CHAPTER VII—Significance of the Ordinance of 1787 75

Bibliography 85

School Contests 91

INTRODUCTION

The Northwest Territory Celebration Commission, created by Congress to

design and execute plans for commemorating the passage of the Ordinance

of 1787 and the establishment of the Northwest Territory, takes pleasure

in presenting this brief outline of the history involved, to the public,

and particularly to the schools, whose students of today will be our

citizens almost before we realize it.

Through the study of the thinking and the deeds of ordinary American

people during the formative—usually called “critical”—period of our

nation’s history, even though not so exciting or colorful as were battles

and heroes, we may find some understanding of how this nation attained

greatness, and provide inspiration to our own and future generations.

Through the years vast amounts of material and substantiating evidence

have come to light, and as historians have been able to view this

formative period in perspective, it has assumed an ever-increasing

importance in the foundation upon which our civilization rests.

As yet, that accumulating recognition is largely scattered through a vast

number of specialized studies and books, as various authorities have

unearthed important and vital related facts.

And so this commission has asked the state historians of the states of

the Northwest Territory, with Dr. Harlow Lindley as chairman, and with

such acceptable assistance as they might secure, to digest the available

material into this brief but coordinated summary.

It is impracticable and unnecessary, for the purposes of this book, to

go into further original research. There is ample accurate material

now available for these pages, the prime purpose of which is to give a

fundamental knowledge to all whom it may reach, and to inspire a further

study by those so inclined, to the end that America may know why America

is, and what it really rests upon, and what may be our surest and

soundest path for progress to the continued betterment of mankind through

government.

NORTHWEST TERRITORY CELEBRATION COMMISSION,

GEORGE WHITE, _Chairman_

E. M. HAWES, _Executive Director_

FOREWORD

This brief elementary textbook presenting the history of the Ordinance

of 1787 and the establishment of civil government in the old Northwest

Territory out of which was created later the states of Ohio, Indiana,

Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and part of Minnesota, has been prepared

at the suggestion of the Northwest Territory Celebration Commission for

supplementary study in the schools.

Under the instructions of the commission, and according to our own

concepts of the purposes of this book, it has seemed impossible to

attempt original research or study into less substantiated phases of the

history covered. Rather, it has been our purpose to digest in correlated

form, and briefly, the fund of material which already has been developed

by countless individual studies and writings.

This available material, although now generous in amount and amply

authenticated, requires some explanation. It is to be remembered that the

people of our early westward movement and, to a great extent, of all our

early history, were _makers_ of history, rather than _writers_ of it.

There were settled communities of individuals who summarized the more

humble events of life, even though these events might be more substantial

and indicative than colorful armies and battles.

Resultantly, research into this history of necessity has been largely

confined to the casual and incidental records of the time—letters,

diaries, the meager public records and scarce newspapers and

publications. This has so far resulted in many specialized studies which

are available. The need now is that these be brought together into a

correlated record of an epoch, which will fit itself into the fabric of

our national history.

Hence this book.

Attention is called to the bibliography, which is included as an aid

to further study. Even this list of published material is necessarily

abridged from the more complete bibliography which is available.

Some repetition is experienced in the text, as is likely with subjects

involving many ramifications and treated by different writers.

Those immediately in charge of this work have consulted with

representatives of various historical agencies and a number of prominent

educators in each of the states concerned.

Harlow Lindley, secretary, editor and librarian of the Ohio State

Archaeological and Historical Society, as chairman of the committee

appointed by the commission, has been responsible for collecting and

organizing the material. The executive director of the Northwest

Territory Celebration Commission prepared Chapter I and the latter part

of Chapter V. Mr. Norris F. Schneider of the Zanesville (Ohio) High

School, has written Chapter III. Dr. Milo M. Quaife, secretary and editor

of the Burton Historical Collection in the Detroit Public Library, not

only has represented the state of Michigan in making the plans for the

book, but also has contributed Chapter VII.

One unique feature of the project is the fact that most of the

illustrations are the work of students in the schools of the states which

evolved from the old Northwest Territory. These were made possible as a

result of an illustration contest sponsored by the commission.

The readers of this book are referred to the pictorial map of the

Northwest Territory issued by the Northwest Territory Celebration

Commission to which reference is made on page 4. This map tells the story

of the evolution of the old Northwest Territory and also contains a copy

of the Ordinance of 1787.

HARLOW LINDLEY, _Chairman_.

Columbus, Ohio

July 1, 1937

CHAPTER I

PRE-ORDINANCE SUMMARY

While much of the history of the American colonies has been ably

presented in other school history texts, and it is not the province of

this book to rehearse it, there is reason for a brief summary which will

place in the mind of the reader the background for the events of which

this book treats.

It is not easy to value or even to understand the forces which were at

work in America unless we consider what _types of people_ were involved.

While most of the colonies were settled by Englishmen, this did not mean

that they were always congenial. The Puritans of New England, radical

in their beliefs and zealous in their doctrines, had little in common,

even while they were in England, with their fellow countrymen who settled

Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. In between these discordant groups

were the Dutch of New York, the Swedes of Delaware, the Catholics of

Maryland, and the Quakers and Germans of Pennsylvania.

Beyond these national and social differences were the trends brought

about by their environments in this new land. The rocky and discouraging

soils of the northern colonies, even the climate itself, tended to widen

the gulf between these people and the pleasure-loving folk of the South,

with its broad fertile acres and mild climate. It was inevitable that

the New Englanders should turn to manufacture and trade, while the South

should remain agrarian, and equally inevitable that this should result in

jealousy and rivalry.

But a still more vital force was at work to encourage distrust and

dislike. People of that day took their religious beliefs very seriously.

Even those who fled from a state church could not escape the idea of

state and religion being inexorably related.

Although the Puritans of Massachusetts had fled England to gain

“religious freedom,” they might better have said to gain freedom for

their own sort of religion, for they were as intolerant of other

religious beliefs as had been the Church of England of theirs. Indeed,

Connecticut and Rhode Island were split off from the Massachusetts colony

because of religious disputes. The southern colonies, still clinging to

the state church of the mother country, were anathema to New England and

New England to them. With the Quakers in Pennsylvania, and the Catholics

in Maryland—and all zealous for their own religious contentions—the

tendency was even further from, rather than toward, the building of a

common nation.

And so, with diverse nationalities, religious and economic and moral

distinctions; with widely varying charters from the king and jealousies

between rival groups of European “owners,” we may well wonder that the

colonies got along together at all.

For a century and a half the population increased, and with it the

discordant feeling between at least many of the colonies. They had only

one thing in common—an increasing distrust of and rebellious spirit

toward the mother country and the king. This could result in the joining

of forces against a common and more powerful enemy. And so it did

finally. But in all this there had been no proposal for a new nation, or,

more particularly, for a new theory and plan of government. True enough,

there had been a convention called at Albany in 1754 for united effort

against the Indians, but the colonies were not strongly in favor of it,

and the king would not tolerate the union.

As lands along the coast became more occupied and therefore higher

priced, and the political uncertainties more acute, the more adventurous

colonists, perhaps irked by the restraint of individual freedom which any

government imposes, struck out for the wilderness westward.

[Illustration: MARQUETTE

_Drawn by Howard Petrey, Superior, Wisconsin_]

Also, because we are trying here to study what was in the minds of

men, _why_ they did this or that, it must be remembered that the world

was still looking for the Northwest Passage to Cathay. As late as the

outbreak of the Revolution, and even later, England was subsidizing

efforts to locate this short route to the fabled East. Thus the same urge

which had led Columbus to the discovery of America played a part in the

development of colonial plans.

From the seventeenth century onward, French missionaries and fur traders

had extended their explorations and their scattered posts, effecting

alliances with the Indians, and inciting violent resistance to English

and colonial approach. As late as 1749 Celoron led a considerable

expedition down the Ohio River, up the Great Miami and to the Lakes,

tacking notices on trees and planting leaden plates claiming possession

in the name of the king of France. This had an ominous meaning, in that

the French had done almost nothing in settling Ohio, whereas it was in

this very direction that English settlement pressed.

During this period, which culminated in the French and Indian War, the

colonies did not cooperate, although, as has already been said, the need

for united effort was first publicly urged at the Albany convention.

After the French and Indian war was over, and the title to the Northwest

had been ceded to England, she herself became suspicious of westward

American settlement, and forbade it, even to the extent of giving to the

province of Quebec the lands she had previously given to the American

colonies.

The rugged and fearless individualists who were most likely to settle

the West were the least inclined to conform to stabilized government,

especially if that government were objectionable in any of its phases.

And, removed beyond the Alleghany Mountains, they would be beyond hope

of subjection. Those who had already migrated to the West asked nothing

from the colonies except help in defense against the Indians—and of

this received very little. They were free men—perhaps the freest of any

considerable group of individuals in ages of history. Ahead of them lay

a wide continent, blessed with God’s bounties, and, as law and restraint

caught up with them, all that was necessary was to move farther westward

to seemingly endless lands and natural resources—and freedom.

[Illustration: ROBERT CAVALIER DE LA SALLE

_Drawn by Marie Kellogg, Superior, Wisconsin_]

In 1776 Virginia, in the fervor of her revolt, did give indication of the

trend of her people’s feelings through her “Bill of Rights,” and this

undoubtedly expressed the long restrained but culminating American idea.

When revolt mounted to the utterance of the Declaration of Independence,

that great document set forth in fervid terms the general principles

of the rights of man. But there was nothing discernible in it as to

what specific form or type of government should make those principles

effective.

The Articles of Confederation, which immediately followed, were but the

forced cooperation of the colonies for defensive purposes.

The soldiers, realizing fully that they probably never would be paid

in sound money, with their own meager fortunes ruined by their years

of struggle, and disgusted with the politics, the compromises, and

ineffectiveness of the Continental Congress, turned to the idea of

western lands. At least, their almost worthless pay certificates could be

used in buying land from the government which had issued such money. In

these far-off wildernesses they would find the freedom they craved and

escape from the seeming ineffectiveness of government under the Articles

of Confederation.

Congress had actually voted at the very beginning of the war, and long

before the nation owned a square foot of these lands, to give western

lands as bounties for military service. The separate colonies, especially

Virginia, had given such bounties for service in the earlier wars against

Indians and French. Washington had made a trip to the Ohio country in

1770 to select such bounty lands, and had been so impressed that he chose

some 40,000 acres of his own. As hero of the troops, and the greatest

single factor in preventing their mutinies, it seems certain that his

enthusiasm for these lands heightened that of the soldiers.

Washington, too, saw that a western frontier peopled by veterans whose

earnestness of purpose and abilities could not be questioned, would form

the safest bulwark against attack by the Indians, or by the British—who

if they gave up title at all, would do so unwillingly and with tongues in

their cheeks. But, as yet, there was no determination, or even clearly

defined suggestion as to the form of government which would apply to the

United States. The Articles of Confederation were unwieldy, undependable,

and, if anything, were working against the idea of representative

government.

In 1783, while the troops were in camp awaiting the signing of the Treaty

of Paris, and on the verge of being discharged to go to—they knew not

what—with no money, and with the rebuilding of their worlds yet before

them, they expressed in writing their hopes and aspirations for their own

and America’s future.

This humble document, recorded by Timothy Pickering as scribe, and signed

by 283 leaders of the men, set forth not only their desire for lands

in the West, but for certain principles of government as fundamental

to their hopes, ambitions and plans. This plan became known to history

variously as the Pickering Plan, the Newburgh Petition, and the Army Plan.

Essentially, it was the innermost determination of ordinary Americans

who had proved their sincerity of purpose. It was probably the first

crystallized expression from the men who had fought to establish the new

nation as to what its tenets of government should be. A study of this

document will disclose a striking similarity to the Ordinance of 1787,

when we get to that point in our history.

We must now go back to another phase of the nation’s development, which

was altogether human, and which is with us today. This was the element

of hope for riches and private profit. In those days it was specifically

called “land hunger.”

All of the earliest westward colonization schemes for America were what

we might call “land grabbing schemes” of various merits. To discourage

this tendency many plans were evolved for the development of the West.

From about 1750 one plan followed another in rapid succession. Each

was an improvement over the one preceding it. One is particularly

significant—that of Peletiah Webster who proposed the surveying into

townships of the lands adjoining the colonies—now states—on the west,

and their sale _in small lots only_, and _one range at a time to the

westward_. This would have established a strong and well-settled

frontier, without large speculative holdings, and would have conserved

for orderly growth the great untold areas of the West.

[Illustration: GEORGE ROGERS CLARK WADING SWAMPS WITH TROOPS

_Drawn by Merle June Dehls, Vincennes, Ind._]

After the Revolutionary War was over, the United States had only in

effect a quitclaim deed from England to the lands north and west of the

Ohio.

But the colonies now asserted their individual claims more vociferously

than ever. There were now 13 states, in effect different and independent

nations, each with a desire for expansion westward. Virginia had, of

her own volition, sent George Rogers Clark into the West during the

Revolution to drive the British from what were ostensibly her lands in

the Illinois country. Clark had done a superb job—and claims are made

that he not only acquired these lands by conquest for Virginia, but

destroyed the budding Indian conspiracy that the British under Henry

Hamilton were fomenting, and which, by attack from the rear, would have

destroyed the entire American cause.

Connecticut and Massachusetts refurbished their charter claims and New

York, through its treaty with the Iroquois Indians, made indeterminate

but extensive demands to the territory.

And, lastly, there were the undeniable rights of the Indians to be

acquired by purchase or by conquest.

Under pressure of states whose colonial charter boundaries had been more

restricted, principally Maryland, the states with wide-flung claims

were urged to cede all their western lands to the nation at large. The

contention was that these lands had been won from the British by common

effort and should therefore be common property. Here, at last, was a

definite indication that development was to be toward one nation, rather

than an alliance of 13 smaller independent governments. How strong this

point really was is not certain, however, for one of the great objectives

was to lessen the common debt, and thus relieve each of the states of its

obligations.

However, the unified nation movement was gaining strength. Intermingling

of men in the army, common purposes in defense, and now, property held in

common were breaking down the old animosities.

[Illustration: GEORGE ROGERS CLARK

_Drawn by Sam Delaney, Marietta, Ohio_]

New York took the lead in ceding her claims in 1780. Virginia, richest,

most populous and with best substantiated claims, followed in 1784. This

was immediately followed by the Ordinance of 1784, the first plan to be

evolved for the West, that made _any_ reference to the principles of

government. This ordinance, although passed by Congress, never became

effective because it made no provisions for acquisition or ownership of

land, and, in fact, there still remained the necessity of Massachusetts

and Connecticut cessions and the acquisition of title from the Indians.

Massachusetts and Connecticut finally ceded their rights, but there

still were no clearly indicative signs of what American principles of

government were to become, beyond a broader right of franchise.

Later, Congress passed the Ordinance of 1785—commonly called the “Land

Ordinance.” This did provide for the survey and sale of lands. It

contained some of the proposals of wise old Peletiah Webster, made years

before, for township surveys, sale by succeeding western ranges, and in

plots small enough to prevent large speculation. But it said nothing

about laws to go with the land, and it, too, became largely ineffective

in its purpose.

And so was enacted the Ordinance of 1787 with all its portent for

government built primarily for man, rather than man for government.

As the ordinance was passed by the Continental Congress sitting in

New York, the Constitutional Convention was sitting in session at

Philadelphia. Two months later the United States Constitution was adopted

by that convention and submitted to the states for ratification. In that

great document as submitted to the states there were no provisions for

these rights of men.

But the people of the United States were not at all indefinite as

to their wishes and interests. Only by assurance that the bill of

rights would be included was it possible to obtain ratification of the

Constitution.

The Ordinance of 1787 was now in effect. America had started westward

under a law of highest hope and modern ideals.

[Illustration: INDIAN TREATY

_Drawn by William R. Willison, Marietta, Ohio_]

Most of the humanitarian provisions of the Ordinance of 1787 became part

of the United States Constitution in the first amendments made four years

later—1791—and one of the greatest found its way into our organic law 78

years afterward, when slavery was abolished by the thirteenth amendment.

This is not, however, the whole story of the Ordinance of 1787 and “How

this Nation?” As Abraham Lincoln later said,

“The Ordinance of 1787 was constantly looked to whenever a new Territory

was to become a State. Congress always traced their course by that

Ordinance.”

Every state constitution subsequently adopted as the nation marched

across the continent to the Pacific Ocean reflected the influence of that

great ordinance. Thus, the concepts of Americans, which perhaps were

planted with the first colonists but which bore fruit in the Ordinance of

1787, determined the most cherished fundamentals of this nation today.

CHAPTER II

HISTORY OF THE ORDINANCE OF 1787

A century and a half ago, on the thirteenth day of July, 1787, the

Congress of the United States, in session at New York, among its last

acts under the Articles of Confederation, enacted an ordinance for the

government of the territory of the United States northwest of the Ohio

River. We know of no legislative enactment, proposed and accomplished

in any country, in any age, by monarch, by representatives, or by the

peoples themselves, that has received praise so exalted, and at the same

time so richly deserved, as has this same Ordinance of 1787.

It has been lauded by our great statesmen, great jurists, great orators,

and great educators.

In his notable speech in reply to Robert Young Hayne, delivered in the

United States Senate in January, 1830, Daniel Webster said of it:

“We are accustomed to praise the law-givers of antiquity; we help to

perpetuate the fame of Solon and Lycurgus; but I doubt whether one single

law of any law-giver, ancient or modern, has produced effects of more

distinct, marked, and lasting character than the Ordinance of 1787. We

see its consequences at this moment, and we shall never cease to see

them, perhaps, while the Ohio shall flow.”

Judge Timothy Walker, in an address delivered in 1837 at Cincinnati,

spoke upon this subject in the following words:

“Upon the surpassing excellence of this ordinance no language of

panegyric would be extravagant. It approaches as nearly to absolute

perfection as anything to be found in the legislation of mankind; for

after the experience of fifty years, it would perhaps be impossible

to alter without marring it. In short, it is one of those matchless

specimens of sagacious forecast which even the reckless spirit of

innovation would not venture to assail. The emigrant knew beforehand that

this was a land of the highest political, as well as national, promise,

and, under the auspices of another Moses, he journeyed with confidence to

his new Canaan.”

Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase said of it:

“Never, probably, in the history of the world, did a measure of

legislation so accurately fulfill, and yet so mightily exceed, the

anticipations of the legislators. The Ordinance has well been described

as having been a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night in the

settlement and government of the Northwestern States.”

Peter Force, in 1847, in tracing its history, declared:

“It has been distinguished as one of the greatest monuments of civil

jurisprudence.”

George V. N. Lothrop, LL.D., in an address delivered at the annual

commencement of the University of Michigan, June 27, 1878, said

substantially:

“In advance of the coming millions, it had, as it were, shaped the

earth and the heavens of the sleeping empire. The Great Charter of the

Northwest had consecrated it irrevocably to human freedom, to religion,

learning, and free thought. This one act is the most dominant one in

our whole history, since the landing of the Pilgrims. It is the act

that became decisive in the Great Rebellion. Without it, so far as

human judgment can discover, the victory of free labor would have been

impossible.”

Notwithstanding the high praises that have been bestowed upon the

ordinance, and the many and great benefits that have flowed from it, its

authorship was, for nearly a century, a matter of dispute. No less than

four different persons have had claims to authorship advanced for them by

their friends.

Who, if any one man, was primarily the author of the ordinance, is

uncertain, and now of little moment. The long contention which was waged

as to its authorship serves its greatest purpose in emphasizing the

importance which was then and has since been attributed to the document.

Because of the geographic implications later involved it is worth while,

however, to consider briefly the various assertions of authorship.

Webster, in his famous two-day speech in reply to Hayne, gives to Nathan

Dane, of Massachusetts, the entire credit for devising the ordinance, and

such was the confidence in Webster’s statement, that many writers since

have accepted it as a demonstrated fact.

Thomas H. Benton, in the debate following Webster’s speech, replied:

“He [Webster] has brought before us a certain Nathan Dane, of Beverly,

Mass., and loaded him with such an exuberance of blushing honors as no

modern name has been known to merit or claim. So much glory was caused

by a single act, and that act the supposed authorship of the Ordinance

of 1787, and especially the clause in it which prohibits slavery and

involuntary servitude. So much encomium and such greatful consequences it

seems a pity to spoil, but spoilt it must be; for Mr. Dane was no more

the author of that Ordinance, sir, than you or I.... That Ordinance, and

especially the non-slavery clause, was not the work of Nathan Dane of

Massachusetts, but of Thomas Jefferson of Virginia.”

Charles King, president of Columbia College, in 1855 published a paper on

the Northwest Territory in which he claimed for his father, Rufus King,

the authorship of the non-slavery clause.

Ex-Governor Edward Coles, in a paper on the “History of the Ordinance of

1787,” prepared for the Pennsylvania Historical Society in 1850, disputed

Webster’s claim for Dane, and asserted the claim of Thomas Jefferson.

Force undertook to gather from the archives of Congress materials for

a complete history of this document, but he found nothing that settled

the question of authorship; and although he probably knew more of the

original documents pertaining to the Northwest Territory than any other

man since its adoption, he died in ignorance of the real author.

Hon. R. W. Thompson, in an eloquent address on “Education,” ascribed the

ordinance to the wise statesmanship and the unselfish and far-reaching

patriotism of Jefferson.

Lothrop, in his Ann Arbor address in 1878, on “Education as a Public

Duty,” said:

“It was a graduate of Harvard, who, in 1787, when framing the Great

Charter for the Northwest, had consecrated it irrevocably to Human

Freedom, to Religion, Learning, and Free Thought. It was the proud boast

of Themistocles, that he knew how to make of a small city a great state.

Greater than his was the wisdom and prescience of Nathan Dane, who knew

how to take pledges of the future, and to snatch from the wilderness an

inviolable Republic of Free Labor and Free Thought.”

In 1876, a year in which many buried historical facts were unearthed,

William Frederick Poole, in an admirable article published in the

_North American Review_, presented the history of the Ordinance in a

most scholarly manner. But discarding the absoluteness of the claims

heretofore set forth, he presents, as the chief actor in this mysterious

drama, Dr. Manasseh Cutler, of Massachusetts.

Following, in a general way, the line of argument laid down by Poole,

it is interesting to examine the foregoing claims in the light of the

known facts. In January, 1781, Thomas Jefferson, then Governor of

Virginia, acting under instructions from his state, ceded to the general

government Virginia’s claims to that magnificent tract of country known

as the Northwest Territory, which had been acquired by Virginia by

king’s charter and also as a result of its conquest by George Rogers

Clark in 1778-79. The Virginia cession, regarded as the most crucial

of the necessary relinquishments of state claims, was not completed in

form satisfactory to the United States until 1784. On the first of March

of the same year Jefferson, then a member of Congress and chairman of

a committee appointed for the purpose, presented an ordinance for the

government of all the territory lying westward of the 13 original states

to the Mississippi River. There were two notable features in this paper;

first, it provided for the exclusion of slavery and involuntary servitude

_after the year 1800_; second, it provided for _Articles of Compact_,

the non-slavery clause being one of them. By this provision there were

five articles that could never be set aside without the consent of both

Congress and the people of the territory. The non-slavery article was

rejected by Congress, and the rest was adopted with some unimportant

modifications, on the twenty-third of April, 1784. Whether even this

ordinance was actually drafted by Jefferson is disputed, because it

was an almost identical copy of the plan submitted by David Howell of

Rhode Island in the previous year. However, on the tenth of May, 17 days

after the Ordinance of 1784 was adopted, Jefferson resigned his seat in

Congress to assume the duties of United States Minister to France. As the

Ordinance of 1787 was not adopted until three years after Jefferson had

gone to France, and since he did not return until December, 1789, more

than two years after its passage, there is serious question as to his

possible influence upon it.

Moreover, careful comparison of the Ordinance of 1784 with that of 1787,

shows no similarity, except in the two points referred to above: the

anti-slavery provision, and the articles of compact. The Ordinance of

1784 contains none of those broad provisions found in the later document

concerning religious freedom, fostering of education, equal distribution

of estates of intestates, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus,

trial by jury, moderation in fines and punishments, the taking of private

property for public use, and interference by law with the obligation of

private contracts. No provision was made for distribution or sale of

lands, and under this Ordinance of 1784 no settlements were ever made in

the territory.

[Illustration: MANASSEH CUTLER

_Drawn by Marie Kellogg, Superior, Wisconsin_]

In 1785, on motion of Rufus King, an attempt was made to re-insert

some sort of anti-slavery provision, but it was not carried. This, so

far as we can learn, is the extent of the grounds for King’s claims to

authorship.

In March, 1786, a report on the western territory was made by the grand

committee of the House, which, proving unsatisfactory, resulted in

the appointment of a new committee. It reported an ordinance that was

recommitted and discussed at intervals until September of the same year,

when another committee was appointed. Of this, Dane was a member. A

report was made which was under discussion for several months. In April,

1787, this same committee reported another ordinance which passed its

first and second readings, and the tenth of May was set for its third

reading, but for some reason final action was postponed. This paper came

down to the ninth of July without further change. Poole has given us the

full text as it appeared only four days before the final passage of the

great ordinance. This bears less likeness to the finally adopted version

than does the Ordinance of 1784.

Force, in gathering up the old papers, found this July 9 version in

its crude and unstatesmanlike condition, and wondered how such radical

changes could have been so suddenly effected; for in the brief space of

four days the new ordinance was drafted, passed its three readings, was

put upon its final passage, and was adopted by the unanimous vote of all

the states present.

This rapid and fundamental change in the ordinance tends to discredit all

of the foregoing claims.

Authorship of public documents which attain greatness is usually a matter

for later dispute.

Such documents have probably never been the work of any one author, but

are rather the coordinated expressions of thought which have developed

over long periods of time and in many men’s minds. Least of all entitled

to credit is the “Scribe” who merely recorded the thought propounded by

others, but whose name often becomes associated with the document.

At the close of the Revolutionary War, Congress, in adjusting the

claims of officers and soldiers, gave them interest-bearing continental

certificates. The United States Treasury was in a state of such depletion

and uncertainty, that these certificates were actually worth only

about one-sixth of their face value. At the close of the war many of

these officers were destitute, notwithstanding the fact that they held

thousands of dollars in these depreciated “promissory notes” of the

government.

On the eve of the disbandment of the army in 1783, 288 officers

petitioned Congress for a grant of land in the western territory. Their

petition went beyond a request for lands, however, and set forth certain

provisions of government as essential to their petition. In this humble

and little-known document known variously as the “Pickering” or “Army”

Plan, were contained many of the proposals which later found their way

into the Ordinance of 1787. Included for instance was the then radical

prohibition of slavery clause. This document bears a closer resemblance

in principles and in wording, to the Ordinance of 1787 when it was

adopted than does any other contemporary document. Among the petitioners

was General Rufus Putnam. It was his plan, if Congress should comply

with the petition, to form a colony and remove to the Ohio Valley.

On the sixteenth of June, 1783, Putnam addressed a letter to General

George Washington elaborating the soldiers’ plan and setting forth the

advantages that would arise if Congress should grant the petition, and

urged him to use his influence to secure favorable action upon it. This

letter is of great interest in the development of the history of the

Northwest. It is printed in full in Charles M. Walker’s _History of

Athens County, Ohio_, pp. 30-36.

The chief advantages of this project, as set forth by Putnam were,

the friendship of the Indians, secured through traffic with them; the

protection of the frontier; the promotion of land sales to other than

soldiers, thus aiding the treasury; and the prevention of the return of

said territory to any European power. There were, in the letter, other

suggestions of far-reaching interest; (1) That the territory should

be surveyed into six-mile townships, one of the first suggestions for

our present admirable system of government surveys; (2) that in the

proposed grant, a portion of land should be set apart for the support of

the ministry; and (3) that another portion should be reserved for the

maintenance of free schools.

One year later Washington wrote to Putnam that, although he had urged

upon Congress the necessity and the duty of complying with the petition,

no action had been taken. The failure of this plan led to the development

of another and better one. It is interesting to note, however, that the

men under whose sponsorship and virtual insistence the Ordinance of 1787

was finally evolved had been subscribers to the Pickering Plan of 1783.

In 1785, Congress adopted the system of surveys suggested by Putnam, and

tendered him the office of Government Surveyor. He declined, but through

his influence, his friend and fellow-soldier, General Benjamin Tupper,

was appointed. In the fall of 1785, and again in 1786, Tupper visited the

territory and in the latter year he completed the survey of the “seven

ranges” in eastern Ohio. In the winter of 1785-86 he held a conference

with Putnam at the home of the latter, in Rutland, Massachusetts. Here

they talked over the beauty and value of “the Ohio country” and devised

a new plan for “filling it with inhabitants.” They issued a call to all

officers, soldiers, and others, “who desire to become adventurers in that

delightful region” to meet in convention for the purpose of organizing

“an association by the name of _The Ohio Company of Associates_.” The

term “Ohio” as used here related to the “Ohio country” or the “Territory

north and west of the River Ohio,” as the present state of Ohio was then

of course non-existent.

Also the name, “Ohio Company of Associates,” is not to be confused with

the earlier “Ohio Company” of the 1750’s which had been one of the

earlier land schemes, operating south of the Ohio River. No man in the

“Ohio Company of Associates” had been a part of the former Ohio Company,

and there was no relation between the two companies.

Delegates from various New England counties met at Boston, March 1, 1786.

A committee, consisting of Putnam, Cutler, Colonel John Brooks, Major

Winthrop Sargent, and Captain Thomas H. Cushing was appointed to draft a

plan of association. Two days later they made a report, some of the most

important points of which were: (1) That a stock company should be formed

with a capital of one million dollars of the Continental Certificates

already mentioned; (2) that this fund should be devoted to the purchase

of lands northwest of the River Ohio; (3) that each share should consist

of one thousand dollars of certificates, and ten dollars of gold or

silver to be used in defraying expenses; (4) that directors and agents be

appointed to carry out the purposes of the company.

Subscription books were opened at different places, and at the end of

the year, a sufficient number of shares had been subscribed to justify

further proceedings. On the eighth of March, 1787, another meeting was

held in Boston, and General Samuel Holden Parsons, Putnam, Cutler and

General James M. Varnum were appointed directors, and were ordered to

make proposals to Congress for the purchase of lands in accordance with

the plans of the company. Later, the directors employed Cutler to act as

their agent and make a contract with Congress for a body of land in the

“Great Western Territory of the Union.”

To those who have studied this transaction of the Ohio Company of

Associates in its various bearings, there can be no doubt that through it

the Ordinance of 1787 came to be. The two were intimately related parts

of one whole. Either studied alone presents inexplicable difficulties;

studied together each explains the other. Through the agency of Cutler

the purchase of land was effected and those radical changes in the

ordinance were made between the ninth and thirteenth of July, 1787.

Cutler was born at Killingly, Connecticut, May 3, 1742. At the age of

twenty-three he graduated from Yale. The two years following were devoted

to the whaling business and to storekeeping at Edgartown, on Martha’s

Vineyard. He did not enjoy this occupation, however, and studied law

in his spare time. In 1767 he was admitted to the Massachusetts bar.

This profession proved little more congenial, and he determined to

study theology. In 1771 he was ordained at Ipswich, where he continued

preaching until the outbreak of the Revolution, when he entered the army

as a chaplain. In one engagement he took such an active and gallant part

that the colonel of his regiment presented him with a fine horse captured

from the enemy. Cutler returned to his parish before the war closed and

decided to study medicine. He received his M.D. degree, and for several

years served in the double capacity of minister and doctor. He was now

a graduate in all the so-called learned professions—law, divinity, and

medicine. In scientific pursuits he was probably the equal of any man

in America, excepting Benjamin Franklin, and perhaps Benjamin Rush. He

was a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and several

other learned bodies. Two years before his journey to New York, he had

published four articles in the memoirs of the American Academy, dealing

with astronomy, meteorology and botany. The last mentioned was the first

attempt made by any one to describe scientifically the plants of New

England. Employing the Linnaean system, he classified 350 species of

plants found in his neighborhood. His articles brought him prominence

among learned groups throughout the country, and secured for him a

cordial welcome into the literary and scientific circles of New York

and Philadelphia. Cutler was well fitted, therefore, to become, as has

already been related, a leading spirit in the enterprise of the Ohio

Company. In 1795 Washington offered him the judgeship of the Supreme

Court of the Northwest Territory, which he declined. He became a member

of the Massachusetts Legislature, and from 1800 to 1804 served his

district as its Representative in Congress. He declined re-election and

returned to his pastorate. At the time of his death in 1820 he had served

there for nearly 50 years.

He was a man of commanding presence, “stately and elegant in

form, courtly in manners, and at the same time easy, affable, and

communicative. He was given to relating anecdotes and making himself

agreeable.” His character, attainments, manners and knowledge of men

fitted him admirably for the task of uniting the diverse elements of

Congress to promote the scheme he was sent there to represent. How he

accomplished this is an interesting story.

Cutler’s diary reveals that he left his home in Ipswich, 25 miles

northwest of Boston, on Sunday, June 24, 1787. He preached that day in

Lynn, and spent the night at Cambridge. He also stopped at Middletown to

confer with Parsons. Here the plan of operations was perfected, and he

pursued his journey, arriving at New York on the afternoon of July 5,

1787. He had armed himself with about 50 letters of introduction. One of

these he delivered immediately to a well-to-do merchant of the city, who

received him very cordially and insisted that Cutler stay with him as

long as he remained in the city.

The next morning Cutler was on the floor of Congress early, presenting

letters of introduction to the members. He was particularly anxious to

become acquainted with southern men, and they received him with much

warmth and politeness. He was so genteel in his manners, and so much more

like a southerner than a New England clergyman, that they took a fancy to

him at once.

During the morning he prepared his applications to Congress for the

proposed purchase of western land for the Ohio Company. He was introduced

to the House by Colonel Edward Carrington, after which he delivered his

petition, and proposed terms of the purchase. A committee was appointed

to discuss terms of negotiation.

It must be remembered that Cutler was employed not only to make a

purchase of land, but to see that the frame of government for the

territory was acceptable to his constituents. Thus he had a motive in

making himself agreeable to the southern men. Among the New England

members there existed some antagonism toward the Ohio Company’s scheme,

since its success would cause many enterprising citizens to leave that

section. Massachusetts had a large tract of land in Maine, and she

desired to turn the tide of emigration in that direction; for this reason

Massachusetts members stood in the way of the western movement. Cutler

felt, however, that their support of the company’s scheme might be relied

upon when brought to a test.

Cutler was invited to dinners and teas, where his engaging manner

made him the center of attraction. He used every occasion as a means

of setting before the members the great advantages that would follow

consummation of the proposed plan.

In the first place, Congress could thus pay a large amount of the

national debt to its most worthy creditors without money. Again, it

would open up the Northwest to settlement, thus insuring large sales of

land to civilians. Further, it would establish a barrier between older

settlements and the western Indians, thus furnishing protection without

expense to the government.

In three or four days he had so fully succeeded in enlisting the favor

of Congress that by July 9 a new committee was appointed to prepare a

frame of government for the territory. It was at this point that the

ordinance under consideration bore so little resemblance to the final

document which was adopted four days later. This committee was composed

of Carrington, Nathan Dane of Massachusetts, Richard Henry Lee and two

others. It is quite probable that the members of this committee were

selected in accordance with Cutler’s wishes.

The next morning after the committee was appointed, it called Cutler into

its councils, having previously sent him a copy of the ordinance, which

had already passed two readings. He was asked to make suggestions and

propose amendments, which he did, returning the paper to the committee

with his suggestions.

On July 10, he left for Philadelphia to visit his scientific

correspondents, Franklin and Rush, and also to look in upon the

Constitutional Convention, which was then in session.

The day following his departure, the committee presented to Congress a

new ordinance prepared in accordance with Cutler’s suggestions. If Force

could have had access to Cutler’s diary in writing up the history of

the Ordinance of 1787, the mystery of the radical changes that he found

between the ninth and the eleventh of July would have been solved.

On the eighteenth Cutler was again in New York. On the nineteenth he made

this entry in his diary:

“Called on members of Congress very early in the morning, and was

furnished with the ordinance establishing a government in the western

Federal territory. It is, in a degree, new modeled. The amendments I

proposed have all been made except one, and that is better qualified.”

The frame of government having been satisfactorily settled, Congress

proceeded to state the conditions on which the sale of lands should be

based. On the twentieth these terms were shown to Cutler, who rejected

them. He said:

“I informed the committee that I should not contract on the terms

proposed; that I should greatly prefer purchasing lands from some of the

states, who would give incomparably better terms; and therefore proposed

to leave the city immediately.”

Thus it appears quite certain that the distinctive flavor of the

ordinance and the provisions which have given it greatness among all the

credos of mankind were injected into it after July 9, and after Cutler

had been requested to make suggestions and amendments.

But that these vital changes were not original with Cutler is evidenced

by his later statement, “I only represented my principals, who would

accept nothing less.”

And so the real responsibility for authorship of the ordinance may be

traced to the men at the Bunch of Grapes Tavern, to the signers of the

Pickering Plan, to the sober-minded and unsung men who had fought and

thought a new nation into potential greatness.

At this time a number of other leading persons who held government

certificates proposed to make Cutler their agent for the purchase of

lands for themselves. This would give him control of some four millions

more of the debt with which to influence Congress. He agreed to act for

them, on the condition that the affair be conducted secretly. The next

day several members called on him. They found him unwilling to accept

their conditions, and proposing to leave immediately. They assured him

that Congress was disposed to give him better terms. He appeared very

indifferent, and they became more and more anxious. His ruse was working

admirably. He finally told them that if Congress would accede to his

terms, he would extend his proposed purchase. In this way, Congress could

pay more than four millions of the public debt. He explained that the

intention of his company was an immediate settlement by the most robust

and industrious people in America, which would instantly enhance the

value of federal lands. He proposed to renew the negotiations on his own

terms, if Congress was so disposed.

On the twenty-fourth he wrote out his terms and sent them to the Board of

Treasury, which had been empowered to complete the contract. These terms

specified that the general government should survey the tract at its

expense, stated the method of payment, number of payments, and the time

at which the deed should be given. The most striking provisions of the

contract set apart the sixteenth section of each township for the support

of free schools, the twenty-ninth section of each township for the

ministry; and two entire townships for the establishment and maintenance

of a university.

These terms called forth much opposition, and taxed Cutler’s lobbying

powers to their utmost. He said:

“Every machine in the city that it was possible to set to work, we now

set in motion. My friends made every exertion in private conversation

to bring over my opponents. In order to get at some of them so as to

work powerfully on their minds, we were obliged to engage three or four

persons before we could get at them. In some instances we engaged one

person, who engaged a second, and he a third, and soon to the fourth

before we could effect our purpose. In these maneuvers I am much beholden

to Col. Duer and Maj. Sargent.”

It had been the purpose of the company to secure the governorship of the

new territory for Parsons, but it became known that General Arthur St.

Clair, the president of the Continental Congress, wanted the position.

St. Clair was withholding his influence. Cutler sought an interview

with him. “After that,” said Cutler, “our matters went on much better.”

It will be remembered that St. Clair became the first Governor of the

Northwest Territory.

On the twenty-seventh, Congress directed the Board of Treasury “to take

order and close the contract.” That evening Cutler left New York for

his home, authorizing Sargent to act in his stead. On the twenty-ninth

of August he made a report to the directors and agents at a meeting in

Boston. A great number of proprietors attended, and all fully approved of

the proposed contract and it was finally executed October 27, 1787.

The Ordinance of 1787 undoubtedly represented the most advanced thought

of that time on the subject of free government.

This ordinance irrevocably fixed the character of the immigration, and

determined the social, political, industrial, educational, and religious

institutions of the territory.

As soon as it was adopted by Congress, it was sent to the Constitutional

Convention at Philadelphia, and some of its most important provisions

were embodied in the new Constitution. Notable among these was one in

the second Article of Compact, in the ordinance, stating that, “for the

just preservation of rights and property, no law ought ever to be made,

or have force in said Territory, that shall, in any manner whatever,

interfere with, or affect private contracts or engagements, bona fide,

and without fraud, previously formed.” This appears in Paragraph 1,

Section 10, Article 1 of the Constitution, prohibiting a state from

passing any “law impairing the obligation of contracts.” This is said to

be the first enactment of the kind in the history of constitutional law.

The fact that the Constitutional Convention included this one proviso in

the draft of the Constitution, indicates that consideration was given

the provisions of the ordinance, and thereby suggests their deliberate

omission from the Constitution, for reasons unknown, inasmuch as the

debates of that convention were, by agreement, not recorded.

However, after the Constitution was submitted to the states for

ratification it quickly became apparent that the people were determined

upon specific provision for the rights of men in their fundamental

law, and while ratification of the Constitution by nine states was

accomplished in 1789, it was only possible by assurance that such

provisions would be immediately added as amendments.

In some form, every one of the states admitted from the Northwest

Territory later embodied similar provisions in their fundamental law. The

adoption or rejection of these principles was not left to the discretion

of the states; being “Articles of Compact,” they could not be discarded

without the consent of Congress.

The sixth article of this compact prohibited slavery forever, within

the bounds of the Northwest Territory. But for this form of compact in

the ordinance, it is perhaps possible that Indiana and Illinois would

have entered the Union as slave states. In 1802 General William Henry

Harrison, then Governor of Indiana Territory, called a convention of

delegates to consider the means by which slavery could be introduced into

the territory, and he himself presided over its deliberations. In the

language of Poole,

“The Convention voted to give its consent to the suspension of the sixth

article of the compact, and to memorialize Congress for its consent to

the same. The memorial laid before Congress stated that the suspension

of the sixth article would be highly ‘advantageous to the Territory’

and ‘would meet with the approbation of at least nine-tenths of the

good citizens of the same.’ The subject was referred to a committee of

which John Randolph of Virginia was chairman, who reported adversely

as follows: ‘That the rapidly increasing population of the State of

Ohio evinces in the opinion of your committee, that the labor of slaves

is not necessary to promote the growth and settlement of colonies in

that region. That this labor, demonstrably the dearest of any, can only

be employed to advantage in the cultivation of products more valuable

than any known in that quarter of the United States; that the committee

deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair a provision wisely

calculated to promote the happiness and prosperity of the northwestern

country, and to give strength and security to that extensive frontier. In

the salutary operation of this sagacious and salutary restraint, it is

believed that the inhabitants of the Territory will, at no very distant

day, find ample remuneration for a temporary privation of labor and of

emigration.’”

When Ohio was admitted to the Union, the advocates of slavery made

strenuous efforts to secure its introduction, but were defeated. Indiana

and Illinois territories later asked that the anti-slavery provision be

set aside. More than one committee reported in favor of repealing it, but

Congress firmly maintained the compact.

The enlightened provisions of the ordinance attracted the thrifty

Yankee from New England, the enterprising Dutchman from Pennsylvania,

the conscientious Quaker from Carolina and Virginia, and some of

the sturdiest pioneer stock from the frontier of Kentucky. Even the

light-hearted French contributed to this great melting pot.

Some historians refer to the spirit of the Northwest Territory as the

“first American civilization,” brought about by welding into a national

entity the diverse and imported civilizations of the earlier colonies.

[Illustration: Northwest Territory

_The FIRST COLONY of the UNITED STATES_]

It is at least an interesting speculation as to whether the newly

born United States would have prevailed as one nation, except for

the opportunity given by the Northwest Territory with its new lands,

common problems, and forward looking government for this merging of the

older states’ discordant traditional concepts of government and social

relations.

Comparison of the social, industrial, and educational conditions in the

states of the Old Northwest with those in neighboring states not born

under the influence of the ordinance creates further evidence of the

value of the principles enunciated by the ordinance.

If, in 1861, the principles and institutions of Kentucky and Missouri,

instead of those of the Ordinance of 1787, had prevailed in the five

states formed from the Northwest Territory, it would have required no

seer to predict another end for the great struggle between the states. As

Lothrop says, “It [the Ordinance of 1787] is the act that became decisive

in the Great Rebellion. Without it so far as human judgment can discover,

the victory of Free Labor would have been impossible.”

While it is not claimed that the ordinance was the source of all the

blessings that have crowned these states, still it is certain that it

was the germ from which many of them have been developed. Neither is it

claimed that all the ills of the Southern States arose from the absence

of similar provisions; however, their presence and influence on the one

hand, and their absence on the other, tended to widen the gulf between

North and South and, when the final struggle came, had a determining

influence on the result.

CHAPTER III

THE FIRST SETTLEMENT IN THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY UNDER THE ORDINANCE OF

1787

When George Washington said farewell to his officers at the end of the

Revolutionary War, he gave them this admonition:

“The extensive and fertile regions of the West will yield a most happy

asylum to those who, fond of domestic enjoyment, are seeking for personal

independence.”

While Washington did not become a shareholder in the Ohio Company of

Associates, several circumstances give evidence as to his having been

active in its planning.

Having personally visited the Ohio country in 1770 for the purpose of

studying and selecting lands, his selection of some 40,000 acres in

Virginia and Ohio for himself; and the comments in his journal of the

trip give ample evidence of his enthusiasm for this part of the West.

His repeated statement during the Revolution that in case of failure to

achieve independence the troops should “retire to the Ohio Country and

there be free”; his long and earnest efforts to open up routes to the

West by canal and by road; his great friendship and admiration for Rufus

Putnam; and his later decisive steps in sending Anthony Wayne to put a

final end to the question of Indian land titles and warfare; all these

indicate far more than a casual interest in the plans for and success of

this first western colony.

Washington had himself earlier attempted to establish a colony on the

Great Kanawha River south of the present town of Point Pleasant, West

Virginia. We can readily imagine that he may have deliberately refrained

from becoming an Ohio Company Associate because of the implications of

personal interest which might follow. But when, on April 7, 1788, a

group of his former officers made the first settlement in the Northwest

Territory, at Marietta, Washington exclaimed:

“No colony in America was ever settled under such favorable auspices as

that which has just commenced on the banks of the Muskingum. Information,

property, and strength will be its characteristics. I know many of the

settlers personally, and there never were men better calculated to

promote the welfare of such a community.”

The founders of Marietta settled in the West to regain the fortunes

they had lost in the Revolution. Some of them earned nothing from their

professions during the eight years of the war. They received little or no

pay for their military services, because Congress had no power to raise

money by levying taxes. Finally, they were paid with certificates issued

by the Continental Congress. Because these notes were worth only about

twelve cents on the dollar the expression, “not worth a Continental,”

became a by-word. In desperation the officers looked to the public land

of the West with its fertility, timber, fur, and game as a place to find

the necessities of life. They were not speculators; they were pioneers in

search of homes for themselves and their children.

Several unsuccessful attempts had been made by the soldiers to secure

land in the West before Congress finally granted them a place to settle.

As early as September, 1776, Congress tried to encourage enlistment by

offering bounties of land—five hundred acres to a colonel, 100 acres to

a private, and other ranks in proportion. At the time this offer was

made, the government owned no public land, nor did it until the winning

of the Northwest by George Rogers Clark, the cession of land claims by

the states, and Indian treaties had provided a public domain. In hope

of securing grants in this presumed domain Colonel Timothy Pickering in

1783 formulated “Propositions for Settling a New State by Such Officers

and Soldiers of the Federal Army as Shall Associate for that Purpose.” He

suggested that Congress purchase lands from the Indians and give tracts

to soldiers in fulfillment of the bounty promises of 1776. In the hands

of Putnam this suggestion became the “Newburgh Petition,” which was

forwarded to Congress with the signatures of about 288 officers in the

Continental Line of the Army. With this petition Putnam sent a letter

to Washington in which he asked support for the appeal of the signers

and outlined their plan. His letter included such wise suggestions as

the exchange of land for public securities, the adoption of the township

system of survey, and the advantage of settlements of soldiers in the

West as outposts against danger from the Indians or from the English in

Canada. In a belated response to these demands Congress enacted on May

20, 1785, “An Ordinance for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands

in the Western Territory,” which applied to the lands won from England,

ceded by the states and now purchased from the Indians. This ordinance

made no provision for government in the West, and, although the “seven

ranges” just west of the Pennsylvania border were surveyed and offered

for sale according to its provisions, but little land was sold and this

attempt at westward settlement was a comparative failure.

This further reflects the determination of the American people to have an

acceptable and agreed-upon form of government upon which to build a new

country.

[Illustration: RUFUS PUTNAM

_Drawn by Herbert Krofft, Zanesville, Ohio_]

In these efforts of the officers to secure western lands, Putnam was

the leader. Putnam had been well taught in the school of experience.

After his father’s death, he had gone, at the age of nine, to live with

his stepfather, who made him work hard and would not permit him to go

to school. “For six years,” Putnam said, “I was made a ridecule of, and

otherwise abused for my attention to books, and attempting to write and

learn Arethmatic.” At the age of 16 he was bound as apprentice to a

millwright. Three years later he decided to escape from the severity of

his master and seek adventure by joining the English army in the French

and Indian War. He returned home from his second enlistment in disgust,

because he had been made to work in the mills when he wanted to fight the

French and Indians. After working seven years as a millwright, he turned

to farming and surveying. Soon after the outbreak of the Revolution he

was appointed military engineer. Later in the war he constructed the

fortifications at West Point and suggested that place for a military

school. He retired from the army a brigadier general and returned to

farming and surveying. Putnam was appointed by Congress surveyor on the

seven ranges of townships provided for by the Land Ordinance of 1785; but

he resigned to survey lands in Maine for his own state and recommended

Brigadier General Benjamin Tupper for the position in Ohio.

Tupper was so closely associated with Putnam in western plans that the

two men have been called twin brothers. It has been suggested that the

two men deliberately investigated land available for purchase in two

different regions to compare their advantages. Tupper was stopped at

Pittsburgh by Indian trouble, but he heard favorable reports of the

Ohio country, which made him enthusiastic for settlement. He hurried

eastward and arrived at Rutland on January 9, 1786. Before the blazing

fireplace in Putnam’s home the two men talked all night about their dream

of settlement in the West. When the morning light gleamed through the

windows of the kitchen, the ineffectual hopes of the army officers had

been forged into a practical plan of action by the enthusiasm of Putnam

and Tupper. On January 25, 1786, Massachusetts newspapers published an

invitation to officers and others interested in western settlement to

meet in their respective counties and appoint delegates to convene at the

Bunch of Grapes Tavern in Boston to form an organization for the purpose.

Although this call was sent out three years after the Newburgh Petition,

the prompt response of the officers showed that there had been no decline

in interest. The Ohio Company of Associates resulted from this meeting.

It has been pointed out that most of those attending were also

members of the military Society of the Cincinnati, so named because

the Revolutionary soldiers thought they resembled the Roman soldier

Cincinnatus in leaving their farms and work to save their country. No

doubt the hope of western migration had been kept alive by discussion

at the meetings of the Cincinnati. Most of those men also belonged to

the Masonic Lodge, and this association also unified and perpetuated the

ideas included in the Newburgh Petition of which most of them had been

signers.

At the meeting in Boston on March 1 the delegates elected Putnam chairman

and Major Winthrop Sargent clerk. One thousand “shares” were planned, and

no person was permitted to hold more than five shares or less than one

share, except that several persons could own one share in partnership.

To facilitate the transaction of business, one agent was elected by

each group of 20 shares to represent their interest at meetings of the

company. Putnam, Manasseh Cutler, and General Samuel Holden Parsons, were

appointed directors to manage the affairs of the company. Sargent was

elected secretary and later General James M. Varnum was made a director

and Colonel Richard Platt treasurer. All land was to be divided equally

among the shares by lot. One year after the organization of the company

25 shares had been subscribed, and Parsons, Putnam, and Cutler were

appointed to purchase a tract of land from Congress.

Although largely responsible for shaping the beginning of the new colony,

Cutler did not move to the tract he purchased; he later visited the

infant settlement, however, and his sons, Ephraim, Jervis, and Charles,

became pioneer residents of the Northwest Territory.

Cutler contracted to purchase for the Ohio Company a million and a half

acres at one dollar per acre, less one third of a dollar for bad lands

and the expenses of surveying. Because the public securities with which

payment was to be made were worth only twelve cents on the dollar, the

actual purchase price was eight or nine cents per acre. The tract was

bounded on the east by the Seven Ranges, which had been surveyed and

offered for sale under the Land Ordinance of 1785, on the south by the

Ohio River, and on the western side by the seventeenth Range; it extended

far enough north to include in addition to the purchase one section of

640 acres in each township for the support of religion, one section for

the support of schools, two entire townships for a university, and three

sections for the future disposition of Congress. An interesting phase of

this provision of the contract with the government was that the Ordinance

of 1787 itself made no specific provision for public school lands, lands

for support of religion, or for university purposes. The Land Ordinance

of 1785 had provided for the setting aside of one section in each

township for public schools, but for neither religion nor universities.

But, so earnest of purpose were the men who had written into the

Ordinance of 1787 “Religion, morality and knowledge, being necessary to

good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of

education shall be forever encouraged,” that in their bargaining with the

land commissioners, insistence was made upon these specific reservations.

And so, perhaps outside the formal tenets of law, was furthered a public

land policy which has done much to make our public school and university

educational system an integral and distinctive feature of this government.

Five hundred thousand dollars was to be paid when the contract was signed

and the same amount when the United States completed the survey of the

boundary lines of the tract. The contract was signed on October 27,

1787, by Cutler and Sargent for the Ohio Company, and by Samuel Osgood

and Arthur Lee for the Treasury Board, as commissioners of public lands.

Because the company could not pay the second installment when it was

due, the tract was reduced in size from a million and a half acres to

1,064,285 acres when the patent was issued on May 20, 1792. By giving

100,000 acres for donation lands to actual settlers, Congress reduced the

final purchase to 964,285 acres.

In conformity with the Articles of Association the shareholders received

equal divisions of the purchase. Instead of the 1000 shares originally

expected, 822 were subscribed. When the final apportionment was made,

each share received a total of 1,173.37 acres in seven allotments of

eight acres, three acres, a house lot of .37 acres, 160 acres, 100 acres,

a 640 acre section, and 262 acres.

Had army pay certificates been worth par, the maximum holding for any

individual would have been about $5900, and from that amount down to a

fractional part of $1173. In such sized holdings there could be little

suggestion of either speculation or monopoly. The army certificates being

depreciated in value as they were, the real value of holdings, in hard

money, varied from about $700 down to a few dollars. On such vast capital

was America started across a continent!!

The Ohio Company purchase was located on the Muskingum River for several

reasons. Since the Associates of this Company expected to engage in

farming, and since they were the first settlers, many have wondered

why they did not choose a level tract rather than the hilly section of

the Muskingum. The answers are several: Although they were the first

settlers, they did not have first choice. Southern Ohio was the only

part of the territory to which the United States could give clear title.

Connecticut withheld her Western Reserve of three and a quarter million

acres east of the Fort McIntosh Treaty line. The western land lying

between the Scioto and Little Miami Rivers was under Virginia option.

Since a location west of the Little Miami would have been too far from

the settled part of the country, a tract of suitable size for the Ohio

Company could be found only in the southeast part of the present state

of Ohio. The southern location just west of the Seven Ranges was closer

to New England and was on the then greatest thoroughfare of western

travel, the Ohio River. Furthermore, the Muskingum region was as far

distant as possible from the Indian settlements farther west. Another

advantage was the protection afforded by Fort Harmar, which had been

constructed in 1785 by United States troops under command of Major John

Doughty for the purpose of stopping illegal occupation of the land. Also,

the settlers would have as neighbors 13 families on the patent of Isaac

Williams, which lay on the Virginia side of the Ohio, opposite the mouth

of the Muskingum. In making his choice of location, Cutler considered

all these factors as well as the advice of Thomas Hutchins, geographer

of the United States, who told him that the Muskingum Valley was, in his

opinion, “the best part of the whole of the western country.”

As soon as the purchase was assured, the Ohio Company started systematic

preparation for settlement. Putnam was elected superintendent. Plans

were made in Boston for a city of 4000 acres with wide streets and

public parks at the mouth of the Muskingum. One hundred houses were to

be constructed on three sides of a square for the reception of settlers.

For making surveys and preparing for immigrants, the superintendent was

ordered to employ four surveyors and 22 assistants, six boat builders,

four house carpenters, one blacksmith, and nine laborers. Each man was

required to furnish himself with rifle, bayonet, six flints, powder horn

and pouch, half a pound of powder, one pound of balls, and one pound of

buckshot. Surveyors were to receive $27 a month, and laborers $4 per

month and board. Although these plans were made when it was midwinter and

travel was difficult, no time was to be lost. These were men of action.

They had waited over three years for Congress to make it possible to

carry out their purposes. Putnam decided to lead an advance expedition to

the Muskingum to be ready for surveying and building and planting early

in the spring, and in _five weeks_ after the land contract was signed,

they were on their way.

There is a substantial lesson in this for us who today profess heartfelt

desires and intensities of purpose. Ahead of these men lay months of

winter, severe enough in the settled communities but far more to be

feared in the hazardous wilderness of the Alleghany Mountains. Travel by

foot, for 800 miles with a plodding ox team for part of their baggage,

over the roughest of roads and uncharted trails, and across swollen

streams was to be their lot. So severe was the risk that no women could

accompany the party. During the trip and at its end possible Indian

attacks endangered them. Such was their prospect which they faced

cheerfully, unflinchingly and enthusiastically.

[Illustration: PIONEER PARTY

_Drawn by Betty Kimmell, Vincennes, Ind._]

The company of 48 men was divided into two parties. The boat builders

and their assistants, 22 in number, met at Cutler’s home in Ipswich,

Massachusetts, on December 3, 1787. Cutler not only helped to fashion

the government for the Ohio Company of Associates; he also provided for

their migration a wagon covered with black canvas and lettered with his

own handwriting “For the Ohio Country.” At dawn the men paraded to hear

an address from Cutler, fired three volleys with their rifles, and went

to Danvers, Massachusetts, where Major Haffield White assumed command.

With their plodding ox team they took a route south and then southwest

over stage coach roads, mountain trails, or cutting their own path as

they went, to the old Glade Road westward through Pennsylvania. After a

toilsome journey, they reached Sumrill’s Ferry on the Youghiogheny River

30 miles southeast of Pittsburgh on January 23, nearly eight weeks after

leaving home. At this place (now West Newton, Pa.) they started to build

boats in readiness for the arrival of the other party.

Putnam assembled the second party of 26 surveyors and assistants at

Hartford, Connecticut, on January 1, 1788. But business at the war office

in New York required him to send the party ahead under the leadership of

Colonel Ebenezer Sproat and rejoin them at Swatara Creek between present

Harrisburg and Lebanon, Pennsylvania. When Putnam arrived, progress was

delayed because the ice on the creeks would not support wagons. With the

courage and energy developed by long military service, Putnam set the men

to work cutting an opening so that the stream could be forded. During

the day spent in cutting ice a heavy snow blocked the roads and made

travel difficult. At Cooper’s Tavern near the foot of Tuscarora Mountain

the snow was so deep that they were forced to abandon their wagons and

build sledges to carry baggage and tools. The horses were then hitched

to the sledges in single file, and the men walked ahead to break a path.

After two weeks of this slow travel, they arrived at Sumrill’s Ferry on

February 14.

[Illustration: PIONEER SETTLERS BUILDING ADVENTURE GALLEY ON THE

YOUGHIOGHENY]

On account of the severe cold and deep snow little progress had been

made by White’s men in building boats; but with the arrival of the

superintendent and more laborers the work went ahead rapidly under the

direction of Jonathan Devol, a ship builder. The largest boat was a

galley constructed of heavy timber to deflect bullets and covered with

a deck-roof high enough for a man to walk upright under the beams. It

was 50 feet long and 13 feet wide with an estimated carrying capacity of

21 tons, although, as Putnam records it, it was of green timber and its

real capacity, therefore, uncertain. The _Adventure Galley_ is the name

commonly ascribed to this boat, although as an afterthought some called

it the _American Mayflower_. Rufus Putnam in his diary written at the

time calls it “Union Galley.” Since one boat would not transport the 48

men with their horses, tools, baggage, and food to support them until

their crops matured, a large flatboat, 28’ x 8’, and three canoes were

also constructed. It will be interesting to know something of what these

“canoes” were like. They were not the hollowed-out log Indian canoes, nor

were they of birch bark. Putnam describes them as of two tons, one ton,

and 800 pounds burthen, respectively.

The popular small boat of the Ohio River, large enough to carry more than

would the log canoe, was called a pirogue. It was a log canoe split in

half lengthwise and with a wide flat section inserted between the two

halves. This made a substantial and safer boat, with greatly increased

carrying capacity, yet easy to handle, and, of course, easy for the

pioneers to build with the primitive materials at hand.

And, speaking of boats and pioneers, Cutler records in his diary that

on August 15, 1788, Tupper, who had been among the original party of

settlers, took him down the river to see his new “mode for propelling

a boat instead of oars.” This consisted of a “machine in the form of a

screw with short blades, and placed in the stern of a boat, which we

turned with a crank. It succeeded to admiration, and I think it a very

useful discovery.” Thus, in the wilderness of Northwest Territory and 50

years before it came into general use, the screw propeller was invented

and successfully demonstrated.

On April 1, 1788, the 48 pioneer settlers of the Northwest Territory

launched their boats out into the Youghiogheny and pushed down that

river to the Monongahela. At Pittsburgh they swung out into the current

of the broad Ohio. John Mathews had been working since February 27 to

collect provisions for the expedition at the mouth of Buffalo Creek (now

Wellsburg, West Virginia). The horses, oxen and wagons had been sent

overland to this point. After stopping the entire day of April 5 to load

these provisions, and their equipment, the little flotilla floated on

and arrived at the mouth of the Muskingum on the morning of April 7. The

banks of the Muskingum at that time were lined with tall sycamores, which

leaned out over the water, and so narrowed the mouth that the pioneers

could not see it through the rain. Consequently the current carried them

past the mouth of the Muskingum and below Fort Harmar. With ropes and

the help of soldiers from the fort, the boats were towed back into the

Muskingum. Then the pioneers rowed across and landed at noon above the

upper point.

In what sense were these 48 founders of Marietta the first settlers in

the Northwest Territory? Certainly they were not the first white men

to live in the Ohio country. Sault Ste. Marie was planted by Marquette

in 1668, 120 years before the founding of Marietta. Burke A. Hinsdale

has said that the French posts—Cahokia, Kaskaskia, Vincennes, and many

others—in the old Northwest contained a population of 2500 people in

1766. Wisconsin, northern Minnesota, Michigan, and Illinois had been

major scenes of French exploration and settlement for a hundred years.

But the French made no attempt to colonize their settlements; they

preferred to keep the wilderness a vast, unbroken game preserve for

trapping furs and Indian trading.

When the English secured possession of the country northwest of the Ohio

River at the end of the French and Indian War, the British government

angered the colonies, first by the decree of 1763 forbidding settlement,

and later by ignoring the colonial charters which had granted the

colonies territory “from sea to sea” and passing the Quebec Act of 1774,

in which representative government was abolished.

It is not possible, a hundred and fifty years later, even if it were

possible at the time, to interpret the working of the minds of the

English king and council. It is a fair surmise, however, supported by

considerable evidence, that the crown then saw the threat of American

independence, if the American people could establish themselves in this

vast and fertile empire beyond the mountains where physical geography

alone would make it impossible for the mother country to hold the

colonies in subjection or enforce her decrees upon them.

[Illustration: LANDING OF PIONEER SETTLERS IN NORTHWEST TERRITORY AT

MARIETTA]

As early as 1761 Frederick Post from Pennsylvania, a Moravian missionary

to the Indians, built perhaps the first “American’s” house in Ohio on

the Tuscarawas River. On May 3, 1772, David Zeisberger and a company

of Christian Indians established Moravian villages at Schoenbrunn,

Gnadenhutten, and Lichtenau (near present New Philadelphia). Clarksville,

now a suburb of Jeffersonville, Indiana, had been established by George

Rogers Clark in 1784. Wiseman’s Bottom, four miles above the mouth of the

Muskingum, was named after a man who made a clearing as entry right to

400 acres while Virginia still claimed the land north of the Ohio. During

the Revolutionary War squatters began to settle northwest of the Ohio.

Since these squatters were trespassing on lands reserved by treaty for

the Indians, Congress attempted to drive them out. Ensign John Armstrong

reported in 1785 that “there are at the falls of the Hawk Hawkin [Hocking

River] upwards of 300 families, and at the Muskingum a number equal.” The

squatters even elected one William Hogland, governor. These temporary

and unlawful settlements would defeat orderly settlement, and deprive

the new nation of the income from sale of the lands. To prevent such

illegal occupation Fort Harmar was erected on the Ohio at the mouth of

the Muskingum.

Marietta was the first legal American settlement northwest of the Ohio

River under the Ordinance of 1787.

The Ohio Company of Associates spoke so enthusiastically in praise of

their land that other New Englanders jokingly referred to the purchase

as “Putnam’s Paradise” and “Cutler’s Indian Heaven.” Aside from the fact

that the land was hilly in some sections, it came up to the expectations

of the settlers. In contrast to the cold weather they had experienced

in Pennsylvania, the pioneers found that the trees were in leaf at the

Muskingum and grass was high enough for pasturing their horses. Over

the entire region stretched an almost unbroken forest of great poplar,

sycamore, maple, oak, hickory, elm, and other trees. Cutler records that

on his visit to Marietta he saw a hollow tree forty-one and a half feet

in circumference that would hold 84 men or afford room inside for six

horsemen to ride abreast. The circles counted in one tree indicated that

it was at least 463 years old. In boasting of the fertility of the land

one settler wrote that “the corn has grown nine inches in twenty-four

hours, for two or three days past.” Buffalo and elk were found in the

woods when the pioneers arrived. A hunter could kill 20 deer in one day

near Marietta. Wild turkeys weighing from 16 to 30 pounds were caught

in pens and clubbed to death. The woods were alive with foxes, opossum,

raccoon, beaver, otter, squirrels, rabbits and other small game. Bears,

panthers, wild cats, and wolves were a menace to stock. Schools of fish

made so much noise with their flopping against the boats that the men

could not sleep on board. The largest fish caught were a black catfish

weighing 96 pounds and a pike six feet long, weighing almost a hundred

pounds.

When the pioneers arrived on April 7, 1788, they were welcomed by

approximately 70 Delaware Indians, who were camping at the mouth of

the Muskingum to trade furs at Fort Harmar. Their chief, Captain Pipe,

assured the white settlers that his people would live at their home

on the head waters of the river in peace with their new neighbors.

Encouraged by this reception, the men unloaded the boards for their

houses the first day and set up a large tent in which Putnam had his

headquarters.

On the next day the laborers began clearing land, and on April 9 the

surveyors started laying off the eight-acre lots. By April 12 four acres

of land had been cleared at “The Point,” and work proceeded rapidly in

building cabins and planting seed.

At first the pioneers called their settlement Muskingum. This name was a

form of the Delaware word Mooskingung, meaning Elk Eye River in reference

to the large herds of elk that ranged in the valley. Cutler’s choice for

a name was the Greek word Adelphia, which means brethren. But on July 2,

at the first meeting of the directors and agents in the new settlement,

it was “resolved, That the City near the confluence of the Ohio and

Muskingum, be called Marietta.” History generally records that this name

was a word formed from the first and last syllables of the name of Queen

Marie Antoinette of France, chosen by the veterans of the Revolution as

a gallant tribute to the nation which aided them in throwing off the

shackles of English rule. Why the final a is uncertain.

Marietta was only the first of the settlements in the Northwest Territory

under the ordinance. Many others were to follow rapidly, some destined

to become great or small cities, and others to remain as villages. It is

worthwhile, however, to follow briefly the history of this first official

settlement for its depiction of the type of immigration into the new

country and to illustrate the problems settlers faced in pushing America

westward.

[Illustration: SETTLERS RECEIVING DEEDS FROM OHIO COMPANY’S LAND OFFICE

AT MARIETTA]

For instance, in surveying the city the directors of the Ohio Company

provided for wide streets and public parks. The principal streets of 90

feet in width ran parallel to the Muskingum River and were designated by

numbers. They were intersected by cross streets named after Washington,

Putnam and other Revolutionary generals. The bank of the Muskingum was

set aside as a “commons” and dedicated forever to public use. It was

called “The Bouery” and is today a public park. Within the city limits

the surveyors found extensive earthworks and mounds which supplied

mysterious evidence of a prehistoric race, which had sometime constructed

a city on the same site. Colonel John May described the cutting of a

tree that had grown for 443 years on one of the earthworks. The larger

elevated square was named Capitolium, the smaller was called Quadranaou,

and the road with high embankments from the river to the “Forty acre

fort” was officially designated as Sacra Via. These were all dedicated

as public property and are so today. A creek which emptied into the

Muskingum below Campus Martius was called the Tiber, after the river near

Rome. This use of classical names indicates that the cultured founders of

Marietta were familiar with Latin and Greek literature.

The first cabins had been built at “the point” and a stockade erected

enclosing some four and a half acres. The Indians told the settlers of

the flood danger, showing them driftwood and laconically pointed out that

“where water has been water will be again.”

In platting the city-to-be the pioneers, therefore, laid out an extremely

broad street on high ground as the intended main street of the town, and

named it for Washington. The complete dependence of the time upon river

transportation and the distance of Washington Street from the Ohio River

prevented its attaining its designed purpose and the business district of

the city has never since realized the expectation of those first settlers.

Early in May, when the crops had been planted in the clearing and cabins

had been constructed at “Picketed Point,” Putnam decided from his study

of treaties at the war office in New York that the tribes would not

permit their lands to be occupied without a struggle. May wrote in his

Journal: “At Boston we have frequent alarms of fire, and innundations

of the tide; here the Indians answer the same purpose.” On account of

the danger of Indian attack all men not needed in the survey were put to

work at the construction of an impregnable fort. This defense was called

Campus Martius, after a name applied to a grassy plain along the Tiber

in ancient Rome where military drills and elections had been held. The

phrase literally means “a field dedicated to Mars, the god of war.”

The fortress was located on Washington Street, three quarters of a mile

above the Ohio River. It consisted of 14 two-story houses arranged in

the form of a hollow square, which measured 180 feet on a side. At each

corner of the square stood a blockhouse with projecting upper story.

Loopholes were cut in the projecting floor for showering bullets on

Indian attackers. The entire fort was constructed of poplar planks four

inches thick and 18 to 20 inches wide, which men hewed and whipsawed

from the huge poplar trees that grew along the Muskingum. In one of

the fort’s houses, which became Rufus Putnam’s home after the fort was

dismantled, and which is now part of Campus Martius Museum, can still be

seen the original timbers and form of construction. In the timbers, hewn

in pre-determined shapes, were stamped Roman numerals, and by matching

corresponding numbers, the artisans of that day were able to assemble the

timbers into complete and substantial structures.

The blockhouses and part of the dwellings were built at the expense of

the Ohio Company. On July 21, 1788, the directors ordered that carpenters

be employed at half a dollar a day and one ration to complete the

blockhouses, and that laborers be paid seven dollars per month and one

ration per day. It was provided

“That a Ration consists of 1½ [lbs.] of Bread or Flour.

“1 lb. of Pork or Beef, Venison or other meat equivalent.

“1 Gill of Whisky.

“Vegetables.”

The complete structure contained 72 rooms. When the Indians finally went

on the war path, the inhabitants constructed three lines of defense

outside the fortress. A row of palisades sloped outward to rest on

rails, a line of pickets stood upright in the earth 20 feet beyond the

palisades, and a barrier of trees with sharpened boughs formed the first

defense. Ammunition, cannon, and spears were stored in convenient

places. The northeast blockhouse was used for religious meetings and

sessions of the courts. At the outbreak of the Indian Wars in 1791,

Campus Martius became the principal refuge of the people in Marietta. Of

it, Putnam, who had built West Point and many other Revolutionary War

fortifications, wrote that it was the finest fort in the United States.

While Campus Martius was being constructed, the survey was continued, the

crops were planted and cabins erected and new settlers arrived. When John

May arrived with a party of 11 men on May 26 and was invited to dinner by

General Josiah Harmar, he was served, according to his diary, “beef a la

mode, boiled fish, bear-steaks, roast venison, etc., excellent succotash,

salads, and cranberry sauce.” Venison sold for two cents a pound and bear

meat at three cents. May was surprised to see in Doughty’s garden an

orchard of apple and peach trees and “cotton growing in perfection.”

Varnum arrived with a company of 40 settlers on June 5. Among them were

James Owen and his wife, Mary Owen, the first woman who settled in the

community. The settlers were so industrious that by June 20, 132 acres

had been planted in corn in addition to large fields in potatoes, beans,

and other vegetables.

As soon as the pioneers had provided shelter for themselves, they

organized a temporary government to insure order and safety until the

arrival of the officers of the Northwest Territory. On June 13 at an

informal meeting of the directors and agents of the Ohio Company, it was

decided that the directors present should act as a board of police to

draw up a set of laws for the community. Colonel Return Jonathan Meigs

was appointed to administer them. At the first official meeting of the

directors the board of police was confirmed. The regulations provided for

cleanliness, health, decency, safety, and moral conduct. Military guard

was established. If any persons arrived who were not stockholders in the

Ohio Company, the board of police was empowered to decide whether or not

they should be permitted to stay. Settlers were required to carry arms

during their work in the fields. No one was allowed to trade with the

Indians without permission from the board or from Fort Harmar. Punishment

for violation of the laws was to consist of either labor for the public,

or expulsion. As evidence of the orderly conduct of the settlers it has

been pointed out that in three months there was only one difference,

and that was compromised. On July 4 the board of police nailed these

temporary laws to the smooth trunk of a large beech tree near the mouth

of the Muskingum.

On July 4 all work was suspended to celebrate the anniversary of the

Declaration of Independence. Since most of the settlers had served in

the Revolutionary Army, they observed the occasion with feelings of

intense patriotism. A federal salute of 13 guns from Fort Harmar opened

the celebration at dawn. At “The Point” on the east bank of the Muskingum

a table 60 feet long was spread with wild meat, fish, vegetables, grog,

punch, and wine. Harmar arrived with his lady and officers from the

fort at one o’clock. Varnum, one of the judges of the territory, then

delivered a flowery oration.

After the oration, the guests were twice driven from the table by

thunderstorms before they finally finished dinner. The patriotic event

continued with the drinking of the following toasts which illustrate the

topics of general interest of the time:

1. The United States.

2. The Congress.

3. His Most Christian Majesty, the King of France.

4. The United Netherlands.

5. The Friendly Powers throughout the World.

6. The New Federal Constitution.

7. His Excellency General Washington, and the Society of Cincinnati.

8. His Excellency Governor St. Clair, and the Western Territory.

9. The memory of Those Who Have Nobly Fallen in Defense of American

Freedom.

10. Patriots, and Heroes.

11. Captain Pipe, Chief of the Delawares, and a Happy Treaty with the

Natives.

12. Agriculture and Commerce, Arts and Sciences.

13. The Amiable Partners of Our Delicate Pleasures.

14. The Glorious Fourth of July.

The Celebration closed with another salute of 13 guns and a “beautiful

illumination” at Fort Harmar.

CHAPTER IV

THE BEGINNINGS OF GOVERNMENT

The Northwest Territory at the time of its organization included all of

the region comprising the present states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,

Michigan, Wisconsin, and a portion of Minnesota. The ordinance for its

government was framed and ordained at the last session of the Continental

Congress in 1787.

This ordinance vested the governing authority in four men, a governor

and three judges. Two years later, by act of Congress, “the Secretary of

the Territory, in case of the death, removal, resignation or necessary

absence of the Governor, became the acting Governor.”

The first governor of the Northwest Territory was Arthur St. Clair, who

arrived at the new settlement, July 9, 1788. He landed at Fort Harmar,

which was garrisoned with United States troops. Sergeant Joseph Buell,

who was stationed at Fort Harmar, wrote in his Journal on the day of the

governor’s arrival:

“On landing he was saluted with thirteen rounds from the field piece.

On entering the garrison the music played a salute; the troops paraded

and presented their arms. He was also saluted by a clap of thunder and

a heavy shower of rain as he entered the fort: and thus we received our

governor of the western frontiers.”

St. Clair was educated at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, came to

America, joined the Colonial Army, and rose to the rank of major general.

He served as president of the Continental Congress and stood high in the

confidence of George Washington. His military reputation, however, later

lost much of its luster in his terrible defeat by the Indians on November

4, 1791, in what is now Mercer County, Ohio. He still owned a large tract

of land in the Ligonier Valley in Pennsylvania and returned there for his

last years. He died in 1818 and was buried at Greensburg, Pennsylvania.

The secretary of the Northwest Territory was Winthrop Sargent, a graduate

of Harvard, a Revolutionary soldier with a fine record, and the scion

of an American family whose representatives have risen to fame in

literature, science and art. Judge James Mitchell Varnum, Samuel Holden

Parsons and John Cleves Symmes, who constituted the first members of the

Supreme Court of the territory, had all risen to high rank as officers

of the Colonial Army in the Revolutionary War. Varnum was a graduate of

Brown University and Parsons of Harvard. All were able lawyers, and

Symmes had been chief justice of the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Under

the ordinance for the government of the Northwest Territory, St. Clair,

Varnum, Parsons, and Symmes constituted the legislature.

Their law-making power, however, was limited in the ordinance, which

declared:

“The governor and judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt and publish

in the district, such laws of the original states,—as may be necessary

and best suited to the circumstances of the district.”

This seems perfectly clear. This little legislature of the governor and

three judges could only _adopt_ such laws as were already in force in

the original states. This lucid statement, however, was made somewhat

obscure by the following language in another clause of the ordinance:

“The laws to be adopted or made, shall be in force in all parts of the

district.” At least that appears to have been the practical conclusion of

this legislature, with the exception of St. Clair, who somewhat mildly

warned his fellow members against enacting laws not drawn from the

statutes of the states. After sounding the warning, however, he joined

the other members in enacting laws with small regard to the statutes of

the original states.

[Illustration: GOVERNOR ARTHUR ST. CLAIR

_Drawn by Jane Cory, Frankfort, Ohio_]

The first law enacted by the governor and judges provided for a

territorial militia in which all men over 16 years of age were to be

enlisted. Each man was required to provide himself with musket and

cartridge box. Murder and treason were punishable by death according to

another law, and flogging was prescribed for theft and minor offenses. A

fine of ten dimes was imposed for drunkenness; and, if the guilty person

did not pay the fine, he served an hour in stocks. Other laws regulated

marriage, set aside Sunday as a day of rest, and urged all citizens to

avoid swearing and “idle, vain, and obscene conversations.” On July 27,

1788, St. Clair established Washington County, which originally included

almost half of the present state of Ohio.

After a number of laws had been enacted by this territorial legislature

and had been published by Congress in two small volumes called “Laws

of the Governor and Judges,” the House passed a bill declaring all the

laws of the territory thus enacted null and void. While the bill did not

pass the Senate, it was stated that the members of that body were in

agreement with the House, but that they did not pass the bill because

they felt that these laws of the territory were null without any action

by Congress. The governor and judges found themselves without laws with

which to govern. The legal structure which they had been industriously

building was about to tumble down to ruin. The last of these worthless

laws that they enacted bore the date of August 1, 1792.

St. Clair wished to assemble the legislature, which it will be

remembered, was composed of himself and the three judges, to _adopt_ laws

_in accordance with_ the requirements of the ordinance, in order that the

territorial government might be administered by constitutional authority.

On July 25, 1793, he called the legislature of the territory to convene

in Cincinnati on September 1 of the same year. Due to the difficulties

of communication and transportation it was found impossible, however, to

meet on September 1, 1793, and it was not until the twenty-ninth day of

May, 1795, that a majority of the members of the legislature were able

to assemble in Cincinnati. In other words, it took about 20 months to

assemble to meet this emergency and adopt a new code of laws to take the

place of those which had been nullified by Congress.

Finally, St. Clair, Symmes and George Turner, who had been appointed to

take the place of Varnum, deceased, met in Cincinnati on May 29, 1795,

to adopt a code of laws. The remaining judge, Rufus Putnam, was not in

attendance.

This is the first _recorded_ meeting of a legislative body within the

present limits of Ohio and the territory northwest of the Ohio River.

This legislature chose its officers and assembled in regular session

until it concluded its labors and provided for the publication, in the

Maxwell code, of the laws it adopted, the very first published in the

Northwest Territory.

Governor Arthur St. Clair presided. Judges John Cleves Symmes and George

Turner were the floor members. Accordingly, there were just enough

members present to conduct the legislative proceedings—one member to

make a motion, another to second it, the presiding governor to put

it to a vote. Armstead Churchill was chosen and commissioned clerk

of the legislature. He appears not only to have kept a record of the

proceedings, but to have prepared drafts of bills for consideration. He

received eight cents for every one hundred words that he wrote.

St. Clair read a lengthy address to the two judges. In the opening

sentences one can gather some knowledge of the difficulties with which

these pioneer legislators had to contend. There were no roads, no

steamboats, no coaches, no telegraph. The mails were uncertain, few and

far between. Prowling Indians had not ceased to be a menace. Rivers often

could not be forded and there were few ferries. The “highways” of travel

were the “low ways”—the rivers winding through the unbroken solitudes of

the primeval forests.

The Ohio was often difficult to navigate. In February, 1795, Judge Symmes

made an effort to meet St. Clair at Marietta. We quote the result from

one of his letters:

“On the 20th of February, therefore, I set out from Cincinnati on my

passage up the river, and was buffeted by high waters, drifting ice,

heavy storms of wind and rain, frost and snow for twenty-three days and

nights, without sleeping once in all that time in any house after leaving

Columbia. I waited in vain twelve days at Marietta for the coming of the

Governor, and, he not appearing, I returned home.”

Travel in these times was not only inconvenient and difficult, but

dangerous. Parsons, one of the first judges of the Northwest Territory,

lost his life by drowning, on his return journey from the Western Reserve

in 1789 down the Big Beaver.

After St. Clair’s message, a resolution was adopted opening the meetings

of the legislature to the public. After inviting the public to the

sessions, the legislature adjourned to meet the following day. At the

second meeting the two judges wrote a dignified reply to the message from

the governor.

The record of their proceedings rested securely in an iron box for about

130 years, after which they came into the possession of the Ohio State

Archaeological and Historical Society. This record shows that the members

of this legislature took themselves and their work seriously. What they

lacked in numbers they made up in dignity and decorum. This legislature

was in session from May 29 to August 25, 1795. It completed the work for

which it had been called and gave to the Northwest Territory a code of

laws framed in strict accord with the Ordinance of 1787.

[Illustration: WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON

_Drawn by William Olson, Downers Grove, Ill._]

While these legislative meetings were in session at Cincinnati, General

Anthony Wayne was concluding the treaty with the Indians at Greenville,

opening the Northwest to peaceful settlement. The subsequent rapid

increase in population soon entitled the territory to the second stage of

government provided by the ordinance—a legislature chosen by its people

to enact laws as soon as there were 5000 free male inhabitants of full

age in the territory. This first elected legislature met in September,

1799, and re-affirmed the earlier laws of the governor and judges.

The next year Congress divided the Northwest Territory into two parts,

the eastern part, comprising approximately present Ohio and eastern

Michigan, remaining as the Northwest Territory; and the western part,

comprising the balance of the previous territory, becoming Indiana

Territory. At this time the territorial capitals were first definitely

located, one at Chillicothe, Ohio, and the other at Vincennes, Indiana.

Thus, Chillicothe became the first capital of the Northwest Territory and

remained so until the state of Ohio was admitted to the Union in 1803.

[Illustration: OLD INDIANA TERRITORIAL HALL

_Drawn by Robert Osterhag, Vincennes, Ind._]

While the governor and some of the judges lived at Marietta, and they had

enacted laws at meetings there, those laws had been invalidated. There

was then no officially designated capital of the territory, the judges

meeting and promulgating laws wherever might be convenient. In 1790, St.

Clair had removed to Cincinnati in preparation for his campaign against

the Indians, which proved so disastrous in 1791.

[Illustration: OX TEAM AND COVERED WAGON PARTY

_Drawn by Earl Laweck, Roger City, Michigan_]

CHAPTER V

GROWTH OF SETTLEMENTS

The arrival of Governor Arthur St. Clair and the territorial judges

encouraged immigration by assuring settlers of the institution of law and

order. When the Reverend Daniel Breck delivered a sermon in the present

state of Ohio, on Sunday, July 20, 1788, he addressed an audience of 300

people from Marietta and the settlement of Isaac Williams on the Virginia

side of the river. After Manasseh Cutler returned home from his visit in

1788, General Samuel Holden Parsons wrote to him on December 11 that “we

have had an addition of about one hundred within two weeks.... Between

forty and fifty houses are so far done as to receive families.”

By the end of the year, 1788, the settlement contained 132 men and 15

families, making a total of nearly 200. James Backus wrote to his parents

that their stock consisted of “one hundred and fifty horses, sixty cows,

and seven yoke of oxen.”

In August of 1787 Judge John Cleves Symmes, an influential man and member

of Congress from Trenton, New Jersey, petitioned Congress for a grant of

land between the two Miami Rivers at the mouth of the Little Miami River,

which became known to history as “The Symmes purchase.” In November of

1788 Benjamin Stites and about 20 others settled Columbia and in late

December of the same year Matthias Denman, Colonel Robert Patterson and

Israel Ludlow with a party of 26 men established Losantiville about

five miles west of Columbia in the Symmes tract and in the very center

of present Cincinnati. These two communities became Cincinnati in 1790

at the request of St. Clair. North Bend was the third of the Symmes

settlements and was settled in February, 1789.

All the settlements suffered a hard winter. At Marietta the Ohio was

frozen over from December until March and the settlers could not get to

Pittsburgh for provisions. Their crops were not large the first year, and

the Indians had driven the game away. Many lived on meat and boiled corn

or coarse meal ground in a hand mill. Here again was demonstrated the

heroism of peace.

Isaac and Rebecca Williams, living in Virginia, directly across the Ohio

River from Marietta, had raised a goodly supply of corn, which, because

of scarcity, had reached two dollars a bushel in the markets. Yet they

chose to sell it to the hungry settlers at fifty cents per bushel, and

proportioned it out according to the number of members of each family.

In order to raise larger crops to provide adequate food supply for the

future, two branch settlements were made early in the spring. Fifteen

miles below Marietta a farming community called Belpre was formed by

40 associates who had spent the winter in Marietta. Extending for five

miles along the Ohio, the settlement consisted of upper, middle and lower

divisions called respectively Stone’s Fort, Farmers’ Castle, and Newbury.

Farmers’ Castle was a fortification containing 13 cabins built for safety

during the Indian War. Soon after Belpre was settled, 39 associates moved

20 miles up the Muskingum to establish themselves at Plainfield, later

called Waterford. Fort Frye was constructed as a place of refuge when

the Indian War started. About a mile away a mill was built on Wolf Creek

by some families who lived in the vicinity. Hearing of the growth of the

Ohio Company settlement, the Virginia House of Burgesses appropriated

money for a road from Alexandria to the Ohio River opposite Marietta.

Merchandise was hauled over this road for many years.

[Illustration: FORT WASHINGTON, CINCINNATI

_Drawn by Junior Vahle, Quincy, Illinois_]

The Ohio Company assisted settlers in establishing themselves. Surveyors

went out to lay off the lots at times when it was necessary to maintain a

guard of soldiers against Indian attacks. The Ohio Company’s Land Office

in which the surveys were recorded, is now the oldest building in Ohio.

Liberal grants of land were made to persons who constructed mills for

the convenience of settlers. The first flour mill in Ohio was erected

about a mile from the mouth of Wolf Creek in 1789 by Major Haffield

White, Colonel Robert Oliver, and Captain John Dodge. In 1797 a brickyard

and tannery were established on land provided by the Ohio Company. In

December of the same year Peletiah White started a small earthenware

pottery, which according to Samuel P. Hildreth “was probably the first

establishment of the kind north of the Ohio.” The directors provided for

the fencing and ornamentation of the public squares in Marietta. For

example, Marie Antoinette Square was leased to Rufus Putnam on condition

that he plant mulberry, elm, honey locust, and evergreen trees in a

specified design.

Near the end of the year 1788 the directors of the Ohio Company had

become worried over the fact that thousands of immigrants floated past

Marietta to settle in Kentucky. To attract some of these people to remain

in the Ohio Company purchase the directors offered 100 acres to men who

would agree to build a dwelling house 24 by 18 feet within five years,

plant 50 apple or pear trees and 20 peach trees within three years,

cultivate five acres, and provide themselves with arms and ammunition for

defense. Settlements on donation lands were expected to serve as outposts

of defense against Indian attack. After granting some free tracts, the

Ohio Company found the practice too expensive and successfully petitioned

Congress in 1792 for a tract of 100,000 acres for donation purposes.

Located in the northeastern part of the Ohio Company Purchase, the

donation tract was approximately 22 miles long and seven miles wide. In

the autumn of 1790 a group of 36 men established a settlement on donation

land 30 miles up the Muskingum from Marietta, at a place called Big

Bottom.

The first town meeting in the territory was held in Marietta on February

4, 1789. Colonel Archibald Crary presided as chairman, and Ebenezer

Battelle was elected clerk. A committee was appointed to draft an

address to St. Clair, and report a plan for a police system. The police

board appointed under this plan consisted of Putnam, Oliver, Griffin

Green, and Nathaniel Goodale. In addition to their police duties, these

men appointed a sealer of weights and measures, fence viewers, and a

registrar of births and deaths. Laws were passed for the government of

the community. Many of the regulations provided for defense against the

Indians by completing Campus Martius and by securely bolting the gates

at sunset. It was ordered “that the main Street leading from Campus

Martius to Corey’s bridge, so called, should be cleared of logs and other

woods that may obstruct it.” Residents of Campus Martius were ordered to

construct walks of hewn logs along their cabins and to provide troughs

or gutters to drain water from the eaves. Wagons, horses, cattle, and

swine were not permitted inside the fort. One resolution prohibited the

purchase of wild meats for the purpose of monopolizing the supply and

charging extravagant prices.

[Illustration: TECUMSEH

_Drawn by Robert Eggebrecht, Vincennes, Ind._]

Food was scarce at the Miami settlements also, and the Indians were

showing increasing signs of resistance to the whites. Several community

blockhouses had been built and small parties of troops sent there to

guard the settlements and their all-essential crops.

In January, 1790, St. Clair removed to Cincinnati, and Major John Doughty

with his troops from Fort Harmar started construction of Fort Washington

as headquarters for increasingly necessary western troops. General Josiah

Harmar arrived in the fall of that year and took charge of the garrison

then comprising 70 men.

Casual readers of history at times marvel at the small size of garrisons

and armies used in these hazardous campaigns against the Indians, and

thereby incline to minimize the severity of the conflicts. To understand

this, it is necessary to realize how few people relatively were in the

entire empire of the Northwest; that transportation and communication

were so difficult as to make the movements of large bodies of men

impossible, even if men had been available; that provisions and supplies

could not be moved in quantity and, beyond two or three days’ supply the

men could carry, the troops had to live on game and what the wilderness

provided; and, lastly, that the Indians were usually small tribes and

attacked in relatively small groups.

The protection normally needed was that of small detachments of hardy and

fearless men trained to the ways of the woods and the Indians. One of the

great problems of the period, as will be seen later, was the militia or

volunteers, who, though eager to fight the Indians, were too impetuous,

too unfamiliar with discipline, and too likely to decide to return to

their homes upon their own initiative.

In October, 1790, a party of immigrants from France—anxious to escape the

impending French Revolution—bought lands and settled in the lower part

of the Ohio Company Purchase at a village called Gallipolis, or the city

of the French. They had been deceived by representatives of the Scioto

Purchase, and believed that they were buying a Garden of Eden, where

nature provided the necessities of life without labor. For instance, they

had been told by agents of the Scioto Company, which will be described

later, that candles grew in swamps on their lands (cat tails), and that

custard grew on trees (paw paws).

Here it seems proper to digress for a moment as to the Scioto Company—or

more particularly to discuss the fact that in those days not all public

men were heroes, and some were not even honest. Then, as now, the

forward-looking forces of progress had to contend with selfishness,

politics, chicanery and downright dishonesty.

It has been before pointed out that when Cutler was negotiating with

Congress for purchase of Ohio Company lands, a group had approached him

with a proposal to make another purchase at the same time for another

company, and that he used this larger purchase to secure passage of the

Ordinance of 1787. This other company was the Scioto Company, whose

membership is not known beyond a small group. Its negotiations with the

Ohio Company were carried on by one man, a public official. Cutler and

Putnam did not permit the Ohio Company of Associates to become entangled

with this other company—beyond the fact that the two purchases were to be

made at the same time.

The Scioto Company was to purchase some 3,500,000 acres in the valley

of the Scioto River. They sent Joel Barlow, a fair poet perhaps, but

of questionable business sagacity, to France to dispose of these lands

to fear-worn French. Barlow employed one William Playfair to sell

the lands, and it was in the booklet the latter prepared that the

fantastic statements as to candles, custard, etc., appeared. The sale

was highly successful. Middle-class French in such jeopardy between the

revolutionists and the aristocracy, hastened to emigrate to the new land

of dreams. What became of the moneys they paid for their new homes has

never been proved. Someone absconded and when they landed at Alexandria,

Virginia, they learned that the Scioto Company had never acquired title

to the lands sold to them.

One interesting incident of this skullduggery is worth mention. Among

the French settlers was François D’Hebecourt, a close boyhood friend

of Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte had originally considered joining

the party, but remained behind to follow if his friend’s reports

substantiated the claims made. In case the new country did come up to

expectations, he was to follow D’Hebecourt, and establish a new empire

somewhere in western America. Of course, D’Hebecourt’s reports of the

villainy of the Scioto Company, the hovels they found for homes and the

ensuing famine which the French settlers endured changed Bonaparte’s

intentions, and he remained in France to leave his mark later on all

Europe.

There are two very interesting suppositions suggested. Suppose the Scioto

Company had kept its word, what might have been the subsequent history

of the world? And suppose, as is altogether possible, that Bonaparte’s

revulsion at the treatment of his countrymen had influenced him 13 years

later in selling Louisiana Territory to the United States. The portent

of such possibilities has no direct connection with our story, except to

show what small affairs of men may affect all history and the millions

of people who live afterward, and, an indication that the world is not

worse, morally or ethically, now than it was then.

[Illustration: SPINNING

_Drawn by Lloyd Hune, Marietta, Ohio_]

Through the intervention of President George Washington, Colonel William

Duer of the Scioto Company agreed to transport the emigrants to their

lands, opposite the mouth of the Big Kanawha. In the meantime, surveyors

discovered that this village site lay within the Ohio Company Purchase,

and not, as supposed, within the Scioto Purchase. Duer contracted

with Putnam to erect buildings for the settlers. Accordingly, Major

John Burnham, with 40 men, erected four rows of 20 cabins each, with

blockhouses at the corners and a small breastwork in front. To these

crude dwellings came the artisans, lawyers, jewelers, physicians, and

servants, the exiled nobility of France. They were so ignorant of

pioneer ways that some were killed beneath the fall of the trees they

chopped down. When the Ohio Company adjusted its affairs in December,

1795, the French settlers paid for their land a second time by buying

it for a dollar and a quarter per acre. At a later time the United

States government granted these unfortunate French a tract of land near

Portsmouth, Ohio, but few of them ever moved there.

History of the Ordinance of 1787 and the Old Northwest Territory A Supplemental Text for School Use · 第 7 / 8 章