Capes of the Delaware. A quick reference to the three posts cited in the post immediately preceding this one indicates that neither the name of John Bowden nor William Thomas appear on any of these lists. Again, fortunately for them, they never experienced the captivity that the second set of crew and marines of the patriot frigate knew so well until the cessation of hostilities between Great Britain and the colonies and their exchange back to the patriots. Thus, these two men must have been on the first cruise of the frigate South Carolina.
Second, both of these men were cited as being "sailors" or "seamen" on board the frigate South Carolina. In Lewis's work, Neptune's Militia, section entitled "Appendix: Crew and Marines of the South Carolina", pages 135-170, the following references are found on the associated pages cited:
John Bowden Sailor page 138
William Thomas Sailor page 167
In the South Carolina Audited Accounts document containing the names of these two men they are cited as follows:
"...William Thomas late a Seaman on Board the Frigate South Carolina... John Bowden also a Seaman on Board said Frigate..."
The almost identical information can be found in Moss's work, Roster of South Carolina Patriots, pages 87 and 926, respectively:
"John Bowden - he served aboard the frigate South Carolina, A.A. 543 1/2."
"William Thomas - he served aboard the frigate South Carolina. A.A. 543 1/2"
Even less is known about these two men - John Bowden and William Thomas - than the two mariners of the immediately previous post - Richard Croom and William Bradford. Those previous two men had also received certificates from the State of South Carolina as well as being cited in Revill's work, Copy of the Original Index Book. Again, all we definitely know of John Bowden and William Thomas is that they both occupied the positions of "sailors" or "seamen" on board the frigate South Carolina.
(Note: In the South Carolina Audited Accounts document, the file number assigned to both John Bowden and William Thomas was 643 1/2. In Moss's work, Roster of South Carolina Patriots, the file number is cited as 653 1/2. The writer of this blog is unsure what to pronounce in this case, but, feels that the South Carolina Audited Accounts document probably contains the correct file number - 643 1/2.)
Third, both of these men received their payment for back wages from the Comptroller-Generals' Office by means of an audited account document - 643 1/2, as it were. The document is relatively brief and will be cited in full here:
"[page 2]
State of South Carolina,
Office of the Comptroller-General} November 18, 1808
No. 2778 370 Dollars. 89
Sir,
Pay to Joseph Winthrop Esquire Attorney for Martha Thomas Widow and Administatrix of William Thomas late a Seaman on Board the Frigate South Carolina & for May Bowden Administratrix of John Bowden also a Seaman on Board said Frigate Three hundred and seventy Dollars 89/100 being the balance due them on the Portage pay book for which this shall be your legal Warrant.
Thomas Lee Comptroller-General
to Charles Burnham Cochran, Esqr. Commissioner of the Treasury
[page 3: reverse of the above]
No. 12 370 89/100 Dollars
November 20th 1808
Legionaries who served on board the frigate
Received Payment November 20th 1808
S/ J. Winthrop"
(Note: The text actually states the last name of the attorney as being "Wenthrop". But, a more careful examination of the text indicates that the correct spelling is "Winthrop". At the conclusion of the document, there is a signature that is only indicated by "...[indecipherable signature], JP" which should be interpreted as "J. Winthrop". The text cited above has been duly corrected to reflect these more accurate spellings.)
Unlike the two men in the immediately previous post, John Bowden and William Thomas received their "...balance due them on the Portage pay book..." in a single lump sum of $370.89. This is a substantial sum of money to be paid to two seamen on board the frigate South Carolina. But, these two men would have sailed on board the patriot frigate on her maiden voyage across the Atlantic Ocean which was the longest of her two voyages. Ostensibly, both of these men signed on board the frigate South Carolina in France and remained on board the ship-of-war until she moored in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on May 25, 1782. There is no indication for John Bowden that he signed on board the patriot frigate early on but, there may be some evidence that William Thomas did sign onto the frigate South Carolina at an early date. In Kaminkow's work Mariners of the American Revolution, page 188, the following entry is found:
"William Thomas - he was committed to Forton Prison. He was pardoned for exchange on December 11, 1779."
William Thomas has a very common name and this could quite possibly be a different man altogether. But, at the same time, this is the only William Thomas cited in Kaminkow's entire work, Mariners of the American Revolution. If this were the same man who signed on board the frigate South Carolina, he would had plenty of time to locate the patriot frigate or be directed to it as a means of obtaining passage home to the Americas. Again, the exchange dates cited may not be the actual date this man was exchanged back to the patriot representatives in France. But, usually the exchange took place not too long after this established date.
Another item as references the payments made to these two men is that we do not know how much each of them received individually. All we know from the South Carolina Audited Accounts document is the lump sum they were awarded - $370.89. There is no breakdown of this total amount as to the individual amounts received by each of these two men.
Fourth, these two men, like to two men of the immediately previous post, received their South Carolina Audited Accounts document on the same day - November 18, 1808. But, there is a difference as to exactly why they received it on the same day as opposed to the previous two men. The previous two men - Richard Croom and William Bradford - received their certificates because their pension applications were all part of the same return - Return 61. All pension applications contained within a single return are all paid on the same date by the Commissioners of the Treasury of the State of South Carolina. But, the two men of this current post - John Bowden and William Thomas - received their certificate on the same day because their names were contained together in a single document requesting "...balance due them on the Portage pay book.". As pointed out earlier, these two men's amount is in the form of a lump sum - $370.89. Thus, these two men received their payment together in the form of a single combined monetary amount.
Fifth, and finally, as stated in Salley's work, Accounts Audited of Revolutionary Claims Against South Carolina, page 4, these audited accounts were documents indicating indebtedness. Evidently, John Bowden and William Thomas incurred debts, most likely after the cessation of hostilities between Great Britain and the newly independent United States. This assumption is based on the date of the issuance of the certificate of payment being so long after the end of the American Revolution - November 18, 1808. This date marks the passage of twenty-five years after the end of the war. It is possible that these men could have owed this debt earlier, possibly even before the war began. It is quite possible we shall never know for certain. But, as with so many veterans of the American Revolution, their debts were incurred after the end of the war and the beginning of peacetime.
The individual who was scheduled to receive the back payments to both of these men was one Joseph Winthrop, Esquire. According to the South Carolina Audited Accounts document, this man had acted as attorney for the estates of these two men who had been seamen or sailors on board the frigate South Carolina. The audited account document cited in full above, clearly states that Joseph Winthrop was to receive "...Three hundred and seventy Dollars 89/100 being the balance due them on the Portage pay book for which this shall be your legal warrant.". Further down, at the bottom line of the audited accounts document, one finds the brief statement:
"Received payment 20th of November 1808
S/ J. Winthrop"
Thus, these two men's balance of back wages due to their services on board the frigate South Carolina went to an attorney for their estates instead of to their wives, who had filed for their back wages.
This brings the readership to the glaring discrepancy between these two men - John Bowden and William Thomas - and the two men of the immediately previous post - Richard Croom and William Bradford. The former two men were deceased at the time of their receiving their back wages "...due them on the Portage pay book.". The audited account document clearly states that:
"...Martha Thomas Widow and Administratrix for William Thomas late a Seaman on Board the Frigate South Carolina & May Bowden Administratrix of John Bowden also a Seaman on Board said Frigate...".
The writer of this blog has seen numerous instances with pension applications where the man who actually served in the American Revolution had died and his widow (or even orphaned son or daughter) was applying for his back wages in order to support themselves. In these cases, the pension application's number would be preceded by a "W" which indicated that it was the widow applying for the pension due her husband. But, this is the first instance where the writer of this blog has seen an audited accounts document that was submitted by the widow, or in the case of this specific document, the widows of the men who served on board the frigate South Carolina during the American Revolution. This might be a common occurrence among the audited accounts documents but, is the first instance this writer has seen.
(Note: The brief, two sentence statement above only indicates that William Thomas was deceased at the time of the filing of the document. John Bowden, as such, is not indicated as being deceased at that time. But, the cover page of this specific document clearly states that these combined statements are for the "Estate of John Bowden" and the "Estate of William Thomas". Referring to these as the "estate of..." usually indicates that the individual in question is deceased and someone else, in this case an administratrix (female administrator) is applying for the back wages.)
So, here is still a further example of a man who had served his country, fought for it's independence, and was yet consigned to debt which was settled by his widow filing for his back wages after he had died. No date of death was stated in the South Carolina Audited Accounts document for either John Bowden or William Thomas but, it would have certainly preceded the date of the payment of "...the balance due them on the Portage pay book..." of the frigate South Carolina.
(A Final Note: Just above the signature line on the final page of the South Carolina Audited Accounts document there appears this brief cryptic statement:
"No. 12 370 89/100 Dollars
November 20th 1808
Legionaries who served on board of frigate"
This type of statement has been experienced before but, only included in the South Carolina Audited Account documents. The writer of this blog is unclear on the meaning of this phrase and the use of the term "legionaries". There was a group of marines who served on the first voyage of the frigate South Carolina that were referred to as the "Voluntaires du Luxembourg" or as the "Legionnaires of Luxembourg". But, the two men referenced in this specific post were sailors and not marines. This may be a reference to an issue of enlistment of the specific individual, possibly diversified roles in moments of combat, or some other hidden factor not discerned as of yet. The writer of this blog will continue to research the use of this term and write on it if he finds any new information regarding these men who lived so long ago.)