USA > Kentucky > A history of the commonwealth of Kentucky > Part 17
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37
· Marshall 1, 290.
169
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
the confederacy of their countrymen. Vermont continued with- out the pale of the union during the whole Revolutionary war, and until March, 1791; vet no indictment was brought against her for treason. At this distance of time, the protracted delays and repeated public disappointments on this question, seem truly inexplicable. It is not known to what else to compare our long succession of fruitless conventions, than to the card edifices of children. which are no sooner erected, than at a breath they are demolished. The assertion may be safely ventured, that no sober political critic of the present day can believe, that any community in these States, would now be so trifled with and tantalized, as the people of this district were, for eight years, in obtaining a separate municiple existence. Some auxiliary resolutions for directing the election of the seventh convention, closed the labors of this addition to the nu- merous and ineffectual assemblies of Kentucky. So excited had public feeling in Kentucky become. in consequence of this provoking course of things, that disunion seems to have been at least proposed, as its *"idea was formerly combatted in the public prints of the time, while nothing more open or formal than the acts of the convention is recollected in its favor." A letter from Chief Justice Muter on the 15th of October, 1788, may represent the feelings of the more considerate and sober, respecting the state of public affairs. In this letter the Chief Justice combats the idea of forming a constitution without the previous consent of Virginia, as contrary to her statute, and in- volving the perpetrators in the guilt of high treason; and that the new State could only be admitted by consent of Virginia, under the federal constitution. But the most pregnant part of this letter is, where he represents, that the resolution of the late convention, if adopted by the people, might fairly be construed to give au- thority to the next to treat with Spain, to obtain the navigation of the Mississippi; if they should think auch a measure condu- cive to their interest.
Every thing proceeding from George Muter would be treated by the author, with the respect inspired by a lively recollection
· Marshall 1, 204. P
170
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
of his venerable, mild, and worthy character; and the concur- rence of Colonel Thomas Marshall, the compatriot, fellow soldier and friend of Washington, must add still greater weight to this letter, which was, indeed, *his measure. Notwithstanding this most respectable authority, some political feeling not at all dis- honorable, or some exaggerated apprehension of consequences, seems to have prompted this public address; if there were no foreign intrigues. As it has before been remarked, the separa- tion of Kentucky from Virginia, was an agreed case between the high parties; the difficulty was one of form and accident only. In such a state of things, it would have been cruel mockery and iniquity in Virginia, to have so far misinterpreted a separation of Kentucky, which had been the subject of repeated and mutual agreements, as to have considered it treasonable. The jealousy of the country could not, however, have been too keenly ex- cited against any attempt at foreign dependence; it is never admitted into the creed of an enlightened patriot, until the last extremity of domestic misfortune; and even then, to be most sleeplessly watched.
CHAPTER XI.
Don Gardoqui's propositions to Mr. John Brown-Apology for Kentucky Statesmen- Court and Country parties in Convention-Wilkinson's memorial to the Governor of Louisiana-New Government of the United States-General Washington's letter to Colonel Thomas Marshall-Transylvania-Indian depredations.
Why the patriotic Marshall and Muter had so much reason to apprehend a foreign connexion at this time, now becomes a painful duty to develope. That private feelings may still be lacerated in this recital, the author laments, and which he will studiously avoid, consistently with the faithfulness of history. Motives, whether of the dead, or the living, shall not be im- peached; but upon strong and conclusive testimony; guilt shall never be tortured into existence, by misrepresentation or forced construction. Under the influence of these views, let the con-
+ Marshall 1, 291.
171
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
duct of the Honorable John Brown, then a member of the old Congress, be entitled to their full bearing, while it is faithfully related. On the 29th of February, 1788, Mr. John Brown pre- sented to the old Congress the address of the Kentucky con- vention, praying for admission into the Union; but it was not until the 3d of July, that it was finally acted on, and then re- ferred to the new government for ultimate decision.
This distinguished public officer then wrote to the President of the Danville convention, giving an account of this additional failure of Kentucky expectations, notwithstanding his best ex- ertions. In this letter was enclosed a detached scrip of paper headed confidential* in these words: "In a conversation which I had with Mr. Gardoqui, the Spanish minister, relative to the navigation of the Mississippi, he stated that, if the people of Kentucky would erect themselres into an independent State, and appoint a proper person to negotiate with him, he had authority for that purpose, and would enter into an arrange- ment with them for the exportation of their produce to New Orleans, on terms of mutual advantage." In addition to this ominous enclosure to Judge MeDowell, a fletter was written by the same gentleman to Judge Muter, dated New York, July 10th, 1788; from which the following extracts are taken, re- ferring the reader to the appendix for the entire document. After mentioning the delay of Congress in acting on the appli- cation of Kentucky, owing to the absence of the members during a "great part of the winter and spring," and when finally committed to a "grand committee, they could not be prevailed upon to report-a nutjority of them being opposed to the measure. The eastern States would not, nor do I think they ever will. assent to the admission of the district into the union as an independent State: unless Vermont or the province of Maine, is brought forward at the same time." Again: "The jealousy of the growing importance of the western country, and an unwillingness to add a vote to the southern interest, are the real causes of opposition; and I am mclinod to believe, they will exist to a certain degree, even under the new government, to
+Judge McDowell's depoution, Innes vs. Marshall. ¡Marshall 1, 301.
1
172
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
which the application is referred by Congress." Again: "'Tis generally expected, that the district will declare its indepen- dence, and proceed to frame a constitution of government." "This step will, in my opinion, tend to preserve unanimity, and will enable you to adopt with effect such measures as may be necessary to promote the interest of the district. In . private conversation with Mr. Gardoqui, the Spanish minister at this place, I have been assured by him in the most explicit terms, that if Kentucky will declare her independence, and em- power some proper person to negotiate with him, that he has authority, and will engage to open the navigation of the Missis- sippi for the exportation of their produce, on terms of mutual advantage. But that this privilege can never be extended to them, while part of the United States by reason of commercial treaties existing between that court and other powers of Europe. As there is no doubt of the sincerity of this declaration, I have thought proper to communicate it to a few confidential friends in the district, with his permission, not doubting but that they will make a prudent use of the information." Upon this confidential letter, (written in the discharge of a critical and important trust) comment is unavoidable; it is an essential and important part of Kentucky history; and it has been the sub- ject of most angry and exasperating controversy. This com- mentary is now undertaken when these passions have died away; although the author has been a witness to their fiercest storms: yet he claims to be governed by a sense of duty only, when he declares, that he continues to feel. as he always did, perfectly uninfluenced by their rage. On any other occasion than one, which has arraved this community in such acrimoni- ous parties, such a declaration might be unnecessary.
The first idea that strikes the mind in considering this letter in connexion with the enclosure to Judge MeDowell, is, that Mr. Brown, and in all probability, many other of the ancient statesmen of Kentucky did incline to discuss, if not adopt a connexion with Spain independent of the feeble and disgraced union, which then existed; one more in name than in fact, disobeyed at home, and despised abroad. Under these circum-
------
----
173
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
stances, the author believes such a measure so far from furnish- ing matter of reprobation, may have been deemed consistent with Kentucky patriotism; and even demanded by its most sacred duties. The denial of any meaning in the letters to Judges Muter and McDowell, beyond that of having been "forwarded for in- formation," as supposed by the latter gentleman in his certificate -
of the 7th of August, 1806," strikes the author as unworthy of the grave subject of communication, and the dignity of the correspondents. But what is more important, it is inconsistent with the only manly and triumphant justification of which he thinks the measure may have been susceptible. To try the conduct of Kentucky statesmen in 1758, under a confederation in ruins and in factions, by the same principles, which should now direct the mind, under an efficient and beneficent govern- ment; would be absurd and unjust. The peculiar circumstances of the times must be adverted to, in order to arrive at any just estimate of the measure, or of its authors. What then, were these circumstances? They are eloquently and no less truly narrated by General Wilkinson. t"Open to savage depreda- tions; exposed to the jealousies of the Spanish government; unprotected by that of the old confederation; and denied the navigation of the Mississippi, the only practicable channel by which the productions of their labor could find a market." In addition to this, Mr. Daniel Clarke in his memoir of 1798, to Secretary Pickering, mentions that. frall who ventured on the Mississippi, had their property seized, by the first commanding officer whom they met, and little or no com- munication was kept up between the two countries." Was this a condition for any community, much less for one of high spirited freemen with their arms in their hands, just fresh from hunting down the Briush lion, to tolerate any longer, than it was unavoidable? Couple these grievances, which must have blasted the industry and the dearest hopes of the country, which must have driven the emigrants back over the mountains, and condemned the rich lands of Kentucky to waste
+ Politicai Transactions, page 39. t Wilkinson's Meinoirs, vol. 2, 119.
# Wilkinson's Memoirs, vol. 2, Appendix 11. P *
174
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
their fertility in uncultivated forests, to become again an Indian country, rather than to continue a civilized society; with the heart burnings on the subject of yielding the navigation to Spain for an indefinite time. Then, from these materials some faint idea may be conceived of the necessity for the statesmen and the people of Kentucky to look to some other protection, for the vital interests of the country, than the tottering and im- becile confederacy, which then deluded the country under the pretence of a government. Can circumstances be imagined more imperative on Kentucky patriots and statesmen, to turn their attention to a foreign connexion for that protection, which their own government could not give; and without which, all govern- ment is a mockery, and a perversion of its very purposes? To the mind of the writer, the circumstances of the case may have had this justification in the view of the parties.
Still, notwithstanding this apology, which is only offered as an hypothetical defence, founded on the probabilities of the transac- tions; the fact is, that the love of country was too strong, and the attachment of Kentucky to her elder homes, was too powerful, the share her numerous Revolutionary citizens had in the glory of the republic was too great, to allow of a separation of the coun- try from the rest of the confederacy. Notwithstanding the long series of hardships and sufferings, which Kentucky had endured, many of which were to be attributed to an inefficient and ill administered government; her statesmen, and still more, the great mass of her people, were true to the Union, and clung with pertinacious attachment to the sacred league of the States. The ties of ancient kindred, of homes and customs, were too strong for the promptings of domestic interest and ambition to dissolve; and it is an honorable proof of the love of the union in this remoto member, that no public motion in any assembly of the people, no resolution countenancing separation from the confederacy, or leading to it, can be instanced in the history of the people of Kentucky. On the contrary. her public acts, amidst the undefended devastations of the Indians, the injuries of the Spaniards, and the neglects of the federal government, constantly breathe a spirit of "filial affection" for the Union,
175
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
and connect their ardent wishes for a separate government, with the rest of the confederacy. From '85 to 90, they petitioned to Virginia and to Congress "to be taken into union with the United States of America," "for a speedy admission of the dis- trict into the federal Union," "and to be erected into an inde- pendent member of the federal Union." The prospect of the new government then in agitation, ought to have had powerful influence with every patriot in suspending an appeal to the dreadful alternative of civil disruption and war. Nothing wor- thy of record beyond the very discussions which occupy this portion of our history, seems to have transpired; until the con- vention of November, 1788, assembled agreeably to the author- ity of its July predecessor. In this assembly the parties, which had been divided on the mode of separating from Virginia, ac- quired more development, and appeared more distinct; no doubt in consequence of the discussions which had intervened. Messrs. Wilkinson, Thomas Marshall, Sen., Muter, Brown, and Innes, were all members: yet in the acknowledgment of his enemies, General Wilkinson was the most distinguished orator, as well as writer. Was an address to be written, which should pour forth the feelings of Kentucky, a debate to be opened upon her vital interests, Wilkinson was equally the author of the one and the speaker in the other. So varied, rich, and polished, were the powers and the acquirements of this singularly versatile person, that whether in the field of Saratoga, the cabinet of Governor Miro, or in the conventions of the backwoodsmen of Kentucky, this gifted man drew all eyes upon him, and was looked up to as a leader and a chief. The friends of Wilkinson, who appear to have contemplated a separation and the forma- tion of an independent government, without the same unneces- sary anxiety for the repetition of the consent of Virginia, which might have been necessary and proper in a mere municipal body, not a large community, were denominated the court party; as its leading members were principally judges and lawyers: the opposition under Colonel Thomas Marshall, Sen., Judge Muter, and John Edwards, afterwards a Senator of the United States, was denominated the country party. The first
176
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
point of difference was, the submission of the resolutions passed by the previous convention to a committee of the whole. The court party favored this reference in order, it seems, to con- nect the navigation of the Mississippi with the formation of a State constitution, and to hurry the latter without waiting for the previous consent of the parent State. This had been re- . peatedly expressed, though not under these peculiar circum- stances. It was perhaps, unparliamentary; since the very pur- pose of commitment is, to divide a subject into its appropriate parts, and to acquire distinct views of its facts and character by special, not general inquiries. But what is of more consequence to the present times, than this skirmish of order, is the full and prominent attitude, which the navigation of the Mississippi assumed in this convention; and mainly owing to the comprehen- sive spirit and sagacious mind of Wilkinson, denounced as he and his associates have been, for their exertions to promote this vital policy, not only of Kentucky, but of the teeming millions of the west. Wilkinson seems to have been more keenly alive to the importance of this trade, and of the formation of a gov- ernment, which might command its enjoyment; than of again obtaining the consent of Virginia previous to the erection of the government. Indeed, he was disposed to obtain this chan- nel for commercial intercourse, so indispensable to the future prosperity of the country by a Spanish connexion, if our gov- ernment could not, or would not procure it. He is said* to have observed in debate, that "Spain had objections to granting the navigation in question to the United States; it was not to be presumed, that Congress would obtain it for Kentucky, or even the western country, only-her treaties must be general. There was but one way, and but one, that he knew of for ob- viating these difficulties; and that was so fortified by constitu- tions, and guarded by lairs, that it was dangerous of access, and hopeless of attainment under present circumstances. It was the certain but proscribed course, which had been indicated in the former convention, which he would not now repeat; but which every gentleman present would connect with a declara- tion of independence, the formation of a constitution, and the * Marshall 1, 316.
-
177
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
organization of a new State; which, he added, might safely be left to find its way into the Union, on terms advantageous to its interests and prosperity. He expatiated on the prosperous cir- cumstances of the country-its increasing population-its rich productions, and its imperious claims to the benefits of commerce through the Mississippi-its only outlet. That the same diffi- culties did not exist on the part of Spain, to concede to the people on the western waters, the right of navigating the river, which she had to a treaty with the United States, there were many reasons for supposing. That there was information of the first importance on that subject, within the power of the con- vention, which he doubted not would be equally agreeable for the members to have, and the gentleman who possessed it to communicate." Such is represented as the material substance of Wilkinson's speech by Mr. Marshall, taken, as supposed from the notes of Colonel Thomas Marshall, whose accuracy on another part of this debate, was vouched for by Judge Thomas Todd, when summoned before a legislative committee in 1806. A member of the convention then desired Mr. John Brown, who was meant, to communicate what he knew. In reply to this invitation, Mr. Brown said, "that he did not think himself . at liberty to disclose what had passed in private conferences between the Spanish minister, Don Gardoqui, and himself; but this much in general he would venture to inform the con- vention-that provided we are unanimous, every thing we could wish for is within our reach." This backwardness does not fully agree with the letters of Mr. Brown to the two judges pre- viously mentioned. In one of these, he communicates the Spanish minister's declaration "with his permission." The truth seems to be, that the party in favor of the immediate separation and independence of Kentucky, was not fully confi- dent of its strength, and of the popular support. None of them seem to have spoken out with the boldness of Wilkinson, or with the unreserved and manly spirit worthy of the interests of Kentucky, painful as the course would have been, which these interests pointed out. Nothing further was done at this time in regard to the Spanish overtures.
அலள்ள
178
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
It would, indeed, be most unbecoming Kentucky to upbraid those who were most forward in promoting what they deemed to be her prosperity, and who were actuated by a patriotism, which, whatever else may be said of it, was zealously devoted to her interests in the peculiar posture of affairs. The author will not join in any reproaches of the kind. After this brief and general response of Mr. Brown, Wilkinson again rose and offered to read an essay on the navigation and trade of the Mississippi, which had been addressed by him to the Governor and Intendant General of Louisiana. The reading was called for, and so satisfactorily had it treated upon the interests of Kentucky, that the author received the unanimous thanks of the convention "for the regard he therein manifested for the interests of the western country." The reader is referred to the appendix as the most appropriate place for the abstract of the essay. Could the views of the court party in this convention have been very obnoxious to the country gentlemen, when this vote of thanks was accorded to the prominent member of the oppo- site party, and when he was constantly employed on the prin- cipal committees? This presumption seems irresistible in favor of Wilkinson and his friends. On the 8th of the month, after the postponement of a report from a committee, (of which Messrs. Edwards, Marshall, Muter, Wilkinson, and some others, were members) appointed to report an address to Vir- ginia, "for obtaining the independence of the district of Ken- tucky, agreeably to the late resolution and recommendation of Congress." Wilkinson offered the following preamble and reso- lution: * "Whereas it is the solenin duty, so it is the ardent de- sire of this convention, to pursue such measures as may pro- mote the interest and meet the approbation of their constituents; but the discordant opinions, which at present divide the good people they represent, render it doubtful whether they can adopt any plan, which will embrace the opinions of all, or even secure the support of a majority-in this state of embarrass- ment, perplexed with doubt, and surrounded by difficulties; in order to avoid error, and to obtain truth; to remove the jeal-
+ Marshall 1, 329.
179
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
ousies which have infected society; and to restore that spirit of harmony and concord, on which the prosperity of all depends; they deem it most eligible to address their constituents on the momentous occasion: Resolved, that a committee be appointed to draft an address to the good people of the district, setting forth the principles from which this convention act; represent- ing to them their true situation, urging the necessity of union, concord, and mutual concession, and solemnly calling upon them to furnish this convention at its next session, with instructions in what manner to proceed, on the important subject to them submitted."
In pursuance of this resolution, Messrs. Wilkinson, Innes, Jouett, Muter, Sebastian, Allen, and Caldwell, were appointed the committee, but no further notice appears of the address ordered. This measure seems to have looked to instructions about separating from Virginia without her consent, and possi- bly to arrangements for the Mississippi trade; although they do not in so many words, appear upon its face. But upon what else, were instructions wanting, or unanimity required? It was not upon the separation in the ordinary legal way; for no dispute existed upon that measure; thus the popular appeal must have been intended to be brought to bear upon some sub- jects, on which opinions were divided. These were the topics mentioned before, and what then, were so likely as these, to be intended to experience the influence of popular sentiment in uniting parties, and giving ascendency to a course of measures different from the legal separation? Whatever force this con- jecture may have, and it is only presented as a probable infer- ence, addresses to Congress and Virginia were adopted, which appear in the appendix to this history, and the convention ad- journed till the first Monday in August, 1789. Thus passed off a most important and critical convention of Kentucky, which might well, had they been more harmonious, have organized a government for the district; as they had been authorized to do, and which, in the words of Wilkinson, "might have safely been left to find its way into the Union, on terms advantageous to its interests and prosperity."
180
'HISTORY OF KENTUCKY.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.