THE MIAMI PURCHASE OF JOHN CLEVES
SYMMES
BY R. PIERCE BEAVER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Miami Country1 includes
about five thousand
square miles in southwestern Ohio with
a small adjoin-
ing portion of Indiana,2 in
the main the basins and val-
leys of the two Miami rivers extending
more than a
hundred miles inland from a fifty-mile
base on the Ohio.
The region holds a most important place
in the history
of Ohio and the Northwest. In the days
before the set-
tlement of Ohio it furnished an avenue
for the British
and Indian invasions of Kentucky, and,
soon after, when
the great western movement began at the
close of the
Revolution, the Miami Country with the
Maumee Valley
was the seat of the great confederation
of tribes which
opposed it. It was necessary to plant a
permanent set-
tlement in those valleys and to crush
the tribes under
Michikinikwa3 before the
rest of Ohio and the North-
west could even be considered for
possible settlement.
Before that was accomplished a United States
army was
defeated and almost wiped out. Through
these experi-
1 See Drake, Picture of Cincinnati, for
a full description of the region
during the years of its first settlement
and especially in 1815, when the
frontier was passing. See also the description
in the "Trenton Circular."
2 "The Wedge," a portion of
the valley of the Great Miami.
3 "Little Turtle."
(284)
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 285
ences there evolved the early military
policy of the gov-
ernment with respect to frontier
settlements. The story
of Miami settlement is in many respects
typical of the
building of the Northwest, but is
peculiar in that it rep-
resents an important but brief phase in
the history of
the Public Land System, and one of the
two attempts
made by an individual or corporation to
settle a large
tract of land purchased from the Government.
It is
the only attempt at a pure proprietary.
The Ohio Com-
pany's grant was intended as a Western
colony for New
England, the Miami Purchase for New
Jersey, Penn-
sylvania, and the South. In the early
history of Ohio
the Miami Country is the most important
of all settle-
ments for it developed most rapidly and
for many years
was the most thickly populated and
prosperous portion
of the State, and so controlled it.
The Miami Purchase, which developed
into the set-
tlement of the entire Miami Country, is
not a story of
land speculation, but of a venture in
frontier settle-
ment. There are many phases of its
history, but funda-
mental and primary are the legal
history of the grant
and the land and sales systems. These
must be disposed
of before we can study the other
phases: the actual
working of the land system from the
point of view of the
purchaser and settler, the settlers and
the settlement,
economic development, and the early
religious history.
This paper is a study of these basic
aspects preliminary
to a study of the other phases.
The Ohio Company was the work of a
group or cor-
poration, 'but the Miami Purchase was
the result of in-
dividual inspiration, and was carried
out under great
difficulties by one man who, in so
doing, ruined himself
286 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
and others. John Cleves Symmes4 was born in 1742
at Southold, Long Island, the son of
Rev. Timothy
Symmes and Mary Cleves. There he lived with his
grandfather, Captain John Cleves, and
there he began
his career as a school teacher and
surveyor. In 1770
he moved to Sussex County, New Jersey, where he
bought a large farm on the Flat Brook
and built his
homestead "Solitude."5 Not
long after he had moved
there, Revolutionary sentiment began to
take active
form, and as early as 1774 he was
chairman of the
county Committee of Safety. The
following year he
was commissioned Colonel of the county
militia, and in
March, 1776, took his troops to New
York where they
were set to building fortifications.
During the same
year Colonel Symmes was the New Jersey
representa-
tive at a military conference at
Ticonderoga, and on his
return with three New Jersey regiments
defeated a
British force. For three years Symmes
commanded
the New Jersey forts and took part in
many battles.
John Cleves Symmes' military service
did not pre-
vent his engaging in civil matters for
his State. In
1776 he was a member of the committee
which drew up
the constitution for the New Jersey
convention; he
4 For the life of John Cleves Symmes,
see Winfield, Chas. H., "John
Cleves Symmes," in Proceedings
of the New Jersey Historical Society,
Series 2, Vol. V, pp. 23, 43; also Historical
and Biographical Encyclopedia
of Butler County, Ohio, pp. 29-31; Bond, Correspondence of John Cleves
Symmes, Introduction, "John Cleves Symmes, Pioneer."
5 Symmes had married Anna Tuttle,
October 30, 1760; she died at
"Solitude," July 26, 1776, leaving
two daughters, Marie, who married Major
Peyton Short of Kentucky in 1790, and
Anna (or Polly), who married
William Henry Harrison. Judge Symmes
married 2nd, Mrs. Mary (Henry)
Halsey, and 3rd, Susanna Livingston,
daughter of Governor Livingston of
New Jersey.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 287
served three terms on the New Jersey
Council; was asso-
ciate justice of the State Supreme
Court 1777 to 1783;
and in 1785 was elected a member of the
Continental
Congress. The problem of the
Public Domain was then
before Congress, and thus Judge Symmes
became in-
terested in the West; and when, during
his second term,
the plan of the Ohio Company met with
Congressional
favor,6 he determined to
found a similar western colony
for persons other than New Englanders,
and especially
for Jerseymen. His friend and neighbor,
Benjamin
Stites,7 returned from the west with
glowing accounts
of the land, which added to Judge
Symmes' enthusiasm.
His friends, General Jonathan Dayton8
and Doctor
6 Congressmen were more than
theoretically interested in the west.
When the Northwest Territory was
organized, Arthur St. Clair, the presi-
dent of Congress, became governor of the
Territory, Winthrop Sargent
secretary and lieutenant governor, and
John Cleves Symmes one of the
three supreme justices.
7 Benjamin Stites was a native of New
Jersey, born near Morristown.
He was a member of a very prominent
Baptist family and was allied with
the Ganos. He removed to Redstone
(Brownsville), Pennsylvania, and
engaged in trading on the Monongahela
and the Ohio. Early in 1786 Stites
took a cargo to Limestone (Maysville),
Kentucky, and there accepted the
leadership of an expedition against the
Indians of the Miamis. . . . This
expedition took him through the whole
region, and he went back to New
Jersey to interest someone in its
colonization.
8 This note on Jonathan Dayton is quoted
from Bond, op. cit., 197,
note 1.
"Jonathan Dayton, born
Elizabethtown, New Jersey, 1760, and died
1824, graduated from Princeton and
studied law. Later his Alma Mater
conferred the degree of LL.D. upon him.
His record in the Revolutionary
Army was a highly creditable one.
Politically, too, his standing was high.
In 1787 he was a member of the
Constitutional Convention, and in 1790
he served as speaker of the New Jersey
Lower House. 1791-1799, Dayton
represented New Jersey in Congress, and
1795-1799 he was speaker. 1799-
1805 he was in the Senate, and President
Adams made him brigadier gen-
eral. By his influence with the
Revolutionary veterans and also with
Congress, Jonathan Dayton was able to
render invaluable aid to Judge
288 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
Elias Boudinot9 were willing
to support him financially
and politically, and the prospect of
founding a successful
colony was so great that Symmes
journeyed west in
1786-1787 to choose a site for his
venture.
II. THE LEGAL HISTORY OF THE PURCHASE
Late in the autumn of 1786, John Cleves
Symmes
journeyed to the West to select a site
for his purchase.1
Symmes. He was personally greatly
interested in western lands, notably
as one of the proprietors of the
reserved lands, and later as an original
proprietor of Dayton. In 1805 Jonathan
Dayton was in the West, doubtless
to look after his various land holdings.
He was arrested as an accomplice
of Aaron Burr, but was never
tried."
9 Elias Boudinot, the great-grandson of
a Huguenot settler of the
same name, was born in Philadelphia in
1740. Studied law at Princeton;
was licensed in 1766 and began practice
at Elizabethtown, New Jersey.
Married Hannah Stockton, whose brother,
Richard Stockton, a signer of
the Declaration of Independence, married
Boudinot's sister. In 1772 he
was elected a trustee of Princeton. He
gave up the practice of law to
enter public office. In 1775 he was
chairman of the Committee of Safety
at Elizabethtown, was member of the
Provincial Congress of New Jersey,
which sent him with Richard Smith to the
Continental Congress. In 1777
colonel and commissary general of
prisoners, and superintendent of the
intelligence department of the army. In
1778 member of Congress; 1782,
president of Congress, in which capacity
he signed the treaty of peace with
England. Member of the House of
Representatives, 1789-1795, when Wash-
ington appointed him first director of
the Mint. He retired in 1805, passed
the rest of his life in literary and
philanthropic work, and died in 1821.
Atterbury: "Elias Boudinot":
"Reminiscences of the American Revo-
lution," Proceedings of Huguenot
Society of America, Vol. 2, 261-298.
1 Judge Francis Dunlavy to Dr. Daniel
Drake. Lebanon, Ohio, De-
cember 9, 1831. "In 1786 John Cleves Symmes,
accompanied by his
nephew, the late Judge Daniel Symmes,
and James Carpenter (and perhaps
others), came out from New Jersey to
view the country, but it being a
perfect wilderness, there not being a
single white person west of the Ohio,
from Pittsburg to the mouth, they passed
on to the Falls and wintered
at Taylor Station on Beargrass. They
returned next spring by way of
the Crab Orchard, etc. Of this journey a
short memorandum or abstract
written by Judge Symmes' own hand was in
my possession for near forty
years, but was lost as above-mentioned.
(It was. left with other papers in
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 289
He determined upon a tract on the
Wabash, returned as
far as Kentucky, and wintered at Taylor
Station on
Beargrass Creek. From that place Judge
Symmes is-
sued, May 29, 1787, an advertisement2
calling the atten-
tion of the people of Kentucky to his
proposed colony.
Colonel Harmar,3 stationed
at the Rapids of the
Ohio,4 obtained a copy of
the advertisement from
Judge
Symmes and sent it5 to the
Secretary of War,6 by whom
it was forwarded to the President of
Congress. Symmes
had not yet informed Congress of his
project, and this
notice was viewed with suspicion.
When he returned to the east Judge
Symmes gave
up his plan of purchasing the Wabash
tract and turned
to the Miami Country. The Wabash was
too far re-
moved from the supply ports of Redstone
and Pittsburg
a house when the Judge moved
elsewhere.--Ed.) It was, however, a mere
journal of the incidents, expenses, and
settlements on the route, still I
valued it highly." (Draper Mss. 10113) appendix; Dr.
Daniel Drake's
"Memoir of the Miami County." Quar.
Publication of Historical and Philo-
sophical Society of Ohio, Vol. XVIII, No. 2-3, April-September, 1923.
Randall and Ryan, History of Ohio, II,
473; Bond, op. cit., Introduc-
tion, 8, note 2, and others states that
Symmes first western journey was
in the spring and summer of 1787 but
give no proof reference.
2 "John Cleves Symmes to the People
of Kentucky," Bond, op. cit.,
278-281.
3 Josiah Harmar, 1753-1813, born in Philadelphia; educated
at the
Quaker school of Robert Proud. Enlisted
at the outbreak of the Revo-
lution as captain in a Pennsylvania
regiment; became colonel in 1777;
brevet colonel, 1st U. S. Reg., 1783;
brevet brigadier general, 1787; com-
mander-in-chief of the army, September
29, 1789. Personally commanded
the expedition against the Indians of
the upper Miami in 1790. The losses
were so great that the expedition was
practically, if not technically, a
defeat, and Harmar resigned his command.
Adjutant-general of Pennsyl-
vania, 1793-1799.
4 Louisville, Kentucky.
5 Colonel Harmar to the Secretary of
War, Rapids of the Ohio, June
15, 1787. St. Clair Papers, 4, 24.
Bond, op. cit., 278, notes 1 and 2.
6 General Henry Knox, Secretary of War,
1788-1795.
Vol. XL--19.
290 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
to make colonization practical, and the
isolated location
of the tract placed it at the mercy of
the Indians unless
strong military protection could be
furnished.
Furthermore, Benjamin Stites gave
Symmes most
favorable accounts of the Miami region,7
and the Judge
himself had had a glimpse of it on his
western journey,
though he probably did not enter the
tract. Encouraged
by the reception given the petition of
Sargent and Cut-
ler on behalf of the Ohio Company,8
Judge Symmes pe-
titioned9 Congress, August
29, to authorize the commis-
7 "At
the time that this contract was made by Judge Symmes for
himself and his associates he had never
seen the subject of his purchase,
but was induced to make it from the
representations given him by Captain
Stites, who had visited the country in
1786 or 1787. So far as it related
to the personal knowledge of the Judge,
he was figuratively, if not literally,
purchasing land in the moon."
Gerrard's Transcript of Denman's Affidavit.
Drake's "Memoir," Appendix, Quarterly
Publication of the Historical and
Philosophical Society of Ohio, Vol. XVIII, No. 2-3, p. 95. Denman was
the original purchaser of Cincinnati.
Judge Symmes, in his letter to the Board
of Treasury, dated New
York, July 14, 1788, pleads ignorance of
the geography of the Miami
country for refusing to agree on the
absolutely definite boundaries at that
time. (Bond, op. cit., 33.) When
he actually explored the country, Symmes
was amazed at some of the discoveries,
such as the doubling of the Great
Miami near its mouth. (Bond, op.
cit., 47.)
8 For
the complete history of the Ohio Company see Hulbert, Archer
B., The Ohio Company.
9 New
York, 29 August, 1787. "To His Excellency, The President
of Congress. The petition of John Cleves
Symmes, of New Jersey showeth,
that your petitioner, encouraged by the
resolutions of Congress of the 23rd
and 27th of July last, stipulating the
conditions of a transfer of federal
lands on the Scioto and Muskingum
rivers, unto Winthrop Sargent and
Manasseh Cutler, Esquires, and their
associates, of New England, is induced,
on behalf of the citizens of the United
States, westward of Connecticut,
who also wish to become purchasers of
federal lands, to pray that the
honorable The Congress will be pleased
to direct that a contract be made
by the honorable the commissioners of
the Treasury Board, with your
petitioner, for himself and his
associates, in all respects similar in form
and matter to the said grant made to
Messrs. Sargent and Cutler, differing
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 291
sioners10 of the Board of
Treasury to enter into a con-
tract with him for the lands between
the Miami Rivers.
Congress received the petition
favorably and on Oc-
tober 3,11 authorized the commissioners
of the Board of
Treasury to enter into a contract with
John Cleves
Symmes for the lands stipulated in his
petition. Nego-
tiations resulted in an outline of the
contract, which
provided12 for the sale of
two million acres on these con-
ditions: "The tract shall be
surveyed and its contents
ascertained by the Geographer13 or some
other officer of
only in quantity and place where, and
instead of two townships for the
use of a university, that only one be
assigned for the benefit of an academy.
That by such transfer to your petitioner
and his associates, on their
complying with the terms of sale, the
fee may pass of all the lands lying
within the following limits, viz.:
Beginning at the mouth of the Great
Miami River, thence, running up the
Ohio, to the mouth of the Little
Miami River; thence, up the main stream
of the Little Miami River, to the
place where a due west line to be
continued from the western termination
of the northern boundary line of the Grant
to Messrs. Sargent, Cutler and
Company, shall intersect the Little
Miami River; thence, due west, con-
tinuing the said western line to the
place where the said line shall intersect
the main branch or stream of the Great
Miami River; thence down the
Great Miami to the place of
beginning." Burnet, Notes on
the Early
Settlement of the Northwest
Territory, 481-482; Land Laws of
Ohio, 1825,
26; St. Clair Papers II, 621-622.
10 Walter Livingstone, Arthur Lee.
11 "Trenton Circular," opening
paragraph. Judge Symmes' prospectus,
the pamphlet addressed "to the
Respectable Public," was printed on a
private press at Trenton, New Jersey,
November 26, 1787. One thousand
copies were issued. (Recorded, Deed
Book C, Butler County Recorder's
Office, Hamilton, Ohio. Recorded from a
mutilated original pamphlet and
the first two pages of a Ms. copy.) It may also be found in Burnet,
op. cit., 482-490; Quarterly Publication of Historical and
Philosophical
Society of Ohio, Vol. V, No. 3.
12 Though this contract was not legally
closed, it formed the basis for
the actual contract, in which its terms
were reduced to conform with the
reduced amount of land involved. The
terms are found in the "Trenton
Circular.'
13 Thomas Hutchins.
292 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
the United States who shall plainly
mark the said east
and west line and shall render a
complete plat thereof to
the Board of Treasury, and another to
the purchaser or
purchasers. Within seven years
from the completion
of this work (unless the frequency of
the Indian irrup-
tions may render the same in a measure
impracticable)
the proprietors shall lay off the whole
tract at their own
expense into townships . . . and divide
the same into
lots according to the land ordinance of
the 20th May,
1785,14 complete returns whereof shall
be made to the
Treasury Board." Further, there
were to be reserva-
tions similar to those within the Ohio
Company's grant;
that is, in each township or fractional
township, the fol-
lowing sections were to be retained by
the United
States: Number 16 for the support of
education; 29
for religion,15 8, 11 and 26
for the future disposition of
14 The Land Ordinance of May 20th, 1785. The public domain was
to be disposed of as soon as the Indian
title was removed. The land was
to be surveyed into townships six miles
square, and subdivided into sections
one mile square. The first lines north
and south, east and west, were to
commence on the Ohio River at the
Pennsylvania border, and only town-
ship lines were to be actually surveyed.
The townships were then to be
sold alternately as a whole or by
sections. Sales were to take place in
the states. As soon as seven ranges of
townships were surveyed, the
townships were to be drawn by lot.
One-seventh was to satisfy claims
for military bounty rights, and the
remainder was to be sold in the states
at public auction by the commissioners
of the loan offices. A minimum
price of one dollar per acre was set.
The purchaser was to pay the cost
of surveying, $36 per township. Congress
reserved in each township sec-
tions 8, 11, 26, and 29 for future
disposition, and section 16 for the
maintenance of schools. One-third part
of all gold, silver, lead, and copper
mines was also reserved. See Treat, National
Land System, 36-38.
15 Under inspiration of the
Ordinance of July 13, 1787, section 29 in
each section of the Ohio Company's grant
was reserved for the use of
religion. This was likewise incorporated
into Symmes' contract. "Curi-
ously enough, as a result of the
sections donated in accordance with this
sentiment, ours is one of the few
governments which still retain a formal
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 293
Congress. One complete township16 was
to be given
for an academy. The price was one
dollar per acre,
payable in specie, loan office
certificates reduced to specie
value, or certificates17 of
liquidated debt of the United
States, subject to a reduction of
one-third of a dollar
per acre for the possible bad lands.
The purchasers might also offer
military bounty
rights18 in discharge of the
contract "acre for acre," pro-
vided that the aggregate of these did
not exceed one-
seventh of the whole. Two hundred
thousand dollars19
was to be paid when the contract was
closed, and a
similar amount one month after the
Geographer or his
agent returned a map and the records of
the survey of
the tract. The remaining sum, with
interest, was to
be paid in six semi-annual instalments,
beginning six
connection with religion. The funds
arising from sections 29 in both the
Ohio Company and Symmes' Purchases are
administered under the State
law of March 28th, 1917, based on the
act of Congress passed February
20, 1833, which authorized the State to
sell '* * * these lands, invest the
money in a productive fund, and annually
apply the proceeds to the support
of religion in the townships where the
land was originally reserved'."
Sherman, Ohio Land Subdivisions, 77.
All the churches within the bounds
of the Miami Rivers and south of the
south boundary of the fourth range
annually receive a small amount from
this fund.
16 The history of the College Township
is complicated. This resulted
in the foundation of Miami University at
Oxford. See Pages 323-328.
17 Interest on certificates would not be
accepted in payment for lands.
"In making payments the principal
only of the said certificates shall be
admitted, and the Board of Treasury for
such interest as may be due on
the certificates, rendered in payment as
aforesaid prior to the first of Janu-
ary, 1786, shall issue indents for
interest to the possessors which shall
be receivable in payment as other
indents for interest as may be due on the
said certificates between that period
and the period of payment, the said
board shall issue indents the payment of
which to be provided for in future
requisitions and otherwise." "Trenton Circular."
18 In accordance with the Ordinance of
May 20, 1785. See Note 15.
19 This was subject to a reduction of
one-third of a dollar per acre,
and, therefore, the payment was really
to be $133,333.00.
294 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
months after the second payment. When the first pay-
ment had been made, the purchasers
would receive a
right to enter on three hundred
thousand acres, and at
the second be granted a deed to six
hundred thousand
acres. Thereafter a further deed was to
pass at each
half-yearly payment. This contract was
never legally
closed, because Judge Symmes had first
to make a pay-
ment, and by July, 1788, he had
deposited in the Treas-
ury $71,428.52 in certificates and
$11,904.68 in military
warrants, a total of $83,333.20;20 and
this was just a
little more than half the required sum.
When Judge Symmes realized that he
could not raise
the sufficient amount he wrote to the Board
of Treasury,
June 11, 1788,21 petitioning
the commissioners to accept
the relinquishment of his contract and
to enter into a
new one with him for one million acres.
He based this
appeal on the difficulty of procuring
bounty rights of the
New Jersey Line. The petition asked
that the million
acres front22 on the Ohio
River the entire distance be-
tween the two Miami Rivers, and that
the grant be made
on the principles "laid down by
the resolution of Con-
gress on the 23rd of October
last."23 The
Board re-
20 Certificate of Mr. McHillegas,
Treasurer, July 12, 1788. Miller, Cin-
cinnati's Beginnings, 23. Similar statements; Bond, op. cit., 30-31.
21 J. C. Symmes to the Board of
Treasury, Bond, op. cit., 29-30.
22 Ibid. "One million of acres fronting on the Ohio, and
extending
inland from the Ohio between the Great
Miami River and the Little Miami
River the whole breadth of the country
from river to river so far as to
include on an east and west rear line
one million of acres, exclusive of
five reserved sections in every
township", etc.
23 "This resolution authorized the
Treasury Board to contract for the
sale of public lands in tracts of not
less than 1,000,000 acres. But no tract
should have a frontage of more than a
third of its depth upon the Ohio,
the Mississippi, the Wabash, or the
Illinois Rivers." Bond, op cit., 30,
Note 10.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 295
plied24 that it was willing
to contract with Mr. Symmes
for one million acres, but that it
could not agree to the
proposed boundaries, and could only
grant a twenty-mile
frontage25 on the Ohio
River, beginning at the mouth of
the Great Miami. The north and south
line should be
drawn from the point twenty miles east
of the Miami
on the north bank of the Ohio and
should run parallel to
the general course of the former.
Having announced
this as an ultimatum the Board could
not be induced to
change it. Symmes had already sold the
tract at the
mouth of the Little Miami to Benjamin
Stites,26 and this
would be excluded from the purchase. In
vain Symmes
pleaded27 that "the
geography of the country between
the two Miamis (was) too little known
to afford suf-
ficient information on the subject to
enable (him) to
say at this time what line with
propriety could be drawn
from the River Ohio to an imaginary
point to be fixed
somewhere between the two Miamis so as
to include one
million of acres adjoining the Great
Miami."
However, he did not state the chief
reason he wished
the banks of both Miamis--the sales to
Stites; and it is
not inconceivable that the Board would
have provided
for those lands if the circumstances
were known. But,
in spite of the lack of agreement, the
Judge considered
the money he had paid into the Treasury
the first pay-
24 Board of Treasury to J. C. S., Bond, op.
cit., 31-32.
25 The Board may have felt this to be in
accord with the terms of
the Resolution of October 23, 1787, but
it was entirely arbitrary, and the
Board had not the slightest knowledge of
the topography beyond the north
bank of the Ohio.
26 20,000 acres.
27 J. C. S., to Board of
Treasury, New York, July 14, 1788, Bond,
op. cit., 33.
296
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
ment28 on his contract,
though it had not been closed, and
the question of boundaries was in
debate.
Impatient to begin his Miami Colony,
Symmes asked
permission29 of the Treasury
Board to enter the tract
with a party of settlers, whom he would
restrain within
stipulated bounds. Once on the ground
he would sur-
vey the land and make an accurate map,
and the question
of boundaries could then be solved in
justice. The
deposit in the Treasury would be his
security. The only
reply30 to this was a demand
that he be explicit
about the proposed terms of boundaries,
and he again
refused31 to accept the Board's
terms. A solution, how-
ever, was in sight, since an "East
Jersey Company"32
was being formed to purchase the
remainder of the two
million acres relinquished by Symmes.
This company
included friends and associates of the
Judge,33 and
Symmes expected to provide for Stites
by transferring
that gentleman's warrants34 to
this company, within
whose bounds he would then be.
Unfortunately, this
company never materialized.
Relying on the East Jersey men, and on
Jonathan
Dayton and Elias Boudinot in Congress,
to protect35
him from hostile action, Mr. Symmes
determined to
enter the tract and make a settlement,36
thinking that
once there he could arrange the
boundary question in
28 Ibid., 34.
29 Ibid., 33.
30 Bond, op. cit., 34, J. C. S.
to Dayton, July 22, 1788.
31 Ibid., 26, J. C. S. to Boudinot, July 18, 1788.
32 Ibid., 11, 26
(Note 4), 27, 34, 201, 220, 231.
33 Including Jonathan Dayton and Elias
Boudinot.
34 Bond,
op. cit., 34.
35 Ibid., 27.
36 Ibid., 27.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 297
his favor.37 He gave his
daughter, Mary Symmes, and
Robert Morris power of attorney,38
and without further
transactions set out for his purchase.
The departure
of the Judge alarmed many, and it was
rumored in Con-
gress that he was going to seize the
land, and hold it by
force. General Dayton immediately sent
him knowledge
of the excitement he was causing,39
and, in reply,
Symmes hastily sent back power of
attorney to Dayton
and Daniel Marsh accompanied by a
disclaimer of any
improper conduct.40 Resolutions41
had been introduced
into Congress to repeal the former ones
authorizing the
contract and to request General Harmar
to arrest
Symmes before he could enter the Miami
Country. For-
tunately Dayton's and Boudinot's
influence saved the
situation, and they declared to
Congress and the Treas-
ury Board that there was a contract to
which they held
the United States,42 and
that the deposit in the Treasury
had made it binding.43
The Board agreed44 to treat
with them, but insisted
that the negotiations be concluded at
once, refusing to
alter the boundary, but soon after
declared that the
power of attorney which Dayton and
Marsh held was
not complete,45 and the
matter was delayed until this was
37 Unfortunately, the accurate
information concerning the topography
of the region which he sent to Dayton
from the Miami Country arrived
too late to have the effect at which he
was aiming here.
38 Bond, op. cit., 28.
39 A letter of August 4, evidently lost,
referred to, Ibid., 36.
40 Ibid., 36-44.
41 Ibid., 198.
42 Ibid., 198.
43 Ibid., 198.
44 Ibid., 199.
45 Ibid., 200,
201; also 48. Before the new power of attorney was
sent, Symmes received word of the
signing of the contract. Some remedy
298 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
remedied. At length, on October 15,
1788, the con-
tract46 was signed by the
Treasury Board and by Jona-
than Dayton and Daniel Marsh on behalf
of John Cleves
Symmes. The terms on the whole were
those of the
originally proposed contract reduced to
apply to the new
situation, but they included several
important changes.
Judge Symmes was to have immediate
possession of
one hundred twenty-three thousand two
hundred ninety-
seven acres, covered by his first
payment, and after a
second payment of $82,198 he would
receive a patent
for two hundred forty-six thousand five
hundred ninety-
four acres (including those already
occupied). It was
agreed that all deeds were to be for
strips of land from
the Great Miami to the twenty-mile line
fronting each
time higher up the Miami, instead of narrow strips
fronting on the Ohio and running the
full length of the
purchase into the interior. A provision
was included
that if Symmes failed to fulfill the
contract it should
fall to the parties of the second part,46a
Dayton and
Marsh. The Little Miami Lands were
excluded.
Dayton sent Symmes a copy47 of
the instrument and
though the latter was glad to have a
legal contract at
last, he received it with great
misgivings, for Stites was
unprovided for; and since the related
Stites and Gano
families were very influential in the
new settlements and
must have been made, or the Board itself
tired of delay, and accepted that
which it had called inadequate.
46 (Records of Hamilton County, Ohio,
Vol. II, 55-59.) Bond, op. cit.,
49, Note 46; Burnet, op. cit., Appendix
C, 490-491.
46a J. Dayton to J. C. S., New York, September 12, 1788,
Bond, op cit.,
201; Burnet, op. cit., 415.
47 Dayton first sent information as to
the contents of the contract in
his letters of October 22, 1788, Bond, op.
cit., 204-207, and later sent him
a copy of the contract (letter, New
York, February 2, 1789).
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 299
in New Jersey, their hostility could be
a great obstacle
to Symmes' colonization.48 Furthermore,
the region
had been surveyed, and the Judge had
sent east a map
proving the injustice of the
twenty-mile limit, but it was
too late. He wrote to Dayton,49 "I
beg you will wait
on the Treasury Board and lay before
them the map
I herewith enclose. The extent of the
distance from
the mouth of the one Miami to the other50
is 27 miles
and 38 chains, ten miles up the Great
Miami and six
miles up the Ohio the distance from the
Ohio to the
Great Miami is not more than 1 1/4
miles, so that the mean
distance from one Miami to the other is
not more than
twenty miles at the mouths and some way
up on an east
and west line they tend much nearer
back, as the hunters
of this Country inform me." The
line was discovered
later actually to cross the Little
Miami several times.
According to the terms of the contract
the United
States was to survey51 the
external lines of the grant,
and the Geographer's agent was to mark
the boundaries
and make an exact map. Within a month
after this
plat would be presented to the Treasury
office,52 Symmes'
second payment would be due, and the remaining
instal-
ments follow as stipulated. Therefore,
it was to the
advantage of the Board of Treasury to
have the survey
accomplished as soon as possible. When
the contract
was first considered in the summer of
1787, the Board
48 Bond, op. cit., 50, J. C. S.
to Dayton.
49 Ibid., 46, Limestone, October 12, 1788.
50 The distance
is actually 34 miles.
51 "Trenton Circular";
Gallatin's "Report to House of Representa-
tives," February 9, 1797, American
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol.
I, 76-77.
52 Gallatin's "Report."
300 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
had informed Thomas Hutchins, the
surveyor general,
of his responsibility in the matter,
and he had commis-
sioned53 Israel Ludlow54
to conduct the survey.
In the summer of 1788 Ludlow journeyed
west to sur-
vey the north bank of the Ohio from the
Muskingum to
the Scioto,55 before proceeding to the
Miami. This was
soon accomplished, and on September 22,
Ludlow ac-
companied Denman's party56 to
"opposite the Licking"
to lay out the town of Losantiville.
Following this, he
traversed the meanders of the Ohio
below the Scioto,
and began to make a preliminary survey
of the Miamis.57
However, Ludlow received little support
from the gov-
ernment or protection from the army,
and he spent much
of his time surveying the internal
lines on Symmes'
grant rather than laying out the
external ones for the
Geographer's office.58
53 Hutchins to Ludlow, Teetor, Life
and Times of Colonel Israel
Ludlow, Appendix, 49.
54 Israel Ludlow was born in 1765 near
Morristown, New Jersey;
received a college education; became a
surveyor and was evidently very
successful in his profession by the time
he had received his commission
from Hutchins. In 1788 he accompanied
Symmes to the West, and from
that time made the Miami Country his
home. He laid out Losantiville
or Cincinnati for Denman, Patterson, and
Filson, and succeeded to Filson's
share in the enterprise after that
person had been killed by the Indians.
In addition to the general operations
related in the following pages, Ludlow
laid out the cities of Hamilton and
Dayton, where street names still bear
testimony thereof. He early erected a
dwelling in Cincinnati, and soon
after founded Ludlow's Station, a
frontier post, now Cumminsville, Cin-
cinnati. There he died January 21, 1804,
only thirty-nine years of age,
and was buried under the
First Presbyterian Church of Cincinnati.
55 Bond, op. cit., 40, J. C. S. to J. Dayton,
August 21, 1788.
56 Drake's "Memoir," Quarterly
Publication, Historical and Philo
sophical Society of Ohio, 56; Teetor, op. cit., 8.
57 Bond, op. cit., 46, 47, J. C. S. to J. Dayton, October 12, 1788.
58 Ibid., 46-47; Biographical and Historical Encyclopedia of
Butler
County, Ohio, 23-29.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 301
After the Constitution had been put
into effect, and
the Treasury Department had been
organized with
Alexander Hamilton as secretary, the
matter was given
attention. In November, 1790, Ludlow
received or-
ders59 to complete at once
under military protection60 the
surveys of the Ohio and Miami
Purchases. But the
army would not cooperate61 and
after a year of disap-
pointment, Ludlow tried to complete his
work with the
assistance of three woodsmen he
employed.62 In this
manner he extended the western boundary
of Symmes'
grant more than a hundred miles up the
Great Miami,
until the deep snow and cold forced him
back. When the
weather improved he began to survey the
east boundary
and followed it to the first point
where it inter-
sected the Little Miami, and there was
stopped by In-
dians.
On May 5, 1792,63 Ludlow sent Hamilton the
completed survey of the Ohio Company's
purchase and
the part of the Miami survey he had
finished. His par-
tial report proved64 that
the eastern boundary could not
be used as it cut into the Virginia
Military reserve. The
boundary was changed by an act of
Congress,65 as will
be explained later, and Mr. Ludlow was
requested66 to
complete the survey in accord with
this. July 10, 1793,
59 Ludlow to Alex. Hamilton, secretary
of treasury, May 5, 1792,
Teetor, op. cit., 50.
60 Ibid.
61 Ibid.; St. Clair Papers, II, 209; Bond, op. cit., 55-56, J. C. S. to
J. Dayton, May 18-20, 1789.
62 Teetor,
op. cit., 50.
63 Teetor, op. cit., 50.
64 Ibid.; Gallatin's
"Report"; Amer. State Papers, Public Lands,
Vol. I, 75.
65 Act of April 12, 1792, Ludlow's findings were already
known.
66 Gallatin's "Report," Amer.
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 75-77.
302 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
he informed67 the Secretary
of the Treasury that he had
completed the survey of the tract as
far north as the
head of the Little Miami River, and
that the region
contained little more than half a
million acres. On the
10th of the following January he
deposited in the Treas-
ury a plat of the purchase certifying
it to contain five
hundred forty-three thousand, nine
hundred fifty acres
within the boundaries designated by the
law of April
12, 1792.68
The contract required69 the
proprietor to subdivide
the purchase into sections and
townships according to
the ordinance of May 20, 1785, within
seven years,
unless Indian disturbances prevented
it, and to furnish
the Treasury office with an accurate
map and descrip-
tion. A township is six miles square,
and contains
thirty-six sections70 each
one mile square. This much
is in accord with the general land
system, but a similar
range system is found nowhere else, for
the ranges are
numbered71 north from the
Ohio River, and the town-
ships in each range are numbered east
from the Great
Miami. The first two ranges are called
Fractional
Ranges I and II. The next range to the
north is the
Entire Range I. Symmes had this system carried into
lands that ultimately came to be north
of his patent, and
the government surveyors72 had
to continue the system
67 Ibid., 76.
68 Op. cit., 68.
69 "Trenton Circular."
70 The numbering is thus: From south to
north, beginning at the
southeast corner (lower left-hand
corner).
71 Biographical and Historical
Encyclopedia of Butler County, Ohio,
22-29; Sherman, Original Ohio Land
Subdivisions (Vol. III, Ohio Topo-
graphic Survey, Final Rep.), 69.
72 Treat, op. cit., 186; Sherman,
op. cit., 69.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 303
through the remainder of the region
known as "Between
the Miamis." There are fifteen
"Entire Ranges" in
the tract.73
In the autumn of 1788, Judge Symmes
employed
thirteen surveyors74 to lay
out the country in the manner
required. He directed75 Israel Ludlow to begin at the
most southerly point on the Ohio River
within the
bounds of the purchase, and run a
meridian north. At
the end of six miles he was to set a
monument or marker,
and from there run a line due west to
the Great Miami,
graduating and marking the line into
mile distances.
This is the base line; and the line
north from the Ohio is
the first meridian. Ludlow extended the
meridian until
it struck the Great Miami a few miles
below the present
city of Hamilton.
The surveyors were instructed to
commence at the
stakes or corners Ludlow had made on
the base line, and
run meridian lines, according to the
magnetic needle,
fifteen miles north and set stakes and
mark trees at the
end of every mile. The east and west
lines were left to
be surveyed by the purchaser. At the
end of fifteen
miles the surveyors reached the third
or Military
Range76 and passing it by,
began their survey again
with the south boundary of the fourth
range. On arriv-
ing77 about one mile north
of the sixth range, the men
73 Sherman, ibid., 69.
74 Bond, op. cit., 72-73, J. C.
S. to J. Dayton, May 18-20, 1789; Biog.
and Hist. Cyc. of Butler County,
Ohio, 22-29.
75 Biog. and Hist. Cyc. of Butler
County, Ohio, 22-29. Burnet, op.
cit.,
418.
76 Burnet, op. cit., 420: (The
Third Entire Range was set apart to
be paid by military warrants, and
therefore is called the Military Range.
Jonathan Dayton was agent for those
holding bounty warrants.)
77 Ibid.
304 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
discovered that the corner stakes did
not correspond
with each other on a due east and west
line. A correc-
tion was effected by running another
line from river to
river, and basing further surveys on
this. Judge
Symmes' men ended their work about
thirty miles north
of the present city of Dayton.
This system of subdivision permitted
much inac-
curacy, and after purchasers had run
the east and west
line, there could scarcely be found two
sections exactly
the same shape and size.78 The
greater part of the sur-
vey was made during severe winter
months, and the sur-
veyors had to give much of their
attention to protection
from the Indians. As the country began
to be settled
there were complaints about the
inequalities, and Judge
Symmes attempted79 to
correct the mistakes by having
Ludlow and John Dunlap80 set
a new standard meridian.
The purchasers were to run new east and
west lines
from the corners on this, and some did
so. The plan
would have changed every corner in the
purchase, but
the new surveys resulted in lawsuits,
and the Supreme
Court81 confirmed the old
corners because the original
survey had been made under authority of
Congress and
accepted by the Treasury Department.
Burnet82 records that Judge Symmes,
"To do justice
among the purchasers and to himself,
established a gen-
eral rule, that in all cases of a
deficiency, he would pay
78 Burnet, op. cit., 418;
Sherman, op. cit., 70.
79 Burnet, ibid., 420.
80 The founder of Dunlap's Station or
Colerain on the Great Miami
near the present village of Venice, the
scene of a famous Indian attack in
the winter of 1790-91. See Burnet, op.
cit., 110-111.
81 Biog. and Hist. Cyc. of Butler
County, Ohio, 85; Burnet, op. cit.,
421.
82 Burnet, op. cit., 420.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 305
to the purchaser at the rate of four
dollars per acre, for
such deficiency, and that where there
was a surplus, the
purchaser should pay for it, at the
same rate." Ac-
cording to the same authority, there
was no complaint
against the procedure.
Judge Symmes disclaimed83 any
responsibility for the
survey of the Military Range, and,
therefore, in June,
1790, Jonathan Dayton appointed84 Israel
Ludlow and
John S. Gano85 to subdivide
the range. After a consul-
tation with Symmes,86 the surveyors
began at the inter-
section of the base line and the
standard meridian and
measured fifteen miles north, and there
ran an east and
west line from river to river to determine the southern
boundary of the Military Range. The
line ran south
of the corners set by the earlier
surveyors, and in some
instances a considerable distance. This
also gave rise
to lawsuits, and the Supreme Court
decided87a in favor
of the irregular line connecting the
original corners,
though the decision was reversed in a
later case,87b af-
fecting the line between two pieces of
property only.
Much of the tract bordering on the
Little Miami
River had already been sold to Captain
Stites, and he in
turn, had sold some portions of his
holdings. Colum-
bia88 had been founded, and
improvement of the land
83 Bond, op. cit., 42, J. C. S.
to J. D., August 21, 1788.
84 Ibid.; 226, J. D. to J. C. S., August 15, 1789; 224; Dayton to
Symmes, February 6, 1790.
85 J. S. Gano, native of Morristown, New Jersey, son of a
prominent
Baptist minister; relative of Benj.
Stites; one of the first settlers of Colum-
bia; the village of Gano in Union
Township, Butler County, is named for
him.
86 Biog. and Hist. Cyc. of Butler
County, Ohio, 22-29.
87 a. and b. op. cit.
88 November 18, 1788, the second
settlement in Ohio. Now incorpo-
rated into Cincinnati.
Vol. XL--20.
306 Ohio
Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
had begun. Judge Symmes was in a sorry
predicament,
and redoubled his efforts to secure a
new boundary, in-
cluding the Columbia region; but the
Board of Treasury
maintained a stubborn determination to
hold to the re-
quirement, and Dayton, Symmes' agent,
made no prog-
ress.89 In the meantime,
Gano drew a map90 which
showed the true courses of the rivers
and revealed the
injustice of the stipulated boundary.
This he deliv-
ered91 to Dayton in August,
1789, but, as the Treasury
system was soon to be changed, Dayton
decided92 not to
interview the Board again, but to wait
until Judge
Symmes was ready to make his second
payment, and
then approach Hamilton on the subject.
An undercurrent of rumor93 was
abroad in the Pur-
chase that the Columbia tract was
outside the lawful
boundaries and that an East Jersey
Company had pur-
chased the lands, and was sending men
to eject the set-
tlers. The unrest thus produced was
suddenly turned
into fear, anger, and almost armed
resistance, when the
Governor of the Northwest Territory,
Arthur St. Clair,
took a hand in the matter. Ludlow94
called on the Gov-
ernor, who was also commander of the army,
to ask for
a military escort, which was refused.
However, in the
interview, St. Clair learned95 what
was the true eastern
boundary. He professed that he found
himself 'in a
very disagreeable predicament, having
clothed many
89 Bond, op. cit., 212; J. Dayton
to J. C. S., February 2, 1789.
90 Ibid.; 89-90, J. C. S. to J. Dayton; 220, J. D. to J. C. S.
91 Ibid., 220.
92 Op. cit.
93 Ibid., 231; J. Dayton to J. C. S., September 5, 1789.
94 Teetor, op. cit., 50 (Ludlow
to Hamilton) ; St. Clair Papers, II, 209.
95 St. Clair Papers, II, 209.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 307
persons with civil and military
authority whom it was
more properly (his) duty to have
removed, and so far
sanctioned their intrusions on the
lands of the United
States."96 The Governor
was probably sincere, but he
exaggerated the state of affairs in the
minds of himself
and others. Symmes wrote,97 "He starts the subject
as though he had lately made a notable
discovery of a
conspiracy against the United States,
and pursues it
with all the fervor and zeal which he
might do if the
lands had been taken possession of by a
colony from De-
troit, under the auspices of the
British Government."
St. Clair would not accept Symmes'
explanation, and
wrote Hamilton98 for
instructions, stating that in the
meantime he would issue a proclamation
to the settlers.
This99 was published August
23, 1791, warning the in-
habitants of the tract of their
predicament and prohibit-
ing further trespass. It also announced
the appropria-
tion of a tract of land around Fort
Washington for the
use of the garrison. This was the first
warning the
people had, and their distress was
great. On the 15th
of September the Governor issued
another proclama-
tion100 notifying the
settlers they would not be molested
until notice was given by the National
Government.
Hamilton had decided that the matter
belonged to the
Secretary of State, and Jefferson
supported the Gover-
nor, as he was bound to do. Jefferson
requested101 an
96 Ibid.
97 Bond, op. cit., 147; J. C. S.
to J. Dayton, North Bend, August 15,
1791.
98 St. Clair Papers, II,
209.
99 Proclamation by His Excellency,
Arthur St. Clair, Ibid., 209.
100 St. Clair Papers, II,
212-213.
101 St. Clair Papers, II,
212-213. Symmes kept Dayton and Boudinot
informed of the controversy and
furnished them with copies of the corre-
308 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
explanation from Symmes, and the matter
at last came
under the consideration of the
Congress. An act "For
ascertaining the bounds of a tract of
land purchased by
John Cleves Symmes" was passed and
signed by Presi-
dent Washington, April 2, 1792.102 The
law provided
that the boundaries of the purchase
should be the Ohio,
the Miamis, and an east-west line from
river to river
at the north, so as to include one
million acres in the
tract.
Governor St. Clair and Judge Symmes
ever after re-
garded each other with suspicion, and
the Judge's in-
fluence was actively thrown against the
Governor and
aided in making his last years in the
Territory so bitter.
While the attention of the Congress was
turned so
favorably to the Miami Purchase, Symmes
determined
to obtain another favor. With the
efficient operation of
the new government, Hamilton's
financial policy, and
the sale of western lands, government
securities, which
had been almost worthless, began to
rise rapidly in
value. Land sales in large tracts
ceased, and those who
held contracts "found themselves
embarrassed by the
improved credit of the nation and the
Indian wars,"103
and could not meet their obligations.
In March of
spondence so that they could answer all
inquiries in the Congress or else-
where. See letter of Symmes to Dayton,
Bond, op. cit., 146, 154, 159. He
pictures, perhaps highly colored, the
condition of affairs resulting from St.
Clair's actions, and especially the
tyranny of martial law. He accuses the
Governor of unfair and cruel treatment
towards himself.
102 The text of the law is printed in Laws of the United
States (Foll-
well Press), 1796, Vol. I, 49-50; Land
Laws for Ohio, 1825, 26-27. The
Bill was passed by the House of
Representatives, March 24; amended by
the Senate, April 4; and the amendment
accepted by the House April 5.
(Annals of Congress, III, 483, 196, 538.)
103
Treat, op. cit., 55.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 309
1792 the Ohio Company104 asked
relief, and Congress
was very generous in the settlement of
their contract.
Judge Symmes was in a similar
situation. The Indian
danger.105 prevented the
heavy influx of settlers he had
expected and kept those on the land
near the Ohio. St.
Clair's defeat106 toward the
end of 1791 was a serious
blow to the project, and Symmes
realized how seriously
it crippled him. Time and again Dayton
wrote107 him
to buy in all the certificates he could
find, but he was
lacking in funds and the certificates
were being held for
a further rise in value. Therefore, on
April 11, 1792,
a petition was presented to Congress,
stating that be-
cause of the advanced price of
certificates he could not
fulfill his contract, and requesting
that a title might be
made to him for so much of the land as
he had already
paid, and that he might be granted
terms as favorable
as those given the Ohio Company. A
House committee
appointed109 for the purpose
reported a bill which was
passed after amendment by the
Senate,110 and on May
5, 1792, the President signed the111 "Act
authorizing the
grant and conveyance of certain lands
to John Cleves
Symmes and his associates."
The act provided that the President
should patent to
John Cleves Symmes such a number of
acres at two-
104 Ibid., 56-59.
105 See
Bond, op. cit., 40-44. 74-78, 88-91, 92-97, 104-107, 126-128, 132-
136, 143-144, 149-151, 156, 173-175,
203, 205, 208, 213; Burnet, op cit., 108-113.
106 Op. cit., 158, J. C. S. to J. Dayton, January 17, 1792.
107 Ibid., 239, 240, 250, 254, 256, 258, 262.
108 Gallatin's "Report," Amer.
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. 1, 76.
109 Annals of
Congress, III, 574 (Dayton was one of
the committee).
110 Annals of Congress, III, 134.
111 Laws of U. S. (Follwell, 1796), Vol. II, 80, 81; Land Laws for
Ohio, 1825; 29-30.
310 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications
thirds of a dollar per acre as were
covered by his pay-
ments, and also an additional tract of
106,857 acres,112
(both tracts with the stipulated
reservations) provided
that sufficient army bounty rights be
delivered within six
months. One complete township was to be
granted for
a college or academy.
Though Dayton immediately sent113 Symmes
knowl-
edge of these two Acts, the six months,
provided in the
second, passed114 without
his hearing from the Judge.
The reason is unknown. Dayton therefore
acted on his
own initiative, and on the last day
possible, November
5, deposited with the Secretary of the
Treasury sufficient
warrants to cover the 106,857 acres.115
In addition
141,683 acres had been paid for, making
248,540 acres
exclusive of the township for the
academy. On the
19th of that month, Dayton wrote116
Symmes that the
patent would have to be confined to the
original bound-
aries of the contract unless the Judge
or a special agent
of his applied and agreed, in accord
with the Act of
April 12, 1792, to alter the
contract. The officials said
Dayton's letter of agency was
insufficient in this mat-
ter. Therefore Judge Symmes journeyed
east in the
spring of 1793, and on June 8,117 in a
letter to the Secre-
tary of the Treasury declared that he
agreed to alter the
112 Warrants covering 36,000 acres had
already been paid. This relief
measure therefore provided that 142,857
acres should be paid in military
warrants. Certainly this was not a
paying financial transaction for the
government.
113 Bond,
op. cit., 267, J. Dayton to J. C. S., May 6, 1792.
114 Ibid., 271,
J. Dayton to J. C. S., November 14, 1792.
115 Ibid., 272.
ll6 Ibid.
117 Gallatin's "Report," Amer.
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 76.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 311
contract. Throughout the next year he
waited118 for
the patent, delayed by some small
matters from time to
time. On September 29, 1794,119 he made
another re-
quest, apparently by command, that the
contract should
be altered, so as to include only the
tract mentioned in
the Act of 12th of April, 1792, and at
the same time he
released and quit-claimed to the United
States for him-
self and his associates, all rights,
titles, and claims to
lands within the bounds and limits of
the first contract,
not contained within the bounds of the
Act of April 12,
1792. The following day, September 30,
the patent was
issued.120 Judge Symmes objected121 to
its being made
to him and his associates, but the
Secretary of the Treas-
ury refused to make it to Symmes alone
because of the
wording of the contract,122 and
the Judge accepted it as
it was to prevent further delay.
The document patented to John Cleves
Symmes and
his associates 311,682 acres of land,
of which 248,540
acres comprised land for which
certificates and military
warrants had been paid, and the
remainder the reserva-
tions within the Grant. These were
Section 16 in all
townships for the support of schools,
29 for religion,
and 8, 11, and 26 for the future
disposition of Congress;
one complete township for an academy,
fifteen acres for
Fort Washington, and one square mile at
or near the
118 Bond, op. cit., 163, 165, 166.
119 Land Laws for Ohio, 1825, 29.
120 Land Laws for Ohio, 1825, 30-33. Text of Patent. Symmes wrote
to Dayton that very day. "The
President sets out today to take command of
the army, & I expect to leave town
tomorrow without my Patent; but like
a true Presbyterian I will suppose the
time is not yet come which was pre-
determined from eternity that I should
receive it." Bond, op. cit., 66.
121 Burnet op. cit., 424; Bond, op.
cit., 166-167.
122 The Contract; Burnet, op. cit., Appendix,
490.
312
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
mouth of Great Miami, provided it be
located within
two years by an agent appointed by the
President.
Within five years Symmes was to cause
the parallel of
latitude forming the northern boundary
to be laid out
and return thereof made to the
Secretary of the Treas-
ury; otherwise the patent would become
void. Further,
this "Parallel of latitude
(should) be run from certain
points or stations, which should have
been ascertained
and fixed by Israel Ludlow, upon the
said Great and
Little Miami Rivers, according to a
survey made by
him, of the courses of the said rivers,
under the direc-
tion of the department of the Treasury,
and heretofore
certified to that department, by a
certificate, having the
date the 24th of March, 1794."
For 248,540 acres of land Symmes paid
$165,963.
42123 in certificates and military
warrants. The cer-
tificates covered 105,683 acres, and
the warrants 142,-
857 acres. The contract had provided
that only one-
seventh of the total be paid in
military warrants, but
Congress was generous, and the Treasury
Department
regarded the warrants as worth one
dollar an acre,124
instead of applying them "acre for
acre." This would
mean that about 95,238 warrants were
paid into the
Treasury. For 105,683 acres Judge
Symmes had paid
$71,428.52 in certificates. How much he
actually paid
in specie value it is impossible to
say, because there is
no record of what the land warrants
were worth at the
time he deposited them. However,
Burnet125 states that
123 Donaldson, The Public Domain, 198.
124
Lee's "Report," Amer. State
Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 127-131;
Gallatin's "Report," Amer.
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 75, 77,
Treat, op. cit., 60, 63.
125 Burnet, op. cit., 415.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 313
at the time the contract was signed,
certificates were
worth six shillings in the pound, and
the land on that
estimate was fifteen cents an acre.
Therefore a cer-
tificate was worth 22 1/2 cents on the
dollar, and the $71,-
428.52 in certificates,126 which
Symmes had paid into
the Treasury, reduced to specie
equalled about $16,-
071.00.
The patent was regarded by Congress127
as terminat-
ing the contract of 1788; and Judge
Symmes must have
likewise regarded it at the time, for
it was granted him
on terms of the Act of May 5, 1792,
which had been
passed because he was unable to fulfill
the contract.
However, there was no formal
cancellation of the con-
tract, nor did he make any formal and
written release
excepting of the lands outside the
boundaries as altered
by the Act of April 12, 1792.
Therefore, it might be
considered that the contract still held
in regard to the
remainder of the million-acre tract,--unless
it was abro-
gated by failure to make the required
payments. The
contract had provided that within a
month after a plat
of the tract had been returned to the
Treasury, Symmes'
first payment would be due, and the
others follow in
semi-annual instalments; and Ludlow had
filed the map
January 10, 1794. It showed that there
were only 543,-
950 acres within the stipulated
boundaries. Therefore
Symmes had possible claim to only
232,268 acres, in-
cluding reserved lands, after the
patent had been fur-
nished him. But the Judge did not make
a payment
within a month after the return of the
survey, nor the
126 Certificate of McHillegas,
Treasurer, July 12, 1788. Miller, Cin-
cinnati's Beginnings, 23. "Treasury Statement," Bond, op. cit., 30-31.
127 Burnet, op. cit., 424.
314 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
second one six months later, and
therefore, unless
another complication entered, it would
appear that he
had forfeited the contract through
non-payment. How-
ever, the complication was there,
because Symmes
claimed128 that he did not
know of the plat and the re-
turns made of the survey. There was circumstantial
evidence129 to show that he
had received a copy, prob-
ably from his friend Ludlow, but when
the Judge de-
cided to press his claims he declared
he had received
none. As it was impossible to prove
that he had, it
might be considered that the instrument
was still in
force.
The controversy over the Little Miami
lands had
taught John Cleves Symmes nothing, and
he had gotten
himself into a hopeless position by
numerous sales130
north of the patent, and even beyond
Ludlow's survey.
Wayne's defeat131 of the Indians in the
Fallen Timbers
Campaign had forever removed the Indian
danger, and
settlers were pouring into the Miami
Country in in
creasing numbers. Lands were in demand,
and in
1796 Congress raised the price to two
dollars per acre.132
Then it was that Judge Symmes revived
his claim to the
whole of the million acres, and attempted
to secure the
remaining 688,318 acres at two-thirds
of a dollar per
128 Gallatin's "Report," Amer.
State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 70.
129 Op. cit.
130
Including the seventh and eighth Ranges between Mad River and the
Little Miami, to Arthur St. Clair,
Jonathan Dayton, Israel Ludlow, and
General James Wilkinson. This was in
1795, and in November of that year
Ludlow laid out the town of Dayton at
the junction of the Great Miami
and Mad Rivers. St. Clair Papers, Vol.
I, 194.
131 Battle of Fallen Timbers, August 20,
1794. Treaty of Greenville,
signed August 3, 1795.
132 Treat, op. cit.; Bond, op.
cit., 17.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 315
acre under the contract of 1788. The
resulting legis-
lation began in the spring of 1796, and
ended with the
Act of March 3, 1803.
In some manner the question of Symmes'
contract
came before the House of
Representatives in the spring
of 1796,133 probably through an
investigation of re-
served lands. The question of the
status of the contract
was referred134 to the
Attorney General, Charles Lee,
who reported May 5, 1796.135 He stated that the origi-
nal contract was still in force, and
that Congress must
pass a law before the thirtieth of the
next September to
reserve the college township and the
tract at the mouth
of the Miami. Further, he said it was necessary for the
survey to be completed, and the map
thereof deposited
in the Treasury, as all future payments
depended upon
that. As the survey had been filed
January 10, 1794,
it is apparent that the Attorney
General did not make a
careful study. However, as it was too late
in the ses-
sion to proceed further, the question
of the nature of the
contract was postponed136 until
the December of the next
session.137 At that time a
memorial138 from John Cleves
Symmes was received asking a
fulfillment of the con-
133 March 4, A resolution in the House
tabled, Annals of Congress, V,
423. March 8, House of Representatives, Annals,
V, 783. April 22, House
of Representatives, Annals, V,
1140. May 3, House of Representatives,
Amer. State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 67.
134 Annals, V, 1140.
135 Amer. State Papers,
Public Lands, I, 69; mentioned,
Annals, V.
1299.
136 Annals, V, 1462. The House,
however, passed, May 28, a bill
authorizing the President to cause the
tract at the mouth of the Great
Miami to be located. Annals, V,
1465. The Annals do not mention it in the
Senate records.
137 December 22; Annals, VI,
1695.
138 December 27; Annals, VI,
1704.
316
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
tract. Albert Gallatin139 informed
the House140 that
the Attorney General's report was not
complete, and had
the problem assigned to a special
committee of which he
was made chairman. Gallatin reported
for the Com-
mittee, February 9, 1797.141 After
relating the history
of the contract and purchase, the
report stated, "The
committee are of opinion: First, that
the application
made by Symmes to have the original
boundaries altered,
in conformity to the Act of April 12, 1792,
(which ap-
plication was made more than nine
months after the re-
turn of the survey ascertaining the
quantity of land
contained within the boundaries
designated by that Act)
and his release of all lands not
included within the new
limits set forth in that law, are a
complete relinquish-
ment of all lands not contained in Mr.
Ludlow's survey
returned to the Treasury Department,
and that he has
no claim whatever, either in justice or
equity, to any
part of the land out of the said
survey."
"Secondly, that although Mr.
Symmes has made no
payment since the completion of the
survey, yet as he
had never formally relinquished his
claim to the lands
contained within the same, and as there
is no proof of
the counter part of the plat having
been formally deliv-
ered to him, he still preserves an
equitable claim on 232,-
268 acres, being that part of Mr.
Ludlow's survey not
included in the patent already granted
to Mr. Symmes;
from which quantity must, however, be
deducted as
usual the lots reserved by the original
contract."
139 The future secretary of the
treasury.
140 January 5, 1797; Annals, VI,
1818.
141 Amer. State Papers, Public Lands, I, 75-77; mentioned, Annals,
VI,
2106.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 317
Further, Gallatin said Symmes had not
paid for
47,625 acres in the amount patented to
him. When the
patent was granted, Symmes and his
associates were
credited with 95,250 acres in Land
Warrants, at the rate
of $1.00 per acre and they were charged
only two-thirds
of a dollar per acre. They received for
these warrants
142,875 acres or an acre and a half for
every acre in
military rights. Though this was approved by the
Attorney-general, it was contrary to
the original resolu-
tions of Congress and the contract
which stipulated that
bounty rights should be applied acre
for acre. It is true
that this was not according to the
contract, but it was a
relief measure, and was not nearly as
generous as the
terms granted the Ohio Company. It was
a reward for
founding an important frontier
settlement, and the terms
of Symmes' Patent were just as legal as
those of the
Ohio Company.
Lastly, Gallatin, in the name of the
committee, recom-
mended that a bill should be drafted
authorizing the
President to grant in fee simple to
Symmes the remain-
ing lands within the survey, reserving
those required,
provided that he make payment for the
same and for
the 47,625 acres, and provided that the
college town-
ship be located.
The committee's report was accepted,142
a bill passed
on February 23, 1797,143 and
sent to the Senate.144 That
142 Annals, VI,
2167-2168; Ibid., 21, 99; February 21, 1797, Gallatin
again gave the particulars of the case, Annals,
VI, 2247-2248.
143 Annals, VI, 2249.
144 "Ibid., 1557, 1558. While the Senate was considering it, a
petition
from Symmes was received, February 27,
protesting against some feature
of it. Ibid., 1561.
318 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
body rejected it,145 and there was
proposed a resolution146
calling upon the Attorney-general to
direct suit against
John Cleves Symmes to obtain payment
for the surplus
lands reported by the House Committee,
or a release
and vacation of the same. However,
consideration of
the resolution was ordered postponed,
and it was not
revived.147
Similar measures148 were
discussed in 1798, and at
last produced concrete action in the
Law of March 2,
1799,149 which disregarded Symmes'
claims entirely, and
merely granted preemption rights at two
dollars per
acre, allowing two years for payment,
to those within
Ludlow's survey who had written
contracts with Judge
Symmes before April 1, 1797. Few of the
persons,
whom the Act meant to relieve, were
satisfied, and there
were many who had only a verbal
contract with the Pro-
prietor, and there was no provision for
those. In July
Governor St. Clair wrote to the
Secretary of State,150
"The law for the selling of lands
claimed by Judge
Symmes under his contract with the
Board of Treasury,
but beyond the northern boundary of his
patent, has
given a, very great alarm to the people
settled thereupon,
and they are very numerous. The
intention was clearly
to secure all those who had written
contracts with the
145 Ibid., 1570 (March 2).
146 Ibid., 1580.
147 While the Senate was considering the
bill, a petition was received
from G. Turner and Peyton Short, Symmes'
son-in-law, who had purchased
land north of the patent line. Their
case serves as an illustration of the
situation in which Symmes' purchasers
found themselves. See Amer. State
Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 77-78.
148 Annals, VII, 1042, 1045, 1917, 1926.
149 Annals,
IX, 3937-3938; Burnet, op. cit., 426; Treat, op. cit., 61.
150 St. Clair Papers, II, 445.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 319
Judge before a certain day, but there
are great numbers
sate down under verbal contracts and on
the faith of his
assurance that he had never
relinquished the contract,
and would contest his right under it.
From almost all
of them he has received money in part
payment, which,
notwithstanding the law, he positively
refuses to return
and from that circumstance many, who
are, or at least
appear to be, very willing to take the
lands on the terms
held out to them by the law, are unable
to make the just
payment at the time required, and are
much agitated by
fear of losing the right of preemption.
There are others,
I am informed, who talk plainly of
holding their posses-
sions by force of arms, and it has been
hinted to me that
they are stimulated to it by the Judge.
Should you think
it proper to proceed in that way, there
are some respect-
able men whose depositions can be
taken, and indeed I
have little doubt of the fact. At the
same time it re-
quires consideration lest a premature
step should in-
crease the evil."
Petitions151 from settlers were showered
upon Con-
gress, including a general petition152
from the people on
the land, forwarded by the Governor,
and one from the
Territorial Legislature.153 Among the
letters was one
from Symmesl54 stating
"the reasons why Congress
should be induced to receive of him the
purchase money
for certain public lands at the
contract price." The
petitions were assigned to a committee155
of the House
of Representatives (headed by a Mr.
Bruce), which de-
151 Annals, X, 207, 211, 515, 523.
152 St. Clair Papers, II, 472.
153 Annals, X, 376.
154 Annals, X, 21 (December 30, 1790).
155 Amer. State Papers, Public Lands,
I, 104-106.
320 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
cided.156 that Judge Symmes
still had a right to the land
within the survey and that he should be
permitted to pay
for it, and that the preemption law
should be extended as
to time for those claimants north of
Ludlow's survey.
The committee reported a bill,157 which
passed the
House,158 but was postponed
until the next session by the
Senate,159 and the
postponement was permanent.
During the next session a course of
legislation160
started in the House, which culminated
in the Act of
March 3, 1801.161 All who
had purchased lands of John
Cleves Symmes outside his patent, but
within Ludlow's
survey prior to May 5, 1792, were
granted preemption
right at $2.00 per acre, and
commissioners were ap-
pointed to adjust the claims before the
first of November
next. No application would be received
after that date.
First payments were to be made on
January 1st. The
commissioners were to meet in Cincinnati
and give three
weeks notice through newspaper
advertisement. They
met November 9th, advertised by
handbills, and gave
only eighteen days notice.162 These irregularities were
stressed in later petitions and
reports, and as usual, the
act called forth many of these.163
A committee re-
ported,164 that the
time-limit for payment should be in-
156 Op. cit.
157 Annals, X, 669 (April 16, 1800).
158 Annals, X,
688 (April 28).
159 Annals, X, 167 (Reported, April 28), 178 (First reading May 9),
180
(Postponement, May 10).
160 Annals, X, 914, 1003, 1001, 1005, 1067 (House of
Representatives);
739, 741, 748, 750 (Senate).
161 Annals, X, 1559-1563; Amer. State Papers, Public Lands, Vol.
I,
112-113; Treat, op. cit., 107-108.
162 Amer. State Papers, Public Lands,
Vol. I, 112-113.
163 Annals, XI,
313, 462.
164 Amer. State Papers, Public Lands,
Vol. I, 112-113.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 321
creased, but as usual action was
postponed, though an
act extending the time-limit and
applying the preemption
rights to the lands north of Ludlow's
survey was finally
passed in 1802.165
Judge Symmes' failure to establish his
claims
brought many lawsuits166 upon
him, directed by persons
who had paid him money for lands that
did not belong to
him and for which they now had to pay
again. Portions
of his property were seized and sold in
increasing
amounts to satisfy judgments against
him.167 He applied
to the Senate for relief from the
operation of the pre-
emption act.168 "As the
legal questions involved in his
claims had never been considered by
competent author-
ity, he asked the privilege of being
heard either in a fed-
eral court or by special commissioners.
If this request
was refused, he made alternative
proposals. For lands
already granted outside his patent, he
offered to pay the
price stipulated in his contract with
the Government. If
this offer was not accepted, he was
willing to give other
lands he held in the Northwest
Territory in exchange
for these holdings."169 The Senate
referred170 the matter
of Symmes' claims to the
Attorney-general, Levi Lin-
coln, who reported January 26, 1803.171
165 Annals, XI, 267, 285, 1249, 1253.
166
The early volumes of Deed Records in the Butler County Recorder's
Office in Hamilton, contain many
depositions taken in such suits.
167
For typical instances see letter of Symmes
to Dayton, Bond, op. cit.,
189.
168 (Received, April 23, 1802.) Annals, XI, 274,
298.
169 Bond, op. cit., 20.
170 Amer. State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. I, 126-127; Annals, XI,
299-300.
171 Annals, XII, 32; Text; Amer. State Papers, Public Lands, Vol.
I,
127-131.
Vol. XL--21.
322
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
Very minutely Lincoln's report reviewed
the history
of the case, the nature and provisions
of the contract,
and the various relative documents.
Then it carefully
and completely considered and disposed
of every pos-
sible legal claim Judge Symmes might
have, but pointed
out that there was reason for a claim
on a far different
basis: "Judge Symmes appears to
have no claims on the
Government founded on a legal right, or
a particular
equity growing out of a fair and
reasonable construc-
tion of his contract. If he has any
claims, they appear
to rest on that voluntary justice and
liberal and general
equity, which a government or an
individual will, or
ought, always to extend, in a matter of
common con-
cern, towards the unfortunate, whose
acts inducing
the misfortune, have been to them
productive of par-
ticular benefits. Generally the
establishment of a set-
tlement in a large, new, and wilderness
country, is
attended with trouble, expense,
hardships, and danger,
to the first settlers, and with profit
and various ad-
vantages to the proprietors of the
country, by increasing
its population, the value and sale of
their lands, and, as
the case has been, the security of the
frontier. On these
grounds, the Judge is pathetic in the
statement of his
claims. They are at least, specious,
and perhaps de-
serve the more attention, as his
disappointment and suf-
ferings appear to have resulted, in
part, from an opinion
of the extent of his contract, although
differing from the
Government's, yet at least colorable,
and supported by
some official reports on the subject.
"How far there are countervailing
circumstances;
how far there was a benefit to the
purchaser, in exchang-
ing the land described in the first
contract for that con-
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 323
tained in the second; what advantage he
derived from
the payment of military rights, one
acre for one and a
half, and to the full proportion of a
million acres; what
from disposing of the township near the
center of his
grant, or from any other source, are
submitted to the
consideration of the honorable
Senate."
The report was referred172 to
a committee and was
never heard of again. From this time
the Congress
took no more action173 in
regard to the Miami Purchase,
and without relief, Judge Symmes was
reduced to pov-
erty. Piece by piece his Miami lands,
his homestead,
"Solitude", and other
possessions were seized by sheriffs
or sold by himself to satisfy those who
had suits against
him. His house, containing many
valuables, was
burned--probably as an act of spite.
The old man, by
the time of his death, was divested of
all his estate ex-
cept a few small scattered plots and
still had many
outstanding claims against him, yet he
continued to
struggle to satisfy them. He died
February 26, 1814,
and was buried at North Bend. His will
provided for
the settlement of all claims against
him as far as his
possessions would permit, and the
testament is bitter
against the Government and those who
enjoyed the
"property which they have
plundered" from him.174
The problem of the College Township
will be briefly
treated. The Ohio Company was granted
by the terms
of their contract two townships for the
establishment of
172 Annals, XII, 82.
173 Petitions
were reported every now and then for several years.
Examples, Annals, for 1805-06,
294, 324, 326, 931.
174 A transcript of the will given by
Americus Symmes to his cousin,
Mr. Alex. Hunter, is in the possession
of Mrs. Mary (Hunter) Miller
of Hamilton.
324
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
a university, and when John Cleves
Symmes petitioned
Congress for a contract he included
this feature, but
asked that he be granted one township
for an academy,
instead of two. This was provided for
in the proposed
agreement for two million acres of
land, but was omitted
from the actual contract for one
million acres. Judge
Symmes had designated one township as
the "College
Township", a choice entire one,
number three in the
first entire range,175 but
as no township was given in the
contract signed by his agents, he
disposed of the tract
as he had full right to do. However,
the Act of May
5, 1792, revived this feature, and the
patent issued Sep-
tember 30, 1794, granted one entire
township within the
grant for the use of an academy,
provided that the "loca-
tion should be made 'with' the
approbation of the Gov-
ernor."
The matter rested until the summer of
1799, when
Governor St. Clair learned of it, and
began his last
controversy with Symmes. The Secretary
of State
wrote176 him regarding the
reservations in the purchase,
and as soon as the Governor discovered
with surprise
that he had a voice in the location, he
summoned Judge
Symmes and demanded to see the patent.177
The Judge
informed him of what had happened to
the township
originally intended for the college,
and offered another,
the first entire township nearest the
junction of the
Great Miami with the Ohio.178 This was the township
175 McBride, A
speech for the General Assembly of the State of Ohio,
etc.; Bradford, "McBride Mss.,
selections relating to the Miami University,"
Quar. Pub. of Hist. and Phil. Soc. of
Ohio, Vol. IV, 1909, No. 2, 56;
Burnet, op. cit., 428.
176 St. Clair Papers, II, 443.
177 Op. cit.
178 Burnet, op. cit., 429.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 325
Symmes had reserved for himself, and on
which he had
intended to lay out a great city,179
and was the only un-
broken one remaining in the purchase.
There were a
few persons living on it, and it had
been partly im-
proved, but the Judge said these
persons were merely
tenants on the land holding leases from
him as Trustee
of the College land.180 However,
St. Clair refused to
accepts181 it on the grounds that it
was not suitable and
that it was then the subject of a
lawsuit. By articles
of agreement, on March 12, 1788,182
Elias Boudinot had
agreed to take an undivided
half-interest in this tract
and all other land Symmes reserved for
himself and he
was now suing for half of the township.
The Judge
insisted that183 "the
claim set up by Mr. Boudinot to the
college township is vague and
conditional, and on his
part the conditions have never been
fulfilled. That upon
which he founds his pretentions is a
document several
months older than the contract itself,
and no lien on the
land can thence accrue. If he had lived
up to the con-
ditions of this contract, which he by
no means did, yet
his redress could only be personal
against the grantee,
and not real, for no color or fee could
pass by the docu-
ment he holds." This suit was
filed in June, 1797,184
and in May, 1802, was decided in favor
of Boudinot, and
Judge Symmes was required to convey
half of the town-
179 "Trenton Circular."
180 J. C. S. to a Committee of the House of
Representatives, Washing-
ton, January 30, 1802; Bradford,
"McBride Mss.," Quar. Pub. of Hist. and
Phil. Soc. of Ohio, IV, No. 1 (1909).
181 St.
Clair Papers, II, 467.
182 Quoted, St.
Clair Papers, 465.
183
Symmes to Committee of House of Representatives.
184 (U.
S. Circuit Court, Eastern District of Pa.) Bradford, "McBride
Mss.," 61; Burnet, op cit., 429-430.
326
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
ship to him. The other half was later
sold by the sheriff
of Hamilton County to satisfy other
judgments against
Mr. Symmes.
When the Territorial Legislature met in
the autumn
of 1799, the Governor sent full
statements of the case
to the House of Representatives on
October 16,185 and to
the Legislative Council on October
19.186 As the only
unbroken township in the purchase could
not be ac-
cepted, and only five sections remained
unsold in the one
originally intended, a committee was
appointed by the
General Assembly to discover a means of
obtaining a
township. The committee reported a
resolution, which
was adopted,187 "That
William H. Harrison, Esquire,
delegate to serve for this territory in
the Congress of
the United States, be instructed to use
his endeavors to
procure an act of Congress to be passed
in the present
session, vesting in certain trustees
and their successors
resident within the grant of land to
John Cleves Symmes
and described in the letters patent
aforesaid the right of
the aforesaid lots, to-wit, Nos. 8,11,
16, 26 and
29 in the third township east of the
Great Miami River
and first entire range of the grant
aforesaid--in trust
to and for the sole intent and purpose
of establishing an
academy and endowing and supporting the
same--.
And that the said William H. Harrison
be also in-
structed, if practicable, to obtain a
grant of thirty-one
sections of land, in a body, lying on
the bank of the
Great Miami River, on the west side,
and so high up the
said river as to lie in a square, and
the whole thereof to
185 St. Clair Papers, II, 465-469.
186 Op. cit., 470-471.
187 Bradford,
"McBride Mss.," Quar. Pub. of Hist. and Phil. Soc. of
Ohio, IV, No. 2, 62-63.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 327
be east of a line extending due north
from the mouth
of the Great Miami River, to and for
the uses, interests,
and purposes aforesaid, and in lieu of
those aliened by
the said John Cleves Symmes.
"And further, if the said William
H. Harrison can
not effect the purposes aforesaid, that
he use all legal
means in his power to have such
measures taken as will
compel the said John Cleves Symmes to
make good the
trust aforesaid, or to render an
equivalent for the same,
to be appropriated agreeably to the
same use and intent
of the original donation."
Governor St. Clair188 Was not very
optimistic con-
cerning this resolution, and he thought
the resolution
ridiculous, since he was sure that
Harrison would use
all his energies to shield his
father-in-law189 from un-
favorable action. The Judge's influence
had been an
important factor in Harrison's
election, too. When the
second session of the Territorial Legislature
opened at
Chillicothe, November 5, 1800, St.
Clair suggested100
that John Cleves Symmes be legally
compelled to make
satisfaction in form of the money
equivalent of the value
of the township (3rd, first range). A
small part of the
fund would be sufficient to erect
buildings, and the re-
mainder, if wisely invested, would
produce more than
enough to support the institution. The following year,
in November,191 the Governor again
called attention to
the matter, and in January, the General
Assembly gave
188 St. Clair Papers, II,
480-481.
189 William Henry Harrison had married
Anna (Polly) Symmes, and
Symmes had been very influential in
aiding Harrison to secure his election.
190 St. Clair Papers, Vol. II,
507-509.
191. Ibid., 536-537.
328 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
its delegate, Paul Fearing,
instructions192 similar to
those previously given Harrison. Symmes
went to
Washington and addressed a statement193
to the com-
mittee of the House which was
investigating the prob-
lem. After a petition from the Ohio
Constitutional
Convention194 in November,
1802, Congress complied
with these requests, and on March 3,
1803, passed an
act195 in addition to the
enabling act granting one com-
plete township in the State of Ohio,
district of Cincin-
nati, to be located under direction of
the State Legisla-
ture before October 1, 1803. If within
five years a
township should be secured within the
boundary of the
patent, this township was to revert to
the United
States.196 Symmes was to be
relieved of his trusteeship
and granted a deed to the township on
payment of $15,-
360.00 with interest from the date of
the patent.197
The township selected was Oxford
township, Butler
County, the final fee of which is
vested in the Trustees
of the Miami University, and deeds are
given for ninety-
nine-year leases, renewable at each
expiration.
III. THE LAND AND SALES SYSTEMS
The land system of the Miami Purchase
is a compro-
mise between that of New England1 with
its regular
192 Ibid, 545-546.
193
Bradford, "McBride Mss.," Quar. Pub. Hist. and Phil. Soc. of Ohio,
IV, No. 1, 6-9. See also his statement
to Dayton; Bond, op. cit. 183-188.
194 Bradford,
"McBride Mss.," Quar. Pub. Hist. and Phil. Soc. of Ohio,
IV, 2, 63-64.
195 Ibid., IV, 2, 63-64.
196 Ibid., 64.
197 Ibid., 64; Burnet, op. cit. 431; Annals, X, 836,
837.
1 Treat, op. cit. 18, 23, 24.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 329
surveys and continuous, compact town
settlement, and
the Southern system2 of
irregular surveys and individual
location. Symmes' scheme permitted the
locator to
choose his land wherever he pleased so
long as his site
could be bounded by the lines of the
regular rectangular
surveys. This was required, not because
of Symmes'
admiration or approval of the New
England system,
but because it was demanded by the
National Land Or-
dinance.3
Professor Bond, in his introduction to
the Symmes
Correspondence, points out the strength of New Jersey
influence on Judge Symmes' thinking and
planning.4
"The Jerseys . . . were established by private persons,
proprietors, who remained in England
for the most part,
and set up old feudal dues, such as the
quit rents, in
their province . . . As a resident of
New Jersey, John
Cleves Symmes adopted the proprietary
as the form of
his projected colony. But the Revolution
had abolished
feudal incidents, and under the new
American govern-
ment the Miami Purchase differed in
many respects
from the Jerseys under the old British
regime. Unlike
the former proprietors, Judge Symmes
had rights over
the land alone, and none over the
government. Also, he
himself owed no feudal dues to a
superior, holding his
land in fee simple under Congress, the
representatives of
the American people. Nor did he
establish either feu-
dal rights or incidents in his colony,
merely passing
along to purchasers of the land his own
rights in fee
simple.
2 Ibid, 24, 25.
3 The Ordinance of 1785.
4 Bond, op. cit. 3, 4.
330
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
"Yet the land system of the Miami
Purchase pre-
served many of the old proprietary
forms. Like the
Jersey proprietors, Judge Symmes could
dispose of his
land on such terms as he pleased,
subject to existing
laws, although competition, notably
with the Ohio Com-
pany and the Kentucky settlements, made
it necessary
to make very favorable concessions.
Indeed the induce-
ments he offered at different times to prospective
set-
tlers may be compared to the
Concessions and Agree-
ments that were drawn up by the
Proprietors of East
Jersey. Even more noteworthy as a
parallelism with
East Jersey was the scheme he adopted
to dispose of the
land between the Ohio and the Miami
which had been
reserved for his own personal benefit.
Dividing the
rights in this land into twenty-four
shares, Judge
Symmes created in reality as many
proprieties, bearing
a striking analogy to the twenty-four
shares of the asso-
ciates who bought East Jersey from
Berkeley and Car-
teret. As in East Jersey, a Board of
Proprietors was
formed which in this case held meetings
in New Jersey,
and sent instructions to their agent,
Judge Symmes, in
Ohio, just as their prototype, meeting
in England, had
issued orders to its representative in
East Jersey. That
is, while the Revolution had abolished
many of the lead-
ing features of the old proprietary
system, there were
still notable similarities between the
Jersey colonies and
the Miami Purchase."
On the 26th November, 1787, Judge
Symmes had
printed on a private press on a farm
near Trenton, New
Jersey, one thousand copies of a
pamphlet addressed "To
The Respectable Public."5 This
was his prospectus,
5 Supra, page 291, note 11.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 331
and set forth his (proposed) contract
with the Board
of Treasury, the land and sales system,
and a descrip-
tion of the country. The pamphlet is
the chief source
of information concerning the land
system and terms of
sale.
The surveys have been fully treated in
the preceding
chapter,6 and it is here
necessary to repeat only that the
tract was subdivided into sections,
townships, and
ranges as was land elsewhere under the
National Land
System, with the exception that the
ranges ran from
west to east, parallel, in a general
direction, to the Ohio,
and numbering north from the river. The
first two in-
complete ranges were called Fractional
Ranges One and
Two, and the next adjoining range to
the north Entire
Range One.
Exploration and accurate surveys should
have pre-
ceded any sales and settlement, but
before a right of
entry could be obtained, Judge Symmes
was required to
make the first payment to the Board of
Treasury. Un-
fortunately the Judge could not raise
the required sum
himself and had to rely on immediate
sales to produce
the funds. This determined the first
part of the sales
system. The Judge and agents appointed
by him issued
land warrants7 for any
number of acres not less than one
hundred and sixty, a quarter-section,
in return for pay-
ment of sufficient certificates or
military warrants. The
warrants were always made for a
township, section, or
quarter-section and the purchaser was
to choose any
such tract in the grant not previously
located and regis-
tered. Benjamin Stites who had visited
the Miami
6 Pages
291 et seq.
7 "Trenton Circular."
332 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
Country, drew a map from memory, and on
this entries
were marked--to be carried out as far
as possible after
actual surveys were made and an
accurate map pro-
duced. This final map and the records
of surveys were
to be kept in the registration office8
on the grant, and
there the warrants were to be delivered
and the location
made and registered. After the
completion of the sur-
veys, location was to be made only in
the registry office
on the grant and with the utmost
accuracy and exact-
ness.9
Warrants could be purchased either from
Judge
Symmes in the Miami Country or from his
agents in
New Jersey, New York, and Philadelphia.
These num-
bered about twenty-five or -six, and
were:10 Michall D.
Henry,11 New York; Edward Fox,12 Philadelphia; Jos-
eph Bloomfield,13 Burlington;
Eli Elmer, Cumberland;
Franklin Davenport, Gloucester; Samuel
W. Stockton,14
Trenton; Richard Stockton,15 Princeton;
Jonathan Rhea,
Monmouth; Andrew Kirkpatrick,16 New
Brunswick;
Daniel Hunt, South Branch, Raritan;
Archibald Mer-
8 Judge Symmes promised to appoint a
Registrar, but failed to do so
and acted in that capacity himself, and
as he was exceedingly busy, the of-
fice suffered neglect. Thus it happened
also that most of the records were
in his home when it burned and so were
lost. Burnet, op. cit. 416.
9 It was further provided that persons
who could not purchase as much
as a quarter-section individually could
throw their certificates together and
purchase a section, half-section, or
quarter-section and divide it to please
themselves. If one presented a warrant
covering a fraction more than a
regular tract he was not permitted to
locate the fraction but was given a
certificate of surplus which he could
apply to a latter purchase or sell it,
or add it to the certificates of others
engaged in purchase.
10 The following list was appended to an
advertisement in the Bruns-
wick Gazette and Weekly Monitor, January
22, 1788, Brunswick, N. J.,
Bond, op. cit. 284.
11 to 16 The first agents appointed. The
names are appended to the
"Trenton Circular."
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 333
cer, Millstone; Major William Lawrey,
Alexandria;
George Cotnam, Oxford; Thomas Anderson,
Newtown;
Major William Holmes, Hackettstown;
Joseph Lewis,
Morristown; James Henry, Lamerton;
Daniel Marsh,
Rahway; Rev. Rune Runyan, Piscataqua;
Doctor El-
mer, Westfield; Elias Dayton, Junior,17
Elizabethtown;
John Burner, Newark; Nehemiah Wade,
Hackensack;
Timothy Day, Chatham; Benjamin Stites,
Scotch
Plains, and probably Elias Boudinot.
Jonathan Dayton
received military warrants and issued
Miami warrants
for location in the Third Range.
The price18 was set at
two-thirds of a dollar per acre
for the first sales--the price Judge
Symmes paid the
Board of Treasury. At the end of six
months the price
was to rise to one dollar, and
after another six-months
period was to increase again if the
country was settled
as swiftly as expected. The purchase price was pay-
able in liquidated debt certificates
(unless the purchaser
presented military warrants for
location in the Third
Range), but interest due on the same
would not be ac-
cepted. New certificates called
indents19 would be is-
sued by the Treasury office to cover
the interest.
Immediately following the entry of the
location the
registrar was to issue a patent or deed
for the same.
However, such deeds for land had no
ultimate validity
until Symmes received his patent from
the President.
17 The
first agents appointed. The names are appended to the "Trenton
Circular."
18 "Trenton Circular."
19 Judge Symmes suggested the purchasers
take care of the matter be-
fore presenting the certificate to him,
but said he was willing to take care of
the indents for those who did not. They
caused him much trouble.
"Trenton Circular." Bond op.
cit., 2, 7, 28, 37, 52, 85, 88, 102, 180, 205, 206,
215, 218, 223, 244, 260, 261, 264.
334 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
Purchase, location, and entry involved
various fees.
First was the "one-penny
proclamation,'"20 of one penny
per acre, exacted at the time when the
warrant was pur-
chased and payable in specie or in
bills of credit of the
States of New York, New Jersey, or
Pennsylvania.
This fee was to defray the expense of
surveying. At
the same time a farthing21 per
acre was exacted to pay
the cost of printing the warrants and
record-books, and
to pay the registrar, and for other
incidental expenses.
Further, the funds22 raised
by the increase in purchase
price were to be regarded as fees for
the construction of
roads and bridges.
The Contract with the Government
provided that
one-seventh of the entire purchase
might be paid for in
military bounty rights. To simplify
matters the Third
Entire Range was set aside to satisfy
military warrants
and Jonathan Dayton took entire charge
of it, Judge
Symmes giving up all responsibility.23
The above regu-
lations applied to this tract as well
as to the remainder of
the Purchase.
To stimulate settlement and improvement
and pre-
vent the evils of absentee ownership,
Judge Symmes
stipulated that within two years after
making location
each owner of land must establish
himself or someone
else on the ground or in some station
of defense, and be-
20 "Trenton Circular."
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid. Bond, op. cit., 14,
35, 42, 44, 45, 49, 88, 90, 122, 123, 124, 130,
131, 143, 155, 169, 172, 173, 174, 180,
181, 210, 218, 226, 230, 235, 245, 255, 265,
266, 269. Burnet op. cit., 415,
418-420. Deed conveying the Third Range
from J. C. Symmes to Jonathan Dayton,
October 13, 1794. Deed Book A.,
Butler County Recorder's Office.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleeves
33 335
gin improvement on every section or
quarter-section he
had located, and remain for seven
years. If this re-
quirement was not fulfilled--unless due
to Indian hos-
tility--the owner was to forfeit
one-sixth of each such
neglected section or quarter-section, a
square at the
northeast corner being taken away.24
The forfeited
land then reverted to the Registrar,
who was to grant it
gratis to any volunteer settler who might
make applica-
tion for it and fulfill the conditions
of settlement and
improvement. At the end of seven years' residence and
upon paying the small fees, the
volunteer settler could
obtain his deed.
The only lands in the Purchase which
did not come
under Symmes' regulation and were not
open for sale
were the lands reserved by Congress,
that is, in each
section, sections 8, 11, 26 for future
disposition, 16 for
schools, and 29 for religion.25
In his original plan, Judge Symmes
reserved for his
personal use the entire township
nearest the junction
of the Ohio and Great Miami Rivers, and
the three frac-
tional townships north, south, and west
of it.26 There
he intended to lay out a great and
beautiful city, named
Symmes, "with eligible streets and
lots of 60 feet wide
in front and rear and one hundred and
twenty feet
24 "Trenton Circular";
Burnet, op. cit., 417-418. Assignment of for-
feiture (to John Cox., Jr.), Deed
Book A, Butler County Recorder's Of-
fice. Some of these cases were thrown
out by the courts, others were held.
The provision was not written in the
deeds, but was a part of the verbal
understanding. The language of the
provision was not entirely clear, how-
ever. It is probably correct to say that
where a definite verbal understand-
ing could be proved the forfeiture held,
but where the provision could not be
proved a part of the contract it did
not.
25 Supra, pp. 292-293.
26 "Trenton Circular."
336 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
deep." Every alternate lot
throughout the town was
to be given to any person who would
build a house or
cabin thereon within two years after
the Judge made the
first payment to the Treasury Board,
and to live there
or keep some family there for three
years. During
that time the settler might cut timber
on adjoining land
belonging to the Proprietor.
However, when Judge Symmes discovered
that he
had too great a financial burden for
him to carry alone
he decided to allow others to take a
share in the proposed
city. Thus arose the Board of
Proprietors.27 As Pro-
fessor Bond suggested, this Board was modeled
after
the Proprietors of East Jersey, but no
definite statement
of its organization and features can be
given. Symmes
sold to Elias Boudinot28 for
£200 an undivided half-
interest in his 40,000 acres of
personally reserved land,
with the provision29 that it
should be subdivided until
there were twenty-four shares in all,
each new pro-
prietor paying £200 to the joint
account of the others.
Each proprietor would be entitled to a
square in the city
and to a twenty-fourth of the remaining
land.
An exact list of the proprietors can
not be given, but
it includes Judge Symmes, Jonathan Dayton, Elias
Boudinot, Matthias Denman, Daniel
Marsh, Matthias
Ogden, Elisha Boudinot, Peartree Smith,
Col. Hedden,
27 See various references in the
Symmes-Dayton-Boudinot Correspond-
ence in Bond, op. cit., 4, 10, 13, 39, 43, 64, 69,
83, 88, 90, 110-113, 126, 136,
173, 184, 191, 193, 209-210, 219, 226,
228, 243, 247, 251, 256. Terms may be
recorded in an old manuscript in the
Hamilton County Court House in Cin-
cinnati, if the record escaped the great
fire there, but the writer has not
been able to gain access to it.
28 The first part of the agreement is
recorded in St. Clair Papers II, 465,
and Burnet, op. cit., 493-494.
29 Bond, op. cit., 39,
note 27.
The Miami Purchase of John Cleves
Symmes 337
Doctor Burnet, Caleb Russell, J. N.
Cummings, Tuttle,
Silas Condict. Jonathan Dayton seems to
have been
chairman of the Board, or at least was
the most active
spirit in it.30 The Board
met now and then, usually at
the home of some member.31 The
actual activities of
the Board are not in the province of
this section.
Theoretically the Board was to
determine the policy to
be followed, to furnish necessary
provisions, and send
instructions to Judge Symmes, the agent
on the ground.
Ultimately two other agents were sent
to assist him.32
On his part, Judge Symmes was to keep
the Proprietors
informed of the state of affairs at
Miami, and to send
suggestions.
The City was a failure because of the
rise of Cin-
cinnati under the protection of Fort
Washington at a
time when Indian hostilities almost put
an end to the
settlement of North Bend. About 1795 or
1796
Symmes settled the claims of all the
proprietors except
Boudinot in order to offer the township
for assign-
ment33 as the college
township. The city resulted only
in the small villages of Cleves and
North Bend, and a
large part of it became the plantation
of William Henry
Harrison.
30 See
references in note 27.
31 As at Denman's, Bond, op. cit.,
219.
32 Captains Howell and Brown, ibid, 136.
33 See pp. 292-293.
Vol. XL--22.
338
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications
CONCLUSION
The machinery of the land system did
not operate as
well in practice as had been expected.
This may be
traced to personal shortcomings in
Judge Symmes him-
self and to the system. Through Symmes'
slip-shod
work as registrar the records fell into
endless confusion.
Moreover, he had begun sales too early,
before the geog-
raphy was known, and many promises as
to location
were impossible to fulfill.
Occasionally warrants were
issued for land already granted; and
most serious of all
was the trouble that arose from the
uncertainty of
boundaries. Tracts were sold on credit
and the purchase
price never collected. The Judge was
not an efficient
business man nor a financier, and he
was too intent upon
the details of settlement to have time
for the details of
business. Furthermore, his duties as
Judge of the Ter-
ritory took him away from the Miami for
long periods
at times, and he had a large plantation
of his own to
direct. His venture proved conclusively
the impractica-
bility of the colonization of a large
tract of land, es-
pecially in a strategic frontier
region, under the pro-
prietary system.
One man could not be a genius in all
points neces-
sary to support the system which
centered upon him,
and the very idea of a proprietary was
foreign to the
democratic spirit of the frontier. Such an enterprise
was never again undertaken in the
Northwest.
Bibliography 339
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
1. American State Papers, Vol. I., Gales and Seaton, Washing-
ton, 1832.
2. Annals of Congress: The Debates
and Proceedings of the
Congress of the United States. Gales and Seaton, Wash-
ington, 1834-1856.
3. Bond, Beverley W., Jr., Editor; The
Correspondence of John
Cleves Symmes. Published for the Historical and Philo-
sophical Society of Ohio by Macmillan,
New York, 1926.
This is the correspondence between
Symmes and Jonathan
Dayton, including also several letters
from Symmes to Elias
Boudinot. An edition by Miller under the
title Cincinnati's
Beginnings was published in 1880; see below. The present
edition has been carefully edited,
referenced, and annotated.
The explanatory footnotes are
particularly valuable. An ex-
cellent introduction, including an
account of Judge Symmes'
life and services, and relevant
documents has been added.
With the exception of a few scattered
letters this is the
whole of Symmes' Correspondence extant.
The letters deal
entirely with the problems of the
Purchase.
3b. Bond, Beverley W., Jr., Ed.; "Dr. Daniel
Drake's Memoirs of
the Miami Country." See below, No.
7.
4. Bradford, John E., Ed., "The
James McBride Manuscripts:"
Selections relating to the Miami
University. The Quarterly
Publication of the Historical and
Philosophical Society of
Ohio (Cincinnati), Vol. IV, No. I, January-March, 1909.
No. 2, April-June, 1909.
5. Burnet, Jacob. Notes on the Early
Settlement of The North-
west Territory. Derby, Bradley, and Co., Cincinnati, 1847.
6. Drake, Daniel, "Memoir of the
Miami Country," 1779-1794.
(Ed. by Beverley W. Bond, Jr.) Quarterly Publication of
the Historical and Philosophical
Society of Ohio (Cincin-
nati), Vol. XVIII, Nos. 2-3,
April-September, 1923.
340 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications
7. Drake, Daniel, Natural and
Statistical View, or Picture of
Cincinnati and the Miami Country, Illustrated by Maps.
Locker and Wallace, Cincinnati, 1815.
This is the earliest
authoritative work on the Miami Country.
Its chief interest
is descriptive.
8. Land Laws for Ohio: A
Compilation of Laws, Treaties,
Resolutions, and Ordinances of the
General and State Gov-
ernments, which relate to lands in the
State of Ohio; includ-
ing the Laws of the Territorial
Legislature; the Laws
adopted by the Governor and the Judges:
and the Laws of
this State, to the years 1815-16. George
Nashee, State
Printer, Columbus, 1825.
9. Mansfield, E. D., & Drake, B., Cincinnati
in 1826. Morgan,
Lodge, and Fisher, Cincinnati, February,
1827.
10. Miller, Francis W.; Cincinnati's
Beginnings. Missing Chap-
ters in the Early History of the City
and the Miami Pur-
chase: Chiefly from Hitherto Unpublished Documents.
Peter G. Thompson, Cincinnati, 1880. This
work is com-
posed entirely of correspondence between
Symmes, Dayton,
and Boudinot. Most of the letters are
not quoted directly,
but their substance is given in
narrative. The material is
neither referenced nor annotated. The
correspondence of
John Cleves Symmes is available in a
more satisfactory edi-
tion: Bond, Correspondence of John
Cleves Symmes (See
No. 3 above), but the Miller collection
contains several let-
ters which have been lost and are not
found in the Bond
edition.
11. Smith, W. D., The St. Clair Papers.
Clarke, Cincinnati,
1882. 2 vols.
12. Symmes, John Cleves,
"Assignment of Forfeiture to John
Cox, Jr." Recorded in Deed Book A,
Butler County Re-
corder's Office, Hamilton, O. A typical
assignment. It
states the provisions which involved
forfeiture.
13. Symmes, John Cleves, "Deed of
Conveyance of the Third
or Military Range to General Jonathan
Dayton." Deed Book
A, Butler County Recorder's Office,
Hamilton, Ohio.
Bibliography 341
14. Symmes, John Cleves, "Last Will and Testament." A copy
made (probably) by John Cleves Symmes,
Jr., or his son,
Americus Vespucius Symmes; in the
possession of Mrs.
Mary Hunter Miller of Hamilton, Ohio, a
Symmes de-
scendant. Illustrates the confusion and
bitterness of the last
years of Judge Symmes and his attitude
towards the situa-
tion.
15. Symmes,
John Cleves, "The Trenton Circular." "To the
Respectable Public." (Trenton, N.
J., November 26, 1787.)
Recorded in Mss., Deed Book C,
Recorder's Office, Butler
County, Hamilton, Ohio Also--Burnet, Notes
on the Early
Settlement of the Northwest
Territory, Appendix, 482-490.
It has also been published by the
Historical and Philosophical
Society of Ohio, Publication, Vol.
V, No. 3.
This is Judge Symmes' prospectus. It
relates the tentative
contract for 2,000,000 acres, the mode
of disposition of the
land, conditions, reservations,
inducements, and gives a de-
scription of the tract. The paper is
frankly an advertise-
ment. The technical details are in no
other place treated as
fully.
15b. Symmes, John Cleves, Correspondence.
See above Nos. 3
and 1C.
16. The Laws of the United States of America. Follwell, Phila-
delphia, 1796, 3 vol.
The texts of the Acts of April 12, 1792, and May
5, 1792,
are recorded.
17. Chase, S. P., Statutes of Ohio
and the Northwest Territory
from 1788 to 1833. Corey and Fairbank, Cincinnati, 1834.
Vol. II.
SECONDARY SOURCES
18. Atterbury, The Rev. Mr.., ed.,
"Elias Boudinot; Reminis-
cences of the Revolution." Proceedings,
the Huguenot So-
ciety of America, Vol. 2, 261-298.
The preface and introduction give a
summary of Boudi-
not's career.
342 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications 19. Donaldson, Thomas, The Public Domain; Its History. The Public Land Commission, Govt. Printing office, Washington, 1880. (There is also an edition of 1884.) 20. History and Biographical Cyclopedia of Butler County, Ohio, Illustrated. Western Biographical Publishing Co., Cincinnati, 1882. 21. Sherman, C. E., Original Ohio Land Subdivisions; being Vol. III, Final Report, Ohio Cooperative Topographic Survey. Printed for the State Geologist's Office at the Ohio State Re- formatory, 1925. 22. Randall, E. O., and Ryan, D. J., History of Ohio: The Rise and Progress of an American State.. Century Co., New York, 1912. Vol. II, Chapter XXII. 23. Teetor, H. B., Life and Times of Col. Israel Ludlow. Cran- ston and Stowe, Cincinnati, 1885. 24. Treat, Payson J., The National Land System, 1785 1820. Treat & Co., N. Y., 1910. |
|
THE MIAMI PURCHASE OF JOHN CLEVES
SYMMES
BY R. PIERCE BEAVER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Miami Country1 includes
about five thousand
square miles in southwestern Ohio with
a small adjoin-
ing portion of Indiana,2 in
the main the basins and val-
leys of the two Miami rivers extending
more than a
hundred miles inland from a fifty-mile
base on the Ohio.
The region holds a most important place
in the history
of Ohio and the Northwest. In the days
before the set-
tlement of Ohio it furnished an avenue
for the British
and Indian invasions of Kentucky, and,
soon after, when
the great western movement began at the
close of the
Revolution, the Miami Country with the
Maumee Valley
was the seat of the great confederation
of tribes which
opposed it. It was necessary to plant a
permanent set-
tlement in those valleys and to crush
the tribes under
Michikinikwa3 before the
rest of Ohio and the North-
west could even be considered for
possible settlement.
Before that was accomplished a United States
army was
defeated and almost wiped out. Through
these experi-
1 See Drake, Picture of Cincinnati, for
a full description of the region
during the years of its first settlement
and especially in 1815, when the
frontier was passing. See also the description
in the "Trenton Circular."
2 "The Wedge," a portion of
the valley of the Great Miami.
3 "Little Turtle."
(284)