USA > Michigan > Kent County > Grand Rapids > Grand Rapids and Kent County, Michigan: History and Account of Their Progress from First. Vol. I > Part 3
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 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73
But railroad tracks and plowshares have long since destroyed all vestige of these routes, so often trodden by the once powerful tribes and their eager visitors. These commercial adventurers were not pio- neers in the true sense of that word, and it is doubtful if they could properly be called advance agents of civilization. Their mission in these parts was neither to civilize the denizens of the forest nor to carve out homes in the western wilderness. "The white man's burden" rested not heavily upon their shoulders and gave them little or no con- cern ; the only motive that brought them hither being a desire to pos- sess, at as little cost as possible, the wares which the Indians had for sale. This object being attained, they wended their way elsewhere, homeward, and the localities which had known them knew them no more. So it remained for the fore-runners of Anglo-Saxon civiliza- tion, as they led the "march of empire" in a westerly direction, to open this section of country for actual settlement and win from hostile na- ture-and at times a more hostile foe in human form-homes for them- selves and posterity.
Hosted by Google
23
EARLY JURISDICTION
The Indians who inhabited the northern region east of the Mis- sissippi at the beginning of historic times were, in language, of two great families, to which have been given the French names-Algonquin and Iroquois. These are not Indian names. In fact, from the word Indian itself which is a misnomer-arising from the slowness of the early voyagers to admit that they had found unknown western con- tinents, instead of the Old World India-down to the names of the tribes, there is a confusion of nomenclature and often a deplorable misfit in the. titles now fixed in history by long usage. The Algonquin family may more properly be termed the Lenape, and the Iroquois the Mengwe, which the English frontiermen closely approached in the word Mingo. The Lenape themselves, while using that name, also employed the more generic title of Wapanackki. The Iroquois, on their part, had the ancient name of Onque Honwe, and this in their tongue, as Lenape in that of the other family, signified men with a sense of importance-"The People," to use a convenient English ex- pression. The Lenape became a very widespread people, and different divisions of them were known in later years by various names, among which was Ottawa, the name of the division of the tribe that chiefly inhabited the present limits of Kent County.
Before proceeding with an account of the organization and settle- ment of Kent County a brief review of the question of title to lands seems to be necessary, the word title as here used having special refer- ence to racial dominion or civil jurisdiction. As is well known, the French were the first civilized people who laid claim to the territory now embraced within the state of Michigan and France exercised nom- inal lordship over the region until the treaty of Paris, in 1763, which treaty ended the French and Indian war. Prior to this date the French actually occupied isolated places in the vast extent of territory claimed by them (the south shore of Lake Erie, for instance), but it is an open historical question when such occupancy began. It is certain, how- ever, that there was not the semblance of courts or magistrates for the trial of civil or criminal issues, and hence the chief function of civil government was lacking. And even for some years after the Michi- gan country passed under the control of the officials of the British gov- ernment, affairs here were managed by army officers, commandants of posts on the frontier.
Immediately after the peace of 1763 with the French, the Prov- ince of Canada was extended by act of Parliament, southerly to the Allegheny and Ohio rivers, and westward from the Detroit river. This, of course, included all of the present state of Michigan, not- withstanding the claims of the colony of Virginia that she had the title to all land northwest of the Ohio river. This conflict of authority was at its height during the Revolutionary war, and in 1778, soon after the conquest of the British forts on the Mississippi and the Wabash, by Gen. George Rogers Clark, Virginia erected the county of Illinois, with the county seat at Kaskaskia. It practically embraced all the ter- ritory in the present states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin. But the British held possession of the Michigan country and all the lake region, and in the same year ( 1778), Lord Dorchester, Governor General of Canada, divided Upper Canada into four districts for civil purposes, one of which included Detroit and the lake territory.
Hosted by Google
24
HISTORY OF KENT COUNTY, MICHIGAN
Great Britain had promised the Indian tribes that the whites should not settle north of the Ohio river, and the government of this almost unlimited region was, during English control, exclusively military, with Detroit as the central post. This was the condition during the Revolutionary war, and even after the treaty of peace, in 1783, the same state of affairs continued until after the second, or Jay treaty, in 1794. Early in 1792 the Upper Canadian Parliament authorized Governor Simcoe to lay off nineteen counties to embrace that province, and it is presumed that the County of Essex, on the east bank of Detroit river, included Michigan and northern Ohio. While this supposition is not conclusive, certain it is that some form of British civil authority existed at their forts and settlements until Detroit was formally and finally given up with all its dependencies in August, 1796.
.
The treaty of 1783, which terminated the War of the Revolution, included Michigan within the boundaries of the United States, and the Seventh article of that treaty stated that the King of Great Britain would, "with all convenient speed, and without causing any destruction or carrying away any negroes or other property of the American in- habitants, withdraw all his armies, garrisons and fleets from the United States, and from every part, place and harbor within the same, leaving in all fortifications the American artillery that may be therein, and shall order and cause all archives, records, deeds and papers belonging to any of the said states or their citizens, which in the course of the war may have fallen into the hands of his officers, to be forthwith re- stored and delivered to the proper states and persons to whom they belong." By a subsequent article it was stipulated that five months should be the utmost term for the validity of hostile acts. The final treaty of September, 1783, reaffirmed all these articles as of the preced- ing date. By the terms of this treaty the international boundary line between the possessions of Great Britain and those of the United States ran through the middle of Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron, and their connecting water-ways, and through Lake Superior to the northward of Isle Royale and thence by the grand portage to the Lake of the Woods, embracing so far as the Northwest is concerned, the entire region to the eastward of the Mississippi river. The maps which ac- companied this treaty left no doubt that the whole of Michigan, as at present constituted, was within the United States. Military posts were garrisoned, however, by British troops, and continued under the do- minion of Great Britain for many years after that date. The British forces showed no inclination to vacate the fort at Detroit, and General Washington sent a messenger to Governor Haldimand to establish a date for the actual surrender of the western posts. Haldimand wrote in a respectful tone to the effect that he could not consider the matter of vacating these posts in the absence of positive orders from his maj- esty. Preparatory to taking possession of the country, and in order to avoid collision with the Indian tribes, who owned the soil, treaties were made with them from time to time (of which more is said on a subse- quent page), in which they ceded to the United States their title to their lands. But the territory thus secured by treaties with Great Britain, and with the Indian tribes-and concerning which we had thus established an amicable understanding-was many years sequestered from our possession. In spite of the claim by Congress for the actual
Hosted by Google
25
EARLY JURISDICTION
possession of the western country, in spite of the agitation on the part of officials of our government for the carrying out of the treaties in good faith, the British government took no action whatever. Governor Haldimand shielded himself behind his lack of instructions, and so mat- ters remained for years in this unsatisfactory condition.
There seems to be some ground for belief that this was a deliber- ate policy, founded upon the expectation or hope that something might turn up in the interest of Great Britain through which that government could continue its occupancy indefinitely. It is known that Washing- ton harbored some such idea. There were still opportunities for com- plications in this state of affairs as between the two countries. No one could foresee what questions might arise or whither the course of events might lead. There were plenty of emissaries of Great Britain working among the Indian tribes, seeking to hold or attach them to British interests and to enlarge a naturally unfriendly feeling against Americans. This very feeling of the Indians was offered as a pretext for maintaining an armed force in the country. It was argued that the safety of the whites could only be assured by the presence of a strong military guard. This the United States had not undertaken to supply. Hence, it devolved upon Great Britain to preserve the peace. In view of the known efforts to foment Indian hostility this argument was transparently deceptive. There were evidences of intrigues on the part of Great Britain in dealing with her former Indian allies, who had suffered severe losses and who felt that they had not been ade- quately rewarded for all their sacrifices. So the Indian question cut a considerable figure in the determination of Governor Haldimand to hang on to the western posts as long as possible.
The British government urged as a further excuse the failure of Americans to fulfill that part of the treaty protecting the claims of British subjects against citizens of the United States, but, from the "aid and comfort" rendered the Indians in the campaigns of Harmer, St. Clair, and Wayne, the apparent prime cause was to defeat the efforts of the United States to extend their power over the country and tribes north of the Ohio, and continue to give the British the advantage of the fur trade, which, from their earlier relations with these tribes, they had possessed and wished to retain. This trade had been of immense value to England. She could not see these profits slip from her trad- ers without a struggle to save them. The region included within the new boundaries of the United States had been the most profitable source of supply. In 1786 a council of Indian nations northwest of the Ohio river was held at the Huron village near the mouth of the Detroit riv- er. This was attended by representatives of all the leading tribes. They were troubled about the boundary between their possessions and those of the United States. They maintained that the Ohio was not to be crossed by the Americans. They also insisted that their rights had not been properly considered in the treaty between the United States and Great Britain. It seemed to be the feeling of the savages that the United States had neglected to show the attention to their wishes which the same demanded. A grand council was held at Fort Harmer, Marietta, in 1787, which formulated a treaty tending to settle in a sat- isfactory manner the points in controversy. The ultimate result of the complaints of the Indians and the international difficulty with England
Hosted by Google
-
26 HISTORY OF KENT COUNTY, MICHIGAN
induced and led to the campaigns of 1790-91-94, ostensibly against the Indians, but substantially against them and their British allies. Mat- ters in controversy with the Indians were finally and definitely disposed of at Greenville, in the present state of Ohio, in 1795, when by treaty the title to large tracts of lands included in Michigan was confirmed to the United States.
Virginia, however, while still adhering to her claim of sovereignty over the northwestern country, on March 1, 1784, ceded the territory . to the United States, and immediately Congress entered seriously upon the consideration of the problem of providing a government for the vast domain. Its deliberations resulted in the famous "Compact of 1787," and under this organization Gen. Arthur St. Clair was appoint- ed governor. It might not be out of place here to call attention to the fact that this compact, in two provisions, which were inspired by Thomas Jefferson, guaranteed to all the right of religious freedom and prohibited slavery in the territory. Hence the citizens of Kent County, in common with the citizens of Michigan, and those of the sister states that were carved from Virginia's grant, can feel a pardonable pride that never, under any American jurisdiction of this domain, has a witch been burned at the stake, or a slave been sold on the auction block. It should be understood, however, that slavery had always existed under the French regime in Canada or New France, to which Michigan also had belonged. Nor did it cease under British rule, for as late as 1782 the commandant at Detroit, Major Arent Schuyler De Peyster, caused an enumeration to be made of the people and property of Detroit, and in the "survey" are found these two items: "Male slaves, 78; female slaves, IOI." It appears that Indians as well as negroes were held in slavery in spite of the Ordinance of 1787, which totally prohibited it. There is a tradition that even as late as the coming of John T. Mason, as secretary of the territory in 1831, he brought some domestic slaves with him from Virginia, and it is not improbable that a few domestic servants continued with the old masters down to the time of the adop- tion of the State Constitution. As late as 1807 Judge Woodward re- fused to free a negro man and woman on a writ of habeas corpus, holding in effect that as they had been slaves at the time of the sur- render, in 1796, there was something in Jay's treaty that forbade their release. But it is proper to say that after the Ordinance of 1787 took effect there was no legal slavery in Michigan.
Though Michigan was included within the provisions of the Ordi- nance of 1787, they could not at once be practically applied owing to the fact that the country was still under British control. In 1792 Que- bec was divided into Upper and Lower Canada, with the seat of gov- ernment of the latter at Toronto, then known as York. Sir Guy Carleton, as Lord Dorchester, had again become Governor General of the whole province, with John Graves Simcoe Lieutenant-Governor, of Upper Canada. The Quebec act, so far as related to this region, was repealed and all legislation under it was abrogated. Permanent courts were established in the regular way and a form of civil government was set up for the first time at Detroit and Michilimackinac.
To encourage the Indians in self-defense and incidentally as a protection to Detroit, Simcoe built a fort at the rapids of the Maumee and garrisoned it with British soldiers. He was evidently persuaded,
Hosted by Google
-
27
EARLY JURISDICTION
even so late as 1794, as was apparently Governor Carleton also, that the prospects were favorable for Great Britain to continue holding the country. But in that very year their hopes must have been blasted, for Jay's treaty, made in September, 1794, stipulated that all the western posts within the territory belonging to the United States should be surrendered by June 1, 1796. In spite of this, however, some of the local representatives of British occupation still sought to postpone the inevitable through Indian hostility which they lent their efforts to pro- mote. While there were some disaffected savages ready to take up arms in behalf of British interests, the councils were divided. Never- theless, there were troubles of a sufficiently serious character to call for the energetic efforts of Gen. Anthony Wayne, and a considerable army. Several bloody engagements took place, in which militia and volunteers from Detroit participated, one of them almost under the gates of the British fort on the Maumee. When the news of Jay's treaty came some of the natives were shrewd enough to see that with a definite date set for the surrender of the country there was small pros- pect of annulling a solemn treaty made and confirmed by the govern- ment of the United States and Great Britain, and they were ready to agree to a permanent peace. Then followed the treaty of Greenville, as already stated, and the end of hostilities.
The ratifications of Jay's treaty having been exchanged, a messen- ger was at once despatched to Lord Dorchester at Quebec, with a demand that its provisions be carried into effect. This time there was no hesitancy in acceding to the demand. The necessary orders for the evacuation of the western posts were issued, and upon the return to Philadelphia of the messenger they were at once put into the hands of General Wayne. They were duly forwarded by him to Lieut .- Col. John Francis Hamtramck, at Fort Miami, to be carried into effect. He despatched Capt. Moses Porter with sixty-five men fully armed and equipped to take possession of Detroit. The detachment arrived on July 11, 1796, and on that day Col. Richard England, then in com- mand of the garrison, lowered the British colors from the flag-staff at Fort Lernoult and Captain Porter ran up the Stars and Stripes. Thus, after long and vexatious delays, the sovereignty of the United States was established over Michigan. Colonel Hamtramck, with his entire command, arrived at Detroit two days later and assumed military au- thority over the post and the town. General Wayne himself came in a few weeks with the powers of a civil commissioner as well as those of a military commander, and remained throughout the summer, busied in getting into operation the governmental machinery. So, for the first time it could be definitely and positively said that Michigan had ceased to be a British province and had attained the dignity of alleg- iance to the United States.
As has been previously stated, Virginia claimed the whole north- west to the Mississippi under her colonial charter of 1609, which gave her a front on the Atlantic 200 miles north and 200 miles south from Point Comfort, "and all that space and circuit of land lying from the sea-coast of the precinct aforesaid up into the land, throughout from sea to sea, west and northwest." It will be readily seen that under this charter she could claim almost anything between the two oceans, north of Cape Fear river. New York, by virtue of a treaty with the Six
Hosted by Google
28
HISTORY OF KENT COUNTY, MICHIGAN
Nations of New York, laid claim to all the country the said Indians had overrun, south to the Cumberland mountains, and west to the Mississippi, but it is very questionable whether Michigan could be brought within her claim, and it never became a practical question. And finally, Massachusetts had a colonial charter extending on the Atlantic border from the Connecticut limit of 42 degrees 2 minutes to a point "three English myles to the northward of said river called Monomack alias Merrymack" and "throughout the mayne landes there from the Atlantic and Western sea and ocean on the east parte to the South Sea on the west parte." This would have carried the projected north line of the Massachusetts claim, if extended due west, to about the north line of Oakland county, or near the latitude of Port Huron and Grand Rapids. The task of the Congress of the Confederation was to unite as many of these claims as possible in the hands of the United States. The first and most important thing to be done was to secure cessions from each of the individual States having claims on the western lands. In doing this aid came in a most unexpected way. It is necessary to premise that, by the "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union," it was provided that the said Articles should not be- come operative and binding until ratified by each of the thirteen states. On Feb. 22, 1779, Delaware, the twelfth state, ratified, leaving Maryland only yet to ratify in order to complete the Confederation.
Maryland demanded, as the condition of her ratification of the Ar- ticles, an amendment giving Congress power to fix the western limits of those states claiming to the Mississippi, and as early as December, 1778, the legislature of Maryland adopted a "Declaration" to the effect that "Maryland will ratify the Confederation when it is so amended as to give full power to Congress to ascertain and fix the western limits of these states claiming to extend to the Mississippi." This document was presented to Congress, Jan. 6, 1779. This was followed by "Instructions to Maryland Delegates," presented May 21, of the same year. The completion of the Confederation' hung on the action of Maryland, and she stood fast and refused to ratify unless the desired amendment was made. Virginia adopted a counter declaration, in which she laid down the proposition that "the United States hold no territory but in right of some one individual State of the Union," and further declared that the setting aside of this principle "would end in bloodshed among the states." It would require a very long chapter to give anything like a full history of the long struggle by which New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Connecticut were finally led to cede to the United States, as trustees for all the States, the lands which they severally claimed "west of the mountains." But it may be sum- marized briefly as follows :
New York led the way, by the passage of an Act, Jan. 17, 1780, "For facilitating the completion of the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union among the United States of America," by which her delegates were authorized to limit her western boundaries, and to cede the surplus of her claim to the United States, for the use and benefit of all such states as should become members of the Federal Alliance. On March 1, 1781, the New York delegates executed a deed of cession, of all her territory west of her present west line, on the meridian of the most westerly bend of Lake Ontario. On the same
Hosted by Google
29
EARLY JURISDICTION
day the delegates of the State of Maryland ratified and signed the Ar- ticles of Confederation, thus completing the Confederation. But al- ready, on Jan. 2, 1781, Virginia had yielded to the pressure of Con- gress and the non-claimant States and had by act of her legislature resolved to cede the territory northwest of the Ohio river for the com- mon benefit, but she placed this cession on such conditions of acknowl- edgment of her title to the transmontane lands and of guarantee of her remaining territory, as rendered it impossible for Congress, represent- ing all the States, to accept. But on Oct. 20, 1783, Virginia made a new or amended cession, obviating the most important objections, and on March 1, 1784, her cession was accepted by Congress. On Nov. 13, 1784, the General Court of Massachusetts authorized her delegates to execute cessions of her lands west of the Hudson river. And on April 19, 1785, just ten years after the day when the "embat- tled farmers" stood on the green in front of the Lexington meeting- house and at Concord bridge, where they "fired the shot heard round the world," Samuel Holton and Rufus King, her delegates in Con- gress, executed, and on the same day Congress accepted the cession of all her right, title and claim to lands west of the meridian of the westerly bend of Lake Ontario, the same being the west line of New York state.
All these pretensions of sovereignty and conflictions of authority were aside from the claims of the real inhabitants of the country. The Iroquois Indians, or Six Nations, laid claim to the entire extent of ter- ritory bordering on the Ohio river and northward, basing their con- tention upon the assumption that they had conquered it and held it by right of conquest. In 1722 a treaty had been made at Albany, N. Y., between the Iroquois and English, by which the lands west of the Allegheny mountains were acknowledged to belong to the Iroquois by reason of their conquests from the Eries, Conoys, Tongarias, etc., but this claim was extinguished by the terms of the treaty of Fort Stanwix, concluded Oct. 22, 1784. Article III of this treaty provided for a line to be drawn four miles east from the carrying path on Lake On- tario, parallel with the Niagara river to Lake Erie and along the north boundary of Pennsylvania, to the west boundary, thence south to the Ohio river. The six nations were to hold to that line, and all west of that line they yielded to the United States. But there were tribes and nations settled on these western lands, who did not admit the right or power of the Six Nations to dispose of the title to their lands. So a separate treaty must be made with them, or the settlers in the Ohio country would experience the horrors of savage warfare on their set- tlements. The treaty of Fort McIntosh, in 1785, was intended to quiet the claims of the Delawares, Wyandots, Ottawas, and Chippewas, in the Ohio valley. The Shawnees relinquished their claims under the provisions of the treaties of Fort Finney, Jan. 9, 1789, by the treaty of Greenville, and various other treaties from that date until 1818. It is a notable fact that every foot of Michigan soil was ac- quired from the Indians through treaty or purchase, and, when com- pared with methods followed in other sections of America, the means employed were decidedly honorable. True, some of these treaties, as for instance, the one concluded at Greenville, were entered into at the close of long and bloody conflict, when the Indians had been conquered
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.