The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Outlaws of Cave-in-Rock
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Outlaws of Cave-in-Rock

Author: Otto A. Rothert

Release date: January 29, 2020 [eBook #61265]
                Most recently updated: October 17, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
        http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
        generously made available by The Internet Archive)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE OUTLAWS OF CAVE-IN-ROCK ***

Transcriber’s Note: Like the original book, this eBook encloses
Bibliography references in square brackets. To avoid embiguity,
this eBook encloses footnote references in angle quotes (e.g., «15»).




  THE OUTLAWS
  OF
  CAVE-IN-ROCK

[Illustration: CAVE-IN-ROCK

(From an original oil painting by J. Bernhard Alberts, made in
1916)]




  THE OUTLAWS OF
  CAVE-IN-ROCK

  Historical Accounts of the Famous Highwaymen
  and River Pirates who operated
  in Pioneer Days upon the Ohio and
  Mississippi rivers and over the
  old Natchez Trace

  by

  Otto A. Rothert

  _Secretary, The Filson Club_

  [Illustration]

  The Arthur H. Clark Company
  Cleveland: 1924




  COPYRIGHT, 1923, BY
  OTTO A. ROTHERT

  _All Rights Reserved_




  TO MY FRIEND
  YOUNG E. ALLISON




Contents


  THE PURPOSE OF THIS NARRATIVE                                   13

  THE LAIR OF THE OUTLAWS                                         17

  PIRACY AND ROUGH LIFE ON THE RIVER                              37

  THE HARPES--A TERRIBLE FRONTIER STORY                           55

  THE HARPES--RENEWAL OF THE TERROR                               83

  THE HARPES--BIG HARPE’S RIDE TO DEATH                          107

  THE HARPES--MYSTERIES AND FATE OF SURVIVORS                    139

  MASON--SOLDIER, PIRATE, HIGHWAYMAN                             157

  MASON--ON THE NATCHEZ TRACE                                    179

  MASON--TRAPPED AND TRIED                                       207

  MASON AND HARPE--DOUBLE-CROSS AND DOUBLE DEATH                 241

  COINERS AT THE CAVE                                            267

  THE FORD’S FERRY MYSTERY                                       283

  PAYING THE PENALTY                                             307

  THE CAVE IN FICTION                                            321

  BIBLIOGRAPHY--MANUSCRIPT SOURCES                               335

  BIBLIOGRAPHY--PRINTED SOURCES                                  336

  INDEX                                                          347




Illustrations


  CAVE-IN-ROCK                                        _Frontispiece_
    From an original oil painting by J. Bernhard Alberts, made
    in 1916

  INTERIOR OF CAVE-IN-ROCK                                        21
    From a drawing by J. Bernhard Alberts made in 1916

  INTERIOR OF CAVE-IN-ROCK ABOUT 1825                             33
    From the original drawing by Charles Alexander Leseuer

  FACSIMILE OF NEWS ITEM REGARDING CAPTURE OF MICAJAH HARPE      123
    Dated, Lexington, Kentucky, September 10, 1799, and published
    in the Carolina Gazette, Charleston, S. C., October 24, 1799

  MAP SHOWING CAVE-IN-ROCK AND THE NATCHEZ TRACE, 1814           193

  FACSIMILE OF PASSPORT ISSUED TO SAMUEL MASON                   213

  Written in French and issued by the Spanish Commandant
    of the District of New Madrid, March 29, 1800

  GALLOWS FIELD, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI                   259
    From a drawing by J. Bernhard Alberts, made in 1917

  IMPLEMENTS AND WEAPONS USED BY THE OUTLAWS                     269

  ENTRANCE TO THE CAVE AND LOWER END OF CAVE-IN-ROCK BLUFF       299
    From an original photograph made in 1917

  VIEW OF CAVE-IN-ROCK AND VICINITY, 1833                        323
    Reproduced from Charles Bodmer’s drawing




The Purpose of this Narrative


This book is intended to give the authentic story of the famous
Cave-in-Rock of the lower Ohio River, as collected from historic
and romantic sources, and to present verified accounts of the most
notorious of those highwaymen and river pirates who in the early
days of the middle West and South filled the Mississippi basin with
the alarm and terror of their crimes and exploits.

All the criminals herein treated made their headquarters at one
time or another in this famous cavern. It became a natural, safe
hiding-place for the pirates who preyed on the flatboat traffic
before the days of steamboats. It came also to serve the same
purpose for highwaymen infesting the old Natchez Trace and other
land trails north and south.

A century ago and more, its rock-ribbed walls echoed the drunken
hilarity of villains and witnessed the death struggles of many a
vanished man. Today this former haunt of criminals is as quiet as
a tomb. Nothing is left in the Cave to indicate the outrages that
were committed there in the olden days.

One state historian of our own times--Parrish, of Illinois--thus
describes it: “The gruesome spot, which in those old border days
witnessed many a scene of revelry and bloodshed, is today no more
than a curiosity, its past victims, white and black, forgotten.
Just below it, where, in 1801, there stood one lone cabin, there
is today a thrifty village.” In a sense the victims have been
forgotten; yet they survive in the true stories of such of them as
the preserved records can be made to disclose.

The story of the Harpes is more than that of mere criminals. They
were arch-criminals among criminals, apparently loving murder for
its own sake. There was a time when the whole of Kentucky and
Tennessee was terrorized at the possibility of their appearance at
any hour in any locality. Samuel Mason (or Meason) the Wilsons, and
others, measured up more nearly to the standard of true highwaymen
and pirates. If they had lived in England their careers would have
closed on Tyburn Hill or at the rope’s end on “Execution Dock.”
The stories of James Ford show that his real classification must
forever remain largely a mystery.

Any history of these outlaws would doubtless be looked upon as
wild fiction unless the statements were carefully verified by
court records and contemporary newspaper notices, and the records
of early writers who gathered the facts regarding them when
these facts were told by men and women who lived at the time the
atrocities were committed. The adage that “truth is stranger than
fiction” is exemplified fully in their careers.

The lives and exploits of these men constitute an important phase
in pioneer life because their deeds greatly affected the settlement
of the new country. Dread of them brought peaceful settlers
together in communities and helped to hasten the establishment
of law and order. Their histories are therefore a part of the
history of the country. The historian who passes them over as mere
blood-and-thunder tales misses entirely one of the high lights in
the great adventure of the settling of the Mississippi basin.

Owing to the sparse population and the great distances between
settlements in the West, the early accounts of these criminals
and their crimes were subject to change and to the effects of
terrorizing rumor. In time the deeds of one would be attributed to
another, and the circumstances of one crime confounded with others.
In the main, however, tradition preserved a generally consistent
story. Here and there men like James Hall and the editors of early
newspapers preserved accounts of them and so blazed the way to
court records and approximated the dates for private archives to
be consulted. The pages that follow contain the result of years of
patient investigation of these records and of archives that have
never been published.

Numbers in brackets inserted in the text refer to the authorities
as numbered in the bibliography.

                              OTTO A. ROTHERT

Louisville, Kentucky, March 17, 1923.




The Lair of the Outlaws


Nature has set her own seal of wonder and immortality upon some of
her works. The cavern of Cave-in-Rock, on the northern bank of the
lower Ohio River, bears such a seal. Lacking the adventitious aids
of immensity, depth, and remoteness, it was regarded with religious
interest in the vague traditions of the aborigines, and has excited
the curiosity, aroused the imagination and stirred the fear of
white men since they first discovered it. The Cave has been at once
noted and notorious, famous and infamous, and it remains today,
through all the changing years and diversities of its use, actual
or attributed, practically unchanged, still challenging curiosity,
surprise, fear, and admiration.

The scenery above and below the Cave attracted the attention of
the earliest western travelers. Much deforestation has taken place
during the past century, but the landscapes along the banks of that
section of the Ohio stand today, as they did in the olden days,
unsurpassed by any other along the river’s course. The mouth of the
Cave is in a high bluff overlooking the Ohio, which is the central
link in a chain of majestic landscapes. It seems almost a paradox
that a spot so beautified by nature should have been made the
headquarters of outlaws, and the scene of much that was hideous in
crime.

Pioneers in the West were likely at any time to encounter
wild animals or to be forced to battle with plundering or
revenge-seeking Indians. Whether traveling overland trails or upon
navigable streams, the first-comers in the middle West were always
in danger of highway robbers or river pirates. The cruelest of all
highwaymen were the Harpes and the shrewdest of the river pirates
were the Masons.

Cave-in-Rock’s history as a rendezvous of outlaws does not begin
until about 1795. The date of the discovery by white men has not
been ascertained. The earliest record found is in _The History of
New France_, by Charlevoix, in 1744. It includes Bellin’s Map of
Louisiana presenting the general course of the Ohio, drawn from
observations made by M. de Lery. When this explorer came down the
river in 1729 he noted the location of the Cave by referring to
it as “Caverne dans le Roc.” After 1778 it is indicated on many
English and American maps. Early travelers designated it by various
names, each of which, except “House of Nature,” contained the word
“cave.” Since 1800, Cave-in-Rock has been practically the only name
applied.

The early French called the Ohio “La Belle Riviere.” In the days
of primeval forests it was one of the most beautiful streams in
the world. Evidences of its former grandeur are nowhere so well
retained as in the neighborhood of Cave-in-Rock. The last of the
giants of the forests standing on the bluffs and in the bottoms
along the river will some day disappear, but Cave-in-Rock will defy
time and its changes, and ever stand as a reminder of the days when
wilderness was king.

Cave-in-Rock is in Hardin County, Illinois, about twenty miles
below Shawneetown and twenty miles above Golconda, or about
eighty-five miles below Evansville, Indiana, and fifty miles above
Paducah, Kentucky. It is about two and one-half miles below Ford’s
Ferry and a half mile above the village of Cave-in-Rock. Its
position commands a long view up and down the Ohio River. It has a
large and dark tunnel-like opening extending into a gray limestone
bluff which is partly hidden by shrubbery and small trees. Whether
one sees it while passing in a boat or approaching it from the
shore the view invariably stirs the beholder. It has the appearance
of a large arched crypt, imbedded in solid rock. It is a “house”
built by Nature, and is as solid as Gibraltar. It is sphynx-like in
its silence, and bewilders those who enter.

The mouth is an arched opening, semi-elliptical in form, about
fifty-five feet wide at the base. The cavern extends back
horizontally one hundred and sixty feet with an almost uniform
width of forty feet. The walls and roof, which change to more or
less of an ellipse near the mouth, again change near the center
into a semi-ellipse and retain that curvature to the end. The
ceiling is horizontal throughout its length, while the floor,
beginning about seventy-five feet from the entrance, gradually
inclines upward toward the rear, and at the extreme end comes
within a few feet of the arched ceiling. At this end there is a
hole large enough to permit a man to climb out into a sinkhole
in the surface above. The upward incline of the floor in the
rear is due to a deposit of earth, washed there during the past
half-century by water coming down through the sinkhole during
heavy rains. Near the middle of the ceiling are two perpendicular
crevices with an average width of less than a foot, extending
across and beyond the Cave, and upward to within about fifteen feet
of the surface of the cliff. One of these narrow crevices has, near
the center, a chimney-like opening sufficiently large to admit a
man. It leads to a rough-walled enlargement about four feet wide
and ten feet high. This small place is known as the “upper cave,”
and has a history and fiction of its own.

In the lower part of what may be designated the lower lip of the
mouth-like opening is a large, level, wedge-shaped space about
five feet lower than the floor of the Cave. At its outer extremity
this wedge-shaped space is almost as wide as the mouth itself,
but rapidly tapers inward to a width of about four feet. It then
continues back into the mouth about twenty-five feet through the
solid rock, in the form of an excavated channel or passage about
three and one-half feet wide. This narrow channel, about five feet
deep at the beginning, inclines upward until it reaches the general
level of the floor of the Cave. The top of the rock on either side
of the excavation is level and resembles a platform. These two
platforms or stage-like floors extend inward and, like the inclined
passage, soon reach the general level of the Cave. This excavated
channel and the part of the wedge-shaped space from which it leads
may have been made by men, but whether by Indians or early whites
is not known. It may possibly be the result of erosion.

At a normal stage of the river the mouth of the Cave is, measured
in the perpendicular, about half-way between the top of the bluff
and the water’s edge. In spring the river frequently comes up to
within a few feet of the opening. When the water is extremely high
it enters; during great floods there is ample depth to row a skiff
the entire length of the Cave.

Such is Cave-in-Rock today, and such it was in pioneer times,
except that in the rear a deposit of earth had not been washed in,
and that large trees, which stood in front of the mouth and hid or
partly concealed it, have long since disappeared. It was an ideal
lair for river outlaws; it furnished shelter and gave them every
advantage over passing travelers.

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF CAVE-IN-ROCK

showing entire interior of cave and entrance to small upper cave

(From a drawing by J. Bernhard Alberts, made in 1916)]

In March, 1766, John Jennings, a Philadelphia merchant, going down
the Ohio with a cargo of goods for Fort de Chartres, Illinois,
notes in his _Journal_ that he stopped for an hour near “a large
rock with a cave in it,” some twenty-five miles below the mouth
of the Wabash River. The earliest record of a homeseeking pioneer
who came to the Cave-in-Rock country and there began an overland
trip into Illinois dates back to about 1780, when Captain Nathaniel
Hull, of Massachusetts, appeared at what later became Ford’s
Ferry. “He and several other young men,” writes Governor John
Reynolds in his _Pioneer History of Illinois_, “descended the Ohio
to a point near Ford’s Ferry on that river [for a while known as
Hull’s Landing and later as Robin’s Ferry] and came across by
land to Kaskaskia.... At this day the Indians were not hostile as
afterwards, so that Hull and party escaped through the wilderness
without injury.” Nor had any white man as yet practiced piracy on
the lower Ohio.

Victor Collot, a French engineer, is one of the first writers who
stopped at the Cave and published a brief description of it. He
knew of its existence long before he arrived, for his book, _A
Journey in America_, shows that he had planned to stop at the “Big
Cave,” and did so in the summer of 1796 when he went down the river
to New Orleans.

A few months later the place was visited by Andrew Ellicott,
then on his way to Natchez for the purpose of determining the
boundary line between the United States and Spain. An entry in his
_Journal_, dated December 15, 1796, shows he “dined at the Great
Cave ... one of the greatest natural curiosities on the river.”

On April 16, 1797, Francis Baily, the English astronomer, stopped
there. His _Journal of a Tour in the Unsettled Parts of North
America_ contains a few pages on the “Big Cave.” Among other
things he says, “its entrance was on a landing-place. It had
somewhat the appearance of an immense oven. We entered it and found
the sides very damp.... We beheld a number of names cut in the
sides of the cave, which in this solitary place, and cut off as
we were from society, gave us a degree of pleasure to look over.”
Baily apparently heard of no outlaws during his short stay. This
probably was due to the fact that his visit was made at a time
when the Cave was very damp, as is frequently the case in spring.
Had he appeared later, he might not have survived to tell of his
interesting travels in America, for during the greater part of the
year 1797 the place was occupied by the notorious Mason family.

Perrin du Lac, in his _Travels through the two Louisianas_, writes
that he embarked at Pittsburgh, April 22, 1802, “in a pirogue
thirty feet long and three feet broad” and that a few weeks later
he stopped at the Cave. He says “it is considered one of the
greatest natural curiosities in North America.”

The first detailed description of Cave-in-Rock ever printed, as far
as now known, appeared in one of the earliest editions of Zadok
Cramer’s _The Ohio and Mississippi Navigator_ and was republished
in the appendix of _Journal of a Tour_, 1805, by Thaddeus M. Harris
without credit to Cramer.

Thomas Ashe, an unreliable English traveler, wrote an account of
Cave-in-Rock shortly after the Cramer or the so-called Harris
description was published, and at a time when reports of some of
the early robberies that had been committed there were still in
fresh circulation. His book entitled _Travels in America performed
in 1806_, contains a chapter of fabrications headed “Cave in the
Rock, Ohio Bank, September, 1806.”

In July, 1807, Christian Schultz, then a young man, started from
Pittsburgh down the Ohio in a flatboat. He arrived at “The Cave
in the Rock” about October 1, continued his trip to New Orleans,
and returned, via ship, to New York. In his _Travels on an Inland
Voyage,_ he devotes a few pages to the Cave, saying, among other
things:

“It is a very curious cavern.... I could not help observing
what a very convenient situation this would be for a hermit, or
for a convent of monks.... I have no doubt that it has been the
dwelling of some person or persons, as the marks of smoke and
likewise some wooden hooks affixed to the walls sufficiently prove.
Formerly, perhaps, it was inhabited by Indians; but since, with
more probability, by a gang of that banditti, headed by Mason and
others, who, a few years ago, infested this part of the country and
committed a great number of robberies and murders....”

Fortesque Cuming, an unprejudiced Englishman, wrote in his _Tour
to the Western Country_ that the Cave is “one of the finest
grottoes or caverns I have ever seen.” This interesting traveler,
in January, 1807, proceeded to Maysville, Kentucky, by boat, and
from there made horseback trips to central Kentucky and Ohio.
Returning to Pittsburgh, he started, on May 7, down the Ohio in a
flatboat for New Orleans. From old Bruinsburg, a few miles above
Natchez, he visited old Greenville. In this town about three
years before, one of the Cave-in-Rock outlaws had been convicted
under unusual circumstances and hanged and buried in an unusual
manner. When traveling by boat Cuming always carried a few skiffs
in order to get ashore more easily. On May 18, 1807, a few minutes
after passing the head of Cave-in-Rock Island, he landed at what
is known as Cave Spring, a cave-like opening a few hundred yards
above Cave-in-Rock from which a strong spring of water constantly
flows. This crevice in Cave-in-Rock bluff is about nine feet high,
three feet wide, and extends back some forty feet. Cuming at first
mistook it for the famous Cave, as has been done by more than one
traveler since his day. In his sketch pertaining to his visit to
Cave-in-Rock he writes:

“Rowing along shore [below Cave Spring] with the skiff, we were
soon undeceived as to that’s being the Rocking Cave, as a third of
a mile lower down, one of the finest grottoes or caverns I have
ever seen opened suddenly to view, resembling the choir of a large
church as we looked directly into it. We landed immediately under
it and entered it. It is natural, but it is evidently improved
by art in the cutting of an entrance three feet wide through
the rock in the very center, leaving a projection on each hand,
excavated above to the whole breadth of the cavern, the projections
resembling galleries.... It is crowned by large cedars, and black
and white oaks, some of which impend over, and several beautiful
shrubs and flowers, particularly very rich columbines, are thickly
scattered all around the entrance.... Standing on the outside, the
appearance of some of the company at the inner end of the cave was
truly picturesque, they being diminished on the eye to half their
size, and removed to three times their real distance.

“There is a perpendicular rocky bluff just opposite the lower end
of Cave Island, about two hundred yards above the Cave, where
the river narrows to less than half a mile wide, forming a fine
situation for fortification.”

Thomas Nuttall probably was the last distinguished traveler who
came down the Ohio in a flatboat and commented on the Cave. In
his _Journal of Travels into the Arkansa Territory_ he states
that he and his party left Shawneetown December 14, 1818. After
floating a short distance they came up with three other flatboats
and, lashing them together, proceeded upon an all-night journey.
He further comments: “The river is here very wide and magnificent
and chequered with many islands. The banks of Battery Rock,
Rock-in-Cave, and other places are bold and rocky with bordering
cliffs. The Occidental wilderness appears to here retain its
primeval solitude; its gloomy forests are yet unbroken by the hand
of man; they are only penetrated by the wandering hunter and the
roaming savage.”

The early western travelers already cited, and a number of
their contemporaries and followers who saw the Cave, published
descriptions or references that agree in the main, but each, in his
own way, was evidently more impressed by certain of its various
features than were some of the others who visited the place. A
few speculated upon it as an Indian temple of prehistoric times.
Some commented upon it from a geological standpoint. A number were
especially interested in the names they found carved on the walls;
some in the trees that grew around the opening. Others dwelt upon
it as a rendezvous of outlaws.

For what various purposes the Cave may have been used in
prehistoric times by Mound-builders and Indians, or even Cave
Dwellers, is a question for archaeologists and ethnologists. There
is far less physical evidence to indicate a previous presence of
robbers and counterfeiters than there is to prove that the place
was inhabited by prehistoric man. A rusty home-made dagger blade
and a part of a counterfeiter’s mold are the only relics that point
toward the outlaw occupancy. On the other hand, five well-defined
mound sites in the level fields above Cave-in-Rock bluff, and the
many flint and stone implements picked up during the past century
in and near the Cave indicate beyond doubt the former presence of
Indians and Mound-builders. In April, 1918, Robert L. Yeakey, while
spading his garden on this bluff, unearthed a carved stone image,
six inches high and four inches wide, weighing two pounds, six
ounces, representing a man in squatting position. The probability
that the image is an idol gives strength to the inference that the
Cave was used as a temple some time in the prehistoric past.

The mounds are additional evidence to this effect. These were
opened many years ago and have since been plowed over often. Each
contained, it is said, from five to ten human skeletons. The bodies
had been placed in a stone-walled sepulcher that was covered with
flags of stone a few inches thick, over which a circular mound of
earth was thrown. The fact that each of these mounds contained a
number of skeletons, apparently placed there at one time, leads
many to the conclusion that a battle, or battles, must have been
fought in or near the Cave and that all, or some, of the dead were
buried together. Scientists advance a plausible explanation of
this: “We know not if these burials indicate famine, pestilence,
war, or unholy sacrifice. We can only conjecture that they were
not graves of persons who had died a natural death.” Because of
the Cave’s temple-like form and its proximity to these old mounds,
it appears more probable that they were erected in connection with
the ceremony of “unholy sacrifice” than for any of the three other
suggested causes.

The Harris description of the Cave, written about 1803, refers
to it as “the habitation of the Great Spirit.” Some thirty years
later, Edmund Flagg, in _The Far West_, written after his visit
to “Rock-Inn-Cave,” says: “Like all other curiosities of Nature,
this cavern was, by the Indian tribes, deemed the residence of a
Manito, or spirit, evil or propitious, concerning whom many a wild
legend yet lives among their simple-hearted posterity. They never
pass the dwelling place of the divinity without discharging their
guns (an ordinary mark of respect) or making some other offering
propitiatory of his favor.”

From official records we learn that the section of the country in
which Cave-in-Rock is embraced was sold, in 1803, to the United
States by the Kaskaskia tribe. In 1818, when the sale was confirmed
by the same Indians and the three other tribes then constituting
the Illinois confederacy, it became unchallenged government
property. Thus, when the Masons, the Harpes, and other early
outlaws held forth there, it was still in the Indians’ territory.

From a geological standpoint, the Cave is evidently nothing more
than a prosaic hole in a limestone bluff. In neither the main cave
nor the crevices above are there any stalactites or stalagmites,
but an incrustation resembling such a formation occurs here
and there on the walls. In 1818, Henry R. Schoolcraft, in his
_Personal Memoirs_, says: “The cave itself is a striking object
for its large and yawning mouth, but to the geologist presents
nothing novel.” Collot, in 1796, expressed the opinion that “it is
an excavation made in the rocks by the continual beating of the
flood.” In a _Report_ published in 1866, A. H. Worthen, director
of the Geological Survey of Illinois, states that “the limestone
(St. Louis limestone) is quite cherty and the Cave has probably
been formed by the action of water percolating through crevices of
the rock and by the eroding influences of the atmosphere.” Neither
of these explanations is satisfactory. No other has been found.
Cave-in-Rock has the appearance of a section of a large cave that
was formed by an underground stream in some remote geological age,
and later disconnected, by upheavals, from the other parts of the
subterranean passage. Some of the other parts may still exist.
Sulphur Springs Cave, four miles southwest of Equality, may be one.
Bigsby Cave, eight miles north of Cave-in-Rock, may be another.
Hardin County is besprinkled with many sinkholes, the outlets
of which are unknown. The “Big Sink,” four miles north of the
Cave, covers about one hundred acres. Cave-in-Rock may have been
an outlet for some of these sinkholes until upheavals made such
drainage impossible.

In early days the virgin forests retarded, to a great extent, the
water of the heavy rains, and as a result floods were less frequent
and less severe. It is probable that when Cave-in-Rock and the
country about were covered with trees the place was damper than
now, for the water then slowly seeped down from the tree-covered
surface. Nevertheless, it was sufficiently dry to serve as a good
shelter not only for outlaws, who frequently occupied it, but also
for men and women going down the river in flatboats.

Today it is comparatively dry, except during the spring and
shortly after a heavy rain. Practically all the water running
through the Cave now comes from a narrow crevice in the rear, which
drains a small sinkhole in the surface. Through this opening, as
already stated, much soil has been deposited in the back part of
the Cave during the past fifty years. Nature has made practically
no changes in the Cave itself since its discovery by white men, but
the landscape has been affected by the removal of the large trees
that once shaded its mouth. A decrepit sycamore, an ash or two, a
few small maple trees, some scrub cedars, and some Virginia creeper
constitute the only vegetation now growing around the opening.

The travelers who visited Cave-in-Rock in flatboat days gave the
place more time and thought than did those who appeared after
the introduction of steamboats. The New Orleans, or Orleans,
which was the first steam-propelled boat to make a trip from
Pittsburgh to New Orleans, passed it in 1811. Not until fully
five years thereafter was the practicability of navigating the
Ohio by steamboats satisfactorily demonstrated. Local tradition
has it that the James Monroe, coming down in 1816, was the first
steamboat to land at the Cave. Thomas Nuttall, who appeared on
the scene two years later, was, as already stated, one of the
last distinguished men who floated down the river in a flatboat
and commented on the place. Leisure was an inseparable feature of
flatboat travel. With the coming of steamboats the lingering of
travelers along the river became a thing of the past. After 1820
comparatively few boats of any kind stopped at the Cave. Boats
became more numerous, but whether propelled by steam or oars, they
traveled not only faster but through a country rapidly increasing
in population, and passengers and crew stopping in this section
found better shelter elsewhere. But Cave-in-Rock was ever pointed
out as a place that “in days gone by” had been the den of flatboat
robbers. Counterfeiters and other outlaws, however, operated in the
neighborhood until as late as 1832.

The earliest record of a professional artist making a sketch of the
Cave dates back to May, 1819, when Major Stephen H. Long came down
the Ohio on the steamer Western Engineer, on his way to his Rocky
Mountains exploring expedition. In his notes on “Cave-Inn-Rock
or House of Nature” he gives a description of the Cave, and says
that Samuel Seymour, the official artist of the expedition,
“sketched two views of the entrance.” Edwin James’s account of this
expedition contains many of Seymour’s pictures, but none of places
east of the Mississippi. Efforts made in Washington to locate his
original sketches were without success.

Edmund Flagg, a traveler, journalist, and poet, who lived the
greater part of his life in Louisville and St. Louis, spent a short
time at the Cave in 1836, while on a steamboat trip gathering
material for his book, _The Far West_. He gives some of the history
of the outlaws of “Cave-Inn-Rock” and then describes the Cave and
the Island. He says the place furnishes “a scene of natural beauty
worthy an Inman’s pencil” and that “if I mistake not an engraving
of the spot has been published: a ferocious-looking personage,
pistol in hand, crouched at the entrance, eagerly watching a
descending boat.”

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF CAVE-IN-ROCK ABOUT 1825

A view from the rear of the lower cave, showing burned embers on
floor, notched log (on left) leading to upper cave, and flatboats
on the river

(From the original drawing by Charles Alexander Lesueur)]

Maximilian, Prince of Wied-Neuwied, writes May 19, 1833: “We
embarked on the Paragon steamboat at Shawneetown ... and after
passing Cave-in-Rock Island, a long wooded island, we glided
past Cave-in-Rock, a cavern which has been drawn by Lesueur.”
Lesueur’s drawing was made about 1825. It is an interior view
looking out over the river and conveys a good idea of the Cave’s
size and form. However, the opening to the small upper cavity and
the leaning pole for climbing into it are placed a little too far
to the left.«1»

Maximilian was accompanied by his artist, Charles Bodmer, who,
during the course of his travels in North America, made eighty-one
pictures, all of which were published in 1843 in the _Maximilian
Atlas_. Most of these drawings pertain to the life of the Indians
of the Upper Missouri, and stand today as the first and best record
of the costumes of these tribes. Among the subjects presented is
his Cave-in-Rock picture, one of the two early views of the Cave
now available. Bodmer probably drew it from memory. It shows a
landscape interesting in itself, but it is an absolutely misleading
presentation of the actual scene. From no point or angle does the
view appear as drawn by him, or even suggest such a scene. By the
ordinary working of nature no such changes could have been brought
about in many centuries. The mouth of the Cave is near the lower
end of a long bluff of almost uniform height and opposite the lower
end of Cave-in-Rock Island. A camera picture of the lower end of
this bluff, made in 1917, appears among the illustrations in this
book. Bodmer’s view places the opening in a short bluff that is
more or less cone-shaped and opposite or above the head of an
island. When high water reaches the mouth of the Cave, as is shown
by Bodmer, then Cave-in-Rock Island is submerged many feet and its
banks cannot possibly be seen. This picture occurs in a number
of books, but without any comments on its gross inaccuracy. Some
reproducers have taken the liberty of adding a setting sun in the
background.

In 1916, J. Bernhard Alberts, of Louisville, made an
impressionistic painting of the mouth of the Cave. His painting is
true to the scene as it was at the time of his visit. He also drew
a pencil sketch showing a general view of the interior with the
inner edge of the mouth in the immediate foreground, the artist’s
point of view being from just outside the mouth.




Piracy and Rough Life on the River


It is not clear when Cave-in-Rock first became the headquarters of
the criminals who flourished on the Ohio, and preyed upon primitive
commerce and travel between Pittsburgh and the Lower Mississippi.
Shortly after the Revolution was under way, renegades from eastern
communities, corrupt stragglers from the American army, and
villains who had had their brutal training in western wilds, began
to seek in the Ohio valley refuge from the more orderly and well
settled communities. Samuel Mason, who had been an officer in the
Continental army, converted the cavern into an inn as early as
1797. While he occupied the Cave, and a few years thereafter, it
was known as “Cave-Inn-Rock.” It was ideally located. Every passing
boat must reveal itself to those in the Cave who had a long, clear
view up and down the river. A lookout could detect boats long
before boatmen could perceive the Cave. The bold beauty of the
bluff made it pleasant for the boats to run in near the sharply
shelving shore, and many travelers were thus simply and easily
delivered into the hands of the banditti. As an inn, where drink
and rest could be had, it decoyed them; as a scene for shrouded
crime it was perfect.

The earliest travelers on the western rivers floated or propelled
themselves with paddles and oars in small, clumsy craft. The Indian
canoe or pirogue was heavy, but was managed with skill by those
accustomed to its use. With the growing stream of settlers and the
increasing number of settlements along the Ohio and Mississippi,
there arose a necessity for larger craft that would bear heavier
burdens. This brought the flatboat era covering the period from
1795 to 1820--that quarter of a century known as the Golden Age
of Flatboating. During that era river piracy was at its height.
The lighter boats, pirogues, skiffs, and batteaux were to the
clumsy rafts and flatboats bearing heavy cargoes what submarines
and torpedo boats have been to the heavier ships in later warfare.
Inland piracy had its advantage in using the small craft on dark
nights for sudden descents and escapes.

In the midst of this period the stately steamboat age began
its development. It was inaugurated in 1811 when the first
steam-propelled “water-walker” made its laborious and astonishing
way from Pittsburgh to New Orleans. By 1820 steamboats had become
a dependable factor in traffic, and were, to river travel, what
the railroad train was later to become to the slow stagecoach
and freight wagon. It was inevitable that under steamboat
influence flatboats of all types--arks, broadhorns, Orleans boats,
keel-boats, and flat-bottomed barges--would follow the primitive
pirogues, skiffs, and batteaux into retirement, except for
neighborhood use. River piracy waned with the conditions it preyed
upon, but not until about 1830 did it cease utterly.

In society, as in nature, everything develops with opportunity and
disappears according to necessity. In the primitive age of river
craft many travelers were captured or killed by Indians bent on
revenge or pillage. These marauders were sometimes led by white
renegades. Later, pioneers floating down the Ohio or Mississippi on
flatboats came in contact with comparatively few savages, but were
exposed to a far more daring and dangerous enemy in the form of
river pirates--white men, many of them descendants of supposedly
civilized European families. These disappeared as the population
increased. Then ensued the reign of the more diplomatic river
pirates--the professional gamblers who, for a half century, used
cards and other gaming devices as instruments with which to rob
those who ventured into their society.

Such were the types of craft and men operating upon and infesting
the rivers in the early days. The country through which these boats
moved was not the country we see today. Changes in the shapes and
channels of the rivers have been numerous, only the rock-defined
reaches preserving their original contours. Appearances in detail
have greatly changed. The wonderful unbroken forests are gone.
Where they once stood are now fields and farms or cut-over forests;
every few miles there is a town. The river channels once mysterious
and uncertain are now carefully charted.

Early voyageurs going down the river had, of course, no guides and
there were no known marks to indicate their approach to any of the
features of the river as it wound through the wild, uninhabited
country. The boatmen who came afterwards carrying maps rudely
scratched, found them unsatisfactory because of inaccuracies or
lack of detail. Not until a handbook was made available, after
some years of careful compilation of river features, could the
uninitiated navigate the large rivers with any degree of safety.«2»

The numerous charts in _The Navigator_ show the curves, islands,
sandbars, eddies, and channels, and mark the location of towns and
many other places of significance. The accompanying text contains
instructions of value to the boatman, and historical data of
interest. It is curious, however, that no section of either the
Mississippi or Ohio is designated as one where outlaws were likely
to be encountered--not even Cave-in-Rock nor the mouth of Cache
River, which were long considered the most dangerous resorts on the
Ohio. In every edition of _The Navigator_ about a page is devoted
to a description of the Cave and instructions to boatmen passing
it, but there is no reference to its grim history. Zadok Cramer
was evidently a practical man, with no eye to the speculative. It
was not until 1814 that he added a few lines bearing on the Cave’s
“economic” history:

“This cavern sometimes serves as a temporary abode for those
wanting shelter, in case of shipwreck, or other accident, which
happen on the river near it. Families have been known to reside
here tolerably comfortable from the northern blasts of winter. The
mouth of this cave was formerly sheltered, and nearly hid by some
trees growing in front of it, but the rude axe has leveled them
to the earth and the cavern is exposed to the open view of the
passenger. Emigrants from the states, twenty-seven years ago used
to land here and wagon their goods across the Illinois country, it
not being more than one hundred and twenty miles from this place to
Kaskaskia on the Mississippi.”

The Cave, of course, had more than criminal uses. How on one
occasion it served as a “temporary abode for those wanting shelter”
is recorded in _The American Pioneer_, published in 1842. In this
magazine Dr. Samuel P. Hildreth, under the title of “History of a
Voyage from Marietta to New Orleans in 1805,” gives an interesting
account of the schooner Nonpareil and her voyage south, based on
data furnished him by members of her crew. The boat was built at
Marietta and started down the river April 21, 1805. She was a
sea-going vessel intended to run on the lakes near New Orleans. The
captain doubtless steered his course by a copy of _The Navigator_.
We quote from Hildreth’s account of what the crew found in 1805 at
the well-known lair of outlaws:

“As the Nonpareil approached near the mouth of this dreaded cave,
a little after twilight, they were startled at seeing the bright
blaze of a fire at its entrance. Knowing of its former fame as the
den of a band of robbers, they could not entirely suppress the
suspicion it awoke in their minds of its being again occupied for
the same purpose. Nevertheless, as they had previously determined
not to pass this noted spot without making it a visit, they
anchored the schooner a little distance from the shore and landed
in the skiff. Being well armed with pistols they marched boldly
up to the cavern where, instead of being greeted with the rough
language and scowling visages of a band of robbers, they found the
cave occupied by smiling females and sportive children. A part of
the women were busily occupied with their spinning wheels, while
others prepared the evening meal. Their suspicions were not,
however, fully removed by all these appearances of domestic peace,
still thinking that the men must be secreted in some hidden corner
of the cave ready to fall on them unawares. On a little further
conversation they found the present occupants of the dreaded cave
consisted of four young emigrant families from Kentucky going to
settle in Illinois. The females were yet in the bloom of life.
Their husbands had bought or taken up lands a few miles back from
the river, and after moving their families and household goods to
this spot had returned to their former residences to bring out
their cattle, in the meantime leaving their wives and children in
the occupancy of the cave till their return.

“Having brought, with their spinning wheels and looms, an abundance
of flax, the women spent the weary days of their husbands’ absence
in the useful employment of spinning. A large fire in the mouth of
the cave gave cheerfulness to the gloomy spot and enabled them,
at night, to proceed with their labors, while its bright rays
were reflected upon the looms, beds, and household utensils which
lay piled up along the side of the cave. By day the sun afforded
them light, the mouth of the cave being capacious and elevated,
while the roof sheltered them from the rain. They were in daily
expectation of the arrival of their husbands, when they would move
out on to their farms in company.

“A little conversation soon dissipated all suspicions of harm from
the minds of their visitors ... and, borrowing from them a torch,
they explored the hidden recesses of the cave. At this time no
vestige of its former occupants remained but a few scattered barrel
staves, and the traces of their fires against the blackened sides
of the rock. The walls, even at that early day, were thickly scored
with the names of former visitors, to which they hastily added
their own, and thousands have no doubt been added since. Bidding a
warm farewell to this singular and solitary community, they entered
their boat, greatly wondering at the courage and confidence of
these lonely females. Their surprise, however, in a manner subsided
when they reflected that they were the daughters of Kentucky and
from the land of Daniel Boone.”

The Nonpareil experienced no trouble with river pirates, but was
wrecked during a storm on the Mississippi and never reached her
proposed destination. So, in one form or another, every flatboat
and other early river craft suffered more or less trouble. History
records many robberies and other misfortunes, but its pages also
show that, notwithstanding the numerous trials and tribulations,
early river life, rough as it was, was more of a romance than
a tragedy. Going down the Ohio and Mississippi proved, in many
instances, “easy sailing” compared to the flatboatman’s overland
trip north over the Natchez Trace and other wilderness roads
infested with highwaymen.

The usual plan of the river robbers was to station one or two of
their men and women at some prominent place on shore to hail a
passing boat. These decoys pleaded to be taken aboard, claiming
they were alone in the wilderness and wished to go to some
settlement further down the river, or that they desired to purchase
certain necessities which they lacked. If the boat was thus enticed
ashore, the crew saw their cargo unloaded, and plundered, or beheld
their craft continue its course down the river in the hands of the
enemy, themselves held as hostages or murdered.

Boat wreckers were another common source of great danger. Under one
pretext or another they managed to get aboard the boat and scuttle
it near a place where their confederates were prepared to make
an attack. Or, like Colonel Fluger, they waited until they found
a boat tied along the bank and then bored holes in the bottom or
dug out the caulking. When the ill-fated boat began to sink, the
fellow-wreckers rushed to the rescue and appropriated the goods
for their own use, killing part or all the crew if necessary.

Then, as now, a number of dangerous channels existed in the Ohio
and Mississippi. They were designated as such in _The Navigator_.
Near the head of some of them lived reliable settlers who made
it a business to pilot boats through for pay. Pirates frequently
succeeded in passing themselves off as trustworthy local pilots.
Boats turned over to such men for safe steering were usually
grounded and immediately thereafter delivered into the hands of
outlaws in waiting.

One of the dangerous channels, against which voyageurs were warned
by _The Navigator_, ran from the head of Walker’s Bar (a bar
beginning about two miles below Cave-in-Rock) down to Tower Rock,
and from there extended to the foot of Hurricane Island, a total
distance of about eight miles. The author of the river guide,
after devoting considerable space to directions for navigating
this channel and avoiding the Hurricane Bars, adds a suggestion:
“Just below the Cave, on the right bank, there is a person who is
sometimes employed to pilot boats through this serpentine channel,
and it is better for a stranger to pay a dollar or two for this
purpose, than run the risk of grounding on either one or the other
of these bars in low water. When the water is high there is no
occasion for a director.”

The outlaws at Cave-in-Rock turned to their advantage the
suggestion published in _The Navigator_. About ten miles above the
Cave, near Battery Rock, or on what has long since been called
the Jonathan Brown Old Place, the robbers stationed a man who
offered to pilot, for a small sum, single boats or small fleets
through this “serpentine channel.” He explained that the person
referred to by _The Navigator_ as living “just below the Cave”
was out on a visit and would not return for a week or more. In the
event the first man failed, another, standing ready a few miles
further down at Ford’s Ferry, offered his services. The pilot who
succeeded in being employed grounded the boat in front of the
Cave if, by the time he reached the place, he judged the cargo
was worth the risk and the crew could be overpowered. If more
time was required, he guided the boat to the head of Hurricane
Island. There it was either wrecked or taken safely through the
channel, the procedure depending on whether or not he judged a
profitable robbery possible. Boatmen who declined to take a pilot
aboard at Battery Rock or Ford’s Ferry were likely, if the water
was comparatively low, to inquire for a director “just below the
Cave.” The man procured there, whether a member of the Cave band
or not, invariably guided the boat safely through. Thus by helping
to maintain one reputable and reliable place near the Cave for
procuring the services of a pilot, the robbers experienced little
trouble in trapping the boats they selected for that purpose.

Although most of the prospective victims were given little
consideration until after they had come within ten or twenty miles
of the Cave, in a number of instances the river pirates began
setting a trap for a boat long before it arrived at Shawneetown.

The fact that the victims were piloted to the Cave by certain
members of a band, or enticed into the place by some other means
for the sole purpose of robbery, is recorded by many early writers;
none of them, however, gives any details. All authors who touch on
the Cave’s history publish statements based on what other men and
women heard other people had experienced while in the hands of
the outlaws. Only one instance has been found in which the victim
himself (Dr. Charles H. Webb) recited to an author the details of
how he was decoyed to the Cave and how he escaped from the men then
occupying the place. The old flatboat robbers and flatboat wreckers
left no first-hand accounts of the methods they employed.

The year 1788 roughly marks the beginning of the big inflow
of settlers into the region west of the Alleghenies, also the
beginning of counterfeiting and other outlawry at Cave-in-Rock.
Many travelers and home-seekers followed the trails and went into
the interior afoot, on horseback, or in wagons; others took the
river to some river point and either settled there, or proceeded
overland to an inland section. Thus, by “long lines of wagons”
and “great fleets of boats” the middle West became settled. In
the meantime many a small party traveled alone over the trails or
drifted down the river in a single boat or in a small fleet, into
the new and sparsely populated country, and became easy prey for
highway robbers or river pirates who were likely to appear at any
time and in any disguise.«3»

The earliest connection of the Cave with the name of any outlaw
who became famous was in 1797, when Samuel Mason, of Revolutionary
fame and hideous fate, seems to have occupied it as a main trap for
his carefully worked out scheme of river piracy on a large scale.
He erected a great rude sign on the river bank near the mouth of
the Cave, proclaiming to every passerby that his “Liquor Vault and
House for Entertainment” was open to the public. Many captains and
their crews and many flatboat passengers were lured to it. After
Mason and his family left for the South, most of the succeeding
bands, during their necessarily short stay, operated a gambling and
drinking place on the same principle.

It was a common practice among outlaws frequently to change not
only their headquarters but their names. While at Cave-in-Rock
Mason was also known as “Wilson.” Thomas Ashe, who wrote about
it, probably did not know that the Wilson he described was Samuel
Mason. Among the various men who appeared after the departure of
Samuel Mason, alias “Wilson,” was one Jim Wilson. Whether Jim
Wilson was his real name is not known. However, between Samuel
Mason as “Wilson” and a later man known as “Jim Wilson” there
has been more or less confusion for almost a century, especially
in tradition. In 1897 William Courtney Watts wrote a historical
romance, _Chronicles of a Kentucky Settlement_, in which he
presents James Ford, of Ford’s Ferry notoriety, as “James Wilson.”
James Ford was in no way connected with Mason or with Wilson, but
his presentation under the fictitious name of “James Wilson” had
added to the already existing confusion.

After James Ford’s death, which occurred in 1833--and many years
before Watts applied the name of “James Wilson” to him--a writer
published a sketch of the career of one Jim Wilson at the Cave.
This sketch is here recapitulated, not as a story that can be
verified in all its details by history, but as a semi-historical
tale which may convey a better idea of the methods, life, and fate
of the Cave’s outlaws than formal history. Only one who will make a
study of the Cave’s past--from the available authenticated records
down to some of its absurd traditions--will recognize this story
as a picture in which facts fairly divide the scene with fiction,
and painted in colors that bring joy to the hearts of readers of
dime novels. When and by whom it was written or first published has
not been ascertained. It apparently was not written before 1836,
for the author, in his introduction, attempts a description of the
Cave as it appeared that year. The writer evidently had read Thomas
Ashe’s account published in 1808, and was also familiar with some
of the Cave’s printed history and oral traditions. The story was
probably first published in an old magazine or newspaper. In 1893
it appeared, anonymously and without credit, in the _Crittenden
Press_, of Marion, Kentucky. From that weekly it was copied by many
newspapers in the lower Ohio Valley, and is now preserved, under
various titles, in many a scrap book.

This old story is interesting because it was written when stories
of the Cave were still fresh. Inaccuracies and confusions of names
and dates may have crept in, but it remains the first concise and
inherently reasonable account of how the Cave was first occupied as
a den by river criminals. In the presentation of the usual method
of the Cave’s renegades, it matters very little whether the first
of those desperate captains of crime bore the name of Wilson,
Mason, or Harpe. In this case it seems clearly the story of Samuel
Mason about 1797. The names they assumed might vary with every
flatboat or raft that passed. An alias is ever the shield of the
criminal. The story describes not only a method actually employed
by the Cave’s outlaws for many years, but also a method by which
the career of more than one of these river pirates was, as we shall
see later, so tragically terminated. The story runs, as follows:

“About the year 1809, one Jim Wilson, a flatboatman, while passing
down the Ohio, was overtaken by a terrific storm. He steered his
boat under the shelter of a cliff. On landing he observed the
opening of the cave. He was attracted by the commodious rooms with
dry ceilings and sanded floors, and resolved that on his return to
Pittsburgh he would bring his family hither.

“In the following spring Wilson’s boat again landed at the foot
of the cliff. This time he was not alone, but with him came his
wife, five children, two slaves, and William Hall, the great
counterfeiter. His boat was loaded with provisions, stores,
liquors, and arms, which he had stolen from the government
warehouse at Fort Pitt on the night before his departure. The great
cave was soon transformed into a dwelling and tavern large enough
to accommodate several travelers.

“Wilson’s object for landing and establishing himself in so
remote and romantic headquarters will be seen hereafter. A sign
was planted at the water’s edge bearing these words: ‘Wilson’s
Liquor Vault and House for Entertainment.’ This novel sign had a
magnetic effect upon the boatmen who were almost daily passing en
route to southern markets, with flatboats loaded with produce.
The boat crews were generally jovial fellows, fond of rum, rest,
and merriment, and hardly a boat passed without stopping. Many
were the guests at Wilson’s Tavern; thieves and gamblers stopped
off here and in a few months the place became infamous for its
licentiousness and blasphemy.

“Wilson had been for many years a deep-dyed criminal and only came
here that he might vary his crimes, and have a wider field for
operation. Out of his guests he soon formed a band of the most
noted robbers, murderers, and counterfeiters that, for two years,
had no parallel in modern history. Their headquarters were at the
Cave, but they had many stations along the Ohio above and below,
which were maintained for the purpose of preventing suspicion being
cast upon the genial landlord at the Cave. The principal station
was at Hurricane Island, where forty-five men were stationed all
the time.

“Each boat that landed at the Cave was captured and such of the
crew as would not join Wilson’s Gang were allowed to drift on to
Hurricane Island where they were again captured and the remainder
of the crew foully murdered and their bodies cast into the Ohio.
With new pilots and crews the boats and cargoes were taken to New
Orleans, and converted into cash which was conveyed to the Cave
through the wilderness of Kentucky and Tennessee.

“Many boats loaded with valuable cargoes left port on the upper
Ohio and its tributaries, under the guidance of experienced and
trustworthy officers. The officers and crews never returned. No
returns for sales were ever received. It soon became a mystery that
so many honorable men never came back to pay over the proceeds,
and to tell the perils of their voyage. It was many months before
any serious suspicions were created. After that it was found that
the cargoes were disposed of by entirely different crews from
those entrusted with them. There was but limited postal or other
communication in those days--letters of special importance were
carried by messengers who often fell into the hands of Wilson’s
men. Thereby they kept posted and, by changing the communication
to suit their purposes, and forwarding them by different carriers,
often thwarted the attempt of justice, and kept their whereabouts
enveloped in mystery for many months. ‘But it is a long lane that
hath no turn.’ It was finally ascertained that no tidings could be
had of any boat after it had passed certain points on the Ohio near
Wilson’s Tavern.

“A meeting of the Pittsburgh shippers was called and it was
determined to ferret out the mystery. This would be a shrewd piece
of detective work which would be attended by many dangers. A large
reward was offered for information as to the exact location of
the robber band. John Waller, a determined and ambitious man of
Maysville, Kentucky, resolved to secure the reward or perish in
the attempt. He was furnished with a cargo contributed by various
shippers along the Ohio, and with five trusted companions he set
out early in the spring of 1810. They floated with the current
many days. At last one evening they came in sight of the Cave, and
were attracted by the novel sign and also the presence of several
females on the bank, who made gestures for them to land. They held
a hasty consultation and resolved to land; a few sweeps of the
steering oar brought them to the foot of the cliff.”

That which follows this clear description of ordinary circumstances
is evidently a mixture of fact and fiction that represents the
imaginative style of the day. It is quite plain that the author
himself had not personally visited the Cave, but had relied upon
the fictions of Thomas Ashe or the reflections from Ashe’s account
that had gained circulation and belief. He accepts the mythical
“upper cave” and has the Cave divided off into rooms and a
“council chamber,” no relics of which have ever been reported by
any matter-of-fact observer from that time to this. The leader,
“Jim Wilson,” he converts into a semi-savage with matted and
tangled hair and beard, who is yet a shrewd trader and an orator of
no mean power for his day. On the occasion of the initiation of new
recruits Jim Wilson delivers a romantic and argumentative speech
that is equal to the best fiction of the times.

The story narrates graphically how Waller and his men were overawed
and compelled, under fear, to agree to join the robber band;
how they were received into it with melodramatic ceremonies and
then were oath-bound, but not fully trusted; how they made their
escape--the savage and astute robbers being, of course, fooled for
the exigencies of the event; how the Waller force combined with
its waiting reinforcements, returned, captured Jim Wilson and then
went to Hurricane Island and destroyed that part of the band; and
how eventually “Jim Wilson’s head was severed, his body buried ...
the head identified and delivered to the proper authorities at
Pittsburgh ... and the captors received the merited reward.” This
last point is plainly an echo of Mason’s fate.

This story of the activities of the early renegades of
civilization, and of the river pirates who occupied the Cave bears
upon its face the stamp of truth that fits neatly into practically
all traditions from about 1795 to about 1820.

Before Mason became famous, however, greater scoundrels than he
were to attract public attention, and hold it for some years.
The story of the Harpes--“Big” and “Little” Harpe--is one that
may freeze the blood as read now in the light of old records and
personal accounts that seem to bring the reader into the very
presence of these two brutes. In the security of law and order in
these days the facts seem remote, but when the sparse settlement of
the West in 1799 is realized, and the further fact that wilderness
hospitality opened doors to all travelers and admitted these
monsters freely with good people, it is possible then to conceive
the horror their deeds and presence aroused.




The Harpes--A Terrible Frontier Story


The career of the two Harpes«4» in Tennessee, southern Illinois,
and Kentucky, particularly Kentucky, at the close of the eighteenth
century has rarely been equalled in the history of crime, either in
peace or war. Its beginning was so sudden, its motives wrapped in
such mystery, its race so swift, and its circumstances so terrible
and unbelievably brutal as to justify Collins, the distinguished
historian of Kentucky, in referring to the brothers as “the most
brutal monsters of the human race.”

At that time, 1798–99, Kentucky had a pioneer population of about
two hundred thousand, which was largely centered in the new
trading and agricultural towns in the eastern part and in the rich
bluegrass country. The remainder of the state, except along the
water courses, was well nigh a wilderness. In the southern and
western portions buffalo grazed, and bear were plentiful. East
Tennessee, where the scourge of crime began, was even more sparsely
settled. This pioneer population was vigorous, rude, and accustomed
even to Indian atrocities. Among the settlers were many who, as
fugitives from justice, had deliberately sought seclusion from the
eastern states because of criminal offenses. The Ohio River was
infested with inland pirates, and the early rivermen themselves
were a rough and violent type. Isolation led well-meaning pioneers
to be generous and confiding to those whom they had tested, but
to a great degree might was right, and strangers looked askance at
each other and were prepared for the worst.

Yet such a rude and hardy people as these were gripped with horror
at the atrocities of the Harpes, at their often unmeaning and
unprovoked murders. It is difficult in these days of well ordered
government to realize the mysterious terror and excitement that
began near Knoxville in 1798 and swept through the wilderness to
the borders of the Mississippi, and across the Ohio into Illinois
like some sudden, creeping fire that breaks out in underbrush, and
grows steadily in intensity and rage until it sweeps forests before
it. All this was, in a measure, realized in the breasts of human
beings as the hideous crimes of the Harpes increased.

Aside from the wars and the recorded importances of political
development, the episode of the Harpes is the most astounding event
in the early life of the Middle West. It engaged the memory of men
for forty years, and the pens of numerous historians, and writers
of memoir have been occupied with it ever since. In the main the
story has been well preserved, but in the details there has been
the variation that grows with repetition. The most dignified
historians have not disdained to seek the minute details attaching
to the persons and actions of these two men from the moment they
began their criminal career to the thrilling blood-chase in which
the older brother was captured and killed, and the younger escaped
into exile and to an even more dramatic and terrible death.

To this day the story of “The Harpes” and “Harpe’s Head” is told
about firesides in the Cave-in-Rock country, in southern and
western Kentucky and in eastern Tennessee. It has been perpetuated
in folk ballads and written by scores of pens. [93]

It is the purpose here to bring together the many threads of the
tale as they have been verified and corrected by original records
sought from Wisconsin to New Orleans, and from Knoxville to
Cave-in-Rock and the Mississippi River.

Judge James Hall, while living in Illinois, wrote a brief account
of one of the crimes committed by these outlaws, and in April,
1824, published it in _The Port Folio_ of Philadelphia. In his
introductory remarks he comments: “Neither avarice nor want nor
any of the usual inducements to the commission of crime, seemed
to govern their conduct. A savage thirst for blood--a deep-rooted
enmity against human nature, could alone be discovered in their
actions.... Plunder was not their object; they took only what would
have been freely given them, and no more than what was necessary
to supply the immediate wants of nature; they destroyed without
having suffered injury, and without the prospect of benefit....
Mounted on fine horses they plunged into the forest, eluded pursuit
by frequently changing their course, and appeared unexpectedly to
perpetrate new horrors, at points distant from those where they
were supposed to lurk.”

Judge Hall, up to that time, had done little more than describe
one of their last crimes, yet _The Cincinnati Literary Gazette_,
May 28, 1825, came out with a statement admitting that there may
have been two outlaws by the name of Harpe, but added: “We have
no hesitation in asserting that their history, as published in
_The Port Folio_, is unworthy of belief.... The horrible details
concerning these men ... such disgusting sketches of human
depravity and barbarism manifest either a vitiated taste or a total
disregard of the morals of the community.”

As far as is now known, at least two papers published in the
month following came to the defense of Judge Hall’s account. _The
Illinois Gazette_, of Shawneetown, among other things, declared:
“The depravity and bloodshed which marked their existence ... are
circumstances too strongly impressed upon the recollections of our
early settlers to be contradicted at this date.”

_The Columbian_, of Henderson, Kentucky, in a half column article
devoted to the same subject, asserts: “The account published in
_The Port Folio_ is correct in every essential point.... However it
may be regretted that such monsters as the Harpes ever should have
existed to disgrace humanity, yet it is an uncontrovertible fact.” [56]

In the August, 1825, issue of _The Port Folio_ Judge Hall published
an account of another murder committed by the Harpes--the killing
of Thomas Langford, who was among their first victims in Kentucky.
In the same number he devotes a few pages to a verification of the
statements he published then and a few months previous. And before
half had been told about the Harpes, _The Cincinnati Literary
Gazette_ was convinced of its error in doubting and disputing the
veracity of Judge Hall. Judge Hall wrote several pages justifying
the publication of the weird and wonderful facts of the career of
the Harpes. His arguments published in 1825 in his own defense hold
good today and may be equally well applied to the story of the
Harpes here given, which, as far as is known, is the first attempt
to compile a complete history of these notorious outlaws:

“If it is intended to be objected, that these ‘horrid details,’
even if true, are not proper for publication--I reply, that
whatever tends to develop the history or character of a people, is
a legitimate subject of public discussion. History to be of any
value must be true. It must disclose not only the truth but the
whole truth. In vain would the historian seek this in the frail
monuments vaguely preserved in the uncertain legend of tradition.
He must resort to national records and to the testimony of writers
contemporary with the events which he attempts to describe, and
if the latter abstain from the narration of ‘disgusting sketches
of human depravity and barbarism,’ history must be curtailed
of her most fruitful source of incident, and men and nations
stripped of their boldest peculiarity. It is perhaps forgotten
that ‘depravity and barbarism’ constitute almost the sole basis
of history, tragedy, and the epic song; that kings and courts are
nothing without them; that they revel amid ‘the pomp, pride, and
circumstance of glorious war;’ and stand forth in bold relief in
every department of civil subordination. It is to be deplored that
such is the fact; but while crime and folly continue to predominate
in the affairs of men, they will be found to swell the pages of
those who attempt to exhibit correct pictures of human nature.

“In describing the American backwoodsmen, a class of men peculiar
to our country, I have thought it proper to introduce among other
authentic anecdotes the story of the Harpes. My object was to
display as well the extraordinary sufferings to which the earliest
emigrants to the western country were exposed, as the courage with
which they met and repelled those hardships.”

The Harpes were believed to be brothers. They were natives of North
Carolina. Micajah, known as Big Harpe, was born about 1768, and
Wiley, known as Little Harpe, was born about 1770. Their father
was said to have been a Tory who fought under the British flag at
King’s Mountain and took part in a number of other battles against
the colonists. Before the close of the Revolution and immediately
thereafter many of the Tories living in the south Atlantic colonies
fled toward the Mississippi. Those who still sympathized with the
King of England and continued to live in the “Old States” were, in
most sections, ostracized by their neighbors. It was to this class
that the parents of the Harpes belonged; and it was, therefore, in
an environment of hatred for and by neighbors that the two sons
grew up.

About the year 1840 Colonel G. W. Sevier, son of Governor John
Sevier, in an interview with Lyman C. Draper, the historian, stated
that Big Harpe, when asked shortly before he was killed why he had
committed so many crimes, answered that he had been badly treated
and consequently had become disgusted with all mankind. [12G] The
same statement is made by J. W. M. Breazeale, another well-known
early Tennesseean, who had lived in Knoxville the greater part of
his life and had investigated the careers of the outlaws.

One writer attributes their acts of fiendish inhumanity to the fact
that they believed every man’s life, whether good, indifferent or
bad, was predestined and that the All Wise had foreordained for
them a hatred of humanity and a career of crime. [121] Draper, in
his “Sketch of the Harpes,” comments on the fact that “their tawny
appearance and dark curly hair betrayed a tinge of African blood
coursing through their veins.”

Criminologists may or may not agree as to the underlying cause of
the great thirst for blood possessed by the Harpes, but the fact
that they were the most savage and terrible characters in this
period of American history cannot be disputed.

About the year 1795 the two men, accompanied by Susan Roberts and
Betsey Roberts, left North Carolina for Tennessee. Susan claimed
to be the legal wife of Big Harpe, whereas Betsey merely posed as
such. Big Harpe, however, claimed both women as his wives. The
Harpes cared as little for the laws of matrimony as for any other
laws and the legality or illegality of anything they did was a
matter of indifference to them.

The two men and their women roamed in central Tennessee about two
years. Most of their time was spent with a few stray Creek and
Cherokee Indians who at the time were ostracized by their tribes
and were committing atrocities against their own people as well
as against the whites. The Harpes joined the savages in their
outrages, and not only encouraged them in their bloody deeds, but
gave them many demonstrations showing to what extent barbarity
could be practiced. Asleep or awake they were armed with tomahawks
and knives and never took a step from camp without a gun. They were
always prepared to shed blood for the satisfaction of shedding it,
or to resist arrest should any attempt be made to capture them.
They lived like man-eating animals. The women as well as the men
wore leather hunting shirts and moccasins made from the untanned
skin of animals they killed. They never wore hats except in the
coldest weather and then used the kind they “whanged” together with
deer skin thongs. [121]

Some time during 1797 the four left middle Tennessee for the new
settlement of Knoxville. While wandering toward the eastern part
of the state they met a young Methodist preacher named William
Lambuth, who was traveling through the wilderness alone. They
robbed him and among his belongings found a Bible. In turning the
leaves, looking for bank bills, Big Harpe discovered on the front
page, written in plain letters the names “William Lambuth” and
“George Washington.” Pointing to the name of the General, Harpe
remarked: “That is a brave and good man, but a mighty rebel against
the King.” The articles found in Lambuth’s possession convinced
the Harpes that he was a preacher, whereupon they returned to him
not only his Bible but also the gun, the little money, and the
horse they had taken. Then abruptly turning from him and shouting,
“We are the Harpes,” they quickly disappeared. This is probably
the only instance in the lives of the Harpes, after the beginning
of their murderous career, when they had anyone, old or young, in
their power, and showed less than a fiendish barbarity. [121]

Obeying the principle that birds of a feather flock together,
the Harpes, it seems, were attracted toward the new settlement
of Knoxville. In March, 1798, James Weir, on his way from South
Carolina to Kentucky, spent a few days in the town. Writing of his
short stay there he says:

“In the infant town of Knox the houses are irregular and
interspersed. It was County Court day when I came. The town was
confused with a promiscuous throng of every denomination. Some
talked, some sang, and mostly all did profanely swear. I stood
aghast, my soul shrank back to hear the horrid oaths and dreadful
indignities offered to the Supreme Governor of the Universe, who
with one frown is able to shake them into non-existence. There was
what I never did see before, viz., on Sunday, dancing, singing,
and playing of cards, etc.... It was said by a gentleman of the
neighborhood that ‘the Devil is grown so old that it renders him
incapable of traveling and that he has taken up in Knoxville and
there hopes to spend the remaining part of his days in tranquility,
as he believes he is among his friends,’ but as it is not a good
principle to criticise the conduct of others, I shall decline it
with this general reflection, that there are some men of good
principles in all places, but often more bad ones to counterbalance
them.” [109]

The Harpes doubtless felt they could better gratify their thirst
for blood in the vicinity of a settlement like Knoxville than in
a wide wilderness where subjects for their cruelty were too few.
They found a small tract of cleared land on Beaver Creek, about
eight miles west of Knoxville. Upon this they built a log cabin for
themselves, and a pen for their horses, and, in order to conceal
their motives, cultivated a few acres of ground. Under this feint
of honest occupation they experienced no difficulty in gaining the
confidence of their neighbors. In fact, so easily had they made a
favorable impression that within a few weeks after their arrival
Little Harpe married Sarah or Sally Rice, a daughter of John Rice,
a preacher living about four miles north of the Harpe hut.

In the meantime the two brothers made trips to the seat of justice,
for then, as now, the occasion and the desire “to go to town” to
see “what’s going on” was a common one among the people who lived
in the country. Swapping horses was then, and still is to a great
extent, one of the features of a day at the small court house
towns. So when, on one of their first trips to Knoxville, the
Harpes brought with them a fine three-year-old mare and offered
to run her in a race, no suspicion was aroused. The horse was
apparently superior to any other in town that day and no owner
could be induced to venture his quarter nag against her. A Mr.
Aycoff, recognizing the mare as an unusually good one, bought her
and became so attached to the animal that he kept her almost a
quarter of a century. It is interesting to note that twenty years
after he purchased her, a gentleman from Georgia, visiting near
Knoxville, recognized her as the filly that had been stolen from
him many years before. [12G]

The Harpes rapidly increased the number of their trips to town, but
it was soon noticed that with each succeeding visit their supply
of pork and mutton increased. They sold this meat to John Miller,
one of the most respected merchants of Knoxville, through whom
the Harpe hams soon became well known. But the reputation of the
two brothers for drinking and gambling, and the disturbances they
raised in the village were sufficient to arouse suspicion in the
community. By this and other evidence John Miller was convinced
that the Harpes were hog thieves, and suspected that their
dishonesty and meanness had no limit. [12G]

Soon after the arrival of the Harpes in east Tennessee a number of
houses and stables near Knoxville were set on fire and many of them
burned to the ground. As no motive for such destruction of property
could be discovered, the citizens attributed it to downright
rascality. So strong had become suspicion against the Harpes that
when Edward Tiel, who lived a mile from Knoxville, discovered that
several of his best horses had been stolen, he enlisted a number
of neighbors and immediately proceeded to the home of the Harpes.
The investigators found that the cabin had been deserted recently,
but noticed indications that horses had been tied to some near-by
trees. Tiel and his men took up the trail and followed it across
Clinch River into the Cumberland Mountains. There they captured
the two Harpes who were alone at the time. The stolen horses were
recovered, but when the captors and their prisoners reached a point
about five miles northeast of Knoxville, the horse thieves made
their escape. [21]

Tiel and his men tried to effect their recapture but, failing
in the attempt, returned to Knoxville. That same night the two
Harpes appeared at Hughes’ “rowdy groggery,” a few miles west of
Knoxville, where they had gone to exercise their brutality before
leaving Tennessee. Hughes, his wife’s two brothers, named Metcalfe,
and a man named Johnson, living in Jefferson County, were present
when the Harpes, who knew the men, rushed in. Johnson was last
seen alive there. A few days later his body was discovered in the
Holstein River. It had been ripped open, filled with stones, and
thrown into the water. Notwithstanding this excess of caution the
stones became loosened and the corpse rose to the surface. When
the body was discovered Hughes and the Metcalfes came forth with a
declaration that the Harpes had committed the crime. Suspicion fell
upon the accusers and as the two Harpes were nowhere to be found,
the three men were arrested and put in jail. They were acquitted on
trial, due to lack of evidence. The Metcalfes immediately fled the
country. A party of “regulators” followed Hughes to his groggery,
gave him a whipping, pulled down his house and drove him out of the
country. [12G]

The killing of Johnson, as far as is known, seems to have been
the first of the murders committed by the Harpes. Up to this time
they had apparently confined their operations to stealing hogs and
horses, and setting fire to houses. They now began a career of
ruthless murder which was so bold that it not only terrified the
citizens of Tennessee and Kentucky, but also alarmed settlers in
many other sections of the Middle West.

The Harpes evidently had arranged to meet their three women
associates at some definite point if they should for any reason
find it necessary to separate. Shortly after the killing of Johnson
the five met in western Virginia, near Cumberland Gap, and there,
in December, 1798, they entered Kentucky--the “dark and bloody
ground,” to be made even darker by the deeds they were to commit
during the next twelve months.

They traveled the Wilderness Road more or less closely, leaving
it only when they felt their safety demanded a detour. Their
first victim in Kentucky was a peddler named Peyton, whom they
encountered near the Cumberland River in what is now Knox County.
They killed him and took his horse and some of his goods, but the
details of this deed are not known. [21]

The outlaws continued along this trail toward Crab Orchard and
Stanford, in Lincoln County, and overtook two Marylanders named
Paca and Bates. Night came on and it was proposed that the party
camp on the first suitable spot. This was agreed upon, but the
Harpes managed not to find a desirable place until it grew dark.
Suddenly, as if by accident, the brothers changed positions, Big
Harpe getting behind Bates and Little Harpe behind Paca, the women
walking about thirty feet in the rear. The Harpes fired and the
two unfortunate Marylanders fell. Bates died instantly. A few
minutes later Paca, who was badly crippled and knocked speechless,
attempted to rise. Big Harpe rushed up to the struggling man,
“splitting open his head with a hatchet or tomahawk he carried in
his belt.” The Harpes, being in need of some clothing, appropriated
only such garments as were immediately useful. They took, however,
all the gold and silver and Continental coin found in possession of
their victims. [121]

The villains continued along the Wilderness Road and one night in
December, 1798, arrived at a public house kept by John Farris in
what is now Rockcastle County, not many miles from Crab Orchard.
With them came Stephen Langford, of Virginia, who was on his way
to Crab Orchard to visit a kinsman and to consider making that
locality his home. Langford probably had not met the Harpes until
that morning. The story of what took place after they met was
related about a quarter of a century later by Judge James Hall,
who, in his day, ranked among the best living authors in America,
and whose statements were then, and have been ever since, cited
as high authority. His story of their encounter with Langford was
first published in August, 1825, in _The Port Folio_. After making
some slight revisions in his “Story of the Harpes” he republished
the sketch in 1828 in his _Letters from the West_, from which book
his account of the Langford tragedy is here quoted:

“In the autumn of the year 1799, a young gentleman, named Langford,
of a respectable family in Mecklenburgh County, Virginia, set out
from this state for Kentucky, with the intention of passing through
the Wilderness, as it was then called, by the route generally known
as Boone’s Trace. On reaching the vicinity of the Wilderness, a
mountainous and uninhabited tract, which at that time separated the
settled parts of Kentucky from those of Virginia, he stopped to
breakfast at a public house near Big Rockcastle River. Travelers
of this description--any other indeed than hardy wood men--were
unwilling to pass singly through this lonely region; and they
generally waited on its confines for others, and traveled through
in parties. Mr. Langford, either not dreading danger, or not
choosing to delay, determined to proceed alone. While breakfast was
preparing, the Harpes and their women came up. Their appearance
denoted poverty, with but little regard to cleanliness; two very
indifferent horses, with some bags swung across them, and a rifle
gun or two, comprised nearly their whole equipage. Squalid and
miserable, they seemed objects of pity, rather than of fear, and
their ferocious glances were attributed more to hunger than to
guilty passion. They were entire strangers in that neighborhood,
and, like Mr. Langford, were about to cross the Wilderness. When
breakfast was served, the landlord, as was customary at such
places in those times, invited all the persons who were assembled
in the common, perhaps the only room of his little inn, to sit
down; but the Harpes declined, alleging their want of money as the
reason. Langford, who was of a lively, generous disposition, on
hearing this, invited them to partake of the meal at his expense;
they accepted the invitation, and ate voraciously. When they had
thus refreshed themselves, and were about to renew their journey,
Mr. Langford called for the bill, and in the act of discharging
it imprudently displayed a handful of silver. They then set out
together.

“A few days after, some men who were conducting a drove of cattle
to Virginia, by the same road which had been traveled by Mr.
Langford and the Harpes, had arrived within a few miles of Big
Rockcastle River, when their cattle took fright, and, quitting the
road, rushed down a hill into the woods. In collecting them, the
drovers discovered the dead body of a man concealed behind a log,
and covered with brush and leaves. It was now evident that the
cattle had been alarmed by the smell of blood in the road, and, as
the body exhibited marks of violence, it was at once suspected that
a murder had been perpetrated but recently. The corpse was taken to
the same house where the Harpes had breakfasted, and recognized to
be that of Mr. Langford, whose name was marked upon several parts
of his dress. Suspicion fell upon the Harpes, who were pursued and
apprehended near Crab Orchard. They were taken to Stanford....”

The killing of the two Marylanders and the peddler was not known
until many weeks thereafter. The report of the murder of Langford
spread like wildfire. _The Kentucky Gazette_, January 2, 1799, in a
characteristically brief paragraph gave sufficient details of the
discovery of the body on December 14 to impress its readers with
the seriousness of an act of barbarity that might be repeated by
the Harpes at any time. “We also learn,” says this paragraph, “that
Mr. Ballenger is in pursuit of them, with a determined resolution
never to quit the chase until he has secured them.”

Captain Joseph Ballenger, the organizer and leader of the pursuing
party, was a prominent merchant of Stanford, Lincoln County. He and
his men trailed the Harpes and their women to the neighborhood of
what was then Carpenter’s Station, a settlement near the present
town of Hustonville and about eight miles southwest of Stanford.
There Ballenger discovered them sitting on a log, evidently
confident that no one could detect their whereabouts. [12F] The
pursuers rushed on them so suddenly that resistance or escape was
impossible.«5»

The five prisoners were taken to Stanford, placed in jail and,
about ten days later, tried before the Court of Quarter Sessions.

Hall’s story of the frontier tragedy, based on personal accounts
that had survived for a quarter of a century, has already been
given. It is brief and is correct as far as it goes, but while
Hall was hearing it from the lips of men who had it from those
concerned with the vengeance of the law, there lay in the custody
of the records of the backwoods court of Lincoln County, the grim
details of that crime of base ingratitude and cruelty in solitude
which so shook the Wilderness. They had lain there forgotten
more than a century when they were found and examined in 1918.
Yellowed with age, written with the goose-quill pen of that period
in a penmanship characteristic of the pioneers, a jumble of half
narrative, half legal style, much of which, however, is in use in
courts today, these records of a terrible episode in history are
eloquent with interest.

The piling up of item on item of court forms, of testimony
laboriously written out and signed, of official jail accounts for
the handling of the criminals, tells in its own way every detail
of a crime committed in fancied obscurity yet which by a series of
fortunate circumstances, was to blaze into a notoriety that set
all the West on fire with fear and horror. One who holds these
long-forgotten records in his hands and curiously searches them
could, with patience and without the aid of imagination, build up
the story of frontier life and the people who lived it. The story
would show that the power of observation exercised by some of the
pioneers was equal to any ascribed to a Sherlock Holmes. It would
be a story of chance incidents woven into chains of circumstances
that were to reveal crime with unerring certainty--a story of
the capture of the criminals, of their life in jail, and of the
destiny by which each of the three women involved was to have
her only child born to her in that frontier jail, the branded
fruit of awful parentage. The mute entries in pounds, shillings,
and pence for every item, set down on these yellow pages without
malice or comment, tell their part of the story as implacably and
dispassionately as fate itself.«6»

These records show that all the Harpes gave their name as
“Roberts,” except Betsey Harpe, the supplementary wife of
Big Harpe, whose name is given as “Elizabeth Walker.” Five
witnesses appeared against them, two of whom--John Farris and his
daughter-in-law, Jane Farris--lived in the house near Rockcastle
River where Thomas Langford, or Lankford, was last seen alive. The
fugitives were captured December 25, 1798. On January 4, 1799, they
appeared before the three judges of the Lincoln County Court of
Quarter Sessions, as it is so recorded, by Willis Green, the clerk,
on the twenty-second page of the Record Book marked “September
1798–March 1802:”

“At a court called and held at Lincoln Courthouse on Friday the 4th
day of January 1799 for the examination of Micajah Roberts, Wiley
Roberts, Susanna Roberts, Sally Roberts, and Elizabeth Walker for
the murder of Thomas Langford.

“Present Hugh Logan, William Montgomery, and Nathan Huston,
Esquires, [the three judges who presided].

“The said [naming the five prisoners] were lead to the bar in
custody of the Sheriff and charged with feloniously and of their
malice aforethought murdering and robbing a certain Thomas Langford
on Wednesday the 12th day of December 1798 on the road leading from
Kentucky to Virginia through the Wilderness, and denied the fact,
sundry evidences were therefore examined and the prisoners heard in
their defense.”

Five witnesses appeared on behalf of the Commonwealth. The
statement of each is written on loose leaves and signed in the
presence of Thomas Montgomery, the official notary, and all were
therefore in a form to be turned over to a higher court should it
become necessary to do so. The affidavit of Captain Ballenger, who
lead the pursuing party, is here quoted in full:

“Joseph Ballenger of lawful age, and sworn, deposeth and saith
that at about the 19th or 20th day of December 1798 he heard that
a murder had been committed in the Wilderness on the body of a
certain Thomas Langford, as supposed; that he, at the request of
James Blain the Attorney General of this Commonwealth with others
(including Thomas Welsh) went in pursuit of some persons suspected
of being the murderers who had passed through Lincoln County; that
they went to the house of John Blain in Lincoln County where they
heard that persons similar to those they were in pursuit of had
left Brush Creek, a branch of Green River, and passed over to the
Rolling Fork of Salt River; that they pursued them and overtook
five persons, the same who this day on their examinations were
called Micajah Roberts, Wiley Roberts, Susanna Roberts, Sally
Roberts, and Elizabeth Walker; that after taking them into custody
they proceeded to search them and found in their possession a
pocket book with the name of Thomas Langford, a great coat, a grey
coating cloth, a short coat--in the pocket of it were broken pieces
of glass--a mixed colored long coat, a pair of breeches, a shaving
glass, a whip, a pair of wrappers, and a horse, this day proved to
be the property of Thomas Langford said to be the person murdered
in the Wilderness, and that they found also a Free Mason’s apron
and many other things in their possession said to be the property
of Thomas Langford. Further saith not.”

David Irby, in his sworn statement, explained that: “he and
Thomas Langford set out from Pittsylvania County in Virginia for
Kentucky, they traveled five days journey together and sometimes
one paid their traveling expense and sometimes the other, all of
which Thomas Langford marked down in his pocket book. Before they
crossed Inglish’s Ferry [Ingle’s Ferry in what is now Montgomery
Country, Virginia] they got a half bushel of oats which the
deponent paid for and also their ferryage at Inglish’s Ferry in
Wythe County (Virginia) the deponent purchased a cheese which
Thomas Langford set down in his pocket book, he says that the
pocket book now before the examining court is the said pocket book
which Thomas Langford had when they traveled together in Tennessee
State. [The trail from Virginia to Cumberland Gap extended into
northeastern Tennessee before reaching Kentucky]. The deponent and
Thomas Langford separated when they agreed to meet at Frankfort
in Kentucky; the deponent heard in Kentucky that the said Thomas
Langford was murdered on his way to Kentucky, he set out towards
the place where the crime was committed and went to the place where
the person who was killed was buried and he, the deponent, and John
Farris unburied and raised the decedent and found him to be Thomas
Langford.”

What Irby saw and heard he further declared convinced him that the
murdered man was no other than his recent traveling companion.

John Farris Sr. swore that on Tuesday night, December 12, 1798: “a
man came to his house on the Wilderness Road who called himself
Thomas Langford and who, after he had told him his name, he
recollected to have been acquainted with in Pittsylvania County,
Virginia, in the youth of Thomas Langford.”

He said his guest remained all night and started the next morning
for the settlements. In the meantime, Farris had: “an opportunity
of viewing his clothing and actually did very curiously examine
the outward clothing of the said Thomas Langford.” A few days
later he heard that “a man was killed on the Wilderness Road, and
on inquiring into the circumstances he was induced to believe
that the person murdered was Thomas Langford ... but not being
fully satisfied that the person found dead was Thomas Langford,
he went to the coroner of Lincoln County, obtained from him an
order--the said coroner having before that time held an inquest on
the body--and in pursuance of the said order, in company with David
Irby and Abraham Anthony who buried the said Thomas Langford as
he supposed, raised him and inspected him ... and that the whole
visage of the person, by him and others raised, answered his idea
of Thomas Langford, but he knew him more particularly by the loss
of a tooth in the front part of his jaw.”

His daughter-in-law, Jane Farris, wife of William Farris, also
identified various things found in the possession of the outlaws
as the property of the murdered man. She evidently observed the
actions of the travelers closely, for she states: “Thomas Langford
had on leggins at her house and as part of the list of one of
them was torn Susan Roberts sewed it to the leggin with white
thread.” She adds that the five prisoners and their victim came
to the house together and “All appeared very cheerful with each
other, Langford seemed to be somewhat intoxicated, he had a small
glass bottle which was filled with whiskey at their house which
Micajah Roberts and Wiley Roberts paid for.” The six left the
Farris house together, but shortly before leaving “there was some
misunderstanding between Thomas Langford and Micajah and Wiley
Roberts ... and Mr. Langford said to Mrs. Farris, in the presence
of all, that he would not offend her for all in his saddle bags
which was worth five hundred pounds.”

The statement made by Thomas Welsh, who was in the pursuing party,
is practically the same as Captain Ballenger’s. He, however, adds
“there was none of the alteration in the great coat at the time of
the finding ... and must have been made by the criminals since they
were taken into custody, they having, for several days after they
were taken in custody, the possession of the great coat.”

There is nothing in the records to indicate what was said by the
prisoners when they were heard in their defense. The decision
of the court was that the five prisoners “ought to be tried for
the murder of the said Thomas Langford before the Judges of the
District Court holden for the Danville District at the next April
Term, and it is ordered that they be remanded to jail.”

Thomas Todd, the prosecuting attorney, in the requirement of
the law, “acknowledged himself indebted” to the Governor of the
Commonwealth “in the sum of ten thousand pounds current money”
should he fail to appear before the judges on the first day of
the April term of the Danville District Court then and there to
prosecute the prisoners. The witnesses “acknowledged themselves
severally indebted ... to the sum of five hundred pounds current
money” should they fail to appear and give evidence on behalf of
the Commonwealth.«7»

On January 5 the five prisoners were taken by the sheriff and a
guard of seven men to Danville, there to await trial before the
District Court in April. The distance from Stanford to Danville
is about ten miles. Neither history nor tradition tells how this
cavalcade made the trip over the trail, whether afoot, on horses,
or in wagons, or by a combination of these means. The condition
then reached by the women may have necessitated the use of a
conveyance for them. This party of thirteen doubtless attracted
much attention along the road, for five prisoners, of whom three
were women, was a sight not often seen. The ten mile trip to
Danville made by the guards with the captured Harpes along this
historic highway, winding through an almost unbroken forest,
readily lends itself to anyone’s fancy.«8»

Evidently John Biegler, “Jailer of the District of Danville,” to
whom the prisoners were delivered and who had them in his custody
several months, felt there was some likelihood of his charges
escaping. His account against the state shows that on January 20,
1799, he bought “Two horse locks to chain the men’s feet to the
ground, 12s. and 1 bolt, 3s.” It seems to have become necessary
to fasten the front door more firmly, for, on February 13, he
purchased “one lock for front jail door, 18s.” Two weeks later he
bought three pounds of nails for 6s. “for the use of the jail.”
The expense items further show that four men, two at a time, were
employed to guard the prisoners.

But with all these precautions, the two Harpes escaped on March
16, leaving their three women and two new-born infants behind.
There is nothing in the court records indicating how they escaped.
The jailer’s expense account merely shows an item dated March
19: “Mending the wall in jail where the prisoners escaped, 12s.”
Breazeale, forty years later, wrote--but cites no authority for
his statement: “the jailer, soon after their escape, resigned his
office, left the jail, bought a farm and settled himself in the
country where he very shortly became wealthy--no one ever knew with
certainty by what means, but the general suspicion was that he had
acquired his wealth by receiving a large bribe from the Harpes to
permit them to escape.”

How they escaped was doubtless a subject of much conjecture and
discussion. Colonel Daniel Trabue in his _Autobiography_ says
that the two men “took two guns from the guard at Danville.”
Whether or not the guard or guards were present and resisted the
prisoners when they took the two guns is not stated. Judge James
Hall, continuing his brief account of the Langford murder, quoted
a few pages back, gives no details, but simply ends with the
statement: “They were taken to Stanford where they were examined
and committed by an enquiring court, sent to Danville for safe
keeping, and probably for trial. Previous to the time of trial they
made their escape.”

Nor do the records contain any hint as to how the two men passed
the time of their imprisonment. Lyman C. Draper, in his “Sketch
of the Harpes,” says that shortly before his escape Big Harpe,
contending it would answer the ends of justice as well, proposed to
whip at fisticuffs the two best fighters in Kentucky, provided he
be set free if he succeeded in whipping the men, and should he fail
he would abide by the decision of the court.

The trial of the three women was set for April 15. But during the
hundred days they were immured in the log jail there was happening
to them the immortal trial that comes to their sex under all
conditions. Yoked as they were irregularly, pursuing as they had
the lives of the hunted and outcast, they had to bear, in the
rigors of winter, in abandonment and in prison charged with murder,
the burdens of motherhood--and to such fathers! These items from
the jailer’s accounts of his expenditures on their behalf tell a
story with which imagination is free to work:

“February 8, ¼ lb. Hyson tea, 3s. 9d., 1 lb. sugar, 1s. 6d. for
Betsey Walker she being brought to bed by a son the preceding
night, 5s. 3d.--February 10, ¼ lb. ginger, 1s. 1d., 1 lb. sugar,
1s. 6d., for ditto, and paid cash to the wife and other assistance
21s. £1. 3s. 7d.”--total £1. 8s. 10d.

“March 7, ⅛ lb. tea, 1s. 10d., 1 lb. sugar, 1s. 6d., for the use of
Susanna Harpe brought to bed by a daughter the preceding night, 3s.
4d. Paid cash midwife for ditto, 18s.”--total £1. 1s. 4d.

“April 9, ¼ lb. tea, 3s. 9d., 1 lb. sugar, 1s. 6d., 1 quart
whiskey, 1s. 6d. for the use of Sally Harp brought to bed the
preceding night by a daughter.”--total 6s. 9d.

It will be noted that when the third child was born a week before
the time set for trial--the second was about a month old and the
other two months old.

Such was the state of affairs when, on Monday, April 15, 1799, the
clerk turned to page 314 of the Danville District Court Order Book
and there began his record of the trial of the three women indicted
for the murder of Thomas Langford. The court was presided over by
Judge James G. Hunter and by Judge Samuel McDowell, who served in
the absence of Judge Stephen Ormsby. “Susanna Roberts, spinster
of Lincoln County was set to the bar in custody of the jailer,”
so runs the record, and pleaded “not guilty;” but “for reasons
appearing to the court” her trial was postponed until the third day
of the term. “Elizabeth Walker” and “Sally Roberts” were not called
on to appear personally that day before the judges, but their cases
were postponed until the 18th.

On the 17th “Susanna Roberts” again appeared in court. A jury of
twelve men was sworn, which, after hearing the same evidence given
in Stanford, presented in the form of written affidavits, declared
her “guilty.”

On the 18th another jury was sworn and “Elizabeth Walker, spinster
of Lincoln County,” was tried on the same evidence presented
against “Susanna Roberts,” but found “not guilty.” The court
proceedings of that afternoon show that the judge “saith he will
not further prosecute the said Sally Roberts (spinster of Lincoln
County) ... and therefore it is considered by the court that she be
acquitted.”

Thus, with the same evidence against each woman, one was found
“guilty,” and one “not guilty” and one was “acquitted.”

On the 19th Susanna, who had been found guilty, appealed for a new
trial and it was granted. The Attorney General, however, concluded
not to prosecute her, and, at his suggestion, the clerk was ordered
to record “certain of the reasons which moved him to enter into
_nolle prosequi_ in this case ... to-wit: Upon considering the
circumstances attending the case of Susanna Roberts and although
she has been found guilty of the charge in the indictment contained
by a verdict of her peers, yet as Eliza Walker has been tried on
the same indictment, on which trial the said Eliza was found not
guilty and the same proof produced against her as was produced
against the said Susanna, and in consequence also of the Court
having granted a new trial and from the probability [of the
evidence] which would be produced on the trial of the said Susanna
at the next term by the two other women, in the same indictment
contained, who are acquitted and discharged, operating in favor
of the prisoner, and also by the advice of the prosecutor and of
the Court, and also to save to the Commonwealth the expenses which
attend her long detention and further prosecution, I have been
induced to direct the Clerk to enter a _nolle prosequi_ as to the
said Susanna Roberts.”«9»




The Harpes--Renewal of the Terror


What had happened to the Harpes and their women was a natural
outcome of the frontier outlook upon life. The three mothers
had gained the sympathy of the court and the community in their
apparent distress and helplessness. It was believed that they
had obtained a happy release from their barbarous masters. It is
probable that many of the persons who now helped in the hunt for
the escaped Harpes did so not because they were highway murderers
and should therefore be shot or hanged, but because they deserved
particular punishment for their brutal conduct toward the young
women. At any rate the settlements were united in the pursuit of
the two men, who had so curiously escaped.

The acquitted women declared that, above all things, they
desired to return to Knoxville and there start life over again.
A collection of clothes and money was made among the citizens
of Danville and an old mare was given to help them on their
way to Tennessee. The three women, each with a bundle over her
shoulder and a child under her arm, and the old mare loaded down
with clothes and bedding, left the jail one morning on what was
considered no easy journey even when undertaken with good horses
and the best of equipment. They walked down the street in Indian
file, led by the jailer, who accompanied them to the edge of town
to point out the road that led through Crab Orchard to Tennessee.
These forlorn and dejected travelers, however, had covered less
than thirty miles when they changed their course and went down
along the banks of Green River. A few days later they traded their
horse for a canoe and then went down the stream and were soon lost
sight of by the spies who attempted to watch them. [12F]

The brutal killing of Langford had stirred the country for almost
two months, and now that the murderers had escaped and the gnawed
bones of the two Marylanders were found, with all evidence pointing
to the Harpes as the perpetrators of this terrible murder, the
citizens became even more enraged. They were aroused to the
realization that the villains must be captured and disposed of at
once. The case required prompt action and any and all methods that
might bring about the extermination of the Harpes were endorsed.

On March 28, 1799, _The Kentucky Gazette_ published the following
paragraph: “The criminals in the Danville district jail for the
murder of Mr. Langford, (as mentioned in our paper of the 2nd
of January last) have made their escape. By an order from W. E.
Strong, Esq., a justice of the peace for Mercer County, all
sheriffs and constables are commanded to take and re-commit them.”

An entry in the Danville District Court Order Book, page 370,
under date of April 22, 1799, reads: “It is ordered that the
Commonwealth’s writ of capias issue from the clerk’s office of
this Court to the Sheriff of Lincoln County commanding him to take
Micajah Roberts and Wiley Roberts who have lately broken the jail
of this District and are now running at large and them, the said
Micajah Roberts and Wiley Roberts, safely to keep so that he have
their bodies before the Judges of the District Court holden for the
Danville District on the first day of their August Term, to answer
for the felony and murder of a certain Thomas Langford whereof they
stand indicted.”

Lynching parties had been organized since the middle of March and
in the meantime a committee was sent to James Garrard, Governor of
Kentucky, presenting to him the necessity of capturing the outlaws.
A memorandum on this subject in the Executive Journal, entered
in the month of April, states that “the governor authorized Josh
Ballenger to pursue them into the state of Tennessee and other
states, and to apply to the executive authorities of such states to
deliver them up.”

Ballenger and his men began their chase before they received
official notice of the governor’s action, and were soon on the
trail. Near the headwaters of Rolling Fork, a branch of Salt River,
they suddenly found themselves face to face with the Harpes, who,
although surprised, were prepared to shoot. The pursuers retreated
in confusion and the Harpes, taking advantage of the situation,
made their escape. Henry Scaggs, one of the party, suggested that
the crowd go to his farm and, with the aid of his dogs, continue
the chase. Scaggs was one of the “Long Hunters” who came to
Kentucky in 1770 with Colonel James Knox and a pioneer who had ever
since been looked upon as “a valiant man in battle and a great
hunter.” Urged by him they resumed the pursuit and continued it
until late that night, when most of the men, becoming discouraged,
left the party because the trail of the Harpes led them through
very thick and almost impenetrable cane.

A few men, led by Ballenger, continued the search, but in a section
where the heavy cane was no impediment. Scaggs, believing the
canebrake should be penetrated, went to a “log rolling” a few
miles north of the home of Colonel Daniel Trabue, and there, with
the aid of Major James Blain, tried to organize another party.
But the men declared that the cane was too thick and the chances
of capture too slight to justify the risk, and the “log rolling”
went on. Scaggs then--on or about April 10--rode to the farm of
Colonel Daniel Trabue, a Revolutionary soldier and one of the most
prominent and altruistic of Kentucky pioneers, who lived about
three miles west of what is now Columbia, Adair County.

While Scaggs was discussing his plans with Colonel Trabue, the
Colonel was patiently awaiting the return of his son, John Trabue,
a lad of thirteen, who had been sent to one of the neighbors to
borrow some flour and seed beans. The boy was accompanied by a
small dog, and, in the midst of the discussion, the dog walked into
the yard badly wounded. [12E] An investigation was immediately
made. The neighbor reported that the boy had left the house a few
hours before with the flour and beans. All efforts made that night
to find him were futile. They began to suspect that he might have
been kidnapped by the Harpes. The search continued for many days,
but all in vain. Evidence of the Harpes was discovered by George
Spears and five other men about fifteen miles southwest of the
Trabue farm, near the East Fork of Barren River, where the outlaws
had killed a calf and made moccasins out of the skin, leaving their
old moccasins behind. The footprints indicated the presence of two
men, but there were no signs to show that a boy was with them. [63]

Little did the pursuers realize what had actually happened. The
innocent lad, walking home over an old buffalo trace, had met the
Harpes as they were crossing it. There they killed the little
fellow, cut his body to pieces, and threw it into a sinkhole near
the path, where it remained hidden about two weeks and was then
discovered by accident. The murderers had taken the flour but not
the seed beans.

Colonel Trabue, in his autobiography or journal, written some
twenty-five years after this tragedy, deplores the fact that the
log rollers did not continue the pursuit: “It is a pity they did
not go, for then John Trabue might not have been killed.” He adds
that these men ever after “reflected very much on themselves for
their negligence, and said this ought to be a warning to others
hereafter to always do their duty.”

In pioneer times the execution of the law by officials was in
many instances an unavoidably slow process, and it therefore
frequently became necessary for the law abiding citizens to
organize themselves into bands and, by any method the emergency
might demand, establish order and safety. No matter how achieved,
preserving peace and fighting danger was looked upon by good
citizens as the imperative duty of all. Had the then slow-acting
laws been relied upon, the sly and quick-traveling Harpes probably
would not have been captured for years, and their victims might
have been numbered by the hundreds. On the other hand, as suggested
by Colonel Trabue, it is possible that had the men who were called
upon by Scaggs done what was in those days considered a duty,
Langford might have been the last victim of the Harpes and their
career ended.

A report that mad dogs were running through the country and were
likely to spring from behind any bush or tree at any time could
not have alarmed the people more than did the realization that the
Harpes had escaped from jail and were killing all who chanced to
be in their path. On April 22, the Governor of Kentucky was again
appealed to for help, and he immediately signed a proclamation
which was published in the Frankfort _Palladium_ on May 2 and May
9, 1799:

    “BY THE GOVERNOR, A PROCLAMATION.

    “Whereas it has been represented to me that MICAJAH HARP, alias
    ROBERTS, and WILEY HARP alias ROBERTS, who were confined in
    the jail of the Danville district under a charge of murder,
    did on the 16th day of March last, break out of the said
    jail;--and whereas the ordinary methods of pursuit have been
    found ineffectual for apprehending and restoring to confinement
    the said fugitives, I have judged it necessary to the safety
    and welfare of the community and to the maintenance of justice,
    to issue this my proclamation and do hereby offer and promise
    a reward of THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS to any person who shall
    apprehend and deliver into the custody of the jailer of the
    Danville district the said MICAJAH HARP alias ROBERTS and a
    like reward of THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS for apprehending and
    delivering as aforesaid the said WILEY HARP alias ROBERTS, to
    be paid out of the public treasury agreeably to law.

    “In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and have
    caused the seal of the Commonwealth to be affixed.

    “Done at Frankfort on the 22nd day of April in the year of our
    Lord 1799, and of the Commonwealth the seventh.

      “(L. S.)
      “By the Governor        JAMES GARRARD
      “Harry Toulmin, Secretary.

    “MICAJAH HARP alias ROBERTS is about six feet high--of a
    robust make, and is about 30 or 32 years of age. He has an
    ill-looking, downcast countenance, and his hair is black and
    short, but comes very much down his forehead. He is built
    very straight and is full fleshed in the face. When he went
    away he had on a striped nankeen coat, dark blue woolen
    stockings,--leggins of drab cloth and trousers of the same as
    the coat.

    “WILEY HARP alias ROBERTS is very meagre in his face, has
    short black hair but not quite so curly as his brother’s;
    he looks older, though really younger, and has likewise a
    downcast countenance. He had on a coat of the same stuff as his
    brother’s, and had a drab surtout coat over the close-bodied
    one. His stockings were dark blue woolen ones, and his leggins
    of drab cloth.”

Before this proclamation by the Governor had time to circulate
throughout the state, report reached the people that the Harpes
had killed a man named Dooley, near what is now Edmonton, Metcalfe
County, [28] and had butchered another named Stump, who lived on
Barren River about eight miles below Bowling Green. [12D]

Stump was fishing, and seeing smoke rising on the opposite side
of the river, a little distance from the bank, presumed some new
arrivals were preparing to settle. He stepped into his cabin and
got his violin, and then crossed the stream to greet the newcomers.
He was clad in his shirt and trousers, without hat or shoes, but he
probably felt that what he lacked in wearing apparel would be more
than counterbalanced by the hearty welcome to the Wilderness he was
prepared to give his new neighbors. So, in this scant attire, and
with a turkey over his shoulder, a string of fish in one hand and
his fiddle under his arm, he entered their camp. He probably never
realized that his good intentions had led him into the hands of the
Harpes. They stabbed him, cut open his body, filled it with stones
and threw it into the river. [12F] Some of Stump’s neighbors, says
_The Kentucky Gazette_, were suspected of having committed the
murder and were taken into custody, but an investigation proved
their innocence and also proved beyond all doubt that the Harpes
were the perpetrators of the crime.

The criminals continued their raid down Barren River into the lower
Green River country to a point near Henderson, Kentucky, and then,
either by land or water, rapidly worked their way to Diamond Island
in the Ohio and to Cave-in-Rock, in or near any of which places
they evidently had arranged to meet their women.

How many men, women, and children these two brothers killed
and what course they followed while rushing through the lower
Green River country and the Ohio Valley between Henderson and
Cave-in-Rock will never be known. Shortly before reaching the Cave,
they committed a murder in Illinois at the mouth of Saline River,
about twelve miles above Cave-in-Rock. Twenty-six years later this
incident was briefly summed up in the _Illinois Gazette_, published
at Shawneetown: “There are persons living in this country whom we
have heard recount the story of the Harpes with great minuteness,
and the place is still pointed out, on the plantation of Mr. Potts,
near the mouth of the Saline River, where they shot two or three
persons in cold blood by the fire where they had encamped.” [56]

The many reports--some false and others only too true--of the
inhuman acts committed by the Harpes had, in the meantime, put
every community on its guard. Captain Ballenger, after pursuing
the outlaws a few weeks, found that, owing to the many conflicting
rumors, he had been thrown off the trail and was moving in a
direction opposite the one taken by the Harpes and, therefore, he
gave up the chase.

Captain Young, of Mercer County, in the meantime organized a
company with the determination to exterminate the Harpes and
all other outlaws, or at least drive them out of the country.
Commenting on Captain Young’s expedition, Edmund L. Starling,
author of _A History of Henderson County, Kentucky_, writes:
“Captain Young and his men recognized the perils of their
undertaking; they understood the wily machinations of the enemy,
and, with blood for blood emblazoned upon their banner, started
upon their mission of capture or death, utterly regardless of their
own personal comforts or the hardships attending a campaign in such
a wild and comparatively unmarked country.”

Having met with success in Mercer, Captain Young and his men
continued their pursuit and finally reached Henderson County. There
they were joined by a number of citizens. The combined forces
swept over the entire country, including Diamond Island, driving
the outlaws out of that part of Kentucky across the Ohio River
into Illinois. A number of the criminals fled to Cave-in-Rock. The
character of the men who usually centered at the Cave was well
known to the refugees, for many of them had helped to make the
place notorious.

Captain Young and his outlaw exterminators having covered the
territory they set out to relieve, left Henderson County and
returned to Mercer County--a distance of more than one hundred and
fifty miles--and were there given a grand ovation. [124]

Governor Garrard, however, must have felt somewhat apprehensive
regarding the return of the Harpes, for the Executive Journal shows
that on June 7 he “deputed Alexander McFarland and brothers” to
take charge of “these inveterate enemies of human happiness” should
they be found “in any adjacent state.”

It seems quite likely that while in the Danville jail the Harpe
women, by some means, sent a message to, or received one from,
“old man Roberts,” the father-in-law of Big Harpe, who then lived
in Russell County, Kentucky. At any rate, as already stated, they
started down Green River shortly after leaving Danville. They
paddled their way down that river until they reached its mouth,
a distance of more than two hundred miles. After stopping in the
neighborhood of Henderson, they continued down the Ohio about
ninety miles to Cave-in-Rock. It was in this section of the Ohio
Valley that they expected, sooner or later, to meet the Harpes.
Tradition has it that shortly after the three women arrived at
Cave-in-Rock two of them proceeded up the river, one to Diamond
Island and the other to a neighborhood south of Henderson, while
the third remained at the Cave; and in this manner they watchfully
awaited the arrival of the Harpes. The two women who had been
loitering near Henderson and Diamond Island, posing under assumed
names as widows, either had left their watching places voluntarily
or were forced to flee from them with their husbands. At any rate,
they finally arrived at Cave-in-Rock and there, in a very short
time, the two Harpes and their three women and three children were
once more united.

As a result of Captain Young’s raid through Henderson County,
Cave-in-Rock became somewhat crowded with outlaws. Realizing that
their number was too great to maneuver with any secrecy and safety,
many left the place voluntarily, some continuing down the river,
others working their way inland, and a few remaining “to pursue
their nefarious avocation.” [124]

The Harpes, however, were driven from the Cave. This aggregation
of outlaws was doubtless a depraved conglomeration of evil doers,
but in the Harpes they found two human brutes beyond even their
toleration.

There is a tradition to the effect that the Harpes had been at the
Cave only a few days when they brazenly related the performance
of an act which, to their surprise, was not cheered by their
companions. A flatboat had come down the river and its passengers,
not realizing they were near the famous rendezvous of outlaws,
landed about a quarter of a mile above the Cave at the foot of
a small bluff, later known as Cedar Point. Among the travelers
on board were a young man and his sweetheart who, while their
companions were making some repairs to the boat, strolled to the
top of the cliff and there sat down upon a rock. The view from
that point is still beautiful and was probably even more so in
primeval days. While the two lovers were sitting on the edge of the
cliff with their backs to the wild woods behind them, leisurely
considering the landscape, or the life before them, the two Harpes
quietly approached from the forest and, without a word of warning,
pushed the lovers off the cliff. They fell on a sandy beach forty
feet below and, to the surprise of all, escaped unhurt. The Harpes
returned to the Cave, and, as already stated, boasted, but without
the expected effect, of the prank they had played.

Shortly after this, two families, carrying a supply of tools and
provisions, were floating down the Ohio in a flatboat, intending to
settle in Smithland, but when they came near Cave-in-Rock they were
captured and robbed by the outlaws. The two or three passengers who
were not killed in the battle preceding the robbery, were brought
ashore. The Harpes, seeing an opportunity to give their fellow
criminals an exhibition of brutality, stripped one of the captives,
tied him to a blindfolded horse and led the animal to the top of
the bluff over the Cave. By wild shouts and other means the horse
was frightened and at the same time forced to run toward the edge
of the cliff, and before long the blindfolded animal with the naked
man tied on its back ran off the bluff and fell a distance of more
than one hundred feet to the rough and rocky shore below. Then the
Harpes pointed to the mangled remains of man and horse as evidence
of another triumph over law and order. Their fellow cave dwellers
probably had never seen such a sight before and evidently did not
care to witness one again. It is likely that only sympathy for
their women and babies saved the Harpes from death at the hands of
the other outlaws. All the Harpes left the Cave at once.

It is probable that their hasty departure took place some time in
May, 1799. Neither history nor tradition tells in what direction
they fled. The people of Kentucky doubtless concluded that since
they had driven these outlaws across the Ohio into Illinois, they
would continue their flight north or proceed by flatboat to some
section along the lower Mississippi.

About the middle of July east Tennessee was shocked to hear of the
cruel murder of a farmer named Bradbury, who was killed along the
road in Roane County, about twenty-five miles west of Knoxville
on what has since been known as Bradbury’s Ridge. [21] The Harpes
were not suspected of the crime, for the impression prevailed that
they had fled permanently and, although their whereabouts was
unknown, it not only seemed quite improbable but almost impossible
that they had returned in so short a time. It soon developed,
however, that they actually had made their appearance again, for
a few days later--July 22, 1799--they murdered a young son of
Chesley Coffey, on Black Oak Ridge, about eight miles northwest of
Knoxville. One version has it that the boy was hunting strayed cows
and while in the woods was slain by the Harpes, who took his gun
and the shoes he wore, and left his body lying under a tree. [12G]
Another account is that “Young Coffey was riding along the road one
evening to get a fiddle. These terrible men smeared a tree with his
brains, making out that his horse had run against the tree.” [63]

Two days later they killed a man named William Ballard, who lived
within a few miles of Knoxville. “They cut him open and, putting
stones in his body, sank it in the river.” [63] It was believed by
the neighbors that the Harpes mistook Ballard for Hugh Dunlap, who
had been active in endeavoring to arrest them the year before. [21]

The Harpes continued their course northward. They crossed Emery
River, near what is now Harriman Junction, and, while their women
were resting for a few days in some secluded spot, the two men
skirmished alone in Morgan County. On July 29, on the spur of a
mountain since known as Brassel’s Knob, they met James and Robert
Brassel. James Brassel was afoot and carried a gun; Robert was on
horseback and unarmed. The Harpes, who were riding good horses,
pretended to be in a hurry, but seeming to have a desire to comply
with the custom of civilized travelers, slowed up and saluted the
men with the question: “What’s the news?” The Brassels related
in detail an account of the murder of William Ballard and young
Coffey. The Harpes replied that they had not only heard of these
tragedies, but that they were now in pursuit of the men who had
committed the crimes. They further asserted that they were going to
wait for the rest of the pursuing party which was coming on behind,
and requested the Brassels to join them when the reinforcements
arrived. To this the two innocent brothers willingly agreed. They
had no more than done so when Big Harpe, accusing them of being the
Harpe brothers, seized James Brassel’s gun, threw it on the ground
and immediately began tying his hands and feet. Robert, suspecting
that he and his brother had fallen into the hands of the dreaded
Harpes themselves, jumped from his horse and attempted to obtain
his brother’s gun in an effort to rescue him. In this he failed
and, realizing that his only hope of escape was flight, he ran
into the woods, leaving his horse behind. He was pursued by Little
Harpe, whom he succeeded in outrunning, and, although shot at, he
was unhurt.

Robert continued his flight about ten miles when he met a Mr. Dale,
who, with two or three other men and Mrs. Dale, was traveling
toward Knoxville. He persuaded them to return with him to the place
where he had left his brother. The men had only one gun among
them for their protection; nevertheless they tried to help the
bewildered man. When they reached the spot in the woods a short
distance from the road where Robert had left his brother, they were
horrified to find that James was not only dead, but that his body
had been “much beaten and his throat cut.” His gun was broken to
pieces. The tracks indicated that the two Harpes had gone toward
Knoxville, from which direction they were coming when they overtook
the Brassel brothers. After the pursuers had followed the tracks a
few miles, they were much surprised to find themselves running upon
the Harpes coming back. At the time the two Brassels were attacked
by the Harpes the outlaws were alone and had with them nothing
but their guns. But now, on their return, they were accompanied
by their women and children, heavily loaded with clothing and
provisions, apparently prepared for a long journey and for battle
and siege.

When this fierce procession of men and women on horseback came
in sight, one of Dale’s men suggested that if the approaching
cavalcade showed no signs of fight, no effort to arrest them should
be made. This immediately met with the approval of the majority.
No attempt to fight was made. The murderers, in the words of
Colonel Trabue, “looked very awful at them” and then passed on. The
pursuers, too, continued their journey for a while in silence, lest
any words they should utter might be overheard and mistaken by the
Harpes as a threat. Robert Brassel complained bitterly of the lack
of courage displayed by the men he had relied upon to help capture
or kill the murderers of his brother. [63]

Thus, uninterrupted, the two Harpes and their wives, with their
stolen horses and other plunder, and with an ever-increasing desire
to shed blood, continued their expedition to Kentucky. Somewhere
near the Tennessee-Kentucky line, either in what is now Pickett
County, Tennessee, or Clinton County, Kentucky, they killed John
Tully, who lived in that section of Cumberland County which in 1835
became a part of Clinton County.

In the meantime citizens of east Tennessee were alarmed. They now
fully realized that the Harpes had actually returned and were
likely to appear any day in any neighborhood. Every man carried his
gun, his dirk, or carving knife, and made every preparation to slay
the monsters.

Robert Brassel resumed his pursuit of the Harpes and was soon
joined by William Wood and others. When they arrived near the farm
of John Tully they met Nathaniel Stockton and a number of neighbors
looking for Tully, who they supposed was lost in the woods. The
search continued and “near the road they found Mr. Tully, killed,
and hidden under a log.” [63] The company buried him and some of
the men agreed they would pursue the murderers.«10»

Immediately after it was discovered that Tully had been murdered,
William Wood and Nathaniel Stockton started afoot to Colonel Daniel
Trabue’s farm, a distance of forty miles. They suspected that
because Colonel Trabue had been active in the pursuit of the Harpes
after his son had been murdered, the monsters were on their way
to his home and store and might be captured there. They related
to the Colonel the details of the crimes the Harpes had recently
committed and he, before they had finished, decided to forward the
news to the governor of Kentucky. In order to impress the governor
with the fact that the report was not another wild rumor, Colonel
Trabue, who was a justice of the peace in Green County, prepared a
written statement, giving a brief account of the recent acts of the
Harpes, as related to him by Nathaniel Stockton and William Wood,
and forwarded it to him in the form of an affidavit. [63]

This sworn statement, consisting of about five hundred words,
was published in the _Kentucky Gazette_ on August 15, 1799. From
it some of the details of the three crimes just related were
taken. It begins with the declaration: “About the middle of July
there was a man killed by the name of Hardin, about three miles
below Knoxville: he was ripped open and stones put in his belly,
and he was thrown into Holston River.” After briefly noting the
circumstances and the exact date of the killing of Coffey, James
Brassel, and John Tully, it calls attention to the fact that the
night after the Harpes murdered Tully “they passed by old Mr.
Stockton’s going toward their father’s-in-law, old Mr. Roberts.” A
point of great human interest is the concise and vivid description
of the two Harpes given in the affidavit prepared by Colonel
Trabue: “The big man is pale, dark, swarthy, bushy hair, had a
reddish gun stock--the little man had a blackish gunstock, with
a silver star with four straight points--they had short sailor’s
coats, very dirty, and grey greatcoats.”

Colonel Trabue, in his _Autobiography_, does not give a copy of his
affidavit, but relative to it, he writes: “I sent out that night
for some neighbors and made arrangements. We sent one man off the
next morning by sunrise to Frankfort to the Governor, that he might
have it published in the newspapers. Mr. Wood’s and Mr. Stockton’s
statement I wrote down and had them swear to it, what they knew of
their own knowledge and what Robert Brassel had told them. I sent
another man down to Yellow Banks [should read Red Banks] to General
Samuel Hopkins with the news and the statement. I directed the men
to go as fast as they could, and spread the news as they went;
it was also immediately put in the newspapers. The man I sent to
General Hopkins was John Ellis. As he went on he spread the news.
He happened to go the same route the Harpes had taken. When they
heard of him they pursued and tried to overtake him. Ellis had a
good horse and went sixty or seventy miles a day. The whole state
got in a great uproar, because it was uncertain which route the
murderers would take.”

The two messengers sent by Colonel Trabue rode over trails that
wound through a sparsely populated wilderness where danger in one
form or another was likely to be encountered at any moment. One
rider dashed in a northerly direction about ninety miles, while
the other rushed westward twice that distance. Each “spread the
news” along his route, and from every settlement he passed, the
report--“The Harpes are here”--was hurriedly sent out. The warning,
in comparatively little time, reached practically every family in
Kentucky and many in Tennessee. The press verified the reports and
soon the people saw for themselves in “black and white,” which was
then considered the garb of “gospel truth,” that the Harpes had
returned to Kentucky and were guilty of crimes even more brutal
than any heretofore perpetrated.

The Frankfort _Palladium_, on August 15, 1799, published the names
of four men and on what day in July each was killed by the Harpes,
and concludes its paragraph with the statement that “we are happy
to hear they are closely pursued and sincerely hope they will
ere long meet the punishment which the atrocity of their crimes
demands.” _The Western Spy and Hamilton Gazette_, of Cincinnati, on
September 3 published a Frankfort news item giving practically the
same facts and expressing the same hope.

Such widespread terror and fear as was aroused by the raid of
the Harpes found expression, no doubt, not only in the _Kentucky
Gazette_ and the _Palladium_, but in all the papers published
in Kentucky and Tennessee. Stewart’s _Kentucky Herald_, of
Lexington, the _Mirror_, of Washington, Mason County, Kentucky,
and the _Gazette_ and the _Impartial Observer_, both of Knoxville,
Tennessee, were in existence at the time. Careful research in
these four papers has failed to reveal any allusion to the Harpes,
for the copies available are of other dates than those likely to
mention these outlaws in their presentation of current events. It
is possible that a number of current newspapers in the east and
south printed more or less about the Harpes and thus warned the
people of the possibility of their sudden appearance. As we shall
see later, the _Carolina Gazette_, of Charleston, South Carolina,
in its issue of October 24, 1799, devoted twenty-five lines to the
Harpes. This story, in all probability, was not its first and only
paragraph relative to them.

Although the alarm was being spread by the people and the press,
and many a man had prepared to slay the outlaws, the report of the
latest butchery was soon followed by another. The day after Colonel
Trabue sent the messengers to Frankfort and Henderson, the Harpes
traveled up Marrowbone Creek and, about twenty-five miles south of
Colonel Trabue’s home, stopped at an out-of-the-way place on which
John Graves and his thirteen-year-old son were cultivating a crop
and making preparations for the rest of the family to join them.
[63]

The Harpes arrived at their cabin late in the evening and got
permission to spend the night. “Early in the morning, probably
before the Graveses awoke, they, with Graves’ own axe, split the
heads of both open and threw the bodies of both in to the brush
fence that surrounded the house.” “There they lay,” writes Draper,
in one of his note books, “until some one, seeing so many buzzards
around, made an investigation and discovered what had taken place.”
[12E] This tragedy was announced in the _Palladium_ of August 22,
in a paragraph quoted from the _Guardian of Freedom_, Frankfort,
Kentucky. The statement then published is another verification of
the notes made by Draper many years later.

From the Graves cabin they traveled north twenty miles or more into
Russell County to the home of old man Roberts, the reputed father
of the two women Big Harpe claimed as wives. The only reference
to this “old Mr. Roberts” is in Colonel Trabue’s affidavit sent
to the Governor of Kentucky in August, 1799. Local tradition has
nothing to say about Roberts--when he came or left, or where his
cabin stood. Evidently he was still living in Russell County
in 1802, for in November of that year Reverend Jacob Young, a
Methodist preacher, met “a brother-in-law of the infamous Micajah
Harpe,” who, although his name is not stated in the preacher’s
autobiography, must have been a son of the “old Mr. Roberts” in
order to qualify for the connection. At any rate, two of the Harpe
women were doubtless invited by their father to remain with him.
If, however, such an invitation was not extended, the women would
have appealed to him for help had they been inclined to reform, and
he, as many other fathers would have done, might have consented to
make an effort to lead them from the vile associations into which
they had fallen. What these two daughters might and should have
done they failed to do. They clung to their companions in crime and
with them fled westward south of Green River toward Mammoth Cave
and Russellville.

While on the way the Harpes killed a little girl and a negro boy.
Writers do not agree as to just where and when these two murders
took place. It is likely they were enacted while the Harpes were
going to Logan County and that they led up to a third child-murder
even more inhuman. The first of these tragedies, as briefly related
by Breazeale, is that “they met with a negro boy going to mill,
dashed the boy’s brains out against a tree, but left the horse and
bag of grain untouched.” The other recorded by Collins is equally
brief: “One of their victims was a little girl found at some
distance from her home, whose tender age and helplessness would
have been protection against any but incarnate fiends.”

They soon reached Logan County. There, according to T. Marshall
Smith, they discovered, about eight miles from Drumgool’s station,
now Adairville, the two Trisword brothers, who with their wives,
several children, and a few black servants, were camping for the
night. The next morning before sunrise, while the emigrants were
still asleep, the Harpes and two Cherokee Indians made a wild
attack on the tent occupied by the travelers and killed the entire
party except one of the men, who ran for help. When the rescuing
party arrived upon the scene it found the ground covered with the
bodies of the dead, some of them badly mangled. While several of
the men were occupied burying the dead, others were looking for
evidence of the direction the outlaws had taken.

This account, because it lacks verification, is not here presented
as one true in its details. It is known, however, that as a result
of this tragedy or because of some other atrocity committed
about this time by the Harpes, William Stewart, sheriff of Logan
County, organized a party of about a dozen men to search for the
highwaymen. This pursuing party, having reason to believe that
the outlaws were traveling south, rushed toward the Tennessee
line. In the meantime, however, the cunning Harpes were working
their way northward. They stopped a few hours about three miles
northeast of Russellville, on the Samuel Wilson Old Place, about
half a mile up Mud River from what is now Duncan’s bridge over Mud
River on the Russellville and Morgantown road. There the Harpes
watered their horses at the same spring that quenched the thirst of
the hundreds of people who a few weeks before attended the Great
Revival conducted by the Reverends John and William McGee and James
M’Gready. Samuel Wilson, an eye witness, in his description of
this religious meeting, says: “Fires were built, cooking begun,
and by dark candles lighted and fixed on a hundred trees around
and interspersing the ground surrounded by tents, showing forth
the first, and as I believe still, one of the most beautiful camp
meetings the world has ever seen.” This was one of the first of the
Great Revival meetings that so spontaneously stirred what was then
called the West. The Harpes doubtless knew or inferred from the
condition of the place that it had been used recently for religious
purposes. [121]

The Harpe men had no patience with their children and often
reprimanded the three women, declaring that the crying infants
would some day be the means of pursuers detecting their presence.
They frequently threatened to kill them. To protect their babies,
the mothers many a night went apart, carrying their children
sufficiently far away to prevent their cries being heard by the
unnatural fathers. But the long-feared threat was at last carried
out. [12F]

It is a strange sequence of events that on this same camp ground
and almost immediately after the Great Revival, one of the Harpes
killed his own child in the presence of its mother. A large maple
tree still marks the spot near which this deed was enacted.

The details of this murder as given today by tradition are
practically the same as those published by T. Marshall Smith: “Big
Harpe snatched it--Susan’s infant, about nine months old--from its
mother’s arms, slung it by the heels against a large tree by the
path-side, and literally bursting its head into a dozen pieces,
threw it from him as far as his great strength enabled him, into
the woods.” This terrible tragedy is briefly referred to by Hall
and Breazeale, both of whom state that Big Harpe, just before
his death, declared he regretted none of the many murders he had
committed except “the killing of his own child.”

The traditions of today and the three early writers just referred
to are probably wrong as to the kinship that existed between the
murdered child and its murderer. Draper, in his sketch of the
Harpes, gives a more flexible statement: “Tradition says they
killed one of their own children.” They had only three children
and all of them were born in the Danville jail. Big Harpe’s boy,
born to Betsey, and his girl, born to Susan, lived many years,
as is shown later. The child that was so cruelly murdered by Big
Harpe could have been no other than the daughter of Sally, who
had married Little Harpe. So, in all probability, if Big Harpe
committed the crime, his brother’s child was the victim.




The Harpes--Big Harpe’s Ride to Death


Rumor had it that the Harpes had left the neighborhood of
Russellville, going south, and were probably making their way to
west Tennessee. In the meantime, however, two small families had
wandered into Henderson County, Kentucky, and were living in a
rented cabin on a small farm on Canoe Creek, some eight miles south
of Red Banks or Henderson. About twenty miles southwest of this
point, near the headwaters of Highland Creek, were Robertson’s Lick
and, west of it, Highland Lick. A few miles east of these, near the
present town of Sebree, was Knob Lick.

The Highland Lick road and a few trails led to these salt licks,
and, because of these roads and the salt wells with their “salt
works,” many pioneers considered the section a very desirable one
in which to live. Settlers were constantly coming for a bushel or
two of salt and then returning home. The coming and going of people
therefore attracted less attention along the Highland Lick road
and its by-paths than in most other sections. And since only a few
months before about fifteen outlaws had been killed in Henderson
County, and all the others had been driven out [124] there was
little likelihood of undesirable persons appearing on the scene.
Principally for this reason, the two small families of recent
arrivals on Canoe Creek attracted no particular attention, and
least of all were they suspected of being notorious criminals. A
good description of the Harpes was in wide circulation, and through
General Hopkins they became especially well known in the lower
Green River country. The return of the Harpes seemed as improbable
as a second bolt of lightning in the same spot.

John Slover lived about a mile from the cabin rented by the new
arrivals, but had seen them only once or twice and then from a
distance. Slover’s career as an Indian fighter in eastern Kentucky
was well known to his friends and acquaintances and was often the
subject of discussion at fireside talks. In fact, his escape from
Indian captivity was so singular and romantic that John A. McClung
devoted a whole chapter to it when, in 1832, he published his
_Sketches of Western Adventure_.

One day Slover was hunting near Robertson’s Lick, writes Draper in
his “Sketch of the Harpes,” and, after killing a bear in the woods,
returned to a path leading homeward. While leisurely riding along
he heard the snap of a gun that failed to fire. Quickly turning in
the direction of the sound he recognized his two new neighbors,
well armed and wilder looking than Indians in battle. Comprehending
the great danger of an encounter with two fierce men apparently
prepared for murder, the experienced Indian fighter put spurs to
his horse and escaped. Slover reported this experience to some of
his friends and ventured the opinion that the two men were the
Harpes. None doubted that an unsuccessful attempt had been made to
shoot him but, on the other hand, none agreed with him that the
Harpes had returned and were loitering around the licks.

A day or two later a man named Trowbridge left Robertson’s Lick to
carry some salt to a farm on the Ohio near the mouth of Highland
Creek. Trowbridge never returned, and his disappearance remained a
mystery until a few months later when one of the Harpe women made
known the facts. Trowbridge was killed by the Harpes about eight
miles above the mouth of Highland Creek and his body sunk in the
stream.

When General Hopkins received a report of Slover’s narrow escape,
although doubting the presence of the Harpes, he detailed a number
of men to watch the place on Canoe Creek. While loitering around
their cabin the Harpes evidently not only wore clothes different
from those in which they were seen by Slover, but also managed to
change their general appearance to such an extent that Slover,
inspecting them from a distance, did not recognize the two men as
the same who had attempted to shoot him. The women were nowhere
seen by the spies, for, as learned later, they were waiting for the
Harpes to meet them at some designated place and time. The guards,
after watching the house about a week without results, quietly
returned to their homes, not realizing that the two suspected men
were aware of their movements.

The next day the Harpes started toward the hiding place of their
women and children. They traveled south about fifteen miles to
the home of James Tompkins on Deer Creek, not far from what was
then known as Steuben’s Lick, near which place, according to one
tradition, General Steuben of Revolutionary fame was wounded, some
fifteen years before, by an Indian. They rode good horses. Both
were fairly well dressed and, upon meeting Tompkins, represented
themselves as Methodist preachers. Their equipment aroused no
suspicion, for the country was almost an unbroken wilderness and
preachers as well as most other pioneers, were often seen traveling
well armed. Tompkins invited them to supper, and Big Harpe, to ward
off suspicion, said a long grace at table. In the course of their
conversation one of the Harpes asked their host about his supply of
venison. Tompkins, convinced that he was dealing with men from whom
he had nothing to fear, admitted to shooting no deer lately for the
simple reason that his powder was exhausted and had been for some
time. Big Harpe, with affected generosity, poured a teacupful from
his powder horn and presented it to Tompkins. That same powder,
as we shall see, later performed a most singular service. [28]
Bidding their host a farewell, ministerial in its pretense, the two
desperadoes, pretending to have an engagement some miles south,
took the trail in that direction.

That same evening, however, they made their appearance on the farm
of Squire Silas McBee, one-half mile northwest of Tompkins’ place.
Squire McBee was a justice of the peace and had been active in
fighting outlaws. The murderers were, therefore, very much disposed
to butcher him. It was early in the evening and the moon was
shining brightly when they approached his house. The Squire kept a
half dozen dogs for bear and deer hunting and, hearing an uproar
among them, the McBees went to the door to investigate the cause.
They saw the pack fiercely attacking two men, but, suspecting that
the intruders might be of an unwelcome character, made no effort to
restrain the hounds. After a fierce fight with the dogs, the Harpes
withdrew.

Foiled in their attempt at Squire McBee’s, they proceeded about
four miles northwest and late that night reached the house of Moses
Stegall--about five miles east of what later became the town of
Dixon. Stegall (also spelled Steigal, and various other ways) was
absent, but his wife and their only child, a boy of four months,
were at home and had, only a few hours before, admitted Major
William Love, a surveyor, who had come to see Stegall on business.
Mrs. Stegall, expressing an opinion that her husband would return
that night, invited him to remain. He climbed to the loft above
on a ladder on the outside of the house and was in bed when the
new arrivals entered the cabin. [57] Stegall at one time lived in
Knox County, Tennessee, [21] and evidently was acquainted with the
Harpes, for Mrs. Stegall knew them but had received instructions
from the Harpes never to address them by their real names in the
presence of a third person. [12E] Major Love came down and met
the two men, little suspecting who they were. In the conversation
that followed the murderers themselves inquired about the Harpes
and, among other things, stated that, according to rumor, the two
outlaws were then prowling around in the neighborhood. [27]

Mrs. Stegall, having only the one spare bed in the loft, was
obliged to assign it to the three men. After Major Love had fallen
asleep one of the Harpes took an axe which he always carried in his
belt and, with a single blow, dashed out the brains of the sleeping
man. The two villains then went down to Mrs. Stegall’s room. She,
knowing nothing to the contrary, presumed Major Love was still
asleep. While reprimanding her for assigning them a bed with a man
whose snoring kept them awake, they proceeded to murder her and her
baby. After gathering some bedding and clothing, among which was
Major Love’s hat, and leaving the three bodies in the house, they
set it afire. [27] It was soon a smoking ruin.«11»

Such, briefly, is the account of the killing of Mrs. Stegall
as given by all writers who describe this tragedy and as still
told in western Kentucky by those who are familiar with local
traditions. Breazeale, however, published some details which are
very characteristic of the inhumanity of the Harpes, but which are
not woven into any of the other versions. They are probably omitted
more for the reason that the accounts are sufficiently gruesome
without them than because of the possibility that such brutality
might be questioned.

This version has it that on the morning the two Harpes burnt
Stegall’s house, they arose and asked Mrs. Stegall to prepare
breakfast for them. She consented to do so, explaining that since
her child was not well and she had no one to nurse it the meal
would necessarily be somewhat long in preparation. The men then
suggested that she place the baby in the cradle and let them
rock it. This she did. “After Mrs. Stegall had prepared their
breakfast and the ruthless and savage murderers had partaken of her
hospitality, she went to the cradle to see if the child was asleep,
expressing some astonishment (as Micajah Harpe acknowledged when
he was afterward taken) that her child should remain quiet for so
great a length of time.... She beheld her tender, harmless, and
helpless infant lying breathless, with its throat cut from ear to
ear.... But the relentless monsters stayed not their bloody hands
for the tears and heart-broken wailings of a bereaved mother. They
instantly dispatched her, with the same instrument (a butcher
knife) with which they had cut the throat of the child; then set
fire to the house and fled.” [21]

Before leaving the Stegall farm they stole Major Love’s horse and
one belonging to Stegall. They concealed themselves along the road
that ran between Stegall’s and McBee’s, reasoning that if the
Squire saw the light of the burning house, he would hasten there
in the morning over this road and thus easily become their victim.
While lying in wait for McBee, the outlaws halted two men named
Hudgens and Gilmore, who were returning from Robertson’s Lick with
packs of salt. The Harpes accused them of murdering the Stegall
family and burning the house. The charge was denied, but when the
two prisoners were told they must appear before Squire McBee to
prove their innocence, they willingly submitted to arrest. While
marching them along, Big Harpe purposely dropped behind and shot
Gilmore through the head, killing him instantly. Hudgens, seeing
this, ran away, hoping to escape, but was overtaken by Little
Harpe, who snatched from him his gun and with it beat out his
brains. [12L]

The murderers then resumed their hiding place, watching for the
approach of the expected McBee. In the meantime, John Pyles and
four other men from Christian County, returning from Robertson’s
Lick, found the Stegall house a smouldering ruin, with not a human
being in sight. Surroundings indicating that the disaster was still
unknown in the neighborhood, they proceeded to McBee to notify
him of their discovery. They were unmolested by the Harpes, who
doubtless felt confident that the men would later return over the
same road with McBee and thus give them the hoped for chance to
shoot the justice of the peace from ambush.

McBee knew nothing of the fire until John Pyles reported it. He
immediately rode to the home of William Grissom (or Grisson) who
lived about a mile north of Stegall’s. It so happened that he took
a short trail instead of the main road and thus providentially
escaped the Harpes. He and Grissom, armed and well mounted,
accompanied by Grissom’s family, rode to the Stegall home. They not
only found the house burned to the ground, as described by John
Pyles, but also discovered in the ashes the half-burned remains
of Mrs. Stegall and Major Love. They then proceeded to McBee’s
house, fortunately taking the same short cut over which the Squire
had ridden in the morning. They had scarcely dismounted when
Moses Stegall rode up. Then, for the first time, Stegall heard of
what had happened to his family since he left home. The necessity
of organizing a pursuing party had already been agreed upon and
Stegall was sent to Robertson’s Lick for volunteers. [12M]

That same afternoon or night the Harpes and their women and two
children, with all their goods and horses, began their flight. The
next morning Stegall returned with John Leiper, Matthew Christian,
and Neville Lindsey. These four, with Silas McBee, William
Grissom, and James Tompkins, constituted a party of seven daring
backwoodsmen, who were prepared to pursue and capture the Harpes,
regardless of what danger and hardship the effort might involve.

Then began the chase after the Harpes--a chase made so cold and
dramatic by its results, that for more than a century every
minute detail of it has been sought by historians and by all
who are curious about those full moments when life and death
look each other in the eye with the event hanging on the balance
of an instant. Various have been the accounts printed, nearly
all agreeing in the main features but differing in those small
details, the rendering of which seems to excite as it satisfies the
curiosity of the mind. The most accurate account of this chase of
death was published in September, 1842, in _The Western Literary
and Historical Magazine_. It was prepared by the distinguished
historical collector and author, Lyman C. Draper, who rendered
invaluable service to western annals by gathering and preserving
more data pertaining to the early history of the Middle West than
any other man of his generation. His “Sketch of the Harpes” was
written, as he is careful to explain, after a long conversation
with Squire Silas McBee himself. After its publication the
narrative was submitted for correction to Squire McBee, who made
but four almost immaterial changes, all of which are noted in the
account to follow.

It is well at the outset to point out that Silas McBee was a man
of education and wide experience, more competent than any of the
others engaged in this whirlwind chase to observe and give an
account of all that occurred. He was born in 1765, fought as a
youth at King’s Mountain, as he had in other Revolutionary battles
and Indian wars. He was a brave soldier, an enthusiastic hunter,
and an ideal pioneer of public spirit and character. In Alabama
he served as a member of its first legislature. After living in
western Kentucky, where for many years he did much for the general
good, he removed to Mississippi and died there in 1845 at the age
of eighty. [41] One of his daughters was the wife of Governor
T. M. Tucker, of Mississippi, and another the wife of United States
Senator Thomas H. Williams, of the same state.

Here is the McBee narrative of that famous chase:

“Mounted, and equipped, and provisioned for a few days, the little
troop started about noon on their expedition against the Harpes,
leaving their women and a faithful old negro servant with a few
guns, to defend the temporarily fortified domicil at McBee’s. The
trail of the Harpes was soon struck south of the road leading to
the Lick; and after pursuing it a few miles, a spot was reached
where the outlaws had evidently dispersed a large drove of
buffaloes, with the design, doubtless, of so tramping down and
tangling the wild grass and shrubbery as to render it difficult, if
not impossible, to discover their course of flight. The pursuing
party understood the stratagem, and though a little puzzled at
first, they soon regained the trail, which, however, forked off at
a little distance--the party dividing, followed each for a mile or
two when the elliptical forks again united. After this they had no
difficulty in keeping the path. At nightfall they halted and camped
on the bottom of the western shore of Pond River, a considerable
tributary of Green River. Their simple repast despatched, and
horses secured, they retired to rest--the earth their bed, a wallet
their pillow, and their only covering the broad canopy of heaven.
That night they slept with an eye half open, but nothing occurred,
save a smart dash of rain, to require particular notice.

“Early the following morning the pursuit was resumed, fording Pond
River with ease, and riding on rapidly till an hour after sun up,
when a couple of dead dogs were found in the trail, recognized as
having belonged to the unfortunate Hutchins and Gillmore whom the
Harpes had so wantonly murdered. From the fact that the bodies were
not swollen in such hot August weather, it was inferred that the
dogs had not long been killed, and that the fugitives could not
be far ahead. They had probably killed the dogs to prevent their
barking, and thus the better to enable them to make good their
escape. It was now proposed by Squire McBee, in order to advance
with the least noise, that four of the most expert footmen should
dismount and push on as rapidly as due regard to caution would
permit, leaving the horses for the remaining three to lead along
more leisurely, yet keeping within hailing distance in case of
need. Leiper, Steigal, Christian, and Lindsay, accordingly went
ahead on foot, while McBee, Grissom, and Tompkins followed with
the horses in charge. The pursuit continued in this manner for
a mile or so, when, not finding the outlaws, the footmen again
mounted their horses, and all went on together. But a short time
elapsed before Squire McBee discovered the ruffians on a distant
hill-side, a strip of low land intervening--both on foot with guns
in hand, Big Harpe having a horse by his side, and both holding a
parley with a person on horseback [corrected by Draper to _afoot_]
whom they had apparently just met. McBee exclaimed ‘there they
are,’ pointing towards them, and at the same time putting spurs
to his horse dashed over the low ground and made for the spot.
Big Harpe instantly mounted and darted off in one direction, and
Little Harpe on foot in another, while the other individual rode
[corrected by Draper to _ran_] rapidly towards McBee, and when
within sixty or eighty yards suddenly dismounted [Draper eliminated
‘dismounted’] and betook himself to a tree. Seeing this bellicose
demonstration on the part of an armed man, McBee in the excitement
of the moment, drew up his gun, loaded with two balls, and ‘blazed
away’ at that part of the body exposed to view, both bullets
taking effect, one passing through the right thigh, and the other
the right arm. At this moment Steigal recognised the wounded man
as a settler living up Pond River some two or three miles; and
perceiving some of the rest of the party in the act of levelling
their pieces, Steigal exclaimed ‘don’t shoot, it’s George Smith!’
The unfortunate man, who knew Squire McBee, now calling him by name
apologised for his singular conduct by saying, that he was nearly
bereft of his senses, expecting every moment that the Harpes would
kill him, and when he _treed_ he had not recovered from his fright
and was totally unfitted to perceive the folly and madness of the
act. Little Harpe, he said, had met him with his gun in one hand,
and a kettle in the other, going after water; and made enquiries
about the settlements, speaking in an elevated tone, evidently
that his brother might hear from the camp, not more than eighty
rods distant, and come to his aid--such at least was the effect,
intentional or not, for Big Harpe rode up and dismounted, and had
been there but a few moments when McBee and his party unexpectedly
made their appearance. Smith desired Squire McBee to assist him
home, which with pleasure he consented to do after the Harpes were
secured. He redeemed his promise, and in time Smith recovered both
from his fright and his wounds [corrected by Draper to read: ‘Smith
hobbled home by himself and in due time etc.’].

“After they broke and ran, the outlaws were instantly out of
sight. A little search enabled the pursuers to discover the camp,
which proved to be a natural room perhaps fifteen feet square,
under a shelving rock projecting from the cliff of a ridge facing
the south, with a large rock directly in front, leaving but a
narrow entrance--affording altogether a very secluded and safe
retreat, susceptible of easy defence. The pursuing party were
rather cautious in approaching the camp, but Little Harpe’s woman
alone remained. When questioned about the Harpes, she frankly said
that Big Harpe had just been there, mounted each of his women on
a good horse, and darted off in great haste. She was asked to
point out the direction they had taken, which she readily did--the
men, however, in their hurry, overlooked the trail and returned
to the camp. Squire McBee, thinking she had purposely deceived
them to gain time for Big Harpe and his women, raised his gun and
threatened to kill her instantly if she did not give the correct
information; upon which she went and pointed it out precisely as
she had described it. After perhaps half an hour’s delay in finding
the camp and parleying with the woman, the pursuers again proceeded
with all possible haste, bent on the destruction of Big Harpe, and
fully determined that nothing should divert them from their purpose.

“Squire McBee was left to bring on the prisoner, whom he mounted on
one of the outlaw’s horses, and, though thus encumbered, he kept
nearly up with the party. When about two miles from the camp, Big
Harpe was again discovered on a ridge a short distance ahead, and
some of the party halloed to him to stop, upon which he abandoned
his women to their fate, and dashed on alone--Leiper, in the
meantime, making an ineffectual shot at the fugitive. Tompkins
and Lindsey were left in charge of the two captured women, while
Leiper, Christian, Grisson, and Steigal renewed the chase with
increased animation. Leiper not being able to draw his ramrod,
owing to its swollen condition from the rain of the preceding
night, had exchanged guns with Tompkins. The fleeing outlaw was
closely pressed, Christian, Steigal, and Grisson each giving him
a shot in the pursuit--Christian’s alone taking effect, wounding
him in the leg. Harpe, discovering that Leiper was considerably
in advance of the others, and supposing his gun empty, concluded
to take advantage, as he thought, of the circumstance, and get a
fair shot at his dangerous adversary. He accordingly stopped his
horse, and while renewing his priming, Leiper took unerring aim,
and fired--and the same powder which the outlaws had a few days
previously given Tompkins, now sped the ball that mortally wounded
Big Harpe. Though badly shot through the spine of his back, the
wounded ruffian, determined to sell his life as dearly as possible,
levelled his gun at Leiper; but even that deserted him in his
hour of need--_it snapped_! and he threw it away in disgust. As
Leiper and Christian were rapidly advancing upon him, Steigal and
Grisson having lagged far behind, Harpe drew a large tomahawk and
brandished it furiously to keep off his pursuers, at the same time
urging on his jaded horse as well as he could. Leiper and Christian
kept close at hand, repeatedly calling upon him to surrender, when
he would again brandish his tomahawk in savage defiance. He finally
agreed to surrender himself if they would stop their horses;
accordingly they all reined up, Leiper and Christian dismounted and
made some demonstrations towards loading; perceiving which, Harpe
suddenly dashed off. Leiper’s horse, which had been standing by his
side, though not held by him, now took fright and darted off after
Harpe’s horse. Seeing the accident, Christian instantly mounted
his steed and quickly overtook the runaway horse, returned him to
Leiper, and both without loading renewed the pursuit. They easily
followed the trail through a small canebrake of thick growth, and
just as the fugitive was emerging from it they overhauled him, not
more than half a mile distant from where he had taken French leave.
His horse was walking quite leisurely, and Harpe’s wonted daring
and bravery seemed to have forsaken him; and, faint from the loss
of blood, he had either lost his tomahawk or thrown it away. They
rode up and pulled him from his horse without resistance.

“Just at this moment Squire McBee came up with his prisoner in
charge; and Steigal and Grisson soon after joined the party. The
dying outlaw, as he lay stretched upon the ground, begged for
water, and Leiper took a shoe from one of Harpe’s feet, and with
it procured some for him near by. McBee now told him that he was
already dying, but they should hasten his death; time, however,
would be given him for prayer and preparation for another world--to
which he made no reply, and appeared quite unconcerned. When asked
if he had not money concealed, he replied that he had secreted a
pair of saddle bags full in the woods on an eastern branch of Pond
River, some twenty miles from its mouth. From his description of
the branch, and their knowledge of the country, they concluded that
there was no such water-course, and gave little or no heed to his
story; but a report, however, has gained some currency--for the
truth of which we cannot vouch, that a considerable sum of specie
has been found, within a few years, near the head waters of Pond
River.

“Steigal, after reminding Harpe how unfeelingly he had murdered his
wife and only child, drew a knife, and exhibiting it to him, said
in plain terms that he intended to cut his head off with _that_!
‘I am,’ said the dying outlaw faintly, ‘but a young man, but young
as I am I feel the death-damp already upon my brow; and before I
die I could wish that old Baldwin might be brought here, as he is
the man who instigated me to the commission of all my crimes.’ This
Baldwin, a very suspicious character, lived at Green Tree Grove,
in the then adjoining county of Livingstone, now called Caldwell;
and though subsequently tried, he was acquitted, nothing positive
being proven against him. When they had somewhat recovered from the
fatigue of the chase, after perhaps an hour’s delay--during which
Harpe lay on the ground upon his right side, unable from weakness
to raise himself, and rapidly ebbing his life away--Steigal
stepped forward and pointed the muzzle of his gun at the head of
the expiring outlaw, who conscious of the intention, and desirous
at least of procrastinating it dodged his head to and fro with an
agility unexpected to the beholders, manifesting pretty plainly
a strong disrelish ‘to shuffle off this mortal coil.’ Perceiving
this, Steigal observed, ‘very well, I believe I will not upon
reflection shoot him in the head, for I want to preserve _that_
as a trophy;’ and thereupon shot him in the left side--and Harpe
almost instantly expired without a struggle or a groan. Steigal,
with the knife he had so menacingly exhibited to Harpe, now cut
off the outlaw’s head. Squire McBee had with him a wallet in which
he had brought his provisions and provender--in one end of this,
Steigal placed the severed head, and some articles of corresponding
weight in the other, and then slung it behind him across his horse,
and all commenced their return. Thus died Big Harpe, long the
terror of the west, and his decapitated body was left in the wilds
of Muhlenberg county, as unsepulchred as his merited death was
unwept and unmourned.

“After the party left the scene of decapitation they re-joined
Tompkins and Lindsay, who had been left in charge of the two women
of Big Harpe, and they all proceeded to the camp of the outlaws,
which they gave a careful examination. Nothing of any value was
discovered, save a dollar and a half in small change pieces. Ten
horses in all were recovered and restored to their several owners.
That noble animal which Big Harpe rode, and which had belonged to
Major Love, was conveyed to his widow, but did not long survive
that terrible ride.

“The head was conveyed to the cross-roads within half a mile of
Robertson’s Lick, and there placed in the forks of a tree, where
for many years it remained a revolting object of horror. To this
day the place where that bloody trophy was deposited is known as
_Harpe’s Head_, and the public road which passes by it from the
Deer Creek settlement to the ‘Lick,’ is still called _Harpe’s
Head Road_. In subsequent years a superstitious old lady of the
neighborhood, some member of whose family was afflicted with fits,
having been told that the human skull pulverized, would effect a
certain cure, thus appropriated that of the memorable outlaw of the
west.”

[Illustration: LEXINGTON, _Sept. 10_.

The two murderers by the name of Harps, who killed Mr. Langford
last winter in the wilderness, and were arrested and broke the
Danville goal, killed a family on Pond river, by the name of
Staple on the 22d day of August, and burnt the house; a party of
men pursued and overtook them and their women; the Harps parted.
Micajah Harp, took two of the women off with him; the men pursued
him, and in riding about 10 or 12 miles, caught him, having
previously shot him. He confessed the killing of Mr. Stump on Big
Barren; he also confessed of their killing 17 or 18 besides; they
killed two men near Robertson’s Lick, the day before they burnt
Staple’s house. They had with them eight horses and a considerable
quantity of plunder, seven pair of saddle bags, &c. They cut off
his head. The women were taken to the Red banks. The above took
place on Pond river in the county of Muhlenburg.

FACSIMILE OF NEWS ITEM REGARDING CAPTURE OF MICAJAH HARPE

Dated Lexington, Kentucky, September 10, 1799, and published in the
Carolina Gazette, Charleston, S. C., October 24, 1799]

Thus ended the career of “one of the most brutal monsters of the
human race.” And Little Harpe, having escaped the pursuers, resumed
elsewhere, as we shall see later, his life of outlawry. The capture
of Big Harpe is briefly described by Breazeale, Collins, Hall, and
a few other historians, but none goes into details as does Draper
in the sketch quoted. Each of these writers, however, presents
some circumstance not mentioned by the others. Some writers say
Big Harpe made a confession before he was killed; others are
absolutely silent on that feature, neither affirming nor denying
it. Local tradition, the current newspapers, and Breazeale are
among those who state that Big Harpe made a confession. It is more
than probable that he did. _The Kentucky Gazette_ of September 5,
1799, prints a statement to the effect that he confessed to killing
about twenty people. Colonel G. W. Sevier, about 1840, recalled
the number as about thirty-one. [12G] The number of their victims
noted in this sketch up to the death of Big Harpe is twenty-eight,
exclusive of the Triswords of whom there were probably about ten.

The report that Big Harpe had been captured and beheaded and that
Little Harpe had escaped spread rapidly throughout Kentucky and
Tennessee, and was soon verified by the state press. Among the
newspapers beyond the boundaries of these two states that announced
this news was _The Carolina Gazette_, of Charleston, which, in its
issue of October 24, 1799, published a paragraph on the subject,
dated Lexington, Kentucky, September 10, which is here reproduced
in facsimile.

History and local tradition have it that Big Harpe was killed in
Muhlenberg County, two miles west of Unity Baptist Church [110]
near what has since been known as Harpe’s Hill. An oak tree four
feet in diameter, which until 1910 stood about a hundred yards
from Pond River on the old Slab Road leading from Harpe’s Hill to
“Free Henry” Ford, was always pointed out as the tree under which
Big Harpe was beheaded and his headless corpse lay until it was
devoured by wild animals. On the south slope of Harpe’s Hill, about
a mile and a half east of Pond River and a few steps off the road
leading to “Free Henry” Ford, is a large isolated rock known as
Harpe’s “House.” It was at this so-called “rock house” that the
Harpes were camping when overtaken by the pursuers. [109]

After Big Harpe had been disposed of and the women held as
prisoners, the pursuers began their victorious march to Robertson’s
Lick, a distance of some thirty-five miles, there to display the
head and to warn Little Harpe and all other outlaws what to expect
should they attempt any depredations. Draper, as we have already
seen, states that before the men started on their return, Stegall
placed the severed head in one end of a wallet and some articles of
corresponding weight in the other end and then swung it across his
horse. The same historian, in one of his note books, wrote: “Big
Harpe’s wife was made to carry the head by the hair some distance;
while slinging it along she kept muttering, ‘damn the head!’”
[12G] Another account is that the men, knowing they would be
obliged to camp out for the night and require more food than still
remained, took some roasting ears from a field along the route and
having no other means of carrying them, put them unhusked into the
bag with Big Harpe’s head. Later, when the corn was taken out and
prepared for supper, one of the men refused to eat “because it had
been put into the bag with Harpe’s head.” [21]

The head was carried to the neighborhood where the two Harpes had
committed their last crime. Authors vary somewhat in the details
of just how this gruesome object was displayed as a warning to
outlaws, but all agree that it was put up by the side of the
highway (about three miles north of what later became the town of
Dixon) near the forks of the road running south from Henderson,
one branch of which extended to Marion and Eddyville and the other
to Madisonville and Russellville, Kentucky. The old road became
known as Harpe’s Head Road, and its successor, the Henderson and
Madisonville Pike, still bears that name.«12»

The captors had traveled about thirty-five miles before they
reached the spot decided upon as the most fitting place to display
the head. Continuing their journey some twenty miles further they
arrived in Henderson and there placed the three women in “the
little log dungeon, then located on the river bank near the present
bridge”--the railroad bridge erected in 1885. [124] About a week
later they were taken to the court house for trial. The minute book
of the Court of Quarter Sessions briefly shows, on pages 4 and 5,
what disposition was made of them by that court, an exact copy of
which is here given as extracted from the records in the curious
courthouse jargon of that day:

    “At a Court of Quarter Sessions called and held for the County
    of Henderson on Wednesday the 4th day of September, 1799, for
    the examination of Susanna Harpe, Sally Harpe, and Betsey
    Roberts, committed to the jail of this county for being parties
    in the murder of Mary Stegall, James Stegall an infant, and
    William Love at the house of Moses Stegall in this County and
    in burning his house and robbing and stealing the horses, goods
    and effects of the said Moses Stegall on the night of the 20th
    day of August last.

    “Present Samuel Hopkins and Abraham Landers Esquires.

    “The said prisoners were set to the bar in custody of the
    Sheriff of this County and being charged with the felony
    aforesaid denied the fact sundry witnesses were thereupon sworn
    and examined and the said prisoners heard in their defence
    by their att’e on consideration whereof it is the opinion of
    the Court that the said prisoners are guilty of the facts
    charged against them and that they ought to be tried for the
    same before the Judges of the District Court holden at Logan
    Courthouse on the first day of their next October Court, and it
    is therefore ordered that the said prisoners be remanded to
    the jail from whence they came there to remain until removed by
    due course of law.

    “John Leiper, Nevil Lindsey, Matthew Christian, and Isham
    Sellers severally acknowledged themselves indebted to his
    Excellency James Garrard Esquire, Governor of this Commonwealth
    in the sum of fifty pounds each to be levied on their lands
    and tenements goods and chattels respectively and to our said
    Governor and his successors rendered in case they fail to
    appear as Witnesses, on behalf of the Commonwealth before the
    Judges of the District Court holden at Logan Courthouse on
    the first day of their next October Term, and then and there
    give evidence against Susannah Harpe, Sally Harpe, and Betsey
    Roberts charged with felony.

                              “(Signed) SAM HOPKINS.”«13»

A search recently made for details regarding this examining
or preliminary trial resulted in the finding of a bundle of
papers labeled “1799,” in which were discovered four depositions
pertaining to the arrest of the Harpe women. They were made
September 4, by the four men who on that day were put under bond to
appear at the trial in Russellville, to which place the case was
ordered for trial. These old documents substantiate the statements
made by Squire McBee to Lyman C. Draper who wove them, with other
details, into his account of the capture of the Harpes. The
depositions show that Moses Stegall arrived at Robertson’s Lick on
August 22, 1799, to procure volunteers to join in the chase.

Matthew Christian in his testimony recites that immediately after
Stegall came to Robertson’s Lick with the news of the murder he
started for Stegall’s farm and became fully convinced that the
report with all its terrible details was true. He then proceeded
to Grissom’s house, which had been designated as a rallying point,
preparatory to going to Squire McBee’s the following morning.
Although it was not known that Grissom’s family had left home and
gone to McBee’s to remain during the proposed pursuit, the men,
nevertheless, met at this designated place “where they tarried all
night.” Christian “found a paper fas’d to the door of Wm. Grayson’s
[Grissom’s] house, signed by Silas Magby and directed to Moses
Stegall in the following words: ‘Come to my house without delay,’
and a jacket hanging up at the said door supposed by the company
to belong to Major William Love. That he from there went to Silas
Magby’s in company with John Leiper, Nevil Lindsey, and Moses
Stegall, that on their way to Magby’s he heard a gun go off which
he supposed was fired by one of the prisoners who had committed
the felony.” This note was apparently a forgery and shows that
the Harpes had planned to kill Stegall; and since it is more than
likely that the outlaws had already started on their flight, this
attempt to waylay Stegall indicates that the Harpes must have been
associated with some accomplice living in the neighborhood, with
whom they prearranged this move.

Isom Sellers’ statement shows that on August 16, four days before
the Stegall fire, the three Harpe women stopped at John Leiper’s
house and inquired the way to Moses Stegall’s and that Sellers
“being indebted to Susannah Harpe one dollar gave her an order
upon Moses Stegall for the said sum which this deponent saith
that Moses Stegall has informed him he has paid agreeable to the
aforesaid order.” There is nothing to indicate the specific purpose
of this statement; however, it is further evidence that Stegall
was acquainted with the Harpes and he may have served as a spy or
messenger for them.

Nevil Lindsey’s deposition gives a detail not mentioned in any
printed sketch or oral tradition: “Three case-knives were stuck
into the body of Mrs. Stegal, one of them was buried in so deep
that the fire which consumed the house would not burn the handle.”

John Leiper asserts that when they “had rode about forty-five miles
they came up with Sally Harpe standing on the ground and ... to
show them the way they had gone went with them for that purpose,
that after riding about a mile and a half they came up with Susanna
Harpe, Betsey Roberts, and Micajah Harpe, they rode by the two
women and followed Micajah Harpe for about four miles, when this
deponent overtook and killed him.”

Christian’s deposition states that Big Harpe, before he died,
“asked for water and that John Leiper went to Pond River and
brought him some in a shoe.” The depositions of both Leiper and
Christian end in practically the same words: “That the said Micajah
Harpe a little while before he expired told this deponent that
Susannah was his wife and that he wished she could come up and
wished her to do better in the future and that the whole of them
would do better in the future, escrowed as he was, and that he
would acquaint her with one thing that was hid.”

Two days after their examining or preliminary trial, the three
women and two infants were sent, by order of Judge Samuel Hopkins,
to Russellville, Logan County, there to appear before the judges
of the District Court, which court at that time embraced Henderson
County. There is no history or tradition as to how the three
women were conducted to “Logan Courthouse.” They probably were
taken on horseback. The minutes of the next term of the court of
Quarter Sessions held in Henderson contain a few items that throw
some light on the expense of holding and then transferring the
prisoners, the total being $281.78.

These entries indicate that the prisoners were accompanied by the
sheriff and five guards and that the county attorney and county
clerk took part in the second trial. The prisoners and their guard
left Henderson September 6, and after traveling the ninety-five
miles, the women were turned over to the sheriff to await their
trial, September 28.«14»

Major William Stewart was sheriff of Logan County at the time.
He more than once had chased the Harpes for many a mile, only
to discover that he was going in the wrong direction and to
become irritated by his failure. He was, notwithstanding his
eccentricities, a just man and one on whom a person in need might
depend, and the three women, realizing this, must have felt
encouraged, not only by the prospect of receiving justice, but also
of having mercy shown them. Draper, in his notes on information
supplied by George Herndon, a Revolutionary soldier, who long lived
in Logan County, writes: “The women were, of course, in his charge,
and lodged in the old log jail, becoming dirty and lousy, Major
Stewart, feeling for their miserable situation, agreed to let them
enjoy the liberty, provided they promised not to attempt to escape
and thus make him liable, for he did the act on his individual
responsibility. They were rejoiced at the offer and he went around
the little town and collected some necessary articles of clothing
for them, had them and their children cleaned up, placed them in
the courthouse and got a couple of spinning wheels and set them to
spinning.” [12F]

Smith says the murders committed by the Harpes in this section
of Kentucky were too fresh in the minds of the people living in
and near Russellville and the suspicion that the women had been
accomplices in their crimes was too strong to fail to arouse a
hatred for the three women. When threats were made to tear down the
log jail and lynch the prisoners, the sheriff secretly conveyed
them into the country, where they remained until brought back for
trial.

This statement probably is not true. It may have originated from
the fact that Stegall and some of his friends rode to Russellville
for the purpose of killing the women should they be acquitted.
Discovering Stegall’s motive, Stewart put the Harpe women back in
jail, pretending “it would never do to turn such characters loose
upon society,” but the next night he hid them in a cave about five
miles from town and thus shielded them from the revenge-seeking
Stegall who, a few days later, returned home. [28]

An examination of the minute book of the old District Court
preserved in Russellville, shows that on Monday, October 28,
1799, a grand jury having been empaneled, “made the following
presentment: Commonwealth against Susanna Harpe, Sally Harpe, and
Betsey Roberts, a true bill.” A District Court was presided over
by a judge and two associate judges, and Judges Samuel McDowell
and John Allen being absent, the women, rather than delay the
trial, agreed to be tried before the one who was present, namely,
Judge James G. Hunter. Judge Felix Grundy appeared in behalf of
the women, and no one, except the prosecuting officer, against
them. Each prisoner was tried by a different jury, the three trials
taking place on October 29th and 30th. “Susanna Harpe, late of the
County of Henderson and parish of Kentucky, spinster, who stands
indicted of felony was led to the bar in the custody of the public
jailor and pleads not guilty to the Indictment, and for her trial
hath put herself upon God and her Country and the Attorney General
in behalf of the Commonwealth, likewise whereupon came a jury,
to-wit: [twelve men are named] who being tried ... and having heard
the evidence, upon their oaths do say that the Susanna Harpe is not
guilty of the murder aforesaid.”

Then followed the trials of “Betsey Roberts, spinster,” and “Sally
Harpe, spinster,” both of whom were found “not guilty of the murder
aforesaid.” No depositions or other records of the proceedings of
these three trials can now be found among the various old documents
still preserved in the Logan County Court House. The women were
liberated and the act seems to have met the approval of the public.

Major Stewart, in his capacity as sheriff, had many opportunities
to talk to his prisoners. Some of the incidents in their lives
could not have failed to touch the heart of any man, especially
when heard from the lips of the women themselves. Forty years after
the Harpe women had been captured, an interview with him on the
subject was arranged to procure facts for publication. From this
interview we quote:

“Major Stewart said the women seemed grateful to him, and related
with apparent candor the story of their lives and their connection
with the Harpes. They told him that their husbands had once been
put in jail in Knoxville, Tennessee, upon suspicion of crime,
when they were innocent; when released, they declared war against
all mankind, and determined to murder and rob until they were
killed. They said they might have escaped after the murder and
robbery at Stegall’s, but for the detention at the branch where
Smith was shot. Big Harpe, expecting to be pursued, proposed that
the three children be killed, that the others might flee without
that encumbrance. His two wives and brother consented after some
discussion, but the wife of Little Harpe took her child off to
the branch where she had seen a projecting, shelving rock, under
which she placed it, and lay down at its outer side, determined to
remain and die with her child. As her husband came to the branch
to let her know they had concluded to put the children to death,
he saw Smith, the horse hunter, approaching. He moved toward him,
and sounded the shrill whistle on his ‘charger’--the understood
signal of impending danger. Big Harpe almost in a moment made his
appearance at the branch mounted on Love’s mare, when the firing
commenced. Smith was shot down and the Harpes fled. Big Harpe did
not go directly to the camp, but circled around it, fearing the
pursuers might already have taken it. These sudden and unexpected
events saved the lives of the children by allowing no time for
their execution. Little Harpe’s wife and child hastily returned to
the camp, when the firing took place a little distance below the
shelving rock, and were made prisoners with the wives and children
of Big Harpe.” [28]

The same delay that resulted in the capture and death of Big Harpe
brought about a great change in the lives of the Harpe women. But
Major Stewart, in the interview given forty years after the women
had been in his charge, evidently was somewhat mistaken in some
of the details and in the identity of some of the characters he
recalled. There never were more than three Harpe children and all
of them were born in the Danville jail. We have seen how the child
of Little Harpe’s wife was killed a few weeks before the women were
arrested and taken to Henderson; it is later shown what became of
Big Harpe’s children, both of whom were with their mothers in the
Russellville jail. It is quite likely that when Big Harpe realized
the pursuers were close at hand, he proposed that the children be
killed and that then Little Harpe’s wife took the two infants and
“determined to remain and die” with them. A few weeks before, she
had seen her own child cruelly murdered by Big Harpe, and probably
had, ever since, awaited a chance to escape from the violence and
villainy of the lives led by the Harpes. She doubtless concluded it
would be far better for her and the two infants to fall into the
hands of the pursuers than to kill the infants, even though the
killing of them would relieve the five Harpes of an encumbrance
which they considered sufficient to interfere with their escape.
At any rate, the desire of Little Harpe’s wife to free herself,
combined with her effort to save the two infants, exercising itself
as it did at this critical moment, delayed the attempt to escape
and resulted in the capture and killing of Big Harpe.«15»




The Harpes--Mysteries and Fate of Survivors


Big Harpe was dead, Little Harpe had vanished into the wilderness
and the women had again been spared through public sympathy with
their apparent helplessness and misfortunes. What was to become
of them and of Little Harpe and of the seven determined men who
had run down the gigantic monster? How were these men rewarded for
their heroism? The records, hunted down with the utmost patience,
constitute a new story in which mystery, tragedy, suspicion and
pathos all enter to bring about poetic justice. It enables us also
to get closer to these terrible personalities.

First as to the seven avengers. On December 16, 1799, the Kentucky
Legislature passed “An Act directing the payment of money to John
Leiper and others.” The preamble stated that “Micajah Harpe, a
notorious offender” had committed “the most unheard of murders” and
the Governor on April 22, had offered a reward of three hundred
dollars “for the apprehension of said Harpe.” It recites its
enactment because “sundry good citizens ... were, while in the
attempt to apprehend him, reduced to the necessity of slaying him,”
and further declares by its enactment all doubt as to the right
of these men to the reward is removed. The money was ordered paid
to “John Leiper, James Tompkins, Silas McBee, Mathew Christian,
Moses Stegall, Neville Lindsey, and William Gresham ... one hundred
of which shall be appropriated to the said John Leiper, and the
residue to be equally divided among the others.”

The second clause shows that “Alexander M’Farling, John M’Farling,
Daniel M’Farling, and Robert White, who from motives of public good
incurred very considerable expense and toil in the pursuit of the
said Harpe and his associates ... be allowed one hundred and fifty
dollars.” These four men probably lived near Danville, and, as
previously noted, had been appointed by the governor to take charge
of the Harpes should they be found “in any adjacent state.”

Five of the men who captured and killed Big Harpe fared well.
Tompkins and Matthew Christian continued to live in Henderson
County, where they died old and highly respected citizens. William
Grissom, about 1810, moved to southern Illinois where he continued
the life of a well-to-do farmer. Neville Lindsey was identified
with the development of west Tennessee. Squire Silas McBee opened
up a plantation in Pontotoc County, Mississippi, and ranked among
the best and most prominent men in that state. It was there, in
1841, he met the historian Draper, to whom he supplied much data
relative to King’s Mountain and also the facts used for his “Sketch
of the Harpes.”

As for Stegall and Leiper, the immediate executioners of Big Harpe,
no sooner had they sprung into public notice by reason of their
acts, than they were enveloped in a mystery of suspicion almost as
deep as that surrounding the Harpes themselves. It has grown deeper
with time, though their deaths within eight years after the tragedy
of the death chase rendered the suspicion more sinister and seemed
to confirm it.

It appears that John Leiper had not only seen the Harpes before
he joined the band in the chase, but was strongly suspected of
having been secretly involved in some of their crimes committed in
central Kentucky. In April, 1799, when Colonel Trabue’s boy was
killed by the Harpes, “Leiper then resided in Adair County and knew
the Trabue family well.” [12E] He probably lived near “old Mr.
Roberts,” the father-in-law of Big Harpe, who then had a farm in
that part of Adair County which, in 1825, became a part of Russell
County. Hypocrite that he was, in all likelihood, he joined some of
the men who had gone out to hunt the murderer of John Trabue. For
some reason he left that section shortly after the Harpes appeared
on the scene. He may have feared that the two outlaws had planned
to establish themselves near “old man Roberts” and therefore went
to Henderson County, where he was least likely to see them again,
and so escape any vengeance they might see fit to execute upon him
for joining the posse. Thus, not to begin a better life but to
escape death, he left Adair County for parts unknown. On July 3, of
the same year, the Henderson County grand jury found an indictment
against him for “living in adultery with Ann L. Allen, from the
20th day of last May.”

When Leiper was asked to join in the Harpe chase it was observed
that he hesitated, saying he had no proper horse for such work, but
that if Captain Robert Robertson’s could be procured, he would go.
When such arrangement was made, Leiper boastingly declared that
if he got sight of either of the Harpes he “would stick to the
chase until he killed them or they killed him.” Later, when Leiper
and Christian overtook Big Harpe, shortly before he was killed,
the outlaw called to Leiper, “I told you to stay back or I’d kill
you,” and Leiper replied, “My business with you is for one or
the other of us to be killed.” These and other remarks, as later
interpreted by the other pursuers, indicated that more than a
casual acquaintance existed between Leiper and the Harpes. Although
applauded for taking part in the killing of Big Harpe, and thus
ridding the country of a scourge, he was nevertheless condemned for
his motive in doing so. He “died suddenly of winter fever some time
during the winter of the cold Friday” (Friday, February 6, 1807).
Up to the day of his death he was looked upon as a suspicious
character by all his neighbors and so, being unworthy of trust and
an outcast, lived and died friendless. [12E]

Moses Stegall was at first the hero of heroes in the returning
band. He had suffered the loss of his wife, child, and home, and it
seems that fate itself had destined him to strike the last deserved
blow. He had been regarded as a questionable character, yet no
one could trace any particular crime to him. The report of the
tragic manner in which he had put an end to Big Harpe kept in the
background, for a time, all unfavorable reports heretofore heard.
But it soon became apparent that he, too, had a hidden motive in
taking so active a part in the pursuit of the outlaws. It was
recalled that when he discovered that Big Harpe had been wounded,
but was still able to talk, he had stepped forward and deliberately
cut off his head. This act was, at the dreadful instant, regarded
by the excited spectators as one highly deserved as far as Harpe
was concerned, but for Stegall it was soon suspected to have been
an act whereby he could silence the tongue of a dangerously wounded
man who might still survive sufficiently to reveal some of the
lawlessness in which Stegall himself was implicated. That this
was his motive is verified by a number of authorities. Draper,
after a conversation with General Thomas Love, of Tennessee, who
was a cousin of Major William Love, and whose wife was a cousin
of Thomas Langford, noted this: “The company, before his arrival,
had some confession from Harpe, and Stegall was afraid he would
be implicated and wanted him out of the way, for Stegall bore a
bad character. Parson Henry says it was suspected that Stegall
purposely left his home to give the Harpes an opportunity to kill
his victims.” [12E]

Forty years after Big Harpe was killed, a preacher traveling from
Lexington, Kentucky, by way of the Henderson and Harpe’s Head
Road to Mammoth Cave, heard the tradition of the capture of Harpe
as then told in the neighborhood where Stegall lived. Relative
to Stegall’s motive, he wrote: “As for Stegall, he never bore a
good character and his excessive zeal and forwardness created
new suspicions against him as being an accomplice of Harpe whom
he might wish effectually to prevent from betraying him by a
precipitate death under colour of vengeance.” [38]

Governor John Reynolds, in his comments on the notoriety of some of
the settlers who, in pioneer days, lived in Illinois near Ford’s
Ferry and Cave-in-Rock, pictures the last scene in Stegall’s life:
“In 1806, at the place, ten miles from the Ohio, where Potts
resided afterwards, on the road west of the river, a bloody tragedy
was acted. A man named Stegall--the same who assisted to kill one
of the Harpes in Kentucky--eloped with a young girl and made the
above place his residence.... Two or three brothers of the seduced
girl, and her father, followed them from Trade Water, Kentucky,
the residence of the father.... They found Stegall and the others
sitting up under a gallery outside of the cabin, with a lamp
burning. The assailing party advanced in silence and secrecy, near
Stegall, and shot him without doing any of the others any injury
whatever ... and brought back the deluded girl to her home and
family.” [102]

Thus within about a half dozen years after Stegall and Leiper
helped to capture Big Harpe they had passed into the Great
Beyond. Tradition insists that but for the persistence of these
two men, the other five would have abandoned the hunt for the
Harpes--as many others had done elsewhere--and both outlaws, in all
probability, would have escaped to add more crimes to their long
list.«16»

Such is the story of the Harpes and their principal crimes. No
doubt regarding these crimes existed in the various localities.
How many similar deeds they actually committed will never be
discovered, for in the sparsely settled country isolated settlers
could, and often did, disappear without leaving any trace of their
fate and in many instances travelers who were killed were missed by
no one.

There also hangs somewhat of a veil of personal mystery over these
criminals. Who were the Harpes and what sort of men were they in
appearance and bearing? Who were the three women that, from choice
or because of terror of their mates, lived through such terrible
experience with them, bore children to them and so became forever
linked with the history of these horrible outlaws?

Whether or not the two Harpes were brothers and the two “wives” of
Big Harpe sisters, is, after all, a question that is not definitely
settled by any authoritative record or direct testimony that
has yet been produced. At this date it seems unlikely that any
further proof of their origin, names or relationship will ever be
discovered. When they were active it was necessary to their safety
to assume various false names. They changed clothing to such an
extent as they could, in order to avoid pursuit and capture, as
well as to avoid suspicion among those they might later approach as
intended victims.

They certainly seem to have been brothers in crime and brutality;
but were they brothers by birth? The supposed wife and the
“supplementary” wife of Big Harpe were, in the same degree, sisters
in their toleration of his crimes, but were they actually sisters
through one sire? Throughout the story the view has been taken that
the two men were brothers and the two women sisters, for such was
the prevailing belief. All the contemporary and early subsequent
accounts so refer to them, except Smith, who, in his _Legends of
the War of Independence_, published in 1855, says the men were
first cousins. He designates Micajah or “Big” Harpe as “William
Harpe,” a son of John Harpe, and Wiley or “Little” Harpe as “Joshua
Harpe,” a son of William Harpe, who was a brother of John Harpe.
Smith also represents Susan, the wife of Big Harpe, as a daughter
of Captain John Wood, and Betsey, Big Harpe’s supplementary wife,
as Maria Davidson, a daughter of Captain John Davidson. Their
fathers, he says, were North Carolinians, both captains in the
Revolutionary army, but in no wise related by blood. Concerning the
two women, he says that they were abducted by the Harpes and became
their “involuntary wives.” He ignores the fact that the two women
seem to have taken no advantage of any of the chances they had to
escape from these villains, and is likewise apparently ignorant
of the fact that the third woman, Sally Rice, the wife of Little
Harpe, was associated with the outlaws during their most outrageous
actions. This same writer says that “Big Harpe and Joshua Harpe”
fought at King’s Mountain in October, 1780, and were about twenty
years old at that time, whereas all other records show the two men
could not then have reached the age of ten.

Smith cites no authority for his various statements, although in
the preface to his book he declares that he obtained his materials
for his pioneer day sketches by questioning survivors of the times
and the events. It is also observed that no other writers of that
time present authority for the statements they make as to the
origin and relationships of the Harpe band.

Breazeale, himself a resident of Knoxville, had opportunities
to gather on the ground early recollections of them. In 1842 he
wrote that when the Harpes appeared there in 1797 or 1798, they
“professed” to have come from Georgia, “represented” themselves
to be brothers, and “said” their name was Harpe. He is careful to
add, “whether their real name was Harpe or not, no one knew; nor
was it ever ascertained where they had been born and brought up, or
who were their relatives.” As they soon turned out to be thieves
and were driven away from the neighborhood of Knoxville, it is at
least possible that the relationship, the name and all else they
gave out might have been assumed and false in order to cover their
tracks from a former place. After the murder of Langford in Lincoln
County in 1799, they were both indicted under the name of Roberts,
which they had evidently assumed and under which they pleaded and
were held. It may be suggested here that if Roberts was the true
name of Big Harpe’s two “wives,” a shrewd criminal would, it seems,
hesitate to assume it as an alias, for the name would help identify
him. After their escape from the Danville jail the governor in his
proclamation of reward for their capture called them “Harpe alias
Roberts,” which shows that their actual names were unknown. It is
reasonable to assume that they used false names as the necessity
arose. When, in Henderson County, they represented themselves as
“preachers,” they must have used fictitious names for the occasion.
The name of Harpe became so full of terror and their description
as “big” and “little” brothers was so broadcast, that change of
name, appearance and pretended occupation was necessary to their
safe movement. It will later appear that Little Harpe, after his
escape from Kentucky, assumed various names, none of which he had
used before and one of which he signed under oath to an official
document.«17»

Having told of some of the deeds the Harpes committed, an effort
is now made to picture to the readers how the monsters looked who
could and did commit these crimes. The career of the Harpes was so
swift and so veiled by its criminal nature, that the opportunities
to examine in detail their appearance and manner was very brief.
“Dead men tell no tales” and since those who saw the Harpes at
their work were usually victims, they could leave no record. Those
who have left descriptions received them from others who had had
them second hand. When the difference in observers and conditions
is considered, and when the disguises and changes of attire
and situation are allowed for, it is surprising to find that a
plausible and convincing portrait is made of Big Harpe.

As already stated, Judge James Hall, in April, 1824, published in
_The Port Folio_ a brief account of one of the crimes committed
by the Harpes, and having been accused of having written a story
“unworthy of belief,” he published in the same magazine about a
year later an account of another of their murders and convinced his
critics and other readers that his stories of the Harpe atrocities
were true. Judge Hall evidently continued his investigation of
the Harpes, and seems to have made a special effort to gather
data relative to their personal appearance. He realized that
fiction is often a better visualizer of persons and their acts
than is formal history. So when, in 1833, he published his romance
entitled _Harpe’s Head_, and later republished it under the title
of _Kentucky, A Tale_, his readers were given a striking picture
of the Harpes, and especially of Big Harpe. In his preface to this
romance he states that although the tale is the “offspring of
invention,” nevertheless “two of the characters [the two Harpes]
introduced are historical and their deeds are still freshly
remembered by many of the early settlers of Kentucky.” Their
acts were, he explains “of a character too atrocious for recital
in a work of this description ... and have therefore been merely
introduced into a tale wholly fictitious.”

Judge Hall’s description of Big Harpe is as follows:

“His appearance was too striking not to rivet attention. In size
he towered above the ordinary stature, his frame was bony and
muscular, his breast broad, his limbs gigantic. His clothing
was uncouth and shabby, his exterior weatherbeaten and dirty,
indicating continual exposure to the elements, and pointing out
this singular person as one who dwelt far from the habitations of
men, and who mingled not in the courtesies of civilized life. He
was completely armed, with the exception of a rifle, which seemed
to have only been laid aside for a moment, for he carried the usual
powder horn and pouch of the backwoodsman. A broad leathern belt,
drawn closely around his waist, supported a large and a smaller
knife and a tomahawk. But that which attracted the gaze of all ...
was his bold and ferocious countenance, and its strongly marked
expression of villainy. His face, which was larger than ordinary,
exhibited the lines of ungovernable passion, but the complexion
announced that the ordinary feelings of the human breast were
extinguished, and instead of the healthy hue which indicates the
social emotions, there was a livid, unnatural redness, resembling
that of a dried and lifeless skin. The eye was fearless and
steady, but it was also artful and audacious, glaring upon the
beholder with an unpleasant fixedness and brilliancy, like that
of a ravenous animal gloating upon its prey and concentrating all
its malignity into one fearful glance. He wore no covering on his
head, and the natural protection of thick, coarse hair, of a fiery
redness, uncombed and matted, gave evidence of long exposure to the
rudest visitations of the sunbeam and the tempest. He seemed some
desperate outlaw, an unnatural enemy of his species, destitute of
the nobler sympathies of human nature, and prepared at all points
for assault or defense.”«18»

It is a vivid, splendid sketch full-length; a portraiture in
full keeping with the idea of a super-criminal and his crimes.
In all points except one it is sustained as to its faithfulness
by the scattered fragments of description that have come down
to us from others speaking independently. The disputed point is
the color of his hair. Instead of the “fiery redness” that Hall
has set down every other witness makes it black. The fact quite
well agreed upon that Little Harpe’s hair was red, suggests that
in this particular Hall’s memory confounded the two. In Governor
Garrard’s proclamation offering a reward for their capture, Big
Harpe is described as being “about six feet high, of robust make,”
“built very straight,” “full fleshed in the face,” “ill-looking
downcast countenance,” “his hair black and short but comes very
much down his forehead.” Trabue says “the big man is pale, dark,
swarthy, has bushy hair.” Breazeale says he was a “very large,
brawny-limbed, big-boned man” and “of a most vicious, savage and
ferocious countenance,” while Stewart [12F] reports him as “among
the tallest class of men, say six feet two to six feet four inches”
and with “sunken black eyes, a downcast, sour look; dark hair and
high cheek bones.” As to the hair being short or long, Draper, as
already stated, recorded in one of his unpublished note books the
pungent and grim picture of Big Harpe’s wife being compelled, after
his death, to carry his decapitated head some distance “by the
hair.” There were evidently times when the hair of both Harpes was,
by force of circumstances, long and times when it was short during
that terrible year they scoured the wilderness. But Big Harpe’s
hair was probably black or dark and may have been curly.

Little Harpe seems to have passed comparatively unobserved in the
presence of his gigantic elder. Governor Garrard’s proclamation
does not even mention Little Harpe’s height, but says he “is very
meager in his face, has short black hair, but not quite so curly
as his brother’s, he looks older, though really younger.” His
countenance was also “downcast.” Hall says he “was smaller in
size, but having the same suspicious exterior, his countenance
equally fierce and sinister.” Breazeale passes his appearance
over, while Stewart, who probably got his account of Little Harpe
from the latter’s wife while she was in his custody, merely says
he was “somewhat under common size, had light hair, blue eyes
and a handsome look.” It may be thought that the wife formulated
that description to lead his pursuers astray. But the Frankfort
_Guardian of Freedom_, of February 29, 1804, four years after Big
Harpe’s death, contained an extract “from a letter from a gentleman
in the Mississippi territory,” written January 8, 1804, in which
is noted the arrest and trial of two outlaws in Greenville,
Mississippi, one of whom, although he gave another name, “was
proved to be the villain who was known by the name of Little or
Red-headed Harpe and who committed so many acts of cruelty in
Kentucky.” Red hair was the particular mark of Little Harpe.

Curiosity as to the three women must be satisfied with even a
less personal account and description. Hall in his _Harpe’s
Head_, merely says of them: “Two of them were coarse, sunburnt,
and wretchedly attired and the other somewhat more delicate and
better dressed.” Major Stewart, who had them in personal charge for
some time and saved them from being lynched, says that Susan, Big
Harpe’s first wife, was “rather tall, rawboned, dark hair and eyes,
and rather ugly,” and was about twenty-five years old. Betsey, the
“supplementary” wife, he described as “rather handsome, light hair
and blue eyes and a perfect contrast with her sister.” Sally, the
wife of Little Harpe, he records was “really pretty and delicate,”
about twenty years old, but he gives no word of description. It
is to be assumed that when Major Stewart saw them they had been
restored to cleanliness and decent attire. [12F]

One is tempted to pause and reflect upon these three women, all
young and once innocent as other girls, who had so swiftly ridden
the “hurricane of all horrors” with two such men, had borne them
children as nomads do traveling the desert. One had had her child
snatched from her arm by Big Harpe and seen its brains dashed out
against a tree. Yet apparently not one of the three attempted
to escape her fate, although frequently separated and having
opportunity to do so. The normal man accustomed to normal women
wonders what they looked like and in what respect the horrors
of their experience had affected them. In the absence of all
description that curiosity cannot be gratified.

The two wives of Big Harpe, if they were really sisters, and
daughters of “old Mr. Roberts” mentioned but once in the pitiable
record, had a brother of whom the Reverend Jacob Young, in his
_Autobiography of a Pioneer_, has drawn a portrait scarcely less
vivid than that which Hall drew of his ferocious brother-in-law,
Big Harpe. It is a curious sensation to gaze even upon this brother
of two such women. The wandering preacher tells how, in 1802,
he entered a cabin in Russell County, Kentucky, where he had an
appointment to conduct religious services. While singing to a small
audience that came barefooted and bareheaded, a man of remarkable
size, who was even more poorly clad than the others, walked into
the room. Then follow the preacher’s words:

“Had I not been used to seeing rough men on the frontier of
Kentucky I should have been frightened. I looked him fully in the
eyes and scanned him closely. His hair appeared as though it had
never been combed, and made me think of old Nebuchadnezzar and his
head ‘like eagles’ feathers.’ He wore no hat; his collar was open
and his breast bare; there was neither shoe nor moccasin on his
feet. I finished my hymn, kneeled down and prayed and took my text
to preach. The man looked for no seat, but stood erect gazing on
the preacher. Before I was half through I saw the tears roll down
his rough cheeks. I closed and told them that on that day four
weeks I would be there again. I rode away, but could not forget
the big man. I was sure he had distinguished himself some way,
which made me anxious to find out his history. I soon found out
that he was brother-in-law to the infamous robber Micajah Harpe,
a character so well known in the history of Kentucky. No doubt
they had been together in many a bloody affray. On my next round
he joined the church, and soon afterward became a Christian. He
could neither read nor write. I procured him a spelling book. His
wife taught him to read, and he soon learned to write. On my fourth
round I appointed him class leader. He trimmed off his hair, bought
a new hat, clothed himself pretty well, and became a respectable
man. I heard of him several years afterward, and he was still
holding on his heavenly way.”«19»

But what was the ultimate fate of the Harpe women, whether hard,
commonplace or tinged with compensatory romance? Draper in one of
his note books gives these last glimpses of them:

“Betsey Roberts [the supplementary wife] was married to John
Hufstetter. They lived on Colonel Anthony Butler’s plantation [near
Russellville] as a tenant, and Mrs. Hufstetter became ‘chicken
raiser’ to Mrs. Butler. Many years ago they moved to Red River, in
Tennessee, and thence elsewhere, probably Duck River.... Her child
grew up and was known as Joe Roberts, and the last known of him he
was enlisted in the army.

“Susan Harpe, as she was called, also lived in a cabin on Colonel
Butler’s plantation, six miles south of Russellville, and being
industrious made a living chiefly by weaving. Her daughter,
‘Lovey,’ grew up to womanhood--very pretty, common size, round
features, handsome form, black hair, rather dark skin and a
dark and sometimes bad, devilish eye. Her temper was bad at
school--always pouting and angry--no one associating with her.
Yet it is thought had Lovey Harpe, with her beautiful form and
naturally pretty appearance, been properly brought up, under the
circumstances she would not only have been a belle, but really a
fine woman. But, soured from neglect and obloquy, it is no wonder
she threw herself away. And both herself and her mother were
finally driven from the neighborhood for their bad character--went
to Christian County on the waters of Pond River, where Colonel
Butler had a mill--there old Susan died, and poor Lovey, destitute
and forsaken, went down the Mississippi to Pearl, where, by this
time, Colonel Butler had removed--and with his family went to
Texas....«20»

“When Sally Harpe was tried, her father, Parson Rice, was present,
a man of fine, irreproachable character, and took his prodigal
daughter home near Knoxville. It was said, and doubtless truly,
that Sally was thought a fine girl until she married Wiley Harpe.
In 1820 Major Stewart was at Ford’s Ferry on the Ohio (a few miles
above Cave-in-Rock) and saw Parson Rice, his family, Sally and her
[second] husband moving to Illinois. He did not recognize them,
but thought he knew them, particularly Sally, who eyed him closely
and, after a little, went to one side, sat down and with her face
in her hands, had a weeping spell, doubtlessly recounting her Harpe
adventures, prompted by the presence of one of the few persons who
had treated her with civility and kindness in her wayward career.
After he left them, Major Stewart recollected hearing the old
gentleman called Rice and the identity flashed upon his mind. Sally
Harpe’s daughter had then grown to womanhood and was a fine looking
young lady.” [12F] The girl referred to by Stewart as Sally
Harpe’s daughter was, in all probability, not a daughter of Harpe.

And so vanished from the scene, swallowed up in the events of the
rapidly developing country, all the principals in this terrible
epic of pioneer days.

But Little Harpe’s career was not finished. He continued the life
of an outlaw and after a few years, as we shall see, received his
deserts at the hands of frontier justice.




Mason--Soldier, Pirate, Highwayman


In the pioneer history of the Ohio and Mississippi valley, Samuel
Mason stands as one of the shrewdest and most resourceful of
outlaws. The Harpes were more widely known and were more terrible
characters; their notoriety was due to their great brutality. Mason
robbed along the roads and rivers solely for the purpose of getting
money; the Harpes killed men, women, and children simply to gratify
a lust for cruelty. The two Harpes were the worst and most abnormal
of their kind, while Mason was one of the shrewdest and therefore
one of the most “successful” of bandits.

These three offer the criminologist a field for study of one of the
phases of pioneer life--a life that has long been of interest from
a historical standpoint. Samuel Mason will be cited in history and
criminology as a striking example of a lawless man receiving his
just reward. In the meantime, genealogists will probably continue
to exclude this “black sheep” from his family. An attempt was made
long ago to tear his “branch” from the family tree so that his
name and those of his children would not mar the beauty of a stem
honored with the names of famous men and women. It was without
doubt the frontier life that Samuel Mason entered, and not the
family from which he sprang that made him what he was.

Mason was a most striking and interesting figure. He had excellent
birth; he had been a fighting soldier on the western frontier in
the American Revolution, acquitting himself with courage. It
is not clear how such a man in time of peace developed into a
highwayman and after years of outlawry came to such a terrible
death. A portion of his history is missing and probably will always
remain a mystery, but his criminal exploits will lack the proper
contrast unless his origin and his early services as a patriot are
presented.

He was born in Virginia about the year 1750. Thirty-five years
after his death Draper recorded in one of his note books
that “Mason was connected by ties of consanguinity with the
distinguished Mason family of Virginia, and grew up bad from
his boyhood.” [12H] This has been assumed in some quarters to
connect him closely with George Mason, one of the signers of the
Declaration of Independence, but there is no proof of it. He
was a captain in the American Revolution. Two of his brothers,
Thomas and Joseph, were among the useful, honest pioneers in the
West. They started with George Rogers Clark on his expedition to
Vincennes, but “when Clark reached Louisville he scattered some
of his men among the neighboring stations of Beargrass [near
Louisville].... Of this party were ... Thomas and Joseph Mason,
brothers of Captain Samuel Mason.” [12C] Another brother, Isaac
Mason, married Catherine Harrison, sister of Benjamin and William
Harrison, and as early as 1770 moved from Virginia to Pennsylvania
where he became one of the wealthiest and most influential citizens
of Fayette County. [76] These three Mason brothers, like Samuel
Mason himself, were, each in a different way, products of their
environment and their times. Pioneer times, like most other
periods, produced a variety of characters and Samuel Mason rapidly
developed into a product quite distinct from most men of his day.

It is not often that the lineage of a highwayman can be traced back
to a position so honorably distinguished as that of an officer in
the American Revolution, yet such was Samuel Mason. After fighting
for the freedom of his country he drifted down the Ohio to western
Kentucky and the Cave-in-Rock country and there began a wild and
free career unrestrained by either human or divine law.

Before taking up Mason’s military history it may be well to recall
a few facts pertaining to the American Revolution: The first battle
in that war was fought at Lexington, Massachusetts, April 19, 1775;
the surrender of Cornwallis took place at Yorktown, Virginia,
October 19, 1781. While these and other battles between were being
fought in the colonies along the Atlantic coast, the frontiersmen
west of the Alleghenies were engaged in the same war with the
British and their Indian allies. On June 24, 1778, George Rogers
Clark left Louisville with about one hundred and fifty men and
floated down the Ohio, passing Cave-in-Rock, and at Fort Massac,
near the mouth of the Cumberland, began his march through Illinois;
he captured Vincennes August 1 and thus saved the west for the
American colonies. Between Vincennes and the Old Settlements lay
a vast country held, after many hard fights, by the settlers who
occupied it.

It was in this frontier defense of the upper Ohio River region
that Samuel Mason took part. A complete history of his career as
a Revolutionary soldier cannot, at this late day, be compiled;
but, from the few statements regarding him that appear in printed
history and from a few old documents still extant, sufficient
evidence can be gathered to show that Mason was not only a
soldier, but that he took a very active part in the struggle.

When and where he enlisted is not known. He probably did so
in Ohio County, Virginia (now West Virginia). In the _List of
the Revolutionary Soldiers of Virginia_, issued in 1912 by the
Virginia State Library, his name appears as a captain of the Ohio
County Militia. The earliest record of his military life is one
showing that in May, 1777, he pursued some Indians who had robbed
and killed a family about fifty miles below Pittsburgh. Mason
started from one of the forts above Fort Henry, now Wheeling, West
Virginia, and “at the head of ten militia gallantly followed the
murderers.” Although he killed only one Indian he frightened and
scattered the others so badly that the expedition was regarded a
success. “This brave young man,” says the report written a few days
later, “will no doubt meet a reward adequate to his merit.” [131]

About two months later we find him at Grave Creek Fort, twelve
miles below Fort Henry. He started on another Indian pursuit July
15. On the 17th he wrote an account of this chase and forwarded it
from Fort Henry to General Edward Hand, whose headquarters were at
Pittsburgh. The original letter is in the Draper Collection. More
than a dozen documents signed by Mason are preserved in the Draper
Collection; all are signed Samuel Mason, except one letter, dated
August 12, 1777, which is signed Samuel Meason.«21» The letter of
July 17, 1777, like other documents just referred to, shows that
Samuel Mason was at least sufficiently familiar with the “three Rs”
to attempt to report in his own handwriting some of the operations
of the militia under him. In it he describes how a number of men,
led first by Lieutenant Samuel Tomlinson and then by himself, had
gone in pursuit of Indians and returned after two futile scouting
expeditions. The suggestion made in this letter that he and his
company be transferred to Fort Henry was carried out. [12J]

Fort Henry was a comparatively old place when this letter was
written. The three Zane brothers and a small party of emigrants had
settled there in 1769. The fort was built in 1774 and was at first
called Fincastle. In 1776 the name was changed to Fort Henry in
honor of Patrick Henry, Governor of Virginia. Up to the latter part
of August, 1777, it was not garrisoned by regular soldiery, but its
defense, like that of some of the other frontier forts, was left
to those who might seek shelter within its walls. By 1777 it had
become a flourishing settlement with about thirty houses around it.
Scouts were employed to watch for Indians and a warning from the
men on guard made it possible for all the inhabitants of the place
to retire to the fort on a moment’s notice.

General Hand, expecting an Indian attack on the fort, ordered
Captain Mason and his men to proceed there immediately and help
defend it. Captain Mason arrived August 12, and sent a report the
same day to General Hand that he would “urge and push” the work
and expected to be fully prepared in a few days to resist the
enemy. [12J] By the middle of the month there were less than one
hundred militia stationed at the fort. After all preparations had
been completed the men became impatient, for there was nothing to
indicate the approach of Indians.

On the night of August 31 Captain Joseph Ogle, who with twelve
other men had been watching the path leading to Fort Henry, came
in and reported that no signs of the enemy had been discovered.
That same night, however, four hundred Indians, led by a few
whites, succeeded in placing themselves in ambush near the
fort. They lay in two lines concealed by a corn field. Between
these lines, along a road leading through the corn field, were
stationed six Indians who could be seen by any one entering the
road from the fort, and who were placed in that position for the
purpose of decoying some of the whites within the line. The next
morning--September 1--two men going out after some horses walked
along the road and passed some of the concealed Indians, unaware of
their presence. They had proceeded but a few steps when, to their
great surprise, they discovered the six Indians standing not far
ahead. The two men turned and ran for the fort. One of them was
shot, but the other was permitted to escape that he might give the
alarm.

Mason, hearing there were only six Indians near the fort, proceeded
with fourteen men to attack them. He soon discovered that he had
been trapped by several hundred and that retreat was impossible.
All of his men were massacred. Captain Ogle and twelve scouts,
ignorant of the strength of the enemy, rushed from the fort
expecting to rescue their comrades, but most of them were killed
in the attempt. Of the twenty-eight soldiers who took part in this
bloody battle only five escaped, among them Captains Mason and
Ogle. Mason, after being severely wounded, concealed himself behind
a fallen tree until the Indians withdrew. [140]

Mason’s venture from the fort, it seems, was a daring deed
performed without consideration of its various possible
consequences. Dr. Joseph Doddridge, in one of his manuscripts
written about 1820, says that the garrison was too hasty in
concluding that the warning sent by General Hand was a false alarm,
and further comments that Mason’s act was another instance of the
“folly and rashness of our militia of early times.” [130]

In the light of a knowledge of Mason’s later life, this act of
bravery, foolish though it may have been, suggests that he then
may have had in him the daring necessary for an outlaw, whose
self-assurance of success was too great to give the possibility of
failure serious consideration.

Captain Mason remained at Fort Henry until the autumn of 1779.
His presence there is shown by a score of receipts now in the
Draper Collection, one of which reads: “Fort Henry 27th April
1778 Received fourteen Flints of Zephaniah Blackford for the Use
of my Company Given my hand. Samuel Mason Capt.” [12N] He was on
Brodhead’s Allegheny campaign in August and September, 1779. [130]
After this expedition he retired from active service at Fort Henry
and was succeeded by Captain Benjamin Briggs. Mason was, however,
militia captain in Ohio County, Virginia, as late as May, 1781, as
his attendance at the Courts Martial proves. [76]

Such is, in brief, a glimpse of Mason’s military career as gleaned
from scattered records. In 1845 Draper filed among his manuscripts
a letter which states that “Capt. Mason resided where Daniel
Steenrod’s house now is, two miles east of Wheeling, and kept a
tavern there in 1780.” [12M] Another of his notes is to the effect
that Mason lived on Wheeling Creek at the Narrows, and that in the
spring of 1782 Indians stole some of his negroes. He and a man
named Peter Stalnaker went in pursuit. The Indians, seeing the two
men coming, concealed themselves behind a large rock a little above
the Narrows and from that position they shot and killed Stalnaker.
Mason fled and escaped unhurt. [12A]

Captain Samuel Murphy, whom Draper interviewed in 1846, gave the
historian a number of facts pertaining to the siege of Wheeling
and in his comments on Mason said: “Mason, many years before [i.e.
before he was wounded at Wheeling] had stolen horses from Colonel
Hite [in Frederick County, Virginia] was pursued and overtaken, and
Mason wounded and the horses recovered. Mason’s brother, Colonel
Isaac Mason, was a very respectable man. When Mason subsequently
turned robber, he would give the up-country people a sufficient
sum of money to take them home.” [12B] In _The Casket Magazine_
of July, 1834, William Darby writes: “Well would it have been for
Captain Samuel Mason if he had fallen with his gallant companions
on the field at Wheeling.” Mason evidently did not remain around
Wheeling longer than a year or two after the close of the
Revolution. Why or when he drifted to east Tennessee is not known.

What character of man Mason was when he reached the prime of life
can be gathered from an unpublished paragraph written by Draper
about 1840, after an interview with Colonel G. W. Sevier: “He first
took possession, without leave or license, of some unoccupied
cabins belonging to General John Sevier in Washington County,
east Tennessee, with several worthless louts around him; one was
named Barrow. Mason and his party were not known to work and were
soon charged with stealing from negro cabins on Sabbath days when
their occupants were attending church; and articles thus stolen
were found in their possession. General Sevier gave notice to
Mason, who had by sufferance remained on his place, that he and his
party must leave the country within a specified time. Knowing the
character of General Sevier, that he was a man not to be trifled
with, Mason and his friends wisely took themselves off.” [12H]

We next hear of him in western Kentucky. It is likely that one of
his purposes in going to that section of the country was to take
up the land granted to him for services rendered as a Virginia
soldier in the Revolution. When he moved west is not known. Finley
says he settled on Red River, south of Russellville, in 1781. His
youngest son, as we shall see later, was born in western Kentucky
about 1787, showing that the Masons had arrived some time during or
before that year. In 1790 a petition was circulated by the settlers
in Lincoln County, Kentucky, who were living on the Virginia
military grants between Green and Cumberland Rivers, asking the
General Assembly of Virginia to establish a county south of Green
River. As a result, two years later, all western Kentucky was
formed into a new county called Logan. This petition was signed by
one hundred and fifteen men, among them Samuel Mason and one named
Thomas Mason, who may have been the eldest son of, or one of the
brothers of, Captain Samuel Mason. Inasmuch as its signers, as far
as is known, were “respectable citizens,” it is likely that Mason
was considered such when he signed, either because he tried to be
one or because he succeeded in passing as such.

The petition recites: “That your Petitioners find themselves
sensibly aggrieved by their distance from Courts of Justice, it
being near two hundred miles from this settlement to Lincoln
Court House, by which, when business renders our attendance
indispensably necessary, we are frequently exposed to much danger
in traveling through an uninhabited country, being subject to
fines and other inconveniences, when from high waters, enemies
near our frontiers, or other causes, it is impossible to attend.”
[106] Mason possibly did not then dream that in the near future he
himself would become one of the worst “enemies near our frontiers”
and be regarded as one of the great dangers to which men were
exposed “in traveling through an uninhabited country.”

Mason’s domestic life in the wilderness of the lower Ohio evidently
was, in the beginning, up to the standard of the average early
settler. But in the wild woods, far away from companionship and
influence of law-abiding citizens, the best of men were subject
to deterioration. Men of education, illiterates, and all other
pioneers were alike exposed to this strong influence of frontier
life. Many men who, by their inborn nature or by their own choice
disregarded law and order, necessarily became, by one route or
another, outcasts. Mason fell and fell fast, and became not only
an outcast, but a notorious outlaw. The only argument that can
be presented in his defense is that he was, to some extent, a
peculiar product of his times--only more “highly developed” than
contemporaneous outlaws who were products of the same influences
and environment. It should be added in justice to Mason that,
unlike the Harpes, he was out for booty and that he personally
never shed blood unless it became absolutely necessary for his own
safety.

To what extent Mason had fallen by 1794 can be gathered from an
entry quoted from Benjamin Van Cleve’s diary, made in July of that
year on his return to Cincinnati from Fort Massac. Van Cleve, with
Major Thomas Doyle and a number of other men, left Fort Washington,
now Cincinnati, on March 16, 1794, with ten boats to repair Fort
Massac and to supply the place with provisions. They arrived at the
fort June 12, and three weeks later some of the men, including Van
Cleve, started on their return up the river. On July 8 they landed
at Red Banks, now Henderson. Here are the entries taken from _The
American Pioneer_, published in 1843:

“July 8. [1794] Came to Red Banks.

“July 9. The weather unpleasant, and the company of soldiers
disagreeable. We [four men] determined to quit the boat and travel
the residue of the way by land. Made preparations to set off in the
morning. This place is a refuge, not for the oppressed, but for
all the horse thieves, rogues, and outlaws that have been able to
effect their escape from justice in the neighboring states. Neither
law nor gospel has been able to reach here as yet. A commission of
the peace had been sent by Kentucky to one Mason; and an effort had
been made by the southwest territory (Tennessee) to introduce law
as it was unknown as yet to which it belonged; but the inhabitants
drove the persons away and insisted on doing without. I inquired
how they managed to marry, and was told that the parties agreed to
take each other for husband and wife before their friends. I was
shown two cabins, with about the width of a street between them,
where two men a short time ago had exchanged wives. An infair was
given today by Mason to a fellow named Kuykendall who had run away
from Carolina on account of crimes, and had run off with Mason’s
daughter to Diamond Island station, a few weeks ago. The father
had forbid him the house and threatened to take his life, but
had become reconciled, and had sent for them to come home. The
parents and friends were highly diverted at the recital of the
young couple’s ingenuity in the courtship, and laughed heartily
when the woman told it. She said she had come down stairs after all
the family had retired, having her petticoat around her shoulders,
and returned with him through her parents’ room, with the petticoat
around both; and in the morning she brought him down in the same
manner before daylight. This Kuykendall, I was told, always carried
in his waistcoat pockets ‘devil’s claws,’ instruments, or rather
weapons, that he could slip his fingers in, and with which he could
take off the whole side of a man’s face at one claw. We left them
holding their frolic.

“I afterwards heard that Kuykendall was killed by some of the party
at the close of the ball.

“July 10. Left Red Banks.”

Ministers and certain others, in pioneer days as at present were
licensed to solemnize marriages according to the laws established
by the state. But a compliance with the church law was, in the
eyes of the Masons, a useless form. They disregarded all laws,
as it suited them. In that section of Kentucky the execution of
the laws was in the hands of Captain John Dunn, a Revolutionary
soldier who was one of the first settlers at Henderson and who, in
1792, was appointed its first constable. Starling in his _History
of Henderson County, Kentucky_, says that Captain Dunn was “the
only recognized officer of the law in all this territory” up to
September, 1796, when he was authorized to “raise three men to
act as patrol at the Red Banks.” This increase in patrol became
necessary not only because the number of settlers was gradually
growing larger, but also because the wild conduct of such men as
Mason made it imperative.

That the presence or absence of the patrol was a matter of equal
indifference to the Masons is shown by some notes Draper received
from Mrs. William Anthony, daughter of Captain John Dunn. [12K]
In her letter she writes that Mason and his family were among the
original settlers of Henderson County and that with Samuel Mason
were “a brother-in-law named Duff, and perhaps a son-in-law.”
Whether or not this Duff to whom she so briefly refers was the
counterfeiter Duff is not known. She states that about 1795
Samuel Mason requested Captain Dunn to sign “some instruments of
writing.” Captain Dunn declined to sign the paper, saying he would
have nothing to do with any such “rascal” as he was. This refusal
aroused Mason and a few days later he and four of his men “fell
upon Captain Dunn in Henderson, drew their concealed weapons and
beat him entirely senseless and until they thought he was certainly
dead, and then threw his body over a fence close by. But Captain
Dunn unexpectedly recovered.” Their hatred of Dunn then grew
greater than ever.

Shortly after Captain Dunn experienced this narrow escape from
death Hugh Knox, afterwards Judge Knox, of Henderson, “incurring
the displeasure of the Masons, was badly beaten by them. Others
fared no better.” One day the Masons stole a negro woman and
her two children belonging to Knox and took them to “their then
quarters at the mouth of Highland Creek.” Knox raised a party,
including Captain Dunn, and managed to regain the three negroes.
Dunn’s participation in this rescue aroused the Masons against him
to an even greater degree. One day Thomas Mason, the oldest son
of Samuel Mason, came to Red Banks with his rifle and threatened
to kill Dunn. Mrs. Dunn, hearing of the threat, begged Thomas
Durbin, Dunn’s cousin, who had just arrived with a flatboat going
down the river, to try to pacify young Mason and take the gun from
him. Durbin being a stranger, it was thought he would succeed. But
Durbin had little more than begun talking to Thomas Mason and made
known the object of his interview, when Mason, without any comment,
shot him dead, and fled.

Mrs. Anthony in the same letter to Draper writes: “Late in
December, 1797, early on a cold morning, Captain Dunn, accompanied
by Thomas Smith, started on horseback for Knob Lick, carrying out
corn meal and intending to bring back salt. As they were coming
near the ford on Canoe Creek, three miles below Henderson, Captain
Dunn remarked that many a time, in former years, he dreaded the
crossing of that creek on account of the Masons, as it was so well
fitted to waylay the unwary, but now that the Masons had gone so
far below [to Cave-in-Rock] he no longer apprehended danger from
them. The words were scarcely uttered--they were about midway
the small stream--when the crack of a rifle told too plainly
that villainy yet lurked there. Captain Dunn fell from his horse
into the partly frozen stream. Thomas Smith got but a glimpse of
the person who did the deed; he could not, in the confusion of
the moment, define his features. The wretch darted off and Smith
conveyed Dunn home, where he died in a few hours. When asked if
he knew the person who shot him he answered that ‘it was that bad
man.’ This allusion was probably to Henry Havard, a young man who
was a friend and supposed accomplice of the Masons.” Thus ended
the life of the first constable of Red Banks, and with this killing
the work of the Masons in Henderson County ended. And with his
departure from there, Mason’s life went from bad to worse.«22»

About the time Mason and his gang left Henderson County there
appeared in Red Banks and on Diamond Island a man named May. Mrs.
Anthony calls him Isaac May, some refer to the same man as Samuel
May, but he is best known as James May. He later played a very
important part in Mason’s history. Writing of this outlaw’s early
career, Mrs. Anthony says: “May loitered about Henderson and had
a lame sister with him--at least she passed as such and thereby
excited some remarks. At length May stole some horses and he and
his sister made off and were pursued and overtaken at Vincennes.
May was brought back to Henderson, and the very first night after
they got him there he managed to break away and make his escape,
which he effected by making an extraordinary leap. He joined
Mason’s gang....” He joined Mason in the South and there performed
another extraordinary act of which, as is shown later, Mrs. Anthony
has more or less to say.

During the greater part of 1797 the Masons were established at
Cave-in-Rock. Their headquarters while in and near Henderson seems
to have been changed from time to time. For a while they had a camp
at the mouth of Highland Creek, as stated by Mrs. Anthony, but
most of their time previous to 1797 was spent not far from what
now is the town of Hitesville, in Union County, Kentucky. A small
stream, tributary to Highland Creek, on or near which the Masons
lived, still bears the name of Mason’s Creek. About twenty miles
south of this old camp is “Harpe’s Head,” where two years later the
head of Big Harpe was placed on the end of a pole. About ten miles
northeast of the Mason Creek country is Diamond Island, where many
early pioneers going down the Ohio in flatboats became the victims
of the Masons.

Fortesque Cuming stopped at Diamond Island May 16, 1808, about ten
years after Mason had left it. Commenting on the place, Cuming
says, in his _Tour to the Western Country_: “Nothing can be more
beautifully situated than this fine island.... It is owned by a Mr.
Alvis, a Scotchman, of great property in South Carolina, who bought
it about two years ago [1806] of one Wells, the original locator.
Alvis has a negro quarter, and near one hundred and fifty acres of
land cleared on the Kentucky shore opposite the Island. This used
to be the principal haunt of banditti, from twenty to thirty in
number, amongst which the names of Harper [sic] five Masons, and
Corkendale [Kuykendall] were most conspicuous. They attacked and
plundered the passing boats, and frequently murdered the crews and
passengers. At length the government of Kentucky sent a detachment
of militia against them. They were surprised, and Harper, one of
the Masons, and three or four more were shot, one in the arms of
his wife, who escaped unhurt though her husband received eleven
balls. The rest dispersed and again recruiting, became, under
Mason, the father, the terror of the road through the wilderness
between Nashville in Tennessee and the Mississippi Territory.”

Cuming’s account is fairly accurate, but if by “Harper” he refers
to Big Harpe or Little Harpe, he is mistaken. The “detachment of
militia” that ran out this band of Diamond Island outlaws could
more properly be called a “regiment” of local regulators, for
there is nothing on record to show that any state militia was ever
sent to the island. In pioneer days regulators, as a rule, relied
upon their own “military strength” and exercised it without formal
orders from “official headquarters.”

Diamond Island is about fourteen miles below Henderson. It is
some three miles long and a half-mile wide, and more or less
diamond shaped. In Mason’s day it was covered with gigantic trees
and luxurious vines and presented so wonderful a scene that it
attracted early travelers who passed it. In pioneer days it was,
according to comments written by many travelers, the most beautiful
island in the Ohio. Zadok Cramer in _The Navigator_, published in
1806, says it is a “large and noble looking island.” J. Addison
Richards in his _Romance of American Landscape_ refers to it as
“the crown-jewel in this cluster of the Ohio brilliants.” Thomas
Ashe, whose trip down the Ohio was “performed in 1806,” goes so
far as to say it is “by far the finest in the river, and perhaps
the most beautiful in the world!” About a generation after Mason
and other outlaws abandoned it as a trap for victims, Edmund Flagg
visited the Island and found that “it is said to be haunted.” In
1917 it was, according to one man’s idea, “sure ha’nted.” This
once luxuriant forest island is now a cornfield, celebrated for
its wonderfully fertile soil and for its “Diamond Island Canned
Corn.” All that is left of its former splendor is its size. Its
heavy fringe of cottonwood and willow still attracts attention and
helps repicture the Island as it was in the olden days. The gnarled
roots along the bank and the driftwood piled here and there on the
beach seem to hold dumb the secrets of Mason and his men and the
tragedies enacted there more than a century ago.

Robbery and its booty were uppermost in Mason’s mind and were the
object of his every act. Nevertheless, in selecting Cave-in-Rock,
seventy miles down the Ohio River, as his next headquarters he
chanced to choose a place, judging from the present appearance of
the landscape, that was far more picturesque than Diamond Island.
All the primeval beauty of the Island has long ago disappeared, and
some of the wild charm of Cave-in-Rock and its surroundings has
vanished with the original forest. Flatboat pirates have come and
gone; the Ohio still flows on as majestically and as mysteriously
as ever, but all its flood of waters will never wash away the
legends of tragedies connected with the two places.

Mason made Cave-in-Rock his headquarters during the greater
part of 1797. River pirates were numerous in the old flatboat
days--especially before 1811 when the first steamboat was run from
Pittsburgh to New Orleans. Travelers were warned by those who had
made trips down the river and knew the usual methods followed by
river pirates; but with all their intended precautions and in
spite of all the instructions received many of the inexperienced
became easy prey for the robbers. The Cave had often been used by
travelers as a temporary stopping place and had become a well
known shelter. But the fact that it had also served as a temporary
abode for outlaws seems not to have been widely circulated before
this time. Mason recognized in it a hiding place that offered him
the shelter of a good house and also one that was very convenient
and reasonably safe. Besides, it was peculiarly fitted for his
purpose, for its partially concealed entrance commanded a wide view
both up and down the river.

He also recognized the necessity of enticing his intended
victims into the Cave in an innocent manner or by some unusual
method. Mason’s reputation as an outlaw was beginning to spread.
He overcame the obstacle of publicity by changing his name to
“Wilson.” In order to lull any suspicion he concluded to convert
the Cave into an inn and he and his family therefore fitted it up
for the purpose of accommodating guests. On the river bank where
it could be seen by those going down the stream he raised a large
sign: “Wilson’s Liquor Vault and House for Entertainment.” And
thus it came about that Cave-in-the-Rock was transformed into
Cave-Inn-Rock and finally to Cave-in-Rock.

Daniel Blowe, in 1820, briefly recorded that “Mason’s gang of
robbers made Cave-in-Rock their principal rendezvous in 1797,
where they frequently plundered or murdered the crews of boats
descending the Ohio.” Most historians who touched on the subject
after Blowe’s time publish, with equal brevity, the same statement.
Henry Howe, in his _Historical Collections of the Great West_,
published in 1852, says: “Sometimes Mason plundered the descending
boats but more frequently preferred to wait and plunder the owners
of their money as they returned.” Comparatively few men returned
north by river and it is therefore likely that not many single
boats or small flotillas going south floated by unmolested. In
this connection Judge James Hall comments that the boats that were
permitted to pass the Cave and Hurricane Island, six miles below,
were pointed out by Mason, who on such occasions would jokingly
remark: “These people are taking produce to market for me.” [61]

Mason discovered that many of his men who went south with captured
boats never returned to report, and he realized that sooner or
later an attempt would be made to capture him if he continued his
work at the Cave. He therefore decided to go south. For these and
probably other reasons he, as stated by Monette, “deserted the Cave
in the Rock on the Ohio and began to infest the great Natchez Trace
where the rich proceeds of the river trade were the tempting prize.”

By what means and under what circumstances Mason and his family
moved south is not known. After leaving Henderson County he
remained longer at Cave-in-Rock than at any other one place. His
name is inseparably associated with Cave-in-Rock, both in history
and tradition, but neither history nor tradition has preserved an
account giving the details of any definite robbery committed by
him while there. It is likely that he left the Cave in ample time
to avoid being driven out by a body of men who had been organized
by the merchants of Pittsburgh for the purpose of trying to
exterminate him and all other river pirates. No record of Mason’s
whereabouts during 1798 and 1799 can now be found. During these two
years many robberies occurred along the Mississippi River and along
various trails on the American side of the river from Kentucky to
New Orleans, but the guilty men were seldom captured. A number of
these robberies, on both river and land, were doubtless perpetrated
by Mason under one or more assumed names.

According to Audubon, the ornithologist, the Masons made their
headquarters for a while on Wolf Island, in the Mississippi,
twenty-five miles below the mouth of the Ohio. About 1815, or a
number of years after Mason’s career was closed, Audubon gathered
the following about the famous outlaw’s stay on this island:

“The name of Mason is still familiar to many of the navigators of
the Lower Ohio and Mississippi. By dint of industry in bad deeds,
he became a notorious horse-stealer, formed a line of worthless
associates from the eastern part of Virginia (a state greatly
celebrated for its fine breed of horses) to New Orleans, and had
a settlement on Wolf Island, not far from the confluence of the
Ohio and Mississippi, from which he issued to stop the flatboats,
and rifle them of such provisions and other articles as he and his
party needed. His depredations became the talk of the whole western
country; and to pass Wolf Island was not less to be dreaded than to
anchor under the walls of Algiers. The horses, the negroes, and the
cargoes, his gang carried off and sold.”

In March, 1800, Mason appeared in New Madrid, Missouri, then
Spanish territory, and applied for a passport. This was issued
to him, as appears later, on the recommendation of a man whom he
had met casually at Red Banks (Henderson, Kentucky) and who was
unaware of the real character of the person he introduced. The
passport not only permitted Mason to settle on Spanish territory
with the privilege of purchasing land, but it also served as a
document designating him as a desirable citizen. When he applied
for this permit, he may have resolved to open up a farm and lead
a respectable life. If so, the resolution to reform was of short
duration, for he made no attempt to select a site for a permanent
home. In the meantime he carefully preserved the passport, knowing
it might some day serve, in its way, as a letter of recommendation.
It would also serve as evidence that he had taken an initial step
toward becoming a Spanish subject. Should he confine his land
operations to the American side, and his river piracy to the
waters of the Mississippi, and make none but American citizens
his victims, the chances were he might some day find a safe and
convenient retreat in the Spanish domain west of the river.

During 1800 and the three years that followed, Mason moved over the
country with remarkable activity. A report of a robbery committed
by him on the Natchez Trace, says Monette, was soon followed by an
account of another perpetrated on the Mississippi many miles away,
and vice versa. Men going down the Mississippi, as those going down
the Ohio, encountered many troubles incidental to the running of
boats. They were always exposed to river pirates of whom Mason was
one. Among other hardships to which they were subjected was the
unrestrained authority of the Spanish, who were then in possession
of the land west of the Mississippi and who practically controlled
the navigation of that river.




Mason On the Natchez Trace


Much has been written about the old Natchez Trace, the narrow
Indian trail leading from Natchez, Mississippi, to Nashville,
Tennessee, at which place travelers took other trails leading
to Illinois, Kentucky, and Virginia. In the flatboat days many
merchants who had disposed of the goods they brought down the Ohio
and Mississippi returned north with the proceeds of their sales
by this overland route; others took the ocean route by way of
Philadelphia, back to their homes. Many of these pioneer merchants
refer to their experience in this wilderness and many early western
travelers who rode over this old trail describe it in their books.
We shall, however, confine our glimpse of the early days on this
historic trace to the facts concerning Mason.

It is more than likely that Mason had committed a number of crimes
along the Natchez Trace before he appeared in New Madrid in
March, 1800. Many pioneers traveling over this route encountered
highwaymen, but none of them succeeded in identifying the men
by whom they had been robbed. The first record of a case with
which Mason is definitely connected is that of a party of boatmen
riding from Natchez to their homes in Kentucky. An account of this
incident is told in _Old Times in Tennessee_, by Josephus C. Guild,
who received his information from John L. Swaney. Swaney told Guild
that more than fifty years before, while carrying the mail over the
old Natchez Trace, he frequently met Samuel Mason and talked with
him.

Swaney began carrying the mail over this old Indian trail about
1796 and was familiar with the route before Mason appeared on the
scene. The distance from Nashville to Natchez he estimates at about
five hundred and fifty miles. It was, in his mail-carrying days,
a mere bridle path winding through an almost endless wilderness.
He rode it for eight years, making a round trip every three weeks.
Traveling at the rate of about fifty-five miles a day permitted
him a day’s rest at either end of his route. He frequently met
Indians along the Trace. At Colbert’s Ferry, on the Tennessee
River, he always found the Indian ferrymen “contrary,” for they
would not cross the river for him if he got to the landing after
bed time. At the Chickasaw Agency, about half-way between the two
places, he changed horses. The only white men he saw were the few
settlers, scattered forty or more miles apart, the occasional
traveler returning north and, now and then, Samuel Mason and some
of his band. Swaney rode a good horse and carried with him, besides
the mail (consisting of a few letters, newspapers, and government
dispatches) a bushel of corn for his horse, provisions and a
blanket for himself, a pistol, a tin trumpet, and a piece of flint
and steel.

Merchants and boatmen brought their provisions and other
necessities on pack-horses or pack-mules. It was from these that
Mason captured much of the food and most of the clothing he and
his people required. These travelers, as a rule, sewed their money
in rawhides and threw the hides in the packs with supplies. At
night, before making a fire, they hid their valuables in the bushes
some distance from the camp in the event of a surprise at night by
robbers. It was in this wilderness that Mason looked for and found
many of his victims. He and his band were the terror of all who
traveled through the Indian nation, except Swaney.

Mason frequently sought interviews with Swaney, with whom he had
many friendly chats. The outlaw often asked what was said about him
by the public. He told Swaney that no mail-carrier need fear being
molested by him and his men, for mail was of no value to them, and
that he “did not desire to kill any man, for money was all he was
after and if he could not get it without taking life, he certainly
would shed no blood.”

“Among Mason’s first robberies,” continues the historian who
interviewed the mail-carrier, “was that of a party of Kentucky
boatmen returning home from Natchez. They had camped at what
was called Gum Springs, in the Choctaw Nation. They ate supper,
and, as a matter of precaution, were putting out pickets before
retiring for the night. In going to their positions one of the
pickets stepped on one of Mason’s men, who were hidden in the grass
awaiting an opportunity to pounce upon the boatmen. The robber thus
carelessly trod on jumped up, gave a yell, and fired off a gun,
calling upon his comrades to shoot and kill every boatman. This was
so unexpected to the Kentuckians that they became panic stricken
and ran off in the wildest confusion, leaving everything, some
even their wearing apparel. Mason and his men went to the camp and
carried away everything.

“The next morning, just at daylight, Mr. Swaney came along, and
seeing the camp fires burning, rode out, but could find no one. He
was going toward Natchez, and having met no party that morning, he
instinctively knew that something was wrong, and began to blow his
bugle. The boatmen recognized the familiar sound and commenced
coming to Mr. Swaney, one and two at a time. He asserted that they
were the worst scared, worst looking set of men he ever saw, some
of them having but little clothing on, and one big fellow had only
a shirt. They immediately held a sort of council of war, and it
was unanimously agreed to follow the robbers and recapture their
property. It was an easy matter to follow their trail through the
cane and grass. Their plan was, as they had no arms, to provide
themselves with sticks and knives, and should they overtake Mason
and his men, attack them by a vigorous charge, knocking them down
right and left with their shillelahs, and if those in front fell
at the fire of the robbers, those in the rear were to rush upon,
overpower and capture the robbers and recover their property.

“They started in pursuit of the robbers under the lead of the big
Kentuckian. They had gone about a mile when they began to find
articles of clothing which had been thrown away by the robbers. The
big Kentuckian found his pants, in the waistband of which he had
sewed four gold doubloons and, to his great joy, the robbers had
not found them. After this it was noticed that the big Kentuckian’s
valor began to fail him, and soon he was found in the rear. The
pursuit was kept up about two miles further, when they were
suddenly hailed by Mason and his men, who were hid behind trees,
with their guns presented, and who ordered them to go back or they
would kill the last one of them. This caused a greater stampede
than that of the night before, and the big Kentuckian out distanced
the whole party in the race back to camp. They abused the big
Kentuckian at a round rate for his want of courage, but he only
laughed at them, saying he had everything to run for. But, to his
credit be it said, he spent his last dollar in procuring supplies
for his comrades.”

Mason was an active man and this comparatively insignificant
robbery was doubtless preceded and followed by others of greater
consequence of which, however, no written record or oral tradition
now exists. Then occurred the Baker robbery on the old Natchez
Trace--a robbery that became widely known through the current
newspapers and soon convinced the public that Mason was an outlaw
of dangerous character, working over a large territory.

Colonel Joshua Baker, the victim of this famous robbery, was a
merchant living in central Kentucky. In his day he made a number
of trips south, going down in flatboats and returning by way of
the old Natchez Trace. Colonel Baker had the misfortune to come in
contact with Mason at least once on land and once on water, and,
as is later shown, played an important part in the activities that
resulted in ending Mason’s career.

In the spring or summer of 1801, Colonel Baker took several
flatboats filled with produce and horses to New Orleans. After
disposing of his cargo, he set out on his return home, accompanied
by four men, each of whom rode a horse. Besides the five riding
horses there were five pack-mules in the cavalcade loaded down with
provisions, and, among other things, the proceeds of the sales made
in New Orleans. Colonel Baker and his men experienced no unusual
trouble until they reached the ford across what was then called
Twelve Mile Creek, but since known as Baker’s Creek. The place is
in Hindes County, Mississippi, about twenty miles west of Jackson
and near where the Battle of Baker’s Creek was fought on January
16, 1863. There, August 14, 1801, the Baker party was surprised
by Samuel Mason and three of his men. A paragraph relative to the
robbery that followed was published in _The Kentucky Gazette_,
September 14, 1801. It is the earliest printed record so far found
of Mason’s activities on the Natchez Trace:

“We are informed that on the 14th of August, about sixty miles
on this side of the Big Biopiere [Bayou Pierre] River, Colonel
Joshua Baker, a Mr. William Baker and a Mr. Rogers of Natchez,
were robbed of their horses, traveling utensils, and about two
thousand three hundred dollars cash. It seems the company had
halted in the morning at a small, clear stream of water in order
to wash. As soon as they had dismounted and gone to the water
four men appeared, blacked, between them and their horses and
demanded the surrender of their money and property, which they
were obliged to comply with. Mr. W. Baker was more fortunate than
his companions. A pack-horse, on which was a considerable sum of
money, being frightened at the appearance of the robbers, ran
away, and they being in haste to escape could not pursue. Mr. W.
Baker recovered his horse [pack-mule] and money. He, however, lost
his riding horse, etc. Colonel Baker and Mr. Rogers came to the
first settlement, where they procured assistance and immediately
went in pursuit of the villains. It is to be hoped they will be
apprehended. One of them who was described by Colonel Baker,
formerly resided at Red Banks. A brother of Colonel Baker, our
informant, obtained this information from Mr. W. Baker, who lodged
at his house [in Lexington, Kentucky] on Thursday night last.”

John L. Swaney, the mail-carrier, whose reminiscences have been
drawn upon, gives some different details of this incident. The
banks at Baker’s Creek are high and steep and at this crossing
there was then nothing more than a deep-cut bridle path on either
bank leading into or out of the stream. The Baker party, after more
or less difficulty, rode down to the creek. While their horses and
mules were drinking, says Swaney, Mason and his men jumped up from
where they had concealed themselves. The victims, realizing they
had been trapped and were at the mercy of the outlaws, surrendered.
Mason made them drive the pack-mules over to his side of the creek,
where two of his men took charge of them but permitted Baker and
his companions to keep their riding horses and side arms. Colonel
Baker then rode to Grindstone Ford, a distance of about forty
miles, and there raised a company to pursue the outlaws.

They followed the trail of the robbers to Pearl River, near
Jackson, Mississippi, and there learned that Mason had crossed
the stream only a few hours before. In the pursuing party was a
man named Brokus, a quadroon Indian. Brokus, according to Swaney,
stripped and swam down the river to ascertain, if possible, what
route Mason’s men had taken. While he was climbing up the bank one
of the robbers punched him in the breast with a gun. Brokus thought
he was shot and, losing his grip on the sapling to which he was
holding, fell back into the river. After considerable swimming and
diving he reached the opposite shore. Swaney ends his story of
this chase by saying: “Mason then made his appearance and notified
Colonel Baker that he would never recover his money. This seemed
to be accepted as the final arbitrament, for the pursuit of the
robbers was abandoned.”

A contributor to _The Natchez Galaxy_ in 1829, in a short article
entitled “The Robber of the Wilderness,” gives another account
of how Mason made his appearance on the banks of Pearl River and
under what circumstances Colonel Baker abandoned the chase. This
Natchez writer has it that when Colonel Baker reached the river the
pursuers took the saddles off their horses and made preparations
to rest for a few hours before resuming the chase. The tracks made
by Mason’s horses showed that his party was much smaller than
theirs. The pursuers therefore anticipated nothing other than an
unconditional surrender. They did not realize how quickly Mason
could turn to his advantage any condition that presented itself.
How the outlaw mastered the present situation is best told by the
contributor to _The Natchez Galaxy_:

“Those preliminaries being disposed of, two of the party strolled
to the bank of the river and, tempted by the coolness and beauty of
the stream, went in to bathe. In the course of their gambol they
crossed to the opposite shore, where they encountered an individual
whose society, under the present circumstances, afforded them very
little satisfaction.

“Mason, aware that he was pursued and having ascertained the
superior force of his pursuers, determined to effect by strategem
what he could not hope to do by open contest. The path into the
forest was narrow here and much beset with undergrowth; and he
placed his men in ambush so that by a sudden onset the party of
Colonel Baker on entering the woods would be thrown into confusion,
and thus be easily despatched or routed. Chance, however, produced
a success more complete than any he could have anticipated. No
sooner had the two naked and unarmed men reached the eastern shore
of the Pearl, than Mason rushed upon them before they could collect
their thoughts or comprehend their danger. He was a hale, athletic
figure, and roughly clad in the leather shirt and leggins, common
to the Indians and hunters of the frontier.

“‘I am glad to see you, gentlemen,’ said he sarcastically, ‘and
though our meeting did not promise to be quite so friendly, I am
just as well satisfied; my arms and ammunition will cost less than
I expected.’

“His prisoners were thunderstruck and totally incapable of reply.
Having placed a guard over them, Mason walked deliberately down
to the shore and hailed the party on the opposite bank, who had
witnessed the scene, that has been detailed, in amazement and
apprehension. As he approached they instinctively seized their arms.

“‘If you approach one step or raise a rifle,’ cried the robber,
‘you may bid your friends farewell. There is no hope for them but
in your obedience. I want nothing but security against danger to
myself and party and this I mean to have. Stack your arms and
deposit your ammunition on the beach near the water. I will send
for them. Any violence to my messenger or the least hesitation
to perform my orders will prove certain and sudden death to your
companions. Your compliance will insure their release, and I pledge
my honor as a man to take no other advantage of my victory.’

“There was no alternative. The arms and ammunition were deposited
as Mason directed. Two of the band were despatched for them, while
a rifle was held to the head of each prisoner. No resistance was
attempted, however, by Colonel Baker or his party, and the arms
were brought across. The banditti were soon in readiness for a
march; the prisoners were dismissed with a good humored farewell;
and the dreaded Mason, true to his word, was soon lost in the
depths of the wilderness. It is hardly necessary to say that the
pursuers, disarmed, discomfitted, and a little chapfallen made the
best of their way back to ‘the settlement’.” [12L]

Shortly after the Baker robbery John Mason, a son of Samuel Mason,
was lodged in the Natchez jail charged with taking part in the
affair. It is more than likely that John Mason happened to be in
town when he was accused and arrested than that an officer brought
him in from the country. At any rate, he was tried, convicted, and
punished by whipping. It is possible that he was innocent of the
specific crime for which he was punished, for he may not have been
present when the Mason band robbed Colonel Baker. About seventy
years later George Wiley, who was a mere lad at the time this
whipping occurred, wrote a sketch on “Natchez in the Olden Times.”
In it he says:

“The old jail, too, was the scene of the first public disgrace
to the noted Mason, who afterwards, with his robber band, became
the terror of travelers from the Ohio River to New Orleans. Mason
and his son were brought to Natchez and lodged in jail, charged
with the robbery of a man named Baker, at a place now in Hindes
County where the road crosses a creek still known as Baker’s Creek.
They were defended at their trial by a distinguished lawyer named
Wallace. He, after the manner so common with lawyers, went to work
to get up a public feeling in favor of his clients, and succeeded
so well that, although the Masons were convicted, the general
sentiment was that they were innocently punished. They were both
convicted and sentenced to receive the punishment of thirty-nine
lashes and exposure in the pillory. I witnessed the flogging and
shall never forget their cries of ‘innocent’ at every blow of the
cowhide which tore the flesh from their quivering limbs, and until
the last lash was given they shrieked the same despairing cry of
‘innocent,’ ‘innocent.’ After they were released the elder Mason
said to the surrounding crowd, ‘You have witnessed our punishment
for a crime we never committed; some of you may see me punished
again but it shall be for something worthy of punishment.’ He and
his son then shaved their heads, and stripping themselves naked,
mounted their horses and yelling like Indians, rode through and out
of the town.” [26]

This account appears correct in all its details except two. Samuel
Mason’s son, John, was the only member of the Mason family arrested
and whipped. If, as stated by Wiley, two men were punished on
this occasion, the other may have been a member of Samuel Mason’s
gang. The other error is in the statement that the two prisoners
were released. It is shown later that after they were whipped they
escaped from jail by the aid of some of Mason’s men.

William Darby, another citizen of Natchez, in an account published
in _The Casket Magazine_, in 1834, tells what occurred shortly
after John Mason was whipped: “One of the jury, whose name I
omit,” writes Darby, “made himself very conspicuous at the trial
of John Mason, wishing before the whole court and audience, that
‘the rascal might be hung.’” By some means Samuel Mason received
a report of the juryman’s statement. A few weeks later this same
juror, returning to Natchez from one of the settlements, had
occasion to ride over a bridle path through a heavy canebreak. He
was suddenly confronted by Samuel Mason who stepped out of the
cane, armed with a tomahawk and rifle, and, raising the rifle,
pointed it at the surprised rider, who immediately threw up his
hands. Mason very calmly informed the juror that he had waited for
him for two days “to blow your brains out.”

The frightened man begged to be spared for the sake of his wife and
children. Mason replied that he, too, had children and loved them
as much as any other father loved his own, and that this was his
first chance to extend to him the same mercy he had shown toward
his son John. Then, as if to further prepare the captive for the
worst, Mason asked: “Did John Mason ever do you any harm? Did I
myself ever do you any injury? Did you ever hear of me committing
murder, or suffering murder to be committed?” Mason shrewdly
omitted the words, “except when necessary.” The juror answered:
“Never in my life.” “Thank God, I have never shed blood,” declared
Mason with great earnestness, “but now, come down off your horse,
Sir. If you have anything to say to your Maker, I’ll give you five
minutes to say it.”

“The terrified man,” continues Darby, “sank off the horse and fell
on his knees, uttering a fervent prayer, addressed rather to the
man who stood beside him with his gun cocked. At length, his words
failed him and he burst into a violent shower of tears. The man
himself, who afterward related the whole circumstance, and could
scarce ever do so without tears at the remembrance, said he every
moment expected death; but Mason, regarding him with a bitter
smile, swore his life was not worth taking, wheeled around and in
an instant disappeared amongst the cane.”

Colonel Baker returned to Kentucky and reports of the daring
robbery on the Natchez Trace and of his unsuccessful attempt to
capture Samuel Mason were circulated throughout the country.
Monette says that about the time the Baker robbery occurred
“the outrages of Mason became more frequent and sanguinary” and
that “the name of Mason and his band was known and dreaded from
the morasses of the southern frontier to the silent shades of
the Tennessee River.” Mason’s depredations must have been many,
although authenticated records of only a few specific instances are
now found.

It is probable a number of his victims did not survive to tell the
tale, for the wide-awake outlaw realized that along the trails and
on the river, as at Cave-in-Rock, his greatest safety lay in the
fact that “dead men tell no tales.” Those who were permitted to
survive had been treated in such a manner that they would be more
likely to describe Mason as a shrewd robber than a cruel murderer,
and, it seems, most survivors were careful not to condemn him too
severely lest one of his “agents” silence their tongues with a
dagger. Mason usually kept an intelligent man at Natchez to observe
the character of the outfits obtained by those preparing to travel
over the trail. Thus he often received advance notice of the
approach of travelers and information in regard to their strength.
[26] As is shown later, Mason had at least one agent, Anthony
Gass, of Natchez, who managed to dispose of the stolen goods turned
over to him. The probabilities were, as asserted by a Spanish
official, that this robber had “firm abettors” throughout the Ohio
and Mississippi valleys.

In those days many a traveler was never heard from after he left
home. In some instances it was because he died a stranger in a
strange land, or was murdered but never missed except by his people
far away, who had no means of learning of his whereabouts or fate.
Sooner or later, the impression would prevail among them that the
missing man was actually or probably killed and robbed. And since
Mason was the most widely known among the outlaws in his day, he
was usually selected as the man at the bottom of the mystery.

An example of such a supposition occurs as an incident in the
life of the grandmother of W. L. Harper, of Jefferson County,
Mississippi. She lived along the old Natchez Trace and frequently
accommodated travelers with food and shelter. On one occasion
a young Kentuckian stopped at her house and, becoming ill, was
obliged to remain several weeks. His conduct and bearing were such
that the old lady took a motherly interest in him. Before he left
“she actually quilted all his six hundred dollars in his coat and
vest, partly to distribute his load, but chiefly to deceive the
robbers then infesting the road. She heard no more of him, but the
supposition was that he was another of Mason’s victims.” [81]

A few months after William C. C. Claiborne took his seat as
governor of the Mississippi Territory he found it necessary to
make an investigation of the robberies on the Mississippi River.
On February 10, 1802, he wrote to Manuel de Salcedo, the Spanish
Governor General of the Province of Louisiana, residing at New
Orleans, informing him that he had received notice of “a daring
robbery which had lately been committed upon some citizens of the
United States who were descending the River Mississippi on their
passage to this town”--Natchez--and that it was uncertain whether
the persons guilty of this act of piracy were Spanish subjects or
American citizens.

[Illustration: MAP SHOWING CAVE-IN-ROCK AND THE NATCHEZ TRACE, 1814]

To this the Governor General replied on February 28, saying among
other things that “It is truly impossible to determine whether
the delinquents are Spaniards or Americans” and that he had
given his officers “the most positive orders ... to take the most
efficacious means of discovering and apprehending the criminal or
criminals that can be adopted ... and I assure your Excellency that
if the criminals are taken they will be punished in such a manner
as to serve as an example to others.” He complained that the people
of “the States and Western Settlements ... having the freedom
and use of the navigation of the Mississippi” came down into the
Spanish territory in great numbers, among whom are “vagabonds ...
who have fled from, or who do not, or can not return to, the United
States.” [113]

Each governor was willing to arrest highway robbers and river
pirates on his own side of the Mississippi, but neither could
suggest to the other that if it became necessary for any pursuing
party to cross the river into foreign territory, such pursuers
might continue the chase without a special permit. Samuel Mason
evidently understood and foresaw this condition of international
affairs. He had purposely avoided committing crimes on the Spanish
side, and now that his notoriety would, in all probability,
result in his being hunted along the Natchez Trace, he moved to
the Mississippi, there to confine his operations to the river and
its American bank, on the very border of a comparatively safe and
easily reached land of refuge.

The Baker robbery was in a sense nothing more than another link
in Mason’s long chain of crimes. Colonel Baker was not daunted by
the loss of his money and his failure to capture Mason, for the
following spring he started down the river again in a flatboat
loaded with merchandise. He supplied himself with guns, not only
to protect his boat, but also to better prepare himself for
his return home over the dangerous Trace. Some time in April,
1802, when his boat reached a point below Vicksburg, then known
as Walnut Hills and Nogales, he came in contact with Mason and
some of his men. Colonel Baker wrote a statement giving the
details of this attack and forwarded it to Governor Claiborne of
Mississippi. Colonel Baker’s written statement cannot be found.
Its effect, however, is shown by the fact that upon receipt of it
Governor Claiborne, who was aware that outlaws had long infested
the frontier, more fully realized the necessity for action. The
governor sent out three official letters from the capital of
Mississippi Territory, each dated, “Town of Washington, April 27,
1802.” [113]

The first was written to Colonel Daniel Burnett, at Fort Gibson,
who was in command of the militia in Claiborne County. It is here
quoted in full from Dunbar Rowland’s _Official Letter Books of
W. C. C. Claiborne_:

        TOWN OF WASHINGTON, APRIL 27, 1802--

    “Sir,--I have received information that a set of pirates and
    robbers who alternately infest the Mississippi River and the
    road leading from this district to Tennessee, rendezvous at or
    near the Walnut Hills, in the County of Claiborne:--a certain
    Samuel Mason and a man by the name of Harp, are said to be the
    leaders of this banditti:--they lately attempted in a hostile
    manner to board the boat of Colo[nel] Joshua Baker, between the
    mouth of Yazou River, and the Walnut Hills, but were prevented
    by Colo[nel] Baker’s making a shew of arms, and manifesting a
    great share of firmness. These men must be arrested; the honor
    of our country, the interest of society, and the feelings of
    humanity, proclaim that it is time to stop their career; The
    crimes of Harp, are many and great, and in point of baseness,
    Mason is nearly as celebrated:--While these sons of rapine and
    murder are permitted to rove at large, we may expect daily to
    hear of _outrages_ upon the lives and properties of our fellow
    citizens.

    “The militia of your regiment not being organized, I presume
    it would not be in your power, to execute (strictly) a
    military order, I shall therefore only request, that you will
    immediately endeavor to procure fifteen or twenty men as
    volunteers, and place yourself, or some confidential character
    at their head.

    “This little force will then proceed to the Walnut Hills,
    and after making the due examination and enquiry at that
    place, they will examine the woods in the neighborhood of the
    Mississippi as high up as Yazou; If you should fall in with
    Mason and his party you will use all the means in your power to
    arrest them, or any of them, and I desire, that the person or
    persons arrested, may immediately be conveyed under a strong
    guard to Natchez.

    “I hope that the honor of taking these lawless men, will be
    conferred upon the citizens of your neighborhood; should they
    succeed, I promise them a very generous reward.

    “I have written to Lieutenant Rennick upon this subject, and it
    is probable, he will give you all the aid in his power.

    “With great respect & esteem.

                              “I am sir, your Hble--Servt:
                                    “WILLIAM C. C. CLAIBORNE

    “P. S. For your information, I have enclosed you the statement
    made by Colo[nel] Baker to me, of the late attempt made to rob
    him.

                              “W. C. C. C.

  “COLO[NEL] DANIEL BURNETT--”

Another letter was sent to Lieutenant Seymour Rennick, who was
in command of a detachment of United States troops at Grindstone
Ford on the Natchez Trace. In it the governor referred to the
attack made on Colonel Baker’s boat and stated that “a certain
Samuel Mason and a certain Wiley Harp ... have been in the habit
of committing with impunity murders and robberies.... I think it
is probable they may be found at or near the Walnut Hills; at that
place the wife of John Mason resides.” He suggested to this officer
that the federal government furnish Colonel Burnett with a sergeant
and twelve men.

The third letter was addressed “To the Officer commanding the
United States Troops near the mouth of Bear Creek on the Tennessee
River.” In it Governor Claiborne writes that: “I have received
information that the road from this territory to Tennessee is
infested by a daring set of robbers, among them are a certain
Samuel Mason and a certain Wiley Harp ... I hope, Sir, that if you
should receive information of any mischief being done or attempted
in the wilderness you will immediately order out a party of men,
and make the necessary exertions to arrest the offenders.”

The lower Mississippi valley was now aroused. Mason had become
a terror in a frontier country that was more or less accustomed
to lawlessness and bloodshed. His robberies were current history
and the whereabouts of Wiley Harpe was a discussed but unsolved
question. A little more than two years before Governor Claiborne
began to move toward the arrest of Mason, the news that Big Harpe
had been captured and beheaded in Kentucky near Cave-in-Rock
(Mason’s one-time headquarters) had rapidly spread throughout the
country. With the report also had come the warning that Little, or
Wiley Harpe, had escaped and fled south. Up to this time--April,
1802--there was nothing to point out the actual or probable
whereabouts of the missing Harpe. No mention of any murders
committed by him appeared in the current newspapers. Indications
and hopes were that he had left the country for good or had been
killed. Governor Claiborne probably had heard from others besides
Colonel Baker that Wiley Harpe was one of Mason’s men. Even though
he was not convinced of Harpe’s presence on the Mississippi, he
knew that by linking the names of these two notorious outlaws
together, the public would more fully realize the desperate
character of Mason and therefore take a more active interest in his
capture.

As indicated in his letter to Colonel Burnett, the governor of
Mississippi Territory promised “a very generous reward” for the
capture of Samuel Mason and Wiley Harpe. Monette says the governor
“offered a liberal reward for the robber Mason, dead or alive,
and the proclamation was widely distributed.” J. F. H. Claiborne,
in his _History of Mississippi_, states that the proclamation was
issued and a reward of two thousand dollars was offered for the
capture of Mason and Harpe. No two historians make precisely the
same statements regarding the reward. It is more than likely that a
printed proclamation was issued, although an effort to find a copy
or reprint has been futile. The proclamation in all probability
gave, among other things, the facts embraced in the following
statement quoted from a letter written two years later by Governor
Claiborne to James Madison, who was then Secretary of State at
Washington: “A reward of four hundred dollars for apprehending them
was offered by the Secretary of War, and five hundred dollars by
myself, in my character as Governor of the Territory.”

The extermination of Mason and his band was a matter of serious
importance to the law abiding and peace loving citizens of the
Territory. And now that a reward of at least nine hundred dollars
had been offered and the militia directed to search for the
outlaws, the prospects of capture appeared very encouraging.
It was known that Mason and Harpe had lived in Kentucky and at
Cave-in-Rock, and it was therefore apparently presumed that they
were old and constant associates. The two outlaws, however, may
never have met in Kentucky nor at the Cave. Whether or not Mason
the robber and Harpe the brute were in the same band, both,
nevertheless, deserved the severest punishment that could be
inflicted by a pioneer people.

A number of highway robbers and river pirates had been arrested
during the time Mason was working in Mississippi, but Samuel
Mason and Wiley Harpe, the most notorious of them all, had evaded
arrest. Where were they likely to be found? As a matter of fact
outlaws camped at any place they found convenient and well adapted
for their work, but never remained long at any one spot. It was
known that Samuel Mason had, at one time, lived about twenty miles
northeast of Natchez, near what is now Fayette. [81] Shortly after
the Baker highway robbery had taken place it was discovered that
at the time of the robbery Mason’s headquarters was near Rocky
Springs, a stopping place on the old Natchez Trace some forty
miles northeast of Natchez and twenty miles south of Vicksburg.«23»

Draper in a brief note [12H] says Mason spent much time at Palmyra
and on Stack Island. Palmyra then, as now, was a very small
settlement on the Mississippi, about twenty miles below Vicksburg.
Stack Island, also known as Crow’s Nest or Island No. 94, was
washed away shortly after Mason’s day, and in time most of its
traditions disappeared. It was on Stack Island, near the mouth of
Lake Providence, about fifty-five miles below Vicksburg, that we
first hear of Mason--after organized bands began to search for him.

Claiborne, the historian, states that: “After the Governor’s
proclamation had been issued Mason and his gang were closely
hunted by the whites and Indians and, having made some narrow
escapes, they quit the country and crossed the Mississippi to
somewhere about Lake Providence [Louisiana] in the then Spanish
territory.” Whether at Lake Providence (which is on the Spanish
side of the Mississippi but practically on the river) or on the
nearby Stack Island in the river, Mason was in a position to flee
easily into that part of the great Spanish wilderness which today
is northern Louisiana and the state of Arkansas. There he could
not only conceal himself more effectually, but also live with
some confidence that the Spanish authorities would not attempt to
capture him.

At Stack Island Mason laid his hand upon fate. The band robbed a
traveler and found among his effects a copy of Governor Claiborne’s
proclamation. [26] Monette says that Mason read it aloud and
“indulged in much merriment on the occasion.” The statement in the
proclamation that Wiley (or Little) Harpe, the Kentucky desperado,
was a member of his gang convinced Mason that the authorities were
in great fear of the prowess of his band and were driven to arouse
the public to terror and activity by conjuring with the dreadful
name of Harpe. Mason was feeling good, notwithstanding the hue and
cry raised by the promise of rewards for his capture dead or alive.
He was perfectly confident of his ability to escape any American
militiamen or Mississippi posse. He could afford to laugh at the
additional incitement to his capture contained in the declaration
that he had joined forces with Harpe.

Nobody can say positively that Little Harpe was at that date a
member of the band. It is more than probable that Mason would not
knowingly have permitted Harpe to join him. The reputation of
the Harpes for brutality was sufficient to condemn them in the
estimation of even such outcasts as Mason and his men. Somewhere in
that southwest wilderness, however, Little Harpe was concealing
himself from the fate that pursued him. He was hiding under assumed
names, not daring to reveal his own even to the most abandoned
persons he met for fear of capture. Hunted like a wild animal, it
was necessary to lose his identity beyond the most remote chance of
discovery.

The question is _was_ Harpe with Mason when the latter read his
name aloud and made merriment about it? Was the headsman of fate
stalking there at Mason’s elbow, compelled to keep silence and
join in the laughter in that hour of grim jocularity? It was not
until April, 1802, that John Setton appears of record as one of
Mason’s band, was captured with him, tried with him, and escaped
with him. It was not until almost two years later, under most
dramatic circumstances, that Setton was to be identified as Little
Harpe--as the man who brought fate home to Mason and himself and
immediately met the pitiless fate he had so long and well deserved.
All this will be shown later, but it is one of the mysteries of
history whether that day at Stack Island Mason laughed himself out
of the fear of Governor Claiborne and committed himself into the
hands of fate in the person of Little Harpe. There is a further
doubt whether Mason ever did actually discover that John Setton was
Little Harpe.«24»

In May, 1802, we find Mason’s band at the mouth of White River,
about one hundred and fifty miles above Stack Island. _The
Palladium_ on August 12, 1802, in a news item dated Cincinnati,
North West Territory, July 31, says:

“A letter dated, Natchez, June 11, from a gentleman who lately
descended the river, contains the following interesting
intelligence: ‘We were attacked by robbers near the mouth of White
River and a breeze springing up, prevented us from being boarded
by two pirogues, having in each six men well armed. They hailed us
from the shore, telling us they wished to purchase some rifles,
and on our refusing to land, they commenced the pursuit. They
originally consisted of three companies, and were commanded by
a person named Mason, who has left the camp at White River, and
scours the road through the wilderness. About two weeks ago they
attacked a merchant boat and took possession of her, after having
killed one of the people on board.’”

Other robberies in 1802 and in the summer and fall of 1803 were
reported, but by whom they were committed is not stated in the
current newspapers. The one just cited, however, was without doubt
some of Mason’s work. It occurred about one hundred and fifty miles
above Stack Island and three hundred miles above Natchez, and some
three hundred miles below New Madrid, which was then the principal
town in the Spanish territory of upper Louisiana. New Madrid is
now the county seat of New Madrid County, Missouri. The New Madrid
country was six hundred miles from Natchez, out of the Mississippi
territory and in a field where Mason felt he could carry on his
usual activities, unhindered by the men who were pursuing him for
the nine hundred dollars reward. Mason went up the river and had
taken steps toward establishing himself a few miles below the town
of New Madrid, in a small settlement known as Little Prairie, when
in January, 1803, he was trapped and captured. He was arrested, not
by the American officials he so much feared, but by the Spanish
authorities who suspected that he was guilty of many of the crimes
that had been committed on their side of the Mississippi River. The
curious story of that frontier pursuit and trial is now to be told
from the French records for the first time.




Mason--Trapped and Tried


The official record of the arrest of the Masons at Little
Prairie and their trial at New Madrid is still in existence. The
whereabouts of this old document has been noted by a few historians
who briefly state that “There is in the Mississippi Department of
Archives and History a record in French of the trial of Mason for
robbery, by the military authorities of New Madrid, dated January,
1803.” But no writer has heretofore penetrated into this manuscript
to discover what the trial revealed or how it ended. It was found
among the papers belonging to J. F. H. Claiborne, the historian,
and is now preserved in Jackson.«25»

The document covers one hundred and eighty-two pages. Many of the
leaves are badly faded. Although the penmanship is far from good,
every word, with few exceptions, can be deciphered. It is filled
with interesting facts and equally interesting perjury. From the
beginning of legislation down through the pioneer days humanity has
ever been the same, and facts and fabrications have been paraded
together before officials who are to pass judgment on the evidence
presented. The Mason trial is no exception to this old practice in
courts, but is rather an exaggerated instance of the tendency, as
common in the “good old days” as in our own times.

The manuscript gives a complete history not only of the
proceedings during the trial, but also of the arrests that preceded
it. It begins with the day New Madrid officials were notified that
the Masons were seen at Little Prairie, thirty miles down the
river. A clerk then, and every day thereafter, carefully noted what
action had been taken by the pursuers and what evidence had been
gathered against the suspects, and continued the record through all
the other proceedings.

The commandant at New Madrid, by whom the pursuit was ordered and
before whom the captives were tried, evidently did not understand
English, which was the only language spoken by nearly all the
persons who appeared before him. Questions and answers were
transmitted through an official interpreter.

There were fifteen witnesses. Eight made declarations regarding
their knowledge of Mason and his family; the other seven were the
prisoners themselves, who testified in their own behalf. Every
witness took “an oath on the cross of his sword” to speak the
truth. In a few instances “and by the Holy Scriptures” was added.
As a witness was being heard the substance of his statements was
recorded in French and after he finished, his testimony was read
to him, transposed into English, and he, “maintaining it contained
the truth to which nothing could be added or unsaid,” signed it
as did the presiding officials. Four of these signatures are here
reproduced in facsimile.

[Illustration: Samuel Mason]

In the official document many statements and legal phrases are
often repeated; they add to its length but throw no new light on
the subject. In the following more or less paraphrased condensation
the number of words is greatly reduced but the substance of the
original is, in the main, retained.

[Illustration: John Mason]

[Illustration: Thomas Mason]

[Illustration: John Setton]

The first entry in the old record is dated January 11, 1803. It
shows that one Pierre Dapron, a citizen of New Madrid, appeared
in court and made a declaration before three officials: the
Commandant, Don Henri Peyroux de la Coudreniere, “Captain of the
Army, Civil and Military Commander of the District of New Madrid;”
Don Pierre Antoine LaForge, “Commissioner of Police and Officer
of the Militia,” and Don Joseph Charpentier, “Interpreter for
His Majesty in the English Language.” Dapron explained to these
officials that he had returned from Little Prairie and considered
it his duty to declare that Ignace Belan had informed him that on
his way to New Orleans with a cargo of salt pork he had seen four
persons at Little Prairie whom he suspected of being members of
the Mason band and although they did not attempt to rob his boat,
he felt their presence should be reported.

George Ruddell, a citizen of Little Prairie, appeared before the
court the same day and “told us by means of the interpreter that
a party of eight men and one woman,” well armed and mounted, had
arrived in town about two weeks before and had taken possession
of an empty house belonging to an American citizen, Lesieur, who
had not been consulted by them nor had they shown any passports.
In the meantime, they rented a ten-acre tract from John Ruddell
and bought a cow and sundry provisions. Among other things that
aroused the suspicion of the neighborhood was the careful manner in
which the house was guarded by the occupants. Ruddell expressed the
opinion that if this was not the Mason band, then it was probably
a part, explaining that “since the Governor of Natchez had the
militia on the lookout for these robbers, the original crowd may
have separated into smaller groups.” He was inclined to think that
although the man called “father” was not the exact size of Samuel
Mason, whom he had seen some years before, he nevertheless felt
confident that “father” Mason was among the members of this gang.
He concluded his declaration by stating that he was acting in
behalf of the citizens of Little Prairie who suggested that these
suspects be arrested and their effects examined.

The next day, “in view of the above cited declarations,” the
Commandant ordered four persons, Joseph Charpentier, LaForge,
George Ruddell, and Don Robert McCoy, “Captain of the Militia,” to
proceed to Little Prairie--a distance of about thirty miles--and
there meet a division of regulars commanded by Corporal Felipo
Canot, who had been ordered to the scene. Upon their arrival at
the place further investigation convinced the officers that the
new suspects were Samuel Mason and some of his followers, and that
about half the number had left the Lesieur house and moved over to
a house owned by Francois Langlois. Realizing that the pursuing
party would soon be scented by the suspects, it was decided to
invade the two houses early in the morning.

At six o’clock in the morning George Ruddell informed Captain McCoy
that the Masons had their horses saddled and loaded with baggage
and were on the point of leaving for New Madrid, but Samuel Mason,
known as “Father Mason,” hearing that the interpreter was in town,
expressed a desire to see him and explain that he wished to go to
New Madrid to “justify himself” and clear himself of the crimes
of which he was “falsely accused.” Captain McCoy, George Ruddell,
and the interpreter walked to the house occupied by Samuel Mason
and suggested to him that, in view of his intention to volunteer a
justification, he and those of his people with him would do well
to go over to the house occupied by his other associates where
he would be given a hearing and could make explanations which
would be forwarded to the Commandant at New Madrid. To this Mason
consented and by eight o’clock his party, consisting of six men,
one woman, and three children, was assembled in the Lesieur house
which, unsuspected by the Masons, was guarded by concealed militia.
Samuel Mason, turning to Captain McCoy, immediately referred to the
“unjust imputations” made against him and his people. The Captain
expressed the opinion that his explanation and justification had
better be made in person to the Commandant. A signal was given by
Captain McCoy, and before the Masons realized it, they were “in
handcuffs and chains.”

Then, in the words of the clerk, “We immediately asked said
prisoners their names and the father or oldest gave his as Samuel
Mason;” those of his four sons, in order of age, were given as
Thomas, John, Samuel Jr. (about eighteen years of age) and Magnus
Mason (about sixteen years of age). Another man called himself John
Taylor (later in the trial known as John Setton). The woman had
three children with her and gave her name as Marguerite Douglas,
wife of John Mason. Upon being questioned by McCoy and Charpentier,
Samuel Mason answered that they had come from Nogales (Vicksburg)
and intended to establish themselves in or near Little Prairie,
in accordance with a passport given him. When asked to produce a
passport issued “by the authorities of the locality from whence
he came,” it was discovered he had “none other than the one we
ourselves had given, dated New Madrid, March 29th, 1800.” This he
surrendered to Captain McCoy, who agreed with the other officials
present that it was genuine.

[Illustration: FACSIMILE OF PASSPORT ISSUED TO SAMUEL MASON

Written in French and issued by the Spanish Commandant of the
District of New Madrid, March 29, 1800]

The original passport was inserted between two leaves of the
record book where it has ever since remained. The following is a
translation:

    “New Madrid, March 29th, 1800.

    “Whereas Samuel Masson, Esqr. has expressed a wish to settle
    in this district and wishes to arrange his business affairs,
    We, Don Henri Peyroux de la Coundreniere, Captain of the Armies
    of His Majesty, Civil and Military Commander of this Post and
    District of New Madrid, hereby grant permission to said Samuel
    Masson to proceed to Natchez per boat, and on his return
    from there, said Samuel Masson may select a suitable place in
    this District for himself and family. He, Samuel Masson, having
    by oath attested his loyalty and fidelity to us, we pray that
    no hindrance be placed to his proposed journey.

                              “HENRI PEYROUX

    “Approved and marked with the flourish of our signature.”

“We told them,” continues the record, “in order that none of their
effects be lost or strayed an inventory of same would be made at
once ... and at two o’clock in the afternoon we proceeded with the
above-named inventory.” This work required almost two days. Every
item was carefully examined and tabulated. There were eight horses,
new and old clothes, many yards of silk, muslin and cotton, old
and new pistols and guns, “a field stove,” a box of salt, three
horns of powder, six barrels of flour, English cutlery, various
other imported goods and more than a hundred other items, and seven
thousand dollars in United States money of various denominations,
of which the series number and amount of each was noted.

The following morning, while the inventory was being made, Samuel
Mason, on behalf of his people, applied for the return of certain
utensils and clothing of which his people had immediate need, and
asked for “a pro and con settlement” with the citizens of Little
Prairie. These requests were granted. On the 16th, the prisoners,
with their property and a military guard, arrived at New Madrid.
How they were transported is not stated.

The trial began the morning of the 17th. “The Commandant having
learned of the conversation Captain McCoy and Charpentier had with
the prisoners, called on these two officers to make declarations.”

Captain McCoy, after taking the oath, declared that his duties as
captain of the militia threw him in the presence of Samuel Mason
much of the time after the arrest, and that the prisoner frequently
spoke to him of the coming trial. Mason, continued the witness,
repeatedly asserted that he had never done any wrong on the Spanish
side of the Mississippi River, and that if time were given him he
could and would, in justice to himself, disclose many criminals. On
one occasion Mason asked “if a man became informer, with proofs and
evidence of crimes committed in the States, could he obtain pardon
for those attributed to him?” McCoy casually answered him that if
he could give such information it would, in all probability, clear
up matters and greatly help him and his people.

Mason stated to Captain McCoy that although it was widely rumored
that he was “the man smeared over with black,” who had committed
many crimes “along the highway,” he could in each instance prove
that he was far from the scene when the robberies occurred. He
denied that he was implicated in the highway robbery or the boat
robbery of a man named Baker, from whom “some three thousand
piasters” were taken. But when he, Captain McCoy, remarked that
Baker would appear in a few days, “the prisoner seemed disturbed
and asked for particulars relative to his coming.”

Captain McCoy further declared that while the inventory was being
taken he asked Mason how he happened to have so many banknotes and
the old man who usually stood as spokesman for his crowd, first
seemed startled and then pretended not to understand the question.
The question was repeated and the prisoners stared at each other
for a moment, when John Taylor (alias John Setton) came to the
rescue by saying: “The banknotes were found in a bag hanging in a
bush, near the road where we happened to be camping.”«26»

Don Joseph Charpentier was next called upon to make a declaration.
The record shows that his statements were practically the same
as those made by Captain McCoy, but touched on a few additional
subjects. He had heard Samuel Mason say that the only thing for
which he could be reproached was having served in prison for debt.
Mason, he said, asked him and some of the other officers whether
or not they thought the money found in his possession was genuine
and all answered, in effect, that they presumed Mason knew. To
this the prisoner replied that he had made no attempt to pass any
of the bills and that if they were counterfeit, he could not be
punished for carrying them. He wanted to know by whose authority
he was arrested, and whether it was likely he would be turned over
to the Americans. He stated he would rather be deprived of all his
property and pass the remainder of his days on Spanish soil than be
delivered into the hands of the United States officials.

On January 18th Samuel Mason appeared before the Commandant,
the Commissioner of Police, the Captain of Militia, and the
Interpreter. Answering questions, he stated that he was born in
Pennsylvania and had lately come from the District of Natchez for
the purpose of residing near New Madrid. As to how he made a
living he swore he had depended upon his plantation, his “horned
cattle,” the labor of his sons and the people he sometimes
employed. He explained that his plan was to have his four sons then
with him, his wife, his son living on the river Monongahela, Mrs.
Thompson (a married daughter) and her husband, another son-in-law,
and a few other kinsmen join him in the settlement he proposed to
establish. He said that he had recently sold his place near Natchez
and the only claim he had on land was located on the Monongahela,
to which he had fallen heir through a “brother who died young.”

When asked why he had not made use of the passport the year it was
issued to him, he asserted that he had been kept busy settling
his business affairs. He added that he had spent much time in the
District of Natchez trying to show that the suspicion held against
him of being a robber was groundless, but notwithstanding earnest
efforts his attempts were in vain.

His attention was called to the fact that since his passport as
a settler’s permit had expired, he would be obliged to give new
references. He then gave the name of his daughter, Mrs. Thompson,
of Cape Girardeau, whose first husband was Mr. Winterington,
and General Benjamin Harrison, whose sister married his, Samuel
Mason’s, brother, the owner of a kiln on the Monongahela. He was
requested to cite, if he could, some local people, and he referred
to Dr. Richard Jones Waters, saying he was the man on whose
recommendation he had received the passport three years before, but
admitted that he had known the gentleman only slightly.

Mason’s answers show that he knew more or less about the robberies
that had been referred to, but in each case he managed to explain
how and from whom he received the information. For example, when
the Owsley boat robbery, in which he said Phillips was implicated,
was under discussion, he stated that in May, 1802, two of his sons
were coming up the Mississippi River and were overtaken by two men,
Wiguens and John Taylor, in a boat, from whom they heard of the
robbery. Later, he met Owsley, the owner of the boat, who requested
him to investigate the case. This he did, with some assistance by
a Mr. Koiret, and in consequence he knew where the booty had been
stored and learned many other details.

He more than once asserted he would throw light on a number of
robberies, and not only give the names of the guilty parties,
but would produce them, “if the Commandant assured him he would
spare his life and exonerate him of all misdeeds which rumor had
so unjustly attributed to him.” The Commandant replied that “it
is customary to spare the lives of such confessors and to show
great leniency toward them.” After a somewhat pathetic recital
before the officials of how his many efforts ended in failure
to “justify” himself, and evidently feeling confident he had
impressed the Commandant as an innocent man, and to show that he
could produce a guilty man, he informed the court that one of his
fellow-prisoners, John Taylor, alias John Setton, alias Wells--“and
sometimes going by other names he, Mason, could not recall”--as one
of the guilty parties. That prisoner, Mason insinuated, could give
much information regarding the robbing of Owsley’s boat and other
robberies, for he knew John Taylor was implicated in them.

John Setton, the man of various aliases, was brought before the
Commandant to testify. He admitted that he had changed his name to
John Taylor, but explained that he did so because Samuel Mason
demanded it, and that he suspected Mason had some specific purpose
in insisting upon the name of John Taylor. He also admitted (and
probably in a triumphant way) that Samuel Mason was correct in his
statement that he, “one of Mason’s fellow prisoners, could give
much information regarding robberies.” He said that he had been
with the Masons since May 14, 1802--eight months.

He swore he was an Irishman and had come to America in 1797, and
shortly thereafter enrolled in Major Geyon’s corps but “deserted
near the high coast.” Reaching Nogales (Vicksburg) he “worked for
three weeks for His Majesty the King of Spain,” and then went down
the river in the “row-gally Louisiana” to New Orleans where, during
the winter, he found occupation as a carpenter. After this, for a
period of about two years, he shifted around in Spanish territory,
either working with white people or “hunting with Chaquetaw
Indians.” One day while in Arkansas an American officer recognized
him as a deserter from the army and asked for his delivery to a
Spanish post. He was delivered into the hands of the American
authorities and placed in jail. There he met Wiguens, an American
soldier, and a month later both escaped. They went back to Arkansas
and were shortly afterwards arrested by the Commander of the
Arkansas Post, who considered them suspicious characters and kept
them in jail twenty-eight days. They then found farm employment for
a month with a man named Gibson, who obtained for them a passport
to go hunting on White River. They hunted until May, 1802, when
they came down the river some distance in a boat and then crossed
over the country to “Little Prairie of the St. Francis River,”
where they sold their skins to one Fulsom. They continued their
trip, for he, Setton, “wished to join his family in Pennsylvania.”
When “at the crossing of the Chaquetaws below the river Ares,” they
met, by chance, John and Thomas Mason, Gibson, and Wilson, and he
had been with the Masons ever since.

The Commandant asked Setton whether or not he was acquainted with
“the man Harpe” and he answered that he had met a man by that name
in Cumberland who had since been killed, but had left a brother,
whose whereabouts was unknown to him. Setton further stated, upon
being questioned, that he did not know whether or not Harpe and any
of the Masons ever had any dealings together or had ever met, but
he felt confident that Harpe had not been around since he had had
the misfortune to fall into Mason’s hands.«27»

Setton, continuing his account, swore that John and Thomas Mason
took possession of all his belongings, and encouraged him to stay
by promising him land on to which he could later move his family
and by giving him a contract “to go after Mother Mason,” who
apparently had some time before refused to live any longer with her
outlaw husband and sons. Setton declared that from the very day
he met the Masons they had kept him like a prisoner. The promised
land had never materialized and the trip for their mother was never
attempted, but he was obliged to linger with them because he found
no opportunity to escape, and the Masons never allowed him more
than two rounds of powder at a time.

He asserted that since he had been with the Masons they had
committed no crimes in his presence. They did not demand that
he steal horses, but apparently expected him to do so. A number
of horses had been brought in and taken away, but he asked no
questions and as he heard no comments made regarding them, he had
no idea how they came or where they went. He knew, however, that
there was an agreement between the Masons and one Burton, of Little
Bay Prairie, who bought at twenty dollars all the horses the Masons
could supply, provided the animals were such that they could be
sold for about sixty dollars.

The Masons occasionally left home “to repair a chimney” and if they
remained a few days they invariably accounted for their prolonged
absence by saying they “could not cross the water,” “lost their
repairing tools,” “were hindered by bad weather,” or “visited
friends,” but in no instance had they given the name of the friend
they claimed to have seen.

Setton related that when he and the Masons were in Nogales,
at the residence of Charles Colin, a Mr. Koiret, an American
citizen, chanced to stop in the house. Koiret impressed the
Masons as a prospective victim, and he (Setton) being permitted
to chat freely with Koiret, soon proved himself “an interesting
conversationalist.” But when Koiret incidentally remarked that
he was simply passing by on his way looking for outlaws who had
committed crimes along the Natchez Trace and the Mississippi River,
John Mason, on a pretext, lured him (Setton) away from the officer,
and, in the meantime, other Masons tactfully managed to “speed
the parting guest.” Turning a corner of the house, he (Setton)
unexpectedly ran into Samuel Mason, who, with drawn dagger,
commanded “silence.” John Mason seized him and the father and son
immediately gagged him, bound his hands and feet, and dragged
him into the house where they held him down on the floor for
about three hours. Feeling that Koiret had got far beyond hearing
distance, they ungagged and untied him, but continued to guard him
closely until the next day.

Setton swore that shortly after he had received this brutal
treatment Samuel Mason prepared a written statement in which he,
under the assumed name of John Taylor, made a declaration that
he, Phillips, Fulsom, Gibson, Wiguens, Bassett, and others were
implicated in one or more of three robberies--the Baker, the
Owsley, and the Campbell and Glass robberies--and in it further
declared that the Masons were in no way connected with any of these
depredations.

After the statement had been prepared the Masons explained to him
that they were going to conduct him to a justice of the peace and
they furthermore convinced him that should he fail to swear to this
written confession and declaration of the three robberies, they
would kill him before he had a chance to inform the officers that
the statements were false and not his own. He related how John and
Thomas Mason, armed with guns, and Samuel Mason, who bore no weapon
at all, forced him to the residence of William Downs, a justice
living below Vicksburg, and that, with seeming calmness, he went
through the form required by the law and the outlaws. He realized
that while he and Samuel Mason were in the house, the two sons were
outside in hiding, prepared to shoot him should the prearranged
signal be given.

The first of the three robberies detailed in the false affidavit,
continued Setton, was the robbery of Baker on the Natchez Trace,
from whom the Masons took “twenty-five hundred piasters in gold,
silver and banknotes.” For this John Mason had been imprisoned, but
by the aid of his brother Thomas and others, made his escape. The
object of the confession was to show that he (as John Taylor) and
others were the guilty men and that Mason was absolutely innocent
of the crime. Notwithstanding his purported statement, he could
prove an alibi, for ten days before the robbery took place, he
had been committed to the Arkansas prison. He suspected that part
of the money found on the Masons by the officials who arrested
them was a part of the booty obtained in the Baker robbery. The
explanation that the money they had was found “in a bag hanging
on a bush near the road” was suggested by Samuel Mason a few hours
before the arrest, saying at the time, “accounting for it in that
way won’t do any harm.”

“The second crime,” resumed Setton, “was the one committed on the
Mississippi at the crossing of the Chaquetaws below the river
Ares,” where the Masons robbed a merchant boat belonging to Owsley.
The Masons tried to show that he and Phillips took the lead in this
affair. He swore he was not connected with the robbery and stated
that he understood Phillips had done nothing more than purchase
two guns from the boatman and was in no way involved with the men
who later bought all the guns that were on the boat, and, with the
newly purchased guns attacked the boat and robbed it.

The third robbery Mason wished to throw upon the shoulders of
Phillips and others by inserting it in the false affidavit, was
the one that occurred on “the road from Kentucky to Natchez,” in
which Campbell and Glass were deprived of several horses, saddles,
and some money. Near the site of this robbery there later was
discovered a sign on a tree, reading “Done by Mason of the Woods.”
The Commandant asked Setton whether or not he thought Mason was
guilty of this hold-up and he answered that he did not know but,
in his opinion, the stratagem fitted Mason, who, if guilty, could
cite it as an instance of the “workings of his enemies” and would
be prepared to prove “that he was elsewhere when the robbery
occurred.” Anthony Glass, the witness thought, was a party to the
deception, for he had been a poor man in Nogales until he came in
contact with the Masons.

On one occasion Mason proposed to Setton that they capture a
certain store boat, drown the owner, rob the boat, and then sell
the goods to Glass, who would pay cash for half its actual value
and never betray them. He asserted that he refused to participate
in the proposed venture, but he suspected that the program was
carried out during one of the “chimney repairing” trips and that
some of the booty could be located by Glass.

He also declared that the pistol the Masons showed Downs and
claimed to be Setton’s had never belonged to him. It was one the
Masons had taken during the Baker robbery and had originally
belonged to Sheriff William Nicholson, whose initials had been
inlaid with silver thread in the handle but had been removed by
the Masons, who were not aware that he (Setton) saw them make the
change. This very pistol, he said, was now among the goods the
officials had taken possession of and was the same one that Samuel
Mason carried to Downs, expecting to use it as evidence against him
when the case came to trial.

Setton explained that two of the saddle bags now in possession
of the Masons were originally tan “and had large tacks fastened
at their corners” and that the tacks were broken off by Samuel
Mason and the leather dyed black. He also stated that the original
color of the trunk they had was red and had been blackened in his
presence by Thomas and John Mason.

Setton, in his comments on the Mason family, remarked that every
member treated him equally bad, except Thomas, who at times seemed
somewhat human. From the conversations of the Masons he inferred
that “the father had been a thief and a rascal for more than
forty years.” On one occasion, Samuel Mason, “after taking three
measures,” boasted to him that he was “one of the boldest soldiers
in the Revolutionary War” and that “there was no greater robber
and no better capturer of negroes and horses than himself.”

On another occasion, after he began to feel his liquor, he
pointed with pride to the fact that he had two partners, Barret
and Brown, who did some killing as a side line and always shared
the spoils with him in consideration of the advice and powder he
furnished them. Setton also stated that Mason had related to him
that when Mason’s eldest daughter was married, he had arranged
with Barret, Brown, and others to steal as many of the horses
of the guests as they could while the guests were feasting at
the bridal celebration, and that when the discovery of the theft
became known, no man displayed more eagerness to pursue the horse
thieves than Samuel Mason himself. A few days later some of the
men who had taken the horses were captured and accused Mason of
being the promoter of the theft, but because of the absurdity of
the accusation Mason experienced no difficulty in proving his
“innocence.”

In his comments on John Mason’s wife, Setton said more than once
she pretended to be sick and requested her husband to send for Dr.
Wales, whom she knew well, but it was his opinion that the woman
simply wished “to chat with the physician” and also “to force the
family cooking upon some one else.”

Setton cited another instance of Mrs. John Mason’s nature. He
related that one day in his presence and in the presence of two or
three of the Masons, Barret, who had lately shown signs of being
dissatisfied with the treatment he received, declared he would
denounce the whole family. Mrs. Mason, hearing this, immediately
jumped up in a rage, knocked Barret’s hat off his head and shouted:
“Monster, you are not going to denounce me or any of us!” She was
about to plunge a long knife into Barret’s heart, when Thomas
interfered, saying: “It is better to part as friends than to part
after a fight,” and peace was restored.

After Setton’s testimony had been heard, the Commandant on the
following day, January 20, ordered Samuel Mason to appear again.
Mason admitted that he had, in a way, detained Setton, but did so
in justice to himself and his sons. The Owsley boat, he swore in
his explanation, had been robbed in April, 1802, and immediately
thereafter the rumor had become current that the Masons were
the guilty men. Mason declared that Owsley did not know by whom
he and his five boatmen had been robbed, but in recounting the
affair Owsley referred to two incidents which in themselves were
sufficient to distinguish this robbery from any other. The first
was that after the boat had been plundered, one of the three
robbers returned five dollars to one of Owsley’s boatmen who had
been seriously wounded during the short battle that took place
before the boat was captured. The other incident was that after
the robbery the outlaws placed a sign on a tree, reading, “Done by
Samuel Mason of the Woods.” John and Thomas had heard this account
a number of times and every version had it that Samuel Mason was
accused of the work.

When his two sons first met Setton and Wiguens, who were
strangers to them, Setton told them the details of the Owsley
robbery, including these two incidents, and a few hours later,
after the brothers had made a more favorable impression, Setton
confided in them, saying he and Wiguens and also Gibson were
among the perpetrators of the robbery. John and Thomas Mason,
then recognizing in the two men the outlaws who had committed
at least one of the robberies of which their father was being
accused, decided to entice Setton and Wiguens to join them and
in the meantime seek an opportunity to force them into a public
declaration of their guilt and thus vindicate the Mason family.
They succeeded in detaining Setton, admitted Samuel Mason, but
Wiguens escaped.

Samuel Mason, in his comments on the Baker boat robbery, stated
that a few days after the boat had been pillaged, Colonel Baker
and a number of other men came to the Mason home near Natchez. The
moment Baker saw John he ordered his arrest, saying, “I could pick
him out of a thousand.” The father proceeded to explain to the
Commandant that Baker’s mistake could be easily explained, as John
Mason and Wiguens resembled each other very much, and added that
shortly after Wiguens and Setton first met his two sons, Wiguens
told John confidentially that he, Setton, Bassett, Gibson, Fulsom,
Phillips, and others were in the Baker robbery.

Going into details, Mason explained that, according to Setton’s
version, Bassett, Fulsom and Phillips were the men who bought for
cash all the guns Baker had on hand and left the boatmen under the
impression that these arms were to be used in a search for the
Mason gang. Setton then told him confidentially that he and the
other members of their band, by prearrangement, appeared shortly
thereafter and robbed Baker of all his money and as much of the
goods as they could carry. Fulsom, in order to inspire courage
in the raiders, assured them they need not fear any pursuing
party which Baker might organize, for he (Fulsom) could on very
short notice, muster and command five hundred Chacquetaw Indians
who would easily annihilate the revenge-seeking Baker. Setton,
in concluding his account to the Masons, laughingly remarked
that it was strange that two men looking so much alike should be
“involved” in the same robbery, and that the guilty man should not
be suspected and the innocent one be accused. Shortly after this
Wiguens suddenly disappeared, very much to the disappointment of
the Masons, who now realized the necessity of guarding Setton more
closely.

Samuel Mason (digressing to another Baker robbery) asserted that
after Baker had been robbed on the Natchez Trace, Baker and the
officers came to arrest John. John submitted immediately, feeling
confident that his innocence would be speedily proven. He could
have vindicated himself had not some of Bassett’s friends refused
to declare that they saw John many miles from the scene of the
robbery when it occurred. After he had been in prison about two
months “he was liberated by men who did not make themselves known
to him.”

The Baker highway robbery having taken place on the American side
and the Owsley robbery on the Spanish side, John, fearing he would
be arrested on either side of the river, took his family and hid
in the woods for a number of weeks. He hoped that in the meantime
his innocence would become established by the guilty parties being
brought to justice. But, instead, suspicion against him and against
the entire Mason family grew stronger day by day.

Samuel Mason admitted that he had brought John Setton before a
magistrate. He further stated that a number of things found in
their possession the day of the arrest in Little Prairie were taken
by them from Setton and held as evidence of his connection with
some of the robberies of which the Masons were accused.

He asserted that after he had urgently requested Setton to declare
his (Setton’s) crime before a magistrate, and thus, perhaps,
receive clemency, “he consented to do so.” He and Setton then went
“about twelve miles below Nogales” to the office of William Downs,
a magistrate. Mason carried with him a pistol Setton told him he
had procured as a part of his booty from the raid on the Owsley
boat. William Downs “received Setton’s confession but was not able
to take his oath, as he had no sheriff on guard with him.” Mason
then, without informing Setton, went in search of Anthony Glass,
who, it was rumored, was part owner of the Owsley boat, to have
him serve as a witness to the affidavit. Mrs. Glass implored her
husband not to act, for she feared his doing so might lead to the
exposure of her brother, one Bassett, who had participated in
various robberies. Glass, however, pacified his wife by telling her
that since Setton was a deserter any sworn statement he might make
would necessarily be ignored, and then insisted that he would go to
Downs and there denounce Setton as a deserter and have him placed
in the hands of the military authorities.

When the two men arrived at the magistrate’s house “they discovered
that Setton, suspecting some trickery, had left.” A few weeks
later, Mason swore, Setton again joined the Masons and had been
with them ever since. After finishing his testimony Mason suggested
that “If Setton told the truth in the testimony he gave in this
trial, our statements must agree.”

The next morning, January 21, John Mason appeared before the
Commandant. The prisoner evidently did not know the contents of
his father’s and Setton’s testimony, but he undoubtedly had some
idea of how his father intended to answer many questions should
they be asked. Most of his testimony agreed, in the main, with
his father’s. He tried to show the Commandant that he had long
attempted to “vindicate” and “establish” himself and to live
“a decent life.” He said he had escaped from prison because he
realized that the defense of his name required his personal
attention. He swore that practically all he knew about the various
robberies regarding which he was questioned, was through reports
he had heard from John Setton, alias John Taylor alias Wells, and
from Druck Smith, alias Smith Gibson. He insisted he had never seen
Phillips, Fulsom, and the other Gibson referred to.

The question of how the Masons came into possession of the eight
horses had not been asked before. John Mason accounted for each by
giving the details of a purchase or trade. He was asked why “he
pursued the two Frenchmen in a boat until they had reached a safe
harbor.” His explanation was that he, Thomas, and Setton were on
the river and followed these men, suspecting them to be robbers
involved in some of the acts of which the Masons were accused. He
hoped that if they were he would succeed in having them verify
Setton’s declaration of his own guilt. When the two men reached
Nogales his boat was on the point of overtaking them. He then
discovered that they were French officials and the pursuit was
dropped without giving the men any reasons for the chase.

He swore that most of the notes and paper money found in their
possession belonged to Setton, who claimed he had “found it in
a bag hanging on a bush near the road,” and who on one occasion
remarked that since then he had more money than he could use. John
Mason added that this statement convinced him that Setton had
stolen the money.

The record of this sworn statement made by John Mason is abruptly
followed by “And the prisoner being asked by the interpreter
whether he had anything further to say or anything to unsay, he
answered ‘No,’ but requested, as his father had done before him,
that we do not hand him over to the United States Government, and
after his declaration was read to him, he persisted that it was
true.”

Thomas Mason followed his brother John and, like him, gave
evidence that agreed, in the main, with his father’s. He swore his
occupation was “farming and harvesting” and “bringing down flour
and whiskey” in boats. He admitted that he had heard of the Baker
and Owsley robberies but claimed he knew none of the details except
those told to him by Setton, and these he repeated.

When he was asked about Setton’s appearance before the magistrate,
he answered that he had accompanied him to Downs’ but did not force
him to make an affidavit. He added that John Mason had received
a message from the Governor of Natchez to the effect that if he
produced a witness who would turn state’s evidence it would “tend
to clear him of his guilt;” hence, their anxiety to have Setton
make a declaration.

After hearing Thomas Mason’s version of the subjects that had been
discussed by the preceding witnesses, the Commandant, who evidently
had been informed that day that the Masons had also maneuvered
further north, asked him whether or not he knew a man named Mosique
and the two Duff brothers while in Illinois. He answered he had
heard of them and understood that one of the brothers had been
killed by Indians. His answers to other questions were to the
effect that he knew nothing of the robbing of a negro in St. Louis,
of a man named Lecompte, and of a stolen negro woman who had been
sold to a priest named Manuel. The officer then asked him whether
or not he was aware that the Masons were accused of these crimes,
“but the witness continued to profess he had never heard of them.”

The fifth prisoner was Marguerite Douglas, wife of John Mason. She
swore she had been married eight years. She answered that to her
“keen regret” she had heard of the robberies of which her husband
and the other Masons were “so falsely accused.” Her knowledge of
these acts, she swore, was based solely on hearsay. Among other
things, she said Setton told her that robbing the Baker boat proved
as easy “as robbing some old woman.” She also swore she knew
nothing about the paper money found in their possession and could
not account for the money and goods discovered among her personal
belongings other than by suggesting that in packing up so hurriedly
she may have placed some of Setton’s personal property in her bag.

Samuel Mason Jr., in his testimony stated that he was eighteen
years old and that he had lived with his parents all the time until
about three months previous. He said his father and brothers had
left his mother at Bayou Pierre--between Natchez and Vicksburg--and
were away for the purpose of establishing a new home, and that she
was now ill and living with her daughter, Mrs. Philip Briscoe.
The Commandant remarked to him: “You ought to speak the truth for
you have a mother, who, it is reported, is a good and honorable
woman, and you ought not to be mixed up in the wickedness of your
father and brothers, who, it is said, are guilty of many thefts
and robberies.” The answers he gave to the few questions asked him
agreed with those given by his father.

Magnus Mason, the last of the prisoners, was called upon January
24. He stated he was about sixteen years old and was born “in
Kentucky on the south side of Green River.” (The others had claimed
Pennsylvania as their native state.) In answer to questions he
stated that he had lived “part of his time with his father in
Kentucky and part with his mother in Bayou Pierre near Natchez.” He
declared his father had spent practically all of the past two years
away from home trying “to discover men who were committing the
robberies.”«28»

The next witness was Dr. Richard Jones Waters, the man on whose
recommendation the passport had been granted to Samuel Mason. Dr.
Waters said he first met Mason in 1791 or 1792 at “Red Banks on the
Ohio,” (now Henderson, Kentucky) which was after he (Dr. Waters)
had settled in New Madrid. He had been traveling in America and on
his return, coming to the Ohio River, engaged Charles Lafond, a
merchant, and two other men who were on their way to New Orleans,
to take him down as far as New Madrid. When the boat reached the
Falls of the Ohio (Louisville) Lafond, hearing that he intended to
remain there a few days, asked permission to let the boat proceed
to Red Banks, where Lafond expected to dispose of some of the goods
on board. The permission was granted on condition that Lafond,
without fail, wait for him there. In due time he (Dr. Waters)
reached Red Banks and then met Samuel Mason for the first time.
Mason claimed that Lafond had gone fishing a few days before and,
in the meantime, started his boat south. He (Dr. Waters) did not
know whether or not Lafond and his boat ever reached New Orleans,
and not until recently, had he suspected foul play.

A year after this, continued Dr. Waters, he was traveling down the
Ohio River, stopped at Red Banks and, to his surprise, met Samuel
Mason again. Mason asked him to come to the house to prescribe for
Mrs. Mason who was sick in bed. The doctor complied and the result
was a trade in which Mason bought seventy dollars worth of medicine
and merchandise, paying forty dollars in meat and giving him a
demand note for thirty dollars on Felic Concer, of New Madrid.
But when he arrived at New Madrid he learned that Concer had left
for parts unknown. In 1798, however, Mason paid the note. He then
saw nothing more of Mason until March, 1800, when he met him and
his son Thomas and a man by the name of Smith who said they had
come to New Madrid for drugs. They purchased some medicine from
him for Mrs. John Mason and other members of the family and paid
for it with merchandise which they claimed they had bought from
a store boat. A few days later Samuel Mason called again, not to
buy medicine but to ask his assistance in procuring a passport
for land on Spanish territory. This he was, at first, unwilling
to give, for, although he knew nothing unfavorable concerning the
family, he was not assured of their character. After the old man
had pleaded with him and declared that although rumor had done all
the Masons great injustice he would never regret the endorsement of
his character, he procured a passport, giving to the clerk at the
time a history of his acquaintance with Mason. A few days afterward
Thomas Mason informed him that he was obliged to go to Kentucky to
straighten out some business affairs before he settled on the land
that would be granted them. He entrusted Thomas Mason with “some
valuable papers for delivery at the Falls of the Ohio.” These
papers reached their destination but much later than Thomas had
promised. No explanation of the delay was offered or demanded.

The record of the proceedings shows that January 26 was devoted
by the officials to inspecting the belongings of the Masons and
approximating their value. The saddles and pistols referred to by
Setton were found as described by him. There was also discovered
some “twenty twists of human hair of different shades which do
not seem to have been cut off voluntarily by those to whom the
hair belonged.” These and a number of other evidences were laid
aside by the inspectors. The belongings were estimated at about
six hundred dollars in value. The silver and paper money amounted
to seven thousand dollars, much of which, however, “appears to be
counterfeit.”

The next day Francois Derousser, a citizen of New Madrid, came
forward, stating that he had an important declaration to make
concerning the prisoners. He explained that he was a native of
Illinois and that in 1791, when he and his family were coming down
the Ohio River and had reached a point near Red Banks, where they
happened to make a landing, a man--the one he now recognized among
the prisoners as Samuel Mason--stepped up to him and, pushing a
gun against his stomach, threatened to shoot him if he did not
follow. He was led into a hut, where several persons were sitting.
Immediately after entering, Samuel Mason shouted: “This is the man
who stole my horses and slaves and sold them to the Indians,” and,
looking around for a rope, Mason seemed to be making preparations
to hang him at once. He finally convinced Mason that he could not
possibly have been guilty of the thefts.

After keeping him in chains all night, continued Derousser, Mason
permitted him to leave, but while he was making some repairs on
his boat to resume his trip, Mason came to him and persuaded him
to remain two months and work with the Mason boys. Mason promised
him a certain quantity of linen, calico, and bed covers for his
services and, needing these badly for his family, he accepted the
proposition. At the end of the specified time the promised goods
were given to him; but three hours after he had received them and
while on his way to his boat, Samuel Mason and a Captain Bradley
overtook him and robbed him of all the goods. That night he
managed to return to his boat and with the aid of Eustache Peltier
succeeded in cutting the ice from around it. He started down the
river, and after much suffering from cold and hunger he and his
family finally landed at New Madrid, where they had lived ever
since.

Eustache Peltier appeared before the Commandant, confirmed the
declaration made by Derousser, and added that he had heard that a
certain Lafond, “an European merchant with an emporium of goods
in New Orleans,” had stopped at the Mason’s house near Red Banks
one night about the time he and Derousser made their escape, but
neither the merchant nor the boat in which he traveled had been
heard from since.

Pierre Billeth, another citizen of New Madrid, declared that he
knew some facts bearing on the Masons and felt it his duty to
report them. He related to the Commandant that during an excursion
in August, 1798, on the Cumberland River, near the mouth, he heard
a negro woman belonging to Samuel Mason tell Rees Jones and James
Downs that her master had forced her to help dispose of the body
of one of his victims. She declared that Mason after stabbing and
robbing the man had commanded her to help tie a rope around his
neck and drag the body to the Ohio, where they threw it in to the
water. This same woman had been stolen by Mason and later sold at
public auction by Sheriff James Downs, then of Kaskaskia, to Father
Manuel, a priest, who lived near St. Genevieve.

All the witnesses having been examined, and the declarations and
proclamations heard, the Commandant January 29, 1803, ordered an
itemized account of the cost of the trial, including the expenses
incurred in making the arrest at Little Prairie. The account
rendered shows that the largest single item was for “the sergeant
and nineteen militiamen for seventeen days’ guard and sentinel
watch of prisoners, at one piaster per day, three hundred and forty
piasters.” Twenty-two men, besides the officers, were employed in
making the arrest and bringing the prisoners to New Madrid, for
which they received one hundred and seventy-six piasters. Another
item reads, “irons and cuffs made for prisoners, eight piasters.”
The total expense is given as one thousand fifty-three piasters, or
about one thousand dollars.

The last entry is dated January 31, 1803, and, like all the
others, is presented in monotonous legal phraseology. It ends
with the statement that: “We [the Commandant] hereby direct that
the proceedings of this trial, originally set down in writing on
ninety-one sheets of paper written on both sides, as well as the
pieces of evidence tending to conviction, together with seven
thousand piasters in U. S. banknotes, be forwarded to the Honorable
Governor General by Don Robert McCoy, Captain of the Militia, whom
we have charged to conduct the prisoners, Mason and consorts, to
New Orleans with the view of their trial being continued and
finished, if it so please the Honorable Governor General.”

And here ends the record of the preliminary trial of the Masons.
Captain McCoy, having been appointed to conduct the prisoners to a
higher court, made his preparations and in due time started for New
Orleans.




Mason and Harpe--Double-Cross and Double Death


Out of the mass of perjury and counter-accusations brought out at
this examination only one thing was clear--that is that Mason and
his gang, as far as testimony and confession went, were not guilty
of any crime on the Spanish side of the Mississippi. Whatever
crimes they may have committed it was essential to their present
safety to locate them on the American or eastern side of the river.
The Spanish authorities had no power to punish them for violations
of law on American territory, but the Spanish Intendant Salcedo at
New Orleans had the power under the comity existing between the
Spanish and American governments to deliver them up to the American
authorities. The New Madrid court, therefore, ordered the prisoners
to be transferred to New Orleans and brought before the intendant.

At that point in the march of events fate took relentless grip on
Samuel Mason and Little Harpe, alias Setton, for their crimes.
The way of atonement was as swift as its end was to be terrible.
It might be quickly summarized, but there is the better way of
pursuing the astonishing and dramatic story through the faded
records and old scraps of publications of those times, thus
getting into actual touch with the persons and with the primitive
conditions under which this strange duel of two master criminals
was fought out. Each feared the other; Mason, perhaps, not knowing
his antagonist. The grim headsman was silently stalking both. In
the language of crime fate was double-crossing both.

From New Madrid to New Orleans was a distance of about nine hundred
miles and to travel it by boat in those days required more than two
weeks. It was as if it had been decreed that Mason should make a
farewell tour through a part of the country in which he had become
so execrated. New Orleans was then the capital of the Spanish
province of Louisiana, the seat of the highest court, and had been
for more than three-quarters of a century the most important town
on the Mississippi.

In 1803 New Madrid was a frontier settlement about fourteen years
old. It was a military post occupied by a small force of soldiers
and a town with a population of about eight hundred who were
French, American, Canadian, and Spanish, or an extraction of these
peoples. New Madrid remained under Spanish rule until 1804 when,
as a part of the province of Louisiana, it became a part of the
territory of Louisiana acquired by the United States.«29»

If an official account of what followed Mason’s trial at New
Madrid was kept it may now exist among the archives in old Madrid
in Spain and may contain data relative to the transfer of the
prisoners. At any rate, Captain McCoy and his guard evidently
started for New Orleans early in February, 1803. It is more likely
that, as a matter of economy and convenience, they traveled down
the Mississippi in a flatboat. The records show that some of the
goods found in the possession of the Masons were carried along as
evidence.

There is neither written history nor oral tradition telling of
Captain McCoy’s departure for New Orleans or how he held his
prisoners on board during the trip. At least one very probable
scene, however, presents itself, and in it John Setton is the
central figure. Samuel Mason was then the most widely known bandit
in the Mississippi Valley. But in the eyes of the law Setton now
suddenly became the most important character of all the outlaws.
He was likely to turn state’s evidence, reveal many robberies that
were long standing mysteries, and thus convict not only Samuel
Mason and his family, but also point out clues that would lead to
the extermination of all river pirates.

The boat was necessarily crowded, for even under the most
encouraging circumstances room on a flatboat was limited. There
were about seventeen persons on board: Captain McCoy, the
interpreter, some five men who constituted the guard and crew,
the seven prisoners, and the three children. Setton was probably
chained in the most conspicuous place where he could be carefully
watched. This must have been done not only to prevent his escape,
but also to prevent Samuel Mason from trying to persuade him to
act in a plot against the crew, or to dictate to him a forthcoming
“confession.”

One can easily imagine that Captain McCoy and his men frowned
at Setton as they would at a chained sheep-killing dog. There
was nothing about him to attract them. On the contrary, he was
repulsive. Setton’s countenance, according to one writer, was
always downcast and fierce, his hair red, his face meager and
his stature below that of the average man. This combination gave
him, as Judge James Hall puts it, “a suspicious exterior.” He was
about thirty years of age and looked the part of a man who was too
much of a villain to smile and thereby try to hide some of his
villainy. To his captors he was nothing more than a vicious dog
whose life was being spared solely that he might later give Mason a
long-deserved, fatal bite.

They not only looked upon him as a thief and murderer, but also as
a fool not fit to live. If he were guilty of the crimes Mason laid
at his feet, then hanging was too mild a punishment for him. By the
same token, if guilty, he was a fool to permit a notorious outlaw
to dictate to him just what to confess and whom to implicate. And
if he were innocent of the crimes he was even a greater fool for
submitting to Mason’s demand and declaring in an affidavit that he,
not Mason, was the guilty man.

With Captain McCoy and his guards on one side, and Samuel Mason and
his family on the other, Setton stood alone between “the devil and
the deep blue sea.” He and Mason were figuratively and literally in
the same boat, but Mason had at least the consolation of knowing
that the members of his family on board were also with him in
sympathy and ready to obey his command, even though it led to
certain death.

Judged by their morals Samuel Mason and John Setton were very much
alike, but in their physical aspect they differed greatly. Mason
was then about fifty-five years old, possibly sixty. Swaney, the
old mail-carrier, who saw him often, described him to Guild: “He
weighed about two hundred pounds, and was a fine looking man.
He was rather modest and unassuming, and had nothing of the
raw-head-and-bloody-bones appearance which his character would
indicate.”

Henry Howe refers to him as “a man of gigantic stature and of more
than ordinary talents.” William Darby says: “Mason at any time of
his life or in any situation, had something extremely ferocious in
his look, which arose particularly from a tooth which projected
forwards, and could only be covered with his lip by effort.”

Regardless of the difference in their physical size and
physiognomy, and regardless of the extent of their guilt, both
men were held for the same crimes and were now on their way to
New Orleans to appear before the Spanish authorities. Less than a
dozen towns and forts were then scattered along the river and all
were small ones. As the boat slowly floated and sailed down the
wide stream between seemingly endless forest and jungle covered
shores, Mason had ample time to view the various places where he
had committed robberies, and to recall how successfully he had
carried out all his attempts. The scenes along the Mississippi
have undergone many changes since Mason’s day. Nevertheless, many
of the views have retained enough of their primitive grandeur to
create in the imagination a landscape of continuous virgin forests
and a vivid picture of what river life was in pioneer days. But,
by searching the old records pertaining to Mason’s career, one
discovers facts that could never have been foreseen by the wisest
prophet nor imagined by the wildest fictionist.

How and when Captain McCoy and his prisoners arrived at New Orleans
has not been ascertained, although an effort has been made to
find newspaper or other accounts giving details on the subject.
There is, however, an unpublished official letter in Spanish, in
the Mississippi Department of Archives and History, which shows
that upon Captain McCoy’s arrival in New Orleans the record of the
proceedings of the trial held at New Madrid was submitted to the
Governor General of Louisiana and his Secretary of War. These two
Spanish officers, after going over the proceedings, concluded that
since the evidence taken did not prove that Mason had committed any
crime on the Spanish side, the prisoners should be handed over to
the Americans. In due time, therefore, they ordered them sent to
Natchez.

The official letter referred to is dated New Orleans, March 3,
1803. It was written by Vidal, the Secretary of War, approved
by Manuel Salcedo, the last Spanish governor of Louisiana, and
forwarded to Governor Claiborne. It briefly reviews the trial and
points out to the Governor of the Mississippi Territory that the
case falls under American and not Spanish jurisdiction.

Governor Claiborne, in all probability, answered this communication
and requested that the Masons be turned over to him, for Captain
McCoy and his men, taking the prisoners and some of their
stolen property, left New Orleans the latter part of March for
Natchez. What occurred when their boat stopped near Point Coupee,
Louisiana--some two hundred and forty miles above New Orleans and
about one hundred miles below Natchez--is told in the following
news item quoted in full from _The Western Spy_, published at
Cincinnati, May 4, 1803:

“Extract of a letter from the Reverend John Smith to a gentleman
in this town, dated Point Coupee, March 28, 1803.

“‘You no doubt have received the account of old Sam Mason’s arrest,
with three or four of his sons, some other villains, a woman and
three children, about thirty miles below New Madrid, by Captain
McCoy, the king’s interpreter and a small party. Captain McCoy has
since taken them to New Orleans in irons, but as no crime could be
charged upon them as being committed in the Spanish Government, the
Governor General ordered them to be taken to Natchez and delivered
to our Government. The day before yesterday as they were passing
this place the mast of their vessel broke, a part of the men were
sent on shore to make a new one, and the rest were left to guard
the prisoners. In a short time they threw off their irons, seized
the guns belonging to the boat and fired upon the guard. Captain
McCoy hearing the alarm ran out of the cabin, old Mason instantly
shot him through the breast and shoulder; he with the determined
bravery of a soldier, though scarcely able to stand, shot him in
the head. Mason fell and rose, fell and rose again, and although
in a gore of blood, one of his party having shot a Spaniard’s arm
to pieces, he drove off McCoy’s party and kept possession of the
boat till evening, when, discovering a superior force they left the
boat, the woman and children following with great precipitation.
There is a party of Caroles [sic] after them and it is supposed
they will succeed in taking them. The commandant at this place
has offered one thousand dollars for taking old Mason dead or
alive. They will be pursued with the utmost diligence by a set of
determined fellows.’”

Mason escaped March 26, 1803. The report of his flight spread
fast. The same facts that were published in _The Western Spy_
were sent out from Natchez as a news item, dated April 2, and
printed with less detail in various papers, among them _The
Tennessee Gazette_ of April 27, _The Kentucky Gazette_ of May 3,
and _The Palladium_ of May 5. In the same news item appears a
brief statement to the effect that Governor Claiborne had received
“official information of the arrival at New Orleans of the French
Prefect for the Colony of Louisiana.”

Mason hoped, as already stated, that by showing he had committed
no crimes on the Spanish side of the Mississippi he would not be
punished by the Spanish authorities. He evidently did not foresee
the possibility of their turning him over to the Americans. At
any rate, the French were taking possession (in form at least) of
Louisiana, and since they had never been implicated in any strained
relations with the states relative to the free navigation of the
Mississippi, Mason was now in equal danger of pursuit on either
side. By choice or circumstance he risked the American side. Two
months after his thrilling escape from the boat he was seen about
fifteen miles northeast of Natchez. This is shown in a report dated
Natchez, June 6, 1803, published in _The Palladium_ July 14, from
which weekly it was copied by various other papers:

“On Tuesday last the notorious Samuel Mason and several of his
party, all well armed, were seen on the Choctaw trace near Cole’s
Creek. Two detachments of the militia of Jefferson County were
immediately ordered out by his excellency, the Governor, in pursuit
of them. We have not yet been informed of the result of this
expedition.”

The expedition was a failure. About two months after it was first
reported that Mason had been seen near Cole’s Creek, James May came
to Greenville, Mississippi--a place formerly called Hunston, some
twenty-five miles in a northeasterly direction from Natchez, and
now extinct--and gave an account of his recent contact with Mason.
James May, it will be recalled, was among the rough characters who
were driven out of Henderson County, Kentucky, about the time Mason
made his departure from there for Cave-in-Rock. May’s past career
was not yet known by the citizens to whom he made this report.
_The Palladium_, ever reliable but sometimes late, in its issue of
September 8, 1803, says:

“By a gentleman from Natchez, we are informed that about the 25th
or 26th of July, a man by the name of James May, came to Hunston,
near Natchez, and made oath before a magistrate, that sundry
articles of property and money, which he then delivered up, he had
taken from the notorious Samuel Mason, after shooting him in the
head just above the eye. May had been robbed and taken by Mason on
his passage down the river, and had joined that party. A few days
after which, the company hearing a firing of guns, Mason ordered
his party, May excepted, to hide the horses. May he directed to
hide a skiff. He took his gun with him, and on his return, whilst
Mason was counting his money to divide with the party, he shot him,
put the money and property on board the skiff, and conveyed it to
Hunston.

“A letter from Natchez, published in the Natchez paper, confirms
the above account. A letter to a gentleman in this town from his
correspondent at Natchez dated the 25th instant, makes no mention
of the above circumstance, but says: ‘The Masons have removed to
Mississippi where they have of late committed many robberies, but
no murders that I have heard of.’”

No complete file of any of the newspapers published in Natchez
from 1800 to 1805 has been found. The few stray copies, located in
various large libraries, contain nothing about Mason’s career. All
are too late or too early to embrace any current news pertaining
to him. Thus it was without success that an effort was made to
verify, by “the Natchez paper” which “confirms the above account,”
the statement regarding May’s appearance in Greenville in July,
1803, or to draw on any Natchez paper for any contemporary reports
relative to Mason.

There is nothing in history or tradition to indicate what action
was taken by the authorities after they received James May’s
report. He evidently left Greenville, but for what purpose can only
be surmised. It is highly probable that, after May presented the
“money and property” he claimed he had taken from Mason as evidence
of his having shot the outlaw for whom a reward was offered, he was
soon convinced that he had produced no positive evidence at all.
Judging from what took place a few months later, he left for the
purpose of bringing in Mason, dead or alive.

May probably had been “robbed and taken” by Mason for the same
purpose that John Setton had been detained--to be used as a witness
upon whom he might try to shift the Mason robberies. If so, May’s
pursuit of Mason for the offered reward was stimulated by a spirit
of revenge. He sallied forth, reconnoitered, and returned; but he
did not return to Greenville, nor alone. He appeared at Natchez
and was accompanied by John Setton. Setton shortly thereafter was
recognized as one of Mason’s band and both men were taken and
committed to jail some time during the latter part of October. When
they were arrested Setton, as shown by later records, claimed he
came to Natchez for the purpose of turning state’s evidence. _The
Kentucky Gazette_, of November 22, 1803, briefly touches on the
situation as it was about a month before that paper went to press:

“A letter from a gentleman at Natchez, to his correspondent in this
town, dated 20th October, contains information that the men who
robbed Mr. Elisha Winters, on his way from New Orleans, have been
taken and committed to jail; so that there is a probability of his
getting his money. They had in their possession sundry articles
taken from the party who were robbed near Bayou Pierre. One of the
robbers has turned state’s evidence against the rest; and says
that if he can be suffered to go out with a guard, he will take
them where all the papers were hid and a number of other things
with some money. The place is not more than two days’ ride, and
application has been made to the governor for the above purpose,
which will doubtless be granted.”

The hunt for Mason was now continued with even greater enthusiasm.
Besides the militia stationed at Natchez and Fort Gibson many men
were on watch for the notorious outlaw and his band. The woods
were full of robber-exterminating and reward-seeking soldiers and
civilians. Mason’s capture was inevitable. May and Setton evidently
formed a pursuing party of their own. According to one tradition,
the two men discovered Samuel Mason near Rodney, Jefferson County,
Mississippi, and, according to another, they found him near Lake
Concordia, Louisiana, not far from Natchez. They gained Mason’s
confidence and succeeded in convincing him that they had returned
in order to follow him as their leader. Then it was that Mason met
the fate he had himself invited.

Monette says: “Two of his band, tempted by the large reward,
concerted a plan by which they might obtain it. An opportunity soon
occurred, and while Mason, in company with the two conspirators,
was counting out some ill-gotten plunder, a tomahawk was buried
in his brain. His head was severed from his body and borne in
triumph to Washington, the seat of the territorial [Mississippi]
government.” Daniel Roe, in a letter published in _The Port
Folio_, August, 1825, states that the two men “took Mason’s head
to Natchez in the bow of a canoe, rolled up in blue clay, or mud,
to prevent putrefaction.” Resuming Monette’s account: “The head
of Mason was recognized by many, and identified by all who read
the proclamation, as the head entirely corresponded with the
description given of certain scars and peculiar marks. Some delay,
however, occurred in paying over the reward, owing to the slender
state of the treasury. Meantime, a great assemblage from all the
adjacent country had taken place, to view the grim and ghastly head
of the robber chief. They were not less inspired with curiosity to
see and converse with the individuals whose prowess had delivered
the country of so great a scourge.”«30»

One version, which first appeared in print about 1876, has it
that “Many fully identified the head by certain marks thereon,
except his wife who as positively denied it.... The Governor had
sent his carriage for her expressly to come down and testify ...
and many believed Mason fled the country and died in his bed in
Canada.... Mason’s family [probably his wife and youngest son] then
resided in this county, not far from old Shankstown, and his wife
was generally respected as an honest and virtuous woman by all
her neighbors, and one of her sons was a worthy citizen of Warren
County not many years ago.” This is quoted in Claiborne’s history
from a “Centennial Address” delivered by Captain W. L. Harper,
of Jefferson County, Mississippi. In 1891 Robert Lowry published
a statement in his _History of Mississippi_, without citing any
authority, that “One of Mason’s gang killed an innocent man, cut
off his head, carried it to the Governor of Mississippi and claimed
the reward.”

May, as already seen, claimed that he had been a victim of Mason
and, a few months previous, had declared he could find and capture
the notorious robber. Setton, on the other hand, having expressed
a desire to turn state’s evidence, admitted having been connected
with the outlaw. The situation was interesting, for it was an
unusual one. The head, having been identified as Samuel Mason’s,
the two heroes of the occasion went before a judge to make an
affidavit and to get an order on the governor for the payment of
the reward. “But just as the judge was in the act of making out a
certificate,” writes Claiborne in his _History of Mississippi_,
“a traveler stepped into the court room and requested to have the
two men arrested. He had alighted at the tavern, had repaired to
the stable to see his horse attended to, and there saw the horses
of the two men who had arrived just before him. He recognized the
horses (principally because each had a peculiar blaze in the face)
as belonging to parties who had robbed him and killed one of his
companions some two months previous on the Natchez Trace, and going
into the court house, he identified the two men.”

Suspicion was immediately aroused. This declaration not only
showed that May, who complained of being robbed, was a robber
himself, but it also indicated that the “reformed” Setton as well
as the “victimized” May, had committed at least one robbery since
they left Greenville in search of Mason. Who are May and Setton,
and where do they come from, and what have they been doing for a
living? Such questions were asked. Absolutely nothing was known
about May. As to Setton, their information was limited to the
report that he had been “badly treated” by Mason; some may have
known that he had traveled under assumed names, but evidently none
yet suspected he was Little Harpe.

The next step in the development of their careers is given in one
of Draper’s manuscripts written after an interview with Colonel
John Stump, who was born in 1776: “In the winter of 1803–4 old
Captain Frederick Stump, commanding a company under Colonel George
Doherty, went as far as Natchez to aid in taking possession
of Louisiana. There Captain Stump, by invitation of Governor
Claiborne, an old friend, made his quarters, and was present when
Setton and May came with Mason’s head to claim the reward of one
thousand dollars. The Governor told them to call at a stated time
and the check would be ready for them. After they had gone Captain
Stump said he believed that Setton was really Little Harpe.... The
description of Little Harpe so well corresponded with Setton’s
appearance that it was agreed to arrest them both.... It was
proclaimed at the landing of Natchez that it was believed that
Wiley Harpe was taken, and if any Kentucky boatman had any personal
knowledge of him, they were desired to examine the prisoner. Five
boatmen recognized him and gave in their evidence to that effect.
Some of them were witnesses in the Harpe case when they broke from
the Danville jail. Said one of these boatmen before seeing him: ‘If
he is Harpe he has a mole on his neck and two toes grown together
on one foot.’ And so it proved, and the fellow with such positive
proof against him shed tears.” [121]

Shortly after this, John Bowman, of Knoxville, Tennessee, called
in to see the two men. He recognized Little Harpe. “Little Harpe
denied the name, but Bowman persisted and said, ‘if you are Harpe
you have a scar under your left nipple where I cut you in a
difficulty we had at Knoxville.’ Bowman tore the man’s shirt open
and there was the scar.” [26]

Up to this time, Little Harpe, under the names of John Taylor,
John Setton, and Wells, had succeeded in concealing his identity.
He now realized that even though he turned state’s evidence
against the Masons, the history of his own terrible career in
Tennessee and Kentucky and at Cave-in-Rock was too well and widely
known for him to expect any mercy, no matter how important his
revelations regarding the Masons might be. At New Madrid he had a
narrow escape from being identified. After he and the Masons were
captured and taken to the Spanish prison, it was rumored that one
of the prisoners was “a fellow who calls himself Taylor but who
is supposed to be that notorious villain and murderer Harpe.” A
statement to that effect was written in a letter dated January 24,
1804, and published six weeks later in _The Western Spy_. But, as
already seen, he had sworn before the New Madrid court, as John
Setton, that he had met a man by the name of Harpe who had been
killed and, when further questioned, declared that he knew nothing
regarding the whereabouts of Little Harpe. Although his identity
was now well established, he, in self-defense, persisted in denying
the name. Escape was his only hope.

Nothing was then known about James May’s past other than his recent
acts connected with the beheading of Mason and his attempted
apprehension of the Mason band. These acts in themselves exposed
him as a man of such a treacherous character that he could expect
no mercy nor any reward. On the other hand, should he be identified
as one of the men who had been driven out of Henderson County,
Kentucky, and be accused of Cave-in-Rock murders and robberies,
then nothing but the severest punishment that could be inflicted
upon him might be expected. With him, as with Little Harpe, escape
was his only hope. And both escaped.«31»

How Little Harpe and May escaped is not known. While at Natchez
they may have been indicted for Mason’s murder. If so, having
killed Mason in compliance with the governor’s proclamation to
capture the outlaw dead or alive, they were acquitted. William
Darby, then living near Natchez, writes that the two prisoners
“learning their danger fled from Natchez, but were taken in
Jefferson County, Mississippi, and confined in jail and in due
time, tried and convicted....” They were tried before the Circuit
Court in Greenville, in January, 1804, as is shown by the few
existing entries made in the now mutilated docket book of that
court. No record of the court proceedings was found, although a
careful search was made.

The first entry found in the docket book is dated Friday, January
13, 1804. The court was presided over by Peter B. Bruin, David
Ker, and Thomas Rodney, who were among the best known men in
Mississippi. It is an interesting fact that when Aaron Burr was
arrested the following year on Cole’s Creek, near Greenville, he
was tried in Washington, Mississippi, before two of these same
judges, the third, Judge Ker, having died of pneumonia contracted
while serving at the trial of Harpe and May. William Downs, as
foreman of the grand jury, brought in “an indictment of robbery”
against each of the prisoners: “The Territory against James May”
and “The Territory against John Setton.” Little Harpe, alias
Setton, and his co-worker May were represented by Mr. Breazeale and
Mr. Parrott. These attorneys evidently made every possible effort
to save their clients. A plea of “not guilty” had been entered.
Then followed much sparring over technicalities. They first
attempted to quash the indictment; they next claimed the court did
not have jurisdiction; and finally presented a petition for a writ
of _habeas corpus_. But all these contentions were overruled.«32»
“And for trial (each) put himself upon the country and General
Poindexter, Attorney General.” Each was tried by separate jury,
James May being the first, and each was found guilty. Then the two
attorneys came forward with “a plea of former acquittal,” but the
court rendered a decision that “the plea of former acquittal is
not sufficient in law to be considered a sufficient bar to this
indictment.” This plea of “former acquittal” leads one to infer
that when Mason’s head was brought to Natchez both men were tried
there and elsewhere for murder, and having been “acquitted” of that
charge they, in all likelihood, argued that they were therefore
also acquitted of highway robbery which was incidental to the
murder.

As already stated, the record of the proceedings containing all
these and other details of the case cannot now be found. There is
nothing to indicate who the witnesses were, except Elisha Winters,
who was “allowed the compensation allowed by law for his attendance
at this term and for traveling to and from said court one thousand
miles.” Among the few available pages of the docket book
bearing on this case is one containing two entries dated February
4, 1804. They show that the sentence passed was in the same words
for each prisoner. James May’s is the first on the record, and is
immediately followed by Little Harpe’s:

[Illustration: GALLOWS FIELD, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

Here, in 1804, two Cave-in-Rock outlaws were hanged

(From a drawing by J. Bernhard Alberts, made in 1917)]

“John Setton who has been found guilty of robbery at the present
term was this day set to the bar and the sentence of the court
pronounced upon him as follows, that on Wednesday the eighth day of
the present month he be taken to the place of execution and there
to be hung up by the neck, between the hours of ten o’clock in the
forenoon and four in the afternoon, until he is dead, dead, dead.
Which said sentence the Sheriff of Jefferson County was ordered to
carry into execution.”

On Wednesday afternoon, February 8th, Little Harpe and James May
were taken from the jail to a field about a quarter of a mile north
of the village of Greenville. There, on what has ever since been
known as “Gallows Field,” they received their well deserved reward,
but not the one they had planned to procure. They paid, with their
lives, what was, considering the atrocity of their crimes, a light
penalty.

In pioneer days the official executioner usually prepared a gallows
by fastening one end of a long beam or heavy pole in the forks of a
tree and placing the other end similarly in another tree. On this
cross timber he tied the rope with which the condemned man was to
be hanged. The prisoner, as a rule, was put on a wagon, his coffin
serving as a seat, and driven to the place of execution. Upon his
arrival the same wagon and coffin on which he rode were used as
the platform and trap of his gallows. After the suspended rope was
properly looped around his neck the condemned man was made to stand
erect on his coffin. When all details had been attended to the
horses were rushed forward, leaving the human body hung suspended
in the air. In some instances the gallows was a frame-work with a
platform in which a trap door was built.

In the hanging of Harpe and May the procedure was somewhat unusual
even for a frontier country. Two ropes were tied to a heavy pole
placed high between two trees. The two men walked from the jail to
the gallows. Each with his hands tied behind him was made to mount
a ladder; his feet were then bound and the noose fastened around
his neck. When the ladders were dropped the two bodies fell as far
as the suspended rope permitted, and thus each was “hung up by the
neck” until, as prescribed by law, he was “dead, dead, dead.” [54]

The news that Samuel Mason had at last been killed was a great
relief to the country. The fact that Little Harpe and James May
were actually hanged was a matter of equally widespread interest.
_The Guardian of Freedom_, February 20, 1804, published the
following, which was copied by a number of papers, including _The
Kentucky Gazette_ of a week later:

“Extract of a letter from a gentleman in Mississippi Territory to
his friend in this town (Frankfort) dated February 8, 1804: ‘There
have been two of Sam Mason’s party--which infested the road between
this country and Kentucky--in jail at Greenville for trial. They
were condemned last term and executed this day. One of them was
James May; the other called himself John Setton but was proved to
be the villain who was known by the name of Little or Red-headed
Harpe, and who committed so many acts of cruelty in Kentucky.’”

_The Palladium_, March 3, published a news item dated Natchez,
February 9, 1804: “Setton and May were executed at Greenville
yesterday between three and four o’clock, pursuant to their
sentence. We are informed that Setton made some confession at
the place of execution which has a tendency to implicate several
persons not heretofore suspected as parties concerned with Masons
in their depredations. May complained of the hardship of his fate;
said he had not been guilty of crimes deserving death and spoke of
the benefit he had rendered society by destroying old Mason.”

The hanging of Little Harpe and James May for highway robbery
was a fulfillment of the written law of pioneer times as well
as the unwritten law of frontier communities. But many of the
enraged citizens felt that the law of pioneer justice had not been
satisfied for the known and unknown murders committed by these two
offenders. There is nothing in history or tradition to indicate
that an attempt was made to lynch the two condemned outlaws. But
the lynch spirit evidently raged. In the words of Franklin L.
Riley, an authority on early Mississippi history: “After their
execution on the Gallows Field their heads were placed on poles,
one a short distance to the north and the other a short distance to
the west of Greenville, on the Natchez Trace.” [105]

How long these gruesome warnings to highwaymen stood along the
road and what finally became of them is not known. Each doubtless
met with a fate befitting a head so ignoble. It is not probable
that they were ever interred in the grave with the two headless
bodies. Tradition has it that the two bodies were placed in a box
and buried in a new grave yard about one hundred yards east of the
Greenville jail and court house and about the same distance north
of the hotel in the central part of the village.

This new grave yard was on the Natchez Trace and contained less
than half a dozen graves. Tradition says that an effort was made
by a number of people who had kinsmen buried in it to influence
the officials to bury elsewhere the decapitated remains of these
despised desperadoes. Their request was not granted, and the burial
was held late on the night of the execution within a few yards of
where stood one of the head-surmounted poles. The next day the
indignant men who had opposed this as a burial place for the two
villains, exhumed their dead and removed the remains about a half
mile south of Greenville and there began a new burying ground which
today is known as Bellegrove Church Yard.«33»

What attempts were made to collect the reward offered for the
capture of Mason? What became of the Masons? It is probable these
questions can never be fully answered. The court records showing
the total expense involved in the trial and transportation of
the Masons, and in the trial and execution of Little Harpe and
James May, have not been found. These expenses were paid by the
territorial and federal governments. One of Governor Claiborne’s
letters [113] shows that in January, 1806, one Seth Caston
“exhibited demands for one hundred dollars for apprehending and
bringing to justice” these two notorious outlaws. There is
nothing indicating the character of Caston’s claim; nor is there
anything to show whether or not he received any money. Harpe and
May were entitled to the reward offered in Governor Claiborne’s
proclamation; it doubtless would have been granted to them in full
had they not proven that above all other rewards they best deserved
that which they received on the gallows.

Neither history nor tradition tells what became of the Mason family
after Samuel Mason met his fate and Little Harpe and James May
received their reward. Samuel Mason’s wife, who evidently did not
approve of her husband’s lawlessness--at least not in her later
years--made her home, as we have already seen, not far from old
Shankstown, in Jefferson County, Mississippi. There, according
to Claiborne, the historian, she was “generally respected as an
honest and virtuous woman by all her neighbors, and one of her
sons [probably Magnus or Samuel Mason Jr.] was a worthy citizen of
Warren County.” Monette says that “the Mason band being deprived
of their leader and two of his most efficient men, dispersed and
fled,” and thus terminated the greatest terror to travelers which
had infested the country.«34»

In the meantime, the headless bodies of Little Harpe and James May
continued to lie in their double grave near the Natchez Trace. As
time rolled on the narrow Trace widened and, as roads frequently
do, it wore deeper into the slight elevation over which it led.
About the year 1850 this widening and deepening process reached
the fleshless bones in the solitary grave, and the two skeletons,
protruding piece by piece from the road bank, were dragged out by
dogs and other beasts until the highway widened beyond the grave
and the burial site became part of the ditch along the Natchez
Trace.

Some twenty years ago, upon straightening out a part of the Natchez
Trace, the small section of the old road of which the burial place
was a part, was discarded as a highway, and today the old road bed,
including the site of the grave, is a mere jungle of briars and
brush.

Thus the last vestige of these two villains disappeared on the very
highway upon which they had committed so many crimes, and possibly
on the very spot where one of their victims breathed his last. The
ocean of time has closed over every one of the personal relics of
all these enemies of society, but the waves that their activities
started still carry on as ripples of human interest.




Coiners at the Cave


The Cave had been used for religious purposes, as a haven in time
of distress, as an inn and as a decoy house for murder and robbery.
Through the widely scattered references to it in early books of
travel and in magazines and newspapers we find also occasional
indications that it had been, at different times and for short
periods, the workshop and headquarters of counterfeiters. There
are, indeed, few details concerning its occupation by bandits and
criminals of any description; this is the veil of mystery that
shrouds it in enduring interest. The knowledge that distinct facts
about definite crimes committed there can never be obtained has
challenged the imagination of various writers. Facts about the
counterfeiters who used it are much less in evidence than facts
about those following other forms of crime; probably because
counterfeiting must of necessity be more secret than other crimes.

There is nothing to indicate that any of the counterfeiters of
Cave-in-Rock were guilty of robbery by force or of murder. The
part they played in outlaw river life was in the purchase of goods
from passing boats and the payment for these goods in counterfeit
coin and currency. Not until it was too late would the receivers
of such money discover they had been duped. For this reason the
counterfeiters could not long use the Cave at one time. There were,
as far as is known, only three counterfeiters identified with the
Cave. Two of these were among the first lawbreakers to convert the
place into a workshop for a nefarious trade; the other was among
the last of its outlaws.

Dr. Frederick Hall, who went up the Ohio in 1839, states in his
_Letters from the East and from the West_ that “this noted cavern
is styled Counterfeiters’ Cave.” He further comments that “in times
gone past, never to revert, it was inhabited by counterfeiters,
robbers, and murderers.” Charles Augustus Murray, in his _Travels
in North America_, writes of his trip down the Ohio in June, 1835.
He says that the current report of the country at the time of his
visit to the Cave, was that when this den of thieves was finally
broken up “it contained great quantities of gold, silver, silks,
and stuffs, and false money, with an apparatus for coining.”

It is not known what disposition was made of the coining tools and
false money referred to by Murray. Nor is it known what became of
any of the apparatus and illegal money left behind by the Cave’s
other counterfeiters. The person who expresses the opinion that
an “upper cave” exists, is likely to add that great quantities
of good and bad money are hidden in the undiscovered cavern. The
counterfeiters probably carried away all their coin and coining
apparatus. The only trace of suggestive evidence preserved today
indicating the former occupancy by counterfeiters is the half of a
double die or mold which was found many years ago in the vicinity
of the Cave. It has been cherished as a possible relic of the
counterfeiting regime there.

[Illustration: IMPLEMENTS AND WEAPONS USED BY THE OUTLAWS

Counterfeiter’s mold, knife blade, iron tomahawk, and stone idol
found in vicinity of Cave-in-Rock, and a flint-lock pistol of the
style used about 1800]

This die was seemingly hidden near the Cave by one of the men who
had used it for the purpose of making counterfeit half-dollars
and the large five-dollar gold pieces of those days. It is a
double plate of iron four and three-quarter inches long and two
and one-quarter inches wide, welded together. The upper plate is
one-eighth of an inch thick and in it are cut two discs, each
being one and one-half inches in diameter and having a gap at
the top, opening to a funnel shaped “feeder.” It is said that a
particular local clay or some other suitable material was placed in
the circle and into this pliable matrix the impression was made of
one side of a genuine half-dollar, or of an old style five-dollar
gold-piece, which was of about the same size. This formed, when
hardened, a more or less durable mold for one side of the new coin.
In like manner another mold was prepared in the other half of the
coining apparatus for the other side of the counterfeit piece.
The two parts of the mold were then placed in proper position
and the hot metal poured into the cavity through the funnel-like
opening. This process doubtless produced, as a rule, a more or
less crude imitation, but since many of the genuine coins of an
earlier date were somewhat crude and were still in circulation,
the counterfeiters experienced comparatively little trouble in
imitating the old pieces.

Among the early counterfeiters who made the Cave their headquarters
for a time was Philip Alston, who looms large in the romance and
gossip of the latter part of the eighteenth and early part of the
nineteenth centuries. He was a gentleman by birth, education, and
early association. He comes down to us handsome in figure and grand
in manner, wearing broad-cloth, ruffles, and lace. He had an air
of chivalry to women and of aloofness, superiority, and mystery to
men. He was the “Raffles” of pioneer days and legend paints him in
high colors.

Alexander C. Finley, in his _History of Russellville and Logan
County, Kentucky_--a unique publication from the standpoint of its
style--says Philip Alston was driven out of the South and settled
in Logan County about 1782. A few years later “his thirst for
counterfeiting again returned.” But “feeling insecure” Alston moved
from place to place in western Kentucky. “About 1790 he crossed
over the Ohio and became the fast friend and disciple of the
notorious counterfeiter Sturdevant [Duff?] at the Cave-in-the-Rock.
But he did not reside here long before he came to himself and
wondered how he, the gentlemanly Philip Alston, although an elegant
counterfeiter, could have become the companion of outlaws, robbers,
and murderers ... and so he returned to Natchez.”«35»

It is quite likely that a counterfeiter named Duff had been making
use of the Cave long before the time of Philip Alston’s short stay
at the place. He may be regarded as Cave-in-Rock’s first outlaw.
Neither history nor tradition has preserved Duff’s Christian name.
One version suggests that he may have been the John Duff who met
George Rogers Clark on the Ohio, near Fort Massac in June, 1778,
and who, after some bewilderment, showed General Clark the way to
Kaskaskia. It is not improbable that the two were one and the same
man. At any rate, very little is known of John Duff, the guide, or
of Duff the coiner.

Governor Reynolds in _My Own Times_ and Collins, in his _History of
Kentucky_ devoted only a few lines to Duff, and these lines pertain
to his death. The author of _A History of Union County, Kentucky_,
prints some five pages on his career, based on traditions gathered
in 1886. Duff apparently lived the latter part of his life in or
near Cave-in-Rock and procured his lead and silver along the Saline
River and in other sections of southern Illinois. He evidently
operated a counterfeiter’s den in different places. According to
tradition, there were at least three places known as “Duff’s Fort:”
one was at Cave-in-Rock, another at Caseyville, Kentucky (near the
mouth of Tradewater River, fourteen miles above the Cave) and a
third in Illinois, at Island Ripple on Saline River (thirteen miles
above its mouth and about twenty-eight miles, via river to the
Cave). Like all outlaws of his and other times, Duff was obliged to
shift his headquarters. It is probable that some of the localities
in which he lived no longer have any traditions regarding his
activities there.

In 1790, Philip Alston, as stated by Finley, fled to the Cave
and became a “fast friend and disciple” of Duff. Collins, in his
chapter on Crittenden County, Kentucky, says that Duff lived
near the mouth of Tradewater River in 1799 and then, or shortly
thereafter, was killed by Shawnee Indians and that “there was
reason to believe some one residing at Fort Massac had employed
the Indians to commit the crime.” Governor Reynolds briefly states
that Duff was killed “near Island Ripple in the Saline Creek, and
was buried near the old salt spring,” and that “it was supposed the
Indians were hired to commit the murder.” Just where he was killed
cannot be ascertained with any certainty after a lapse of so many
years. There are two or three coves or small caves on Saline below
Island Ripple, each of which is known as Duff’s Cave, and each has
a local tradition to the effect that Duff was killed in it.

The compiler of _A History of Union County, Kentucky_, is the
only writer who has gathered any Duff traditions, and since he
confined his research to the stories told in and near Caseyville,
his life of this Cave-in-Rock outlaw does not branch into the many
and varied claims made in local traditions of other sections.
Nevertheless, his sketch of this pioneer and counterfeiter is one
that might be accepted as typical of what would be found in the
other localities in which Duff had made his headquarters. In sum
and substance the story runs as follows:

Duff lived in a house called “Duff’s Fort,” which stood near what
later became the old site of the Christian Church in Caseyville.
Here he dispensed a rude but cordial hospitality. On the bluff
above was his meadow. The overhanging cliff near his house
furnished a shelter for his horses. The shallow cove in which they
stood is now almost filled with alluvial soil deposited by the
little brook which flows near. His household consisted of his wife
and a faithful black slave named Pompey, who would risk anything or
undergo any hardship for his master.

It is said that Duff was a brave man and a good strategist; he was
seldom found at a disadvantage. He often had narrow escapes in his
encounters with the officers of the law and the people living in
the vicinity. On one occasion, when he was closely pursued by his
enemies, he ran towards his home. There he found his wife at the
river doing the family washing. Near her was a large iron kettle,
in which she was boiling clothes. Without hesitation Duff upset the
kettle, rolled it into the stream, where it was quickly cooled, and
lifting the kettle over his head, he plunged into the water. The
river was low at this point, enabling him to wade most of the way
to the farther bank. Before he reached the Illinois shore, however,
his pursuers appeared on the Kentucky side and opened fire. Their
aim was well directed. Several of the bullets struck the kettle,
but rebounded without injury to the man beneath. On reaching the
dry land he took the kettle from his head. Holding it behind him
as continued protection, he ran for safety. The pursuers increased
their fire. More bullets rained upon the impromptu shield--but Duff
escaped unhurt to the shelter of the woods.

On another occasion when sorely pressed he took refuge with a
Mrs. Hammack, who was an old-time Methodist living in that part
of the country. She treated him so kindly that he decided to let
her have a glimpse of his hidden treasures. On the appointed day
he blindfolded her and his wife and led them by a very circuitous
route to a cave. After they were in the mysterious cave he removed
the bandages from their eyes and, by the light of torches, the
two women were enabled to see the large quantities of counterfeit
silver and gold coins in boxes and chests stored by Duff. He then
replaced the bandages and took the two women back to Mrs. Hammack’s
house. Mrs. Hammack’s impression was that the cave ran into the
side of a cliff but, notwithstanding many efforts, she was never
able to retrace her steps to the place. Mrs. Duff related, after
her husband’s death, that he had taken her from their home to the
cave on another occasion and in the same manner. He then promised
her that he would some day show her the way to his cave, but
explained at the time that he could not then do so, for his enemies
might torture her into a disclosure of his location when he was in
it. His intentions were frustrated by his sudden death. There are
three different accounts of Duff’s death given by local tradition.

One version has it that he was killed by some of the citizens of
the county, near the bluff where he quartered his horses. According
to this account, a number of men were pursuing him and when he
showed fight they were obliged to shoot him. Another says he was
killed by Indians with whom he had quarreled about a dog fight. The
following is the version most widely accepted:

Duff, three of his associates, and his slave Pompey, while in
Illinois securing white metal, were surprised by about six
soldiers sent from Golconda, Illinois, or some other point below
Cave-in-Rock. The counterfeiters were captured and taken down
the river in a boat. Handcuffs were placed upon all the white
prisoners. Pompey had not been manacled because the soldiers
carried only four sets of irons and, furthermore, they presumed
the negro cared little whether his master was doomed. Near
Cave-in-Rock they stopped for dinner. When they landed, all the
soldiers went ashore except one who was left in charge of the
prisoners and the boat. After stacking their arms near the boat,
they went into the Cave to build a fire and prepare the meal.

One of the prisoners whispered to Duff that he found he could slip
his irons off. Pompey hearing this, passed a file to him and,
taking advantage of the absence of the guard, who went ashore for a
few minutes, he filed away at Duff’s fetters and soon succeeded in
breaking them. At a signal, Pompey sprang upon the guard and tied
him to a tree and then proceeded to liberate the two men chained in
the boat. Duff and the other unfettered prisoner immediately seized
the stacked arms and rushed upon the men in the Cave who, having no
side arms, were forced to an unconditional surrender.

Some of the soldiers were tied and others secured with irons and
all thrown into the boat and set afloat. They drifted down the
river and, as they were floating opposite the fort from which they
had been sent, they were ordered to stop, but of course could not
do so. They were fired upon a number of times before the commander
discovered their helpless condition. He then sent out a skiff and
brought them ashore. In the meantime, Duff and his companions had
made their way up the river to the Saline and had got safely home
again.

The inglorious outcome of this expedition greatly incensed the
commander of the fort and he was determined upon revenge. He
accordingly hired a Canadian and three Indians to go up the river
to Duff’s Fort and kill him. They were to ingratiate themselves
into the good graces of the counterfeiter and watch their
opportunity to kill him. If they succeeded they were to return and
receive a reward.

They arrived in Duff’s neighborhood and camped below his house.
The Canadian soon became friendly with Duff, who did not suspect
the object of his presence, and was invited to his house. The
genial hospitality of the counterfeiter was fatal to the Canadian’s
plan, and each day he found himself less inclined to carry out his
murderous scheme. Meanwhile the Indians were becoming impatient.
One evening they informed the Canadian that they had concluded to
kill Duff the next day, whether he helped or not. He then decided
to put Duff upon his guard.

The next morning, although Duff was drinking rather heavily, the
Canadian disclosed the plot to him. Duff, seizing a stick, rushed
from the house, swearing he would whip the Indians with it and
drive them off. He met them coming towards his house, painted and
armed for a conflict. Pompey, recognizing the danger his master
was facing, rushed to him with a loaded gun, but before it could
be used the Indians shot Duff and his slave. “The leader having
fallen,” says the author of _A History of Union County, Kentucky_,
in concluding his account of Duff, “the rest of the gang were
speedily dispersed.”«36»

About a generation after the days of Duff there appeared upon
the scene a man named Sturdevant, whose counterfeiting career
continued in the Cave-in-Rock country until 1831. In the meantime
the flatboat pirates who had used the Cave as their headquarters
had disappeared and the mysterious Ford’s Ferry band was drifting
towards its dispersement.

The identity of Sturdevant is as vague as that of Duff. Tradition
has it that Sturdevant did not counterfeit money in the Cave but
that, beginning about 1825, and for a short time thereafter, he
used the “House of Nature” as a “Banking House of Exchange.” There
he met his confederates and exchanged, at an agreed rate, some of
the counterfeit money he made in his fortified home nine miles
below the Cave. Judge James Hall, in his _Sketches of the West_,
published in 1835, devotes two pages to Sturdevant. His is the best
of the few published accounts. It is well worth quoting in full:

“At a later period [that is, after Mason’s time] the celebrated
counterfeiter, Sturdevant, fixed his residence on the shore of the
Ohio, in Illinois, and for several years set the laws at defiance.
He was a man of talent and address. He was possessed of much
mechanical genius, was an expert artist and was skilled in some of
the sciences. As an engraver he was said to have few superiors;
and he excelled in some other branches of art. For several years
he resided at a secluded spot in Illinois, where all his immediate
neighbors were his confederates or persons whose friendship he
had conciliated. He could, at any time, by the blowing of a horn,
summon some fifty to a hundred armed men to his defense; while
the few quiet farmers around, who lived near enough to get their
feelings enlisted and who were really not at all implicated in
his crimes, rejoiced in the impunity with which he practiced his
schemes. He was a grave, quiet, inoffensive man in his manners,
who commanded the obedience of his comrades and the respect of his
neighbors. He had a very excellent farm; his house was one of the
best in the country; his domestic arrangements were liberal and
well ordered.

“Yet this man was the most notorious counterfeiter that ever
infested our country and carried on his nefarious art to an extent
which no other person has ever attempted. His confederates were
scattered over the whole western country, receiving through regular
channels of intercourse their supplies of counterfeit bank notes,
for which they paid a stipulated price--sixteen dollars in cash
for a hundred dollars in counterfeit bills. His security arose,
partly from his caution in not allowing his subordinates to pass a
counterfeit bill, or to do any other unlawful act in the state in
which he lived, and in his obliging them to be especially careful
of their deportment in the _county_ of his residence, measures
which effectually protected him from the civil authority. Although
all the counterfeit bank notes with which a vast region was
inundated were made in his house, that fact could never be proved
by legal evidence. But he secured himself further by having settled
around him a band of his lawless dependents who were ready at all
times to fight in his defense; and by his conciliatory conduct,
which prevented his having any violent enemies. He even enlisted
the sympathies of many reputable people in his favor. But he became
a great nuisance from the immense quantity of spurious paper which
he threw into circulation; and although he never committed any acts
of violence himself, and is not known to have sanctioned any, the
unprincipled felons by whom he was surrounded were guilty of many
acts of desperate atrocity; and Sturdevant, though he escaped from
the arm of the law, was at last, with all his confederates, driven
from the country by the enraged people, who rose, almost in mass,
to rid themselves of one whose presence they had long considered an
evil as well as a disgrace.”

Governor Reynolds notes that in 1831 Sturdevant’s fort was attacked
by some Regulators, and that one Regulator and three counterfeiters
were killed, and “the suspected gang broken up.”

James A. Rose in his article on “The Regulators and Flatheads in
Southern Illinois” says: “Regulators descended on the Sturdevant
stronghold only to find that their movements had been spied upon
and that they were expected. A number of shots were exchanged;
finally a charge was made on the stockade and the door broken down.
They found, however, that a small piece of artillery was trained on
the stairway leading to the Sturdevant stronghold, and a halt was
called and reinforcements asked for. During the night Sturdevant
and his band of criminals managed to make their escape. This is one
of the earliest records of the citizens of this region taking the
law into their own hands.”

Sturdevant was never again heard of in that or any other locality.
What became of him is not known. This attack on his headquarters
ended forever counterfeiting in the Cave-in-Rock country.«36a»




The Ford’s Ferry Mystery


After Mason left Cave-in-Rock other outlaws still continued to
use the cavern as a temporary stopping place or headquarters.
An outlaw’s stay at any place is of necessity short. Mason, in
1797, had lived there longer than any other. Those who followed
him were more or less migratory. Residents in the vicinity were
in no way implicated in the various acts that made the Cave so
notoriously dangerous, until the mysterious Ford’s Ferry band
began its robberies. Since 1834, when that organization ceased its
operations, the Cave has never been identified with outlawry.

To what extent James Ford, the owner of Ford’s Ferry--a crossing
place on the Ohio two and one-half miles above the Cave--was
connected with this organization was not revealed in his day nor
since, and it is not at all likely that it will ever be determined.
He is more frequently discussed in tradition, and his life is the
subject of a greater variety of opinions than that of any other man
connected with the tragedies of the Cave-in-Rock country. According
to one version, “Jim Ford was as black as some have painted him,”
and, according to another, his connection with the mysterious band
had the effect of preventing bad men from committing more crimes
than they would have if his influence had not acted as a restraint.

A careful study of the few written records and the many varied oral
traditions pertaining to Ford, indicates that when he reached the
prime of life conditions had undergone many changes. Outlaws were
no longer in a position to carry on their depredations with the
freedom that attended the earlier days. Population had increased,
and with that increase came a better reign of law. The line between
law-abiding and law-breaking citizens was rapidly widening. For
about ten years, ending in 1833, Ford apparently stood between
the two, and kept in close touch with both. By mingling with
the upright citizens he held in some measure the respect of the
community, and by acting as one of the leaders of the highwaymen he
reaped a share of their booty. In serving the two opposing classes
he faced, and finally met, the fate common to such men.

His education and appearance, and his public activities, gained
for him the confidence of the community and the standing of a
trustworthy man, which he held until toward the close of his life.
Before he died many of his fellow-citizens began regarding him with
more or less suspicion, and he soon became a man of mystery. After
his death his career was extensively discussed throughout the lower
Ohio valley. Our account is confined principally to court records
and oral traditions. These old records, as far as known, have not
been cited heretofore by anyone attempting to tell the story of
James Ford.

Tradition has it that James Ford was born some time during the
latter part of the Revolution. His father, it is said, was a
Revolutionary soldier and moved with his son to western Kentucky
about 1803. Thus he appeared in the Cave-in-Rock country about
half a dozen years after the Masons and Little Harpe had gone
south, but was living in the neighborhood when “Jim Wilson” and
some of the other outlaws were holding forth at the Cave. His
home was a half-mile southwest of what is now the village of
Tolu, Crittenden County, Kentucky. It was a mile from the Ohio
and the head of the notorious Hurricane Island, about eight miles
below Ford’s Ferry and five miles below Cave-in-Rock. Ford owned
a number of good farms in what was then northern Livingston, now
Crittenden County. So well was he known along the lower Ohio that
Samuel Cuming’s _Western Navigator_, published in 1822, designates
the river landing near his home as “Major Ford’s.” The old court
records preserved at Smithland show that he was a justice of the
peace in 1815 and held the office a number of times thereafter,
and that practically every suggestion made before the county court
“on motion of James Ford” was carried. He frequently served as
appraiser and administrator of estates. Through these and other
acts of trust he gained the prestige of a desirable citizen. The
improvement of roads was encouraged by him, especially those
leading to Ford’s Ferry.

One of the most interesting chapters of the mystery surrounding
Ford’s Ferry may be found in a book of personal reminiscences
and local traditions of Cave-in-Rock and its vicinity disguised
as historical fiction and called _Chronicles of a Kentucky
Settlement_. Its author, William Courtney Watts, who possessed an
excellent education, was a very successful man of international
business experience, born at Smithland, Kentucky, near
Cave-in-Rock. Much of his information came directly from his father
and other pioneer settlers.

Among the men who figure in the romance, and whom Watts personally
knew, was Dr. Charles H. Webb, of Livingston County, of which
Smithland is the seat. Dr. Webb married Cassandra Ford, the
daughter of James Ford. He related the story of his life to Watts
and thus contributed a chapter to history that stands alone. There
exists in more or less abundance printed data relative to some of
the methods employed by the bands of robbers at Cave-in-Rock to
entice boats to land at the Cave and get possession of victims.
All these, however, are, as already observed, stories based on
statements made, not by men who spoke from actual observation, but
by persons who had heard others relate another man’s experience.
In Dr. Webb we actually touch hands with a well-known and highly
respected citizen who was lured to the Cave by some of the tricks
suggested--tricks regarding which few lived to tell the tale and of
which nobody else left any direct authoritative account.

Dr. Charles H. Webb and his brother John, both young men, left
South Carolina in 1822 for Philadelphia and shortly thereafter set
out for the West in search of fortune, with St. Louis as their
destination. At Cave-in-Rock, on their way down the Ohio, they met
their great adventure and were separated as the narrative records.
Dr. Webb, having lost all, settled at Salem. There he subsequently
met and knew Watts. The two became fast friends when Watts, much
the younger of the two, had grown up. It was from Dr. Webb, in the
flower of his middle age, that Watts had this story:

“My brother and I descended the Ohio River from Pittsburgh to
Louisville in a flatboat, and after remaining a few days in
Louisville we again started on another flatboat, intending to go
on it as far as the mouth of the Ohio River or near there.... The
boat, a ‘broadhorn,’ was in charge of one Jonathan Lumley, who
owned a large proportion of the cargo which consisted of corn,
provisions, and whiskey. With Mr. Lumley were three other stout
young men as hands, making, with my brother and myself, who had
agreed to work our way for food and passage, six persons on board.

“Day after day as we floated along, the better I got acquainted
with my companions and the more I found that, under a rough
exterior, they were warm-hearted, generous, and confiding fellows,
equally ready for a jig or a knock-down, for a shooting match or a
drinking bout, for a song or a sermon.

“I was playing on my flute as our boat was nearing Cave-in-Rock,
and when within full view of the high rocky bluff, at the base
of which is the entrance of the Cave, we observed a woman on the
top of the bluff hailing us by waving a white cloth, whereupon
our captain, as we called Mr. Lumley, ordered us to pull in close
to shore, within easy speaking distance, so as to learn what was
wanted.

“Presently a man came from the entrance of the Cave, and called
out: ‘Hey, Cap! have you enny bacon or whiskey on board?’

“‘I-yie!’ shouted back our captain.

“Won’t yer land? We’re short on rations here, an’ want ter buy
right smart!’ said the man.

“‘Goin’ to the lower Mississippi!’ answered our captain, ‘and don’t
want to break bulk so high up.’

“‘But, Cap, we’ud be mi’ty obleeged ef you’d lan’. An’ we’ve got
a woman here and a boy who want passage down ter the mouth er
Cumberlan’. They’ve bin waitin’ a long time, an’ll pay passage.’

“‘All right then,’ replied the captain, ‘I’ll land; but let them
come aboard at once.’

“And land we did some two hundred yards below the Cave, when the
captain and three others--my brother being one of them--went ashore
and walked up to the entrance. After waiting for more than an hour,
and none of our men returning, I asked my remaining companion to
go up to the Cave and see what was detaining them. Another hour
passed away; the sun had gone down, and night, with clouds, was
rapidly coming on.

“I began to feel uneasy, and to add to my uneasiness, a large dog
which we had on board began howling most dismally. Presently,
by the dim twilight, I saw three men approaching the boat from
the Cave. At first I thought them a part of our crew, but I was
soon undeceived, for they came on board, and with pistols drawn,
demanded my surrender. Resistance was useless; my arms were soon
bound behind my back, and I was told that if I made any row my
brains would be blown out. I asked about my friends but was only
told that they were ‘all right,’ that the captain had ‘sold the
boat and cargo,’ and that what little information they had given
was ‘enough’ for me ‘to know.’

“I was then blindfolded, and when my money had been taken from me,
I was assisted--I should say lifted--into a skiff, into which two
of the three men, so I thought, entered. I begged to know what had
become of my brother, and told them that he and I were passengers
on the boat and no part of the crew proper. I did this hoping that
if they knew we were passengers and had no direct interest in the
boat and cargo they would think us less likely to return to the
Cave and molest them. But the only answer I got was that the ‘fewer
questions’ I asked the better it would be for me, ‘by a d----
sight.’

“The skiff was then rowed away--in what direction I could not tell,
but in some five minutes there was a pause in the rowing, and
soon a slight jar as of two skiffs coming together, followed by a
conversation in low tones, the purport of which I could not catch.
Very soon, however, one of the men approached me and whispered in
my ear. There seemed to be a remnant of mercy in the intonations
of his words, rather than in the words themselves. He said: ‘We’re
goin’ ter vi’late orders a little, an’ turn yer loose here in the
middle er the river. An’ the furder yer float away frum here ’fore
yer make enny noise, the better for yer by a d---- sight. Yer’d
better lay low an’ keep dark till mornin’ comes.’ The speaker
then slackened the cords that bound my arms, after which he again
whispered: ‘Yer ken work ’em loose when we’re gone, say in ’bout an
hour, but not sooner, er yer may get inter trouble. An’ don’t yer
never come back here to ax enny questions, or yer’ll fare worse,
an’ do nobody enny good.’

“The man then left me seated in the stern of the skiff, and I could
tell from the motion and the rattling of a chain that a second
boat was being pulled along side it, into which the man stepped,
leaving me alone. I strained my ears to catch the slightest sound,
but I could neither hear the click of oars nor the dip of a paddle;
the latter, however, might have been used so noiselessly as to be
unheard. I was therefore in doubt. I thought possibly the other
boat might be floating close to me and that I was being watched.
This brought to my mind the man’s caution not to try to free my
arms for an hour. I therefore, remained quiet for about that length
of time. No sound reached me except the moaning of the night winds
among the forest trees that lined each shore, the occasional
barking of wolves, and the weird cry of night-fowls--particularly
the blood-curdling hooting of great owls....

“After a long and painful effort I succeeded in releasing my arms
and freeing my eyes from the bandage. Looking around I found the
heavens overcast: the night was so intensely dark that I could see
only a dim outline of the shore. I discovered there were neither
oars nor paddle in the skiff, but I was floating some two or three
miles an hour, and it might be many hours before I would pass any
habitation. I therefore made up my mind to lie down in the skiff,
try to get some sleep and await the coming of morn. But the distant
growling thunder was creeping nearer and nearer; flash after flash
lit up the heavens, followed by almost deafening discharges that
rolled, crashed, and reverberated along the river and among the
forests, which moaned and groaned under the pressure of the rising
wind. The waves in the river were momentarily increasing, and were
dashing my little skiff about in a way that was alarming....

“I knew if the downpour continued for many minutes my skiff would
fill and sink. There was but one way to bail it out--to use one of
my thick leather shoes as a scoop. I worked manfully while the rain
lasted, which, fortunately, was not for more than an hour.

“The long night finally passed, but the heavens were still
overcast. I peered along both banks--looked, hoping to see smoke
curling above some cabin chimney--but there was no sign of
human habitation. Occasionally I raised my voice to its highest
pitch--gave a loud halloo--but no answering voice was returned.
However, about an hour later, I saw an island ahead of me; it was
evidently inhabited, for notwithstanding the leaden aspect of the
skies, I could see smoke ascending from among the trees. I used my
hands as paddles as vigorously as I could so as to drift against
the head of the island, and in this I succeeded. Having secured my
boat, I soon found the cabin, and was kindly received by a Mr.
Prior and his wife who gave me a good breakfast. I told them of my
misfortune, and they expressed much sympathy for me. Mr. Prior, who
seemed to be an honest and intelligent man, told me that he was one
of the earliest settlers in those parts. He said he had often heard
of the depredations of the Wilson gang about the Cave and that I
was lucky to have escaped with my life. He advised me to stop at
Smithland, at the mouth of the Cumberland River, where I might
obtain assistance and directions as to what was best for me to do.
Mr. Prior then made me a paddle out of a clapboard, and bidding him
and his kind wife goodbye I returned to my skiff, pushed off, and
that evening arrived in Smithland.”

At Smithland young Webb was directed to Salem, “which then
contained a population, white and black, of about two hundred and
fifty.” There, in turn, he was advised by Judge Dixon Given to
consult Colonel Arthur Love relative to the best method of gaining
information regarding his brother who had been captured at the
Cave. Colonel Love, a highly esteemed citizen, lived a few miles
from the home of James Ford, who was suspected by many of being a
leader of the Cave-in-Rock band. No crime, however, had ever been
traced to Ford “with sufficient clearness to cause his arrest and
trial.” On his way to Colonel Love’s farm Webb fell from his horse
and sprained his ankle, and it so happened that Cassandra Ford,
daughter of James Ford, found the helpless young man lying in the
road. She took him to her home, and he soon discovered he was in
the house of the very man he dreaded most. But his fears rapidly
vanished, for his rescuer had become very much attached to him and
he to her. He was shown the flute of which he had been robbed near
the Cave. The mother and daughter revealed to him the fact that
they, like many of their neighbors, felt somewhat suspicious that
James Ford was, in some way, connected with the notorious crowd at
the Cave. Ford, who was away from home much of his time, did not
return until about a week after the crippled man was admitted. Then
Webb saw “the masterful, self-willed, dreaded, and almost outlawed
man.” He gave a description of him as he appeared at that time:

“He was about six feet in height, and of powerful build, a perfect
Hercules in point of strength; but he has now grown too corpulent
to undergo much fatigue. His head is large and well shaped; his
sandy brown hair, now thin, is turning gray, for he must be fully
fifty years old; his eyes, of a steel-gray color, are brilliant and
his glance quick and penetrating; his nose rather short and thick;
his upper lip remarkably long, his mouth large, and his lips full
and sensuous. He has a broad, firm, double chin, and his voice is
deep and sonorous. His complexion is very florid, and he converses
fluently. On the whole, when in repose, he gives one the idea of
a good natured, rather than a surly, bulldog; but, if aroused, I
should say he would be a lion tamer.”

When Webb’s foot was sufficiently healed to permit his leaving
the Ford home he took his flute and crutches and returned to
Salem. Shortly thereafter he made the first of his many calls on
Miss Ford. In the meantime, learning that his brother had been
allowed to depart from the Cave unhurt, he wrote letters to various
places and finally located him. Later he “went to Fort Massac on
a flatboat and from there walked to St. Louis,” where he found
his brother established in business. The two spent several months
together in the city and, according to the story as related in
_Chronicles_, it was during his absence from Kentucky that Ford,
the “almost outlawed man,” passed beyond the reach of law.

It was at Ford’s Ferry that many emigrants going to the Illinois
country crossed the Ohio. In Ford’s day the ferry at Shawneetown
and another at Golconda also were thriving and the three were, in a
sense, rivals.

A river crossing with the reputation of having the best roads
leading to and from it was usually given the preference. Ford,
realizing this, placed sign-boards at a number of road crossings,
and cards in some of the taverns, advertising the highway to
his ferry. What was known as the Ford’s Ferry Road extended, in
Kentucky, some eight miles south of the ferry and, in Illinois,
about twelve miles north of it. That part of it in Kentucky
running north from Pickering Hill to the ferry, a distance of four
miles, was well maintained by the county through Ford’s influence.
The road leading from his ferry into Illinois was an equally
important one, but its condition depended solely upon his interest
and efforts in the matter. He attempted to persuade the local
authorities in Illinois to change the old Low Water Road running
through the bottoms to Pott’s Hill, a distance of twelve miles,
to one over higher ground. Failing in this effort, he, at his own
expense, opened up a new road ever since known as Ford’s Ferry High
Water Road.

Thus with about twenty miles of comparatively good road through a
densely wooded country and with a first class ferry, and by proper
advertising, he succeeded, as one man expressed it, “in having
things come his way.” Many people, it is true, were molested at
the ferry and along the highway leading to and from it; but such
misfortunes were then likely to befall any traveler at any place.
If a robbery occurred along the Ford’s Ferry Road, the news of the
hold-up invariably ended with the report that “Jim Ford found the
robbers and ran them out of the country.” And so, for many years,
the Ford’s Ferry Road and Ford’s Ferry maintained the reputation of
being “safe again.” In the meantime, strangers continued to travel
over it, and many fell into the well-set trap.

At the foot of Pickering Hill, near Crooked Creek, newcomers
frequently met, as though by chance, some “strangers” who explained
that they were on their way to Illinois. The unwary emigrants
continued their travel accompanied by persons who seemed honest
men. The “strangers” soon gained their confidence, and if, by the
time Ford’s Ferry was reached, the desirability and possibility of
a hold-up had not been ascertained, the united party crossed over
into Illinois. At Potts’ Hill, or before reaching that wayside
tavern on the south hillside, the newcomer was either robbed or
permitted to continue his journey unmolested. It is said that many
a traveler who was found weak and destitute by the “strangers” was
given money and other help by them. On the other hand, the traveler
who exhibited evidence of wealth and prosperity almost invariably
met his fate along the road, at the ferry or at Potts’ Hill.

Billy Potts was the strategist on whom the highwaymen relied
as their last and best man to dispose of any encouraging cases
that had not been settled before they reached his house. Potts,
by one means or another, succeeded in persuading the selected
travelers to remain all night at his inn. His log house was large
and comfortable and stood near a good spring which, then as now,
offered an abundant supply of water for man and beast. Tradition
says many a man took his last drink at Potts’ Spring and spent
his last hour on earth in Potts’ house. Human bones are still
turned up by plowmen in the Potts’ Old Field, and since there is
nothing to indicate that they are the remains of Indians, the
conclusion is they represent some of the victims of the mysterious
Ford’s Ferry band. The log house occupied by Billy Potts is still
standing. Many years ago it was converted into a barn. On its floor
and walls there can still be seen a number of large dark spots.
Tradition has it that they are stains made by human blood. Some
of the old citizens living in the neighborhood insist that they
are as distinct today as they were more than half a century ago,
notwithstanding the ravages of time.

There are many traditions of mysterious murders attributed to the
Ford’s Ferry highwaymen. Every one is a fearsome tale and has
evidently undergone many changes since it was first told. Some
seem to have more versions than they are years old. None, so far
as is now known, can be verified by documentary or other positive
evidence. All these tales are apparently based on facts but it is
also evident that each is much colored by fiction. A version of the
tradition pertaining to Billy Potts and his son is here retold:

A traveler was riding north on the Ford’s Ferry Road one day, and
after crossing the ferry was overtaken by the son of Billy Potts.
Young Potts expressed a delight at having found a man with whom he
could ride and thus not only pass the time away more pleasantly,
but also travel with greater safety. After going a few miles young
Potts gained sufficient information to convince him that the man
was well worth robbing. When they reached a point along the road
where a hold-up could be made with the least danger of exposure,
Potts pulled out his pistol, forced the man to throw up his hands
and then proceeded to rob him. While Potts was in the act of
taking his victim’s money, two farmers living in the neighborhood
happened upon the scene. Not being in sympathy with the gang
of highwaymen and having recognized young Potts, they informed
others what they had witnessed and reported the robbery to the
authorities. Ford, so runs the story, realizing that one of his
men had been detected and that much evidence could be produced to
convict the guilty one, advised him to leave for parts unknown,
and thus not only save himself but also shield his confederates
from further suspicion. The young man left, and a few days later,
rumors emanating from the gang, to the effect that young Potts had
been driven out of the country by Jim Ford, circulated freely. The
disappearance of Potts substantiated the report, and Ford received
the credit for ridding the community of an undesirable citizen.

Young Potts wandered around for several years, in the meantime
growing a beard and gaining in weight. He evidently changed in
appearance to such an extent that he felt confident no one--not
even his mother--would recognize him, and that he could return
home without the least fear of detection. He reached Pickering
Hill on his homeward journey and there met a number of “strangers”
who informed him that they were resting preparatory to resuming
their travel to the Illinois country. Potts recognized in these
men his old companions in crime, but none suspected who he was. He
rode with them to Ford’s Ferry, in the meantime keeping the men
in ignorance as to his identity. When they reached the Ohio he
saw that active preparations were being made to rob him and, if
necessary, to murder him. He then revealed his identity. But it was
only after producing considerable proof that he convinced the men
that he was their long gone accomplice. A great rejoicing followed.

Early in the evening young Potts started alone over Ford’s High
Water Road to his father’s house, where he arrived shortly after
dark. He found his father and mother at home and, as he had
anticipated, was not recognized by them. He decided to attempt to
conceal his identity until late in the night, for he concluded
that if before making himself known he could impress his father
with the fact that his wandering boy had accumulated money, the
surprise which he was soon to give him would be even greater. With
this double surprise in view, young Potts displayed a large roll
of money and whispered to his unsuspecting host that he knew he
was in a safe place for the night. The two men had chatted in the
candle lighted room for an hour or more, when the guest asked for
a drink of water. Out into the dark they walked and down to the
Potts Spring, a distance of some three hundred feet. The young man
getting down on his knees, leaned over the rock-lined spring. While
in the act of drinking he was stabbed in the back, under the left
shoulder blade, and instantly killed.

The murderer took the money from his victim’s pocket, but failed
to find anything to indicate who he was, from where he came, or to
what place he intended to go. Old Potts dug a shallow grave and in
it buried all evidence of the crime. He returned to the house, and
after reporting to his wife that he had “made a good haul,” retired
for the night.

The next morning some of the Ford’s Ferry gang rode to Potts’
Hill to celebrate the return of their friend. Before they had an
opportunity to explain the object of their coming, Potts recited
the details of how he had disposed of an “easy” man the night
preceding. One of them then began the story of how they had met
the young fellow and how, when they were at the point of carrying
out their intention of robbing and killing him, he made himself
known and proved beyond doubt that he was young Potts, their former
associate. But before the account was finished old Potts and his
wife accused the crowd of concocting this story and cursed the men
for plotting against them. But, persisting and giving every detail
of what happened during the time the victim was in their presence,
the men created doubt in the minds of Potts and his wife, though
Potts asserted that in his opinion the man he had killed was not
his son, but perhaps a friend in whom his son had confided to such
an extent that he was able to convince them that he was young Potts
himself.

At this point of the discussion Mrs. Potts recalled that her son
had a small birthmark under one of his shoulder blades, but which
shoulder blade she could not remember. Upon learning this, the men,
hoping to find such evidence as would convince the parents of the
identity of their son, repaired to the grave. It was shallow and
the soil loose. In a little while the body was uncovered. Without
waiting for it to be taken from the grave, Potts bent forward and
began to rip the clothing from the corpse. The back showed no mark
on the right side. The bloody wound made by the dagger that had
pierced the heart was then examined. It revealed the presence of
the remembered birth mark....

It was at Cave-in-Rock that the Ford’s Ferry band met to discuss
some of its plans and operations and to divide the spoils. This
rendezvous was two miles from the road on which the highwaymen
operated, and therefore sufficiently distant to avoid discovery
by anyone traveling over that land route. It was conveniently
reached by a boat from Hurricane Island or from Ford’s Ferry.
Furthermore, it was an ideal hiding place in which to lie in wait
for flatboats going down the river.

[Illustration: ENTRANCE TO THE CAVE AND LOWER END OF CAVE-IN-ROCK
BLUFF

(From an original photograph made in 1917)]

What went on at these meetings was never revealed to any one not
a member of the organization. The tragic story of Billy Potts and
his son is one of the few secrets that leaked out, and it was not
divulged until long after Potts died and the organization had
ceased to exist. No arrests were made and for a long time no local
citizens were suspected; for, as already stated, every reported
robbery was soon followed by the news that the crime had been
committed by a traveling highwayman, who had since been driven out
of the country.

In time suspicion began to point toward a number of local men whose
incomes were out of proportion to their labor, and whose frequent
and long absences were accounted for by them in contradictory ways.
Vincent B. Simpson, who lived on the Kentucky side of the Ohio and
ran the ferry boat at Ford’s Ferry, and Henry C. Shouse, who lived
on the Illinois shore at Cedar Point almost opposite, were among
those suspected of being implicated in some of the depredations and
were regarded as two of the men responsible for the circulation
of counterfeit money. Both were apparently on intimate terms with
James Ford, whose two sons were also suspected of being involved
in some of the lawlessness which was then increasing rapidly. Ford
owned Ford’s Ferry and the ferry house near it. The ferry, however,
was run by Simpson, who occupied the house.

After carefully concealing its acts for many years, the clan
began drifting to the inevitable. A lack of trust among the men
themselves and the increasing danger of their work indicated that
sooner or later something would occur to end its career. The end
came in 1834. Strange to say, it was brought about, not through a
dispute over the division of spoils or a wholesale arrest of its
members, but was due more directly to a lawsuit regarding a slave
than to any other cause known to the public. Tradition is vague
regarding this litigation, but the court records reveal sufficient
data from which to glean the cause of the beginning of the end of
the Ford’s Ferry mystery.

The Circuit Court Records of Livingston County contain the
proceedings of a suit entitled “Ford versus Simpson” which began
in September, 1829, and continued nearly two years. James Ford’s
petition recites that on January 7, 1829, he bought from Vincent
B. Simpson a slave named Hiram, for the sum of eight hundred
dollars. Simpson guaranteed him to be “a good blacksmith, sound
and healthy,” but the negro died soon after the sale, at the age
of thirty-four. Ford set forth that the man was “no blacksmith and
no labourer and was labouring under a disease called hernia,” and
that he was worth only two hundred and fifty dollars at the time
of the sale. In consequence of the loss of time and work resulting
from the purchase of the negro, Ford sued for one thousand dollars
damages. Simpson tried, through various witnesses, to prove that
the slave was a good mechanic and a healthy negro, but failed to
establish any of his claims. Ford, on the other hand, produced
many men who upheld him and gave much testimony to prove that
Simpson had practiced a fraud in making the sale. The case dragged
through the courts until March 9, 1831, when, by agreement of the
attorneys, the suit was ordered dismissed, “each party paying their
own costs.”

This was a victory for Ford, for rumor had it that he and Simpson
were equally implicated in certain robberies. Ford had proved
Simpson a deceitful man and could now cite the Hiram transaction
as an example of his unreliability. Ford was prepared, should
Simpson reveal any of their secrets and “try” to implicate him; he
was fortified against any accusation, true or false, that Simpson
might make. In the meantime, Simpson continued to run Ford’s Ferry.
Whether or not Ford attempted to remove him is not known. It is
probable that each feared the other, and that each was awaiting the
other’s first damaging act. Ford and his two grown sons evidently
foresaw the possibility of serious trouble.

These two sons were Philip and William M. Ford (whose ages, in
1831, were respectively thirty-one and twenty-eight years). He
had one daughter, the Cassandra who, February 5, 1827, married
Dr. Charles H. Webb, as previously noted. The daughter was an
accomplished and highly respected woman, and is so represented in
Watt’s _Chronicles_. Her husband was all his life a model citizen.
Ford’s first wife, it is said, was a Miss Miles, whose brother
at one time ran a ferry where the village of Weston, Kentucky,
now stands. After the death of his first wife, Ford, January 15,
1829, as shown by Livingston County marriage records, married Mrs.
Elizabeth Frazer, a widow with three daughters. Mr. Frazer and his
family, so runs the story, were coming down the Ohio in a flatboat
and chanced to stop at Ford’s home. Mr. Frazer became ill while
there, and a few days later died. In the course of a short time
Ford married the widow, and from that union was born, in 1830, one
child, James Ford Jr.

Trouble was brewing. What preparations were made by Ford and
his two sons to meet the uncertain developments is not known. A
perusal of the wills recorded in Livingston County reveals the
fact that Philip Ford made a will on November 21, 1831, and that
within seven months thereafter wills were also made by his brother
and father. Philip Ford died two days after he had prepared his
will. One tradition has it that he died of yellow fever, but that
is not at all likely to be true. The document was not recorded
until June, 1833. It shows he was a widower and a man of some
means. He designates his father and brother-in-law, Dr. Webb, as
administrators. He bequeathed some of his estate to his father,
sister, and brother William, but the greater part to his only
child, Francis Ford, then a small boy. Among the items were seven
slaves, two of whom, “Irene, a woman, and Kitty, a girl,” were to
be retained and the other five sold “at nine months credit, the
proceeds to go for the whole use and benefit of my son.” Another
item reads: “My gold watch I wish Doct. Charles H. Webb to take
charge of until my son comes of age and then to go to my son
Francis Ford.” As requested in this document, he was “buried by the
side of where my beloved wife is buried and in a decent manner.”
The inscription on his gravestone reads:

    “To the memory of Philip Ford who was born November 25th, 1800,
    departed this life November 23d, 1831.”

A year later William died and was buried beside his brother.
Tradition ascribes his death to cholera. Be that as it may, there
is nothing to indicate that he “died with his boots on,” although
he might have met that fate had he survived a few years longer. The
graves of the two brothers are on the Ford Old Place about one
mile southwest of Tolu. Each is marked with a dressed stone box
grave cover, which, before the collapse a few years ago, was about
six feet long, three feet wide and three feet high, the top being
a well carved slab bearing an inscription. The inscription on the
grave of Ford’s second son can be interpreted in more than one way:

    “To the memory of William M. Ford, who departed this life on
    the 3d day of Novr. 1832, aged 28 years. Whose benevolence
    caused the widow and orphant to smile and whose firmness caused
    his enemies to tremble. He was much appresst while living and
    much slandered since dead.”

William also left a will. It is dated June 1, 1832. The official
records show that it was recorded July 27, 1832, a little more
than three months before he died. Tradition has forgotten how
William’s “firmness caused his enemies to tremble” and by what
means he was “much appresst while living and much slandered since
dead.” Nor is there any tradition regarding the identity of the
widows and orphans who, through his benevolence, were caused to
smile. His will, however, throws some sidelights on his career as a
father. The document does not refer to a wife, living or dead. One
tradition has it that at the age of twenty-two he married a girl by
the name of Simpson, but that name does not appear among the three
mothers of his children referred to by him. He first bequeaths all
his estate to his two sons, one of whom was, in 1832, seven years
old, and the other seven months. After stating the name of the
mother of each, he adds: “both of said children I acknowledge to be
my sons.” But in the event of the death of both boys before they
reached the age of twenty-one, he gives two thousand dollars to
the young daughter of a certain woman he mentions, and bequeaths
practically all the residue of his estate to his uncle, Richard
Miles.

It is said that the inscription placed on the grave of William
was dictated by James Ford. Beginning a short time before the
death of his two sons, many accusations against William and his
father gained wide circulation. Ford evidently hoped that such
an inscription on the tomb of the “appresst” and “slandered” son
would have the effect of a voice from the grave and do much toward
subduing undesirable true and false reports that might continue
to circulate after his death. Tradition says James Ford requested
his wife to place an inscription of a similar character on his
grave, hoping it would, to a considerable extent, prevent the
community from attributing all the lawlessness to him and none to
the mysterious Ford’s Ferry band, of which he was openly accused of
being the leader. Mrs. Ford, in all probability, would have carried
out this wish had she not died so soon after her husband. Be that
as it may, nothing marks the grave of James Ford nor that of his
wife. If small stones were erected over them they have long ago
disappeared, as have some of the other headstones that once stood
in the same graveyard. The spot pointed out as the one where James
Ford was buried is a few feet from William’s grave and is now, and
long has been, covered by a briar patch.




Paying the Penalty


After the death of his two sons James Ford was, in a sense, obliged
to stand alone and face, as best he could, any and all reflections
upon his reputation. According to one tradition, some of the
law-abiding citizens continued to regard him as an innocent victim
of treacherous associates. It appears that among the members of
the Ford’s Ferry crowd there were only a few whom he dared trust.
Henry C. Shouse was one of them and he, with two others, as is
shown later, played an important part in the closing act of the
mysterious band.

From the time of the lawsuit between Ford and Simpson each lay
perdu awaiting the action of the other. Each realized, so runs the
tradition, that the other “knew too much.” One morning, shortly
after the death of Ford’s second son, Shouse approached Simpson
at Ford’s Ferry and tried to arouse the ferryman’s anger and lead
him into a fight. Simpson, suspecting a hidden motive, quietly
withdrew. A few days later Shouse accused Simpson of treachery,
claiming, among other things, that Simpson had circulated a report
to the effect that “some one will soon turn state’s evidence, and
certain robbers, counterfeiters, and murderers will then quit
business for good.” A lively fight followed; both men were badly
bruised, but neither was victorious.

Thus did Shouse, greatly influenced by others, make and set his
trap for Simpson. Simpson, sensing the situation, immediately
prepared for any defense that firearms might afford him. These
strained relations between the two men, each watching the other,
continued for about a week. On June 30, 1833, Simpson went in his
boat from Ford’s Ferry down to Cave-in-Rock and, upon his return,
stopped at Cedar Point and walked up to the home of Shouse. Whether
Simpson had gone there to kill Shouse or to attempt to bring about
a reconciliation is an unsettled question. He had reached a point
in Shouse’s yard when, without warning, some one, firing from the
second story window of Shouse’s log house, shot him in the back,
inflicting a wound of which he died next morning.

News that Simpson had been shot spread fast. Shouse was, of course,
immediately accused of the murder. Those most familiar with the
general state of affairs suspected that James Mulligan and William
H. J. Stevenson, both of whom lived near by, were accessories.
A search was made in the neighborhood, but not one of the three
men could be found. The law-abiding citizens on both sides of the
Ohio recognized in the death of Simpson the removal of a man who,
either through a selfish motive or for the good of the public,
contemplated revealing secrets the exposition of which would
have led to the extermination of a band of men who had disturbed
the community for many years. Pursuing parties were sent out and
messengers and letters dispatched in every direction in an effort
to capture the three fleeing men and bring them back for trial and
punishment.

In the meantime, the situation and its causes were taken under
consideration by certain citizens not in any of the posses. Most
versions have it that a few days after Simpson had been killed
a small number of men who chanced to gather at the home of his
widow, took up, in secret, the question of avenging Simpson’s
death. It is said that no definite decision was reached by them,
but that each trusted the vengeance to fate itself. However, three
men were appointed to ride to Ford’s residence and ask him to come
to Simpson’s in order that he might be prepared to join the crowd
which was, early the next morning, to appear before the grand jury
and give testimony as to the killing.

On their way the messengers met Ford near the Hurricane Camp
Ground. After hearing their mission he stated he was then riding
to the ferry to learn the latest news and offer his services. The
messengers, accompanied by Ford, rode back to Simpson’s, where
they arrived about sundown. A few minutes later Ford and a dozen
or more men present were invited to take supper, but all declined,
apparently for the reason that they were occupied discussing their
plans for the next day. After night had fallen the invitation was
again extended. About half the number then went into the kitchen
to eat, and the rest stood in the open passage that ran between
the two rooms of the log house. Ford, accepting a chair, leaned it
against the log wall and sat down. The men, one by one, stepped out
of the passage, leaving Ford comfortably seated alone in the dark.
While in this position a man handed him a letter, in the meantime
standing to one side and holding a lighted candle over Ford’s head,
seemingly for the purpose of throwing light on the paper. Ford was
engaged in reading the letter when someone concealed behind a rose
bush in the front yard, shot him through the heart, the bullet
lodging in the log wall against which he was leaning. Ford fell on
the floor dead. The body was immediately carried out in the yard
and preparations were soon begun to send it to his home.

Placed in a rude box, on a wagon drawn by two oxen, Ford’s body was
taken to the Ford farm and there prepared for burial, which took
place a day or two later. According to tradition, the only persons
present at the funeral were his wife, his daughter and her husband,
two of his neighbors and about half a dozen slaves. A terrific
storm suddenly came up while the little procession was marching
from the house to the family graveyard, a distance of about a
quarter of a mile. The slaves were in the act of lowering the
coffin when a crash of thunder frightened one of them so badly that
he dropped the rope with which he was helping to lower the corpse,
and ran away. The head of the coffin struck the bottom of the grave
and wedged the box into an angular position. Attempts were made to
pry it to a level, but without success. While the storm was raging
the remaining slaves, with all possible haste, filled the grave.
After completing the mound, these superstitious negroes ran to
their cabins and from that date “saw things” that have not been
seen since, but have entered into many traditions pertaining to the
Fords. For example: Some of them _saw_ “Jim Ford land in Hell head
foremost.”

The names of the man who held the candle and the one who fired the
shot that killed Ford were never revealed, then or thereafter. It
is said that no investigation of the assassination was ever made,
and, furthermore, that if official proceedings had been attempted,
no evidence of any kind could have been procured.

Ford was suspected to be the leader, adviser, and protector of the
so-called Ford’s Ferry band, but whether or not he was actually
all these was never positively proved. Had his wife lived a
little longer, she in all probability, would have carried out
his suggestion to erect a monument over his grave. If so, the
inscription would have followed, more or less, the lines prepared
by him as his son William’s epitaph. There would have been some
truth in words to the effect that James Ford had not only rendered
much assistance to widows and orphans, but also to the poor and
destitute, and that his “firmness caused his enemies to tremble.”
As to how he was “appresst while living” it is impossible to
determine now. That he was “much slandered since dead” is true,
judging from some of the tales told about him even to this day.

One of these improbable stories is that Ford punished a slave by
placing the man’s head in a vise and while it was thus fastened cut
off the negro’s ears and pulled out his teeth.

Another is to the effect that after the Ford’s Ferry men had
murdered and robbed a flatboatman they learned from papers in his
pocket that his name was Simmons. They buried their victim on the
hill near the Ferry. Soon thereafter it was noticed that many
persimmon sprouts began to shoot up out of the grave and the ground
near by. Although grubbed out a number of times they reappeared
each succeeding spring. Ford, seeing that the matter was viewed
as an evil omen and working on the superstition of some of his
men, ordered the remains taken up and ceremoniously lowered into
the river below Cave-in-Rock, “where,” as one man expressed it,
“Simmons couldn’t sprout any more.” But the sprouts continued to
sprout on the hill overlooking Ford’s Ferry and today “the old
‘simmons thicket” helps perpetuate this old tale.«37»

There is an absurd but widespread tradition that James Ford had
acquired, through his “frolics at the ferry,” a vast fortune
consisting of “dozens of farms, hundreds of slaves, and barrels of
money” and that in his will he not only named every man connected
with the robber band, but gave each a slave or mule. This story,
like many of the others, is absolutely without foundation. His
will, recorded August 5, 1833, indicates that he was not a man
of more than ordinary wealth. It was written in his own hand. It
contains many errors in composition and spelling and, like many
other early documents, is sparsely punctuated. It is nevertheless
evidence that his practical education was far above most of his
contemporaries, though his scholastic training was slight.
His penmanship was good, as can be seen by his signature here
reproduced.«38»

[Illustration: Jas. Ford]

Tradition has it that Ford had been buried only a few days when the
report reached Ford’s Ferry that Shouse, Mulligan, and Stevenson,
who were accused of having killed Simpson, had been overtaken. The
three had started for Texas, but were arrested in Arkansas. Shortly
after the guards and their charges started on their return the
captives tried to escape. Each prisoner was then placed astride a
horse and his feet tied under the animal. In due time they were
landed in the jail at Equality, Illinois, then the county seat of
Gallatin County.«39»

The court records show that the Gallatin County grand jury at its
September term, 1833, indicted Shouse for the murder of Simpson,
with Mulligan and Stevenson named as accessories to the crime. The
original indictment is still preserved. The greater part of the
document is a repetition of old and verbose legal phraseology,
reciting what is summed up in the following extracts:

“That ... not having the fear of God before their eyes, but being
moved and seduced by the instigations of the Devil on the thirtieth
day of June ... with force and arms ... in and upon one Vincent
B. Simpson, in (violation of) the peace of God and of the people
of the said State, feloniously, wilfully, and of their malice
aforethought, did make an assault, and that the said Henry C.
Shouse, with a certain gun called a rifle, of the value of ten
dollars, then and there charged with gun powder and a leaden bullet
... did shoot off and discharging said rifle gun, so loaded ... did
wound the said Vincent in and upon the left side of the back bone
near the shoulder blade, inflicting a mortal wound in and through
the body ... of which said mortal wound said Vincent did languish
and languishing did live until the first day of July ... and of
said mortal wound did die.... And that the said James Mulligan and
the said William H. J. Stevenson, then and there, feloniously,
wilfully, and of their malice aforethought, were present, aiding,
helping, abetting, comforting, assisting, and maintaining the said
Henry C. Shouse, the felony murder aforesaid to do and commit.”

A careful perusal of the court records and documents leads to the
discovery of these facts: The case was called for trial a few days
after the indictment had been found. Fifteen witnesses had been
summoned; all were ready to give testimony for the state, but none
for the defense. After considerable discussion by the attorneys,
a change of venue to Pope County was granted, and the case was
docketed for trial at Golconda in November. Beginning November
21, 1833, and continuing six days, Shouse’s attorneys, Fowler and
Gatewood, made every effort to secure a postponement, claiming
technical errors committed by the court. Failing in this, they
presented the fact that Mulligan had died in jail and Stevenson
had escaped, and on that ground succeeded in deferring the trial
until the May term following. There is nothing to indicate
the circumstances of the death of the one, nor the escape and
disappearance of the other.

On May 21, 1834, the case was again presented and the attorneys
argued for further delay, but failed. Shouse stood trial, and
after a two days’ hearing the jury was instructed to consider the
evidence. There is nothing in the written records showing for
what motive Shouse killed Simpson. In fact, the records contain
little other than stereotyped legal phrases relative to postponing
the case. They throw practically no light on the evidence heard.
No summaries of the testimony have been found. Shouse denied his
guilt. The name of Ford does not appear in any of the documents.
Tradition says that Shouse not only did not betray Ford, but
shielded him whenever an opportunity presented itself.

After the jury had retired, one William Sharp appeared on the scene
and begged to be heard. Shouse’s attorneys prepared a written
avowal of what Sharp’s statement would contain and presented it
to the judge with an argument that in view of the new evidence by
a material witness the case be retried, regardless of the verdict
of the present jury. This was overruled. This document is the only
one from which can be gathered any suggestion as to the character
of evidence probably employed by the defense. Its plea was that
“Shouse expects to prove by said witness (Sharp) that the deceased
Simpson told him about a week before his death that he had some
short time before collared the defendant Shouse and dared him to
cut, that he intended then in a few days to take his pistol and
go over to Shouse’s house and settle him.” This was a plea of
self-defense. But, as already stated, this motion was overruled.
The jury, after due deliberation, found Shouse “guilty as charged.”

According to most traditions, Simpson had more knowledge of the
criminal conduct of the Ford’s Ferry outlaws than it was safe for
one man to have. It was rumored that a large reward was about to
be offered for evidence leading to the conviction of any member of
the band, and Simpson’s confederates feared he would be tempted to
betray them. Shouse, it seems, was selected--or volunteered--to see
that “dead men tell no tales.”

No man of his time was more familiar with the details of the
Shouse murder trial than William Courtney Watts. He furnished
the following statement to a representative of the Louisville
_Courier-Journal_ which published it March 27, 1895:

“Shouse was one of the ring-leaders of the notorious Ford gang and
it is generally believed that Ford deputized him to kill Simpson.
It was observed that after Shouse was sentenced to be hanged, his
attorney, Judge Wyley P. Fowler, spent a large part of his time in
the cell of Shouse. It finally leaked out that Shouse was dictating
to Judge Fowler a history of the robber band to which he had
belonged and that his statements implicated some of the wealthiest
and most prominent citizens in Livingston County. At that juncture
Judge Fowler received a number of anonymous letters in which
writers threatened his life in the event of his ever making public
the communications made to him by Shouse. By the advice of friends
Judge Fowler spent the succeeding winter in Frankfort. Upon his
return Mr. J. W. Cade, the circuit clerk, asked Judge Fowler if
the Shouse history had been destroyed. He replied: ‘No good could
come of its publication. It would cast a shade upon the reputation
of some of Livingston County’s most esteemed citizens.’ Nothing
further was ever heard of the manuscript and it is believed that
Judge Fowler destroyed it.”

It is said Judge Fowler’s notes were based on the dictations the
doomed Shouse intended for the public, and on such reports as were
being openly discussed among the people. Judge Fowler, however,
having been Ford’s attorney for a number of years and having
represented Shouse in his last trial, recognized that any statement
he made would be considered as based on confidential information
received by him as an attorney, and that, in consequence, he would
be unjustly condemned.

What Shouse’s history and confession contained was the subject of
much speculation for a generation or two. There is an impression
among some people living in the lower Ohio River valley that Judge
Fowler’s alleged manuscript on the history of the robber band
still exists. Inquiry recently made among his descendants resulted
in learning that many years before his death in 1880, he, in the
presence of an intimate friend, destroyed all his data on the
subject. Judge Fowler never permitted any one to see his notes and
seldom discussed the matter. It is said that on one occasion when
he was asked whether or not the Ford’s Ferry band was a branch of
the clan led by John A. Murrell, he left the impression that it had
at one time made some preparations to work in conjunction with the
great western land pirate and his band of negro stealers.

More or less has been written by historians and novelists about
John A. Murrell, but no writer connects him with Cave-in-Rock or
Ford’s Ferry. _The History of Virgil A. Stewart_, a book on the
life of Murrell, compiled by H. R. Howard and published in 1836,
gives an incomplete list of Murrell’s associates. Among the four
hundred and fifty names there recorded there is none familiar to
persons now living near Cave-in-Rock. Tradition says that Shouse
made a few trips between the Cave and Marked Tree, Arkansas, to
meet Murrell or some of his representatives for the purpose of
delivering and receiving messages pertaining to negro stealing and
the disposition of counterfeit money. But whether or not the Ford’s
Ferry band was ever part of the John A. Murrell clan will remain,
in all probability, one of the Ford’s Ferry mysteries.«40»

On June 7, 1834, Judge Thomas C. Brown sent a writ to Joshua
Howard, Sheriff of Pope County: “Whereas ... Judgment hath been
given in our said court that the said Henry C. Shouse shall be
hanged by the neck until he is dead and that execution of said
judgment be made and done on Monday the ninth day of June A.D.,
1834, between the hours of twelve of the clock at noon and four
of the clock in the evening of the same day, at some convenient
place in the vicinity, not more than one-half mile from the town
of Golconda in said county, in the usual manner of inflicting
punishment in such cases....” And on June 9 Shouse paid the
extreme penalty.

Tradition has it that on the day of the hanging thousands of people
came to Golconda from Gallatin and Pope counties, Illinois, and
from Livingston County, Kentucky, and other sections, to see the
first legal hanging in the county and to witness the death struggle
of a Ford’s Ferry and Cave-in-Rock outlaw. Even to this day, a
large crowd in that section of the country is measured as being
“as big as the one when Shouse was hanged.” The execution took
place in the creek bottom immediately north of the town limits, at
a spot where the slopes of the hills converge to form a natural
amphitheatre. About two o’clock in the afternoon Shouse was placed
on an ox-cart and driven to the scaffold that had been built by
erecting two heavy timbers with a cross beam over them. Between
these two upright posts the cart was placed, and into it the
condemned man’s coffin was then shoved, thus serving the purpose
of a platform and trap. Shouse’s hands were tied behind his back;
he was blindfolded and made to stand erect upon his coffin. The
suspended rope was looped around his neck; the oxen pulled the cart
forward and Shouse fell.

Thus terminated the career of one of the members of the mysterious
Ford’s Ferry band, and with it passed away forever bloodshed and
robbery at Cave-in-Rock.




The Cave in Fiction


Historical novels, with some exceptions, present the past in a more
interesting manner than do the formal histories which are intended
as chronicles of actual facts. It has been said, on the one hand,
that “truth is stranger than fiction,” and on the other that
“fiction is often more truthful than fact.” Fiction is undoubtedly
more truthful in the presentation of the manners and social life
of the period portrayed than is formal history. The history of
Cave-in-Rock and the careers of the outlaws identified with the
place is not only stranger than fiction, but is besprinkled
with many tragic and melodramatic scenes which, although almost
unimaginable, are actually true. For more than a century fiction
writers have used the Cave as a background for stories. These
authors by freely discarding the leading facts and drawing on their
own imaginations wrote stories less original than might otherwise
have been produced.

No effort has been made to compile a more or less complete
collection of works of fiction pertaining to the Cave. The stories
and poems commented on in the course of this chapter are only such
as were incidentally found while in search of history. Although
this fiction has very little of facts for a basis, and most of the
scenes are far from probable, nevertheless it necessarily stands
not only as Cave-in-Rock literature, but also as a contribution to
the good, bad, or indifferent literature of America. The fact that
more than one edition was published of the Cave-in-Rock novels here
referred to indicates, to some extent that they represent some of
the types of stories then in demand.

Stories dealing with mysterious murders and highway robberies
have always found many enthusiastic readers. It seems that every
decade of the nineteenth century produced at least one new tale of
Cave-in-Rock. And in our own times the writings of some well-known
living authors show that the Cave is still supplying material for
fiction.

In Irvin S. Cobb’s story “The Dogged Under Dog,” (originally
published in the _Saturday Evening Post_, August 3, 1912, and
shortly thereafter printed in Cobb’s book entitled _Back Home_) one
of the characters, recalling some of the rough men who lived near
the Cave when that country was still new, says Big Harpe and Little
Harpe were run down by dogs and killed and that “the men who killed
them cut off their heads and salted them down and packed them both
in a piggin of brine, and sent the piggin by a man on horseback up
to Frankfort to collect the reward.”

Nancy Huston Banks in _Oldfield_, 1902, devotes a few pages to
Cave-in-Rock, the Harpes, and a character she calls “Alvarado,” a
mysterious Spaniard who frequented the lower Ohio valley and who
was suspected of having been a comrade of Jean Lafitte. Mrs. Banks,
in her next historical novel, _’Round Anvil Rock_, 1903 (in which
Philip Alston is one of the leading characters) refers to that
section of Kentucky lying opposite the Cave as having been the
“Rogues Harbor.”

The Harpes, Masons, and the Cave are introduced in _The Ark of
1803_, by C. A. Stephens. This book for boys, published in 1904, is
intended as a picture of romances and tragedies incidental to early
navigation on the Ohio and Mississippi. It serves that purpose
fairly well, although practically no statement made by the author
regarding the Harpes and the Masons is in accordance with history
or tradition.

[Illustration: VIEW OF CAVE-IN-ROCK AND VICINITY, 1833

It shows a landscape interesting in itself but false to the actual
scene

(Reproduced from Charles Bodmer’s drawing)]

Our earliest item relative to fiction pertaining to the Cave was
found in a review published in _The Port Folio_, February, 1809, of
Thomas Ashe’s _Travels in America Performed in 1806_, printed in
London in 1808. The critics in Ashe’s day, and ever since, declared
the writer of _Travels_ a literary thief, bone thief, and infamous
prevaricator and ridiculed his work on the ground that it was
filled with incredible stories grafted onto authentic incidents and
actual facts. This general condemnation gave the new book a wide
circulation for a few years. The editor of _The Port Folio_ devotes
a dozen pages to his “entire contempt both of Mr. Ashe and his
work.”

Most of the travelers who appeared after Ashe’s day and examined
the Cave detected in his sketch a combination of facts and fiction
that helped spread the name and history of this interesting and
picturesque rendezvous of outlaws. Many a visitor still goes to
the place expecting to explore the “upper cave” but soon discovers
that its size has been wildly exaggerated by Ashe. His account
of the Cave is one of the longest ever written and will always
be of curious interest no matter from what standpoint it may be
read, other than history. The reproach to Ashe is that he gave the
hoax out as veritable facts encountered in his travels and never
corrected this impression or acknowledged his purpose. About half
of what he says concerning the Cave is at least highly probable;
the remainder is wholly fictitious.

A casual investigation of the stories published after outlawry
terminated at Ford’s Ferry, brought to light two novels and a
long poem in which the Cave serves as a background. Viewed from
the standpoint of today their plots have the consistency of a dime
novel. Browsing in the field of fiction also led to the discovery
of the one time celebrated romance of _Harpe’s Head_.

_Harpe’s Head_, by Judge James Hall, was first published in America
in 1833, and the following year was printed in London under the
title of _Kentucky, A Tale_. It was later republished in America
in Judge Hall’s volume, _Legends of the West_. _Harpe’s Head_ is
the only novel in which the notorious Harpes are introduced as
characters. It is a story of a small emigrant family traveling from
Virginia to western Kentucky over the route then endangered by the
Harpes. All the characters are fictitious, except the two outlaws
and their wives. No reference is made to their career at the Cave.

The romance is written in a dignified and graceful style.
_Atkinson’s Casket_ for November, 1833, in its comments on the
book says “it has some masterly scenes,” and quotes one in full--a
Virginia barbecue. Among other interesting sketches of pioneer
times woven into _Harpe’s Head_ is one of “Hercules Short” or
“Hark Short, the Snake Killer,” a half-witted boy who performs
extraordinary feats and who labors under the impression that he is
a son of Big Harpe. On one occasion “Hark” remarks that his mother
told him, “If anybody was to rake hell with a fine-comb they would
not find sich a tarnal villain as Big Harpe.”

Edmund L. Starling, in his _History of Henderson County, Kentucky_,
1887, says: “The history of the Harpes in this portion of Kentucky,
has long ago, and repeatedly found its way into the histories of
Kentucky and other states, in pamphlets and the newspapers of
the country, and at one time was even dramatized for the American
stage. But it was so desperate and appalling to all rational
sensibilities that it was abandoned by the drama.” I did not find
any pamphlets or dramas regarding the Harpes.

The earliest novel found using Cave-in-Rock for a background
is _Mike Fink, A Legend of the Ohio_, by Emerson Bennett, who
for a time was a well-known writer of thrilling romances. This
melodrama was first published in Cincinnati in 1848, and although
now a somewhat rare book, it ranked, judging from the number of
editions issued, among widely-read stories of the middle of the
last century. Its popularity was not due to any high literary
merit, but to its wild and extravagant plot. The greater part of
the story deals with bloody battles between a band of outlaws and
the flatboat crew and passengers led by Mike Fink. Practically all
the action takes place in or near the Cave, and for that reason “A
Legend of Cave-in-Rock” would have been a more appropriate subtitle.

Shortly after _Mike Fink_ was put into circulation there appeared
in the _Alton_ (Illinois) _Courier_, 1852, a prize serial entitled
_Virginia Rose_, by Dr. Edward Reynolds Roe. Having gone through
a pamphlet edition, this Cave-in-Rock story was published in book
form in 1882 under the title of _Brought to Bay_, and in 1892 the
same story was republished and its title changed back to _Virginia
Rose_. Dr. E. R. Roe--not E. P. Roe with whom he is sometimes
confused--was a citizen of Illinois, practiced medicine and wrote a
number of books. He died in Chicago in 1893 at the age of eighty.
He lived in Shawneetown a few years, beginning in 1843, and it is
said he prepared the greater part of this manuscript while residing
there.

The book has no preface and the presumption is that all the
characters are fictitious. The story deals with the career of
a girl, Virginia Rose, who was kidnapped in Shawneetown by her
father, the leader of the Cave-in-Rock outlaws. He takes her to
the Cave, and it so happened that shortly thereafter the New
Madrid earthquake of 1811 occurs. The citizens of Shawneetown,
suspecting that the stolen Virginia Rose may have been taken to
the Cave, so runs the story, organize a rescuing party. Upon their
arrival at the Cave, they, to their great surprise, find the place
abandoned. Boxes and barrels were scattered around, their contents
undisturbed, and the general appearance indicated that the place
had been abandoned suddenly.

In the words of the author: “Remnants of a feast which had never
been eaten were lying upon a table; lamps were hanging around burnt
out for want of oil.... The hatchway overhead, which communicated
with the room above was not closed ... but the avenues which led
from it to the inner cave had disappeared. The rock had fallen from
above in vast masses and closed all connection between the upper
cave and the outer world forever.... What was a hill back of the
cave bluff now appeared to be a hollow or depression, as compared
to the ground around it.... The outlaws had met their fate--they
had perished in the earthquake [except the leader and his daughter
who were on the Mississippi at the time] perhaps in the midst of
gay festivities, perhaps in the hour of music and dancing! Who
could say? Not a soul was left to tell the tale. The men who had
come to execute vengeance could not now avoid sympathy for the
dead.”

Thus did the author of _Virginia Rose_ make the New Madrid
earthquake wipe out the Cave-in-Rock’s “inner cave” or “upper
cave” that had been “discovered” and is so extravagantly described
by Thomas Ashe!

Between recorded history on the one hand and stories of fiction on
the other stands the book _Chronicles of a Kentucky Settlement_,
1897, by William Courtney Watts. It is a historical romance based
solely on local tradition. Although this work is somewhat faulty in
its general construction, and may be, at times, somewhat crude in
its literary style, it is, nevertheless, one of the most faithful
historical sketches of early Kentucky.

The leading characters are Joseph Watts and Lucinda Haynes, who
were first thrown together in 1805 when children on their way from
North Carolina to the West, Joseph going to Tennessee and Lucinda
moving with her parents to Kentucky. A few years later Joseph Watts
began a search for Miss Haynes and found her near Salem, Kentucky.
After a courtship such as none but lovers in a new country could
experience, they were married and became the parents of the author
who tells their story. Among other characters is Charles H. Webb,
who gave Watts an account of his capture at Cave-in-Rock and escape
from the outlaws and who later married the daughter of James Ford.

The gloomiest tragedy in the book concerns the unfortunate Lucy
Jefferson Lewis, sister of Thomas Jefferson, whose two sons killed
a slave on their farm near Smithland, Kentucky, and cut up the body
in an attempt to conceal their crime. One of the Lewis brothers
committed suicide on his mother’s grave and the other escaped
after he had been arrested for murder and placed in jail. All the
characters in _Chronicles_ are presented under fictitious names.«41»

It is probable that every person who saw the landscape of which
the opening of the Cave forms a part had his sense of romance and
poetry stirred by the sight. To what extent attempts were made to
express this emotion in the form of poetry or verse is not known.
Only one poem has been found--“The Outlaw,” by Charles H. Jones,
of Cincinnati. It comprises about one thousand two hundred lines,
published in 1835 in a neatly bound booklet called _The Outlaw and
Other Poems_. In the October, 1835, issue of the _Western Monthly
Magazine_, of Cincinnati, Judge James Hall devotes two pages to a
eulogistic review of the book, encouraging the young poet in his
work. A more enthusiastic reviewer might have called this an epic
of Cave-in-Rock.

In his introductory note Mr. Jones briefly refers to the then
well-known fact that the Cave had been for many years the resort of
a band of outlaws all of whom were finally either killed or driven
out by the Rangers. As to his authorities he states that “the
ravages of the robbers are still fresh in the recollection of many
of the inhabitants of the lower Ohio valley.”

About one-half of the poem is an “effervescence of poetic fancy,”
with here and there a real gem. The plot is dramatic. The story
begins in Virginia. Our hero shoots his successful rival in love
immediately after the wedding ceremony. Believing he has killed the
groom and that the shock has proven fatal to the bride, he flees to
the wilds of the West. He drifts down the Ohio, joins the band of
outlaws at the Cave and soon becomes their leader--The Outlaw.

One “dark tempestuous night” a flatboat passing the Cave is
attacked by the robbers; a fierce and bloody combat follows.
The Outlaw discovers among the passengers the very girl who had
discarded him for another--and still alive. He stabs her in the
heart and then--

    “He raised her body from the floor,
       And hurled it to the foaming wave,
     Her white robe red with streaming gore,
       A fitting shroud for such a grave.”

The battle continues. The Outlaw kills man after man, when to his
surprise he finds himself facing the very man he thought he had
killed in Virginia. The two recognize each other instantly. They
draw daggers and The Outlaw is slain. And the boatmen, so runs the
story, exterminate the band of robbers at the Cave.

    “The morning breaks, the fight is o’er,
     Peace smiles again upon the shore ...
     Yon arching cave is lonely now,
     The tenants of its holds have fled,
     Or on the hill-top’s rocky brow
     Are sleeping with the dead....

     No more those cavern’s walls will ring
     With sounds of mirth and rioting,
     And peacefully along the tide,
     The laden barks will slowly glide;
     Their crews no more will deem they see
     A robber’s form in every tree,
     And grasp their rifles and prepare
     For deeds of blood and carnage there;
     But as they pass along the shore,
     Will pause and rest upon the oar,
     And tell of many a bloody tale,
     The legends of yon gloomy vale;
     And travelers, with curious eyes,
     Will view its chambers in surprise,
     And scarce believe that where they stand,
     Was heard the clash of brand on brand,
     And yonder yawning cavern’s gloom
     The Outlaw’s dwelling--and his tomb;
     But rather all they hear they’ll deem
     A fable, or a fairy dream.”




Bibliography


_Manuscript Sources_

  EXECUTIVE JOURNAL, May 25, 1796 to October 23, 1799, and
    Appendix, Governor James Garrard. Archives of Secretary of
    State, Frankfort, Kentucky.                                     [1]

  CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AGAINST SAMUEL MASON and companions
    begun January 11, 1803, Port of New Madrid. MS in French.
    Department of Archives and History, Jackson, Mississippi.       [2]

  LETTER FROM NICHOLAS MARIA VIDAL, in Spanish, dated New
    Orleans, March 3, 1803, to Governor W. C. C. Claiborne.
    Department of Archives and History, Jackson, Mississippi.       [3]

  LETTER FROM DR. JOHN SIBLEY, dated Natchez, February 18,
    1803, to his son Samuel Hopkins Sibley. Sibley Letters,
    Vol. I, Missouri Historical Society, St. Louis.                 [4]

  COURT OF QUARTER SESSIONS RECORDS, September 1798–March 1802.
    Danville District Court Records, September 1796–1800. Also
    Filed Documents. Stanford, Lincoln County, Kentucky.            [5]

  COURT OF QUARTER SESSIONS RECORDS, Vol. I. Also Filed
    Documents, Henderson, Henderson County, Kentucky.               [6]

  LOGAN DISTRICT COURT RECORDS, Vol. I. Russellville, Logan
    County, Kentucky.                                               [7]

  GREENVILLE COURT DOCKET, 1803–1804. Fayette, Jefferson
    County, Mississippi.                                            [8]

  LIVINGSTON COUNTY COURT RECORDS, 1810–1836. Livingston County
    Circuit Court Records, Books G and H. Smithland, Livingston
    County, Kentucky.                                               [9]

  LIVINGSTON COUNTY WILL BOOKS, A and B. Livingston County Deed
    Book B. Livingston County Marriage Register, 1822–1839.
    Smithland, Livingston County, Kentucky.                        [10]

  POPE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT RECORDS, Book B. Also Filed
    Documents. Golconda, Pope County, Illinois.                    [11]

  DRAPER MSS (Wisconsin State Historical Society).                 [12]

    A Draper’s Notes: 2s 187.
    B Draper’s Notes: 3s 27, 28.
    C Draper’s Notes: 3s 37,38.
    D Draper’s Notes: 5s 70–72.
    E Draper’s Notes: 30s 114–129.
    F Draper’s Notes: 30s 183–193.
    G Draper’s Notes: 30s 306–311.
    H Draper’s Notes: 30s 312–316.
    I Draper’s Notes: 31s 55,56.
    J Draper’s Frontier Wars MSS: 1u 65–79.
    K Draper’s Kentucky MSS: 2cc 34a.
    L Draper’s Kentucky MSS: 29cc 75, 76.
    M Draper’s Pittsburgh and Northwest Virginia MSS: 7nn 16.
    N Draper’s Shepherd Papers: 1ss 91.
    O Draper’s Virginia MSS: 6zz 61.


_Printed Sources_

  ALLEN, WILLIAM B. History of Kentucky (Louisville, 1872).
    411–417.                                                       [13]

  AMERICAN PIONEER, Cincinnati. _See_ 65, 66.

  ASHE, THOMAS. Travels in America Performed in 1806 (London,
    1808). 250–265.                                                [14]

  ATKINSON’S CASKET, a monthly, Philadelphia, November, 1833:
    Review of James Hall’s Harpe’s Head, A Legend of Kentucky.     [15]

  AUDUBON, JOHN JAMES. Audubon and his Journals, by Maria R.
    Audubon (New York, 1900). vol. ii, 232, 233.                   [16]

  BACON, M. E. Memories of Bold River Pirates kept alive by
    Cave on the Ohio. Courier-Journal, Louisville, October 6,
    1907.                                                          [17]

  BAILY, FRANCIS. Journal of a Tour in the Unsettled Parts of
    North America, 1796–1797 (London, 1856). 247.                  [18]

  BECK, LEWIS C. A Gazetteer of the States of Illinois and
    Missouri (Albany, 1823). 98, 99.                               [19]

  BLOWE, DANIEL. View of the United States of America (London,
    1820). 577.                                                    [20]

  BODMER, CHARLES. Maximilian Atlas. _See_ 84.

  BREAZEALE, J. W. M. Life as It Is (Knoxville, 1842). 126–151.    [21]

  BROWN, SAMUEL R. The Western Gazetteer (Auburn, New
    York, 1817). 29.                                               [22]

  CAROLINA GAZETTE, a weekly, Charleston, South Carolina. News
    item: October 24, 1799.                                        [23]

  CASKET MAGAZINE, Philadelphia. _See_ 15, 37.

  CHARLEVOIX, P. F. X. DE. History of New France (Paris, 1757):
    Map dated 1744.                                                [24]

  CINCINNATI LITERARY GAZETTE, a weekly. Editorial: May 28,
    1825.                                                          [25]

  CLAIBORNE, J. F. H. Mississippi as a Province, Territory and
    State (Jackson, 1880). 226, 227, 530, 531.                     [26]

  CLAIBORNE, GOV. W. C. C., Official Letters. _See_ 113.

  COLLINS, LEWIS. Historical Sketches of Kentucky (Maysville,
    Kentucky, and Cincinnati, 1847). 352–354.                      [27]

  COLLINS, RICHARD H. History of Kentucky (Covington, also
    Louisville, 1874 and 1882). vol. i, 25; vol. ii, 345–352,
    476, 482, 695, 757.                                            [28]

  COLLOT, GEORGE H. VICTOR. A Journey in North America (Paris,
    1826). vol. i, 185–187 and Atlas.                              [29]

  CRAMER, ZADOK. The Ohio and Mississippi Navigator
    (Pittsburgh), 1803, 1806, 1814, 1818.                          [30]

  CRITTENDEN PRESS, Marion, Crittenden County, Kentucky,
    August, 1893: The Cave-in-Rock, a Rendezvous of Cut-throats
    and Robbers.                                                   [31]

  CUMING, FORTESQUE. Sketches of a Tour to the Western Country
    (Pittsburgh, 1810); in Thwaites, Early Western Travels,
    vol. iv, 267–274.                                              [32]

  CUMINGS, SAMUEL. The Western Navigator (Philadelphia, 1822).
    Map no. 14.                                                    [33]

  CUTLER, JERVIS. A Topographical Description of the State of
    Ohio, Indiana Territory and Louisiana (Boston, 1812). 60.      [34]

  DANIELS, WILSON. Steamboating on the Ohio and Mississippi
    before the Civil War. Indiana Magazine of History,
    Bloomington, June, 1915.                                       [35]

  DARBY, JOHN F. Personal Recollections (St. Louis, 1880).
    84–97.                                                         [36]

  DARBY, WILLIAM. Notes on Western Border Life. Casket
    Magazine, Philadelphia, July 1834.                             [37]

  DAVIDSON, REV. ROBERT. An Excursion to the Mammoth Cave and
    the Barrens of Kentucky (Lexington, 1840). 21.                 [38]

  DOW, LORENZO. History of Cosmopolite or Lorenzo’s Journal
    (Cincinnati, 1849). 7th ed., 344.                              [39]

  DRAKE, SAMUEL G. Book of the Indians of North America
    (Boston, 1833). 61.                                            [40]

  DRAPER, LYMAN C. King’s Mountain and Its Heroes (Cincinnati,
    1881). 224.                                                    [41]

  DRAPER, LYMAN C. A Sketch of the Harpes. Western Literary
    and Historical Magazine, a monthly, Louisville, September,
    1842.                                                          [42]

  DUNBAR, SEYMOUR. A History of Travel in America
    (Indianapolis, 1915). vol. i, 299–300, vol. ii, 649–650.       [43]

  ELLICOTT, ANDREW. Journal of Andrew Ellicott 1796–1800
    (Philadelphia, 1803). 21.                                      [44]

  EVANS, ESTWICK. A Pedestrious Tour of Four Thousand Miles
    (Concord, New Hampshire, 1819); in Thwaites, Early Western
    Travels, vol. viii, 281.                                       [45]

  EVANSVILLE COURIER COMPANY. History of Union County, Kentucky
    (Evansville, Indiana, 1886). 376–380                           [46]

  Everybody’s Magazine, New York. _See_ 126.

  FICTION. _See_ chapter “The Cave in Fiction.”

  FILSON CLUB. _See_ 106, 123.

  FINLEY, ALEXANDER C. History of Russellville and Logan
    County, Kentucky (Russellville, 1878, 1879, and 1890).
    Volume First three pamphlets comprising five books: Book i,
    1878; Books ii and iii, 1879; Books iv and v, 1890.            [47]

  FLAGG, EDMUND. The Far West, or A Tour Beyond the Mountains
    (New York, 1838); in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, vol.
    xxvi, 71–77.                                                   [48]

  FLINT, TIMOTHY. History and Geography of the Mississippi
    Valley (Cincinnati, 1832). vol. i, 332.                        [49]

  FLINT, TIMOTHY. Recollections of the Last Ten Years (Boston,
    1826). 83.                                                     [50]

  FOLK-LORE, JOURNAL OF AMERICAN, Boston. _See_ 93.

  FORMAN, SAMUEL S. Narrative of a Journey Down the Ohio and
    Mississippi in 1789–1790 (Cincinnati, 1888). 36, 37.           [51]

  GRATZ, SIMON. Letters of Thomas Rodney to Caesar A.
    Rodney. Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography,
    Philadelphia. July and October, 1919.                          [52]

  GUARDIAN OF FREEDOM, a weekly, Frankfort, Kentucky. News
    item: February 29, 1804.                                       [53]

  GUILD, JOSEPHUS C. Old Times in Tennessee (Nashville, 1878).
    92–99.                                                         [54]

  HALL, FREDERICK. Letters from the East and from the West
    (Washington, 1840). 163.                                       [55]

  HALL, JAMES. Story of the Harpes. Port Folio, Philadelphia,
    April, 1824, and August, 1825.                                 [56]

  HALL, JAMES. Letters from the West (London, 1828). 91–94,
    266–268, 272.                                                  [57]

  HALL, JAMES. Harpe’s Head, A Legend of Kentucky
    (Philadelphia, 1833); Kentucky, A Tale (London, 1834);
    Harpe’s Head, in Legends of the West (Cincinnati, 1855).       [58]

  HALL, JAMES. Review of The Outlaw and Other Poems, a booklet,
    Charles A. Jones, published in Cincinnati, 1835, Western
    Monthly Magazine, Cincinnati, October, 1835.                   [59]

  HALL, JAMES. Sketches of History, Life and Manners in the
    West (Philadelphia, 1835). vol. ii, 71, 89–90.                 [60]

  HALL, JAMES. Romance of Western History (Cincinnati, 1857).
    353–355.                                                       [61]

  HANNA, CHARLES A. Wilderness Trail (New York, 1911). vol. ii,
    126.                                                           [62]

  HARPER, LILLIE DUPUY. Journal of Colonel Daniel Trabue.
    Colonial Men and Times (Philadelphia, 1916). 141–146.          [63]

  HARRIS, THADDEUS M. Journal of a Tour into the Territory
    Northwest of the Allegheny Mountains 1803; with appendix
    (Boston, 1805). 373, 374.                                      [64]

  HILDRETH, SAMUEL PRESCOTT. History of a Voyage from Marietta
    to New Orleans in 1805. American Pioneer, vol. i,
    Chillicothe, Ohio, January and April, 1842.                    [65]

  HILDRETH, SAMUEL PRESCOTT. Extracts from B. Van Cleve’s
    Memoranda. American Pioneer, vol. ii, Cincinnati, Ohio,
    January, 1843.                                                 [66]

  HOFFMAN, CHARLES FENNO. A Winter in the West (New York,
    1835). vol. ii, 121.                                           [67]

  HOUCK, LOUIS. History of Missouri (Chicago, 1908). vol. ii,
    143.                                                           [68]

  HOUGH, EMERSON. Story of the Outlaw (New York, 1907). 36–73.     [69]

  HOWARD, H. R. History of Virgil A. Stewart and His Adventure
    in Capturing and Exposing the Great Western Land Pirate
    [John A. Murrell] (Philadelphia, 1836).                        [70]

  HOWE, HENRY. Historical Collections of the Great West
    (Cincinnati, 1852). 181–185.                                   [71]

  HULBERT, ARCHER BUTLER. Ohio River, a Course of Empire (New
    York, 1906). 196–198.                                          [72]

  ILLINOIS STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. _See_ 75, 108.

  INDIANA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. _See_ 35.

  JACKSON, SHADRACH L. Life of Logan Belt, the Noted Desperado
    of Southern Illinois (Cave-in-Rock, Illinois, 1888). 57, 58.   [73]

  JAMES, EDWIN. Account of an Expedition from Pittsburgh to
    the Rocky Mountains, from Notes of Major Stephen H. Long
    (Philadelphia, 1823); in Thwaites, Early Western Travels,
    vol. xiv, 80, 81.                                              [74]

  JENNINGS, JOHN. Journal from Fort Pitt to Fort Chartres in
    the Illinois Country, March 8, 1766–April 6, 1766; in
    Illinois Historical Collections, 1916, vol. xi, 167–177.       [75]

  KELLOGG, LOUISE PHELPS. Frontier Retreat on the Upper Ohio
    1779–1781. Wisconsin Historical Society, Collections, 1917,
    vol. xxiv, Draper Series vol. v, 413, 427, 429, 494.           [76]

  KELLOGG, LOUISE PHELPS. _See_ 76, 130, 131.

  KENTUCKY ACTS, Passed at the Seventh General Assembly for the
    Commonwealth (Frankfort, 1799). 199.                           [77]

  KENTUCKY ACTS, Passed at the Ninth General Assembly for the
    Commonwealth (Frankfort, 1801). 19.                            [78]

  KENTUCKY GAZETTE, a weekly, Lexington. News items: January 2,
    March 28, April 25, August 15, September 5, 1799; September
    14, 1801; May 3 and 17, November 22, 1803.                     [79]

  LESUEUR, CHARLES ALEXANDRE, in America, by Adrien Loir (Le
    Havre, France, 1920).           [79A]

  LONG, C. W. Bloody History of a Graveyard. Evening Post,
    Louisville, November 2, 1905.                                  [80]

  LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL. _See_ 17, 94.

  LOUISVILLE EVENING POST. _See_ 80.

  LOWRY, ROBERT, and William H. McCardle, History of
    Mississippi (Jackson, 1891). 504, 505.                         [81]

  MARSHALL, HUMPHREY. History of Kentucky (Frankfort, 1824).
    vol. i, 159, vol. ii, 470.                                     [82]

  MASSEY, STEPHEN L. James’ Traveler’s Companion (Cincinnati,
    1851). 168, 169.                                               [83]

  MAXIMILIAN, PRINCE OF WIED-NEUWIED. Voyage in the Interior of
    North America, 1832 to 1834 (London, 1843); in Thwaites,
    Early Western Travels, vol. xxii, 202. Bodmer’s Atlas.         [84]

  MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. _See_ 2, 3,
    105, 114.

  MISSOURI HISTORICAL SOCIETY, St Louis. _See_ 4.

  MONETTE, JOHN W. History of the Discovery and Settlement of
    the Valley of the Mississippi (New York, 1848). vol. ii,
    352, 353.                                                      [85]

  MURRAY, CHARLES AUGUSTUS. Travels in North America, 1834–1836
    (London, 1839). vol. i, 165.                                   [86]

  MURRELL, JOHN A., Life of. _See_ 70.

  NATIONAL HISTORICAL COMPANY. History of Caldwell and
    Livingston Counties, Missouri (St. Louis, 1886). 711.          [87]

  NEVILLE, MORGAN. Mike Fink, the Last of the Boatmen.
    The Western Souvenir for 1829, edited by James Hall.
    (Cincinnati, Ohio, 1829). 107.                                 [88]

  NUTTALL, THOMAS. Journal of Travels into the Arkansa
    Territory, 1819 (Philadelphia, 1821); in Thwaites, Early
    Western Travels, vol. xiii, 71.                                [89]

  PALLADIUM, a weekly, Frankfort, Kentucky. News items: May 2
    and 9, August 15 and 22, 1799; August 12, 1802; May 5, July
    14, September 8, 1803; March 3, 1804.                          [90]

  PARRISH, RANDALL. Historic Illinois, the Romance of the
    Earlier Days (Chicago, 1905). 293, 401, 402, 446.              [91]

  PENNSYLVANIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY. _See_ 52.

  PERRIN DU LAC, F. M. Travels Through the Two Louisianas in
    1801–1803 (Paris, 1805); in Richard Phillips’ Collection of
    Travels, vol. vi, 43.                                          [92]

  PERROW, EBER CARLE, Songs and Rhymes from the South. Journal
    of American Folk-Lore, Boston, April-June, 1912.               [93]

  POOL, A. H. T. Smithland, One of Kentucky’s Most Picturesque
    Towns. Courier-Journal, Louisville, March 27, 1895.            [94]

  PORT FOLIO, a monthly, Philadelphia, February, 1809: A
    Criticism by “C.” of Thomas Ashe, Travels in America.          [95]

  PORT FOLIO, Philadelphia. _See_ 56, 95.

  PRIEST, JOSIAH. American Antiquities and Discoveries in the
    West (Albany, 1833). 138–144.                                  [96]

  PURCELL, MARTHA GRASSHAM. The Sister of the Sage of
    Monticello Sleeps in Kentucky’s Soil. D. A. R. Souvenir,
    Lexington, Kentucky, October, 1908.                            [97]

  PURCELL, MARTHA GRASSHAM. Stories of Old Kentucky
    (Cincinnati, 1915). 153–155.                                   [98]

  RAFINESQUE, CONSTANTINE S. Ichthyologia Ohiensis (Lexington,
    Kentucky, 1820). Reprint, Cleveland, 1899. 52.                 [99]

  RANKIN, JOHN. Letters on American Slavery (Boston, 1833).
    62–65.                                                        [100]

  REYNOLDS, JOHN. My Own Times (Belleville, Illinois, 1855).
    Reprint, Chicago, 1879. 46, 114.                              [101]

  REYNOLDS, JOHN. Pioneer History of Illinois (Belleville,
    1852). 72, 239.                                               [102]

  RICHARDS, J. ADDISON. Romance of American Landscape (New
    York, 1854). 195, 197–200.                                    [103]

  RICHARDSON, JACOB. Going West in 1820. In Hyde Parke
    Historical Record (Massachusetts) 1904, vol. iv, 54.          [104]

  RILEY, FRANKLIN L. Extinct Towns and Villages of Mississippi.
    In Publications of the Mississippi Historical Society,
    1902, vol. v, 346.                                            [105]

  ROBERTSON, JAMES R. Petitions of the Early Inhabitants of
    Kentucky to the General Assembly of Virginia, 1769 to 1792.
    Filson Club Publications No. 27 (Louisville, 1914). 141.      [106]

  RODNEY, THOMAS, letters of. _See_ 52.

  ROOSEVELT, THEODORE. The Winning of the West (New York,
    1889). vol. i, 173.                                           [107]

  ROSE, JAMES A. Regulators and Flatheads in Southern Illinois.
    In Transactions of the Illinois State Historical Society
    for the Year 1906 (Springfield, 1906). 109.                   [108]

  ROTHERT, OTTO A. History of Muhlenberg County, Kentucky
    (Louisville, 1913). 93, 435–448.                              [109]

  ROTHERT, OTTO A. History of Unity Baptist Church, Muhlenberg
    County, Kentucky (Louisville, 1914). 3.                       [110]

  ROTHERT, OTTO A. Local History in Kentucky Literature
    (Louisville, 1915). 9.                                        [111]

  ROWLAND, DUNBAR. Encyclopedia of Mississippi History
    (Madison, Wisconsin, 1907).                                   [112]

  ROWLAND, DUNBAR. Official Letter Books of W. C. C. Claiborne.
    1801–1816 (Jackson, Mississippi, 1917). vol. i, 9, 45, 61,
    91–94; vol. ii, 40; vol. iii, 245.                            [113]

  ROWLAND, MRS. DUNBAR. Marking the Natchez Trace. In
    Publications of the Mississippi Historical Society, 1910.
    vol. xi, 345–361.                                             [114]

  ST. LOUIS REPUBLIC, October 29, 1911: Lower Illinois Cave
    Long a Nest of Pirates.                                       [115]

  SAFFORD, WILLIAM H. Blennerhassett Papers (1891). 186.          [116]

  SCHOOLCRAFT, HENRY R. Indian in His Wigwam (New York, 1848).
    23.                                                           [117]

  SCHOOLCRAFT, HENRY R. Personal Memoirs (Philadelphia, 1851).
    26, 27.                                                       [118]

  SCHULTZ, CHRISTIAN. Travels on an Inland Voyage in the Years
    1807 and 1808 (New York, 1810). vol. i, 201, 202.             [119]

  SEALSFIELD, CHARLES. Americans as They Are (London, 1828).
    76.                                                           [120]

  SMITH, T. MARSHALL. Legends of the War of Independence and
    of the Earlier Settlements in the West (Louisville, 1855).
    318–377.                                                      [121]

  SPALDING, MARTIN J. Sketches of the Early Catholic Missions
    in Kentucky (Louisville, 1844). 175, 176.                     [122]

  SPEED, THOMAS. Wilderness Road. Filson Club Publications No.
    2 (Louisville, 1886). 17–51.                                  [123]

  STARLING, EDMUND L. History of Henderson County Kentucky
    (Henderson, 1887). 26, 31–33, 95, 104, 105, 523–529, 796.     [124]

  STEELE, MRS. ELIZA R. Summer Journey in the West (New York,
    1841). 216.                                                   [125]

  SWAIN, JOHN. The Natchez Trace. Everybody’s Magazine, New
    York, September, 1905.                                        [126]

  TENNESSEE GAZETTE, a weekly, Nashville, Tennessee. News item:
    April 27, 1830.                                               [127]

  THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD. On the Storied Ohio (Chicago, 1903).
    273, 274.                                                     [128]

  THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD, Editor, Early Western Travels,
    1748–1846 (Cleveland, 1904–1908), 32 vols. vol. iv, Cuming;
    vol. viii, Evans; vol. xiii, Nuttall; vol. xiv, James;
    vol. xxii, Maximilian; vol. xxvi, Flagg. Also editor of
    Withers’s Chronicles.                                         [129]

  THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD, and Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier
    Defense on the Upper Ohio, 1777–1778; Wisconsin Historical
    Society, 1912. Draper Series vol. iii, 21–68.                 [130]

  THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD, and Louise Phelps Kellogg. Revolution
    on the Upper Ohio, 1775–1777. Wisconsin Historical Society,
    1908. Draper Series, vol. ii, 254, 255.                       [131]

  TRABUE, DANIEL, Autobiography of. _See_ 63.

  TRIPLETT, FRANK. History, Romance and Philosophy of Great
    American Crimes and Criminals (St. Louis, 1884). 223–250.
    [An unreliable book.]                                         [132]

  TRIPLETT, ROBERT. Roland Trevor, or the Pilot of Human Life
    (Philadelphia, 1853). 201                                     [133]

  VENABLE, W. H. Beginnings of Literary Culture in the Ohio
    Valley (Cincinnati, 1891). Biographies of Timothy Flint and
    James Hall, 323–385.                                          [134]

  VIRGINIA STATE LIBRARY. List of the Revolutionary Soldiers of
    Virginia (Richmond, 1912). 301.                               [135]

  WATTS, WILLIAM COURTNEY. Chronicles of a Kentucky Settlement
    (New York, 1897).                                             [136]

  WESTERN LITERARY AND HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, Louisville. _See_ 42.

  WESTERN MONTHLY MAGAZINE, Cincinnati. _See_ 59.

  WESTERN MONTHLY REVIEW, [Timothy Flint, Editor,] Cincinnati,
    January, 1830: Colonel Plug, the Last of the Boat-wreckers.   [137]

  WESTERN SPY AND HAMILTON GAZETTE, a weekly, Cincinnati. News
    items: September 3, 1799, March 9 and May 4, 1803.            [138]

  WHEELING GAZETTE, (West Virginia), a weekly, December 10,
    1829: The Robber of the Wilderness, reprinted from The
    Natchez Galaxy. (Draper MSS. 29CC 75–76).                     [139]

  WISCONSIN STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. _See_ 12, 76, 130, 131.

  WITHERS, ALEXANDER S. Chronicles of Border Warfare
    (Clarksburg, Virginia, 1831). Edited by Thwaites
    (Cincinnati, 1895). 224–228.                                  [140]

  WOODS, EDGAR. Albemarle County in Virginia (Charlottesville,
    1901). 236, 237, 251, 254.                                    [141]

  WORTHEN, A. H. Geological Survey of Illinois (Springfield,
    1866). vol. i, 354.                                           [142]

  Young, Jacob. Autobiography of a Pioneer (Cincinnati, 1858).
    95–97.                                                        [143]


  LIBRARIES used in the preparation of this book.

    _Chicago_: J. Christian Bay’s Private, Chicago Historical
    Society, John Crerar, Newberry, and University of Chicago.
    _Cincinnati_: Cincinnati Public, Historical and Philosophical
    Society of Ohio, and Young Men’s Mercantile. _Frankfort_:
    Kentucky State Historical Society, and State Library.
    _Jackson_: Mississippi Department of Archives and History.
    _Lexington_, Kentucky: Lexington Public. _Louisville_: Young
    E. Allison’s Private, Filson Club, Louisville Free Public,
    and R. C. Ballard Thruston’s Private. _Madison_: Wisconsin
    State Historical Society. _New Harmony_, Indiana: Workingmen’s
    Institute. _New Orleans_: Gaspar Cusach’s Private, Howard
    Memorial, Louisiana Historical Society, State Museum, and
    Thomas P. Thompson’s Private. _St. Louis_: Missouri Historical
    Society. _Springfield_: Illinois State Historical Society.
    _Washington_: Library of Congress.




FOOTNOTES


«1» Charles Alexander Lesueur (1778–1857) French naturalist and
artist, was a member of Robert Dale Owen’s communal colony at New
Harmony, Indiana, forty miles northeast of the cave. His drawing
of Cave-in-Rock has never been published except in a doctoral
thesis by Mme. Adrien Loir entitled, _Charles Alexandre Lesueur,
artiste et savant Français en Amérique de 1816 a 1839_; issued in
1920 by Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Le Havre. In this thesis are
reproduced forty of Lesueur’s drawings.

«2» The first, and in a sense the only standard guide book of this
kind ever published, was Zadok Cramer’s _The Ohio and Mississippi
Navigator_. It made its appearance about 1801 and was followed by a
number of revised and enlarged editions until 1824, when the last
edition was printed. It was practically the only printed guide for
flatboats.

«3» Conflict with pirates, cut-throats, and counterfeiters was only
one of the perils to which the boatmen were exposed on their long
and trying trips into the western wilds. Floating ice, heavy winds
and rains, treacherous currents, hidden bars, and large snags were
among the natural dangers that constantly engaged the attention of
the steersman. Many boats, managed by careless or inexperienced
men, were overturned, the craft and cargo damaged or lost, and,
as was frequently the case, some or all on board drowned. Poorly
constructed boats were put out of commission after meeting with
only a few minor obstacles.

«4» Prior to about 1824 Harpe was spelled Harp.

«5» After killing Langford the Harpes probably continued to travel
along the Wilderness Road until they reached Crab Orchard, from
which place radiated, besides the Wilderness Road to Cumberland
Gap, at least four other routes: the Louisville route, the
Frankfort and Cincinnati route, passing Logan’s Fort (or Stanford)
Danville, and Harrodsburg, the Maysville route, and the Tennessee
route. Crab Orchard, being a converging point of roads, many
travelers going east waited there until a crowd of a dozen or
more was organized, thus assuring each a greater safety in making
the trip through the Wilderness. Settlers passing through the
Wilderness going west usually left home in a crowd sufficiently
large to protect itself. [123] Langford, as is shown later, met
the five Harpes in the Wilderness and, notwithstanding their
appearance, he doubtless felt that they would at least serve as
protection in the event of danger. The Harpes, after killing
Langford, probably passed through Crab Orchard and continued
northwest via the Frankfort road, toward Stanford and in or near
Stanford turned west for the purpose of misleading anyone who might
pursue them as that course threw them toward both Tennessee and
western Kentucky.

«6» In 1799 Stanford was a frontier settlement of less than 200
persons, including slaves. In 1780, when Lincoln County was formed,
Logan’s Fort or St. Asaph’s became the seat of justice. In 1787
(on land presented by Colonel Benjamin Logan, a site about half
a mile east of the fort, where the brick court house now stands)
the county erected a log court house thirty feet long and twenty
feet wide, with a small jury room on each side, the structure
forming a T. Near it stood a log jail of two rooms, each twelve
feet square.[28] In these log buildings the Harpes were tried and
confined.

«7» A perusal of the accounts kept by Joseph Welsh, the sheriff of
Lincoln County, reveals many interesting facts. John Gower against
the Commonwealth of Kentucky runs: “For making a pair of handcuffs
for Wiley Roberts 9s. And putting on and taking off when committed
and before trial 2s. 6d. To putting on and taking off the handcuffs
after trial and before removal to the District jail 2s. 6d.,”
making a total of 14s. For this same service on Micajah Roberts,
Gower received, respectively 2s. 6d., 1s. 3d., and 1s. 3d., a total
of only 5s.

The sheriff received the following sums: “For summoning a court
for the examination” of the five prisoners, £1. 5s. “For summoning
twelve witnesses vs. Micajah Roberts and others, at 1s. 3d. each,
15s.” “For imprisoning, 2s. 6d., keeping in jail 10 days at 1s. a
day, 10s., Removing to District jail, 7s. 6d., total 20s.,” making
a total of £5.

Another bill presented by the sheriff was for eight men guarding
the five prisoners in the Lincoln County jail for fourteen days
at 4s. 6d. each per day, making a total of £25. 4s. The last bill
shows he paid seven of the guards “for one day and traveling twenty
miles in removing the above prisoners to the District jail and
returning at 2d. per mile, 6s. 4d. [sic]” making a total of £2. 4s.
4d.

The total of all these accounts is a little more than £35. or what
would today be about $175.00.

«8» Danville, in 1799, with a population of a little over 200, was
one of the most important towns in Kentucky. In 1784 the court
authorized the building of “a log house large enough for a court
room in one end, and two jury rooms in the other end on the same
floor ... and a prison of hewed or sawed logs at least nine inches
thick.” [82] The buildings were still in use when the Harpes were
taken there to await trial.

«9» The account of the Danville jailer shows that the two men had
been confined 71 days, Sally and Betsey 102 days, and Susanna 103
days, for which a charge of 1s. per day for each was made; 449 days
£22. 9s. In the same record is a memorandum to the effect that the
three infants had been in jail 69, 43, and 9 days, or a total of
121 days. The jailer evidently intended to make a charge for this
item, but there are no figures to indicate the contemplated amount.
Four men for guarding the jail 103 days received a total of £6. 6s.
An item shows: “April 12, 21¾ cords wood from the 5th of January
until this day for the use of guards, court, and prisoners @ 6
[sic] cutting the wood for the above, 2s. 6d., £2. 14s. 4d.” The
total of the three items is £31. 9s. 4d. The seven Danville items
previously noted amount to £5. 7s. 11d. This makes the Danville
expense a grand total of £36. 17s. 3d., or what would today be
about $185.00. This, with the $175.00 Stanford account makes a
grand total of the now known expense items a sum that would today
be about $360.00.

«10» A special act of the Kentucky legislature was passed and
approved December 18, 1800, for the relief of the widow of John
Tully, extending the statutory time of payment for lands taken up
by him on the south side of Green River under a settlement act and
exempting her in the interval from paying interest. The extension
was given until December 1, 1810. The preamble of the act recites
its enactment because “Tully ... having obtained a certificate for
a settlement of two hundred acres of land ... having settled on
said land, was assassinated by the murderers called Harpes, and
consequently left his wife, Christiana Tully, a desolate widow
with eight small children.” This is a notable instance of pioneer
liberality and sympathy for a widow in distress, particularly in
spite of the fact that, according to Colonel Trabue, Tully not only
knew the Harpes, but also, less than a year before they murdered
him, had carried messages to them from the Harpe women when the
outlaws were making for Cave-in-Rock.

«11» Tradition says Major William Love’s charred corpse was buried
near the site of the Stegall house. His widow survived him many
years and is buried at Piney Fork Camp Ground, about six miles east
of Marion, Kentucky. On the marble slab at the head of her grave is
the inscription: “My name was Esther Love, daughter of Wm. & Nancy
Calhoun of Abbeville, South Carolina, born Sept. 30, 1765, died
Mar. 2, 1844. My husband Wm. Love was killed by the Harpes Aug.
1799. Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord.”

«12» Draper in his “Sketch of the Harpes” places Big Harpe’s
head “in the forks of a tree,” but in a later note [12G] he has
it “placed or rather stuck on the sharpened end of the limb of a
tree.” Breazeale has it “upon the top of a lofty pole, or in the
fork of a tree.” Collins, in one version, says the men “stuck it
upon a pole where the road crosses the creek,” and in another, that
“a tall young tree, growing by the side of the trail or road, was
selected and trimmed of its lateral branches to its top, and then
made sharp. On this point the head was fastened. The skull and
jaw-bones remained there for many years--after all else had been
decomposed and mingled with the dust.” In his sketch on Webster
County, Kentucky, Collins states that “Big Harpe’s head was stuck
upon a pole” near an oak tree which was still standing, and that
the letters H.H. for Harpe’s Head, carved upon it in 1799, were
still legible in 1874.

Robert Triplett, in his anonymous autobiography, _Roland Trevor_,
publishes an absurd story to the effect that the two Harpes had
stolen the daughter of a pioneer living near Henderson. The father
pursued Big Harpe, wounded him, and shortly thereafter captured
him. This confused and confusing writer says: “Harpe lay near a
tree. The father lifted him, and set him up against it, and then
went a little way to a branch, from which, in the brim of his hat,
he carried Harpe some water, and while he was drinking reloaded his
rifle, and shot him. Then with his knife he cut off his head and
stuck it on a pole at the fork of the road between Henderson and
Madisonville, which place, from that circumstance, was called, and
is to this day, ‘Harpe’s Head.’”

Another absurd story of the Harpes appears in _History of Great
American Crimes_, by Frank Triplett who with a few facts and a
vivid imagination succeeds in covering some twenty pages on the
Harpes. According to his account, Leiper and Stegall organized
a pursuing party, and when the wounded outlaw was overtaken one
end of a rope was adjusted around Big Harpe’s neck and the other
thrown over a limb of a large tree under which the wounded man lay.
“Appalled by the blasphemies of Harpe, the word was given, and,
with a strong pull, his body was run up some six or eight feet from
the ground, and whirling round and round in the rapidly gathering
twilight, it quivered convulsively for some moments; there was a
fierce death struggle and the soul of the most demoniac murderer
that ever cursed our continent had gone out into the limitless
realms of eternity. When satisfied that Harpe was dead, the corpse
was lowered to the ground, the head cut off and fixed in the fork
of the tree which had served his executioners as a gallows.”

«13» Samuel Hopkins was a Revolutionary general. He was born in
Virginia and, in 1797 went to Henderson and there represented
Richard Henderson & Co., owners of a large tract of land lying
in that section, granted them by the legislature of Virginia. He
continued to make Henderson his home until 1819, the time of his
death. He served several terms in the Kentucky legislature and from
1813 to 1815 represented his district in Congress. During the war
of 1812 he was commissioned a major-general. [124]

«14» The recorded expense items show six men were allowed $7.50
each for guarding the Henderson jail during the ten days the Harpe
women were imprisoned. One man was given $4.32 “for victualling
Susannah Harp, et al. in the jail for eight days.” Andrew Rowan,
the sheriff, was allowed $71.25 “for removing prisoners from
Henderson to Logan jail, 190 miles--95 miles one way--and also
$4.54 for cash advanced for diet for said prisoners from Henderson
to Logan jail.” Five men were allowed $5.70 each for guarding the
prisoners en route to Russellville. William B. Blackburn, “attorney
for the Commonwealth in this county,” received $60.00 and John D.
Haussmann, the county clerk, and the sheriff, each $30.00 “for his
ex-officio services.” These items, with $4.17 paid the sheriff “for
summoning and attending the court,” make a total of $281.78.

«15» Maj. William Stewart was one of the most eccentric characters
in early Kentucky history. His life is full of suggestions for
romance and song. He was born in South Carolina about 1772, and, at
the age of eighteen, “getting into some difficulties, he left his
native state.” He went to Nashville, says Finley, and from there
started for Henderson--possibly with the intention of continuing
to Cave-in-Rock. On his way north he joined a man and wife going
to the Green River country. To what extent they influenced him is
not known. However, when the three travelers reached the place that
later became Russellville, they decided to settle there. In 1791
he left Logan County and “after years of toil, hunting, and nobody
knows what else, he finally settled in Stanford and, in 1795,
became a dry goods clerk for one Ballenger”--the same man who, a
few years later, went in pursuit of the Harpes. In 1796 he returned
to Logan County and died there in 1852. He was the first sheriff of
Logan County. Collins says: “He was one of the celebrities of the
place ... faithful to his friends, and dangerous to his foes.”

Smith in a chapter devoted to Stewart calls him William Stout:
“Always eccentric in his material and style of dress--often he
appeared attired in an entire suit made of various colored ‘lists,’
taken from the finest broadcloths sewed together, fantastically
cut and fitted to his person, while the buttons on his coat and
pantaloons were quarter dollars, United States coin, with eyes
attached by his own ingenuity (for he was a worker in metals) and
his vest buttoned with genuine United States dimes. This dress,
however, was rather for high days and holidays.... On the morning
of the day on which he died, he, with but little aid, drew on his
curiously constituted, many colored suit of clothes, and in that
attire he died and was buried.” [121]

«16» When, in 1860, the town of Dixon was laid out to be the seat
of justice for the newly established county of Webster, one of the
principal streets forming the court house square was named after
John Leiper and another after Moses Stegall. These pioneers were
thus honored, not to show that “the evil men do lives after them,”
but to reward two men whose names were “linked with one virtue” at
least--that of being responsible for the capture and death of Big
Harpe.

«17» Whether or not the Harpes were brothers and Big Harpe’s two
“wives” were sisters is a question that can never be decided
definitely by history, but it is one over which psychologists may
long argue. If the two men actually were brothers and the two women
actually were sisters, it is an anomaly in nature. The Harpes were
not ordinary criminals. They were abnormalities in a type that is
itself abnormal. It is well recognized that abnormal products of
all kinds in nature are exceptions or variations and are not the
rule, and that genius in creation, in destruction, in crime, in
art, etc. is very seldom duplicated by the same parentage. Abnormal
criminals are extremes of a type opposed to abnormal geniuses
of the creative or imaginative type. Brothers or sisters in
either class occur seldom, if ever. For these reasons, a parental
connection between the two Harpes and between the two women may
properly be doubted. It is true that Big Harpe was the heartless
leader and that Little Harpe might have been an ordinary weakling,
obedient to Big Harpe because he feared him or because he failed
to recognize the inhumanity of the crimes he was called upon to
commit. No other record is now recalled showing such a horrible
partnership between blood brothers.

«18» Lewis Collins prints this description of Big Harpe in his
edition of 1847, and his son and successor, Richard H. Collins,
likewise republished it in his _History of Kentucky_ in 1874. By
both it is credited to Colonel James Davidson. The elder Collins
says Colonel Davidson was “personally cognizant of most of the
circumstances.” Judge Hall’s _Harpe’s Head_ had been published in
1833 and there can be no doubt that Colonel Davidson copied his
description of Big Harpe, word for word, from the book, relying
upon Judge Hall’s opportunities for and good character in accuracy.

«19» It is probable that in the early days many an outlaw was “said
to be” a kinsman of the Harpes. The case of Mrs. George Heatherly,
referred to in the _History of Caldwell and Livingston Counties,
Missouri_, 1886, is one instance discovered. The Heatherly Gang,
according to this account, operated in the Upper Grand River
country of northern Missouri in 1836 and a few years preceding.
They robbed many white settlers and often stole horses from the
Indians. “Old George Heatherly was regarded as a thief in Kentucky
and Mrs. Heatherly (his wife) was a sister of the notorious
Kentucky murderers and freebooters, Big and Little Harpe.... Old
Mrs. Heatherly is said to have been the leading spirit of the gang,
prompting and planning many a dark deed, and often assisting in its
execution.” There is no proof advanced, however, that this woman
was a sister of the Harpes.

«20» It is interesting to note that Susan Harpe, wife of Big
Harpe, many years after his death tried to convey the impression
that Little Harpe, not Big Harpe, was the greater villain. Draper,
recording some statements made to him by George Herndon who lived
near Russellville, says that Big Harpe’s wife told Mrs. Herndon
that “Big Harpe said to Little Harpe that he thought they had
better quit killing people and go to some backwoods country, for
if they did not, he feared they would be detected and killed.
Whereupon, Little Harpe flew into a passion, cursed his brother
for a coward, and said if he ever talked that way again he would
shoot him.” In order to defend him further, she declared that “Some
days before Big Harpe’s death he fancied the ground continually
trembling beneath his feet.” In this way she tried to show that Big
Harpe actually did suffer great fear and remorse of conscience and
insinuated that Little Harpe was beyond the reach of such feelings.
[12F]

«21» Family names were spelled indifferently in colonial and
republican times. In the fashion of English speech Meason was
pronounced Mason.

«22» In her account to Draper Mrs. Anthony states that in addition
to Henry Havard, Samuel Mason had, besides his own family, at least
two other accomplices while living near Henderson: Nicholas Welsh
and a man named Hewitt. Henry Havard, after the assassination
of Captain John Dunn, fled to his father’s home on Red River,
Tennessee. The regulators there, upon hearing that he had been
employed by Mason to kill Dunn, “raised and went to old Havard’s,
found Henry hid between two feather beds and shot through the beds.
They made the old man pull out the body of his son and when they
found his brains were oozing out they knew he was quite dead.”
Hewitt was captured on the Kentucky shore opposite Diamond Island,
by regulators who were “strongly inclined to kill him, but finally
refrained, but made him break his gun.” Nicholas Welsh, who ran
the tavern in which Mason and his men made their headquarters when
in Red Banks, disappeared immediately after Captain John Dunn was
shot, and was never again heard of.

«23» One of Mason’s daughters-in-law, Mrs. Tom Mason, continued
to live for a short time at the Rocky Springs rendezvous after
the camp had been abandoned by the others, who rightly suspected
that the governor’s reward would result in a thorough search along
the Trace. It is possible Mrs. Mason’s condition made flight
impossible, but it is more probable she concluded to remain behind
and, in time, find a home in some law-abiding community. Guild, who
interviewed Swaney, gives us only one glimpse of this woman:

“After the band had left she started to the Chickasaw Agency where
she would be able to communicate with her friends. When Mr. Swaney
met her she was on her way, carrying her babe, together with some
provisions. Mrs. Mason begged Mr. Swaney to assist her.... He spent
nearly a whole day in assisting the woman, and then made up lost
time by riding all night. Mrs. Mason told Mr. Swaney that Mason’s
band was safe out of reach of their pursuers, and that before
leaving they buried their gold in the bottoms near the river and
cut the initials ‘T.M.’ on trees near the spot so they could easily
find it in the future.”

According to one tradition [114] Mason crossed the Mississippi
River and went westward to the highlands northwest of Vicksburg
“which are known to this day as Mason Hills” and there hid some
booty. “To the present day,” continues this chronicle, “many people
believe that rich treasures lie buried out in the Mason Hills.”

«24» Cramer’s _Navigator_, 1818, says: “Stack or Crow’s Nest
Island has been sunk by the earthquake [of 1811] or swept by
the floods.... Stack not long since was famed for a band of
counterfeiters, horse thieves, robbers, murderers, etc. who made
this part of the Mississippi a place of manufacture and deposit.
From hence they would sally forth, stop boats, buy horses, flour,
whiskey, etc. and pay for all in fine, new notes of the ‘_first
water_.’ Their villainies (after many severe losses sustained by
innocent, good men, unsuspecting the cheat) became notorious, and
after several years’ search and pursuit of the civil law, and in
some cases the _club-law_, against this band of monsters, they have
at length disappeared.”

«25» The author is indebted to Dr. Dunbar Rowland, of the
Mississippi Department of Archives and History, for the privilege
of having a translation made of the record of Mason’s trial.

«26» Samuel Mason probably had heard of “money growing on trees.”
It was a common practice for travelers to hide their money over
night in the bushes near the place they camped. It is likely that
Mason sometimes “found” the money of highway travelers while they
were asleep, or “found” it after he had surprised the campers
and driven them off before they could procure their brush-hidden
valuables.

«27» The story of John Setton’s life up to this time, as recited
by Setton himself, doubtless appeared very plausible to the
officials. There was, nevertheless, very little truth in it. This
court identified him by the names Setton, Taylor, and Wells. It
apparently disregarded Samuel Mason’s statement that the prisoner
sometimes went by other names which he, Mason, could not recall.
These three names were equally unfamiliar; none were connected
with the known history of any crime. Mason himself may have been
ignorant of the real name and true history of Setton. Be that
as it may, Draper in one of his early note books, written about
1840, gives the following facts regarding the man who passed as
one John Setton and whose identity, it seems, was then unknown by
the historian himself. He states that John Setton was originally
from North Carolina and, while traveling along the Natchez Trace,
lingering more or less among the Indians, he fell in company with
a young man named Bass, who lived in Williamson County, Tennessee.
Then, in the words of Draper:

“Bass was not very well and Setton, very friendly, would catch
Bass’ horse and do him other offices of kindness. When Bass reached
his father’s residence he invited Setton to sojourn a time, recruit
his horse, etc. Setton did so and courted a sister of young Bass
and married her. He started with his new wife for North Carolina.
When they reached the North Fork of Holston, in Hawkins County,
East Tennessee, Setton gave information that his wife’s horse ran
away and her feet being in the stirrups, had dragged and killed
her. This is the story he told negroes. The white persons being
absent from home, he had his deceased companion buried hurriedly.
He disposed of her clothing and saddle for little or nothing and
in a few hours put off with both horses. After he had gone, his
conduct led some of the people thereabout to disinter the dead
body, and found she had evidently been killed by heavy blows on the
head. Setton fled, went first to Louisiana, then down the river,
enlisted at Fort Pickering at the Chickasaw Bluffs (Memphis) into
Captain Richard Sparks’ company. By his conduct he was soon made
a sergeant. He was in the habit of going out hunting. One day he
borrowed Captain Sparks’ elegant rifle, took a canoe and some
provisions and started on a several days hunt down the Mississippi.
Setton steered up the Arkansas and then joined Mason.” [12H]

«28» Nothing in the records indicates whether or not the officials
recognized the connection in the testimony given by the Masons and
Setton.

«29» Practically all the province of Louisiana, including New
Orleans, was transferred from France to Spain in 1769. Spain
secretly ceded the same territory to France September 1, 1800, but
the French did not take formal possession until November 30, 1803.
On April 30, 1803, or about seven months before this formality
was performed, Napoleon secretly sold Louisiana to the United
States and accordingly, December 20, 1803, at New Orleans, lower
Louisiana was formally transferred to the American Republic, and
March 9, 1804, at St. Louis, the same ceremony took place for upper
Louisiana, which included New Madrid.

«30» Under what circumstances Mason was trapped by May and Setton
and whether or not he really knew by whom he was snared has not
been ascertained. Mrs. William Anthony, in her letter to Draper,
states that on one occasion when Mason and his party were crossing
the Mississippi River, May was acting as ferryman and “Mason said
the others might all go over first and he would remain till last.
When all were over but Mason, May returned for him, and as Mason
was alone with his bag of money, May killed him and took the head
to Natchez.”

Audubon, in one of his _Journals_ under the head of “Regulators”
gives another version: “At last a body of Regulators undertook, at
great peril, and for the sake of the country, to bring the villain
to punishment.... One day as he was riding a beautiful horse in
the woods he was met by one of the Regulators, who immediately
recognized him, but passed him as if an utter stranger. Mason, not
dreaming of danger, pursued his way leisurely, as if he had met no
one.... At dusk, Mason, having reached the lowest part of a ravine,
no doubt well known to him, hoppled (tied together the forelegs of)
his stolen horse, to enable it to feed during the night without
chance of straying far, and concealed himself in a hollow log
to spend the night. The plan was good but proved his ruin. The
Regulator, who knew every hill and hollow of the woods, marked the
place and the log with the eye of an experienced hunter, and as he
remarked that Mason was most efficiently armed, he galloped off to
the nearest house where he knew he should find assistance. This was
easily procured, and the party proceeded to the spot. Mason, on
being attacked, defended himself with desperate valor; and as it
proved impossible to secure him alive he was brought to the ground
with a rifle ball. His head was cut off, and stuck on the end of
a broken branch of a tree, by the nearest road to the place where
the affray happened. The gang soon dispersed, in consequence of the
loss of their leader, and this infliction of merited punishment
proved beneficial in deterring others from following a similar
predatory life.”

Such may have been the end of one of the sons of Mason. There
is nothing in history or tradition connecting this act of the
Regulators with the career of Samuel Mason.

«31» All the early records prove beyond a doubt that John Setton
and Wiley Harpe or “Little” Harpe were one and the same man. A few
of the later writers confuse May and Setton and, apparently as a
result of a superficial knowledge of the careers of these outlaws,
state that Wiley Harpe had assumed the name of one May.

«32» The counsel for the defense evidently objected to the
jurisdiction of the court, claiming that the alleged “robberies
by Mason’s men” did not occur within the bounds of Mississippi
Territory. The question of jurisdiction is commented on in two of
the letters written in 1804 by Thomas Rodney to Caesar A. Rodney.
[52]

«33» Greenville, originally called Hunston, was an important town
on the old Natchez Trace. It lay about twenty-five miles northeast
of Natchez, and was a thriving village as early as 1798, when the
United States took possession of Mississippi Territory. A number
of the state’s wealthiest and most aristocratic pioneers lived
in or near the town. In 1825 the seat of justice was moved from
Greenville to Fayette and soon thereafter the old town passed out
of existence. The site of old Greenville has been under cultivation
for many years. The court house and the jail stood in what is now
known as “Courthouse Field.”

The city of Greenville, Mississippi, on the Mississippi River,
which was established long after old Greenville became an extinct
town, is a thriving place of more than 10,000 inhabitants.

«34» What became of Mason’s men is not known. A frontier rowdy
named Edward Rose is described in Washington Irving’s Astoria.
Lyman C. Draper wrote on the fly-leaf of his copy of this book that
“Rose was probably one of Mason’s gang.”

«35» Finley says Philip Alston was born in South Carolina and in
early manhood became “a full grown counterfeiter.” After living
in Natchez and “attaining to the highest respectability ... his
avaricious eye rested on a golden image of the Savior, in the
Catholic Church, ... and he went immediately and counterfeited some
coins from it.” He fled from Natchez to Kentucky and settled in
Logan County, where he established a salt works and store at Moat’s
Lick. While running these he managed the Cedar House, a tavern near
Russellville. He also farmed, preached, and taught school, and
incidentally “flooded the country with spurious money.” Thus he
became, “not only the first farmer, manufacturer, and merchant, but
he established the first depot of exchange and the first bank, and
also the first mint in western Kentucky.” About 1788, “the whole
people rose up in their majesty and banished him.” He next appeared
in Livingston and Henderson counties and then fled to Cave-in-Rock.
After a short stay at the Cave he returned to Natchez where “he
found his old enemies, who became his fast friends. He rose in the
estimation of the Spaniards until he was appointed an _empresidio_
of Mexico, when in the midst of his success and returning fortune
death stepped in and sealed his fate.”

Finley, who never cites authorities, states that “Peter Alston,
Philip Alston’s youngest son, became an outlaw and robber, and
joined Mason’s band at Cave-in-the-Rock and was allied to the
Harpes, and with one of the Harpes was executed at Washington,
Mississippi ... for the killing of his chief, Mason, for the
reward.” No records have been found that contradict any of Finley’s
statements, except the one to the effect that Peter Alston killed
Samuel Mason.

Nancy Huston Banks in her novel _’Round Anvil Rock_ presents Philip
Alston as a kind but mysterious gentleman who, although generally
trusted by the community, is regarded by some with suspicion
because of his frequent absences and ever-replenished supply of
imported cloth, laces, and jewelry. In the novel Alston refers to
Jean Lafitte as “my resepected and trusted friend,” and admits that
he, Alston, makes business trips to Duff’s Fort, near Cave-in-Rock,
although “it was no longer a secret that regular stations of
outlawry were firmly established between Natchez on the one side
and Duff’s Fort on the other.”

«36» Duff secured metal from the veins of lead ore on the Saline
and, as it contained a little silver, he separated the silver from
the lead as best he could and made counterfeit coins. In this
connection the author of _A History of Union County, Kentucky_,
further comments:

“The traditions of Duff’s great wealth have acted upon many of the
citizens of Caseyville much as the tales of Captain Kidd’s plunder
affected the inhabitants of Long Island. Youthful imaginations have
been inflamed with thoughts of the fabulous wealth stored away in
some cavern along the Caseyville cliffs. Many a ramble has turned
into a search for the caves in that vicinity, but so far as the
public knows, none of them has ever eventuated in any discoveries.”

«36a» Sturdevant’s stockaded fort stood on the long bluff
immediately above what later became the town of Rosiclare,
Illinois, and commanded a good view of the Ohio. Dr. Daniel
Lawrence, of Golconda, saw the ruins of the Sturdevant house as
late as 1876. The place had then been in a dilapidated condition
for some time, but enough remained to show that in its day it was
a substantial log structure, a story and a half high, with three
rooms on the ground floor, including a log L on the north side.
Digging into some of the old logs, he discovered many small holes
made by bullets. A new stone quarry was in operation at the time of
his visit and he was present when a blast blew out of a crevice a
set of dies for making counterfeit half dollars. The foreman took
the plates home for souvenirs, but their whereabouts is now unknown.

«37» The _Chicago Times_ published an article July 17, 1879,
entitled “Hell on the Ohio,” which, in 1888, was republished in
_The Life of Logan Belt_, a book by Shadrack L. Jackson, who then
lived in the village of Cave-in-Rock. This distorted account of
Ford is here reprinted as an example of one of the many absurd and
almost groundless stories that have gained wide circulation:

“Not far from Cave-in-Rock is Ford’s Ferry, which gets its name
from a man who was one of the noted criminals of pioneer history.
He lived on the Kentucky side about two miles above Cave-in-Rock
and was ostensibly a farmer, owning a large tract of land. He also
kept a hotel. Ford was always surrounded by a gang of desperate
men, highwaymen and murderers, and, while nothing was ever proved
on him, he was looked upon as equal to his companions in guilt.
He was a robber of flatboats and of emigrants. Dead bodies were
found near his house, and isolated and freshly made graves were
discovered in that neighborhood. Men were known to start West with
a little money, to locate, and were never after heard of. Their
friends would inquire, follow them to Ford’s and there lose all
traces of them. It was one of his habits to cut down trees and
obstruct the road to rival ferries, until the owners would be
compelled to quit and leave, thinking retaliation only a means of
provoking death. But Ford brought on himself the penalty of his
lawlessness.

“An old feud existed between him and the father-in-law of a man
named Simpson, and Ford killed his enemy. Simpson gathered a crowd
of friends and went armed to Ford’s house for the purpose of
killing him. They found him on the Illinois side loading a boat. He
knew at once why they had come, begged for his life and appealed
for protection to one of their number, Jonathan Brown by name.
Brown was touched by the appeal and interceded for the terrified
man. The plea was so far successful that the crowd waited two or
three hours, but when darkness came, they took him out and shot him
dead when he was begging hardest to be spared. It is said that none
of the crowd proper did the shooting, but that Simpson compelled
his negro to do the deed.”

«38» It may be proper here to record that descendants of James
Ford, like the descendants of other crude but strong pioneer stock,
rose to deserved prominence in the business and social life of
several western cities. The family is scattered, but the respect
its members command and the success they have achieved bears
testimony to the strain of ability and energy inherent in the
blood. It leads also to deeper consideration of one of the theories
in the Ford’s Ferry mystery, that James Ford was perhaps a victim
of circumstances growing out of his peculiar personality in a
dangerous surrounding.

«39» The crime was committed in that part of Gallatin County which
in 1839 (when Hardin County was formed out of parts of Gallatin
and Pope counties) became the eastern portion of Hardin. Previous
to the organization of Hardin, Cave-in-Rock was a “corner” at the
southern extremity of the line separating the two original counties.

«40» The fact that the names Murrell and Mason sound somewhat alike
is sometimes the cause of confusion. For example, occasionally one
hears that Little Harpe cut off the head of Murrell, whereas Harpe
was hanged when Murrell was four or five years old.

On a map of the Ohio, compiled 1911–14 under the supervision of the
Ohio River Board of Engineers on Locks and Dams, Cave-in-Rock is
erroneously designated Merrell’s [sic] Cave.

One absurd tradition has it that James Ford’s first wife was a
sister of Murrell, and another is to the effect that both Ford and
his wife were related to Mason, Murrell, and the Harpes.

«41» An exhaustive search through the fiction printed during the
first part of last century probably would result in finding all the
Cave-in-Rock tales referred to by early writers.

Henry R. Schoolcraft visited the Cave in 1818 and in his _Personal
Memoirs_ commented that “as a scene of a tale of imaginative
robber-life it appeared to me to possess great attractions.”
Later in his book entitled _The Indian in His Wigwam_ he adds:
“The Cave’s associations of the early robber era ... have been
commemorated by the pen of fiction of Charles Brockden Brown.”
In 1834 Charles Fenno Hoffman writes that “its peculiar form has
suggested one of the most agreeable tales to an admired Western
writer.” Edmund Flagg, in _The Far West_, written in 1836, states
that murdering and boat robbing perpetrated at the Cave by Samuel
Mason and his band “has suggested a spirited tale from a popular
writer.”

Judge James Hall wrote for a number of magazines. Among his
articles may be one on the outlaws at Cave-in-Rock, or a story
in which he pictures the activities of the Harpes, the Masons,
and others during their stay there. My search for any of his Cave
sketches has been fruitless.




Index


  Adair County (Ky.): 86, 141

  Adairville: 103

  Alberts, J. Bernhard: 36;
    pictures by, 3, 21, 259

  Allen, John (of Ky.): 135

  Allen, W. B., _Kentucky_: 336

  Allison, Young E.: 7;
    library of, 345

  Alston, Peter: 272

  Alston, Philip (counterfeiter): 271–274, 322

  _Alton Courier_, “Virginia Rose:” 327, 328

  “Alvarado,” in _Oldfield_: 322

  Alvis, Mr.: owner Diamond Island, 172

  _American Pioneer_, S. P. Hildreth: Marietta to New Orleans, 40–43;
    Van Cleve’s Journal, 167, 168, 339

  Anthony, Abraham: at Langford burial, 75

  Anthony, Mrs. William: letter to Draper, 169–171, 252

  Ares River: 221, 225

  Arkansas Post: 220, 224

  Ashe, Thomas, _Travels_: 24, 25, 48, 173, 325, 336;
    condemned, 325

  Atkinson’s Casket: 326, 336, 337

  Audubon, John James, _Journals_: 177, 252–254, 336

  Aycoff, Mr. (of Knoxville): 64


  _Back Home_, Cobb: 322

  Bacon, M. E., “Bold River Pirates:” 336

  Baily, Francis, _Journal_: 24, 336

  Baker, Joshua: robbed by Mason, 183–188, 190, 196, 216, 223, 224,
          226, 229–234

  Baker, William: robbed by Mason, 184

  Baker’s Creek (or Twelve Mile Creek): 183, 184, 188

  Baldwin, Old Man (outlaw): 122

  Ballard, William: killed by Harpes, 95, 96

  Ballenger, Capt. Joseph: pursues Harpes, 69, 85, 91;
    affidavit, 73

  Banks, Nancy Houston: _’Round Anvil Rock_, 272, 273, 322;
    _Oldfield_, 322

  Barren River: 86, 89, 90

  Barret (associate of Mason): 227, 228

  Barrow (associate of Mason): 164

  Bass, Mr.: contact with Setton, 221, 222

  Bassett (associate of Mason): 223, 229–231

  Bates: killed by Harpes, 66, 67

  Battery Rock: 27, 44, 45

  Bay, J. C.: library of, 345

  Bayou Pierre: 184, 234, 235, 251

  Bear Creek: 198

  Beaver Creek: 63

  Beck, L. C.: _Gazetteer_, 336

  Belan, Ignace (merchant): 209

  Bellegrove Church: 264

  Bellin’s map of Louisiana: 18

  _Belt, Logan_, Jackson: 311, 312, 340

  Bennett, Emerson: _Mike Fink, A Legend of the Ohio_: 327

  Biegler, John (Danville jailer): 77–80

  Big Rockcastle River: 68, 69

  Big Sink, near Cave: 30

  Bigsby Cave, near Cave: 30

  Billeth, Pierre: testimony Mason’s trial, 238, 239

  Black Oak Ridge (Tenn.): 95

  Blackburn, W. B. (attorney): 133

  Blain, Maj. James (attorney general): 73, 86

  Blain, John: pursues Harpes, 73

  Blowe, Daniel: _View of the United States_, 175, 336

  Bodmer, Charles (artist): 35, 36, 336

  Bowman, John: identifies Little Harpe, 255

  Bradbury: killed by Harpes, 95

  Bradbury’s Ridge (Tenn.): 95

  Bradley, Captain (associate of Mason): 238

  Brassel, James: killed by Harpes, 95–99

  Brassel, Robert: pursues Harpes, 96–98, 100

  Brassel’s Knob (Tenn.): 95

  Breazeale, Mr. (attorney): 258

  Breazeale, J. W. M.: _Life as it Is_, 78, 103, 105, 112, 125, 126,
          128, 146, 150, 151 [65, 66, 95, 111, 113, 127] 336

  Briscoe, Mrs. Phillip (daughter of Samuel Mason): 234

  Brokus (quadroon Indian): 185

  _Brought to Bay_, E. R. Roe: 327

  Brown (associate of Mason): 227

  Brown, C. B. (novelist): 330

  Brown, Jonathan: near Cave, 44, 312

  Brown, Samuel R., _Western Gazetteer_: 336

  Brown, Judge Thomas C.: 318

  Bruin, Judge Peter B. (of Miss.) 257

  Burnett, Col. Daniel: letter to, 196

  Burr, Aaron: 257

  Burton (associate of Mason): 222

  Bush Creek: 73

  Butler, Col. Andrew: helps Harpe woman, 154, 155


  Cache River: 40

  Cade, J. W. (circuit clerk): 317

  _Caldwell and Livingston Counties, Missouri_: 154, 341

  Caldwell County (Ky.): 122

  Campbell, Mr.: robbed by Mason, 223, 225

  Canoe Creek: 107, 109, 170

  Canot, Felipo: New Madrid militia, 211

  Cape Girardeau: 218

  _Carolina Gazette_: 101, 124, 126, 337

  Carpenter’s Station (Ky.): 69

  Carpentier, Joseph (interpreter): 209, 210, 212, 216

  Caruthersville (Mo.): see _Little Prairie_

  Caseyville: 273, 274, 278

  _Casket Magazine_: 164, 189–190, 245, 257, 326, 336, 337

  Cave Dwellers: 27

  Cave Spring; near Cave, 26

  Cave-in-Rock: location, 17, 18;
    scenery near, 17, 19;
    discovery by white men, 18;
    maps showing, 18, 193;
    high water, 20, 30;
    geology, 29, 30;
    described, 19, 20, 23–25, 27, 31, 32;
    Indians and Mound Builders at, 25–29;
    Harpes at, 90–94;
    Mason at, 174–176;
    counterfeiters at, 268–281;
    Jim Wilson at, 47–51;
    James Wilson, of _Chronicles_, at, 47, 291–293, 329;
    Dr. Charles H. Webb at, 286–291;
    Ford’s Ferry Band at, 298, 299;
    in fiction, 321–332.
    Other names;
      Big Cave, 23, 24;
      Cave-in-the-Rock, 25, 175, 272;
      Cave-Inn-Rock, 32, 37, 175;
      Caverne dans le Roc, 18;
      Counterfeiters Cave, 268;
      Great Cave, 23;
      House of Nature, 18, 19, 32, 279;
      Murrell’s Cave, 318;
      Rocking Cave, 26;
      Rock-in-Cave, 27;
      Rock-Inn-Cave, 29, 175

  Cave-in-Rock, Upper Cave of: 19, 21, 24, 25, 51, 325, 328, 329

  Cave-in-Rock (village of): 13, 18

  Cave-in-Rock Bluff: 26, 28, 35, 299

  Cave-in-Rock Island: 26, 35, 36

  Cedar House (in Ky.): 272

  Cedar Point: near Cave, 93, 301, 308

  Charlevoix, _New France_: 18, 337

  Chicago: Historical Society, 345;
    University of, 345;
    John Crerar Library, 345;
    Bay’s private library, 345;
    _Times_, 311, 312

  Chickasaw Bluffs: see _Memphis_

  Chickasaw Agency: 180, 201

  Choctaw Nation: 181;
    crossing, 221, 225, 229

  Christian, Matthew: pursues Harpes, 114–125, 130, 131, 141;
    deposition of, 131, 132;
    reward to, 139;
    life, 140

  Christian County (Ky.): 113, 155

  _Chronicles of a Kentucky Settlement_, Watts: 47, 285–293, 329, 344

  Cincinnati: Public Library, 345;
    Young Men’s Mercantile Library, 345;
    Ohio Historical and Philosophical Society, 345;
    see _American Pioneer_;
        _Literary Gazette_;
        _Western Monthly Magazine_;
        _Western Review_

  Claiborne, J. F. H.: _Mississippi_, 201, 265, 337 [189, 191, 202, 256];
    Wiley quoted, 188, 189;
    _MS._ on Mason’s trial, 207

  Claiborne, Gov. William C. C.: 199, 200–202, 246, 253, 254, 264;
    letters by, 192–198;
    _Official Letter Books_, Rowland [195, 196, 264] 337, 343

  Claiborne County (Miss.): 196

  Clinch River: 65

  Clinton County (Ky.): 97, 98

  Cobb, Irvin S., _Back Home_: 322

  Coffey, Chesley (son of): killed by Harpes, 95, 96, 99

  Coiners at Cave: see _Counterfeiters_

  Colbert’s Ferry: 180

  Cole’s Creek: 248, 249, 257

  Colin, Charles: friend of Mason, 223

  Collins, Lewis, _Kentucky_: [111] 337

  Collins, Richard H., _Kentucky_: 55, 125, 128, 150, 273, 274 [71, 89,
          110, 135, 137] 337

  Collot, Victor H., _Journey_: 23, 30, 337

  _Colonial Men and Times_, L. D. Harper: including _Autobiography_ of Trabue;
          see _Daniel Trabue_

  Concer, Felic (merchant): 236

  Concordia Lake: 251

  Counterfeiters at Cave: 32;
    die used, 268–271;
    Alston, 271–274;
    Duff, 272–278;
    Sturdevant, 272, 278–281

  Crab Orchard (Ky.): 66, 67, 69, 70

  Cramer, Zadok, _Navigator_: 24, 39, 40, 41, 44, 173, 203, 337

  Crittenden Co., (Ky.): 274, 285;
    Marion, 111;
    Piney Fork Camp Ground, 111

  _Crittenden Press_: story of Jim Wilson, 48–52, 337

  Crooked Creek: 294

  Crow’s Nest: see _Stack Island_

  Cumberland Gap: 65, 66, 74

  Cumberland River: 66, 238, 287, 291

  Cuming, Fortesque, _Tour_: 25, 26, 172, 173, 337

  Cumings, Samuel, _Western Navigator_: 285, 337

  Cusach, Gaspar: library of, 345

  Cutler, Jervis, _Topographical Description_: 337


  Dale, Mr. and Mrs.: pursue Harpes, 96, 97

  Daniels, Wilson, “Steamboating:” 337

  Danville (Ky.): log court house, 77;
    Harpes escapes jail, 78, 255;
    three Harpe children born, 79, 80, 137;
    Harpe women tried and liberated, 79–83;
    arrest of two Harpe men ordered, 84;
    court record of Harpes, 79–82, 335;
    district court records, 70–84, 335

  _Danville District Court Records_, Lincoln Co.: 70–84, 335

  Dapron, Pierre: declaration of, 209

  Darby, John F., _Personal Recollections_: 337

  Darby, William, _Casket Magazine_: 164, 189–190, 245, 257,
          326, 336, 337

  Davidson, John: father-in-law of Big Harpe, 145

  Davidson, Maria: wife of Big Harpe, 145

  Davidson, Robert, _Excursion_: [143] 337

  Deer Creek: 109, 125

  Derousser, Francois: testimony Mason’s trial, 237, 238

  Diamond Island: 90–92, 167, 171;
    described, 172–174

  Dixon (Ky): 110, 127;
    streets named, Leiper and Stegall, 144

  Doherty, Col. George: of militia, 255

  Dooley, Mr.: killed by Harpes, 89

  Douglas, Mrs. Marguerite: see _Mrs. John Mason_.

  Dow, Lorenzo, _Cosmopolite_: 338

  Downs, James (sheriff): 238, 239

  Downs, William (justice): 224, 226, 231, 233, 257

  Drake, Samuel G., _Book of Indians_: 338

  Draper, Lyman C.: _Draper MSS._, Harpes and Masons [60, 64–66, 70, 84,
          89, 90, 95, 102, 105, 113–115, 126–128, 134, 141–143, 150,
          152, 155, 156, 158, 160, 161, 163–165, 169, 188, 201, 220–222,
          255] 335, 336;
    “Sketch of the Harpes,” 60, 79, 108, 115–125, 130, 140, 338;
    Harpes, 60, 128, 134, 154;
    Mason, 160, 265;
    Setton, 220, 221, 255;
    _King’s Mountain_ [115] 338

  Drumgool Station (Ky.): 103

  Duff (brother-in-law of Mason): 169

  Duff (counterfeiter): 272–278

  Duff, John (guide): 273

  Duff brothers (of Ill.): 233

  Duff’s Cave: 274

  Duff’s Fort: 272–274, 277

  Dunbar, Seymour, _History of Travel_: 338

  Dunlap, Hugh: pursues Harpes, 95

  Dunn, Capt. John (constable): 168–171

  Durbin, Thomas: killed by Thomas Mason, 170


  _Early Western Travels_, Thwaites, editor:
    Cuming, _Tour_;
    Evans, _Tour_;
    Flagg, _Far West_;
    James, _Expedition_;
    Maximilian, _Voyage_;
    Nuttall, _Travels_; 343, 344

  Elicott, Andrew, _Journal_: 23, 338

  Ellis, John: pursues Harpes, 100

  Emery River: 95

  Equality (Ill.): 30, 313

  Evans, Estwick, _Tour_: 338

  Evansville: city of, 18;
    Courier Company, _History of Union County_, 273–278, 338

  _Everybody’s Magazine_: “Natchez Trace,” by Swain, 338

  _Executive Journal_ (Ky.): 85, 92, 335


  Farris, Jane: 72;
    on death of Langford, 75, 76

  Farris, John (inn keeper): 67, 72;
    on death of Langford, 74, 75

  Fayette (Miss.): 200, 264

  Fayette Co. (Penn.): 158

  Filson Club: 5, 345;
    Robertson’s _Petitions_, 166, 342;
    Speed’s _Wilderness Road_, 70, 343

  Fink, Mike: see _Mike Fink_, 327, 341

  Finley, Alex. C., _Russellville and Logan County_: 165, 271–274, 338

  Flagg, Edmund, _Far West_: 29, 32, 173, 330, 338

  Flatboating, Golden Age of: 38

  Flint, Timothy: _History and Geography of the Mississippi Valley_, 338;
    _Recollections_, 338

  Fluger, Colonel, or Colonel Plug (boat-wrecker): 43, 344

  _Folk-Lore, Journal of American_: [57] 338

  Ford, Cassandra (daughter of James Ford): 285, 291, 292, 303;
    Mrs. Charles H. Webb, 285, 303

  Ford, Francis (infant son of Philip): 304

  Ford, James: 14;
    youth, 284;
    appearance, 292;
    marriage, 303, 318;
    as James Wilson in _Chronicles_, 47, 291–293, 329;
    Ford’s Ferry Road, 293–297;
    Ford versus Simpson, 302, 303;
    death, burial, grave, and will, 306, 309–313;
    facsimile of signature, 313;
    see _Ford’s Ferry Mystery_

  Ford, James, Jr. (infant son of James Ford): 303

  Ford, Philip (son of James Ford): will and grave of, 304

  Ford, William M. (son of James Ford): 303;
    will and grave of, 304, 305

  Ford’s Boat Landing: 285

  Ford’s Ferry: location of, 18

  Ford’s Ferry Mystery: 283–306;
    James Ford, 283–285;
    Webb brothers at Cave, 286–292;
    Ford’s Ferry Road, 293;
    Potts tragedy, 294–301;
    Ford versus Simpson, 302, 303;
    death and wills of Philip and William Ford, 304, 306

  Forman, Samuel S., _Journey_: 338

  Fort de Chartres: 23

  Fort Gibson: 196, 251

  Fort Henry (Wheeling, W. Va.): 160, 164

  Fort Massac: 159, 167, 274, 292

  Fowler, Judge Wiley P. (attorney): 314–317

  Frazier, Mrs. Elizabeth: marries James Ford, 303

  Free Henry Ford: 126

  Fulson (associate of Mason): 220, 229, 232


  Gallatin Co. (Ill.): 313, 319

  Gallows Field: near Old Greenville, 261;
    picture of, 259

  Garrard, Gov. James: urges capture of Harpes, 85, 92, 100;
    issues proclamation, 88, 89

  Gatewood, Mr. (attorney): 314

  Geyon, Major: militia, 220

  Gibson (associate of Mason): 220, 221, 223, 228, 229

  Gibson, Smith (alias Druck Smith): 232

  Gilmore, or Gillmore: killed by Harpes, 113

  Given, Judge Dixon (attorney): 291

  Glass, Anthony (associate of Mason): 191, 223, 225, 226, 231;
    Mrs. Glass, 231

  Golconda (Ill.): 18, 276, 293, 314, 318, 319

  Gower, John (jailer at Stanford): 76, 77

  Gratz, Simon, _Rodney Letters_: [258] 338

  Grave Creek Fort: 160

  Graves, John (and son): killed by Harpes, 102

  Green, Willis (court clerk): 72

  Green Co. (Ky.): 99

  Green River: 84, 90, 92, 98, 103, 108, 116, 165, 235

  Green Tree Grove (Ky.): 122

  Greenville, Old [Hunston], (Miss.): 25, 151, 249, 250, 254–266;
    Little Harpe and James May executed at, 255–266;
    court records, 257–261, 335;
    picture of Gallows Field, 259

  Grindstone Ford: 185, 198

  Grissom, William (or Gresham): pursues Harpes, 114–125, 131;
    reward to, 139

  Grundy, Judge Felix: 135

  _Guardian of Freedom_: 102, 151, 262, 339

  Guild, Josephus C., _Old Times in Tennessee_: 179–183, 201,
          244 [262] 339

  Gum Springs, Old (Miss.): 181


  Hall, Frederick, _Letters_: 268, 339

  Hall, James: 15, 330;
    “Story of the Harpes,” _Port Folio_, 57, 58 [90]
    _Letters from the West_, 67–69, 78, 105, 125, 176 [111];
    _Harpe’s Head, or Kentucky A Tale_, 148, 150, 322–326;
    _Legends of the West_, 326;
    _Romance of Western History_ [176] _Western Souvenir_, 341;
    _Western Monthly Magazine_, 330;
    description of Harpes, 149–154;
    Sturdevant in _Sketches_, 279–281

  Hall, William (counterfeiter); 49

  Hammack, Mrs.: visits Duff’s cave, 275, 276

  Hand, Gen. Edward: 160, 161

  Hanna, Charles A., _Wilderness Trail_: 339

  Hardin, Mr.: killed by Harpes, 99

  Hardin, Co. (Ill.): 18;
    when formed, 313;
    Cave a “corner” of county line, 313

  Harpe, Betsey (alleged wife of Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Big: see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Joe Roberts (alleged son of Big Harpe): 154

  Harpe, John (brother of Wm. Harpe): 145

  Harpe, Joshua (or Little Harpe): 145;
    see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Little: see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Lovey (daughter of Big Harpe): 154, 155

  Harpe, Micajah (or Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Sally (wife of Little Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Sally Rice (daughter): 156

  Harpe, Susan (wife of Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, Wiley (or Little Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Harpe, William (brother of John Harpe): 145

  Harpe, William (or Big Harpe): 145;
    see _The Harpes_

  Harpes, The:
    (1) Big Harpe (alias Micajah Harpe, alias Micajah Roberts);
    (2) Little Harpe (alias Wiley Harpe, alias Wiley Roberts, alias
          John Setton, alias John Taylor, alias Wells, see also
          _Setton_, _Taylor_, Wells);
    (3) Susan Harpe, (wife of Big Harpe, alias Susan Roberts);
    (4) Betsey Harpe, (supplementary wife of Big Harpe, alias Betsey
          Walker, alias Betsey Roberts);
    (5) Sally Harpe (wife of Little Harpe, alias Sally Rice, alias Sally
          Roberts)....
      Parentage, kinship, marriage, 60–63, 144–147, 154;
      personal appearance, 61, 88, 89, 99, 148–154, 243, 244, 255, 262;
      children, 79, 80, 105, 106, 137, 154–156, 326;
      character, 14, 52, 55–58, 152–156;
      motives, 60, 61, 157....
    In Knoxville and Tenn., 61–66;
    along Wilderness Road, 67–76;
    imprisonment and trial at Stanford, 71–76;
    in Danville jail, men escape, women released, 77–82;
    governor’s proclamation of reward, 83–89, 100, 150;
    reward paid, 139, 140;
    on Diamond Island, 172, 173;
    at Cave-in-Rock, 90–94;
    return to Tenn., 94–97;
    return to Ky., 97–106;
    in Henderson Co., and lower Green River Country, 107–114;
    capture and death of Big Harpe, escape of Little Harpe, 114–125, 136–138;
    ultimate fate of Big Harpe’s captors, 141–154;
    Big Harpe’s head on Harpe’s Head Road, 125–128....
    Murders committed by:
      Johnson, 65, 66;
      Payton, 66;
      Paca and Bates, 66, 67;
      Langford, 67–77;
      Trabue, 86, 87;
      Dooley, 89, 90;
      on Potts plantation, 90;
      Bradbury, 95;
      Coffey, 95, 96;
      Ballard, 95;
      Brassel, 96;
      Tully, 98, 99;
      Hardin, 99;
      Graves and son, 102;
      negro boy, 103;
      small girl, 103;
      Trisword brothers, 103, 104;
      a child of Harpe, 105, 106, 137;
      Trowbridge, 108,109;
      Hudgens and Gilmore, 113;
      Love, 111–114;
      Mrs. Moses Stegall and son, 111–114;
      Samuel Mason, 250–254....
    Harpe women arrested, tried and released, 125–138;
      ultimate fate of Harpe women, 154–156....
    Little Harpe, as John Setton, Taylor, and Wells, in South and in
          Mason’s band, 196–203, 203–266;
    Draper’s notes on life of John Setton, 221, 222;
    Harpe, as Setton, tells life of self, 220, 221;
    facsimile of his signature as John Setton, 209;
    testimony as Setton at Mason trial, 219–228;
    sent in chains to New Orleans, 241–246;
    joins May and helps kill Mason, 250–254;
    captured and executed with May, 256–266

  “Harpes, Sketch of the:” see _Draper_

  “Harpes, Story of the:” see _James Hall_

  _Harpe’s Head_, Hall: see _James Hall_

  Harpe’s Head, and Harpe’s Head Road: 125–128, 143, 172

  Harpe’s Hill: 126

  Harpe’s “House”: 126

  Harper, L. D.: _Colonial Men and Times_, including Trabue’s
          _Autobiography_, 339;
    see _Daniel Trabue_

  Harper, W. L. (orator): 192, 253

  Harriman Junction: 95

  Harris, Thaddeus M., _Tour_: 24, 29, 339

  Harrison, Benjamin and William (of Penn.): kinsman of Mason, 158, 218

  Haussman, John D. (clerk): 133

  Havard, Henry: “a bad man,” 170, 171

  Hawkins Co. (Tenn.): 221

  Haynes, Lucinda, in _Chronicles_: 329

  Heatherly Gang: 154

  “Hell on the Ohio,” _Logan Belt_, by Jackson: 311, 312

  Henderson (Red Banks): 90, 92, 100, 107, 127, 129–133, 137, 143,
          167–172, 177, 184, 235–238

  Henderson and Madisonville Pike: 127

  Henderson _Columbian_: 58

  Henderson Co. (Ky.): 93, 107, 140, 141, 167–172, 176, 177, 249, 256;
    county court records, 129–133, 335;
    see Starling’s _Henderson County_, 343

  Henry, Parson: 143

  “Hercules Short,” or Hank Short in _Harpe’s Head_: 326

  Herndon, George; on Harpes: 134, 155

  Hewitt (accomplice of Mason): 171

  Highland Creek: 107–109, 169, 172

  Highland Lick: 107

  Hildreth, S. P., _American Pioneer_: 40–43, 167, 168, 339

  Hindes Co. (Miss.): 183, 188

  Hiram (a slave): 302

  Hite, Colonel: Mason steals horse from, 164

  Hitesville (Ky.): 172

  Hoffman, Charles Fenno, _Winter in the West_: 330, 339

  Holstein River: 65, 99

  Hopkins, Gen. Samuel: urges capture of Harpes, 100, 108, 129, 133;
    sketch, 130

  Houck, Louis, _Missouri_: 339

  Hough, Emerson, _Story of the Outlaw_: 339

  Howard, H. R.: _History of Virgil A. Stewart_, life of John A.
          Murrell, 317, 318, 340

  Howard, Joshua (sheriff): 318

  Howard Memorial Library: 345

  Howe, Henry, _Historical Collections_: 175, 245, 340

  Hudgens (Hutchins): killed by Harpes, 113

  Hufstetter, John: marries Betsey Roberts, 154

  Hughes, Roudy Groggery: 65

  Hulbert, A. B., _Ohio River_: 340

  Hull, Nathaniel (Ill. pioneer): 23

  Hull’s Landing (or Robbins Ferry): 23

  Hunston: see _Old Greenville (Miss.)_

  Hunter, Judge James G. (of Ky.): 80, 135

  Hurricane Island: 44, 45, 50, 52, 176, 285, 301;
    Camp Ground, 309

  Huston, Judge Nathan: at Harpe trial, 72


  _Illinois, Historic_; Parrish: 13, 341

  _Illinois, Pioneer History of_, Reynolds: 23, 342

  _Illinois Gazette_: 58, 90

  Illinois State Historical Society: 340, 345;
    see _John Jennings_, also _James A. Rose_

  _Impartial Observer_: 101

  Indiana State Historical Society: 340

  Indians: 25, 27–29

  Ingle’s (Inglish’s) Ferry: 74

  Irby, David: account of trip with Langford, 73–75

  Irene (a slave): 304

  Island Ripple: 273, 274


  Jackson, Shadrach L., _Logan Belt_: 311, 312, 340

  Jackson (Miss.): 183, 185

  James, Edwin, _Expedition to Rocky Mountains_: 32, 340

  _James’ Traveler’s Companion_, Massey: 341

  Jefferson Co. (Miss.): 248, 251, 257

  Jefferson Co. (Tenn.): 65

  Jennings, John, _Journal_: 23, 340

  Johnson, Mr.: killed by Harpes, 65, 66

  Jones, Charles H., _The Outlaw; and Other Poems_: 330–332

  Jones, Rees: on Cumberland River, 238


  Kaskaskia Tribe: 29

  Kellogg, Louise Phelps: _Frontier Retreat_ [158, 163];
    Thwaites and Kellogg: _Frontier Defence_ [163];
    _Revolution on the Upper Ohio_ [160] 340, 344

  _Kentucky, History of_: see _Allen_;
    see _Collins_;
    see _Marshall_

  _Kentucky, Petitions to Early Inhabitants of_, Robertson [166] 342

  _Kentucky Acts_: 98, 139, 140, 340

  _Kentucky Gazette_: 69, 84, 90, 99, 101, 126, 184, 248, 251,
          262, 263, 340

  _Kentucky Herald_: 101

  _Kentucky Settlement, Chronicles of a_: see _Watts_

  Kentucky State Historical Society: 345

  Kentucky State Library: 345

  Ker, Judge David (of Miss.): 257

  Kitty (a slave): 304

  Knob Lick: 107, 170

  Knox, Judge Hugh (of Ky.): 169

  Knox Co. (Ky.): 66

  Knox Co. (Tenn.): 111

  Knoxville: described by Weir, 62, 63;
    Harpes at, 62–66, 95, 146, 155, 255, 256

  _Knoxville Gazette_: 101

  Koiret, Mr.: secret service, 219, 223

  Kuykendall [Corkendale], (son-in-law of Mason): 167, 168, 172


  Lafitte, Jean (pirate): 272, 322

  Lafond, Charles (merchant): 235, 238

  LaForge, Pierre Antoine: New Madrid militia, 209, 210

  Lambuth, Rev. William: unmolested by Harpes, 60

  Landers, Judge Abraham (of Henderson): 129

  Langford, Thomas (also Lankford and Stephen Langford): killed by
          Harpes, 67–69;
    Hall’s account, 67–69;
    court investigation, 72–77;
    pursuit of murderers, 84;
    Mrs. Love, a relative, 142

  Langlos, Francois (of New Madrid): 211

  Lecompte, Mr. (of St. Louis): 233

  _Legends of the West_, Hall; see _James Hall_

  Leiper (Lieper) John: pursues Harpes, 114–125, 130–132;
    deposition of, 132;
    reward to, 139;
    life of, 140–142;
    Leiper street in Dixon, Ky., 144

  Lesieur, Mr. (of Little Prairie): 210, 211

  Lesueur, Charles Alexander: drawing of Cave, 35;
    Life in America, by Loir, 35, 340

  _Letters from the West_, Hall: see _James Hall_

  Lewis, Lucy Jefferson, in _Chronicles_: 329;
    two sons of, 329

  Lexington Public Library: 345

  Library of Congress: 345

  _Life as It Is_: see _J. W. M. Breazeale_

  Lincoln Co. (Ky.): 66, 69, 70, 84, 165;
    Danville district court records, 70–76, 79–82, 335

  Lindsey, Neville: pursues Harpes, 114–125, 130, 131;
    deposition of, 132;
    reward to, 139;
    life, 140

  _Literary Gazette_: 57, 58, 337

  Little Prairie (now Caruthersville, Mo.): 205, 207–212, 230, 239;
    Mason captured in, 207–215

  Little Prairie of the St. Francis River: 220

  Livingston Co. (Ky.): 272, 285, 316–319;
    court records, 302–305, 312, 313, 335

  Logan, Judge Hugh: at Harpe trial, 72

  Logan Co. (Ky.): 103, 104, 165

  _Logan District Court Records_, Russellville, Ky.: 129–133, 135, 335

  Logan’s Fort (or St. Asaph’s): 70, 71;
    now Stanford, Ky., 70, 71

  Loir, Adrien, _Lesueur in America_: 35, 340

  Long, C. W., Louisville _Post_: 340

  Long, Stephen H., _Expedition to Rocky Mountains_: by James, 32, 340

  Louisiana (a row galley): 220

  Louisiana: Historical Society, 345;
    State Museum, 345

  Louisville: _Courier-Journal_, 316, 336, 341;
    _Post_, 340;
    _Western Literary and Historical Magazine_, 111–125, 344

  Louisville Free Public Library: 345

  Love, Arthur, in _Chronicles_: 291

  Love, William: killed by Harpes, 111–114, 129, 131, 142;
    wife Esther, 111, 112

  Lowery, Robert, _Mississippi_: [192, 200,] 253, 340

  Lumley, Jonathan (boatman): 286, 287


  McBee, Squire Silas: 110–115;
    story of Harpes told Draper, 115–125, 130, 131;
    reward to, 139;
    life of, 115, 140

  McClung, John A., _Western Adventure_: 108

  McCoy, Capt. Robert: captures Mason, 210–212;
    testimony at trial, 216, 217;
    takes Mason to New Orleans, 239–246;
    death of, 247

  McDowell, Judge Samuel (of Ky.): 80, 135

  McFarland (M’Farling) Alexander, John, and Daniel: pursue Harpes, 92;
    reward to, 140

  Madison, James (Secretary of State): 200

  Madisonville and Henderson Pike: 128

  Manuel, Father: 234, 239

  Marked Tree (Ark.): 318

  Marrowbone Creek: 102

  Marshall, Humphrey, _Kentucky_: [78] 340

  Mason, Isaac (brother of Samuel Mason): 158, 164

  Mason, John (son of Samuel): in Natchez jail, 188–190;
    at New Madrid trial, 212–226, 228, 230, 233;
    testimony of, 231, 232;
    signature of, 209;
    see _Samuel Mason_

  Mason, Mrs. John (Marguerite Douglas): 198, 227, 236;
    testimony of, 234

  Mason, Joseph (brother of Samuel Mason): 158

  Mason, Magnus (son of Samuel): New Madrid trial, 212;
    testimony of, 234, 235;
    becomes worthy citizen, 265

  Mason, Samuel: 14, 25, 29, 37, 46–48, 52;
    ancestry of, 157, 158, 217, 218;
    personal appearance of, 244, 245;
    Revolutionary soldier, 158–163, 165, 226;...
      In Va. and Tenn., 163–165;
      in Ky., near Russellville, 165, 166;
      near and in Henderson, 167–172;
      marriage of a daughter, 167, 168, 227;
      on Diamond Island, 172–174;
      at Cave-in-Rock, 174–176;
      on Natchez Trace
      and the Mississippi, 176–232;
      robs Kentucky boatmen, 181–183;
      robs Joshua Baker, 183–188, 190, 196, 216, 223–234;
      robs Owsley, 219, 223, 225, 228, 233;
      John Mason in Natchez jail, 188–190, 230, 232;
      American and Spanish authorities look for Mason and Harpe, reward
          offered, 191–205, 210, 233, 247, 252, 255....
    Mason family captured at Little Prairie, 207–215;
    trial at New Madrid, 215–240;
    record of criminal procedure, 207–240, 335;
    passport, 212–215, 236;
    testimony at trial, 217–219, 228–231;
    sent in chains with Little Harpe to New Orleans, 241–246;
    escape, 247–251;
    double-crossed and beheaded by Little Harpe and James May,
          251–254, 272;
    identification and execution of his murderers, 255, 266;
    facsimile signatures of Samuel, John, and Thomas Mason, 208–209

  Mason, Mrs. Samuel: 222, 234, 236

  Mason, Samuel, Jr.: New Madrid trial, 212;
    testimony of, 234;
    becomes worthy citizen, 265

  Mason, Thomas (brother of Samuel Mason): 158 [165?]

  Mason, Thomas (son of Samuel): 165, 170;
    New Madrid trial, 212–228, 232, 236, 237;
    testimony of, 233, 234;
    signature of, 209;
    see _Samuel Mason_

  Mason, Mrs. Thomas (daughter-in-law of Samuel): 201

  Mason Hills: 201

  Mason’s Creek: 172

  Massey, S. L., _James’ Traveler’s Companion_: 341

  Maximilian, Prince of Wied-Neuwied, _Voyage in America_: 32, 35, 341

  May, James (or Isaac or Samuel May): 171, 249, 262;
    joins Little Harpe and helps kill Mason, 250–254;
    captured and executed with Little Harpe, 256–266

  Meason, Samuel (same as Samuel Mason): 14, 160

  Mecklenberg Co. (Va.): 67

  Memphis (Chickasaw Bluffs): 222

  Mercer Co. (Ky.): 84, 91, 92

  Metcalf brothers: suspects, 65

  Metcalfe Co. (Ky.): 89

  _Mike Fink, A Legend of the Ohio_, Bennett: 327

  “Mike Fink, The last of the Boatmen:” Neville, 341

  Miles, Richard (kinsman of Ford): 306

  Miller, John (merchant): 64

  “Mississippi, Extinct Towns of,” Riley: 263, 342

  _Mississippi, History of_, Lowry and McCradle: [192, 200] 253, 340

  _Mississippi, Valley of the_, Monette: 176, 178, 191, 199,
          202, 252, 341

  _Mississippi, as a Province, Territory and State_, see _J. F. H.
          Claiborne_

  Mississippi, Department of Archives and History, 207, 246,
          335, 341, 345;
    MS. of Mason’s trial, 207

  _Missouri, History of_, Houck: 339

  Missouri Historical Society: 341, 345

  Moat’s Lick: 272

  Monette, John W., _Valley of the Mississippi_: 176, 178, 191, 199,
          202, 252, 341

  Monongahela River: 218

  Monroe, James (steamboat): 31

  Montgomery, Thos. (notary): 72

  Montgomery, Judge William: at Harpe trial, 72

  Montgomery Co. (Va.): 74

  Morgan Co. (Tenn.): 95

  Mosique, Mr. (of Ill.): suspect, 233

  Mound Builders: 27, 28

  Mud River: 104

  Muhlenberg Co. (Ky): 122, 126;
    Rothert’s history of, 342

  Mulligan, James (associate of Shouse): 308, 313–315

  Murphy, Samuel: on Mason’s career, 164

  Murray, C. A., _Travels_: 268, 341

  Murrell, John A. (“land pirate,”): 317, 318, 341;
    see _H. R. Howard’s Stewart_


  Nashville: 179, 180

  Natchez: 23, 25, 179, 180, 181, 188, 191, 197, 204, 246–252,
          263, 264, 272

  _Natchez Galaxy_: 185–188, 344

  Natchez Trace: 13, 43, 178, 223–225, 230, 254, 265, 266, 343;
    described, 179–181;
    Mason on, 179–205;
    Swaney on, 179–183, 201;
    see _Mrs. Rowland_, and _John Swain_

  _Navigator, The Ohio and Mississippi_, Cramer: 24, 39–41, 44,
          173, 203, 337

  _Navigator, Western_, Cummings: 285, 337

  Neville, Morgan, “Mike Fink, The Last of the Boatmen:” 341

  New Harmony Workingmen’s Institute: 345;
    communal colony, 35

  New Madrid: 177, 180, 204, 205, 242;
    Mason’s trial at, 207–240

  New Orleans: Mason prison at, 183, 241–246

  Newberry Library: 345

  Nicholson, William (sheriff): 226

  Nogales: see _Vicksburg_

  Nonpareil (schooner): 41–43

  Nuttall, Thomas, _Travels_: 27, 31, 341


  Ogle, Capt. Joseph: Fort Henry, 161, 162

  _Ohio, On the Storied_, Thwaites 343

  Ohio County Militia (W. Va.): 160 163

  Ohio Historical and Philosophical Society: 345

  _Oldfield_, Banks: 322

  Ormsby, Judge Stephen (of Ky.): 80

  “Outlaw, The,” poem, Charles H. Jones, in _The Outlaw_: 330–332

  Owsley, Mr.: robbed by Mason, 219, 223, 225, 228, 233


  Paca killed by Harpes, 66, 67

  Paducah (Ky.): 18

  _Palladium_: 101, 102, 204, 248, 249;
    proclamation by Governor Garrard, 88, 89, 341

  Palmyra (Miss.): 201

  Parrish, Randall, _Historic Illinois_: 13, 341

  Parrott, Mr. (attorney): 258

  Parrow, E. C, in _Folk-Lore Journal_: [57] 338

  Pearl River: 185, 186

  Peltier, Eustache: testimony Mason’s trial, 238

  Pennsylvania Historical Society: [258], 341

  Perrin du Lac, _Travels_: 24, 341

  Peyroux, Henri (commandant, New Madrid): 209, 211–215

  Peyton: killed by Harpes, 66

  Phillips: in boat robbery, 219, 223, 225, 229, 232

  Pickering Hill: 293, 294, 296

  Pickett Co. (Tenn.): 97

  Piracy on rivers: 37–53, 175, 176, 178, 203

  Pittsylvania Co. (Va.): 73, 74

  Plug, Colonel, (or Colonel Fluger, boat-wrecker): 43, 344

  Poindexter, George (attorney general): 258

  Point Coupee: 246, 247

  Pompey (slave): 275–278

  Pond River: 116, 118, 121, 126, 132, 155

  Pool, A. H. T., “Smithland:” 341

  Pope Co. (Ill.): 313, 318, 319;
    court records, 313, 314, 335

  Port Folio: 341, the Harpes, by Hall, 57, 58, 67–69 [58, 90];
    D. Roe on Mason, 252;
    Ashe condemned by, 325

  Potts, Billy: 294, 298, 301;
    kills his son, 294–298

  Potts’ Hill, and Potts’ Spring: 293–297

  Potts’ Place: 143

  Potts’ Plantation: Harpes murder on, 90

  Priest, Josiah, _American Antiquities_: 342

  Prior, Mr., in _Chronicles_: 291

  Providence Lake: 201

  Purcell, Martha G.: _Stories of Old Kentucky_, 342;
    “Sister of Sage of Monticello,” 329, 342

  Pyles, John: pursues Harpes, 113, 114


  Rafinesque (scientist): 342

  Rankin, John, _Letters_: 342

  Red Banks: see _Henderson (Ky.)_

  Red River: 165

  Rennick, Lieut. Seymour: letter to, 197, 198

  _Revolutionary Soldiers of Virginia, List of_: 160, 344

  Reynold, John: _My Own Times_, 273, 274, 281, 342;
    _Pioneer Illinois_, 23, 342

  Rice, Rev. John (father-in law of Little Harpe): 63, 155, 156

  Rice, Sally (wife of Little Harpe) see _The Harpes_

  Richards, J. Addison, _Romance of American Landscapes_: 173, 342

  Richardson, Jacob, “Going West in 1820:” 342

  Riley, F. L., “Extinct Towns of Mississippi:” 263, 342

  Rivers, piracy and rough life on: 37–53, 175, 176, 178, 203

  Roane Co. (Tenn.): 95

  “Robber of the Wilderness:” _Natchez Galaxy_, also _Wheeling Gazette_,
          _Draper MSS._, 185–188, 344

  Roberts (brother-in-law of Harpe): 153, 154

  Roberts, Betsey (alleged wife of Big Harpe) see _The Harpes_

  Roberts, Joe (alleged son of Big Harpe): 154

  Roberts, Micajah (or Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Roberts, Old Man (father-in-law of Big Harpe): 92, 99, 102,
          103, 141, 153

  Roberts, Sally (wife of Little Harpe) see _The Harpes_

  Roberts, Susan (wife of Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Roberts, Wiley (or Little Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Robertson, James R., _Petition of Early Inhabitants of Kentucky_:
          [166] 342

  Robertson’s Lick: 107, 108, 113, 114, 127, 130, 131;
    Robert Robertson, 141

  Robin’s Ferry (or Hull’s Landing): 23

  Rockcastle Co. (Ky.): 67

  Rockcastle River: 72

  Rocky Springs: 200, 201

  Rodney (Miss.): 251

  Rodney, Judge Thomas (of Miss.): 257;
    “Letters to Caesar A. Rodney,” [258] 342

  Roe, Daniel: letter, 252

  Roe, Edward Reynolds: _Virginia Rose_, 327, 328;
    _Brought to Bay_, 327

  Rogers, Mr. (of Natchez): robbed by Mason, 184

  Rogues Harbor: near Cave, 322

  Roosevelt, Theodore, _Winning of the West_: 342

  Rose, Edward (outlaw): 265

  Rose, James A., “Regulators and Flatheads:” 281, 342

  Rose, Virginia, in _Virginia Rose_, by E. R. Roe: 327, 328

  Rothert, Otto A.: _Muhlenberg County_ [63, 127] 342;
    _Unity Baptist Church_ [126] 342;
    _Local History_, 342

  _’Round Anvil Rock_, Banks: 272, 273, 322

  Rowan, Andrew (sheriff): 133

  Rowland, Dunbar: Mississippi Department of Archives, 207;
    _Gov. Claiborne’s Letter Books_, 196–198 [195, 196, 264] 343;
    _Encyclopedia of Mississippi History_, 342;
    MS. record Mason trial, 207, 335

  Rowland, Mrs. Dunbar: “Natchez Trace:” [201] 343

  Ruddell, George: reports detection of Masons, 210, 211

  Ruddell, John (of Little Prairie): 210

  Russell Co. (Ky.): 92, 102, 141, 153

  Russellville (Ky.): 103, 104, 130, 154, 165;
    Harpe women at, 133–138

  _Russellville and Logan County_, Finley: 165, 271–274, 338

  Russellville and Morgantown Road: 104


  St. Genevieve (Mo.): 239

  St. Louis _Republic_: 343

  Salcedo, Manuel de: letter to, 192;
    letter from 246

  Salem (Ky.): 286, 291

  Saline River: 90, 273, 274, 277, 278

  Salt River, Rolling Fork of: 73, 85

  Scaggs, Henry: pursues Harpe, 85–87

  Schoolcraft, Henry R.: 334;
    _Memoirs_, 29, 330;
    _Indian in His Wigwam_, 330

  Schultz, Christian, _Travels_: 25, 343

  Sealsfield, Charles, _Americans as They Are_: 343

  Sebree (Ky.): 107

  Sellers, Isham: 130;
    deposition, 131

  Setton, John (name assumed by Little Harpe, after death of Big Harpe):
          203, 212, 217, 219, 221, 228, 233, 234, 237, 241, 250, 252,
          254, 256–262;
    own story of life, 220, 221;
    Draper on life of, 221, 222;
    see _John Taylor_;
    see _The Harpes_

  Sevier, G. W. (of Tenn.): 60, 126, 164

  Sevier, Gov. John: 60, 164, 165

  Seymour, Samuel (artist): 32

  Shankstown, Old (Miss.): 253, 265

  Sharpe, William: witness for Shouse, 315

  Shawneetown (Ill.): 18, 27, 32, 45, 90, 293, 327, 328

  Short, Hark, “Hercules Short,” (alleged son of Big Harpe): 326

  Shouse, Henry C: 301;
    kills Simpson, 307, 313, 314;
    trial of, 314–318;
    hanged, 319

  Simmons, Mr. (flatboatman): 311

  Simpson, Vincent B.: 301;
    Ford versus Simpson, 302, 303;
    killed by Shouse, 307–314

  Slover, John (Indian fighter): 108, 109

  Smith, Druck (alias Smith Gibson): 232

  Smith, George: wounded by Harpe, 118, 136, 137

  Smith, Rev. John: letter on Mason, 246, 247

  Smith, T. Marshall, _Legends_: 103, 105, 146 [61, 62, 67, 105, 138]
          343

  Smith, Thomas (of Henderson): 170

  Smithland (Ky.): 94, 285, 291, 341

  Spaulding, Martin J., _Early Catholic Missions in Kentucky_: 343

  Spanish authority along the Mississippi: 178, 192, 195, 205, 242

  Spears, George: pursues Harpe, 86

  Speed, Thomas, _Wilderness Road_: [70] 343

  Stack Island (Crow’s Nest, or Island No. 94): 201–204

  Stafford, William H., _Blennerhassett Papers_: 343

  Stalnaker, Peter (associate of Mason): 163, 164

  Stanford (Ky.), (Logan’s Fort): 66, 69, 70:
    court records, 70, 76, 355

  Starling, Edmund L. _Henderson County_: 91, 92, 168, 326 [92, 93,
          107, 130] 343

  Steamboat: Orleans, 31;
    Paragon, 32

  Steele, Eliza R., _Journey_: 343

  Stegall, John (infant): killed by Harpes, 111–114

  Stegall, Steigal, Moses: 110, 129–132;
    pursues Harpes, 114–125;
    reward to, 139;
    Stegall street in Dixon, 144;
    life of, 142–144

  Stegall, Mrs. Moses (Mrs. Mary Stegall): killed by Harpes, 111–114,
          129, 132, 134

  Stephens, C. A., _The Ark of 1803_: 322

  Steuben’s Lick (Ky.): 109

  Stevenson, William H. J. (associate of Shouse): 308, 313–315

  Stewart, William (sheriff): 104, 133–138, 150–156;
    Sketch of, 138

  Stewart, _History of Virgil A._ (life of John A. Murrell):
          317, 318, 340;
    see _H. R. Howard_

  Stockton, Nathaniel: pursues Harpes, 98–100

  Strong, W. E.: pursues Harpes, 84

  Stump, Mr.: killed by Harpes, 89, 90

  Stump, Capt. Frederick: identifies Little Harpe, 255

  Stump, Capt. John: interviewed by Draper, 255

  Sturdevant (counterfeiter): 272, 278;
    Hall’s _Sketches_, 279–281;
    see _Counterfeiters at Cave_

  Sulphur Springs Cave (Ill.): 30

  Swain, John, “Natchez Trace”: 343

  Swaney, John L.: story of Mason, in Guild’s _Old Times_, 179–183, 201,
          244 [262] 339


  Taylor, John (name assumed by Little Harpe after death of Big Harpe):
          212, 217, 219–221, 224, 232, 256–262;
    see _The Harpes_

  _Tennessee, Old Times in_, Guild: 179–183, 201 [262] 244, 339

  _Tennessee Gazette_: 248, 343

  Tennessee River: 180, 191, 198

  Thompkins, James: pursues Harpes, 109, 114;
    reward to, 139;
    life, 140

  Thompson, Mrs. (daughter of Samuel Mason): 218

  Thompson, T. P.: library of; 345

  Thruston, R. C. Ballard, library of: 345

  Thwaites, Reuben Gold: _On the Storied Ohio_; editor Wither’s
          Chronicles; Thwaites and Kellogg: _Frontier Defense_;
          [163] _Revolution on the Upper Ohio_ [160]; 343, 344;
    see _Early Western Travels_

  Tiel, Edward; pursues Harpes, 65

  Todd, Thomas (attorney): 76

  Tolu (Ky.): 285, 305

  Tower Rock: 44

  Trabue, Daniel: _Autobiography in Colonial Men and Times_, 78, 86, 87,
          97–100, 102 [86, 95–99, 102] 141, 150, 339

  Trabue, John: killed by Harpes, 86, 87, 141

  Tradewater River: 143, 273, 274

  Triplett, Frank, _Great American Crimes_: 128, 344

  Triplett, Robert, _Roland Trevor_: 128, 344

  Trisword brothers: killed by Harpes, 103, 104

  Trowbridge, Mr.: killed by Harpes, 108, 109

  Tully, John: killed by Harpes, 98, 99;
    legislative act for Christiana, widow of, 98


  Union Co. (Ky.): 172

  _Union County Kentucky_, Evansville Courier Co.: 273, 278, 338


  Van Cleve, B., Journal of: 167, 168, 339

  Venable, W. H., _Beginnings of Literary Culture in Ohio Valley_: 344

  Vicksburg (Walnut Hills, or Nogales): 196–198, 201, 212, 220,
          223–225, 232

  Vidal, N. M. V. (secretary of war, Spanish Louisiana): 246

  _Virginia Rose_, E. R. Roe: 327, 328

  Virginia State Library, _List of Revolutionary Soldiers of
          Virginia_: 160, 344


  Wabash River: 23

  Wales, Doctor: attends Mrs. John Mason, 227

  Walker, Betsey (alleged wife of Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Walker, Elizabeth (alleged wife of Big Harpe): see _The Harpes_

  Walker’s Bar: 44

  Wallace, Mr. (lawyer): defends Mason, 188

  Waller, John: captures Jim Wilson, 51, 52

  Walnut Hills: see _Vicksburg_

  Warren Co. (Miss.): 253, 265

  Washington (Miss.): 196, 252, 257, 272

  Washington Co. (Tenn.): 164

  Waters, Dr. Richard Jones: 218;
    testimony Mason trial, 235–237

  Watts, Joseph, in _Chronicles_: 329

  Watts, William Courtney: _Chronicles of a Kentucky Settlement_ 47,
          285, 329, 344;
    Webb brothers, at Cave, 285–292;
    Ford as Wilson, 47, 291–293;
    Watts on Shouse case, 316

  Webb, Dr. Charles H. (son-in-law of James Ford): 46, 292, 303, 304,
          329;
    at Cave, 285–291

  Webb, Mrs. Charles H.: see _Cassandra Ford_

  Webb, John: held at Cave, 286–291

  Webster Co. (Ky.): 128, 144

  Weir, James; describes Knoxville, 62

  Wells (name assumed by Little Harpe): 219, 221, 232, 256;
    see _The Harpes_

  Welsh, Joseph (sheriff): 76–77

  Welsh, Nicholas (associate of Mason): 171

  Welsh, Thomas: pursues Harpes, 73;
    on death of Langford, 76

  Weston (Ky.): 303

  _Western Literary and Historical Magazine_: Draper’s “Sketch of the
          Harpes,” 115–125, 344

  _Western Monthly Magazine_: Hall’s review of _The Outlaw_,
          330, 339, 344

  _Western Monthly Review_: 344

  _Western Souvenir_, Hall: 341

  _Western Spy and Hamilton Gazette_: 101, 246, 248, 256, 344

  Wheeling, Siege of: see _Fort Henry_

  _Wheeling Gazette_: 185–188, 344

  White, Robert: pursues Harpe, 140

  White River: 203, 204, 220

  Wiguens (associate of Mason): 219, 220, 223, 228 229

  Wilderness Road: 66–68, 72, 75;
    _Wilderness Road_, Speed [70] 343

  Wiley, George: quoted in Claiborne’s _Mississippi_, 188, 189

  Williamson Co. (Tenn.): 221

  Wilson (associate of Mason on the Miss.): 221

  Wilson, James: name for James Ford in _Chronicles_, 47, 291–293, 329

  Wilson, Jim: career of, 47–52;
    Liquor Vault and House for Entertainment, 47, 49;
    Wilson’s Tavern, 49, 51;
    Wilson’s Gang, 50, 284

  Wilson --: name for Samuel Mason at Cave, 47, 175

  Winterington (son-in-law of Samuel Mason): 218

  Winters, Elisha: robbed by Mason, 251, 258

  Wisconsin State Historical Society, 335, 336, 344, 345;
    see _Draper_, Kellogg’s _Frontier Retreat_, Thwaites and Kellogg,
          _Frontier Defence_, _Revolution on the Upper Ohio_

  Withers, Alexander S.: _Chronicles of Border Warfare_ [162] 344

  Wolf Island: 177

  Wood, John (father of Susan Harpe): 145

  Wood, William: pursues Harpe, 98–100

  Woods, Edgar, _Albemarle County in Virginia_: 344

  Worthen, A. H. (Ill. geologist): 344

  Wythe Co. (Va.): 74


  Yazou River: 196, 197

  Yeakey, Robert Lee: owner of Cave, 28

  Young, Captain: pursues outlaws in Ky., 91–93

  Young, Rev. Jacob, _Autobiography_: 102, 103, 153, 154, 345




Transcriber’s Notes


Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a
predominant preference was found in the original book; otherwise
they were not changed.

Spelling errors and inconsistencies within quoted passages have not
been changed.

Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced quotation
marks were remedied when the change was obvious, and otherwise left
unbalanced.

Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between paragraphs
and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that support
hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations lead
to the corresponding illustrations.

Footnotes, originally at the bottoms of pages, have been collected
and placed after the Bibliography.

The index was not checked for proper alphabetization or correct
page references.

Page 15 explains that numbers in brackets refer to Bibliography
entries. One of the Transcribers has determined that, in the
Index, a page number in square brackets means that on that page
is a reference to the source that is cited using the Bibliography
number. For example, the above entry for “Withers, Alexander S.”,
refers to “[162]” and that page has a Bibliography reference to
“[140]”, which is “Withers, Alexander S. Chronicles of Border
Warfare”.





End of Project Gutenberg's The Outlaws of Cave-in-Rock, by Otto A. Rothert



*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE OUTLAWS OF CAVE-IN-ROCK ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.