USA > Missouri > A history of Missouri from the earliest explorations and settlements until the admission of the state into the union, Volume II > Part 25
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
13 Brackenridge's Views of Louisiana, p. 236.
14 Charleville vs. Chouteau, 18 Mo., p. 505. This property is now in the heart of St. Louis and worth untold millions. Madam Verdon died in 1796;
200
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
commandants of Ste. Geneveive, New Bourbon and Cape Girardeau was assigned 150 pesos each annually, but the other commandants served without pay, although perhaps at greater expense on account of receiving the Indians and entertaining them on their visits. Tru- deau thought they were entitled to a salary.
In practice the administration of the laws was simple. After hear- ing the stories of both parties, the decree of the Commandant or the Syndic was promulgated, and to that decree, with rare exceptions, all parties submitted.15 It is also true that during the entire period of the Spanish occupation, only a few cases were carried by appeal from upper Louisiana to the Governor-General at New Orleans. The despotism, if so it may be designated, exercised by these civil and military officers must have been mild and beneficent in character.
Under this judicial system we are told "judgment and execution might be had in four days," yet, by special indulgence, which it seems was always extended, time was generally given to a delinquent defendant so that he could pay without distress or sacri- ficing his property. To illustrate: Andrew Ramsay secured a judg- ment against Edward Robertson before the Post Commandant of Cape Girardeau, but Robertson was not able to pay, and in order to secure a stay of execution, addressed the following letter copied literally in English to this officer :
"To Don Louis Lorimier, Commander Civil and Military of the Post at Cape Girardeau.
Honoured Sir;
In answer to the order given to Mrs. Ramsay by me, the note Mr. Ram- say has on me was due in the fall of 1797, which I was ready and willing to dis- charge it at that time and Mr. Ramsay purchased the note in the fall of 1798, and if he had sent the note from Kentucky at that time, I was able to have paid it without any damage to me; but his knowing that corn would be scarce in this settlement at this season of the year, must certainly have been his reasons for not sending it forward until now, and as this advantage is taken of me, I am not able to pay the corn at this season, as it is not to be had in this country and it was not my neglect that the corn was not paid at the season that it became due. I am in hope that your honor will allow me the same season of the year to pay it as the note became due. Honoured Sir, if you will please to wait until Mr. Ramsay comes home and he will take any property, in lieu of the corn, that I can spare, I will immediately on his arrival pay him up. I expect he will be at home himself in a short time, and is a reasonable man. But as for Mrs. Ramsay, she is destitute of anything that is consistent with reason, and Sir, you know very well that I have summoned a number of the inhabitants that was indebted to
her maiden name was Victoire Richelet; she married Joseph Verdon in 1772 and separated from him in 1775. The piece of ground or lot was situated behind the fort adjoining the land of Chouteau and Marly, and the property was valued at the time of her death, it seems, at ten dollars.
15 De Bow's Review for 1847, p. 33.
201
CRIMES
me before you in order to recover payment of them to answer my contracts and am not one dollar the better off, as they are not able to pay me. Therefore, I pray your Honor will consider my case with them and give all of us time to make the produce before we can pay it.
13th May, 1799."
his EDOURD X ROBERTSON. mark
It is claimed that fees, costs and legal charges were very low during the Spanish domination at St. Louis, but the cost bills in the judicial proceedings that have been preserved do not bear out this statement.16 It was notorious that the costs and expenses of every kind attendant upon litigation before the Spanish tribunals and officers at New Orleans were very great. The American settlers in this Spanish territory generally manifested little inclination to enter into litigation. Of course, during this period there were no practicing lawyers in the country, nor was forensic discussion encouraged or even tolerated.
No disposition was shown by the people generally to violate the criminal code of the province. The French attach more disgrace to legal punishment than do most other people.17 The early American settlers were awed by the dread of the " Mexican mines and the dun- geons of the Havannah." However, this threat to send to the mines was generally only a brutum fulmen, for according to Clark "if a man suffers in such a business his crime must be aggravated, and then he is only sent to the mines if devoid of friends or money to bribe his judges."18 A single instance will show how even small criminal matters in upper Louisiana were managed: In 1800 one Moses Moodey, a merchant settler, came to the house of one Griffin in the night at about eleven o'clock, and demanded "his things and a settle- ment." But Griffin said that this was no time to settle, and after some further dispute, Moodey drew his pistol, threatening both Griffin and his wife. Griffin then sprang upon Moodey, who evaded his grasp and escaped. All of this was witnessed by one Dr. Wallis. Complaint was made by Griffin to Dunegant, the Commandant of St. Ferdinand, and six militiamen were at once ordered to search for Moodey. He was duly arrested and sent to DeLassus in St. Louis where he was imprisoned. Soulard was deputed to go to St. Ferdi- nand to take the evidence, and this he did without delay. After remaining in prison a month, Moodey petitioned DeLassus for release, acknowledging his guilt, saying that this was his first offense; that
16 I Scharff's History of St. Louis, p. 301.
17 Stoddard's Louisiana, p. 283.
18 2d Wilkinson Memoirs, Extract from Daniel Clark's Memoir in Appendix.
202
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
he was under the influence of liquor; that he would pay the costs and hereafter "give no cause for complaint." In this petition Griffin joined, and accordingly Moodey was pardoned.19
It can be easily imagined that seditious language, was especially held in profound abhorrence by the constituted authorities, under such a combined military and civil judicial system. Consequently, it was only at rare intervals that the French settler, politically cowed and tamed, would allow language in derogation of the existing order of things to escape his lips, because if such language was reported to the Lieutenant-Governor or to the Commandant of the post, as it would usually be with promptitude, the punishment was swift and condign; no judge nor jury to delay matters, or the execution of the judgment. We have heretofore referred to the case of one Le Tourneau, who was banished from the society of the happy and contented early inhabitants of "Paincourt" by decree of Governor Piernas. Here is the way Governor Piernas got rid of Monsieur Le Tourneau :
"We, Don Pedro de Piernas, Captain of Infantry and Lieutenant-Gov- ernor of the Illinois settlements of his Catholic Majesty: In view of the complaint of Mr. Louis Lambert of the 15th of August against Amable Le Tourneau, a Canadian, accused of using improper and seditious language in con - tempt and derision of the ordinance of the King, published by us at the door of the church on the day of the Feast of the Assumption, and also of Mr. Joseph Labusciere of the same date of the same affect, we declare the said Amable La Tourneau duly attainted and convicted of seditious language, and a disturber of the public peace, and sentence him to ten years banishment from his Majesty's settlements, with still heavier punishment should he dis- regard this sentence, and reappear; as also to pay all the costs and expenses of this prosecution."
"Sentence executed this day - Cottin, Alquazil." 20
19 The cost-bill in this case was as follows:
Governor's fees, decree and signature, .. . 8 reals,
Governor's fees, for order to Adjutant Soulard, 8 reals,
Governor's fees, in reading affidavit, . 24 reals,
Of the cost of 12 pages, one real for four pages, 3 reals,
Signature to cost-bill, . . . 2 reals,
45 reals, or $5.62}
Soulard's fees: going out of town, 4 ducats,
· 44 reals,
Horse and feed, each 8 reals, .
16 reals,
Two taking affidavits, two ducats each, 44 reals,
Eight and one-half pages, writing 2 reals,. 17 reals,
Eight signatures, four reals each, 32 reals,
153 reals,
or $19.12
Total cost 198 reals, or $24.75.
20 1 Scharff's History of St. Louis, p. 303.
203
ARBITRATION FAVORED
But the Le Tourneau family seems to have remained, although the unfortunate Amable was exiled. After the United States acquired Louisiana, one Louis Le Tourneau dit Lafleur and his wife, Marie Bissonette, traded property with one Charles Bosseron and Theresa Brazeau, his wife, and the difference of $150.00 was settled in "deer skins at the rate of two and one half lbs. to the dollar."
Malefactors when apprehended did not fare easily before tribunals thus organized in these settlements. The following judgment, also accidentally preserved, in which Don Louis Lorimier, Commandant at Cape Girardeau, deals out summary justice to a horse thief, shows how crimes against live property were punished :
"Whereas, it evidently appears by the written depositions of William Lor- imier and Henry Sheridan, that Robert Pulliam, an inhabitant of Horse Prairie settlement, in the district of Kaskaskia, territory of the United States, hath committed a theft in this place the nineteenth day of the month, we, Don Louis Lorimier, Commander, civil and military, of the Post of Cape Girardeau, by virtue of the authority vested in us to maintain good order and administer justice in the said post, have condemned, and do hereby condemn, the said Robert Pulliam to receive thirty lashes on his bare back, and to defray the expense incurred by his prosecution, and restore the articles stolen, after which, the said Robert Pulliam is hereby ordered to depart without further delay from this post, and to appear no more therein, else he shall be liable to receive five hundred lashes at every time he shall be apprehended within the limits of our jurisdiction. We, therefore, do hereby give orders to the inhabitants of this post not to harbor the said Robert Pulliam in or near their plantations, and whenever he shall be found within the extent of this post, to apprehend and bring him before us; and every inhabitant who shall not comply with the present order shall be culpable and fined accordingly.
Given at Cape Girardeau, the twenty-fourth of July, in the year one thou- sand seven hundred and ninety nine. L. LORIMIER,"
Civil controversies were often settled by arbitration. As a case in point may be cited, the controversy between Louis Diard and Jean Datchurut, a merchant of Ste. Genevieve in 1769, involving what were at that time large interests. Diard having obtained, before Don Luis Unzaga, Governor-General at New Orleans, in January, 1770, a judgment ex parte which was about to be executed in St. Louis in upper Louisiana, it was agreed that in order to "put a stop to a suit which might be ruinous to both," the whole controversy should be referred to "three expert arbitrators, knowing their bus- iness." The men selected were, " Mr. Perrault, merchant, at present in the post of St. Louis" acting for Diard, and "Mr. Laclede Liguest, also merchant in this place" and "Mr. Lambert Lafleur, Lieutenant of Militia," as the third, in case of disagreement. After this agree- ment had been signed by the parties, before Don Pedro Piernas, Lieutenant Governor, he made the order under the date of June
204
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
Ist that "considering the foregoing claim, we order Messrs. Per- rault, Laclede and Lambert, heretofore named, will decide between Messrs. Diard and Datchurut and will make report to us of their award in the case, to be made known to whom it may concern." On June 9th the two arbitrators promptly decided the case without calling on the third man, Lambert, settling the whole controversy in- volving many complicated questions of commercial law.21
The first legal controversy within the present limits of Madison county of which we have any record, arose in 1770. Pierre Massè dit Picard and Jean Baptiste LaBastille, lead miners living at " Mine La Motte" were the plaintiffs. They had taken out 20,000 pounds of lead at this mine, when they were interrupted in their profitable work by another miner, named LaRose who forbade them mining any more, claiming that the land upon which they had worked belonged to him and that he had transferred the land to Datchurut, one of his creditors; he also took possession of the lead they had mined. Massè and LaBastille thereupon applied to Piernas for relief, alleg- ing that they did not know the land belonged to LaRose; that the land was not surveyed and the lines run until after they had brought out the lead; that LaRose could not show them his lines when ques- tioned; in short, " that the land had not been measured" and "lines established" before they mined the land. This petition was filed by them November 30, 1770, and on December Ist, Piernas ordered "that in default of LaRose having measured and marked his land, the said Picard and LaBastille may take away their lead and mineral seized by Dachurut and LaRose."
But Massè dit Picard was not so fortunate in another case, also arising in this lead district. One Pierre Dagobert was then a merchant in Ste. Genevieve; he also was engaged in operating lead mines, and therefore employed Massè as a miner and agreed to pay him one hun- dred francs a month in lead at 5 cents a pound, current price at that time, for his work. But when his time was out and he applied to Mrs. Dagobert for his pay, Mr. Dagobert being absent, she went with him to Mr. Vallé, the Post Commandant at Ste. Genevieve, who had the lead in his possession. Vallé offered payment in cash instead of the lead, lead having gone up in price. This led to a dispute in which Massè says, in his petition to the Lieutenant-Governor, he was violent- ly thrown against a trunk by Vallé, who also threatened to have him imprisoned and then directed his clerk to write on the back of his
21 [ Billon's Annals, p. IOI.
205
SPEEDY TRIALS
contract of agreement to work, an acceptance of the pay offered him by Vallé, and a relinquishment of his claim to the lead, all this over his mark of the cross. Massè's petition was filed in February, and in March the matter was referred to Charpentier for investigation and testimony was taken. A statement was made by Vallé at the instance of Piernas, and in June Lieutenant-Governor Cruzat, who in the meantime had succeeded Piernas as Governor, ordered Massè to make a public retraction and apology to Mr. Vallé for the injurious impu- tations made against him in his petiton, "in the presence of three notable citizens to be selected by Don Louis de Villars," and to suffer eight days imprisonment. In November Massè asked for permission to take the case before Governor-General at New Orleans, and this permission was granted; but the decision of Cruzat was confirmed by the Governor-General. Then in June, 1776, the Lieutenant-Governor gave notice that he had appointed Pierre Laclede, Henry Charpentier and Martin Duralde to receive the apology, and Diego Blanco and Jean Olivier, two soldiers, were appointed as witnesses, the Lieutenant- Governor fixing a day early in November for this purpose, but Vallé was sick on the day fixed and could not attend in person. He there- fore appointed Dr. Joseph Connand, at that time a merchant in St. Louis, to represent him. On the day appointed Massè declined to make an apology, saying " he had not given any offense to Mr. Vallé ;" but, apparently having reconsidered the matter, on the 12th of Nov- ember, he wrote to the Lieutenant-Governor that he "would comply with the decision in the case." Although Massè finally lost his case it is very evident that he was a sturdy and independent man, not easily awed and cowed into submission by the constituted officials, who combined executive, judicial and administrative powers, and that he did not readily surrender what he considered his rights.22
The speedy disposition of cases is illustrated in another instance. In 1780, Charles Gratiot, a merchant at Cahokia, deposited with Charles Sanguinet a lot of merchandise, which Sanguinet afterwards refused to give up, claiming that Gratiot was indebted to him. Gratiot filed what we would call a petition in replevin with Lieutenant- Governor DeLeyba on May 8th; Sanguinet replied on May 10th ; depositions were taken next day, and on May 12th Gratiot made an offer to Sanguinet to allow him to keep the goods at his (Gratiot's)
22 According to Billon, Masse died July 24, 1780, at the house of Dr. Reynal, and was buried in the graveyard which then existed on Market street east of Third street in St. Louis.
206
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
appraisement. This Sanguinet declined, but on May 16th he pro- posed that the goods be appraised by arbitrators. This Gratiot de- clined, and on May 20th Sanguinet finally refused to accept the goods at Gratiot's valuation, and on May 26th DeLeyba entered the follow- ing decree :
"All the evidence in this case having been attentively examined and duly considered, we decide that Mr. Sanguinet is not sustained in his defence; that he corruptly detained the goods of Mr. Gratiot that had been merely entrusted to his care for safe keeping, as is proven by all the evidence in the case. In consequence, we condemn the said Mr. Sanguinet in all the costs, expenses and damages of this suit, and direct him to restore to Mr. Gratiot all the merchandise, etc., deposited with him by said Gratoit for safe-keeping, under penalty of imprisonment."
The rights of laboring men who had entered into an agreement or engagement to work were then regarded lightly. If a workingman failed to work as he agreed he was liable to be arrested and sent to prison until he made up his mind to work, as he had contracted. A complaint against a laboring man is preserved in the Ste. Genevieve archives and gives us a vivid idea of how laboring men were managed then. A man by the name of Mullen had agreed in writing to work for Moses Austin, but concluded to quit for some reason or other. Austin objected and filed his petition with the Commandant of the district of Ste. Genevieve to make Mullen work as he had agreed - in words following :
"To Don Francesco Vallé, Commandant Civil and Military of Ste. Gene- vieve, &c.
Moses Austin of Ste. Genevieve has the honor to represent to you that one named Mathew Mullen, whom he engaged for one year by written contract to work at the Mines of Breton, refuses to fulfil his engagement and will not work for your petitioner.
Your petitioner therefore prays you, Sir, to order the said Mullen to fulfil his engagement and in case of refusal that he may be compelled thereto by force, and you will do justice.
At Ste. Genevieve the 29th May, 1799.
MOSES AUSTIN."
Upon this petition the Commandant endorsed the following order :
"Let the present be communicated to the party, that he may give reasons or adhere thereto. Ste. Genevieve, 29th May, 1799.
VALLÉ."
It can not be denied that however vicious the system, in many instances effective and substantial justice was meted out. The cases were not long delayed or continued from month to month. Short
207
JUDICIAL SALES
cases, short orders or decrees, and mandate to restore property, or to go to the "calaboza," as the jail of that period was generally desig- . nated, were much in favor.
Offenses against personal character, such as slander and libel, at that time appear to have been quite prevalent, in " Paincourt" (St. Louis.) Thus, one Michael Calas was cited for having defamed the reputation of Madame Montardy and dealt with in a summary way. It was decreed that he personally apologize and ask her par- don, and in addition pay a fine of twelve hundred mararedis, one half to go to the lady, and the other one half to go to the church. The order closes as follows: "and to be banished and chased away from this part of the Illinois for ten years, as a pernicious calumnia- tor and disturber of the public repose, as much for the present offense as other violences committed heretofore. To this effect he will be conducted by a detail of men beyond the bounds of this province where this sentence will be read to him by the constable of this post, enjoining on him to respect his banishment and not to re- appear under penalty of corporal chastisement if found in the pos- sessions of his Catholic Majesty." A certain Menard also, who had impeached the honor of one of the early ladies of St. Louis, was ordered to publicly disclaim the slander, and in addition con- demned to suffer "imprisonment of fifteen days as an example to others."
Many other cases relating to the women of early St. Louis came before the Lieutenant-Governor. So Joseph Robidoux was made miserable by a report, which was spread abroad, breaking up a pro- posed marriage between him and the daughter of Bequette; the slan- derous words being that his family in Canada had harbored "wicked ones." Robidoux petitioned that Bequette be compelled to disclose the informant. The Lieutenant-Governor, however dismissed the complaint and very sensibly advised all parties to hold their tongues, recommending Robidoux to secure documents from Canada establishing the respectability of his family.
The civil and military Commandants were generally vigilant in enforcing all such rules and ordinances as related to the administra- tion of public affairs in the country. No one was allowed to settle on the public domain in the country without express permit of the Post Commandants. No one, not even an old resident of the country, was permitted to travel from one village to another more than twenty miles distant without obtaining from the Post Commandant a pass-
208
HISTORY OF MISSOURI
port, in which was specifically stated the road to be travelled going and returning.23
Judicial sales always took place on Sunday at the church door, at the close of Mass, at 12 o'clock noon. Everybody was supposed to attend church, and consequently, this occasion was deemed most appropriate to execute a judicial process. When real property was sold it was not finally knocked down to the highest bidder on the first Sunday, but it was exposed to sale again on two subsequent Sundays, and if no one bid a higher price at these subsequent days, the sale was announced as settled. Evidently, real estate speculation was not favored at the expense of the distressed debtor. At such sales the commandant of the Post or the Lieutenant-Governor was always present. On Sunday, too, the decrees, new laws and ordinances of the Governor-General of the province or kingdom, and the new rules and regulations of the Lieutenant-Governor or Post Commandant, were read.
Under the Spanish law the commandants were required to make a register of the inhabitants of their respective districts, and of this register a copy was required to be sent to the Royal Council of the Indies.24 Accordingly almost the first official act of Piernas, when he took possession of upper Louisiana, was the issuance of an order to take the census. When this was done the total population residing in the western Illinois country numbered only 891.25 At that time the population of the villages of St. Louis and of Ste. Genevieve was exactly the same.26 The largest part of this population had only recently settled on the west side of the river. In 1771, according to Hutchins,27 the total population on the east side, including 230 ne- groes, was 530, and the total population on the west side, including 120 negroes, 723. But in 1772, there were 497 persons in St. Louis of whom 198 were slaves; and in Ste. Genevieve 592, of whom 287 were negro slaves, showing a total population of 1,088, in what is now Miss- ouri. During the administration of Miro, in 1785, a census of upper Louisiana shows the population of St. Louis to have been 897, and of Ste. Genevieve 594, a total of but 1,592. In 1788 the population of the St. Louis district had increased to 1,197, and in Ste. Genevieve
23 American State Papers, Public Lands, p. 451, Letter of Hon. Thomas F. Riddick.
24 White's Recompilation, American State Papers, 5 Public Lands, p. 225.
26 2 Martin's History of Louisiana, p. 3. ,
26 Gayarre's History of Louisiana, Spanish Domination, p. 23.
27 Hutchins' Topographical Description, p. III.
209
TREATMENT OF INDIANS
district to 896. Morgan writes, in 1789, that he was astonished to find that in twenty years the country had not advanced in agriculture or population, and that, according to the report made by Hutchins in 1769, the present population did not exceed that at the earlier date, "whereas, at that time, there was not a single farm settled on the waters of the Ohio, and now in Kentucky alone you will find more than 150,000 inhabitants." In 1795 Trudeau reports the total popu- lation at 2,927, this report not including New Madrid, which in 1791 numbered 219 persons. In 1796 the total population was 3,083, and in addition New Madrid numbered 457 white persons and 42 slaves; but in 1797 the population of New Madrid had increased to 693.
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.