Stoney-Baynard House, Plantation Drive, Hilton Head Island

Source document Quoted word for word from HABS SC-863. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

The late eighteenth- or early nineteenth-century main house is the largest, domestic tabby structure known from Hilton Head Island. Its double pile plan with wrap around porches, moreover, has no parallel in extant tabby architecture of Beaufort County. BART

Historical Information

Loss of local court and other legal records during the Civil War has obscured details concerning the development of the site and associated structures. However, by piecing together the imperfect and dispersed information which still survives, Chicora Research Foundation of Columbia, South Carolina, has produced an outline history, on which the following account is based. 1 Before the American Revolution, land on which the Stoney-Baynard House stands was owned by John Bayley. Bayley' s estate was confiscated by the State of South Carolina and sold at auction in at which time John Mark Verdier, a well-known merchant of Beaufort, and Thomas Fergusson purchased portions of the property. These parcels were later restored (ca.1794) to Benjamin Bayley.

Subsequently, the site passed to members of the Stoney family but exactly when and under what circumstances cannot be determined. It is probable that two brothers, John and James Stoney, who were both merchants of Charleston, gained control of the property near the beginning of the nineteenth century in a speculative ve>1t1ire invoiving k"C!i}.llisition of cotton lands on Hilton Head Island. Exactly when the tabby house was erected is unrecorded. Style and proportion suggest construction near the height of the Beaufort District's first cotton boom.around to either by the Stoney brothers or possibly by their father, John Stoney, Sr. It is said, moreover, that the senior Stoney owned the property near the tum of the eighteenth century.

Archaeological investigation supports a late eighteenth- or early nineteenth-century date; ceramic analysis indicates domestic activity was at its peak on the site between and Jam es Stoney probably occupied the house down to February of when a newspaper account reported that he died "at his late residence on Hilton Head Island, St. Luke's Parish." 1 Adams and Trinkley Trinkley 1 li.:h r: STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 2) The first known graphic representation of the dwelling and its surroundings is given by a federal hytlrographic chart dated to 2 This shows two clusters of buildings. One incorporated the main house and what was perhaps a smaller service building or flanker.

The second building group was located some distance away to the northeast and included a slave settlement which, if accurately portrayed, comprised twenty-three separate dwellings arranged in two parallel rows, Assuming an average of four inhabitants per dwelling, this settlement accommodated around ninety-two individuals. Between the slave "street" and shoreline of Calibogue Sound stood another larger structure of unknown function.

While only a few local planters (less than ten per cent) owned as many slaves, John Stoney was forced by the bankruptcy of certain business associates to borrow from the Bank of Charleston in This debt, and others subsequently contracted, remained unpaid at -the-ffme of his death l:nNovemner of 183S.-siifaequentHffgaifon by-creditorsforcecrthe sate of - his estates. The Bank of Charleston acquired the house under discussion and its surrounding lands in Three years later the same tract was sold, this time to William E. Baynard who acquired "all that plantation tract or piece of land on Hilton Head Island said to contain twelve hundred acres more or less" bounded north by land belonging to Henry Bond, east by the Atlantic Ocean, and south west by "Calibogue" or Tybee Sound.

Baynard died four years later, the tract then passing to his son Ephraim. 3 The U.S. Coastal and Geodesic Survey chart Sea coast of South Carolina from the mouth of the Savannah River to May River, dated documents the plantation layout as it appeared under Ephraim Baynard. Since there had been changes, although little or no development had taken place around the main house which still stood with its flanking outbuilding irnlated from the plantation's principal slave settlement. But the latter settlement had diminished in size and presumably in population, now comprising ten structures arranged irregularly in two discontinuous yet still parallel rows.

Southwest of the slave row, seven additionai structures appear, but their larger size and scat!c:red distribution suggesting a group of barns, storage sheds or other agricultural buildings. After falling into Union hands following the Battle of Port Royal on 9 November the Stoney- Baynard tract was sold by the U.S. Direct Tax Commission for unpaid taxes totaling $80 plus penalties in Advertisements for the sale call the plantation "Braddock's Point''. Adams and Trinkley, fig. 4. :, Trinkley identifies a 1200-acre tract listed under the name of Ephraim Baynard (William Baynard's son) by the United ~tates Census of as this property.

lt so (as appears likely since no other tract of similar size i~ listed in J 863 to have heen in Baynard hands) it was then valued at and producing cotton (36 bales) and plantation 1oodstufls usual for the Beaufort District including corn bushels); peas bushels); sweet potatoes hushels): and butter pounds). Livestock included 95 head oJ cattle, 40 milch cows, 8 oxen. and 70 pigs along with 5 horses and a mule. STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 3) no,ing that it was "said to be or owned by Baynard and formerly by John Stoney." Valued at $4 the tract "bounded N and NE by Lawton Place, SE and S by the Atlantic Ocean; VI/ and NW by Calibogue Sound" was somewhat smaller than it had been in containing rather than 1, 200 acres.

Bought in at auction by the United States (for Braddock's Point was redeemed, except for a 45-acre tract reserved for the construction of a lighthouse, by the heirs of William E. Baynard in August of If the tabby house still stood at this time in anything approaching habitable condition is uncertain. On neighboring islands, such as Daufuskie and Spring Island, plantation structures were systematically looted during the Civil War for the sake of their materials and any valuables which may have been left behind by former owners.

Given its elevated and conspicuous position, the Stoney- Baynard house cannot have escaped the attention of parties of foraging solcHeis:ffowevei,-raiher atTeasi-oiie- groupwas-- quartered in the main residence during June of Other Union men camped nearby, re- occupying or even refashioning outbuildings located to the northeast. Destruction could have come in when a fire swept through what was perhaps an already despoiled and-dilapidated structure. After Braddock's Point was sub-divided and lost its former identity as the result of sales and amalgamation with adjacent properties. These passed to the Hilton Head company in and later to Sea Pines Plantation which ultimately (date uncertain) set aside land around the Stoney-Baynard house for recreational purposes.

Ruins of the main house and its dependencies were deemed eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places by the South Carolina Department of Archives and History in PART IL

Architectural Description

Main House The Stoney-Baynard House occupies a prehistoric dune ridge located toward the south end of Hilton Head Island slightly east of Calibogue Sound within what is now Sea Pines Plantation. The site is elevated. rising to a height of 25' to 27' above sea level. Today, tabby walls of the main house are substantially ruined, but enough fabric survives to establish that the building was rectangular in plan. measuring north-to-south x 46' -6" east-to-west. Only the northeast corner stands to what is probably its original height (about above present ground level). Elsewhere, walls have disassociated, disappearing almost completely along the building's west side and standing to a maximum height of elsewhere.

While it appears almost ce11ain that the dwelling mcorporated one main story raised about over an elevated basement. an additional (second) floor cannot be entirely excluded without systematic excavation of wall falls. lnterior organization 1s now confused, tumbles of fallen STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 4) brick, depressions, and other features suggesting that cross partitions divided front from rear spaces in :;,ome kind of deep, double pile plan ordered about a central hallway at the first floor level. Internal chimneys are likely, positioned between front and rear rooms. Extant beam sockets and excavation attest that porches fronted the north, south, and east facades.

It is prob~ble that the porch system also extended along the now largely destroyed west facade to enclose the building on all four sides, however this possibility needs confirmation by excavation. Porch supports, excavated south and east, indicate that porches were about 9' wide 11 and raised at basement level upon rectangular brick piers measuring 12 x in plan. Nothing is known of the first floor porch supports above. The principal entrance was from the south, a splayed set of brick steps giving access to the first floor porch and living area. No evidence survives for any staircase linking -the interior spaces. - -- - Exterior tabby walls measure O" in width at the basement level.

At the first floor level, wall thickness is reduced to in a way which produces narrow ledges on both interior and exterior building faces. Impressions and other details indicate exterior tabby walls were cast 11 using timber "molds" (forms) measuring in height. Following completion of each tabby round, the molds were struck and reused at successively higher building levels. Impn~ssions of removable timber ties ("pins") holding inner and outer faces of the molds together during casting 11 operations are mostly rectangular in section, measuring approximately 3 11 x 1~ and distanced approximately - 2'-9"on center. Around the basement openings of the east facade, there is evidence that circular dowels were substituted for rectangular formwork ties.

"Ghost" impressions preserved along the interior face of the north facade indicate that the first floor joists ran north-to-south, measured about 3 11 x 12 11 in section, and were positioned 11 about 2' on center. Sockets attest that shallow timber lintels, about 2 deep, spanned over first floor window openings. Nothing is known about the roof frame, except that it was probably of a hipped form. If the main roof was carried over the porches and supported on a colonnade cannot be confirmed, although structural evidence now visible suggests this possibility. Facades feature continuos 2" set-backs at first f10or level. Consequently, principal living areas appear raised on a high plinth. This resemblance is strengthened and emphasized by molding applied in lime monar at the junction.

Where still extant, patches of the original finish show that the exterior faces of the building received at least two coats of oyster-shell lime stucco, the final coat scored to imitate s1onework. Scoring defined blocks long and laid-up as re~rnlar 12" high courses. and straight arches over window openings. Facade organization is now dislocated by falls and structural disassociation. Assuming symmetry, the remains of the north facade suggests a five bay arrangement at the first floor level, STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 5) with large window opening~ measuring approximately (high) x (wide) paired right and left of what was possibly a central doorway. Basement window openings were smaller (measuring high x wide) positioned between, rather than below, the first floor window openings.

Except that it had three, unequally spaced basement doorways, nothing certain is known about the south facade. The east and west facades are fragmented. On the east facade, two basement window openings show clear signs of enlargement. Too little is preserved of the architecture to draw definite conclusions regarding influences which inspired the design of the Stoney-Baynard main house. This is unfortunate since _i! be (1!1_l1!l_l1~1:1_al buJlc!i.!!g_ !~~--]3~-~l1!~1!_!?_i~-!!~~~- . pile plan, tabby exterior walls, and enclosing porches on at least three (most probably four) sides. The dwelling's original roof frame, which if still extant might provide crucial information about the designer's intentions, has entirely disappeared.

However, assuming the northwest exterior comer stands near its original height, then it can be seen that the main roof was hippecriather-- -- than gabled. But, questions regarding junctions and details remain open. Was, for example, the main roof carried over the porches and supported on a colonnade as often the case in Louisiana? Or, alternatively, were roofs enclosing the porches treated as elements separate from the principal roof frame, a condition far more common in South Carolina? Tantalizing as these architectural puzzles may be, neither excavation nor architectural analysis has so far provided answers.

Outbuildings Fragments of three outbuildings survive northeast of the main house These are arranged in single file and aligned N40E to follow the old dune ridge on which the principle settlement was erected. Nearest the house, Structure 1 is represented by a wide tabby fonndation which define what was probably a raised, timber framed structure measuring 4" x i overall. Judging by the width of its foundations, Structure 1 was one and one-half or even two stories high. There is evidence for an exterior end chimney, measuring in width, fabricated from brick and tabby brick centered on each of the short sides, but nothing certain is known of the building's plan or facade treatment. The second structure was slightly larger.

measuring about x overall, but there is no visible evidence for any chimney to heat the interior spaces. It has been suggested that the tabby foundation. measuring in width. consists of blocks salvaged from another structure during the Civil War but this conjecture requires confirmation. 4 4 Trinkley is the source of this premise. STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 6) Most distantly removed from the main house, Structure 3 is now represented by a massive tabby chimney base measuring x overall. The size and form of the largely destroyed building to which the chimney base belonged has not been ascertained. Too little architectural fabric survives to allow certain identification of any of the outbuildings described.

However, close proximity to the main house and overall organization suggests that Structure 1 accommodated house slaves. PART III. SOURCES OF INFORMATION A. Drawings: done in1991-by olin-Brookei.-'fhe---~-- - originals are on file with Brooker Architectural Design Consultants, in Beaufort, South Carolina. B.

Source document Quoted word for word from HABS SC-863. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

Adams, Natalie and M[ichael] Trinkley. Archaeological testing of the Stoney /Baynard Plantation ,Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina. Research Series 28. Columbia, SC: Chicora Foundation Inc., [Cole, Cynthia] Historic Resources of the Low Country. Yemassee, SC: Low Council of Governments, Taylor,,,C.R. Biographical Directory of the South Carolina Senate, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, Trinkley, Michael. Further Investigation of the Stoney /Baynard Main House, Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina. Research Series 47. Columbia, SC: Chicora Foundation Inc., PART IV. PROJECT INFORMATION This project was sponsored by the Historic Beaufort Foundation and by the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) division of the National Park Service, Paul D.

Dolinsky, Chief, HABS. This report is one component of a larger survey of extant examples of tabby architecture within Beaufort County, South Carolina. The documentation was undertaken by HABS under the direction of Paul D. Dolinsky with assistance from Virginia B. Price, HABS Historian, who worked with Jefferson G. Mansell, (formerly of) the Historic Beaufort Foundation, Ian D. Hill, Beaufort County Planning Department, and Colin Brooker, Brooker Architectural Design ohsultants, to identify subjects of study and locate them in the field in and Colin STONEY-BAYNARD HOUSE HABS No. (page 7) Brc;>oker, whose research underpinned the project, wrote the historical report. Evan Thompson, now with the Historic Beaufort Foundation, assisted Bwoker in the production of the reports. Jack E.

Boucher, BABS Photographer, took the large format photographs.