USA > Ohio > Hamilton County > Cincinnati > Centennial history of Cincinnati and representative citizens, Vol. I, Pt. 1 > Part 51
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 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89
"The name was invented by John Filson, one of the original proprietors, who intended to ex- press by it, the town opposite the mouth of Lick- ing River. He resided in Lexington, Ky., where the plan of the projected village was formed, and the name imposed in the month of August. 1788.
"The setlement did not, however, commence till the 26th of the following December. From that time till the 2d of January 1790-this day' fifty-one years-the place bore the name of Los- antiville and no other. It was then changed to Cincinnati by Governor St. Clair.
1
"Your friend and servant, "DAN DRAKE." "CHARLES CIST."
.
Upon this Cist comments as follows :
"I must be permitted to remark that, while I consider Dr. Drake's statement of the 'more than
.
297
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS
twenty documentary evidences' explicit and reli- able, I do not regard it as conclusive, because the writer evidently had not time or motive to examine it in the light of the difficulty I had presented to him, and which he had perhaps never heard of before. He probably had letters, for I have seen such of the early dates of Cin- cinnati addressed to Losantiville, but it is ob- vious that such proof would not determine the fact. The name first designed having origin- ated at Lexington would be widely known there, and letters thence would naturally bear the in- tended name of the place; and, indeed, where a name is once given, officially or by custom, it is apt to adhere, long after it has become changed by law or otherwise. Thus Maysville and Brownsville were known as Limestone and Red- stone, and called nothing else, long after they had borne their present names in print. Wash- ington, Pennsylvania, was called Catfishtown for many years, although only a sobriquet or nick- name, and it will be many years before our northwestern section of Cincinnati ceases to be known by any other title than Texas, although a mere flash name.
"To these testimonies and to the popular no- tion that the place was given its present name by General St. Clair, on the 2d January, 1790, I have to oppose the testimony, among others, of Jacob Fowler and Samuel Newell, highly intelligent men and old settlers-Fowler having supplied the garrison at Fort Washington with buffalo meat, from its establishment up to St. Clair's ar- rival and afterward. They both aver that from their earliest knowledge of it they never heard it called Losantiville; and Fowler, who was as clearheaded in his recollections of the past as any man I. have ever known, stated to me explicitly that he never heard it called by any other name than that of Cincinnati.
"The communication of Judge Burnet, which follows, in my judgment, is testimony which cannot be disputed and argument which must be conclusive."
Mr. Cist prints entire the letter which is so full of information as to entitle it to a place here :
"CINCINNATI, October 5, 1844.
"Dear Sir-At the close of a conversation which passed between us a few weeks since, re- specting the original plan and name of the place, which is now familiarly called the Queen City of the West, you requested me to furnish you with such reminiscences in relation to that sub-
ject as my early residence in the West might enable me to give.
"You are aware that I was not among the first adventurers to the Miami valley. When the set- tlement of it began I had not finished my educa- tion; but I commenced my journey to join the little band of adventurers as soon as my profes- sional studies were closed, which was in the spring, after the treaty of Greenville, in 1795, had terminated the Indian war; of course the town had been laid out, and the settlement of it commenced, before my arrival. It had, how- ever, made but little progress, either in popula- tion or improvement; though it contained a larger number of inhabitants than any other American village in the Territory, excepting Ma- rietta ; and if you take into the account the off- cers and soldiers of the garrison, and others at- tached to the army, it very much exceeded the population of that place.
"Most of the persons who saw the town laid out, and put up the first cabins erected in it, were here when I came, and were my earliest com- panions and associates. Without professing an unusual share of curiosity, it is natural to sup- pose, that I learnt from them, correctly, the few and simple historical facts of the place, which, for good or ill, I had selected for life as my residence. By way of comparison, it may be said, that the facts connected with the recent lo- cation of the Cincinnati Observatory-the dona- tion made by our distinguished fellow-citizen, N. ' Longworth, Esq.,-the ceremony of laying the corner-stone of the edifice, by the venerable sage and patriot of Quincy, and the name of Mount Adams then publicly given to it, are not more distinctly known, as matters of history, than were the facts of laying out, establishing and naming of the town of Cincinnati, at the time to which I refer. They were a subject of inquiry by every stranger who came to the place, and every per- son in the village could recite them. There was but one version to the story, which was this : that Mr. Denman, of New Jersey, entered into a con- tract with Col. Robert Patterson, of Lexington, and John Filson, a surveyor in the employ of Judge Symmes, to lay out the land opposite the mouth of Licking River, then the exclusive prop- erty of Mr. Denman. A plat of the contemplated town was made out, and Losantiville agreed upon as its name ; but before any step was taken to carry that contract into effect, and before a chain had been stretched on the ground, Mr. Filson was killed by the Indians, not having done anything to fulfill hiis part of the contract; in
,
298
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF CINCINNATI
consequence of which it was forfeited, and the projected town fell through. This is all that was ever done toward the establishment of a town by the name of Losantiville; yet, as was natural, the settlement, then just beginning, was for some time called by the intended name of the projected town.
"Early in the next season, Mr. Denman en- tered into a new contract with Col. Patterson and Israel Ludlow, to lay out a town on the same ground, but on a different plan from the one for- merly agreed upon. To that town they gave the name of Cincinnati, and by that name it was sur- veyed and known in the fall of 1789.
"I was informed by Judge Turner, one of the earliest adventurers to the West, that he had seen both plats, and that the general outline and plan of division were nearly the same in both, but that the first or Filson plat, to which the name of Losantiville was to have been given, set apart two entire blocks for the use of the town, and that it gave as a public common all the ground between Front street and the river, ex- tending from Eastern row to Western row, then the extreme boundaries of the town plat : and it is impressed upon my mind, though I cannot say what caused that impression, that on the first or Filson plat, Front street was laid down nearer to the river, or made more southing in its course westward, than we find it on the plat of Cincinnati. I was also informed that some of the names, which had been selected for streets of the Losantiville plan, were given to streets on the plan of Cincinnati, and that others were rejected. This circumstance may account for a fact, which is no doubt remembered by many now living in the city, that after Joel Will- iams had become proprietor, by purchasing the right of Mr. Denman, and had determined to claim the public common, as private property, an unsuccessful effort was made to change the names of some of the streets on the genuine plat of Cincinnati by substituting others, taken from . the plat of Filson. That attempt created some temporary difficulty in the minds of persons not correctly informed, as to the true history of the town, and many took the precaution of inserting both the names in their deeds and contracts.
"But independent of these facts, it must be evident that the name of the town could not have been changed after the town had been estab- lished, named and surveyed. The territorial statute of December, 1800, which I advocated and voted for in the Legislative Council, mnade it the duty of the proprietors of every town
which had been laid out in the Territory, before that time, to cause a true and correct map, or plat thereof to be recorded in the recorder's office of the county in which it lay, within one year after the passage of the act, under a heavy pen- alty.
"The name of the town constitutes a's import- ant a part of the plat of it as the names of the streets or the numbers of lots, and the title to property acquired in it is affected as much by error, mistake or uncertainty, in the one, as in the other; it was therefore considered important for the security of property holders that a true record should be made of these matters, and of everything else appertaining to the plat, precisely as they were when the town was established, and the sale of the lots commenced. Hence, the law required a true and correct plat-in other words, the original plat, without change or variation, to be recorded.
"When the plan of Cincinnati was recorded by Israel Ludlow in 1801-the original proprietors were all living, he being one of them. It is therefore impossible to suppose, that he did not know what the original plat contained-or that he acted without authority-or that he would falsify the plat by placing on it any name other than the one originally given to it. I was intim- ately acquainted with Col. Ludlow who recorded the town plat, and was professionally consulted by him as to the requirements of the statute. He was very much annoyed by interference of Joel Williams, a sub-proprietor, who insisted on mak- ing innovations, or changes in the original plat, calculated to favor a claim he was setting up to the public common or landing. I gave it as my opinion that Mr. Williams not being an original proprietor, or even a resident of the country when the town plat was formed and established, and having had no agency in the formation of the original plan of the town, could not be pre- sumed to know what it was: and moreover, that the statute did not recognize him as having any other or greater authority to interfere in the mat- ter, than any other individual who had become the purchaser of a single lot.
"The result was, that each of those individu- als prepared and lodged in the recorder's office a plat of the town, affirming it to be a true copy from the original. Unfortunately, perhaps- certainly without legal authority,-the recorder placed both plats on the record, but the com- munity soon became satisfied that the plat pre- pared and certified by Col. Ludlow, was alone to be relied 011.
-
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS
299
"This, however, has no other bearing on the subject matter of our conversation, than arises from the fact, that each of them affirmed Cin- cinnati to be the true, original name of the town.
"The controversy between them continucd for several months, and was marked with great warmth. On one occasion it terminated in a violent personal conflict, in which the original plat of the town, made and agrced to by the pro- prietors at Limestone, in the winter of 1788-9, bearing on its face the name of Cincinnati, was torn in pieces, each party retaining a part of it. In this altercation Colonel Ludlow took the ground that Williams was an unauthorized in- truder, and that the statute made it his duty, as an original proprietor, to record the plat, cor- rectly and faithfully as it came from the propric- tors, neither adding to, subtracting from or al- tering anything which was on it when it was agreed to and signed by the proprietors.
"To show how firmly he adhered to that principle I will mention one case. The ground bounded by Broadway, Front street, Main strect and the river, had been publicly given, and set apart by the proprietors, with his knowledge and concurrence, as a common, for the use of the town forever. This fact he knew and affirmed, but, because the word common had not been written on the map within the lines inclosing that donation, or elsewhere, he refused to insert it on the copy made for the recorder; and yet it is affirmed by implication that he deliberately made out and placed on record a plat of the town, affirming it to be a true copy of the orig- inal, knowing that it contained a name altogether different from the one which had been in the first instance adopted and entered on the plat.
"I will state further that, at an early period, professional duty made it necessary for me to investigate the facts connected with the origin and establishment of Cincinnati, which did not extend to any other individual then or now liv- ing, and it so happened that the performance of that duty was required at a time when the town was almost in its incipient state, and when all the original proprietors and most of the first adven- turers and settlers were living within the village or in places casily accessible.
"Without presuming to claim more of tact or industry than belongs to the profession general- ly, it may be presumed, considering the sources of correct information then within iny reach, that I must, at least, have ascertained the name
of the place, the establishment and history of which I was investigating.
"It has been already intimated that Joel Will- iams, soon after he purchased the proprietary right of Mr. Denman, set up a claim to the com- mon before described, alleging it to be private property, reserved by the proprietors for future disposition. On the strength of that pretence he crected a brick house on the northwest corner of the tract in question. In consequence of this movement a number of the most public-spirited of our citizens-Martin Baum, Jesse Hunt and General Findley taking the lead-raised a fund by subscription, to defend and sustain the right of the town. I was employed to collect and per- petuate the testimony applicable to the case; and you will not hesitate to believe that, in executing that commission, my inquirics werc directed to the original proprietors and to such other pcr- sons as were likely to have any knowledge of the facts, touching the laying out of the town and the matters contained on the original plat. I mention this to show that there was something more than curiosity prompting me to this in- vestigation of the carly history of the town, which ought to entitle it to credence.
"Now, let any person ask himself what de- scription of facts 'were likely to be disclosed in the course of such an examination, and the an- swer will be, precisely such as were stated in the preceding part of this letter, if they existed, al- though they could not have any bearing on the matter, then in controversy. On the supposition that they did not exist, was there a sufficient motive to induce anybody to fabricate them? It would be difficult to assign a reason in favor of any affirmative answer.
"You will perceive that, to sustain the right of the town to the common, it was necessary to prove the correctness of the plat recorded by Indlow, which affirmed Cincinnati to be the true, original and only name of the town. In pursuing that inquiry the facts came out that there had been a previous project for laying out a town, the name of which was to have been Losantiville, but that that project had fallen through. As that matter had no relation to the subject I was specially investigating, it was not noticed in the depositions, but omitted as irrele- vant.
"Having said this much on the subject of our ' conversation, I will state as information which may be interesting, if not useful, that in No- vember, 1794, Samuel Freeman purchased the unsold interest of Robert Patterson in the town
300
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF CINCINNATI
section and fraction-that in March; 1795, Joel Williams purchased the unsold interest of Mr. Denman, and in November, 1803, he also pur- chased of Samuel Freeman the proprietary in- terest acquired by his purchase from Colonel Patterson, by which he owned and represented two shares or equal third parts of the unsold lots and ground in the section and fraction.
"You are, no doubt, acquainted with the fact that, by an arrangement between Judge Symmes and the first proprietors of the town, he was to retain the title in trust for them and to execute deeds to the purchasers of lots, on their produc- ing certificates of the respective purchases, signed by any two of the proprietors. You have also, it is presumed, licard that all those certifi- cates, of which no record has been preserved, were consumed in the conflagration of Judge Symmes' house. These facts, connected with the sale of Freeman's entire proprietary right to Joel Williams, may possibly account for the link which is said to be wanting in the chain of title to part of the ground, lying west of the town plat, now held under Joel Williams. That fatal fire may have consumed the documents required to make out a complete paper title.
"This conjecture is in some measure corrobo- rated by a reference to the peculiarities of Mr. Williams, who had an active mind-was some- what eccentric-possessed a vein of humor, and could at times be very sarcastic. He was, how- ever, quite illiterate and unusually careless, and, having great confidence in Judge Symmes, he generally relied on him as a friend and adviser, though, on one or two occasions, there was some serious misunderstanding between them. I was frequently engaged for him, in his legal contro- versies, and it so happened that a paper required in his cause was found in the keeping of Judge Symmes. I have several times, when calling on him for papers, seen him open and examine the contents of his desk, which gave me an oppor- tunity of knowing that even the most valuable of his papers were kept in a very careless and slov- enly manner ; and 1. have often thought that it would have been better for him if all his papers had been in the safe keeping of a guardian or friend ; and particularly so, as every person who had been a purchaser of a town property was exposed more or less to the consequence of his carelessness, resulting from the peculiar manner in which titles to property, within the town sec- tion or fraction, though beyond the limits of the town plat, were to be obtained. To illustrate my meaning : there have been cases in which
non-residents have purchased lots, obtained their certificates, and left them in the hands of Judge Symmes, without calling for deeds; after the burning of the Judge's house, and the consequent destruction of their evidence of title, other per- sons, by a fresh purchase, or otherwise, have be- come the legal owners of the same lots.
"Very respectfully,
"J. BURNET." "CHARLES CIST."
. In considering these letters and Mr. Cist's comment, it may be well to preface with the state- ment that despite- Judge Burnet's training as a lawyer he had no advantage in the matter of ac- curacy of statement or the ability to weigh ma- terials over Dr. Drake. Dr. Drake possessed the true scientific method in a degree certainly above that of many men of his time and probably would have stood among the first men at his pro- fession of the present day. His study was not limited by any particular profession or subject. His information was of the widest and his pub- lications, probably more numerous than those of any of the early writers of this neighborhood, covered almost every field of activity. So far as relates to the early history of Cincinnati, he is the conclusive authority upon any subject that came under his treatment. He arrived here at about the same time that Judge Burnet arrived, and from the carliest time of his residence gave close attention to the history and life of the com- munity. The first work of any consequence pub- lished about the city was his little volume pub- lished in 1810. His volume "Notices Concern- ing Cincinnati" published in 1810 and his book published in 1815 called for convenience "The Picture of Cincinnati" are among the most val- ued possessions of any collector who is fortunate enough to possess them. Dr. Drake in many re- spects was the most considerable figure in the civic life of the early days of this community, and his personality appeals with great force to any student of that period.
Burnet essentially fair in intention is not as accurate in his method and his statements must be taken more as those of a controversialist. Cist was most indefatigable as a collector of ma- terials and to hiim is owing a very large part of the information that we have concerning the his- tory of the city. He had, however, absolutely 110 power of arranging his materials or of weigh- ing evidence. He was accurate in his methods so far as the collection of statistics and their ar- rangement is concerned. He was most careful
1
301
AND REPRESENTATIVE - CITIZENS
in recording statements and transcribing docu- ments. He was most pleasant in his treatment of the subject but the critical method was abso- lutely unknown to him. Drake himself would get up at night to indulge in a discussion and was as anxious to prevail as any other man but to his clear vision the facts presented themselves exactly as they were and however much he might wish to use them for his purpose he was not ca- pable of distorting them even unconsciously. He was always, in other words, the searcher for truth. Burnet equally as sincere was always the advocate.
Bearing in mind these peculiarities which must be considered with reference to all the ma- terials furnished by these three writers, and in any history of the early days of Cincinnati they contribute a very large proportion of the mate- rial, it is easy to disentangle the facts from the arguments in the statements just quoted. Dr. Drake unfortunately gives nothing but his con- clusion although the statement of Cist that Drake had not examined the matter and may not have heard of it is amusing in view of Drake's well known position as the first historian of the city and of the further fact that he resided in the town during the pendency of the suits after- wards referred to by Judge Burnet and that they excited great public interest. Cist infers that . Dr. Drake's proofs were letters addressed to Losan- tiville. It will be apparent that however his ar- gument might apply to such letters it had no ap- plication to letters and records written at Los- antiville.
Mr. Cist bases his view, it will be seen, partly on the testimony of Jacob Fowler and Samuel Newell. Fowler's statement is given by him as follows : "The place was called Cincinnati when I first saw it, although the giving of that name is said to have been done by St. Clair afterward. I am positive of the fact. At that time, there appeared forty or fifty cabins in the town, and but one or two stone chimneys among them all. The timber on the site of the built parts had been a heavy growth of sugar-tree, beech, and oak, with a few black walnuts, mostly large, and the cabins were surrounded with standing tiniber, as well as with large butts of logs, considered too difficult -and unprofitable to split, and which were therefore left to decay. The corners of the streets, as far as practicable, were blazed on the trees." (Cincinnati in 1859, P. 76.)
At the time Major Fowler made this statement he was 84 years old. He was speaking of events that had . occurred more than a half century be-
. fore. His first real experience in the settlement was in connection with the fort for which his brother had supplied meat. They wandered up Mill creek or crossed over into Kentucky at Yeat- man's Cove or at the Stone Landing, at Ludlow street, so called because the stone for Fort Wash- ington was landed there. With the town he had at that time little to do. He staid there but a short time and went away and did not return until 1791. It is apparent that the time of which he speaks in his statement to Mr. Cist is the later period. In 1789 there were but eleven families in the town and about twenty small log cabins. After the Harmar expedition in 1790 the popu- lation had increased to about forty families and there were about forty cabins. This is the state- ment of the Directory of 1819, generally accept- ed as correct.
Judge Burnet lays great stress on the fact that when Israel Ludlow recorded his plat he called it the plat of Cincinnati. This plat it will be remembered was recorded for the purpose of be- ing used in evidence in litigation then in view. With all due respect to the statement that it was recorded because of the statute of the Legisla- ture of December, 1799, the suggestion is ven- tured that it took Mr. Ludlow and his counsel, Judge Burnet, a long time to record this plat in the interest of the public and to avoid the pen- alty, for it was not until 17 months afterwards, April 29, 1802, and not in 1801 that the plat was put on record. That particular plat had been in possession of the parties for at least six months for Denman's certificate is dated November 20, 1801. It was very naturally called the plan of the town of Cincinnati as it was that town whose lines were then in question.
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.