Ohio History Journal

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)

• 1
 

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

• 2
 

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.

• 3
 

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

• 4
 

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

• 5
 

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.

• 6
 

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

• 7
 

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.

• 8
 

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

• 9
 

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.

• 10
 

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.

• 11
 

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.

• 12
 

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.

• 13
 

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 I}bid., 198.

43 Ibid., 198.

44 Ibid., 199.

^{45 I}bid., 200, 201; also 48. Before the new power of attorney was

sent, Symmes received word of the signing of the contract. Some remedy

• 14
 

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).

• 15
 

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."

• 16
 

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.

• 17
 

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.

• 18
 

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.

• 19
 

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.

• 20
 

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.

• 21
 

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.

• 22
 

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.

• 23
 

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-

• 24
 

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.

• 25
 

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.

• 26
 

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.

• 27
 

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.

• 28
 

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.

• 29
 

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.

• 30
 

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.

• 31
 

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.

• 32
 

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.

• 33
 

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.

• 34
 

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.

• 35
 

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.

• 36
 

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.

• 37
 

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.

• 38
 

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-

• 39
 

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.

• 40
 

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.

• 41
 

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.

• 42
 

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.

• 43
 

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.

• 44
 

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.

• 45
 

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.

• 46
 

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.

• 47
 

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."

• 48
 

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."

• 49
 

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.

• 50
 

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.

• 51
 

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."

• 52
 

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.

• 53
 

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.

• 54
 

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.

• 55
 

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.

• 56
 

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.

• 57
 

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.

• 58
 

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.

• 59