Mississippi Territory promised “a very generous reward” for the
capture of Samuel Mason and Wiley Harpe. Monette says the governor
“offered a liberal reward for the robber Mason, dead or alive,
and the proclamation was widely distributed.” J. F. H. Claiborne,
in his _History of Mississippi_, states that the proclamation was
issued and a reward of two thousand dollars was offered for the
capture of Mason and Harpe. No two historians make precisely the
same statements regarding the reward. It is more than likely that a
printed proclamation was issued, although an effort to find a copy
or reprint has been futile. The proclamation in all probability
gave, among other things, the facts embraced in the following
statement quoted from a letter written two years later by Governor
Claiborne to James Madison, who was then Secretary of State at
Washington: “A reward of four hundred dollars for apprehending them
was offered by the Secretary of War, and five hundred dollars by
myself, in my character as Governor of the Territory.”
The extermination of Mason and his band was a matter of serious
importance to the law abiding and peace loving citizens of the
Territory. And now that a reward of at least nine hundred dollars
had been offered and the militia directed to search for the
outlaws, the prospects of capture appeared very encouraging.
It was known that Mason and Harpe had lived in Kentucky and at
Cave-in-Rock, and it was therefore apparently presumed that they
were old and constant associates. The two outlaws, however, may
never have met in Kentucky nor at the Cave. Whether or not Mason
the robber and Harpe the brute were in the same band, both,
nevertheless, deserved the severest punishment that could be
inflicted by a pioneer people.
A number of highway robbers and river pirates had been arrested
during the time Mason was working in Mississippi, but Samuel
Mason and Wiley Harpe, the most notorious of them all, had evaded
arrest. Where were they likely to be found? As a matter of fact
outlaws camped at any place they found convenient and well adapted
for their work, but never remained long at any one spot. It was
known that Samuel Mason had, at one time, lived about twenty miles
northeast of Natchez, near what is now Fayette. [81] Shortly after
the Baker highway robbery had taken place it was discovered that
at the time of the robbery Mason’s headquarters was near Rocky
Springs, a stopping place on the old Natchez Trace some forty
miles northeast of Natchez and twenty miles south of Vicksburg.«23»
Draper in a brief note [12H] says Mason spent much time at Palmyra
and on Stack Island. Palmyra then, as now, was a very small
settlement on the Mississippi, about twenty miles below Vicksburg.
Stack Island, also known as Crow’s Nest or Island No. 94, was
washed away shortly after Mason’s day, and in time most of its
traditions disappeared. It was on Stack Island, near the mouth of
Lake Providence, about fifty-five miles below Vicksburg, that we
first hear of Mason--after organized bands began to search for him.
Claiborne, the historian, states that: “After the Governor’s
proclamation had been issued Mason and his gang were closely
hunted by the whites and Indians and, having made some narrow
escapes, they quit the country and crossed the Mississippi to
somewhere about Lake Providence [Louisiana] in the then Spanish
territory.” Whether at Lake Providence (which is on the Spanish
side of the Mississippi but practically on the river) or on the
nearby Stack Island in the river, Mason was in a position to flee
easily into that part of the great Spanish wilderness which today
is northern Louisiana and the state of Arkansas. There he could
not only conceal himself more effectually, but also live with
some confidence that the Spanish authorities would not attempt to
capture him.
At Stack Island Mason laid his hand upon fate. The band robbed a
traveler and found among his effects a copy of Governor Claiborne’s
proclamation. [26] Monette says that Mason read it aloud and
“indulged in much merriment on the occasion.” The statement in the
proclamation that Wiley (or Little) Harpe, the Kentucky desperado,
was a member of his gang convinced Mason that the authorities were
in great fear of the prowess of his band and were driven to arouse
the public to terror and activity by conjuring with the dreadful
name of Harpe. Mason was feeling good, notwithstanding the hue and
cry raised by the promise of rewards for his capture dead or alive.
He was perfectly confident of his ability to escape any American
militiamen or Mississippi posse. He could afford to laugh at the
additional incitement to his capture contained in the declaration
that he had joined forces with Harpe.
Nobody can say positively that Little Harpe was at that date a
member of the band. It is more than probable that Mason would not
knowingly have permitted Harpe to join him. The reputation of
the Harpes for brutality was sufficient to condemn them in the
estimation of even such outcasts as Mason and his men. Somewhere in
that southwest wilderness, however, Little Harpe was concealing
himself from the fate that pursued him. He was hiding under assumed
names, not daring to reveal his own even to the most abandoned
persons he met for fear of capture. Hunted like a wild animal, it
was necessary to lose his identity beyond the most remote chance of
discovery.
The question is _was_ Harpe with Mason when the latter read his
name aloud and made merriment about it? Was the headsman of fate
stalking there at Mason’s elbow, compelled to keep silence and
join in the laughter in that hour of grim jocularity? It was not
until April, 1802, that John Setton appears of record as one of
Mason’s band, was captured with him, tried with him, and escaped
with him. It was not until almost two years later, under most
dramatic circumstances, that Setton was to be identified as Little
Harpe--as the man who brought fate home to Mason and himself and
immediately met the pitiless fate he had so long and well deserved.
All this will be shown later, but it is one of the mysteries of
history whether that day at Stack Island Mason laughed himself out
of the fear of Governor Claiborne and committed himself into the
hands of fate in the person of Little Harpe. There is a further
doubt whether Mason ever did actually discover that John Setton was
Little Harpe.«24»
In May, 1802, we find Mason’s band at the mouth of White River,
about one hundred and fifty miles above Stack Island. _The
Palladium_ on August 12, 1802, in a news item dated Cincinnati,
North West Territory, July 31, says:
“A letter dated, Natchez, June 11, from a gentleman who lately
descended the river, contains the following interesting
intelligence: ‘We were attacked by robbers near the mouth of White
River and a breeze springing up, prevented us from being boarded
by two pirogues, having in each six men well armed. They hailed us
from the shore, telling us they wished to purchase some rifles,
and on our refusing to land, they commenced the pursuit. They
originally consisted of three companies, and were commanded by
a person named Mason, who has left the camp at White River, and
scours the road through the wilderness. About two weeks ago they
attacked a merchant boat and took possession of her, after having
killed one of the people on board.’”
Other robberies in 1802 and in the summer and fall of 1803 were
reported, but by whom they were committed is not stated in the
current newspapers. The one just cited, however, was without doubt
some of Mason’s work. It occurred about one hundred and fifty miles
above Stack Island and three hundred miles above Natchez, and some
three hundred miles below New Madrid, which was then the principal
town in the Spanish territory of upper Louisiana. New Madrid is
now the county seat of New Madrid County, Missouri. The New Madrid
country was six hundred miles from Natchez, out of the Mississippi
territory and in a field where Mason felt he could carry on his
usual activities, unhindered by the men who were pursuing him for
the nine hundred dollars reward. Mason went up the river and had
taken steps toward establishing himself a few miles below the town
of New Madrid, in a small settlement known as Little Prairie, when
in January, 1803, he was trapped and captured. He was arrested, not
by the American officials he so much feared, but by the Spanish
authorities who suspected that he was guilty of many of the crimes
that had been committed on their side of the Mississippi River. The
curious story of that frontier pursuit and trial is now to be told
from the French records for the first time.
Mason--Trapped and Tried
The official record of the arrest of the Masons at Little
Prairie and their trial at New Madrid is still in existence. The
whereabouts of this old document has been noted by a few historians
who briefly state that “There is in the Mississippi Department of
Archives and History a record in French of the trial of Mason for
robbery, by the military authorities of New Madrid, dated January,
1803.” But no writer has heretofore penetrated into this manuscript
to discover what the trial revealed or how it ended. It was found
among the papers belonging to J. F. H. Claiborne, the historian,
and is now preserved in Jackson.«25»
The document covers one hundred and eighty-two pages. Many of the
leaves are badly faded. Although the penmanship is far from good,
every word, with few exceptions, can be deciphered. It is filled
with interesting facts and equally interesting perjury. From the
beginning of legislation down through the pioneer days humanity has
ever been the same, and facts and fabrications have been paraded
together before officials who are to pass judgment on the evidence
presented. The Mason trial is no exception to this old practice in
courts, but is rather an exaggerated instance of the tendency, as
common in the “good old days” as in our own times.
The manuscript gives a complete history not only of the
proceedings during the trial, but also of the arrests that preceded
it. It begins with the day New Madrid officials were notified that
the Masons were seen at Little Prairie, thirty miles down the
river. A clerk then, and every day thereafter, carefully noted what
action had been taken by the pursuers and what evidence had been
gathered against the suspects, and continued the record through all
the other proceedings.
The commandant at New Madrid, by whom the pursuit was ordered and
before whom the captives were tried, evidently did not understand
English, which was the only language spoken by nearly all the
persons who appeared before him. Questions and answers were
transmitted through an official interpreter.
There were fifteen witnesses. Eight made declarations regarding
their knowledge of Mason and his family; the other seven were the
prisoners themselves, who testified in their own behalf. Every
witness took “an oath on the cross of his sword” to speak the
truth. In a few instances “and by the Holy Scriptures” was added.
As a witness was being heard the substance of his statements was
recorded in French and after he finished, his testimony was read
to him, transposed into English, and he, “maintaining it contained
the truth to which nothing could be added or unsaid,” signed it
as did the presiding officials. Four of these signatures are here
reproduced in facsimile.
[Illustration: Samuel Mason]
In the official document many statements and legal phrases are
often repeated; they add to its length but throw no new light on
the subject. In the following more or less paraphrased condensation
the number of words is greatly reduced but the substance of the
original is, in the main, retained.
[Illustration: John Mason]
[Illustration: Thomas Mason]
[Illustration: John Setton]
The first entry in the old record is dated January 11, 1803. It
shows that one Pierre Dapron, a citizen of New Madrid, appeared
in court and made a declaration before three officials: the
Commandant, Don Henri Peyroux de la Coudreniere, “Captain of the
Army, Civil and Military Commander of the District of New Madrid;”
Don Pierre Antoine LaForge, “Commissioner of Police and Officer
of the Militia,” and Don Joseph Charpentier, “Interpreter for
His Majesty in the English Language.” Dapron explained to these
officials that he had returned from Little Prairie and considered
it his duty to declare that Ignace Belan had informed him that on
his way to New Orleans with a cargo of salt pork he had seen four
persons at Little Prairie whom he suspected of being members of
the Mason band and although they did not attempt to rob his boat,
he felt their presence should be reported.
George Ruddell, a citizen of Little Prairie, appeared before the
court the same day and “told us by means of the interpreter that
a party of eight men and one woman,” well armed and mounted, had
arrived in town about two weeks before and had taken possession
of an empty house belonging to an American citizen, Lesieur, who
had not been consulted by them nor had they shown any passports.
In the meantime, they rented a ten-acre tract from John Ruddell
and bought a cow and sundry provisions. Among other things that
aroused the suspicion of the neighborhood was the careful manner in
which the house was guarded by the occupants. Ruddell expressed the
opinion that if this was not the Mason band, then it was probably
a part, explaining that “since the Governor of Natchez had the
militia on the lookout for these robbers, the original crowd may
have separated into smaller groups.” He was inclined to think that
although the man called “father” was not the exact size of Samuel
Mason, whom he had seen some years before, he nevertheless felt
confident that “father” Mason was among the members of this gang.
He concluded his declaration by stating that he was acting in
behalf of the citizens of Little Prairie who suggested that these
suspects be arrested and their effects examined.
The next day, “in view of the above cited declarations,” the
Commandant ordered four persons, Joseph Charpentier, LaForge,
George Ruddell, and Don Robert McCoy, “Captain of the Militia,” to
proceed to Little Prairie--a distance of about thirty miles--and
there meet a division of regulars commanded by Corporal Felipo
Canot, who had been ordered to the scene. Upon their arrival at
the place further investigation convinced the officers that the
new suspects were Samuel Mason and some of his followers, and that
about half the number had left the Lesieur house and moved over to
a house owned by Francois Langlois. Realizing that the pursuing
party would soon be scented by the suspects, it was decided to
invade the two houses early in the morning.
At six o’clock in the morning George Ruddell informed Captain McCoy
that the Masons had their horses saddled and loaded with baggage
and were on the point of leaving for New Madrid, but Samuel Mason,
known as “Father Mason,” hearing that the interpreter was in town,
expressed a desire to see him and explain that he wished to go to
New Madrid to “justify himself” and clear himself of the crimes
of which he was “falsely accused.” Captain McCoy, George Ruddell,
and the interpreter walked to the house occupied by Samuel Mason
and suggested to him that, in view of his intention to volunteer a
justification, he and those of his people with him would do well
to go over to the house occupied by his other associates where
he would be given a hearing and could make explanations which
would be forwarded to the Commandant at New Madrid. To this Mason
consented and by eight o’clock his party, consisting of six men,
one woman, and three children, was assembled in the Lesieur house
which, unsuspected by the Masons, was guarded by concealed militia.
Samuel Mason, turning to Captain McCoy, immediately referred to the
“unjust imputations” made against him and his people. The Captain
expressed the opinion that his explanation and justification had
better be made in person to the Commandant. A signal was given by
Captain McCoy, and before the Masons realized it, they were “in
handcuffs and chains.”
Then, in the words of the clerk, “We immediately asked said
prisoners their names and the father or oldest gave his as Samuel
Mason;” those of his four sons, in order of age, were given as
Thomas, John, Samuel Jr. (about eighteen years of age) and Magnus
Mason (about sixteen years of age). Another man called himself John
Taylor (later in the trial known as John Setton). The woman had
three children with her and gave her name as Marguerite Douglas,
wife of John Mason. Upon being questioned by McCoy and Charpentier,
Samuel Mason answered that they had come from Nogales (Vicksburg)
and intended to establish themselves in or near Little Prairie,
in accordance with a passport given him. When asked to produce a
passport issued “by the authorities of the locality from whence
he came,” it was discovered he had “none other than the one we
ourselves had given, dated New Madrid, March 29th, 1800.” This he
surrendered to Captain McCoy, who agreed with the other officials
present that it was genuine.
[Illustration: FACSIMILE OF PASSPORT ISSUED TO SAMUEL MASON
Written in French and issued by the Spanish Commandant of the
District of New Madrid, March 29, 1800]
The original passport was inserted between two leaves of the
record book where it has ever since remained. The following is a
translation:
“New Madrid, March 29th, 1800.
“Whereas Samuel Masson, Esqr. has expressed a wish to settle
in this district and wishes to arrange his business affairs,
We, Don Henri Peyroux de la Coundreniere, Captain of the Armies
of His Majesty, Civil and Military Commander of this Post and
District of New Madrid, hereby grant permission to said Samuel
Masson to proceed to Natchez per boat, and on his return
from there, said Samuel Masson may select a suitable place in
this District for himself and family. He, Samuel Masson, having
by oath attested his loyalty and fidelity to us, we pray that
no hindrance be placed to his proposed journey.
“HENRI PEYROUX
“Approved and marked with the flourish of our signature.”
“We told them,” continues the record, “in order that none of their
effects be lost or strayed an inventory of same would be made at
once ... and at two o’clock in the afternoon we proceeded with the
above-named inventory.” This work required almost two days. Every
item was carefully examined and tabulated. There were eight horses,
new and old clothes, many yards of silk, muslin and cotton, old
and new pistols and guns, “a field stove,” a box of salt, three
horns of powder, six barrels of flour, English cutlery, various
other imported goods and more than a hundred other items, and seven
thousand dollars in United States money of various denominations,
of which the series number and amount of each was noted.
The following morning, while the inventory was being made, Samuel
Mason, on behalf of his people, applied for the return of certain
utensils and clothing of which his people had immediate need, and
asked for “a pro and con settlement” with the citizens of Little
Prairie. These requests were granted. On the 16th, the prisoners,
with their property and a military guard, arrived at New Madrid.
How they were transported is not stated.
The trial began the morning of the 17th. “The Commandant having
learned of the conversation Captain McCoy and Charpentier had with
the prisoners, called on these two officers to make declarations.”
Captain McCoy, after taking the oath, declared that his duties as
captain of the militia threw him in the presence of Samuel Mason
much of the time after the arrest, and that the prisoner frequently
spoke to him of the coming trial. Mason, continued the witness,
repeatedly asserted that he had never done any wrong on the Spanish
side of the Mississippi River, and that if time were given him he
could and would, in justice to himself, disclose many criminals. On
one occasion Mason asked “if a man became informer, with proofs and
evidence of crimes committed in the States, could he obtain pardon
for those attributed to him?” McCoy casually answered him that if
he could give such information it would, in all probability, clear
up matters and greatly help him and his people.
Mason stated to Captain McCoy that although it was widely rumored
that he was “the man smeared over with black,” who had committed
many crimes “along the highway,” he could in each instance prove
that he was far from the scene when the robberies occurred. He
denied that he was implicated in the highway robbery or the boat
robbery of a man named Baker, from whom “some three thousand
piasters” were taken. But when he, Captain McCoy, remarked that
Baker would appear in a few days, “the prisoner seemed disturbed
and asked for particulars relative to his coming.”
Captain McCoy further declared that while the inventory was being
taken he asked Mason how he happened to have so many banknotes and
the old man who usually stood as spokesman for his crowd, first
seemed startled and then pretended not to understand the question.
The question was repeated and the prisoners stared at each other
for a moment, when John Taylor (alias John Setton) came to the
rescue by saying: “The banknotes were found in a bag hanging in a
bush, near the road where we happened to be camping.”«26»
Don Joseph Charpentier was next called upon to make a declaration.
The record shows that his statements were practically the same
as those made by Captain McCoy, but touched on a few additional
subjects. He had heard Samuel Mason say that the only thing for
which he could be reproached was having served in prison for debt.
Mason, he said, asked him and some of the other officers whether
or not they thought the money found in his possession was genuine
and all answered, in effect, that they presumed Mason knew. To
this the prisoner replied that he had made no attempt to pass any
of the bills and that if they were counterfeit, he could not be
punished for carrying them. He wanted to know by whose authority
he was arrested, and whether it was likely he would be turned over
to the Americans. He stated he would rather be deprived of all his
property and pass the remainder of his days on Spanish soil than be
delivered into the hands of the United States officials.
On January 18th Samuel Mason appeared before the Commandant,
the Commissioner of Police, the Captain of Militia, and the
Interpreter. Answering questions, he stated that he was born in
Pennsylvania and had lately come from the District of Natchez for
the purpose of residing near New Madrid. As to how he made a
living he swore he had depended upon his plantation, his “horned
cattle,” the labor of his sons and the people he sometimes
employed. He explained that his plan was to have his four sons then
with him, his wife, his son living on the river Monongahela, Mrs.
Thompson (a married daughter) and her husband, another son-in-law,
and a few other kinsmen join him in the settlement he proposed to
establish. He said that he had recently sold his place near Natchez
and the only claim he had on land was located on the Monongahela,
to which he had fallen heir through a “brother who died young.”
When asked why he had not made use of the passport the year it was
issued to him, he asserted that he had been kept busy settling
his business affairs. He added that he had spent much time in the
District of Natchez trying to show that the suspicion held against
him of being a robber was groundless, but notwithstanding earnest
efforts his attempts were in vain.