USA > Missouri > A History of Missouri from the Earliest Explorations and Settlements Until the Admission of the state into the union, Volume III > Part 6
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
For three successive years he received the highest proof of the confidence of his fellow-citizens, by being elected a delegate to represent them in the General Assembly of this state, a station which, even his political opponents acknowl- edge, he filled with eminent ability. Possessing a liberal and energetic mind and correct classical taste, he distinguished himself at the bar and in the senate as an orator, a civilian and statesman; and his correct and gentlemanly conduct ensured him the respect and esteem of his associates, in both situations even when differing from him in political sentiments. While his talent, integrity and activity raised him high in public estimation, his social virtues and friendly disposition endeared him to a wide circle of acquaintances in private life, whose attachment to him increased with their intimacy, as it afforded them opportunity of knowing his worth and spirit."
He was adjutant of the twenty-seventh regiment and shortly before the action in which he was killed he addressed a short speech to the soliders, which it is said had much to do with the steady resistance to the attack of the enemy so honorable to the regiment. While in the active performance of his duty he
43
PENROSE
The third member of this Board of Commissioners was Clement Biddle Penrose.16 He arrived in St. Louis in December, 1805, from Philadelphia. He was a man of considerable property when he came to St. Louis and invested his means in town lots and lands, but these investments proving unprofitable he gradually became so reduced in circumstances that at the time of his death, May 15, 1829, he held the position of justice of the peace.17 After his death his widow with two daughters and a son, Clement Biddle, removed to Jefferson parish, Louisiana, where the mother and two daughters died. Clement Biddle returned to Philadelphia after the death of his mother, and there attained a prominent position. The Pen- rose family was cultured and refined and somewhat exclusive and hence probably Billon says, "the ladies in this family were very aristocratic in their ideas, priding themselves very much on their lineage."
This commission thus constituted met December 1, 1805, with the exception of Penrose, who did not arrive until December 4, in St. Louis. In the beginning it seemed that those favoring an indiscriminate confirmation of land claims, and claiming big land grants, greatly influenced the commissioners. Charles Gratiot received a musket or rifle ball through the head which killed him. At his death he was about forty-three years of age. He left a widow and five small children.
1 Clement Biddle Penrose was the only surviving child of James Penrose by his wife Sarah Biddle and was born at Philadelphia, February 20, 1771. He was married at Trinity church, New York City, to Anne Howard, daughter of Major Charles Bingham by his wife Anne Howard, daughter of Sheffield Howard. His boyhood was cradled amidst the scenes of the Revolution, and in his early childhood he was elected as one of the two youthful standard-bearers to one of the first companies raised in Philadelphia. Driven from there when the city fell into the hands of the invading foe, he accompanied his widowed mother and uncle Colonel Clement Biddle to Valley Forge. Mr. Penrose enjoyed the advantages of a liberal education, part of which he received in Europe, where he went in 1788 with his mother, and step-father Rudolph Tiller. Returning to Philadelphia, he was commissioned by Governor Mifflin, ensign of a company of light infantry in the seventh battalion of the city and Liberties militia. In 1803 he was a candidate for Congress, on the Democratic ticket, but failed of an election. In 1805 he was commissioned one of the Land com- missioners of Louisiana Territory, and removed to St. Louis. General James Wilkinson married a sister of Mr. Penrose's mother.
His oldest son, Charles Bingham Penrose in 1819 returned from St. Louis to Philadelphia where he finished his law studies, settled in Carlyle and became eminent at the bar and as a politician. In 1841 he was appointed Solicitor of the Treasury by President Harrison and held this office until the close of Presi- dent Tyler's administration, and then resumed the practice of the law in Phila- delphia. He died April 6, 1857. Senator Boies Penrose of Pennsylvania is a descendant of Clement B. Penrose.
17 Billon's Annals of St. Louis, vol. 2, p. 217. He particularly explains that, "A long life of idleness and extravagant living gradually reduced his means."
44
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
was elected clerk and Marie Philip Leduc translator for the board, defeating Barthelemi Cousin for this position. Gratiot and Leduc were both closely identified with the coterie that surrounded the Lieutenant-Governors Trudeau and DeLassus when they so lavishly distributed the royal domain without authority. Leduc had been engaged in antedating many concessions made by DeLassus. Calvin Adams and William Sullivan were appointed ministerial officers of the commission. William C. Carr, on the 20th of December, appeared as agent of the United States. On the 23d of the month the board thought it time to forward to the Treasury Department an esti- mate of its probable expenses, and in which the monthly rent for the room in which the commission met is set down as $12 and the necessary wood to keep the room warm is estimated at fifty loads at 75 cents a load. CHARLES GRATIOT A compensation for the ministerial officers of $30 a month, in the opinion of the board, was not deemed "unreason- able."
The commission was now well at work and soon ascertained that its task would be very difficult, and so advised the authorities at Washington and that it "would be a matter of importance also to be furnished with a correct copy of the Spanish territorial laws which we doubt the possibility of obtaining here." What was, and what was not the Spanish law, evidently began to loom up as a problem, hence the request for "correct" copies of the Spanish colonial laws. Whether these "correct" copies were ever furnished is not recorded.
In a letter addressed to Gallatin, the Secretary of the Treasury, William C. Carr, the agent of the United States to investigate the land claims, fully describes the confusion existing as to the rights of the lead miners in the Ste. Genevieve district. Under the Spanish law all intruders on the royal domain could be removed summarily by the commandants of the several districts, but the people of the district of Ste. Genevieve contended that they had a right to dig mineral on the king's domain under the former government, by custom; that under that section of the Act of Congress which pro- vided that "All laws, usages and customs of the Spanish govern- ment not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States should be continued in force," they still retained the right of
45
LEAD MINES
digging on the public lands; and hence Major Hunt, commandant for that district, was in doubt whether they ought to be removed as unauthorized settlers or intruders on the public land. Carr says that General Wilkinson thought proper to correct Major Hunt, and ordered Colonel Hammond, the commandant at St. Louis, to go into Major Hunt's district and proclaim to the people his order prohibiting them from digging mineral any longer on the public lands, and that when Major Hunt arrived at the mines he found the people in such a state of agitation concerning the prohibition, that he extended the permission of digging mineral on the lands of the United States for twenty days longer, and that about the expiration of this time, Governor Wilkinson having changed his mind on the subject, issued a counter-proclamation giving the people liberty to commence mining again on the public land. Carr then continuing gives a very interesting account of the productiveness of these lead mines, the value of the lead extracted, and how these mines might be made valuable to the government. He says:
"It is certainly not my province to determine whether such a custom did in fact exist under the Spanish government, or whether if it did it is continued by the Act of Congress. I can only state that whatever the grounds are upon which miners are permitted to continue their operation on public land it appears to me highly meriting the notice of government. Because, the quantity of mineral obtained from public land is enormous indeed and would certainly be no small source of revenue to the Treasury of the U. S. All the mineral that is obtained comes from the public land, those parts of the mines covered by private claims being preserved by the owner to carry on the manufacture of lead by purchasing the mineral obtained from the public land. It was not uncommon this year after the proclamation of the governor forbidding miners to encroach further on the public land and previous to the time which the prohibition took effect, that single miners obtained for one day's labor from $50 to $100. This was done at Mine à Breton part of which is claimed by Moses Austin, Esquire, and serves to discover the fertility of the mines and what might be done by miners who had a proper stimulus applied to induce them to labor. I estimate the mineral raised last summer at this time alone to be worth at least $50,000. The price of mineral claimed and delivered at the furnace is $2 per hundred weight, and lead is from $6 to $6.50 and none to be had. As fast as it is smelted it is exported. To estimate the probable amount of revenue which would annually flow into the Treasury of the U. S. for working only two of the mines, to-wit: that part of Mine a Breton not included in Mr. Austin's grant and that part of Mine la Motte also uncovered by private claims (however much of this mine is claimed and by what particular species of title I have not yet been able to ascer- tain) would be utterly impossible because it depends on so many contingencies. Yet I am clearly of opinion in the course of a few years it would discharge no inconsiderable part of the purchase money for Louisiana. Therefore, it strikes me as highly improper that the United States should be thus deprived of one of the greatest sources of wealth arising from the purchase.
I would therefore respectfully submit whether it would not be good policy in the government not only to take some immediate steps towards terminating this rapid depreciation of the value of the public mines, but also whether it would not be good policy either to make some arrangements towards working
.
46
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
them or letting them to the highest bidder, and whether it would not be best, at the same time giving these people who have always had permission to dig on the public land under the former government, and who have been accustomed to obtain the greatest part of their living in that manner, the greatest possible satisfaction by permitting them still to dig the mineral, but upon condition that all the mineral obtained should be deposited in the hands of an agent to be appointed for that purpose and who should further be specially charged with the care of the mines and to pay out to each miner the usual price for clean mineral delivered at the furnace, which is as I before stated $2 per hundred weight, and have the mineral smelted for the benefit of the U. S. This might be effected very easily because all the French miners will be willing to receive merchandise for their mineral, which might be furnished by government and is done now by one or two individuals who keep merchandise for that purpose, who have erected furnaces and smelted the mineral for their own benefit." 18
Gallatin writing to Jefferson, says:
"On the subject of the papers relating to the lead mines, I believe some decision will be necessary. Shall the people be permitted to continue digging or not? The Spanish government was both despotic and lax, neither respecting individual rights nor protecting its own. The sooner the inhabitants are taught that our principles are the reverse, the better; and whether it might not be proper to instruct General Wilkinson' to remove or forbid digging where no title appears, but a permission is submitted. By the Act of last year, the com- missioners are directed to make to the Secretary of the Treasury a report on the subject to be laid before Congress. Nothing has yet been received from them and in the meanwhile the habit of occupying and wasting public property under the government of the United States takes deeper root." 19
The commissioners apparently were considered too liberal by Mr. Carr at this period, and he made continuous complaint of their action to the Secretary of the Treasury. In a letter dated August 15, 1806, Gallatin writes the President :
"I enclose a letter from Mr. Carr, the land agent of the United States in upper Louisiana, in which he continues to complain of the bias of the commis- sioners in favor of claims which he considers as unfounded or suspicious. After making proper allowance for the party spirit in that territory, it still appears to me that the interest of the United States will be materially injured by the conduct of the commissioners, and since Congress have by their Act of last session pro- vided that the board should "In their several proceedings and decisions conform to such instructions as the Secretary of the Treasury may, with the approbation of the President of the United States, transmit to them in relation thereto," I have prepared a rough sketch of instructions, intended to be finally submitted to your consideration, but which I request you will previously correct, adding to it or rejecting such as you please, and on its being returned a fair copy will be transmitted for your final approval. They all appear to me to be consistent with the Act of 2d March, 1805, and with equity; one exception only on which I have some doubts. The last proviso of the 2d section of the Act, which section confirms the claim of actual settlers who inhabited the lands claimed on or before the 20th of December, 1803, enacts that "This donation shall not be made to any person who claims any other tract of land in the said territory by virtue of any French or Spanish grant." The question is whether the words in the roth instruction, "or by virtue of whose right land is claimed," are consistent with the true spirit of the proviso. Carr's letter will explain the reason why · those expressions have been inserted in the instructions, but I doubt their pro- priety. It may also be asked whether that part of the 9th instruction which de-
18 Jefferson Papers, 2d Series, vol. 16, No. 105.
19 Jefferson Papers, 3d Series, vol. 6, No. 3.
47
DANIEL BOONE
clares that concessions shall be rejected as fraudulent when entered under a false date in the surveyor-general's book, is not too harsh. This with all others is submitted to your consideration.20
The commissioners also issued some certificates of their pro- ceedings to claimants, and Gallatin, in 1807, wrote Jefferson that they "ought not to have given to any person certificates of their proceedings tending to give them a color of title," and under his instructions this practice thereafter ceased.
Soon the board began to inspect things more closely, instigated to this course by the inquisitive Lucas. It developed that various and sundry questions were being asked and pressed, and some of the witnesses consequently failed to appear, hence this entry on the records of the commission: "The board issued an attachment for Antonio Soulard and he was brought before the board by the con- stable of the United States, and there purged himself of contempt by showing that he fell from a horse the night before he was to appear and was therefore detained at the house of James Richard- son, the deputy-surveyor." When he appeared and was examined, he however refused to answer some questions propounded, nor did he ever answer these questions.
Daniel Boone in 1806, accompanied by his son Nathaniel Boone, appeared before the commissioners, saying he was invited in 1798 by Trudeau to remove with his family to upper Louisiana, and that he was appointed by DeLassus as commandant of Femme Osage. At the time he appeared before the commissioners he was seventy years of age, his wife being sixty-eight years of age. He gave as his excuse for not cultivating land granted to him, that DeLassus told him that he need not trouble himself about cultivating his land, being commandant of the district it would not be required of him. The commissioners, nevertheless, rejected his claim. Evidently the com- missioners were now construing the rules and ordinances as to land- grants strictly. In Boone's case, however, Congress afterward by special Act perfected his title. But James Bridges and one or two others, seeing it stated in the papers that Boone had received a grant from Congress, hastened from Kentucky to Missouri with ancient claims against him, originating out of titles made by him that under the decisions of the courts of Kentucky were held invalid, and secured payment of their demands, Boone yielding up this Spanish grant thus confirmed.21
" Jefferson Papers, 3d Series, vol. 6, No. 20.
" Draper's Notes, vol. 6, in Wisconsin Historical Society.
-
48
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
In accordance with a communication received from the Secretary of the Treasury and the attorney-general, the commissioners made a change of the rule first adopted, and under which on authority of the second section of the Act of 1805, claimants who had not re- ceived Spanish grants, but made claim by reason of actual settlement were allowed a larger amount of land than was permitted under the Spanish rules and regulations. The board accordingly resolved "that the quantity of land to be granted to each settler, (under said section), shall in the future be in the same ratio as provided for by the Spanish law and usages, and shall be restrained to one mile square."22 Shortly after this, Mathew Wing, who had been appointed by the board, was expelled from his important office "as constable of the United States."28 Why, does not appear.
In June, 1806, the board met in Ste. Genevieve and again met there in November, 1807. Commissioner Bates was subsequently delegated to take testimony of claims at Cape Girardeau and New Madrid. Lucas took the testimony of claimants at St. Charles.
The board, as can be well believed, did not give satisfaction to all the interested parties. Some of the members of the board seem to have been more unpopular than others, as appears from the following entry on the minutes of the board: "While the board was in the discharge of its duty this morning, Rufus Easton, late judge of the territory, entered the room where the commissioners were seated upon the bench, and immediately in sight and full view of all the commissioners, came up to James L. Donaldson, Esq., with a bludgeon and calling him many opprobrious epithets struck him with great violence over the arm and head several times, nor desisted until Mr. Donaldson descended from the bench and got pos- session of a sword cane of .which he drew the sword. The board taking into most serious consideration this outrage of the laws and insult to their authority, apprehensive of the alarming consequences which may flow from so dreadful a precedent, satisfied that they have the inherent right to protect their persons from outrage while in the discharge of their duty, by process of commitment do adjudge and order that a warrant be issued against the said Rufus Easton directed to the sheriff of St. Louis." The warrant was accordingly issued, ordering the arrest of Easton and his commitment "to the common jail of the town of St. Louis" during fourteen days, at which time
22 Minutes of Board of Commissioners, vol. I, p. 257.
2 Minutes of Commissioners, vol. I, P. 307.
49
SECRETARIES OF BOARD
"he will be admitted to make such reparation as may be satisfactory to the board, or be remanded until such reparation be made." But what reparation Easton made does not appear on the record.
It is circumstances such as these that indicate the distracted condition, the feuds, contentions, lawlessness, and greed for land, that then prevailed in the territory. Such events convulsed society, destroyed the confidence of the old inhabitants of the country and caused them to regret the change of government. Many of the lead- ing Americans were always armed with either dirks or pistols, and the notorious desperado John Smith T. is a fair sample of the adventurers, land speculators and bullies that for a time made it customary for the judges on the bench to have pistols and ataghans by their side. The conduct of Easton in assailing Donaldson while in the performance of his judicial functions, plainly indicated the necessity of being prepared for any emer- gency by judicial officers. Donaldson shortly after this incident resigned.
Charles Gratiot remained secretary of the board until July, 1807, when from the min- utes in the records it appears that his services "were dispensed with." This would seem to indicate that the board was then eman- cipating itself from the influence of the large Trudeau and DeLassus land claimants. William Christy was appointed as his suc- WILLIAM CHRISTY cessor." Christy was succeeded in 1808 by Thomas Fiveash Riddick, originally from Virginia, and who was in every way competent. He was the ablest clerk of the board during its existence. Frederick Bates succeeded Donaldson as a member of the board. He was a native of Virginia, born in Gooch- land county, June 23, 1777, and only enjoyed the benefits of a limited education. At the age of 20 years he went to Detroit, where he engaged in the mercantile business, and also acquired a familiarity with the French language, customs and habits of the French habitants there, which proved of great value to him in his new position in
" Wm. Christy, born at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Jan. 10, 1784, moved to Kentucky as a boy of 15 years of age, was with St. Clair in his campaign against the Indians in northwest Ohio, served under Wayne in 1794, came to St. Louis in 1804, appointed one of the judges of the Court of Common Pleas and Quarter Sessions; auditor of public accounts for the territory; register of the land office for a number of years. He died in St. Louis in 1837.
50
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
the Louisiana territory. In 1805 he was appointed by Jefferson as United States Judge of the Michigan territory, but in the following year removed to St. Louis and was appointed secretary of the Louisi- ana territory under the administration of General James Wilkinson, then governor. Bates published a compilation of the laws of Louisi- ana in 1808, the first book published in Missouri. After the ad- mission of Missouri he was elected second governor, succeeding Governor Alexander McNair. He died in office in 1825. He married Mary Ball, daughter of Colonel John .S. Ball, and lived on a farm in Bon Homme township in St. Louis county, at the time of his death, riding on horseback once a week to St. Charles, then the seat of government, to attend to his official duties as governor. A circumstance duly recorded in the minutes of the board throws some light on his true character and evidences a somewhat dema- gogic spirit. It seems that the clerk of the board in speaking of the commission used the word "honorable" before his name, to which he objected, and therefore it was solemnly FREDERICK BATES resolved that henceforth the commissioners or any one of them should be styled in the minutes of the board, or in any official action, by their Christian and family name, adding to it the word "Commissioner," and not otherwise. The resolution was adopted by the vote of Lucas and Bates, Penrose voting in the negative.25 Apparently Penrose was not disposed to lower either his own dignity or the dignity of his office in order to gain cheap popularity. On another occasion, when Bates was Governor of Missouri, he was invited to attend the reception of La Fayette, to take place in St. Louis, but declined to have anything to do with the matter, because no appropriation had been made by the state to entertain him in a manner becoming the dignity of the state. So the governor of the state on that memorable occasion was conspicuous by his absence. The total expense incurred by the city of St. Louis to entertain this distinguished guest on that historic visit amounted to exactly $37.26
The commission made a final report in 1811, confirming in a most liberal manner all legitimate claims, but rejecting all manifestly
25 Minutes of the Commissioners, vol. 3, p. 476.
287 Darby's Personal Recollections, P. 57.
51
HUNT'S MINUTES
illegal, unauthorized and fraudulent claims. All the books and papers of the commission were transmitted to Washington, and thus closed the first chapter of these Spanish land claims.
After this report was made, on the suggestion of Penrose and Riddick, by the Act of 1812, the right and title of the United States to certain town lots, outlots and claims in and adjacent to St. Louis, Portage des Sioux, St. Charles, St. Ferdinand, Village à Robert, Carondelet, Ste. Genevieve, New Madrid and Little Prairie in Mis- souri were confirmed to the inhabitants of these villages. And in 1834 by a supplementary act all claimants to lots and outlots in such villages were required within eighteen months from date of said Act to prove the "inhabitation, cultivation and possession" of claims to lots so as to distinguish between the private or individual and vacant property in such towns and villages as had been granted these towns and villages by the Act of 1812. Such proof, it was provided, should be made before the recorder within eighteen months, and accordingly Theodore Hunt, the recorder, began to take testimony in February, 1825, and this testimony has been pre- served in what is now known as "Hunt's Minutes." The Act of 1812 further provided that the claims to land in virtue of settlement and cultivation which were not confirmed because permission to settle by the Spanish officers had not been proven, or because the land claimed, though inhabited, was not cultivated on December 20, 1803, should be confirmed in case it should appear that it was cultivated prior to December 20, 1803, and cultivated eight months thereafter. The recorder of land titles was vested with the same power in relation to claims as the board of commissioners had under the former laws, respecting claims filed prior to July 1, 1808, except that his decision was subject to revision by Congress.27 The time within which to file claims was again extended by this act to Decem- ber 1, 1812, and then by a supplement again to January 14, 1814. By Act of 1813, in all cases where the commissioners had reduced the amount of land, Congress confirmed to the claimants the full quantity claimed, but not exceeding six hundred and forty acres.28 Under Act of 1814 all incomplete French and Spanish grants or con- cessions, granted prior to 1803, for land in every case where it ap- peared that the concession contained a special location or had been located prior to the date mentioned "by a surveyor authorized by
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.