USA > Kentucky > The political beginnings of Kentucky. A narrative of public events bearing on the history of that state up to the time of its admission into the American Union > Part 12
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
The truth, as it seems deducible from all the facts now discoverable, seems to be that Brown, conversing freely with Gardoqui, had fully done what McDowell and Muter desired him to attempt. He had sounded Gardoqui completely, and drawn from him what was to be the last card of his diplo- matic game. He had verified this discovery by the secret despatches sent by Carmichael from Madrid to the Congress. He and Madison were now perfectly agreed that Spain had weakened in her resolution, and that the free use of the
172
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
Mississippi would soon follow in the sequence of events ; and therefore it was that the two persons most able to mod- erate public excitement and direct opinion in Kentucky were put in full possession of the last phase of Spanish plan.
The Spaniard was really sincere in his wish that a pretext might be found in the purely formal declaration of a new State for according the navigation so much desired, and thus soothing the irritated West. And Brown greatly hoped that the July Convention would frame a Constitution, apply to Congress for admission, and so smooth the way for a con- ciliatory policy. With the information that he sent to Gar- doqui, that the Kentucky Convention would not pursue the prompter plan, but would again memorialize Virginia for separation and Congress for admission, all discussion of the subject ended.'
" It was not until the next year that Brown and Gardoqui again met. Under date 25th June, 1789, Gardoqui mentions to Floridablanca the return of Brown to New York as a member of the House of Representatives in the first Congress. Gardoqui quickly perceived that the frontier delegate had not only escaped his trap, but fathomed the plan of Spain. The meeting was pleasant and the old hint of disunion was not renewed. Still bent upon pushing every practical expedient for securing the navigation of the Mississippi, Brown opened the subject by adverting to Morgan's New Madrid colony, established the year before, and offered to find the capital for establishing at the mouth of the Big Black River one hundred American families within eighteen months, and an additional one hundred families annually for four years, provided a grant of six hundred thousand acres of land was made, and security of religious and civil rights guaran- teed to the settlers. The idea was evidently to establish a free port below Morgan's free port of New Madrid. The suggestion does not seem to have been very seriously presented or considered, and went no further than a mention in Gardoqui's despatch. (Gardoqui to Floridablanca, No. 316, 25th June, 1789.) In the same despatch Gardoqui speaks of Brown's entering the Congress under the Constitution, and that the new gov- ernment would have the benefit of his knowledge of affairs touching the West and the
173
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
The Congressman was encouraged as he wrote to Innes by the outlook of the new government. Nor were Gardo- qui's anxieties now so serious, for before the November con- vention convened the arrangement with Morgan for the colony at New Madrid had been perfected and announced. The modus vivendi thus found tided affairs over the breakers of the formative period; the installation of Washington as President steadied the confidence of all the West, and the pacific temper of Carondelet tempered the administration of the Province of Louisiana."
The letters despatched to McDowell and Muter were (for a time at least) as prudently treated by the recipients as the gravity of their contents required and as the writer intended they should be. They were designed to communicate an important political fact to the personal confidence of two men in the District most proper to know it and most likely to keep from the conventions of their people the exciting
Spanish policy. In his secret despatch he says of Brown: "He will conduct himself with much discretion and precaution, still, by my faith, I will not prove unequal to him, nor do I fear him (y que esto sujeto procedera con mucho reserva y precaucion, pero, a fe, que yo ni lo ire en zaga, ni lo temo)." (Gardoqui to Floridablanca, Secret Despatch No. 25, 25th June, 1789.) This is the last mention by either of the other.
I Brown wrote to Innes from New York under date 28th September, 1789: "Judg- ment, impartiality, and decision are conspicuous in every transaction of the President, and from the appointments which he has made there is every reason to expect that the different departments will be conducted with justice and ability. I consider the appointment of Mr. Jefferson (vice Jay) as a measure favorable to the interests of the Western Country, and calculated to remove those fears which exist respecting the navi- gation of the river Mississippi. I am fully convinced that we have nothing to fear on that score from the present President. This I speak from a knowledge of his sentiments."
-
174
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
topic which the Spanish Minister would have rejoiced to see brought into public discussion.
A debate in Kentucky, in view of the action of her dele- gates in opposing the ratification of the Constitution, would have strengthened Gardoqui's position in his diplomatic battle over the commercial treaty between Spain and the United States, by the introduction of that dangerous ele- ment which Washington had so clearly discovered in the West. Indiscreet publication would have aroused those "turbulent spirits among its inhabitants who, from the pres- ent difficulties in their intercourse with the Atlantic States, have turned their eyes to New Orleans, and may become riotous and ungovernable if the hope of traffic be cut off by treaty." The wisdom of the sage had already perceived that "whenever the new States become so populous and so extended to the westward as really to need it, there will be no power which can deprive them of the use of the Missis- sippi."?
McDowell never made public the letter received by him until 1806, when he published a statement in vindication of Brown and of the conventions of 1788. Muter gave his let- ter in 1790 (and long after Miro had abandoned all hope and Gardoqui had gone back to Spain) to Marshall as material
I Washington to Henry Lee. (Washington's Writings, Vol. IX, p. 180.)
Washington to Henry Lee. ( Washington's Writings, Vol. IX, p. 173.)
175
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
for a political campaign, incurring the contempt of violated confidence,' and at a later day the denunciation of those whose temporary purpose he had served,2 forfeiting in his old age the good opinion of all the prominent men of his adopted State.
The Convention of July, 1788.
When the convention already chosen in April met at Danville on 28th July, 1788, a quorum was lacking, and it was not till next day that the chairman laid before the con- vention the "sundry papers and resolutions of the Congress of the United States, addressed to Samuel McDowell, es- quire, late President of the Convention in Kentucky." The original MS. journal of proceedings has been found.3 The proceedings were entirely harmonious, and under the wise and temperate guidance of McDowell as president, and Shelby as chairman of Committee of the Whole, a series of resolutions were adopted by unanimous vote.+
The basis of the proceedings taken was a resolution intro-
I Brown's MS. Memorandum of his statement as a witness in the proceedings against Sebastian.
2 Marshal!, History of Kentucky, edition of 1824, Vol. II, p. 78.
3 The MS. volume fortunately discovered and preserved by Col. R. T. Durrett, of Louisville, Ky., contains the original record of the Conventions of July, 1788, Novem- ber, 1788, July, 1789, July, 1790, and of the Constitutional Convention of April, 1792. It is wholly in the handwriting of Thomas Todd, afterward Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
4 MS. Proceedings of Convention, 31st July, 1788.
176
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
duced on the 30th, the author and mover of which was prob- ably Judge Caleb Wallace, then a Justice of the Supreme Court of the District,' the other members of which were McDowell and Muter. The memorandum of the proposi- tion reads as follows in the MS. journal of the convention :
"A resolution, declaring that the powers of this Convention so far as depends on the Acts of the Legislature of Virginia were annulled by the Resolutions of Congress, and resolving that it was the duty of this Con- vention as the Representatives of the people to proceed to frame a constitu- tion of Government for this District, and to submit the same to their con- sideration with such advice relative thereto as emergency suggests, was read.
"Ordered that the said resolution be committed to a committee of the whole convention." 2
It does not appear from the journal of the convention that this proposition was advocated or opposed with any heat. There was general dissatisfaction at the failure of Congress to grant the former application for admission, but no traitorous purpose was charged by or against any public man. It was not until in after years political rivalries and
'Christopher Greenup (at one time Governor) deposed in the suit of Innes against Marshall, in the Mercer Circuit Court, February, 1815, that Wallace introduced this resolution, and that he did so in the November convention of 1788. This is evidently a slip of memory or of the pen by which "November" was substituted for " July ;" for Wallace was a delegate in July though not one in November. Greenup uses this language: "I think Mr. Wallace submitted a resolution for proceeding to form a constitution and submitting it to Congress without applying again to the State of Virginia, observing that she had already given her consent to the measure, and it would be saving time." This accords with the original journal of July, 1788, though the name of the mover is not there given.
2 MS. Journal of Convention, 30th July, 1788.
,
ـلعـ
177
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
conflicting ambitions were added to old personal dislikes, that detraction and furious charges of every imaginable sort of wrong doing set the country in an uproar. It is worth noticing at this point that even Thomas Marshall, afterward so strenuous in his denunciation of all who approved the immediate formation of a Constitution and an immediate application to Congress, was then in perfect accord with Wallace' as to the legality, propriety, and expediency of immediate action.
The resolution thus referred to the Committee of the Whole was modified in the report made to the conven- tion.
On the 31st July it is recorded in the MS. journal that " Mr. Shelby reported that the committee had taken into consideration the matters referred to them, and had come to a resolution thereon, which he read in his place and deliv- ered in at the Clerk's table, where it was again twice read and unanimously agreed to, as follows, viz :
' In his deposition, given 15th September, 1813, in the suit of Innes against Mar- shall, Judge Caleb Wallace testified in this regard as follows: "This deponent does not recollect whether the late Colonel Thomas Marshall was or was not a member of the Convention which assembled at Danville in July, 1788. But this deponent, about that time, or shortly before, heard Col. Marshall express great dissatisfaction with Con- gress for having declined to decide on the application of the people of Kentucky to be erected into a separate State, and declared that he was clear for proceeding to form a constitution of government and establishing the District of Kentucky an Independent State, and then apply for its admission into the Union, not doubting but that it would be received without further delay, and this it was believed was the sentiment of several respectable citizens of the District, and of some who resided in other parts of the State of Virginia."
23
178
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
" Resolved, Whereas, It appears to the Members of this Convention that the United States in Congress assembled have for the present declined to ratify the compact entered into between the legislature of Virginia and the people of this District respecting the erection of the District into an Inde- pendent State, in consequence of which the powers vested in the Conven- tion are dissolved, and whatever order or resolution they pass can not be considered as having any legal force or obligation-But being anxious for the safety and prosperity of ourselves and constituents do earnestly recom- mend to the good people inhabiting the several counties within the District, each to elect five representatives on the times of holding their Courts in the month of October next, to meet at Danville on the first Monday in Novem- ber following, to continue in office until the first day of January, 1790; and that they delegate to their said' representatives full powers to take such measures for obtaining admission of the District as a separate and inde- pendent member of the United States of America, and the navigation of the river Mississippi, as may appear most conducive to these important pur- poses : And also to form a constitution of government for the District and organize the same when they shall judge it necessary, or to do and accom- plish whatever on a consideration of the state of the District may in their opinion promote its interests.
"Resolved, That the elections directed by the preceding resolution be held at the court house of each county, and continued from day to day for five days including the first day.
" Resolved, That the sheriffs within the respective counties of this Dis- trict be requested to hold the said elections and make return thereof to the Clerk of the Supreme Court immediately after the same are finished, and also to deliver to each representative so elected a certificate of his elec- tion; and in case there should be no sheriff in either of the said coun- ties, or he should refuse to act, that any two acting magistrates then present may superintend and conduct the said elections and make returns and grant certificates in the same manner that the sheriffs are requested to do.
"Resolved, That every free male inhabitant of each county within the
1
-
179
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
said District has a right to vote at the said elections within their respective counties.
" Resolved, That a majority of the members so elected be a quorum to proceed to business.
' Resolved, That if the said convention should not make a house on the said first Monday in November, any three or more members then assembled may adjourn from day to day for five days next ensuing; and if a convention should not be formed at the end of the fifth day, that they may then adjourn to any day they may think proper not exceeding one month.
"Resolved, That the sheriffs of each county, or the said magistrates, as the case may be, read or cause to be read the aforesaid resolutions on each day of the elections, immediately preceding the opening of the said elec- tions.
"Ordered, That the President do request the printer of the Kentucky Gazette to publish the proceedings and resolves of Congress by him laid before this Convention, also such part of the proceedings of this conven- tion as the President shall think proper, and in particular that the printer continue to publish weekly until the first of October next the recommenda- tion for electing another Convention, and the several resolutions relative thereto."
The convention was not yet so divided into irritated fac- tions as to exchange wanton charges of public infidelity. The letter from Brown to Muter was known to Marshall and Edwards, and McDowell had its duplicate. The estimate of those who knew of the letter and its contents, and of the interview with Gardoqui, was expressed in a resolution for which Muter and Marshall voted along with every other delegate, and by which it was:
180
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
"Ordered, That the President do wait on John Brown, Esquire, when he returns to this District, and in the most respectful terms express to him the obligations which this Convention and their constituents are under to him for his faithful attention to their interest in Congress.
"Ordered, That the thanks of this Convention be given to Mr. Thomas Todd for his services as Clerk this session."1
From the orignal MS. journal of the July Convention of 1788 it is thus seen [as does not appear from Marshall's his- tory of the State, written twenty-three years after the occur- rences] that the convention was unanimous, and that it expressly and without dissent recognized the power of a convention to proceed upon the already given consent of Virginia to frame a Constitution and petition Congress for admission to the Union.2
No apparent difference of opinion is discoverable among the members, save that Wallace thought the July Convention
1 MS. Journal Convention, July, 1788.
? The resolutions of the convention of July, 1788, are incorrectly given in the draft published by Marshall. (History of Kentucky, Vol. I, pp. 325, 326, 327, edition of 1812.) He omits that important part of the paper which recites that the resolutions were "unanimously agreed to;" an omission necessary to the political argument pursued by him. The resolve of thanks to Brown is also left out. It is much to be regretted that so strong and well informed a writer as Marshall should have had so little of the true historic reverence for accuracy. The history of Marshall was not written until 1812, twenty-four years after the event. During this period his sentiments toward Innes, Brown, Wallace, and Nicholas had been those of bitterest hostility, most cordially reciprocated by them. He really wrote his side of a personal quarrel and called it (and no doubt thought it) history. Mr. Roosevelt ("Winning of the West") has recognized how this affects the trustworthiness of Marshall as an historical authority. Paxton, his relative, admits of Humphrey Marshall and his history, that "it is able and interesting, but prejudice and partisanship appear on every page. He was an overweening Feder- alist, and wrote more as a politician than as an impartial historian." ( Paxton, Geneal- ogy, etc., of the Marshall Family, p. 81.)
181
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
could do this. Shelby and others thought that a new con- vention should meet in November to accomplish the work. None seem to have doubted that a Constitution could first be framed, and the necessary action on the part of Congress and of Virginia, if requisite, taken afterward. Col. Thomas Marshall was a member acquiescing in this unanimous vote. So also were Muter and Edwards. All parties, even those who soon became unrelenting personal and political ene- mies, concurred in approving of a State organization to be effected in the coming November, and they had before them the precedent of Vermont, the already expressed willingness of Virginia, and the good will of the other States as shown by the Continental Congress' resolution of 3d July. They were wise in view of the emergency, and were justifiable in view of the facts. "For," to use the temperate words of Butler in his History of Kentucky, "had a domestic govern- ment been organized after the repeated and harmonious co-operation of the great contracting parties [Virginia and Kentucky], it is not to be supposed that it would have been so technically misconstrued as to have been viewed as trea- sonable to Virginia or hostile to the Union, owing to re- peated and unavoidable accidents. The magnanimous tem- per of Virginia would have cured every thing."
1 Butler's History of Kentucky, edition of 1836, p. 168. The action of another frontier people in after years is a good commentary upon the practical suggestions of Brown and Wallace, and goes far to prove how wise was that plan which looked to the
182
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
The convention of July, having finished its session with the adoption of the resolutions calling yet another convention for November, adjourned. Its members sepa- rated in a spirit of harmony, agreed as they were, without a dissenting voice, upon the indicated plan for a speedy organization of the new State and its application for ad- mission into the Union.
The Appearance of Connolly in Kentucky.
The interval between the adjournment of the convention of July and the convening of that called for November, 1788, was marked by the appearance in Kentucky of an emissary empowered to cultivate a British interest and at- tach, as far as possible, prominent men to a scheme for a British alliance.
Col. John Connolly made his way from Detroit to Ken- tucky, where he arrived in the beginning of October. He was known by report to the people of the West, and in no
immediate framing of a Constitution and its presentation to Congress. Prof. Royce has excellently told the story of the formation of a State Government in California (History of California, American Commonwealth Series, 1886, pp. 246-259). Like the pio- neers of Kentucky, the '49ers of California recognized and acted upon "the American political instinct." The chief military authority, Gen. Riley, recognizing the practical needs of the time, issued his proclamation without law therefor, called a convention, provided for orderly elections, the delegates met, and " the ponderous machinery of the Constitution was soon after in order and lightly running, notwithstanding all the pre- liminary wrangling among master workmen about plans and doctrines."
183
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
pleasant way, for he had adhered to the British cause, and in 1775 had been authorized by Lord Dunmore to raise and command a partisan regiment of Loyalists and Indians, to be called the "Loyal Foresters." On his way to the western frontiers, where his command was to act, he was arrested, and Dunmore's instructions for the enrollment of his regiment found concealed in the handle of his satchel. He was cast into prison and kept there until near the close of the war. He was a native of Lancaster County, Penn., a physician by profession, and one of the best informed men of his times about the western country. It was he who selected and secured a patent in 1773 for the two thousand acres of land at the Falls of the Ohio, on which the city of Louisville was first laid out, and he was the conspicuous sufferer by its con- fiscation under the verdict of a jury, of which Boone was one. Wilkinson imagined that the purpose of the visit was to win over himself, and met Connolly with a show of friendliness that drew from him an avowal of the British plan. It was, in brief, to assist the western settlers in opening the Mississippi to navigation by equipping, arm- ing, and paying a force of ten thousand men to move down the river against New Orleans, where a British fleet would co-operate. Connolly, in the name of Lord Dorchester, promised honors and rewards to such men of influence as would fall into the scheme, and military rank in the
184
The Political Beginnings of Kentucky.
British army equal to that which had been held by them in the American service.'
His errand was cloaked under the pretense of looking after the valuable lands once owned by him at the Falls of the Ohio, and confiscated because of his adherence to the cause of the Crown in the Revolutionary struggle. He concealed his mission so adroitly that its true purpose was communicated to but three persons besides Wilkinson. These were Thomas Marshall, George Muter, and Charles Scott .?
The true purpose of the British agent's journey to Ken- tucky was not divulged to the public for many years after- ward, nor was any eminent public man intrusted with the secret for several months.3 It was in February, 1789, that Col. Thomas Marshall, in the same letter which intimated his suspicion that Brown favored separation from the Union and
1 Wilkinson to Miro, 12th February, 1789. (Gayarre, History Louisiana, Spanish Dom- ination, 'pp. 235, 236.)
2 Col. Thomas Marshall's Letter to Washington, 12th February, 1789. It will be found in Butler, History of Kentucky, edition 1836, Appendix pp. 520, 521.
3 The former acquaintance of Connolly and Thomas Marshall, and the circum- stances of the visit of the former to Marshall's home in (what is now) Woodford County, are detailed by A, K. Marshall (son of Thomas) in the " Western World" newspaper for 25th October, 1806, in one of the innumerable articles filled with charge and coun- tercharge that were then so fashionable in political controversy. From this statement it is clear that Connolly made to Thomas Marshall, in October, 1788, direct overtures for a severance from the Union and a State organization under British protection. It is not to be asserted that Marshall agreed; every presumption is to the contrary. Noth- ing in his history warrants a suspicion of his devotion to American nationality. He did not, however, inform Washington of what had occurred till February, 1789, four months later.
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.