#frederick kinloch

[john-laurens]

Francis Kinloch's Birth Date

One might believe that Francis Kinloch's birth date has been definitively established as March 7, 1755 - a quick Google search of the man will certainly report that date across numerous sites. Certainly this fact must have been established from some surviving record, right? That's a question I have been asking myself as I have come to find several inconsistencies that could suggest a different birth date (or at least cast some doubt on the certainty of the March 7, 1755 date). You've seen the "was Alexander Hamilton born in 1755 or 1757" discourse. Allow me to now introduce you to my "was Francis Kinloch born on March 7, 1755 or March 6, 1756" ramblings. I will present several pieces of information that point to the different possible birth dates, and I welcome any additional information or interpretations that others may have! After reading, add your vote to the poll to establish Kinloch's new birth date through democratic means.

When was Francis Kinloch born?

March 7, 1755

March 6, 1756

Other

Voting ended onMar 14

Kinloch's birth date is given as March 7, 1755 across various sources

We begin with the most basic piece of evidence. Several encyclopedias, biographical sites, and ancestry sites give March 7, 1755 as Kinloch's birth date. Kinloch's siblings typically don't have such certainty associated with their birth dates - they often just have a year and perhaps a month given, but rarely (never?) a specific date. The fact that this specific date has been reported across various books and websites with such confidence suggests that there must be some record pointing to this date. But what is it? I've searched some ancestry sites and generally found that the March 7, 1755 date was cited from online biographical entries, but I have yet to find a historical record that gives this date. Birth certificates did not exist in the 18th century, but there were baptismal records, birth/baptism announcements, and even records kept by the families themselves. The Kinloch family history and genealogy research files held by the South Carolina Historical Society mention a Kinloch family Bible that contained the birth and death dates of family members. However, the book was rebound, and some information may have been lost:

The old Kinloch Bible has just been returned by Mrs. Lesesne, whose mother had it. It was left to Grandmama; it was rebound some years before the war, the Green Baize covers being replaced by leather; only one entry of Birth is now in it (see below) but others may have been lost in the rebinding. ... At the top of the blank page between "The Prophets" and "The Apocrypha", is the following in the handwriting of Mrs. Ann I Kinloch. "James Kinloch born at Weehaw near George Town the 11th of August 1762 a quarter before nine at night & privately baptised by the Revd Mr. Prince on the 22d of the same month. Died at Kinsington 12 December 1765 & there buried." (The last in in [sic] lighter ink)

Anne Kinloch was Francis Kinloch's mother, and James Kinloch was his younger brother. Perhaps the Bible previously contained birth dates of others in the Kinloch family, including a potential March 7, 1755 date for Francis. Maybe this information was retained by descendants of the Kinlochs despite it not being retained in the family Bible after its rebinding. Unfortunately, there is likely no way to know what information was lost here. But what else does the Kinloch family have to say?

The Kinloch family history and genealogy research files show much uncertainty about Kinloch's birth date

It is clear from these files that I am not the only one confused about Kinloch's birth date! Across these files, Kinloch's birth date is given as March 6, 7, and 8 with the year given as 1755 and 1756. Often there are cross-outs, numbers written over other numbers, slash marks (e.g., 1755/1756), and question marks surrounding the given dates. If the Kinloch descendants are this unsure of their ancestor's birth date, how can we be confident in the March 7, 1755 date given across various sources? Was March 7, 1755 just picked as Kinloch's birth date at one point and then just parroted across different sources? Again, it's difficult to know the chain of events and passing along of information that happened to give the now-cited March 7, 1755 date. You may be wondering if there are any references to Kinloch's birth date during his lifetime. Thankfully, the answer is yes, but unfortunately, the information is just vague enough to contribute to further uncertainty.

Anne Kinloch mentions Francis's birthday in a 1776 letter

According to a transcript held in the Kinloch family history and genealogy research files, Anne Kinloch wrote the following to her son Francis on March 10, 1776:

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

This does not specify March 7th as Francis's birth date, but we do get an explicit reference to his age! Unfortunately, this could be interpreted two different ways.

Francis was born in 1755 and turned 21 in 1776.

Francis had just turned 20 in March 1776 and therefore started his 21st year of life, making his birth year 1756.

Francis's 21st birthday would have been a very important one, as he would finally be able to access his late father's estate upon turning 21. It's possible that his mother was congratulating him on reaching this critical age. However, "21st year of life" and "21 years old" are two different things. Essentially, a person turns X years old upon completing their Xth year of life. For example, a newborn is in their first year of life from age 0 days to 365 days, but they do not turn one year old until day 365. The use of "21st year" does suggest a 1756 birth date, but it is possible that Anne was remarking on her son reaching the important age of 21, which suggests a 1755 birth date. Let's see what Francis himself had to say about his age and birth date.

Francis Kinloch stated that he was 56 years old on March 6, 1812

This is the piece of information that makes me believe Kinloch's birth date is either March 7, 1755 or March 6, 1756. @my-deer-friend made a post about a letter Kinloch wrote to his grandson Francis Kinloch Nelson, wherein he mentioned "this day I am 56 years of age." This letter was written on March 6, 1812. @my-deer-friend mentions that the grandson may have mentioned his age in the preceding letter, thus prompting Kinloch's note. According to findagrave, Francis Kinloch Nelson was born March 2, 1800, so it's quite possible that he had made a mention of his age/12th birthday in his letter, thus prompting grandfather Francis Kinloch to mention his age in his reply.

If Francis was 56 years old on March 6, 1812 and was born on March 6, that gives his birth year as 1756. You may think that his solves the whole birthdate issue and pretty firmly establishes Kinloch's birth date as March 6, 1756. Unfortunately, Kinloch was also notoriously a little shit. If March 7, 1755 is the correct birth date, then the date of this letter (March 6, 1812) was the eve of his 57th birthday. I think it's entirely within the realm of possibility that Kinloch confidently stated to his grandson that he was 56 years old at the time of writing this letter, despite him turning 57 in mere hours. This would be technically correct, but very pedantic! Finally, let's come to understand Kinloch's birth through his death.

Kinloch's age at his death on February 8, 1826 is recorded as 69 years

Kinloch died on February 8, 1826, and the "Return of Deaths within the City of Charleston, from 5th to the 12th February 1826" gives his age at death as 69 years. Assuming that Kinloch would have turned 70 on his birthday the following month, this places his birth year as 1756. In Kinloch's obituary authored by his son Frederick, his birth year is again given as 1756. Presumably the Kinloch children would have reported their father's age to the physician who recorded his death as well. This again points pretty clearly to a birth year of 1756, but the obituary does contain a definitive error pertaining to Kinloch's age. It states that he left for England at the age of 9. In reality, Kinloch departed for England in 1768 and would have been 12-13 years old. Did they get both the birth year and the school age wrong? I think it's understandable that children would be less certain about their father's early school years and could have easily made a mistake there, but I think they would have had greater confidence in their father's birth year.

Conclusion: ?

Overall, it's difficult to be certain about Kinloch's birth date. I think the mentions of ages and birth dates by Anne Kinloch, Frederick Kinloch, and Francis Kinloch himself do suggest a March 6, 1756 birth date, but then the question remains why a March 7, 1755 birth date has become so established.

[john-laurens]

Francis Kinloch's Obituary

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[john-laurens]

"Sailed yesterday & ran my boat against a post off South Bay_ the day employed to very little purpose besides reading Gibbons essays."

-Francis Kinloch, in a note dated June 24, 1795

"I am between 7 & 8 & have a little horse named Popet_ adieu my dear sister_ I bathe in the Sea_"

-Frederick Kinloch (son of Francis Kinloch) to his sister (presumably his half-sister Eliza Kinloch Nelson, who lived in Virginia), in a letter from 1797

"Ben going into the Sea like Polyphemus after Ulysses &c Fredericks escape the same day when he fell out of the Boat &c what a necessary part of education swimming is &c"

-Francis Kinloch, in a note from 1797

The first quote I enjoy simply because of Francis's lack of sailing ability. The last two quotes serve as an interesting follow-up to Francis saving Lord North's son from drowning in a river - the line "what a necessary part of education swimming is" is likely a reference to both that event and Frederick's falling out of the boat. Francis appears to have been a strong swimmer, and his note above suggests he enjoyed swimming in the sea (presumably the Atlantic Ocean). It's difficult to say whether Frederick was able to swim to safety after falling out of the boat or if Francis had to jump in after his son, but it's interesting that Francis dealt with multiple swimming-related emergencies in his life. It seems likely that Francis would have taught his son how to swim, especially if they both frequented the sea.

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