USA > Ohio > Montgomery County > Dayton > History of the city of Dayton and Montgomery County, Ohio, Volume I > Part 10
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 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98
West of the Great Miami, complications arose through tomahawk claims and squatter rights. In western Pennsylvania, land was to be had for the taking- four hundred acres for the building of a cabin and the raising of a small crop, with the privilege of preempting one thousand acres adjoining. All through the west the claims of first comers were loud and often effective. By blazing a few trees about a selected locality a "tomahawk claim" was established, which though having no validity in law, was yet often bought and sold. The erection of a cabin was sometimes supposed, though erroneously, to secure preemption rights. West of the Great Miami, beginning with 1797 and 1798 in the south part of what is now Montgomery county, and a few years later in the land further north, a considerable number of squatters established themselves. Most of them were a roving, adventurous class and soon gave place to regular settlers. Others were earnestly desirous of securing permanent homes, but were compelled to settle irregularly and await the survey of the land and the opening up of the land-office.
LAND SALES.
The special commissioners of the government to sell lands to persons hav- ing preemption rights to lands between the Miamis opened up an office at Cin- cinnati, November 9, 1801. The price of public lands to these persons was fixed at two dollars per acre. At this session of the commissioners, which lasted till December 31st, one hundred and two thousand six hundred and sixty-three and one-half acres were disposed of, the purchasers paying down one-fourth of the purchase money. The sales did not need to wait for the re-survey in 1802, as the special act of congress providing for that survey made it to conform for the most part to previous surveys. If those who had bought of Symmes the seventh and eighth ranges east of the Great Miami and Mad rivers and other large tracts had chosen to do so, they could have secured the lands contracted for at two dollars per acre, but they had already sold large parts of these lands
87
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
at one dollar and less per acre and for the most part did not avail themselves of their privilege. Small purchasers in these tracts, if not protected by the pro- prietors, had a right to preempt land at the same price per acre. Lands not applied for under preemption rights were later sold as the lands west of the Miami were to be sold. A few persons had availed themselves of the privileges offered in the act of congress in 1799 for the relief of purchasers from Symmes. The commissioners were especially charged with the duty rightfully to adjust conflicting claims.
In the plat of Dayton, in-lots 3, 5, and 20 and out-lots 5, 26 and 52 were entered by Jonathan Mercer, and in-lots 8, 14, 46, 51, 52 and 78 were entered by Benjamin Van Cleve. The entire cost and expense for an in-lot was about one dollar. Other persons who had bought lots of the proprietors made arrange- ments with D. C. Cooper and he entered in November, 1801, the land that in- cluded the site of Dayton with the exception of the lots named above and became titular proprietor of the town. Likewise, prior to the close of 1801, he entered other land between the Miamis, his entries amounting in all to three thousand one hundred and ten acres. As congress from time to time extended the time when delayed payments were to be made, Mr. Cooper did not apply for or receive patents for his land till in 1812 and 1813, at which time he made deeds to those who were entitled to them. The government records show that a large number of entries were made for land between the Miamis within the present limits of Montgomery county in 1801 and immediately following years. The special survey in 1803 of preemption lots based on contracts with Symmes shows who the earliest settlers were. The sale of the lands west of the Great Miami was on an entirely different basis, as compared with the sale of lands between the Miamis. A regular land office was opened in Cincinnati the first Monday in April, 1801. Colonel Israel Ludlow was the first register and Gen- eral James Findlay was the first receiver. General Findlay was also one of the three commissioners to dispose of lands between the Miamis to those having preemption rights. In 1800, General William H. Harrison, then delegate in congress for the Northwest Territory, secured the passage of a law authorizing the sale of parts of congress lands, to which class the land west of the Great Miami belonged, in tracts of three hundred and twenty acres. Before this no tracts of less than six hundred and forty acres, or section lots, were sold. All con- gress lands at this time were to be sold at public vendue or auction at not less than two dollars per acre. In few cases was more than the minimum price bid. Some of the best land in Hamilton and Butler counties commanded only ten cents premium per acre. Land not sold at auction was subject to entry by any one at two dollars per acre. Nearly all of the congress lands were thus sold. Later the land was offered for sale in smaller subdivisions-one hundred and sixty acres, then eighty acres, then forty acres. In 1820, the price of government land was placed at one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre.
In the southern part of Montgomery county, west of the Great Miami, a number of entries of land were made in 1801, the entries becoming fewer or disappearing altogether as the northern part of the county was reached. Many entries were made in 1802. At first five per cent of the purchase money was to be deposited at the time of purchase, the amount to be increased to one-fourth
88
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
of the purchase money within forty days. Another fourth was to be paid within two years; the next within three years; and the final installment with all accumulated interest within four years from the day of sale. Under the credit system, a vast debt, amounting in 1820 to twenty-two million dollars, came to rest on the purchasers of lands. For their relief the time and method of pay- ment were changed again and again.
MEMORIAL TO CONGRESS.
The following memorial to congress, drawn up probably in 1803, by the hand of Benjamin Van Cleve, gives interesting information as to the Dayton settlement and the distress caused by their invalidated land titles.
"To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress Assembled:
"The petition of the first settlers at Dayton and Mercer's Station, in Mont- gomery and Greene counties, Ohio, respectfully sheweth: That the Hon. Judge Symmes having made a relinquishment of his claim to a certain tract of lands lying between the Miami rivers, to Gov. St. Clair, Gen. Wilkinson, Jonathan Dayton and Israel Ludlow, Esquires, the said lands being all the seventh and eighth ranges of land east of Mad river; in order to form settlements on the same and augment its value the proprietors offered certain gratuities and priv- ileges to such as might engage to become first settlers, which are contained in the articles accompanying the petition.
"On the 5th of November, 1795, forty-six persons engaged to become set- tlers at Dayton, but from the many difficulties in forming a new settlement so far in a wilderness country, only fifteen of those came forward, with four others, making nineteen in all.
"From the threats and ill-treatment of the savages to the people of Mer- cer's Station it was once evacuated, and at several times Mr. Mercer with two brothers maintained the station at the risk of their lives. These settlements were formed by your petitioners a few months after the treaty of Greenville, when we had not faith in the friendship of the savages. Our settlement was immediately on their hunting grounds. We were not able to keep a horse amongst us during the first season, by reason of their stealing. The scarcity of provi- sions had raised flour to nine dollars a barrel, and other articles in proportion, which we had to purchase and transport fifty miles through a wilderness, clear- ing roads, etc .; under all these and many more difficulties we labored in hopes of obtaining our lands at a low rate and the small gratuity offered. Several of your petitioners have not been able to procure any land; others have laid their claims before the commissioners agreeably to the late law, and purchased at two dollars an acre. We beg leave to state to your honorable body that the proprietors have not received the expected advantages from the forming of these settlements ; that your petitioners have been at a vast expense, labor and difficulty in forming the said settlements, and have received no recompense nor privilege other than subsequent settlers; that they first opened a way, in conse- quence of which the country has become populous and the United States has received a handsome revenue from the sale of the lands; that the town of Day-
89
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
ton is purchased by a subsequent settler, and we pray that congress will make to us such gratuity in lands, or deduction from payments of land, or grant such other relief as our case merits.
"Your petitioners further pray in behalf of Rev. William Hamer, a settler at Dayton, who, having settled on the section twenty-nine in the second town- ship and seventh range, before the lines were run, with an expectation of hold- ing it agreeable to the terms set forth in Article A, has since continued to cultivate and improve it, as it was supposed to be appropriated for religious purposes, he being a preacher of the Gospel and having the approbation of Mr. Ludlow, one of the proprietors, as appears by the Article C. Now, as the said section is to be sold as other lands, the said Hamer is willing to pay two dollars per acre for it, in installments, agreeable to the late laws for the disposal of United States lands. We pray your honorable body may grant him a preemp- tion and the indulgence he wishes; and your petitioners shall, etc.
"William Gahagan, Samuel Thompson, Benjamin Van Cleve, William Van Cleve, Thomas Davis, James McClure, Daniel Ferrell, John McClure, Thomas Hamer, Abraham Grassmire, William Hamer, Solomon Hamer, William Chen- oweth, George Newcom, William Newcom and James Morris.
"Thomas Davis, representative of John Davis, deceased; William Hamer, representative of Solomon Goss; B. Van Cleve and William Gahagan, repre- sentatives of John Dorough ; Jonathan Mercer, for himself and others of Mercer's Station, on Mad river."
An explanation of the reference to William Hamer may be necessary. In Symmes' contract it was stipulated that the proceeds of section sixteen should be devoted to education and those of section twenty-nine should be devoted to the maintenance of religion. In Symmes' first advertisement, he had asked teach- ers and preachers of the gospel to occupy these sections. As Mr. Hamer was occupying section twenty-nine without any contract that would give him the" right to preempt, intercession was made in his behalf. In government sales, section twenty-nine was sold in the usual way. August 18, 1804, Mr. Hamer entered the northeast quarter of section twenty-nine. Probably no one put in a bid against him.
SUITS IN THE SUPREME COURT.
As if the troubles already named were not enough, two suits relating to conditions and acts in 1801 and 1802 were begun in 1807 against D. C. Cooper, on whose title the people were so largely dependent, the suits running through the courts till 1813.
The one case was brought in the supreme court in Montgomery county, No- vember 1, 1807, against D. C. Cooper by Jonathan Dayton, Arthur St. Clair, Ralph Phillips, William P. Meeker and Samuel Denman through Judge Jacob Burnet, their attorney. The plaintiffs averred thereon or about June 17, 1802, an agreement was entered into between D. C. Cooper and Jonathan Dayton, Matthias Denman, Samuel Meeker and Israel Ludlow, by which it was agreed to purchase not exceeding ten thousand acres of land on joint account on both sides of the Great Miami river, including the town site of Dayton, said tract to
90
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
be as close to the town of Dayton as D. C. Cooper and Israel Ludlow should select, and should include such sections and parts of sections as said Cooper had claimed to acquire through preemption, except certain lands named as ex- cluded from the common possession. It was also alleged that Governor St. Clair should have the privilege of becoming a joint partner. The land was to be surveyed into small tracts and what should not be sold by 1808, should be divided among the shareholders. Denman, Meeker and Ludlow were to make the first payment as a balance against the service of Cooper in surveying and acting as agent. Cooper was to have restored to him such expense as he had incurred in preempting the land that should be thrown into the common pos- session. Denman sold an interest to Ralph Phillips. William P. Meeker also purchased an interest. Other changes were made. It was charged that Cooper made entries of valuable tracts in his own name and combined with others to defeat the agreement named. Cooper made answer through his attorney, Joseph H. Crane, admitting the agreement, but declaring that the complainants had not made payments according to the agreement, with the exception of three hundred and seventy-five dollars, paid by Denman toward a proposed purchase of three thousand acres west of the Great Miami river. It was claimed further by Cooper that he was informed by Denman that the other parties were not favorable to proceeding in the way outlined, and that he therefore was absolved from the agreement. After a number of continuances the complainants withdrew the suit in 1813.
The second suit against D. C. Cooper was a case in equity, brought by Arthur St. Clair, Jonathan Dayton, Abijah Hunt, Ralph Phillips, William P. Meeker, Samuel Denman and Thomas Hunter, the petition being dated December 3, 1807. The petition begins with naming the original proprietors, purchasers of the seventh and eighth ranges east of the Great Miami and Mad rivers-St. " Clair, Dayton, Wilkinson and Ludlow. Wilkinson sold his fourth interest, January 25, 1797, to Abijah Hunt, Ralph Phillips and John Phillips for three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars. Whether Wilkinson made or lost money depends on how much he had already paid out. John Phillips sold his part to Hunt. St. Clair sold one-third of his interest to Hunt and two-thirds of his interest to Samuel Meeker, who, in turn, sold interests to others. Day- ton and Ludlow sold to Denman one equal one-third part of their rights, Den- man later selling the interest thus acquired to Ralph Phillips. It is averred that Ludlow, who was made agent, made Cooper, in the fall of 1796, his deputy, that Cooper did not make reports to the proprietors as required and later en- tered in his own name lands that should have been entered by or for the pro- prietors. They asked, therefore, to have these preemption rights transferred to themselves and for other relief. Cooper replied that he had been given in 1795 a contract by Ludlow entitling him to purchase four thousand acres of land at a stipulated price and that when he went to Cincinnati to make preemp- tions, the proprietors, some of whom were present and authorized to act for the entire number, consented to his making entries as he did. Apparently they could not afford to pay two dollars per acre for the land and fulfil their con- tracts to those who had bought land of them. The strength of Cooper's case
91
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
is indicated by the fact that after long delays, the complainants withdrew the suit, June 15, 1813.
The sales by the proprietors continued till November 12, 1804. The prices came to be very small, being based on the chances to recover from Cooper or on what available land would be worth above the government price of two dollars per acre. Wilkinson received, in 1797, three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars for his right to fifteen thousand acres, and in 1804, Hunt re- ceived four hundred dollars for his right to three thousand acres. Dayton seems to have become hopelessly involved, as June 10, 1803, he assigned in trust to Elias B. Dayton and Isaac H. Williamson all his interest within the so-called Symmes' purchase. With all these distracting questions as to titles and the direct loss of purchase money, labor and improvements, is it any wonder that the village of Dayton dwindled rather than grew and that the surrounding coun- try suffered as well? Survival in the circumstances showed the value of the location and the tenacity and sterling worth of the people.
SKETCHES OF FIRST SETTLERS.
The first settlers of Dayton will ever hold a place of special interest. This chapter may well be brought to a close with sketches of these pioneers.
WILLIAM HAMER was a native of Maryland. In 1792, he, with his wife and children, came west, descending the Ohio river to Cincinnati in a flatboat, built by himself and his son, Solomon, then sixteen years of age. The lumber in the boat was used in constructing a house, in which the family lived until they started to their place on Mad river, in March, 1796. The children in the family were Solomon, Thomas, Nancy, Elizabeth, Sarah and Polly. Mr. Hamer was a Methodist local preacher, and at family prayers could be heard a great distance. Religious meetings were early held at his place. He located on sec- tion twenty-nine, the section which under Symmes' contract was to be devoted to the support of religion. He derived no advantage, however, from this fact. In this home, a son was born, December 9, 1796, and out of regard for the new settlement was given the name Dayton. In 1827, Mr. Hamer died as the result of an accident while on his way to Cincinnati. Of his children, Nancy married William Gahagan, who came on the pirogue, and Sarah married, in 1801, David Lowry, who had previously settled on Donnel's creek in Greene county.
JONATHAN and EDWARD MERCER settled on Mad river, eight miles from its mouth and there established what was called Mercer's Station, then an exposed place which they twice were compelled to abandon because of danger from the Indians. Jonathan Mercer died prior to 1810.
GEORGE NEWCOM was born in the north of Ireland, of Presbyterian stock in 1771, and in 1775 was brought to this country by his parents. His father died in Dayton about 1805. George Newcom married Mary Henderson of Washington county, Pennsylvania, and moved to Cincinnati about 1794. A daughter born in 1794 in Cincinnati, died before the family left that place. The next child, John W., was born September 9, 1797, near Hamilton, married Martha Grimes, November 20, 1820, and died July 7, 1836. A daughter, Jane, was born April 14, 1800, being the first girl child born in Dayton. She married, May 20, 1819,
92
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
Nathaniel Wilson. The two next children, George Alexander and Charles Grimes, died in infancy. The next child, Eliza Jane, was born April 17, 1825, married John Comly, and died March 5, 1873. The next child, Mary Ann, was born January 9, 1827, and died May 18, 1854. The wife of Mr. Newcom died in 1834, and two years later he married Elizabeth Bowen, a widow. George New- com was a soldier in Wayne's army. He also served in the War of 1812. He was the first sheriff of Montgomery county, holding that office five years. He was later state senator, filling that position eight years. He was a member of the lower house five years, and filled many other positions of honor and trust. His name, however, will always stand most closely connected with the old tavern, the center of every form of activity when Dayton was at best an experiment. He died February 25, 1853.
WILLIAM NEWCOM, a brother of George, was about twenty years of age when he came to Dayton. He married Miss Charlotte Nolan, of Kentucky. For a number of years he lived on a farm near Dayton. He served in the War of 1812, and died a few months after his enlistment as the result of exposures in the army. A son, Robert, was a prominent carpenter and builder, and a grandson, Milo G. Newcom, at present ( 1909) lives on Wilkinson street.
THOMAS DAVIS was a native of Wales. He was a soldier in the Revolutionary war. He settled on the bluffs, south of Dayton. He brought with him a large family. His son, Owen Davis, was in business for himself and a taxpayer in 1798. He operated for many years a mill five miles west of Xenia, on the Big Beaver creek. About the mill a few houses were built and here the first Greene county court was held in 1803.
JOHN DAVIS, a brother of Thomas Davis, is said to have settled on the west side of the Miami river. He was killed by an accident at Cooper's mill in 1799. This is said to have been the first death that occurred at Dayton.
WILLIAM CHENOWETH brought his family with him from Kentucky. He was a blacksmith, but did not work at his trade as shown by an advertisement in a Cincinnati paper, stating that there was no blacksmith within twenty miles of Dayton. His home on Mad river was, in 1803, included within the limits of Greene county.
JOHN DOROUGH, a married man, was a miller by trade. He owned a mill on Mad river, later known as Shoup's mill and later still as Kneisley's mill.
DANIEL FERRELL came with his family from western Virginia, and settled on land, probably now within the limits of Miami county.
JAMES MORRIS came from Pennsylvania and served in the expedition of General Harmar, in 1790. He was a farmer. He was twice married, after com- ing to the new settlement, but left no children.
ABRAHAM GRASSMIRE, an unmarried German, was a weaver by trade. He was handy in the construction of household articles and helped to make the first looms for the settlers. He moved to Honey creek about 1802.
SOLOMON Goss, who was living in Dayton in 1799, probably soon afterward moved further up the Miami.
SAMUEL THOMPSON came from Pennsylvania to Cincinnati where he mar- ried Catherine, widow of John Van Cleve. He was the leader of the party coming by water. With him were his wife, Catherine, their little daughter, Sarah, two
93
DAYTON AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
years old, and Matthew, two months old, and Mrs. Thompson's daughter, Mary Van Cleve, nine years old, and her son, Benjamin Van Cleve. Mr. Thompson held a number of offices in the new community. He was drowned in February, 1815, in Mad river just below the Staunton road ford. His wife died August 6th, 1837.
WILLIAM GAHAGAN, a young Irishman, came to Cincinnati with General Wayne's army, in 1793 and served through 1794 and 1795. He afterward made his home with William Hamer whose daughter, Nancy, he married. In 1794, he and Benjamin Van Cleve assisted in conveying army supplies on the Ohio river and later he assisted Captain Dunlap in surveying expeditions. About 1805, he moved to what came to be the territory of Miami county, where he died in 1845. He and Benjamin Van Cleve were the twin screws in propelling the pirogue up the Miami.
MRS. MCCLURE joined the party of settlers, bringing with her her children, James, John, Thomas, Kate, and Ann. Her husband was killed in St. Clair's de- feat. The family after living in Dayton four or five years, moved to Honey creek.
BENJAMIN VAN CLEVE, and the family to which he belonged have great interest to every citizen of Dayton. John Van Cleve, the founder of the family in America, came from Holland to Long Island about 1650, later settling in New Jersey. Benjamin Van Cleve was the son of John and Catherine Benham Van Cleve, his father being the son of Benjamin and Rachel Van Cleve. John Van Cleve was residing in Monmouth county, New Jersey, when four of his children were born, Benjamin, born February 24, 1773; Ann, born July 30, 1775, married to Jerome Holt; William, born in 1777; Margaret, born in February, 1779, married to George Reeder ; Mary, born February 10, 1787, and Amy, born in July, 1789, were born while the family were residing in Washington county, Pennsylvania. The family determining to move west, came down the Ohio river in a boat arriving at Cincinnati, January 3, 1790. Here John Van Cleve followed the trade of blacksmith, engaging, likewise, in farming. In 1791, while at work in an out-lot in Cincinnati, he was killed by the Indians. Benjamin, the oldest child, now eighteen years of age, at once took, as best he could, the place of a father in the family. Mrs. Van Cleve later married Samuel Thompson and to them were born two children, Sarah and Matthew, before they moved to Day- ton. Much of the time between 1791 and 1794, Benjamin was employed in the quarter-master's department in connection with Fort Washington. Among other duties he accompanied brigades of loaded pack horses to the headquarters of St. Clair's army, was present at his defeat, furnishing a vivid account of the same. In 1795, he accompanied Captain Dunlap's surveying party to the Mad river country, was present when Colonel Ludlow surveyed the plat of Dayton, and in 1796 was one of the first settlers of Dayton. His marriage to Mary Whit- ten, August 28, 1800, was the first marriage in the new settlement. In Dayton he was the first postmaster, the first school teacher, the first clerk of the court, serving with a slight break till the close of his life, which occurred November 29, 1821. He was the father of five children, John Whitten, born June 27, 1801, died September 6, 1858; William James, born October 10, 1803, died October 30, 1808; Henrietta Maria, born November 16, 1805, married Samuel
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.