USA > Pennsylvania > The making of Pennsylvania; an analysis of the elements of the population and the formative influences that created one of the greatest of the American states > Part 20
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
And yet within two months the settlers began to re- turn. They hoped to harvest what was left of their
287
E
1
1
The Making of Pennsylvania
grain, and build anew their fortunes. They obtained the protection of some troops, and built forts. But the Indians, though no longer an army, were still prowling in scattered bands through the woods, and for months and even years continued to pick off stragglers and make sudden descents upon the farms. They would lie for weeks in the bushes, living on berries and roots, creeping and watching for their victims. They would imitate the call of wild turkeys to entice the hunter to his death. The horrors and atrocities that continued for years are almost beyond belief, and in their sum total equal all that was done in the massacre and fight of July 3.
That event, now known in history as the Battle of Wyoming, has been given here in its subdued coloring, the result of the careful researches of Miner. Even then it is bad enough. But at the time of its occurrence newspaper accounts were circulated in Europe which greatly exaggerated the worst details. Zebulon Butler and his men were said to have been invited out to a parley, enticed on and on by a white flag, which always moved as they approached, until they were surrounded and destroyed. The terms of the surrender were falsified. Indian Butler, when asked what terms he would grant, was said to have replied " the hatchet." He is charged with dressing and painting his white men like Indians, shutting up the garrison in the fort and burning them alive; also with shutting the women and children in their houses and burning them alive, cutting out the tongues of cattle and leaving them to perish, together with other enormities.
All this was taken from an account sent from Pough-
288
The Connecticut Invasion
keepsie to various newspapers a short time after the massacre, made up from the statements of frightened women and excited men. It was accepted as the truth for many years, copied into the histories of the Revolu- tion by Ramsay, Gordon, and Botta, and used by Chief- Justice Marshall in his " Life of Washington." But the investigations of Miner during the first half of the present century, his thorough examination of every eye-witness that could be found, revealed the true situation, and re- duced the tale to its proper proportions.
Campbell, in his poem of Gertrude, so far as he con- fined himself to actualities at all, seems to have been in- fluenced by the Poughkeepsie story. He represents the women, children, and men retreating to a fort, or tower, as he calls it, which is attacked, and Gertrude and her father fall bleeding on each other's bodies before the eyes of the lover, Waldegrave.
The story of the battle was valuable in its day, but not because of its exaggeration, for the true story would have been equally valuable. It drew the sympathy of all Europe to the side of the Americans. It weakened the Tory party in England, and encouraged those who, like Burke and Lord Chatham, sympathized with the colonies. It gave an impulse to eloquence and a sting to sarcasm. There was but little moral support for that administra- tion which, as one of those orators expressed it, " had associated with the arms of England the tomahawk and scalping-knife of the savage."
It was the most disastrous victory the British ever won in America. It can be truthfully said that of all the Americans who fell in the Revolution, none died more effectively for their country than the " undisci-
19
289
The Making of Pennsylvania
plined, the youthful, and the aged" who perished in the Battle of Wyoming.
But whatever moral support may have been gained, it was not enough to satisfy Washington and other public men. The Six Nations would come again. They were the worst part of the British army. It was decided to tear out, root and branch, the whole system of Indian alliance in New York, and destroy forever that budding civilization which a great nation was turning from its purpose. The man selected for the task was General Sullivan, who had been born in Maine of Irish parentage, and afterwards became a citizen of New Hampshire. He was of the dashing type, well adapted for a cutting-out expedition, with the faults, that often go with that char- acter, of a hasty temper and a reckless tongue.
His army assembled at Wyoming, and on the 31st day of July, 1779, set out for the north, over three thousand strong. From the time of his arrival at Wyoming the Indians and British played all round him, cutting off stragglers and killing isolated settlers and hunters. Brant attacked the Minisink settlement in Orange County, New York, and also the Connecticut settlement at Lackawaxen. The rangers who went to relieve these places were led on and on, by the apparent retreat of the Indians, until they were ambuscaded, and more than a hundred of them killed. Brant boasted that he returned from these expeditions with double as many scalps and prisoners as he had warriors.
All this was to distract the attention of Sullivan and turn him aside from his main object. But he gave no heed to such attempts, and sent out no side expeditions, either for relief or revenge. He marched straight up the
290
The Connecticut Invasion
Susquehanna, aiming for the very heart of the Indian empire. The savages and Tories mustered about two thousand men under the command of Butler, Brant, and the Johnsons, and made a final stand on the Tioga River below Newtown.
The battle was short and decisive, and Sullivan passed on among the beautiful lakes Seneca, Cayuga, and Canandaigua, and reached the Genesee River, in the northwestern part of the State, where the level valley, extending for twenty miles, with scarcely a tree, and all under Indian cultivation, astonished the eyes of his soldiers. We can form some idea of the extent of this Indian civilization when we find that Sullivan reported that he had destroyed forty towns, and that his army of nearly four thousand men had been occupied for a month in this work of destruction. Some towns were left untouched for lack of time. Apple and peach orchards were girdled, and corn and vegetables were burnt. An entry in the Journal of Colonel Adam Hubley shows the method.
"Wednesday, September 15th .- This morning the whole army, excepting a covering party, were engaged in destroying the corn, beans, potatoes, and other vegetables, which were in quantity immense, and in goodness unequalled by any I ever yet saw. Agreeable to a moderate calculation, there was not less than two hundred acres, the whole of which was pulled and piled up in large heaps, mixed with dry wood, taken from the houses, and consumed to ashes."
Eleven years afterwards, Big Tree, a Seneca Indian, and member of a delegation to the United States Govern- ment, was in Philadelphia. "Father," he said, addressing Washington, "when your army entered the country of the Six Nations, we called you the town-destroyer. To
291
1
The Making of Pennsylvania
this day, when your name is heard, our women look behind and turn pale, and our children cling closer to the necks of their mothers."
Such was the end of the Six Nations and their alliance with the British. Individual depredations still continued, and for many years scalping parties crept through the woods about Wyoming. But their organization as a nation was destroyed, their empire gone. The following winter most of them were quartered on the Niagara River near Buffalo, where they had to subsist on salt meat, fur- nished by the British, and were decimated by the scurvy. They soon dwindled to that remnant which we now see, in summer time, selling baskets at Saratoga and Richfield Springs.
No sooner was the Revolution ended than Pennsyl- vania appealed to the Continental Congress to settle her dispute with Connecticut. The question was growing in importance. The land was no longer the private property of a family to be held for speculation. It was part of the State, belonged to the people, and the rapidly growing population were anxious to enter it and reap the advantage of its fertility.
During the contest with England, Pennsylvania had refrained from pushing the matter, and in fact had been specially requested by Congress to refrain, as there were already contests enough. But within fifteen days after Lord Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown, a petition was presented to Congress asking that the case be heard under that clause of the Articles of Confederation which provided for the settlement of disputed boundaries. By August of the following year, 1782, the two States had mutually agreed on the persons who should constitute a
292
The Connecticut Invasion
court, and this Court of Commissioners opened its ses- sions November 12, at Trenton, New Jersey. William Bradford, Joseph Reed, James Wilson, and Jonathan D. Sergeant appeared as counsel for Pennsylvania, and Eliphalet Dyer, William S. Johnson, and Jesse Root appeared for Connecticut.
The trial and argument lasted forty-one days, and must have completely exhausted the subject. But un- fortunately only short notes of the arguments of counsel have come down to us, and the court abstained from giving the reasons for their decision, which was short and carefully worded.
" The Cause has been well argued by the learned Counsel on both sides.
" The Court are now to pronounce their sentence or judgment.
" We are unanimously of opinion that Connecticut has no right to the lands in controversy.
"We are also unanimously of opinion that the jurisdiction and pre- emption of all the territory lying within the Charter of Pennsylvania, and now claimed by the State of Connecticut, do of right belong to the State of Pennsylvania.
" Wm. Whipple.
" Welcome Arnold.
" Dan'l Brearly.
" Cyrus Griffin.
" Wm. C. Houston.
" Trenton, 30th Dec., 1782."
1
The decree of the commissioners was quietly acqui- esced in by Connecticut. It was the first instance in which a serious conflict between two States had been settled by the powers given to the Union under the Articles of Confederation. The Union had dealt suc- cessfully with outside enemies in the Revolution ; but it was a question whether it would be strong enough to
293
2
The Making of Pennsylvania
settle internal disputes. The Trenton decision was an important step in nationality.
Why the reasons for such an important decision should be withheld the commissioners never vouchsafed to ex- plain. When they first met they adopted a resolution that, no matter what their decision should be, they would never disclose its reasons; and neither the prying curi- osity of that generation nor the subsequent investiga- tions of learned antiquarians have been able to unveil the mystery.
Probably they were influenced by the thought that this was the first decision under the Continental Union of a serious dispute between two independent States. If their decision should be accepted and quietly acquiesced in, a great step in uniting the country would have been gained. But if the decision should be attacked, criti- cised, or resisted, any substantial Union of the States might forever after be impossible. It was a case that would test the real intentions of the people. It was an American question, more than a question of either Pennsylvania or Connecticut. It was important, there- fore, that whatever was done should be done thoroughly, surely, and with as little chance as possible for attack. They may have heard of Lord Mansfield's advice to the unlearned men who were going out to be judges in India. "Decide the cases," said his Lordship, "by your common sense, and if you never give your reasons it will be hard to prove that you have made a mistake."
If we had full reports of the arguments of counsel it might be possible to supply some of these reasons which the court declined to give. But we have only the short headings which some of the lawyers made in preparing
294
The Connecticut Invasion
for their speeches, and a letter or two describing in a general way what was said. The headings are very in- adequate material from which to reconstruct arguments. Wilson's speech occupied four days; but his headings are all contained in a little over a page of print.
Judging by the material we have, it would seem that the Connecticut counsel treated the question as one of mere title to land as between private individuals, and took advantage of every small technicality and every cause of delay. They professed to have lost their great Indian deed. They declared they had looked every- where for it in vain, and were chaffed by the Pennsyl- vania counsel, who asked them if they had looked in their breeches' pockets.
They produced it quickly enough, however, when ordered to produce it by the court. They acted all through the case after the manner of men who knew that the decision would be against them, and were determined to make a good appearance by fighting every point.
The Pennsylvania counsel took broader ground. Some of Wilson's notes point to the argument already made, which had formerly been urged by Provost Smith, that the king as sovereign of all the land had the legal right to alter old grants, and his last grant was binding. One of the notes says, " What was the inten- tion of the parties when the sale or jurisdiction was granted ?" Another says, "The power of explaining the old charters in America according to equity and intention was vested in the Crown, now in the United States." Many of his notes refer to the subject of " intention," and he apparently dwelt long on that point.
295
The Making of Pennsylvania
Some of Sergeant's notes are to the same effect. He reminds the court that the Susquehanna Company, at the suggestion of the Connecticut Assembly, had applied to the Crown for a new grant of Wyoming. This showed that they believed the Pennsylvania title valid, and wanted to correct it by a fresh grant. He also calls attention to the point that, although the king had made the famous Plymouth grant, he afterwards granted to others some of the lands comprised in it.
Wilson and Sergeant were both well-known men. Wilson a few years after took a prominent part in the convention which framed the National Constitution. Sergeant had been a member of the Continental Con- gress, attorney-general of the State, and was the father of John Sergeant, one of the famous leaders of the Philadelphia bar.
Hoyt, in his "Brief of a Title," suggests that one of the arguments made by the Pennsylvania counsel must have carried great weight. It was in evidence that from the time of her charter in 1662 up to the middle of the next century, a period of almost a hun- dred years, Connecticut had made no attempt to take possession of or settle her western land. It, therefore, became derelict, abandoned, and opened to the next actual settlers who should enter it under any authority from the Crown. As a matter of fact, the Penns had built some huts at Wyoming a short time before Con- necticut effected any actual settlement, and thus made their right secure.
Several of Wilson's notes refer to the argument from policy and convenience, and doubtless this point was fully elaborated. It was evidently for the best interests
296
The Connecticut Invasion
of the country at large that the Pennsylvania title should prevail. There was nothing to be gained by having a State split up into fragments, with other States intervening between the fragments. There was no ad- vantage in Connecticut having a piece of jurisdiction in New England, another piece in Pennsylvania, and per- haps a third in Ohio. Why should there be a Connec- ticut No. I, and a Connecticut No. 2 ?
If Connecticut were allowed to do this, other States must be allowed to do it. Massachusetts claimed seven millions of acres in the western part of New York, because her charter, like that of Connecticut, reached from sea to sea. Virginia also had similar western pos- sessions. It would be better for the peace and stability of the new Union for each State to be centralized and
compact.
Connecticut in New England was large
enough. But if she attempted to enlarge herself by taking half of Pennsylvania, she would cut down Penn- sylvania to an insignificant commonwealth, and not materially benefit herself, for the branch would be too far from the parent stem to be a source of power. These western claims of New England States were a continuous cause of civil war. The Massachusetts claim in New York had already, like the claim of Connecticut in Penn- sylvania, brought about a great loss of property, and led to cruelty and bloodshed. If all these claims were cut off, New England would lose no real advantage, and trouble would cease.
These were the views of the political leaders of the time, and all the disputes about outlying western lands were settled on that basis. The lands outlying within the bounds claimed by another State were given to the
297
The Making of Pennsylvania
State within which they lay. The far western lands, beyond the bounds claimed by any State, were surren- dered to the United States as a common fund for the benefit of all. Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia accepted this rule, and in the end gave up their outlying territory to the general government. It was the obviously wise policy.
So wise was it, and so thoroughly in accord were the public men of the time, that it has been supposed that there was a secret understanding between Congress and the members of the Trenton Court that the Pennsylvania title should be quietly allowed to prevail, and that Con- necticut should receive a grant farther west to quiet her people. Connecticut did receive from Congress such a grant, and held for a time that part of Ohio still known as the Western Reserve. But that there was a conspiracy or agreement of this kind is a mere supposition, unsup- ported by a single fact.
The fair Wyoming was turned over to her Pennsyl- vania lovers, and everybody felt that the new union was valuable for other things than war. It might have been supposed that troubles would cease. But, unfortunately, the Trenton decision settled only the question of political jurisdiction. That was the only question before the court, and the only point on which they were willing to hear testimony and argument. The right of the Con- necticut settlers to retain their lots and farms, after the question of political jurisdiction had been passed upon, was left undecided.
The Articles of Confederation provided a method for settling this private right of soil by a tribunal separate
298
The Connecticut Invasion
from that which decided the political boundaries. After they had entered their decree at Trenton the commis- sioners had addressed a letter to the chief executive of Pennsylvania, urging that, for the sake of peace and order, the Connecticut settlers be left undisturbed on their lands until their title could be tried in the way pro- vided. This letter was kept secret by the Pennsylvania government for many years, and for reasons which will become clearer as we advance.
As to the right of these settlers to continue to own their farms, there has never been but one opinion among the honest and intelligent. They had entered under color of title. They had been led by all the circum- stances of the situation to believe their title good. It had been given to them by a recognized and orderly government. They had cultivated the land, improved it, and, with a heroism almost unequalled in history, defended the northern border of Pennsylvania against the British and the Indians. The transfer of the valley from Connecticut to Pennsylvania should have been merely a change of political government, allowing private titles to stand as they were found. The Pennsylvania claimants, who had been induced to buy paper titles from the Penns, but who had never occupied or improved the land, should have been reimbursed for their loss from the public treasury.
The precedents governing the case were numerous. There had already been boundary disputes between Rhode Island and Connecticut, between Massachusetts and Connecticut, between Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and between New York and Connecticut. In all of these the private right to the soil had remained
299
The Making of Pennsylvania
unaltered by the change of political jurisdiction. Penn- sylvania herself had already had two famous boundary disputes, one with Maryland and another with Virginia, and in both of these the same rule had been followed.
The only instance in which an attempt had been made to disregard the rule was in the contest between New York and New Hampshire. The land in dispute was that known as the " New Hampshire Grants," afterwards the State of Vermont. This territory had been settled under New Hampshire titles, which New York attempted to abrogate in favor of the titles she had subsequently granted to her own citizens. The consequence was a long, petty civil war in which the gallant Vermonters were successful, expelled the invaders, and New York finally acquiesced in the rule which she found herself unable to break. All this was perfectly familiar to the men of that time. It was an age of boundary disputes, and it is scarcely too much to say that every man in the country capable of doing a day's work was well informed as to what was right and just in such matters.
But, as already shown, a class of people had grown up in Pennsylvania who loved Wyoming, but not for her beauty and romance. These were the persons who had obtained title to the land through the sales made by the Penn family in 1771. As time went on, and the original tracts were divided and subdivided by sales and inheritance, these people became more and more numer- ous until they were a power in the community, and ac- quired the doubtful honor of forming our first legislative lobby. Upon their heads rests a large part of the re- sponsibility for the subsequent vacillating and disgrace- ful conduct of the government. How easily wrong
300
The Connecticut Invasion
begets wrong, and misfortune breeds misfortune! Every new tribulation of Wyoming is more complicated than the last, and now we have a Third Pennamite War.
The full details of the struggle would fill the remaining pages of this volume, and the legal problems involved are more intricate than those of the charters. Penn- sylvania never offered to submit the question of private ownership to the tribunal provided in the Articles of Confederation. Such a tribunal would have, in all prob- ability, decided in favor of the Connecticut settlers. The settlers made repeated efforts to have it appointed, and in 1784 the Continental Congress actually passed a bill to that effect. But the strong remonstrance of the Penn- sylvania Legislature and the efforts of the Pennsylvania members in Congress compelled its repeal. Pennsyl- vania was determined to work out the problem in her own way, through her own courts and legislature.
The first action taken by the assembly was to appoint commissioners to inquire of the matter, and, meantime, all legal proceedings against the settlers were stayed. The commissioners set out for Wyoming, and were under the control of the land-jobbers. They coolly in- formed the settlers that they could remain on half their land under a lease for one year. At the end of that time they must surrender all. The widows of the men slain by the savages were to have a further indulgence of an additional year, but only on half their land.
That these proposals should be refused, and refused with indignation, was to be expected. But when the commissioners returned, the land-jobbing legislature justified all their doings and sent them back with two companies of soldiers to carry out their plans.
301
The Making of Pennsylvania
The commissioners had previously remodelled the government of Wyoming, dividing it into two Pennsyl- vania townships, and electing justices of the peace. Under the lead of a certain Alexander Patterson, a Scotch-Irishman, who was now in charge of proceedings, the name of Wilkesbarre was changed to Londonderry. Zebulon Butler was arrested and imprisoned on the charge of high treason. He had protested against the disorders of Patterson's soldiery. Old and respectable citizens were seized, thrown into loathsome jails, starved, and insulted. Land-owners were ejected, their cattle driven off, their barns burnt, and the Pennsylvania claimants put in possession.
A slight show of resistance gave Patterson the oppor- tunity he wanted, and with a little bloodshed he anni- hilated the settlement. The plundered and homeless Yankees once more sought the paths to the eastward,- those paths so often trod by the faint and failing. They passed again through the Shades of Death, and the scenes of the Indian massacre were repeated. The women and children hunted through the swamps and mountains had but little to choose between their former and their present pursuers, the Indian Brant and the white man Patterson.
This Patterson had been in the employ of the proprie- tors all through the Pennamite wars, a service of which he was very proud. Some of the men under him were also veterans of the same campaigns. They had culti- vated a fierce hatred for the Connecticut settlers, which they expressed in violent language. Patterson's official communications to the government denounce the settlers as banditti, perjurers, ruffians, and .a despicable herd.
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.