THE 313:: C1535 CJERN'CR ANS 3132‘st {Nb ”£6“ EQJAN rvRRQTfifiv 1295-18 Essrerta‘: 'Av ‘- ‘ a an no; ‘7 z 33.. "‘“ "3‘53.ch 71.3. -f‘ '5‘?!th .r 5.4 {13"} &‘§§xfii-q¢| PS;1 “2-:‘ a" stflo Rifle-t: ' 3‘3““ rn ' to «IR 0') 37;: 2:; :17: 21'! THE—5‘; LIBRAR Y This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Rule of the Governor and Judges in Michigan Territory, 1805-1823. presented by Timothy Frederick Sherer has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in History mrw I Major pM‘essor Date Seotember 30, 1976 Sm: LIBRARY U i 1: a: n: I. a: :N :— as: gaaeeoeaan:aaaeaeeaaeeeaaaaaaoaaaeacaccaaaaaafirazaf an: ,..._ was .5 8.5:? a. n w H. . H. mm Mm _n an am Z 22:: I I! r'! w l ‘0 1" I“ n 'I an 0'31: v-a r-I .. ._ a” ¢, n. ~_ a~.mm we ”a gm hm . 23;: :3: G MD 1. 1'. $0 I" ,_ m s- an if, n i s“ M J9 '\ 7" ('1'! .rs "‘ w m V ‘9 L1 ‘ . 0') cm 6) C.) G) mu. \n a) CD GD 0'). 1'! o: as an a) as 12‘ c3) memaacaaaauauuuec maaoammammmmu:“mammmnwmmw _~:L~:._:.:L~:.:.~:.p:.-:.hp:.fifiphfihtg::3 mmmmmmomaouumuuumummmmmmmuauoum:mmmwwummmuw.m nmammammmmmmmmmmmauQmmmmmnmnnmmmmmmmnmmmnmmmmm vvvwvvvov~ve~vv.v:I...~..¢vvvwv:.:;:cevv’w nunmnnnnnnannnnmflrnmnnnnmnnnnnnnmmmmnmmmsnnmna ~N---~N-NN~NNN--~N--~N~N~NN~N---~NN :_::::_::_::___:_:_:::___:fi_:_ _~ - n. q. ”_ N. ._ _. a. u. h. a. a. .a no ~u _. a. an .m "a .m an .n mm ~n an .m «w a. ~. g. n. v» my “v _. a. an an km on an an an ~m rr 2-“ o:- . ya "I c m . 1‘ W to C I c; CO L C" U?) to II) (4") no cu g.“ vvzlv. Cd N NNNNN ___:__ ”n «M .fi an ”a mu n~ . _ r. x . grill .HE. ABSTRACT THE RULE OF THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES IN MICHIGAN TERRITORY, 1805-1823 By Timothy Frederick Sherer Michigan Territory, created by Congress in 1805 out of part of true original Northwest Territory, was ruled by a governor and three jLudges for eighteen years. As there was no representative assembly in tflris first stage of government, these officials had great power--they adopted the laws, served as Supreme Court justices, treated with the Iruiians, and maintained law and order. This dissertation is a case study of the administration of one American territory during its first governmental period. Michigan's early territorial experience was unique for several ‘reasons. Most of the nearly five thousand residents in 1805 were of French backgrounds and spoke little English. While the British had surrendered their western posts to the United States by 1796, they still loomed as a menace across the Detroit River, and constantly interferred in Michigan affairs, particularly in their dealings with the Indians. Most of the territory's population was centered in and around Detroit, the largest town. Before Governor William Hull and judges Augustus Woodward, John Griffin, and James Witherell arrived in Michigan, Detroit had burned to the ground. Most secondary accounts describe the legislative and judicial efforts of the governor and judges from 1805 to 1812 as "chaotic," and ,1 v!“ ' II. p .. , u v» . .f .1 |\ ,E3 Timothy Frederick Sherer concentrate on the eccentricities of Woodward and his occasional petty feuds with Hull. Unfortunately this approach has neglected the positive and more important accomplishments of the territorial officials who re- built Detroit, gained Congressional aid for destitute citizens, improved transportation, laid the foundation of an educational system, created a court system, and adopted an extensive criminal code. During this per- iod the judges sitting as a Supreme Court heard over four hundred cases. Hull's importance in dealing with the Michigan Indians has been similarly neglected. As Superintendent of Indian Affairs in Michigan he counteracted British influence among the tribes by giving the Indians teachers, tools and implements, and food and clothing. He also acquired by treaty a tract of land for the United States that included roughly the southeastern quarter of the Lower Peninsula. Although the War of 1812 ended his Indian program, he was instrumental in promoting their welfare. Woodward was the sole territorial official remaining in Michigan after Hull surrendered Detroit to the British in the War of 1812. He spoke against the British destruction of American homes and property, attempted to rescue whites taken by the Indians, and eased the suffering of many territorial inhabitants. In spite of his efforts to assist Americans, the British occupation of Michigan was a devastating blow to the territory and created serious problems for the territorial officials in 1814 when they returned to power. Lewis Cass, Hull's replacement as governor in 1814, contributed greatly to Michigan's recovery from the devastation of the War of 1812. Cass was instrumental in rescuing whites taken by Indians and in obtaining Timothy Frederick Sherer emergency rations for white settlers. He continually petitioned Congress for emergency aid to rebuild the territory and to aid those unfortunate citizens who had lost nearly everything in the conflict. As Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Cass proved himself an able and gifted administrator. He improved and expanded Hull's program of Indian education, created new agencies, increased Indian expenditures for food, tools, and clothing, and instituted more rigid regulations for traders and agents. He also acquired by treaty several million acres of land for the United States. In dealing with the Indians, Cass was also forced to confront the power and the influence of John Jacob Astor's American Fur Company. A Many writers have focused on the despair and destruction in Michigan following the War of 1812 without recognizing the positive ac— complishments of the governor and judges. From 1814 to 1823 these of- ficials adopted legislation concerning internal improvements, a new uni- versity, a territorial bank, and the regulation of trade and commerce. They laid out fourteen new counties, adopted a new criminal code, and legislation regulating prisons and procedures in criminal cases. Dur- ing this period the Supreme Court handled nearly six hundred cases. This study takes issue with the claim by some writers that by 1823 the governor and judges were forced to give up their legislative power to an elected assembly because the general populace was dissat- isfied with their administration. Much of the criticism leveled at the territorial officials originated from a small faction of Americans and former Britishers who desired self-government. The majority of the inhabitants--those of French extraction--resisted attempts by the governor Timothy Frederick Sherer and judges to involve them in representative government and were satis- fied with their administration. In 1818 Michigan residents voted against a popularly elected general assembly. The rule of the governor and judges in Michigan reveals both strengths and weaknesses in the territorial system established by the Ordinance of 1787. The major weakness was the failure to include citi- zens in the governmental process, particularly those Americans already accustomed to self-rule. Another weakness was that because of their many duties, the territorial officials were forced to restrict the time allotted to any one particular duty. At the same time a concen- tration of power in the governor and judges was necessary in Michigan. Because of the great number of French-speaking inhabitants unfamiliar with American law or language, these officials were forced to take the lead in establishing a workable system of government. Michigan was fortunate in having strong governors in Hull and Cass and competent judges in Witherell and, especially, Woodward. A wide range of both manuscript and printed sources was used in this study. Important manuscript collections included "The Michigan Territorial Papers," "The Transactions of the Supreme Court of Michigan, 1805-1824," and the papers of Augustus Woodward, Benjamin Witherell, Lewis Cass, William Hull, Solomon Sibley, and William Woodbridge. Let- terbooks, records of executive proceedings, memorials, and petitions to the governor and judges, found at the Michigan State Archives were also valuable. State and War Department records in the National Archives were also very important. Useful printed sources included The Territor- ial Papers of the United States, The Laws of the Territory of Michigan, Timothy Frederick Sherer American State Papers, and the Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collec- tions. Many secondary accounts also made significant contributions to this study of the rule of the governor and judges. THE RULE OF THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES IN MICHIGAN TERRITORY, 1805-1823 By Timothy Frederick Sherer A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department Of History 1976 ©Copyright by TIMOTHY FREDERICK SHERER 1976 To my wife, Judy, whose constant love and continual support made this possible. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to many fine people for their assistance and advice in making this study possible.' I would like to thank the staffs at the Michigan State University Library, the Michigan State Archives, the State of Michigan Library, the Clarke Historical Library, Central Michigan University, the Bentley Library and the Clements Library, University of Michigan, the Burton Historical Collections, Detroit Public Library, and the National Archives, Washington, D.C., for their friendly assistance. Special thanks and recognition must be given to my committee. I am grateful for the interest, scholarly advice, and patient guidance of Doctors Frederick Williams, Paul Sweet, and C. David Mead. I consider myself fortunate to have them as members of my committee. Individual recognition must be given to the chairman of my committee, Dr. Harry Brown. Were it not for his unselfish assistance and scholarly direction, this study might never have been completed. I would like to thank all my friends and fellow graduate students who have shown interest in my work and have offered me encouragement. Special thanks must also go to my parents, who instilled in me a- love of knowledge at an early age. Their interest and encouragement have been valuable aids in the completion of this study. While many people have made important contributions to this study, I stand alone in being responsible for its shortcomings. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................... LIST OF FIGURES ......................... LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................... Chapter I. MICHIGAN'S PRE-TERRITORIAL PERIOD ............ II. THE LEGISLATIVE BOARD--1805-1812 ............. III. THE FOUNDATIONS OF JUSTICE ................ IV. HULL AND INDIAN AFFAIRS ................. V. MICHIGAN AND THE WAR OF 1812 ............... VI. CASS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS ................. VII. THE LEGISLATIVE BOARD REBUILDS THE TERRITORY ....... VIII. THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE--l814-1823 ......... IX. THE END OF THE BEGINNING ................. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY ...................... Page iv vi vii 43 92 134 158 222 260 300 322 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Areal Development ....................... 24 2. Michigan Counties, 1803 .................... 26 3. Major Indian Trails and Tribal Areas ............. 136 War of 1812, Northwest Territory ............... 163 5. War of 1812, Detroit Area ................... 166 6. Indian Cessions ........................ 211 7. Michigan Counties, 1818 .................... 256 8. Michigan Counties, 1822 .................... 257 9. Philu Judd Map of Michigan, 1824 ............... 321 vi BHC CHL CL FRC MPHC MSA MSU NA NW RG49 RG59 RG75 RG107 SD SG ND LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library Clarke Historical Library, Central Michigan University Clements Library, University of Michigan Federal Records Center Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections Michigan State Archives Michigan State University National Archives Northwest Territory Records of the Bureau of Land Management General Records of the Department of State Records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs General Records of the Department of War State Department Surveyor-General War Department CHAPTER I MICHIGAN'S PRE-TERRITORIAL PERIOD Irish traveller Isaac Weld, visiting Detroit in the Northwest Territory at the close of the eighteenth century, observed a tiny and rather primitive community. The town, situated on the western bank of the Detroit River, contained but a few more than one hundred houses. Jutting out into the river were wooden wharfs, built to accommodate the trading crafts that contributed economic life to the distant outpost. Several streets, running parallel to the river, were intersected by others at right angles. They were narrow, unpaved, and generally dirty. A sudden downpour rendered them next to impassable. Footways, formed of square logs laid transversely close to each other, provided pedestrians firm underfooting. A strong stockade surrounded the inhabitants. It had four gates, with blockhouses at each opening, and a small fort near the north wall with small field-pieces to discourage hostile intruders.1 Trade constituted the most important activity of Detroit's in- habitants, nearly two-thirds of whom were of French extraction. No less than twelve trading vessels belonged to the town's commercial in- terests, and included brigs, sloops, and schooners of from fifty to one hundred tons each. "The stores and shops in the town are well furnished," Weld observed, "and you may buy fine cloth, linen, etc., and every article 1Isaac Weld, Jr., Travels Through the States of North America and the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada During the Years 1795, 1796, and 1797 (2 vols.; London: John Stockdale, 1807), 11, 183-189. l of wearing apparel, as good in their kind, and nearly on as reasonable terms, as you can purchase them at New York or Philadelphia."2 Across the Detroit River were the British settlements of upper Canada, whose inhabitants recognized the frontier outpost as a key to the Indian trade of the Wabash Valley. Detroit's streets were usually thronged with Indians of one tribe or another, intent on securing a favorable exchange for their furs and skins, or on simply taking in the sights. One could also observe many old Indian women leading about their daugh- ters, "ever ready to dispose of them, pro tempore, to the highest bidder."3 While it had a promising future as a western commercial and trading center, Detroit in 1796 was a small, frontier village of ap- proximately five hundred inhabitants. The French were the first Europeans to leave a lasting influ- ence on Michigan. As early as 1701 the green forest lands and the sparkling waters had induced Cadillac to erect Fort Pontchartrain on the present site of Detroit, in an effort to bolster French influence against rising British pressure in the Northwest.4 Under Cadillac's 2Ibid. 3Henry M. Utley and Byron M. Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory, and State (4 vols.; New York: The PubliShing Society of’ Michigan, 1906), II, 133. Hereafter cited as Utley, Michigan. 4George Catlin, The Story of Detroit (Detroit: The Detroit News, 1923), 4-8. Hereafter cited as Catlin, Detroit. The French had estab- lished Sault Ste. Marie in 1668, MichilimacEinac in 1669, and Fort St. Joseph, at the mouth of the St. Joseph River in 1679, but these were trading posts and military headquarters instead of real settlements. «I. ..\f.. guidance, French farmers called "habitants" came to inhabit the lands surrounding the tiny outpost. Cadillac granted them lands fronting on the Detroit River, as well as land extending back into the interior. He also invited neighboring Indians to live near the settlements where they could trade their furs and receive instruction from the Jesuits. Cadillac reasoned that by daily contact with both hardworking settlers and the clergy, these Indians would gradually come to accept the cus- toms and culture of France. Cadillac's scheme failed, as the red men were frequently debauched by liquor and often exploited by avaricious fur traders.5 The fur trade remained the major reason for French interest in Michigan, and also the spoils for which England and France contested in their several wars in America in the eighteenth century. Three trad- ing posts in Michigan served as strategic points of French control in the struggle with the British. Michilimackinac, erected at the Straits of Mackinac, served as a rendevouz for trappers and traders plying their trade to the north and northwest. Fort St. Joseph, built near the present city of Niles, became the trade center for the Illinois Country and lands to the south. Detroit became the focal point for peltry dealers journeying from the far west. Despite French attempts to license traders to discourage English competition, Michigan trappers, particularly the famous "coureurs de bois," often scorned such regula- tions and even turned a profit by trading with the English. The influence 5Clarence M. Burton, History of Wayne County and the City of Detroit (5 vols.; Detroit: The S. J. Clark Co., 1930), I, 41-52. Here- after cited as Burton, History of Wayne County, 1 of these French trappers and traders was lasting in Michigan. Many of them continued in the fur trade under both the British and the Americans.6 British and French rivalry in Michigan and the northwest broke out in open warfare in 1744 with King George's War, the third such con- flict between the two powers since the Glorious Revolution in England in 1689. In 1744 several hundred Ottawa, Huron, and Pottawatomi braves lived around Detroit, and nearly two hundred Ottawa warriors were en- camped near Michilimackinac. The French had been successful in retain- ing the allegiance of many Michigan Indians, but some tribesmen had discovered that a better bargain was to be gained by dealing with the British. In 1745 Chief Nicolas of the Huron tribe living near Sandusky permitted the British to build a "strong house" near his village. Iro- quois tribesmen, at the instigation of the British, prodded Huron war- riors to attack Detroit. The attack failed, but several-French traders returning to Detroit were captured and killed. The British were later 7 Peace came in 1748. forced to give up their trading post at Sandusky. In the years to come, Michigan Indians, intent on increasing their own influence in the lands of the Great Lakes, would continue to serve as pawns in the conflicts between foreign powers. 6Willis Dunbar, Michigan: A History of the Wolverine State (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1965), 88l93. Hereafter cited as Dunbar, Michigan. 7Howard Peckham, Pontiac and the Indian Uprising(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1947), 30-33. Hereafter cited as Peckham, Pontiac. The French and Indian War of 1754 signaled the final contest for power in America between France and England. Most of the fighting took place outside of Michigan, but that area was involved in the hos- tilities. When General Braddock led an English force against Fort Duquesne, the Detroit militia was called upon to help reinforce that garrison. Grain and other provisions from Detroit were also sent east to maintain the French positions. Hurons, Pottawatomies, Ottawas, Miamis, and other Indians from around Detroit supported the French at Duquesne, and their later withdrawal contributed to the decision to abandon the post to the English.8 When the tide of battle began to turn against the French, many of their former Indian allies began to waver in their support. A delegation of Ottawa, Huron, and Chippewa journeyed to Fort Pitt and smoked the peace pipe with George Croghan, who represented the British.9 With the fall of Quebec in 1759, English victory in North America was only a matter of time. The following year the French gave up Montreal and all Canada with it. General Amherst selected Robert Rogers to travel westward with a sufficient force to take over the Great Lakes posts from the French. The transfer of military and civil control in Michigan from French to British hands did little to disturb existing conditions. Most Frenchmen took the oath of allegiance and remained at their homes. 8Burton, History of Wayne County, I, 71-72; James Campbell, Outlines of the Political History of Michigan (Detroit: Schober & Co., 213-216. Hereafter cited as Campbell, Political’History of Michigan. 9Dunbar, Michigan, 112. They continued to be Roman Catholics, took care of their farms, married and reared large families, and "died and slept peacefully with their fathers in St. Ann's churchyard."10 King George prohibited the English governors from making grants of lands and English subjects from purchas- ing Indian lands. This latter condition was not strictly observed in Michigan, however, and a later American government experienced some confusion in unraveling conflicting claims.1] Generally, the French seemed convinced of the military power of the English, and showed little disposition to challenge it. Michigan was shaken out of its brief peaceful interlude by the uprising of Pontiac in 1763. With the expulsion of the French from North America, the Indians discovered that they were at the mercy of the English traders. Free gifts of weapons, ammunition, and powder were-not as forthcoming as under the French. Land speculators began to invade Indian lands to spy out possible future holding. Alarmed by the growing power of the whites, Pontiac, whose village lay a few miles from Detroit, attempted by craft to take over that post. Failing in this venture, he placed Detroit under siege. News of Pontiac's ac- tivities spread rapidly and soon other western posts were in danger. By the end of July, only three forts--Pitt, Niagara, and Detroit--were still in British hands. In New York, General Amherst ordered two re- lief expeditions to move westward. Captain James Dalyell reached 10Utley, Michigan, I, 252. 1.ICampbell, Political History of Michigan, 132-133. Detroit late in July with supplies and reinforcements, enabling that post to hold out against Pontiac's forces. Colonel Henry Bouquet de- feated an Indian force at the Battle of Bushy Run early in August to break the seige of Ft. Pitt. West of Ft. Pitt the war on the frontier continued into the fall. When Pontiac's warriors began to desert him and French assistance failed to arrive, hostilities came to an end. Pontiac slipped away to the Illinois Country, where he later met his death at the hands of an Indian assassin.12 British civil government was extended to Michigan in 1765 when it was included in the Province of Quebec. That same year Sir Guy Carleton became the first Governor-General of Canada. As the population of this province remained principally French, British laws, customs, and religion were not readily accepted or understood by the inhabitants.13 By the Quebec Act of 1774, Parliament extended the boundaries of that province south as far as the Ohio River and west to the Mississippi River. French law was to be observed, but in crim- inal cases British law would take precedence. Roman Catholics were to enjoy religious freedom. Four lieutenant-governors were to be ap- pointed, one each for Michilimackinac, Detroit, the Illinois settlments, 12Peckham's Pontiac contends that the Ottawa chief was not the chief strategist of the Indian uprising, but instrumental mainly in uniting the tribes around Detroit for an assault on that post. For an earlier account, crediting Pontiac with a central role in the rebellion, see Francis Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac (2 vols.; Boston, 1851). 13Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 152-153; Burton, History of Wayne County, I, 120. and Vincennes. There was no provision for an elected assembly. In- ferior courts were to be established at both Michilimackinac and De- troit, with appeals possible to the superior courts at Montreal and Quebec.14 Henry Hamilton, the lieutenant-governor at Detroit in 1776, was unimpressed with the Canadians in Michigan. He found them "so illiterate that few can read and very few can sign their own names."15 Most Detroit residents knew little about breeding sheep and were poor farmers. Hamilton believed that they were also lazy. Nevertheless, the soil was so rich that even careless and ignorant farmers could raise crops. Some whites made a living by exploiting the Indians through dishonest weights and measures and shoddy trade goods. Any regulations regarding such trade were either not known or not duly enforced. Disputes between traders and Indians were common, often resulting in murder. Occasionally traders could borrow heavily on credit, lured by quick profits at the expense of the Indians, only to find themselves unable to repay their creditors. Through "ignor- ance or dishonesty or both," these traders would become business fail- ures, run out on their creditors, and journey to a new post to start the process all over again.16 14F. Clever Bald, Michigan in Four Centuries (New York: Harper & Bros., 1954), 79-80. Hereafter cited as Bald, Michigan. - ~ 15Report of Lieutenant Governor Henry Hamilton, August, 1776, in Utley, Michigan, I, 300-303. Ibid. War returned to Michigan in 1775, and the area was placed under martial law by the British. This time the upstart Americans were the enemy, and the Indians around Detroit were encouraged to unleash their fury on the settlements in the Ohio Valley. Whites such as Simon and James Girty, Alexander McKee, and Matthew Elliott frequently led such 17 Indian enthusiasm in the northwest for the British cause raids. was reduced in 1779, however, when George Rogers Clark forced Hamilton to surrender the post of Vincennes and its 79 defenders. The British then strengthened their defenses at Detroit and proceeded to take the offensive. In 1780 they led a large force of Michigan Indians against St. Louis, Kaskaskia, and Cahokia, but were unsuccessful.18 That same year, Captain Henry Bird headed a body of several hundred Indians in a move against Kentudy. When the warriors became uncontrollable and proceeded to pillage indiscriminately, Bird was forced to return to Detroit with his mission imcomplete.19 Because of Indian hostilities in Michigan, some Americans favored plucking the western thorn of De- troit from their side. "I have ever been of the opinion that the re- duction.of the post of Detroit would be the only certain means of giving peace and security to the whole western frontier," Washington wrote to l7 Catlin, Detroit, 68-70; Burton, History of Wayne County, I 129-134. 18Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 174-180; Dunbar, Michigan, 143. 19 Utley, Michigan, I, 181. 10 Jefferson in 1781.20 Detroit was not taken by the Americans in the Revolutionary War, however, and hostilities continued in the northwest until the spring of 1783 when news arrived that a peace treaty had been signed.21 Although Great Britain agreed in the Treaty of 1783 to evacuate her forces from the territory ceded to the United States "with all con- venient speed," she continued to occupy Detroit, Michilimackinac, and other western posts until 1796.22 The British justified this action by claiming that the United States had failed to encourage the restora- tion of confiscated loyalist pr0perties seized during the Revolution, or the repayment of American debts owed to Britishers before the war. The retention of these western forts enabled the English government to keep the valuable fur trade in the hands of Canadian traders and to retain control over the Indian tribes, valuable allies in the Revolutionary War.23 20George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, December 28, 1781, quoted in Silas Farmer, History_of Detroit and Michigan (Detroit: Silas Farmer and Co., 1884), 259. Hereafter cited as Farmer, History of Detroit. 21 Burton, History_of Wayne County, I, 179-180. 22Julius Pratt, A History of United States Foreign Policy (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965), 30-31. Hereafter cited as Pratt, U.S. Foreign Policy. 23Dunbar, Michigan, 151-152; Ray Allen Billington, Westward Ex ansion (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1967), 152-153. Hereafter c1te as Billington, Westward Expansion. ll Thus Michigan, technically a part of the United States by the Treaty of 1783, continued to remain under British control for the next thirteen years. After 1783 the British included Michigan within the Province of Canada under the jurisdiction of English law and Canadian courts. In July of 1788 Detroit became a part of the judicial District of Hesse, one of four such districts established by Governor Sir Guy Carleton in Upper Canada. Each district was to contain a court of common pleas, a 24 sheriff, and justices of the peace. In 1791 the British Parliament established two provinces, Upper and Lower Canada, with Michigan in- cluded in the former. The Quebec Act was repealed. Trial by jury was introduced in both civil and criminal cases. Upper Canada was also to have an elected assembly. Counties were set up in each province, the Detroit area being divided between the counties of Kent and Essex.25 In 1792 Francois Baby, William Macomb, and David Smith from the Detroit area were elected to the assembly, which met at Niagara.26 In 1796 the British decided to abandon their western posts. Indeed, by Jay's Treaty of 1794, the English had promised that the forts 27 would be evacuated no later than June of 1796. British expenditures 24William Riddel, Michigan Under British Rule: Law and the Law Courts, 1760-1796 (Lansing: Michigan HistoricaliCommission, 1926), 19- 261 Hereafter cited as Riddell, Michigan Under BritiSh Rule. 25 193-194. Catlin, Detroit, 91; Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 26Burton, History of Wayne County, I, 202-204. 27Pratt, U.S. Foreign Policy, 41-43. 12 in Europe, because of the French Revolution, made it more difficult to maintain garrisons in America's hinterland and to send great quanti- ties of presents to an Indian population "whose appetite was almost as large as the area over which it roamed."28 Daily, more and more Ameri- cans were moving into the trans-Allegheny West, challenging British in- fluence and control in the Northwest. General Anthony Wayne's victory at the Battle of Fallen Timbers in 1794 had convinced the defeated Indians that British aid could no longer be relied on; it had also con- vinced many among the English that Detroit could be taken if the Ameri- cans made a determined effort.29 In addition, the reports from Montreal revealed a decline in the fur trade south of the Great Lakes. As Brit- ish fur activities began to shift further northward, Michigan and the Ohio Country became economically less important. During the summer and fall of 1796, Britain surrendered most of her western posts to the Uni- ted States, ending her regime in Michigan and the Northwest. Secretary of State Timothy Pickering reported to Rufus King in August of 1796 that "By this time all the British posts must have been delivered up to the troops of the United States . . . in the most handsome manner, on the 30 part of the British." Michigan had finally become a part of the United States. 28Nelson Russell, The British Regime in Michigan and the 01d Northwest, 1760-1796 (Northfield, Minnesota: Carleton Cellege, 1939), 270-271. Hereafter cited as Russell, The British Regime in Michigan. 29 Bald, Michigan, 89-90. 30Timothy Pickering to Rufus King, August 8, 1796, quoted in Russell, The British Regime in Michigan, 270. 13 When Lieutenant Colonel John Hamtramck arrived at Detroit in 1796 with an American occupational force, he found a population of about five hundred, principally French, but also including Englishmen, Scots, Dutchmen, Germans, and Indian and Negro slaves. Such Americans as were present were probably Tory refugees from the East.31 Many of these, including Alexander McKee, Simon Girty, and Matthew Elliot, decided to quit Detroit for Canada. John Askin, a prominent merchant in Michigan, informed Colonel Richard England at Montreal that "in short my opinion is that many People who Intended residing here will move Over, some of them no doubt more from Interest than Attraction. at same time I cannot say since the Arrival of Lt Colonel Hamtramck that he has given any Cause of dislike."32 While Michigan did not come under American jurisdiction until 1796, technically it was a part of the Northwest Territory after 1787. According to the Ordinance of 1787, this territory was eventually to be carved into not less than three or more than five states. As this ordinance served as the basis for Michigan's later territorial govern- ment, it is worth examining in some detail. One Michigan writer ob- serves that the 1787 Act "may most properly be called a constitution; since it vested the whole original legislative authority in other bodies than Congress, and in some particulars was meant to operate as a permanent 31 32John Askin to Colonel Richard England, July 30, 1796, in Milo Quaife, ed., The John Askin Pa ers (2 vols; Detroit: Detroit Library Commission, l93ll, II, 48-58. Hereafter cited as Askin Pagers. Dunbar, Michigan, 173; Bald, Michigan, 95-98. 14 compact between the United States and the people of the Territory."33 The Ordinance of 1787 provided for a governor and three judges to administer the new territory "north and west of the Ohio River," assisted by a secretary. A governor was to be appointed for three years, and was required to reside in the district of his appointment and to hold a freehold estate of one thousand acres. A secretary, whose term was four years, was to possess five hundred acres. His duties included keeping and preserving the acts and the laws passed by the legislature, the public records of the district, and the pro— ceedings of the governor in his executive department. The territorial secretary was also to transmit authentic copies of such acts and pro- ceedings every six months to the secretary of Congress. Three judges were also to be appointed to constitute a territorial court, which was to have common law jurisdiction. These judges were to hold a freehold estate of five hundred acres, and their commissions were to continue in force during good behavior.34 The governor and judges, or a majority of them, were authorized to "adopt and publish in the district, such laws of the original States, criminal and civil, as may be necessary, and best suited to the circum- n35 stances of the district. . . . These officials were to report the 33Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 207. 34The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, I (BostonzTCharles C. Little & James Brown, 1848), 51. Hereafter Cited as U.S. Stats. 35Ibid. * 15 adoption of such laws to Congress, and these laws, unless rejected by Congress, were to be in force until a general assembly was elected for the territory. Afterwards, the legislature was to have the authority to alter such laws as it saw fit. Under the ordinance, the governor retained wide powers during the first territorial stage of government, before a general assembly had been organized. It was his responsibility to appoint such magis- trates and other civil officers in each county and township as were nec- essary to maintain peace and good order. The governor was to make prop- er division of the territory, after Indian title had been extinguished, into counties and townships. He was to make sure that the laws that had been adopted were being enforced in all parts of the territory.36 As soon as the Northwest Territory, or any of its parts desig- nated for future states, contained five thousand free adult male in- habitants, an assembly was to be elected, with one member for each five hundred male inhabitants, until the assembly contained twenty- five members, when the number and proportion of representatives would be determined by that body. Representatives were required to be United States citizens, reside in the district, and hold title to two hundred acres of land. An upper house or council of five members was to be selected by Congress, from ten persons nominated by the representatives. Councillors were to serve five years, while representatives served two. The governor, the legislative council, and the assembly were to constitute 16 the territorial legislature, with the power to "make laws, in all cases, for the good government of the district, not repugnant to the princi- 37 The ples and articles in this ordinance established and declared." governor was to have an absolute veto, however, and the power to “con- vene, prorogue and dissolve" the general assembly when he deemed it expedient. This second stage of territorial government would remain in force until the area numbered sixty thousand inhabitants. At that time it would "be admitted, by its delegation, into the Congress of the United States on an equal footing with the original states in all respects whatever."38 The Ordinance of 1787 guaranteed important rights to the indi- vidual citizen. No person was to be molested because of his mode of worship or religious sentiments. Inhabitants were to be entitled to the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, trial by jury, and judi- cial proceedings according to the course of the common law. All per- sons were to be eligible for bail, unless the offense was capital and the proof against the individual was strong. No man was to be deprived of his liberty or property, except by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land. All fines were to be moderate and there were to be no cruel or unusual punishments inflicted on wrongdoers. No law was to be made to interfere with private contracts or engagements, as 37Ibid. As in the case of laws adopted previous to a terri- torial legislature, any divisions into counties or townships by the governor could later be amended or altered by that legislature. 381m. 17 long as they did not break the law or interfere with the public good.39 "Good faith" was to be observed towards the Indians, according to the terms of the Ordinance, and their land and property was not to be taken without their consent. Their property, rights, and liberty were not to be disturbed except in "just and lawful wars authorized 40 From time to time, laws founded in "justice and human- by Congress." ity" were to be made to prevent injustice to the Indians, and to pre- serve peace and friendship with them. Slavery and involuntary servi- tude were not to be allowed in the territory, except for the punishment of crimes, but fugitives from lawful labor were to be subject to recla - mation.4] The Ordinance specified the procedure for property descent for both resident and non-resident proprietors in the Northwest Territory. The estates of such proprietors, dying intestate, were to descend to and be distributed among their children and the descendants of a de- ceased child in equal parts. If there were no children or other de- scendants, then such property was to be equally divided among the next of kin. There were to be no distinctions between "kindred of the whole and half blood;" all legitimate heirs were to be equally considered. 391bid. 40Ibid. 41Ibid. In spite of this provision, slavery continued to exist in Michigan even after the British evacuation in 1796. In 1782 there were 179 slaves at Detroit. See Harley Gibb, "Slaves in Old Detroit," Michigan History, XVIII, 143-146. Hereafter this collection will be cited as Michigan'History. 18 Estates in the Northwest Territory were to be devised or bequeathed by wills in writing, signed and sealed by the person of "full age" owning such estate, and attested by three witnesses.42 American civil government finally came to Michigan in August of 1796 when Winthrop Sargent, the Northwest territorial secretary, accompanied General Anthony Wayne's army to Detroit. Sargent, acting governor in the absence of Arthur St. Clair, proceeded to establish Wayne County, which included all of the present state of Michigan, as well as parts of northern Ohio and Indiana, and a strip of eastern Wisconsin and Illinois bordering on Lake Michigan.43 The acting gov- ernor experienced no small difficulty in selecting local officials, for Peter Audrain was the only American at Detroit, and the majority of the inhabitants of French descent were unable to read or write. Nevertheless, Sargent observed impartiality in distributing offices between both British and French, while appointing Audrain to four 44 posts. Seven justices of the peace were selected, including James Abbott, James May, and Robert Navarre, who sitting together were to 42Ibid. 43Proclamation by Winthrop Sargent erecting Wayne County, in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections (40 vols.; Lansing: Michi- gan Historical Commission,71877-1929), VIII, 496-497. Hereafter this collection will be cited as MPHC. 44Bald, Detroit's First American Decade (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, l948),’55-57. HereafterTEited as Bald, Detroit. At Detroit Audrain served as clerk of the Court of Quarter Sessions, judge of probate, prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas, and also re- corder. l9 constitute a Court of General Quarter Sessions. A Court of Common Pleas was also established. In general, Sargent found civil matters in Mich- igan in a state of disorder. Land titles were confused and records had been carried off by the British. Sargent promptly drafted a request to Canadian officials for their return.45 Sargent found the French element in Detroit generally more favor- able to American rule than the British; he also distovered that they were relatively unconcerned about active participation in civil govern- ment. He informed Secretary of State Timothy Pickering that the people of French descent in Wayne County, if left to their own devices, would "prefer remaining a Colony of the United States And if they should at all comply with a requisition for Delegate to a general Assembly of the Territory, it would be with a very great reluctance."46 The secretary decided that the great distance from Detroit to the Ohio Country, cou- pled with the probable expense, contributed to French apathy. He looked less favorably on Michigan's British sympathizers. Malden, the British post across the river from Detroit, had been christened "Smugglingburg" by the Americans, in recognition of a prominent pastime of that settle- ment. Furthermore, it had been the practice of British sympathizers in Wayne County to use fear and intimidation to force simple and ignorant 45Ibid. 46Sargent to Timothy Pickering, September 30, 1796, in Clarence Carter, ed., The Territorial Papers of the United States (27 vols.; Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1934-1945), II, 578. Hereafter this series will be cited as Carter, Terr. Papers. 20 farmers to sign lists stating that they were British subjects.47 American settlement at Detroit after 1796 was gradual and often motivated by developing business opportunities. James Henry chose the frontier outpost as the site for both a store and a tannery, and pur- chased several thousand dollars worth of goods in Montreal for the en- terprise. He was later assisted by James Kennedy of Pittsburgh and James Williams of Hagerstown, Maryland. Frederick Bates, a Virginian and one of Michigan's first territorial judges, came to Michigan as an employee of the quartermaster's department in the Northwest Territory. Two American lawyers who came to Detroit were David Powers of New York and Solomon Sibley, who originally came from Massachusetts, but had practiced at Marietta on the Ohio River. Sibley, destined to play an important role in Michigan's territorial development, was not overly impressed with Detroit's appearance when he first arrived. He found it a village "without taste or elegance." A week later he had decided that he would be content to spend the rest of his days in Michigan, provided he was able to find a suitable wife without having to return to Massachusetts.48 Trouble occasionally arose in Michigan because inhabitants of British and French backgrounds could not get along with each other. Pro-British factions in the territory spoke against the new American 475argent to Timothy Pickering, August 14, 1797, Ibid., 622- 624. 48Bald, Detroit, 123-124; Campbell, Political History of Mich- igan, 217-218. 21 rule, while most Frenchmen were willing to accept it. British loyal- ists urged Detroit citizens to refuse to support any new authorities in Michigan and to withhold their services as witnesses and jurors in any court cases. In 1797 the sheriff and the magistrates of Wayne County complained to Congress that because of the influence of British loyalists it was difficult to assemble a jury or to maintain order in Detroit. These petitioners doubted that even the Wayne County militia could be counted on in case of an emergency.49 Differences in customs and language also strained relations between the newly arrived "Yankees" and the older French inhabitants in Michigan. French girls considered most of the American men rough and boorish. Frederick Bates and his friend George Wallace attended the Catholic Church in Detroit one evening, with an eye to viewing the young French ladies. They took the pew of a "Miss Navarre" but moved to another when she arrived. When the young lady looked down at her dress toward the end of the service, she found it stained by tobacco juice which the interlopers had thoughtlessly spat upon the kneeling bench! Solomon Sibley often looked upon the French at Detroit as "exceedingly ignorant and lazy." They experienced occasional priva- tion not because the soil was poor, but because of idle work habits. He was critical of their practice of throwing manure into the river instead of spreading it on their fields. Sibley remained skeptical of French loyalty to the United States, and believed that the habitants 49Petition to Congress from Wayne County, July 12, 1797, in Askin Papers, II, 112-113. 22 and the Indians would unite against the Americans should French tr00ps ever invade the country.50 Political rivalry reared its head in Michigan in 1798, when Governor St. Clair called for elections for a house of representatives for the Northwest Territory, whose population had swelled to over 5,000 free adult males. James May was supported by most of the British resi- dents of Detroit. Solomon Sibley, favored by the Americans and most of the French p0pulation, defeated May by more than fifty votes. May then accused Sibley of influencing the outcome of the election by passing out liquor to the voters, as well as by posting discharged soldiers with clubs at the polls, who threatened to assault anyone voting for May.51 After Sibley had left for Cincinnati to take his legislative seat, word arrived at Detroit that Wayne County was entitled to two more representatives, according to census returns. Once again May ran and was defeated, this time by Francois Joncaire de Chabert and Jacob Visger.52 The Territory of Indiana was created in 1800 when the Northwest Territory was divided. The western boundary of the Northwest Territory was to run due north from Ft. Recovery to the national boundary in Lake Superior, approximating the present Ohio-Indiana line extended north to Canada. The area that eventually became the Michigan territory was thus soBald, Detroit, 140—142. 5'Dunbar, Michigan, 181; Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 219. 52For the roll and results of this election, see MPHC, VIII, 509- 511. 23 split, with its eastern half in the Northwest Territory and its western part included in the Indiana Territory. The Indiana Act provided for a government "in all respects similar" to that set forth in the Ordinance of 1787, with a governor, a secretary, and three territorial judges who would constitute a court. Congress moved the seat of government from Cincinnati to Chillicothe in the east, and named Vincennes on the Wabash River the governmental center for Indiana.53 William Henry Harrison, former secretary of and delegate to Congress from the Northwest Terri- tory, was named the governor of Indiana, as well as superintendent of Indian affairs for that region. John Griffin, one of the three Indiana territorial judges, was later to accept a similar position in Michigan.54 The town of Detroit was incorporated by the Chillicothe govern- ment in 1802 and placed under a board of trustees. John Askin wrote to Robert Hamilton, a Canadian merchant in Queenston that "this place is incorporated. . . . The legislature honored me so far as to make me the first of five trustees who they named & to whom they gave great au— thority."55 He was joined by John Dodemead, Charles Girardin, James Henry, and Joseph Campau, all well-known citizens of Detroit. At their first meeting, the trustees discussed the problem of fire protection. 53U.S. Stats., 11, 108. 54Beveriy Bond, Jr., The Civilization of the Old Northwest (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1934),’151. Hereafter cited as Bond, The Old Northwest. 55John Askin to Robert Hamilton, April 8, 1802, in Askin Papers, 11, 372-374. 24 1787 - 1800 1800 - 1803 1803 - 1805 1805 -1818 1818 - 1834 1834 - 1836 1‘ 11111 ~ 1 1 1 l“ 'le l 1 l ‘ ' i1 ‘ ‘ .1 ‘il ' i ‘1‘ ‘ I“ vliiiilil 1 Figure 1. Areal Development Source: Earl Senniger, Jr. , Atlas of Michigan (Flint, Michigan: Flint Geographical Press, 1970) 84. 25 Defective chimneys were ordered repaired, and every householder was in- structed to place a barrel filled with water close to his home. Towns- men were given specific tasks in case of fire emergency, and the first 55 Other organized fire department was created in February of l802. early concerns of the trustees included the regulation of horse-racing in the streets of Detroit, and the price and weight of loaves of bread, which was baked by public bakeries in large ovens.57 By an enabling act passed by Congress in April of l802 permit- ting the people of Ohio to draw up a constitution and apply for admis- sion to the Union, Detroit and eastern Michigan were annexed to Indiana Territory.58 The people of Wayne County were not consulted concerning this decision, and there were Federalist charges that the Republicans in Congress had separated Wayne County from the new state of Ohio so that the Federalist majority in the county would be excluded from the 59 Ohio constitutional convention. In January of 1803, Governor Harrison issued a proclamation establishing Wayne County, Indiana, including in it all of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, a large part of the upper one, and small sections of Illinois and Wisconsin.60 56Farmer, Historygof Detroit, l33; Catlin, Detroit, 108-109. Evidently Detroit's early attempts at town government were less than successful. Every month people complained about the non-observance of the fire ordinance, and even the trustees of the town were fined for failing to uphold the law. Catlin, Detroit, 108-l09. 57Catlin, Detroit, 108-109. .58 Annals of Congress, Seventh Congress, First Session, 1348-1351. 590unbar, Michigan, 182-183; Bond, The Old Northwest, 120. 60For a copy of Harrison's proclamation, see MPHC, VIII, 540-542. 26 WAYNE C OUNTY, INDIANA i Figure 2. Michigan Counties, 1803 Source: Earl Senniger, Jr., Atlas of Michigan (Flint, Michigan: Flint Geographical Press, 1970), 83. ~ 27 The decision to include Wayne County within the Indiana Terri- tory was not popular in Detroit. As part of the Northwest Territory, Michigan had sent representatives to a general assembly as early as 1798. Indiana was still in the first stage of territorial government, and Michigan was forced to give up her representatives and submit again to the rule of the governor and judges. Vincennes was even more distant than Chillicothe, and the citizens of Detroit had little reason to hope that a government six hundred miles away would be eager to hear or to act on their problems. A memorial to Congress by Detroit inhabitants in March of 1803 specified many of Michigan's complaints regarding its recent transfer to Indiana Territory, and asked that a new and independent territory be created in Michigan. Commercial problems had arisen in Detroit, necessitating their removal to the courts. Unfortunately, only two sessions of the circuit court had been held at Detroit in six years. Some cases had been pending for four years, and were still awaiting settlement. If the judges of the Northwest Territory had been reluctant to journey to Michigan, because of the great distance and the hazards of the Indian Country, the Indiana judges were even more so. Michigan's remoteness placed its citizens "in a situation truly Critical and alarm- ing, and in many respects, but a little preferable to a state of nature."61 These petitioners strongly maintained that an independent Mich- igan territory could have obvious beneficial effects for both Michigan 61Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of Detroit, March 20, 1803, in Carter, Terr. Papers, VII, 99-106e»~ ”' 28 and the United States. A separate territory would be a spur to new settlement, which would improve communication with the Ohio Valley. The federal government would be relieved of the considerable expense of supporting troops and garrisons in Michigan. The petitioners ex- pressed the hope that the government in Washington would not be indif- ferent to the lucrative trade and corrmerce of the Great Lakes region, but "by its countenance and protection afford a fair opportunity to the enterprising Citizen of Capital to enter into and share an equal partic- ipation, in the Only Trade of the Country, at present wholly engrossed by foreigners."62 Greater revenue could be garnered from dutiable articles of commerce arriving in Michigan if there were local govern- mental supervision. Michigan citizens had little use for a federal government that failed to consider their local problems. Thus abandoned, such a citizen would "rather embrace the earliest possible opportunity to quit a country, wherein he is not certain of even protection for his Person, much less for his property."63 Congress was not unmindful of events and circumstances in Mich- igan. A Congressional committee, responding to a Michigan memorial in 1803, reported that the petitioners were bounded on one side by the British Province of Canada and encompassed on the other by Indian tribes. This committee decided that Michigan was entitled to a separate territor- ial government because its remote situation prevented its citizens from 29 receiving fair treatment in the courts and adequate representation in 64 the government at Vincennes. In 1803 the Senate passed a bill creat- ing Michigan Territory, but it was defeated in the House.65 Despite Congressional setbacks, Michigan residents continued to impress upon Washington both the need and the desirability of a new and independent territory. A petition forwarded in September of 1803 pointed out that if Michigan residents could possibly maintain a regular intercourse with Indiana, the need for a separate territory might justly be questioned. Compared to the rest of the country, however, Michigan was obviously remote and therefore needed its own territorial government to manage its own affairs.66 A memorial to Congress in 1804 by the "Democratic Republicans of Wayne County," recounted the familiar criticisms of governmental neglect by Indiana Territory officials and-the lack of an adequate and responsible court system. There was a more urgent need, however, for a separate Michigan territory. Such an erection would lessen the ties of British loyalty and help to dispel some of the "anti—republican notions" which certain local citizens had imbibed. These citizens had transferred their allegiance from France to England to the United States, and had ended up with no attachment to any of these countries. 64Annals of Congress, Eighth Congress, First Session, 24-30. 551010., 78, 212, 1042. 66Petition to Congress by Inhabitants of Detroit, September 1, 1803, in Carter, Terr. Papers, VII, 118. 30 These petitioners hoped that a regular and moderate exertion of author- ity, blended with justice, would perhaps gain the allegiance of these people and make them a faithful body of "Citizen-soldiers" for the pro- tection of the frontier.67 Michigan became a separate territory in June of 1805. The southern boundary was a line drawn eastward from the southerly bend of Lake Michigan, and a line through the middle of Lake Michigan to its northern extremity and then due north to the northern boundary of the United States was the western boundary. Only a small portion of the Upper Peninsula was included. The Congressional act establishing Mich- igan Territory provided for a government similar to the one established for the Indiana and Northwest territories. Officers in Michigan were to "exercise the same powers" and to "perform the same duties," as well as receive the same compensations as officers in Indiana Terri- tory. Michigan, like Indiana before it, was to "adopt" laws. Any suits or legal proceedings pending by the end of June, 1805, in the area becoming Michigan Territory were to be proceeded in to judgments as if the act had not been passed. Detroit was to be the seat of government.68 In March of 1805 the Senate confirmed President Jefferson's nomination of William Hull to be governor of Michigan for a three-year 67Petition to Congress by Democratic Republicans of Wayne County, December 6, 1804, Ibid., 240-242. 68U.S.‘Stats., II, 309. See also William Jenks, "The Creation of the Territory of Michigan," Michigan History, II, 270-288;“ 31 term. In addition, the Senate consented to the appointments of Stanley Griswold of New Hampshire as secretary, and Augustus B. Woodward of Washington, Frederick Bates of Michigan, and Samuel Huntington of Ohio as territorial judges. When Huntington declined the office, John Grif- fin of Indiana Territory replaced him. James Witherell of Vermont re- placed Bates in November of 1806, when Bates resigned to accept a gov- ernmental appointment in Missouri.69 Michigan's first governor was born in 1753 in Derby, Connecti- cut. Hull graduated from Yale College at the age of nineteen, studied law, and became a member of the bar in 1775. When a company was raised at Derby for the Revolutionary War, Hull was selected as captain. Dur- ing the war he took part in the battles of White Plains, Trenton, Princeton, Saratoga, Monmouth, and Stony Point, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel at war's end. His daughter, Mrs. Maria Campbell, later wrote of her father's Revolutionary experiences, and pointed out that he was stationed in the most exposed and advanced positions and suffered fatigue, hardships, and dangers. "So severe was the duty," she noted, ". . .that half of his detachment was exchanged every 70 Hull's record was such that he won the commendation of 71 fortnight." both General Washington and Congress for gallantry and bravery. 69Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 9-12, 46, 197. 70Maria Campbell, Revolutionary Services and Civil Life of General William Hull (New York: D. Appleton 8 Co., 1847), 197. Here- after cited as Campbell, Hull. This volume, prepared from Hull's man- uscripts, is obviously sympathetic to the General, and in places is a defense of his actions rather than an objective account of his life. 7'Bond, The Old Northwest, 210; Bald, Michigan, 106. 32 After the war, Hull settled in Newton, Massachusetts, and began to practice law. In 1781 he married Sarah Fuller of Newton, by whom he had seven daughters and one son. He soon became a prominent man in his new home. In 1787 he served on a committee to prepare a reply to in- surgents in the celebrated Shays' Rebellion, and drafted the instruc- tions for Newton's representative in Congress. Hull believed that the virtue of the higher classes had preserved the independence of the country. When insurgents defied the federal government, then military force became the "only alternative." Hull's class-consciousness and his eastern outlook were not the most promising credentials for the future governor of a western territory. At the same time, however, he believed that government was instituted for the "benefit and happi- ness of the people."72 Hull occupied several important positions while a Massachusetts resident. In 1788 he was appointed a justice of the peace, and later became a justice of the common pleas, and a justice of the peace and of the quorum. During this time, he retained ties with the state mil- itia, serving first as brigadier and then as major general after 1797. He was both a founder and charter member of the Massachusetts branch of the Society of Cincinnati, and a member of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Boston. In 1792 he sought appointment as post- master of Boston, but was unsuccessful. He then went to Philadelphia 72Campbell, Hull, 227-232; William Jenks, "Sketch of the Life of William Hull," MPHC, XL, 25. Hereafter cited as Jenks, "Hull," MPHC, XL. Besides replying to insurgents in Shays' Rebellion, Hull played an active part in their defeat, serving as an aide to Governor Linco n. 33 as representative of the Massachusetts Officers of the Revolutionary War, and attempted to induce Congress to make further compensations to the soldiers and officers of that war. Again, he was unsuccessful. The following year Alexander Hamilton appointed Hull as an American agent to visit Canada to obtain supplies for the Indians who were to meet with U.S. commissioners the following summer at Sandusky for the purpose of effecting a treaty. Hull failed to obtain any Canadian sup- plies, but did gain the promise of Governor Simcoe at Niagara that the British would not prevent American transportation of provisions across the Great Lakes. After a trip to Europe in 1795, where he renewed his friendship with Lafayette, Hull returned to Massachusetts and his law practice. In 1802 he was elected a state senator, and continued in that post until 1805.73 When the question of the creation of a new territory in Michi- gan arose, President Jefferson recognized Hull as a man politically sympathetic to his own views, and with a creditable civil and military record. Hull was fifty-two years old when he accepted the appointment as Michigan's first governor. He had built a solid reputation and standing in Massachusetts, but had suffered financial setbacks in land 74 speculation in Ohio and Mississippi. The governor's annual salary 730enks, "Hull," MPHC, XL, 26; Campbell, Hull, 240-242. 74Jenks, I'Hull," MPHC, XL, 27-30. Hull had invested in the famous "Yazoo lands" in Mississippi in 1796, and also in the Connecti- cut Reserve in Ohio. His investment in the latter was a total loss as a result of incorrect surveys. 34 of two thousand dollars could not have served as a great inducement to give up the security of the East for the Michigan frontier. Hull's decision to accept the governorship led to grief and misfortune instead of the glory and recognition he sought. Frederick Bates, one of the three territorial judges, was born in Belmont, Virginia in 1777. His father, a Quaker and a merchant, raised a large family, and although he was unable to give his sons a college education, they all received the basic skills and were encour- aged to study and to work. While a youth of seventeen, Frederick be- came county clerk of Goochland County. In that office he gained famil- iarity with court procedure and spent his spare time studying for the bar.75 Bates was one of the few territorial officials to have a first- hand knowledge of Michigan before his appointment. As an employee of the Quartermaster Department of the United States Army, he was based at Detroit but often visited other Michigan outposts. The young Vir- ginian, a friend of Jefferson and a Republican, found it expedient to support the Federalists while in Michigan. At Detroit he informed his brother Richard that "nothing democratic will go down with us. A young fellow in this Country whose principles are democratic could 75Edward Bates, "Sketch of Frederick Bates," MPHC, VIII, 563- 565. Hereafter cited as Bates, "Bates," MPHC. VIII. Edward Bates was the younger brother of Frederick, later to serve-as attorney-gen- eral under Lincoln. 35 scarcely find employment as a Shoe black."76 By 1800 Jefferson was President, and the young man could openly acknowledge his true loyal- ties. He went into business for himself as a storekeeper in Detroit in 1802, still studying law in his spare time. Bates became the post- master at Detroit in 1803, and the receiver of the land office at that outpost in 1804.77 Friendships between the Bates family and Jefferson and Madison undoubtedly helped young Frederick secure the judgeship. Methodical and exact in business, Bates was a constant and observant reader, well versed in the English classics, aware of French literature, and a good historian. His brother Edward observed that while Frederick was no public speaker, his powers of conversation were "somewhat remarkable-- fluent always, sometimes brilliant, and generally, at once, attractive and instructive."78 Bates remained a man of retiring habits and few but strong friendships. At Detroit he was on close terms with Hull, who had shown him courtesy and kindness at the outset of his public It was Michigan's loss when Bates accepted a territorial judgeship at St. Louis in 1806.79 76Frederick Bates to Richard Bates, December 24, 1799, quoted in Bald, Detroit, 163. "I cannot think your politics are radically changed," Richard responded, "but only dissembled for your own convenience while among those miscreants of Detroit, those instruments M000 .9 “”1. 0. L . t ‘ - - . ------ . m . Themes. 3 0a. 1.11 Noumea . n In..." Inch (0 rod Hull: ion. I- ' ,9”... 0' Done-7'16 A»... 1012 " TM..." a. n no ‘ Gen-coo o! n. ‘; cum , n ' ”n“ N E w V O . Dooobom (Che...) ‘ - mvod. cure-t g C 19 Av... m: ’ i. ' #- " ‘ . —_ — _ ”mun-n .‘ 5 [no I... —— —— .. _ . _ M “and Item I II M-on- ‘3’ a... 10 w, m: 8 . ' “.0 " In 0‘ ’ Notch” W m. f ’0' H Show ”,0". "u I VIRGINIA Figure 4. War of 1812, Northwest Territory Source: Major James Ripley Jacobo, USA, Rot. , and Glen Tucker, 1119 War of 1812 (New York: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1969), 49. 164 By early August Hull had apparently abandoned any plans for an attack on Fort Malden. Van Horne's defeat had destroyed chances for supply from the south, and had demonstrated the unreliability of the militia. Without supporting artillery, a frontal attack on the British fort would be impossible. Hull had learned that no attack would be made against the British at Niagara, and that General Brock was pro- ceeding westward with reinforcements for Malden. Perhaps most dis- tressing was the news that Fort Michilimackinac had fallen. Hull informed Eustis that he had "every reason to expect, in a very short time, a large body of Savages from the north, whose operations will "'5 He decided to recross the river to be directed against this Army. Detroit to attempt to reopen his supply lines. While Hull fortified his position at Detroit, he sent Lieuten- ant Colonel Miller south with a force of over six hundred men to open the supply route to Ohio. A British force of about one hundred and fifty regulars and two hundred and fifty Indians waited in ambush for Miller's troops at Monguagon, fourteen miles south of Detroit. This time the American force stood their ground. The enemy was driven back, with over one hundred killed and wounded. Miller's force suffered over eighty casualties. Instead of proceeding south to the River Raisin, where Captain Henry Brush and a small detachment waited with supplies, Miller encamped and sent a runner to Detroit for assis- tance. Hull finally decided to recall Miller's force to Detroit. He had made two unsuccessful attempts to open a passage to the south, '5Hu11 to Eustis, August 4, 1812, in MPHC, XL, 433-435. 165 and his fears of complete encirclement continued to grow. These fears were increased with General Brock's arrival at Malden in the middle of August.16 Hull made a final attempt to reach the needed supplies at the River Raisin. He ordered Cass and McArthur to lead a party of about four hundred men south by a back trail. Hull evidently believed that the British would not attack Detroit, and that the urgent need for pro- visions justified the absence of so large a force from the American post. It is also probable that he suspected Cass and McArthur of leading a movement to depose him, and was glad to see them gone from Detroit. Cass later admitted to Eustis that "we . . . determined in the last resort to incur the responsibility of divesting the General [Hull] of his command. This plan was eventually prevented by two of the Commanding officers of regiments being ordered upon detachment."17 On August 15 General Brock demanded that Hull surrender De- troit. He told the American commander that he did not wish to join in a "war of extermination," but warned that the hundreds of Indians who had swelled the ranks of his army would be beyond his control the moment the battle began.18 In spite of this threat, Hull's answer was firm and direct. "I have no other reply to make," he told Brock. "than to inform you, that I am prepared to meet any force, which may 16Coles, The War of 1812, 50-51; Gilpin, The War of 1812, 99- 104. 17Cass to Eustis, September 10, 1812, in MPHC, XL, 477-485. 18Brock to Hull, August 15, 1812, Ibid., 451. 166 MICHIC’AN /' / ---- ( ,/ fi‘fii‘m“ . ’ . '1“ W1 11 PEER, CANA’DA i Mars/try New ”,3” ’Ti-tE meanest: at T“ A" ' e ”Dame [’1' RIVER, ”BORDER, BETWEEN THE 1 11.5. A. & CANADA I a ’Fort maldm 01' ‘ ‘7' . u” Shipyard ‘ 56¢,“ 0’ ¢°f\ f," 2" Ed; Mmfbufg ‘ ventral/{12,115 and, ' ‘3: ",7 gamumec/ts azzrzfzwgru " ,I,. 1 "23; june #1143. 1612. 1.1.. . t ‘1: 6: a“) 5,- .- rigging, \J’vc/crwzu/ fin/7750715 Campaign . . f~ Sept, -0(£ 1875 ,3 it, a}; Figure 5. War of 1812, Detroit Area Source: Harrison Bird, War For The West, 1790—1813 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), 118. 167 be at your disposal, and any consequences, which may result, from any exertion of it, you may think proper to make.“19 That same evening the British guns opened fire across the Detroit River, and were answered by the American batteries. This artil- lery duel quickly emptied Detroit of civilians, with many taking shelter in the fort while others hid in a large ravine to the west of the stockade. Judge Woodward had just arisen from his bed when a shot came through the room, struck the pillow and the bed, and drove them right into the fireplace. The spent ball than rolled harmlessly out upon the floor.20 The firing continued into the night. By the next morning Hull had decided to surrender Detroit. In the early dawn Brock's forces advanced on the American fort. He commanded over three hundred regulars, four hundred militia, and about six hundred Indians. Inside Detroit there were about a thousand men fit for duty, besides the four hundred still absent with McArthur and Cass. Hull also possessed the advantage of a fortified position with numerous cannon. When the British artillery began to bombard the fort, Hull's cannon were strangely silent. He ordered the American gunners to leave their posts and sent an officer to General Brock under a flag of truce to request a cessation of hostilities.21 In surrendering Detroit, Hull gave up over two thousand fight- ing men to the enemy. The articles of capitulation also included the 19H011 to Brock, August 15, 1812, Ibid., 452. 20Farmer, History of Detroit, 276; Woodford, nggflggg; 109- 2IHamil, The War of 1812, 19-20; Horsman, The War of 1812, 40-41. 168 force under McArthur and Cass, and the men under Brush at the River Raisin. Brush ignored the order to surrender and withdrew his men safely to Ohio. Cass and McArthur returned to Detroit under orders, and bitterly instructed their men to stack their arms. Both officers and enlisted men were critical of Hull's action and accused him of cowardice.22 Hull, the other officers of the regular army, and all enlisted regulars were sent to Quebec as prisoners of war. The offi- cers and men of the Michigan and Ohio militias were allowed to return home on parole, with the promise that they would not serve in the war until exchanged. Leaving Colonel Procter in command at Detroit, General Brock returned to Niagara.23 A court-martial demanded by General Hull was finally convened in January of 1814. He was charged with treason, cowardice, neglect of duty, and unofficer-like conduct. His former officers were the chief witnesses against him. Cass and McArthur, now generals, were 22Milo Milton Quaife, ed., War on the Detroit, the Chronicles of Thomas Vercheres de Boucherville and the Capitulation by an Ohio volunteer (Chicago: The LakeSide’Pressi'l940), 303-309. Hereafter cited as Quaife, ed., War on the Detroit. Cass and McArthur had returned to within several miles of Detroit the day before the capitu- lation. Hamil notes that "already deeply involved in a plot to sup- plant their incompetent commander, they neither went to his support nor informed him of their whereabouts. However justified may have been their lack of confidence in Hull, their conduct helped to bring about the result they feared." Hamil, The War of 1812, 20. 23Gi1pin, The War of 1812, 117-120. Brock was evidently sur- prised in his easy conquest of Detroit. He wrote George Prevost on August 16 that 2,500 troops had surrendered, and about twenty-five pieces of ordnance had been taken without one British loss. "I had not more than 700 troops including Militia, and about 400 Indians to accomplish this service," he told Prevost; "when I detail my good fortune, Your Excellency will be astonished." Brock to Prevost, August 16, 1812, in MPHC, XV, 132. 169 among the most hostile. General Henry Dearborn served as president of the court.24 The prosecution charged Hull with treason for surrendering military papers aboard the Cayauga to the British, for retreating from Canada, and for surrendering Detroit. Hull pointed out that if the Secretary of War had informed him of the outbreak of war--an event already known to the British-~the ship with military documents would never have been sent. In any event, there were no papers on board that could possibly inform the British that Americans contemplated or had undertaken war with England. “If this were so," he asked the court, "how is it to be accounted for that the Enemy should have assailed her in a hostile manner before she was captured?"25 The court could find little evidence to support a charge of treason in this affair, or in Hull's actions in Canada and Detroit, and eventually dismissed it. Charges of cowardice, neglect of duty, and unofficer-like con- duct were levied against Hull in connection with his retreat from Canada and the surrender of Detroit. He stated that a withdrawal from Canada was necessary because of a lack of artillery, the advance of British reinforcements from Niagara, and the Indian threat from the north after the fall of Michilimackinac. "My further intention was to concentrate my forces at Detroit," he added, "that I might from thence open & secure my communications with the State of Ohio. 24 igan, 306. 25The Defence of General Hull, in MPHC. XL. 572. Dunbar, Michigan, 212; Campbell, Political History of Mich- 170 UPC" Which. in my JUdgment the salvation of the Army depended."26 Perhaps it is as easy to condemn Hull for bad judgment as it is for cowardice in the Malden affair. He contended that an impor- tant reason for moving against the British post was to quiet dissen- sion among his troops and to maintain confidence in his leadership. He failed to achieve either goal by retreating from Canada without taking offensive action. He might have fared better had he initially resisted the pressures of his subordinates and remained in a defensive position at Detroit. There is little support for his further conten- tion that he undertook the Malden expedition only with the understand- ing that additional land and sea forces would soon be available to him. In the same order from Eustis advising him to exercise his own judgment in seizing the British stronghold, the Secretary cautioned that "it is also proper to inform you that an adequate force cannot soon be relied on for the Reduction of the Enemies forces below you."27 The strongest evidence of Hull's cowardice and misconduct remained the surrender of Detroit. He again pointed out that a lack of supplies, a superior opposing force, and a grave mistrust of the ability of his own troops contributed to the decision to surrender. It is evident that a major reason for Hull's decision was his fear of Indian depredations. Had his army been defeated in battle and Detroit overrun by the enemy, the Indians would have gone on a bloody rampage. "The country would have been deluged with the blood of its Inhabitants," 261bid., 617. 27 Eustis to Hull, June 24, 1812, Ibid., 397. 171 he told the court; "neither women nor children would have been spared."28 Hull had no assurance that the Indians would remain pacific even after a peaceful surrender. His decision to capitulate, made without con- sulting his subordinate officers, was a very personal decision, and the final responsibility must rest with him. Hull was guilty of being afraid, not for his personal safety, but for the safety of Michigan. It cannot be said that Hull's court-martial was conducted in an open and impartial manner. Having lost many of his private papers aboard the Cayauga, he was refused permission to examine the files of the War Department in order to copy documents needed for his defense. A change in procedure at the trial allowed the witnesses to be examined in the presence of each other, and their opinions admitted as evidence, even though they were interested in the outcome of the trial. It was also questionable that Dearborn, whose actions at Niagara freed Brock for an attack on Detroit, Should sit as presiding judge. A student of Hull's court-martial has concluded that he was "made the scape-goat for inefficiency everywhere . . . the government neglected to throw about him the safeguards which are granted the meanest criminal."29 In March of 1814 the court-martial at Albany delivered its verdict. Hull was acquitted of treason, but convicted on the other three charges. The court imposed the sentence of death, but recom- mended that the President show mercy to the general. In April 28The Defence of General Hull, Ibid.. 638- 29John Van Deusen, "Court-Martial of Gen. William Hull," Michi an Histor , XII, 668-694. Hereafter cited as Van Deusen, "Hull," Michigan History, XII. 172 President James Madison approved the finding of the court, but remitted the execution of its sentence. Hull was dishonorably discharged from the army.30 Michigan came under British control with the defeat of Hull and the surrender of Detroit. The day of the capitulation, General Brock proclaimed that present territorial laws would continue in force until further notice or "so long as the peace and safety of the said 3] Religious freedom was to be continued. Territory will admit thereof." Any arms in the hands of the militia or of private citizens were to be delivered to the British. With Brock's return to Canada, Colonel Henry Procter assumed the office of governor of Michigan. He reaffirmed Brock's order that American laws would continue in force in Michigan. Civil officers remaining in the territory were to continue in their respective offices. Courts of justice were to be held as usual.32 New laws in Michigan did not have to be adopted from the laws of any American states, and a majority was not necessary to adopt new laws when any territorial officers were absent. The expenses of the civil administration were to be "defrayed quarterly, by the proper Officer in the military dapartment paying the lawful amount thereof to the civil treasurer."33 30Ibid., 692. 3IProclamation by Major-General Isaac Brock, In Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 195, R659, NA. 32No session of the Supreme Court in Michigan was held during the period of British occupation. Blume, Transactions, I, 221. 33Regulation of the Civil Government of the Territory of Mich- igan, in Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 200, R659, NA. 173 Duties, customs, and revenues accruing according to the laws of the United States were to be paid to the military department. Internal duties and revenues were to be paid to treasurers as prescribed by law. Procter also assumed control over the offices of postmaster, register and receiver of the land office, and the superintendent of Indian affairs.34 Procter offered the position of secretary of the territory to Judge Woodward, the only important American official remaining in Michigan. Unsure of the constitutionality of such an appointment under American law, he declined any official position but decided to stay in Michigan and serve as an intermediary between the British and the Americans until he could receive instructions from Washington. Some of the justices of the peace also decided to remain with him.35 Woodward defended his decision to remain in Michigan in a letter to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin in September of 1812. "It was thought respectful and conciliatory that an American citizen should, in present circumstances, be selected for the purpoose," he told Gallatin, "and particularly one of the officers of the late government."36 Of these, he was the only one left. By staying, he hoped to maintain a slim American hold on the territory, protect American claims, and continue territorial laws if possible. 34Ibid. 35Gilpin, The Territory of Michigan, 59-60; Woodford, Woodward, llO-lll. 36Woodward to Albert Gallatin, September 7, 1812, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 174 In addition, he believed that he could intercede for his countrymen and prevent the pillage of their properties by the Indians.37 While awaiting an official reply from Washington concerning his activities under the British-~a reply he never received--Woodward provided valuable service to the inhabitants of Michigan. He took the lead in raising money to ransom unfortunate captives taken by the Indians, destined for torture or death, who were frequently paraded through the streets of Detroit. He provided necessities for sick prisoners unable to be moved from Fort Malden. He supplied food and shelter for those dispossessed outside of Detroit, who flocked to him for assistance. In a very real sense, Woodward served as a buffer between the citizenry and the military.38 There were those who interpreted Woodward's actions in Mich- igan during the British occupation as traitorous. "I see in the public newspapers, that Judge Woodward is said to have accepted an office under a foreign government . . ." Stanley Griswold wrote to Secretary of State James Monroe; "if this be correct information, I presume our government will consider it sufficient cause for vacating "39 In November of 1812, his office as a Judge of that Territory. George Poindexter of Mississippi introduced a resolution in Congress to repeal the act establishing Michigan Territory. He was upset 37Ibid. 38Noodford, Woodward, 112-113. 39Stanley Griswold to James Monroe, November 2, 1812, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 416-417. Griswold announced his availabil- ity to replace Woodward Should that judge be removed. 175 that the Michigan officials continued to draw their salaries, even though one of them was a prisoner of the British and the other had accepted a commission under British authority. Poindexter called for a reorganization of the Michigan government. He wanted to eliminate the present territorial officers and to appoint others made of "more f."40 No action was taken on the resolution. sterling stuf It is doubtful that Woodward can be truly accused of collabor- ating with the enemy during the War of 1812. He accepted no official position under British authority and received no remuneration from the crown. He performed no official acts under the British and did not conduct a single session of court. His stay in Michigan was vol- untary, to offer what assistance he could to the people of the terri- tory. By January of 1813, Woodward had heard nothing from Washington, and he evidently felt that the absence of approval might signify dis- approval. As he prepared to leave the territory, he received a memorial from Detroit citizens asking him to stay. These citizens called him the "rock of our safety" and implored him to reconsider his decision to leave.41 Woodward was impressed by this show of support and decided to stay. In an address to Detroit residents early in 1813, he promised to stand by them, even though they might be 40 195-196. Annals of Congress, Twelfth Congress, Second Session, XXV, 41Address of the Citizens of Detroit to A. B. Woodward, January 6, 1813, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 176 "abandoned by all."42 In the fall of 1812, William Henry Harrison was appointed to take command of a new Northwestern army, with orders to protect the western frontier, retake Detroit, and then move against Upper Canada. He began assembling men and equipment in Ohio for a move against the British at Detroit. Harrison sent General James Winchester with a force of over twelve hundred men to the Rapids of the Miami, to begin construction of sleds for an attack on Malden. Harrison promised to send Winchester reinforcements from Ohio, which would assist him in his advance on Detroit.43 Winchester's decision to engage the enemy without reinforce- ments proved tragic. On the Miami he received pleas for help from residents at Frenchtown on the River Raisin south of Detroit. Win- chester sent a force of nearly seven hundred men to Frenchtown, which drove off a small Britich detachment and secured the settlement. Win- chester later arrived with over two hundred reinforcements. Several days later General Procter crossed the Detroit River on the ice with nearly six hundred regulars and militia and several hundred Indians. He surprised Winchester's army, defeated it, and compelled the entire force to surrender. He then withdrew to Malden with over five hundred American prisoners. The American wounded were left at the River Raisin.44 42A. B. Woodward to Certain Citizens of Detroit, January 6, 1812, in Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 218—220, R659, NA. 43Hami1, The War of 1812, 23-24; Coles, The War of 1812, 113-114. 44Horsman, The War of 1812, 84-85; Gilpin, The War of 1812, 163- 168. 177 Procter's abandonment of American prisoners at the River Raisin produced one of the most shameful episodes in the War of 1812. Over eighty prisoners were left in the hands of some fifty Indians and several interpreters. The Indians became drunk, massacred many of the Americans, and took the rest to distant camps to be held for ransom, tortured, or killed. Robert Richardson, a member of Procter's force at the River Raisin, told John Askin that the prisoners were left "without any proper protection and were the same evening murdered by the Indians . . . we have not heard the last of this shameful transaction."45 The River Raisin Massacre created new tensions between Procter and many Michigan residents. Openly critical of his actions in this affair, they feared that Indian attacks would next be directed against Detroit. Procter in turn suspected that there were movements in De- troit toward organized resistance against the British because of the massacre. He decided to banish a number of potential troublemakers from the territory. He also admitted to Major-General Roger Sheaffe at Fort George that after these dissidents had been removed, it was his intention to "bring over as many of the Inhabitants as I can to take the oath of Allegiance to His Majesty, 8 if I find they can be n46 trusted, Arm them in Defence of the Territory. Upset over this latest British move, Detroit citizens asked 45Robert Richardson to John Askin, February 7, 1813, in Askin Papers, II, 750. 46 242-243. Procter to Roger Sheaffe, February 4, 1813, in MPHC, XV, 178 Woodward to speak to Procter on their behalf. They asked him to present the British officer with a series of resolutions that stated that he had violated the August 16 capitulation.47 Woodward informed Procter that it was unlawful either to banish Michigan citizens or to compel them to take an oath of allegiance to England. He pointed out that in a state of open and declared war a subject or citizen of one party could not transfer his allegiance to another party without incurring the penalties of treason. "The law of nations does not justify either coercion upon any man to bear arms against his country," he told Procter; "a man of spirit ought rather die ten thousand "48 Procter's reaction to this latest defiance of British deaths. authority was to declare martial law. Difficulties between Woodward and Procter were increased because of the case of Whitmore Knaggs. Knaggs, formerly a member of Hull's forces, had left Michigan for Pennsylvania after Detroit's capitulation, but had found little assistance in the East. Returning to the territory, it was his misfortune to arrive at Frenchtown in time to witness Winchester's defeat by Procter. After the battle, Knaggs was apprehended by the British, accused of being a member of Winchester's army, and made a prisoner of war.49 47Resolutions of the Citizens as to the Orders of Gen. Proc- ter, Ibid., XXXVI, 276-280. 48Woodward to Procter, February 10, 1813, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 49$tatement of Whitmore Knaggs, Unaddressed, May 24, 1813, in MPHC, XV, 302-304. 179 Woodward labored unsuccessfully to secure Knaggs's release from a British jail. Procter accused Knaggs of violating his parole and of being under arms. Woodward pointed out that Knaggs had only returned to visit his family and had carried arms to defend himself from Indians. The chief justice admitted that Knaggs was an "ignorant and a turbulent man"--he had once assaulted Woodward-~but declared that in this instance he was not to blame. Even General Winchester had filed an affidavit stating that he was not a member of his force.50 Procter was not impressed and refused to release his prisoner. By the beginning of 1813, Woodward had decided to leave Michigan. An important reason for this decision was Procter's growing animosity towards the chief justice. The British officer considered Woodward an "artfull designing, 8 Ambitious Man," and told his superiors at Fort George that the chief justice had ingratiated himself with his own government and had remained in the territory merely to court his own popularity. Procter also admitted that he no longer could either get along with Woodward or control his actions in Michigan. February of 1813, Woodward was granted a pass to leave the territory. He was the last territorial judge to depart from Michigan. At Albany Woodward reflected on his recent service in Mich- igan. He reminded Monroe that he had held no official position under 50Woodward to Procter, January 29, 1813, in Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 243-246, R659, NA. See also the Affidavit of General Winchester, 1812, in MPHC, XV, 307. 5'Procter to Roger Sheaffe, February 4, 1813. in “BEE; XV: 242-243. -411 180 the British and had accepted no financial rewards. He was critical of Winchester's military activities in Michigan, labeling his advance to the River Raisin as "a measure as erroneous and indiscreet, in substance; as it was weak, and defective, in execution."52 He also doubted that everyone would either understand or accept his activities in Michigan. "To expect that in the singular, perhaps unexampled situation in which I was placed, unaided alone," he wrote, "the coun- sel of my own government cut off, the course which I have pursued would meet with the eniire, or at the least, the immediate approba- tion of every mind, might be to expect too much."53 By September of 1813 the tide of war was turning in favor of the Americans. The destruction of the British fleet by Lieutenant Oliver Perry in the battle of Lake Erie gave the United States control of the upper lakes. Faced with a severed supply line, Procter decided to abandon Fort Malden. He burned the public buildings at that post, as well as at Detroit, and destroyed his surplus supplies. Both British and Indian forces began a retreat towards Lake St. Clair and the Thames River. General Harrison's force, ferried across the lake by Perry, pursued the British up the Thames. In early October the Americans engaged and defeated the British in the battle of the Thames.54 52Woodward to James Monroe, March 22, 1813, in Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 234-237, R659, NA. 53'Ibid. 54Gilpin, The Territory of Michigan, 62-63; Coles, The War of l 12, 129-135. 181 Michigan again came under American control with the arrival of McArthur's force at Detroit in late September. General Harrison proclaimed that the civil government of Michigan should be reestab- lished and that the former officers should renew the exercise of their authority. All British appointments and commissions were declared at an end, and all citizens regained their rights and privileges. The last incumbent territorial officers who were forced to resign because of the British occupation were to resume their offices until further changes were made known.55 General Lewis Cass was appointed military administrator. In late October President Madison named him governor of the territory.56 Sporadic fighting continued in Michigan for over a year fol- lowing the battle of the Thames. In July of 1814 Major George Croghan led an expedition against Fort Michilimackinac. On the way to that post, he stopped at St. Joseph Island with a force of over seven hun- dred men in five ships. Finding the fort deserted, he ordered it burned. He finally arrived at Michilimackinac in August. When the ships' guns could not be elevated to assault the fort, Croghan landed his forces for a frontal assault by land and was defeated by the British.57 In October General McArthur led a mounted force of over six hundred men across the St. Clair River into Canada and occupied 55Proclamation by William Henry Harrison, September 29, 1813. in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 449-450. 56Commission of Lewis Cass as Governor, October 29, 1813, Ibid., 453. 576i1pin, The War of 1812, 242-245. 182 the small settlement of Baldoon. He then engaged in raids on British supplies at Oxford and Brantford, and defeated a detachment of British When word arrived of the approach of British regulars, His was the last action of any militia. McArthur led his men back to Detroit. importance on the Michigan frontier before the coming of peace in December of 1814.58 Michigan began a slow return to normalcy with the end of the ldar'of 1812. As the Treaty of Ghent called for the return of all cxanquered territory, Ford Malden was handed over to the British while 'trre Americans occupied Michilimackinac. In an effort to erase feel- ings of hostilities, prominent Detroit citizens staged a "Pacification Dinner" and invited their former enemies from across the river to par- t‘i ci pate. Michigan had survived enemy attacks, Indian depredations. ii'1<1 the occupation by a foreign power. Her citizens began the diffi- CU1 t task of rebuilding a devastated frontier. \ 586i1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 67. CHAPTER VI CASS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS As the newly appointed governor of a war-torn and ravaged Michigan Territory, Lewis Cass also assumed the duties of superinten- dent of Indian affairs. In that capacity he spent many months away from Detroit and his other governmental responsibilities. As Indian superintendent, Cass reduced British influence over the Michigan tribes, prevented outbreaks of tribal warfare, and secured millions of acres of Indian land for American settlement. His fairness and his sense of justice earned him the respect and the friendship of both red men and white. Michigan's second governor was born in Exeter, New Hampshire, in 1782. At the age of ten he was enrolled in Phillips Exeter Academy, and was the classmate of Edward Everett and Daniel Webster. Cass joined his father, a professional soldier, at Marietta, Ohio, about 1799, and studied law. He was admitted to the bar at the age of twenty and four years later was elected to the Ohio legislature. In 1807 he was appointed United States marshal for Ohio, a position he held until 1812. He continued a lucrative law practice and invested substantially in Ohio lands. With the outbreak of the War of 1812, Cass, already a brigadier general in the Ohio militia, closed his law office and journeyed to Dayton where he was designated colonel of a 183 h 184 regiment of militia. Before the war with Britain had ended, he was chosen to replace Hull as governor of Michigan Territory.1 Cass was an excellent choice. His service as an Ohio legisla- tor, marshal, and lawyer gave him a first-hand knowledge of government and law. He was also familiar with life on the frontier. His military experiences taught him the responsibilities of command and administra- tion. One of his recent biographers notes that he was "richly endowed with self-assurance which, leavened by a sincere and kindly interest in others, provided him with a quality of leadership."2 The War of 1812 had devastated Michigan Territory and imposed hardships on both Indians and whites. At Detroit Cass discovered that extensive war damage to farms, fields, and crops made it diffi- cult for both groups to find enough to eat. In 1813 he told William Woodbridge, the newly appointed territorial secretary, that "the .Dodians daily come in throwing themselves upon our mercy. Their Situ- ation is truly deplorable."3 Because of the destruction caused by the recent hostilities, Cass wondered if Michigan was really "worth "4 possessing. Michigan's weakened condition and a continuing British threat 1Willis Dunbar, Lewis Cass (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1970), 8-13; Andrew McLaughlin, Lewis Cass (New York: Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1892), 33-52. 2Woodford, Lewis Cass, The Last Jeffersonian (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press,71950), 32. Hereafter cited as Woodford, Cass. 3Cass to William Woodbridge, November 9, 1813, in Cass Papers, BHC. 41bid. 185 across the Detroit River combined to influence Cass's adoption of a realistic and practical Indian policy. I'I am no enthusiastic believer in Indian friendship and professions," he wrote Secretary of War John Armstrong in 1814, "but I have no doubt but important advantages will result from their assistance and cooperation."5 British attempts to influence the Michigan Indians forced the new governor to devise ways to keep them at peace and to retain their loyalty. He decided that even though many whites might despise the Indians, it was wise to attach the various tribes to the United States either by appealing to their affections and interests or by compelling them to remain at peace with the whites by a display of force. The only question remaining was which method--force or gentle persuasion--could best secure Indian allegiance with the most economy.6 Cass expressed early displeasure with the state of Indian affhirs in Michigan. He complained to Armstrong that he possessed neither the manpower nor the resources to deal adequately with the Indians. The governor was confident, however, that he could improve the Indian situation in Michigan if he was granted discretionary power to employ needed assistants and to purchase sufficient Indian presents. Without this authority, detailed instructions from Wash- ington would be necessary. He complained to the War Department that there were so few statutory provisions regulating either the inter- course with the Indians or the expenditures made on their behalf 5Cass to the Secretary of War, July 25, 1814, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 60, FRC, Chicago. 6Cass to the Secretary of War, September 3, 1814, Ibid. 186 that an officer without discretionary authority or detailed instruc- tions could have his drafts protested and his accounts rejected in Washington. "I feel no disposition to be placed in either of these situations," he told the War Department in 1814.7 Cass outlined plans for his Indian program in Michigan in a letter to Armstrong in September of 1814. One of his first concerns I was to reverse the poor record of American trading practices with the Indians. British medals given to the Indians were of solid materials, while the American ones were hollow. The British gave presents freely to the Indians to win their good will. While the Americans gave annuities to the Indians, they did not consider these as "gifts" but rather payment for ceding their lands to the United States. Cass decided that a just distribution of presents to the Indians, to gain their trust and friendship, was worth more than a million dollars spent on troops, arms, and expeditions against them. He informed Armstrong that presents to the amount of not less than thirty or forty thousand dollars should be distributed to the Indians north and west of Detroit.8 The governor's estimate of annual expenditures for the Indian Department at Detroit in 1814 amounted to more than twenty thousand dollars. Over eight thousand dollars was designated for twenty-two interpreters. Nearly five thousand more was intended for additional interpreters, together with their quarters, food and fuel. Money 7Cass to the Secretary of War, July 25, 1814, Ibid. 8Cass to General Armstrong, September 3, 1814, in Cass Papers, BHC. 187 required for council houses, office rent, firewood, postage and letters, and other expenses amounted to an additional four thousand dollars. Some three thousand was earmarked for expeditions among the Indians to retard British influence.9 Because of the strategic importance of Detroit, Cass felt that such large Indian expenditures were necessary. He considered Detroit in peace or war the "most important point" in relation to the Indians of the United States. They had to pass through the Detroit area to preserve their communications with the British. At Detroit, the Americans could observe British machinations among the Indians. Cass did not believe that thirty or forty thousand dollars for Indian presents was excessive. If they were treated liberally they would remain friendly to the United States. After a few years their num- bers would decrease and they would pose no threat to Michigan. Then their friendship would be useless.10 While awaiting confirmation of his Indian budget for Michigan, Cass published a list of rules and regulations for the territorial Indian department. These rules applied to the newly appointed Indian agent at Detroit, Gabrie1 Godfroy, as well as any subagents and inter- preters employed by the Indian department.n Presents purchased for Indians on a warrant from the governor were to be obtained from 9I id. ”mm. 11For a list of the agents and interpreters in Michigan in 1814, see Cass to the Secretary of War, September 3, 1814, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 475-477. ENE on Vii the '11 1161 (i5 u? CIJ =~ :1: ‘- l 1." H‘ "If?! 188 designated stores. At the end of each month, the secretary would collect accounts from the stores and charge them to the accounts of the respective purchasers. Goods were to be distributed in the pres- ence iyf "two respectable citizens." Accounts would be scrutinized by the governor at the end of the purchasing period. Presents sent to the agent at Detroit or to subagents elsewhere in the territory were to be checked against invoices. Annuities were to be distributed in the presence of three citizens.12 These rules also outlined the expected behavior of agents, sub- agents, and interpreters. Agents and subagents were to be informed on the condition of their charges, and were to determine if anyone was giving the Indians false information or attempting to prejudice them. Interpreters were required to interpret truly, and to inform the agents of whiskey sales to the Indians of which they had knowledge. Agents, subagents, and interpreters were to be paid quarterly. Cass warned that any person in the Indian department "deficient in zeal, industry, or fidelity" would be immediately dismissed.'3 The War Department informed Cass in October of 1814 that his estimates concerning the annual expenditure of the Indian department 12Copy of the Regulations for the Indian Department, September 15, 1814, in Cass Papers, BHC. 13Ibid. Cass was pleased with his initial changes in the Detroit department. He informed Monroe that when he arrived in De- troit, the Indian department was so distorted that a system was neces- sary to insure the good conduct of several persons in that department. After posting his new regulations, he told Monroe that "I flatter myself they are so framed as to attain this object, as well as to prevent the misapplication of any of the funds appropriated to the purpose." Cass to Monroe, September 20, 1814, in Cass Papers, BHC. 189 at Detroit were thought reasonable and that his program respecting presents to the Indians was also approved. It is evident that much of Cass's later success as Indian superintendent was based in part on the government's willingness to support his programs. Armstrong told Cass that General John Mason, the Superintendent of the Indian Office in Washington, had spent forty thousand dollars for presents for the western Indians, and had also made up new American medals. "Your regulations for the Government of the Indian Department are approved of,“ Armstrong told Cass, "and it requires only a strict and honest execution of them by the several Agents to place that Depart- ment on a sound and good foundation."14 Cass continued his plans for Indian reorganization in Michigan in 1815. Upset over British success in trading with the Indians, he called for the establishment of American agencies at Michilimackinac, Green Bay, and Fort Dearborn to supply the Indians and to gain their confidence. He wanted these agencies, together with one at Fort 15 Wayne, to be directly responsible to him. The War Department soon established these posts and replaced them, as well as one at Piqua, Ohio, under his direction.16 With the exception of Detroit, Cass considered Michilimackinac 14Secretary of War to Governor Cass, October 24, 1814, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 495-496. 15Cass to A. J. Dallas, July 20, 1815, in Letters Rec'd., WD. Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 60, FRC, Chicago. 16Francis Paul Prucha, Lewis Cass and American Indian Policy_ (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1967), 5. Hereafter cited as Prucha, Cass. 190 the most important point respecting Indians on the northwestern fron- tier. The trade and movement of the Indians in that area were often extensive, and the British had established an important base at Drummond Island, forty miles from Michilimackinac. Furthermore, Michigan winters cut off communications between Michilimackinac and the southern part of Michigan for up to six months. Cass wanted a responsible person stationed on Mackinac Island to counteract British influence on the Indians and to watch for hostile movements among '7 In December of 1815, Major William Puthuff was appointed the tribes. Indian agent at Michilimackinac. In addition to new agencies, Cass recommended the establishment of new regulations concerning trade and intercourse with the Indians. He suggested that agents grant trading licenses to individuals only within specified areas and that subagencies be built in certain remote 18 He called for a Michigan statute barring anyone in the places. Indian Office from trading with the Indians, because he felt that existing federal statutes were too vague. He suggested that monies paid to the Indians be in goods or specie, as any paper money would be worthless to them. He called for a body of interpreters to travel 17Cass to William Crawford, October 27, 1815, in Carter, Terr. Pa ers, X, 606-608. George Graham, chief clerk of the War Department, toId Cass that President Madison had consented to a post at Michili- mackinac primarily because of the governor's efforts to secure it. George Graham to Governor Cass, December 29, 1815, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 613. 18Before this, agents applying for licenses at one agency who were refused because of misconduct, merely went to another agency to get licenses. 191 continually through Indian country to keep the Indians friendly, to apprehend unlicensed traders, and to notice unusual Indian activity. Finally, he recommended a continuation of gifts to Indians to preserve their good will. Troops and expeditions against them were expensive and the results were unsure. He believed that gifts to the Indians were cheaper than campaigns against them, and were more successful in promoting peace.19 Certain limitations tended to reduce Cass's effectiveness as Indian superintendent. He complained to Secretary of War Crawford in 1815 that he was often unable to attend to Indian affairs because of his duties on the legislative board and his attention to citizen com- plaints. When he did try to meet the needs of the Indians, they frequently brought him insignificant problems and complaints. In addition, they expected to be fed when they called upon him. Cass asked Crawford for more supplies and rations, as well as for an assis- tant to help in carrying out his responsibilities in respect to the Indians.20 War Department clerk George Graham informed Cass in April of 1816 that he would shortly receive the monies necessary to effect friendly relations with the Indians. Besides the annuities for the Ottawas, Chippewas, and Potawatomies for the years 1813 through 1816, 19Cass to A. J. Dallas, July 20, 1815, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Ma‘in Series, R6107, M221, roll 60, FRC, Chicago. 20Cass to Crawford, September 8, 1815, in Governor Lewis Cass Cor~respondence Book, May 17, 1814, to March, 1820, Sec. of State Records, MSA. Hereafter cited as Cass Correspondence Book, 1814-1820, Sec.. of State Records, MSA. 192 Cass would also receive nearly twenty thousand dollars worth of goods to be distributed in presents to the Indians when it seemed expedient. Graham apologized for the delay, but promised to forward needed Indian goods as soon as possible.21 Occasionally Cass encountered financial difficulties even after he had received payment from Washington for his Indian program. According to a treaty signed by the Ottawas, Chippewas, and Potawotomies in 1817, the United States government agreed to pay annuities of over nine thousand dollars, as well as annuities due these Indians by former treaties.22 This amounted to over twelve thousand dollars, and was to be paid in specie. In 1819 Cass received a draft for slightly over ten thousand dollars from Washington to pay the annuities, over two thousand dollars short. He sent two men and a wagon to cash the draft at the United States Branch Bank at Chillicothe. Once there, they waited for two weeks before the bank's cashier told them that he could not cash the draft and give them the silver necessary for the Indian annuities. They were forced to return to Michigan empty- handed. The expense to the territory for this trip had been over three hundred dollars. Cass asked Calhoun to send him the money necessary to complete the payment of annuities and to make future 2IGeorge Graham to Governor Cass, April 19, 1816, in Carter, 1953;. Papers, X, 627-629. 22Charles Kappler, Comp. & ed., Indian Treaties,_l778-1883 (Neva York: Interland Publications, Inc., 1972), 145-151. Here- after cited as Kappler, Indian Treaties. 193 drafts on New York banks in order to pay off the Indians.23 If Cass occasionally seemed harsh when viewing the Indians as potential enemies, or aloof when regarding them as uncivilized beings, he could also sympathize with their problems and work to better their condition. "I doubt whether the eye of humanity in a survey of the world could discover a race of men more helpless and wretched," he told Crawford in 1816.24 For much of the year, many Michigan Indians subsisted on roots. There were even reports that during the late war certain Indians had killed and eaten their own children. Cass was uncertain whether the Indians could successfully adopt a program of civilization. Nevetheless, he believed that their condition could be improved, principally by changing them from hunters to tillers of the soil.25 Cass took steps to better the condition of the Michigan In- dians in 1816 by asking Crawford to send a carpenter, wheelright, saddler, tailor, cooper, and an armourer to Detroit to make needed articles for the Indians. With the assistance of these artisans, they would have the benefit of farm implements, wooden buckets, wheels for their wagons and plows, gun repairs, and articles of clothing. The Wyandots had already profited from governmental assistance, and had built themselves farms and houses, and planted orchards. 23Governor Cass to the Secretary of War, August 1, 1819, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 84, FRC, Chicago. 24Governor Cass to the Secretary of War, June 6, 1816, Ibid. roll 68, FRC, Chicago. 25Ibid. 194 Cass expressed the hope that they would soon be able to support them- selves. If they were successful farmers, they would serve as a good example to other Michigan Indians.26 In 1816 Cass estimated that over six hundred Chippewas and Ottawas, nearly one thousand Wyandots, Senecas and Munsees, more than twelve hundred Potawatomies, and over eight hundred Indians of other tribes were dependent upon the Michigan Indian department. This estimate did not take into account the "immense number of individuals" who visited Detroit, Michilimackinac, Fort Dearborn, and Green Bay each year. To help support these Indians, he requested over one thousand rations a day, to be distributed among the agencies at De- troit, Michilimackinac, Green Bay, and Fort Wayne. He estimated that Detroit would need over twelve thousand dollars a year to support its Indian program, while each of the other posts would need nearly six thousand dollars. This money would be well spent, however, as it would result in security for the Michigan frontier, in the l'meliora- tion of the condition of the Indians and in their permanent attachment & friendship."27 While Crawford approved of Cass's efforts for the Michigan Indians, he warned him that government aid was not inexhaustible. The Secretary noted that expenses for the Indian Department would 26Governor Cass to the Secretary of War, June 6. I815: 1" Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 648-650. 27Cass to the Secretary of War, November 29, 1816, in Letters Received by the Office of the Secretary of War Relating to Indian Affairs, 1800-1823, Record Group 75, M271, roll 1, CHL. Hereafter Letters Received by the Office of the Secretary of War Relating to Indian Affairs will be cited as Letters Rec'd., WD, Ind. Aff. 195 once again exceed appropriations and advised Cass to exercise modera- tion in his accounts. He approved of Cass's employment of a black- smith and a cooper at Detroit, but objected to hiring a tailor, whose Skills would discourage industry among the Indian women. He pointed out that southern Indians had received only the services of black- smiths and wheelrights, but were as advanced as the Michigan Indians. Besides, too much governmental assistance was not sound policy. Crawford was opposed to turning Indians into perpetual "beggars" through a continual program of government aid. "If we supply all their wants gratuitously," he told Cass, "there is but little proba- bility that they will make the necessary exertions to help themselves."28 Cass also supported religious efforts by missionaries in Mich- igan to improve the conditions of the Indians. He lent his support to the Carey Mission among the Potawatomies, near present-day Niles, run by Reverend Isaac McCoy, who was backed by the Board of Managers of the Baptist Missionary Convention. Upon occasion, Cass employed McCoy as a subagent in various governmental matters dealing with the 29 The governor also encouraged the work of Reverend Potawatomies. Jacob Van Vechten, Secretary of the Board of the Northern Missionary Society, who was concerned with uplifting the Michigan tribes. "We owe it to ourselves as men, as politicians, and as Christians," he told Van Vechten in 1821, "that some decisive measures should be 28Secretary of War to Governor Cass, July 2, 1816, in Letters Sent. WD, Ind. Aff., RG75, M15, roll 3, CHL. 29Woodford, Cass, 145. 196 adopted gradually and permanently to ameliorate the condition of this unfortunate race of men."30 Although he approved of religious efforts among the Indians, Cass was realistic about such operations and those in charge. He ob- served that some missionaries were afraid to "tell the worst part of the story" because the benevolent societies and individuals sponsor- ing them might withdraw their support. It was no easy task to change the precarious and erratic life of the hunter to that of the domesti- cated farmer. Cass knew from firsthand experience that permanent amelioration could not be expected from teaching the Indians abstract doctrines alone; "The great truths of Christianity must be taught them in conjunction with arts which are most necessary to their com- 31 fortable subsistence," he told Van Vechten. Any improvement in their spiritual development had to be accompanied by a corresponding improvement in their physical condition. Cass decided that individual property for Indians was an important first step in any plan of improve- ment.32 White men in Michigan often exerted a negative influence on the Indians. Cass complained to Crawford in 1816 that contact with whites had subjected the Indians to "moral and physical evils, which threaten at no distant day to extirpate the small number that 30Cass to Rev. Jacob Van Vechten, May 10, 1821, in Records of the Executive Office, 1810-1910, MSA. Hereafter this collection will be cited as Exec. Off. Records, 1810-1910, MSA. 3'Ibid. 32Ibid. 197 33 Indian hunting grounds had been reduced because of the remains.” sale of land to whites. The diseases of civilization were particular- ly devastating to the Indians. In addition, Cass believed that the introduction of whiskey among the tribes had produced new violent confrontations between Indians and whites.34 Cass was particularly concerned about the harmful effects of whiskey. Under its influence the Indians frequently became the vic- tims of unscrupulous traders. The governor wanted whiskey excluded from the Indian lands because he believed that this would lessen the likelihood of Indians being cheated by whites. While federal law prohibited the sale of liquor on Indian lands, there was no provision to keep Indians from buying spirits at the white settlements. In response to this situation, the territorial legislative board adopted an act as early as 1812 prohibiting the sale, barter, or disposal of any spiritous liquors to any Indian within Michigan at the risk of a 35 In 1815 the legislative board fine of up to one hundred dollars. adopted an act forbidding the sale or gift of any spiritous liquors to Indians unless sanctioned by the written permission of the super- intendent of Indian affairs.36 While Cass was opposed in principle to the introduction of liquor among the Indians, he occasionally consented to its use when E 33Cass to the Secretary of War, June 6, 1816, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, 86107, M221, ro11 68, FRC, Chicago. 34Ibid. 35 Terr. Laws, 1, 180-181. 36Ibid., 201-202. 198 it suited his purpose. He was concerned in 1818 that the Northwest Company was attempting to draw Indians from Michigan Territory to the shores of Lake Superior to control the fur trade in that section. This was to be accomplished in part by transporting a large supply of liquor to that area and distributing it freely to the Indians. He instructed William Puthuff at Michilimackinac to investigate the matter. If Puthuff discovered that the Northwest Company was using liquor to influence the Indians, he was authorized to use a "small quantity of spirits" to win the Indians back to the American trade at Michilimackinac. This was to be done under tightly regulated con- ditions, and only in response to a Similar action by the Northwest Company. At the same time, Cass admitted that he was generally utter- ly opposed to the introduction of liquors into the Indian country. "Their effects are too obvious to admit of doubt," he told Puthuff, "and too deleterious to the morals and manners of the Indians to allow their use to them."37 Cass considered the regulation of the Indian trade an impor- tant element in protecting the Indians, but was not an enthusiastic supporter of the government's "factory" system, a program restricting trade to government agents or "factors" at trading posts. There had been a government Indian factory at Detroit from 1802 until 1805, When it was dismantled and moved to Fort Dearborn. An Indian factory oPerated on Mackinac Island after 1808 until the British captured 37Cass to William Puthuff, July 4, 1818, in Carter, Terr. 13.1133, x. 778-779. ""— 199 38 Cass told the island in 1812. It was not reopened after the war. the Secretary of War in 1814 that "in our intercourse with the Indians we have adopted too much the ideas of trading speculation. Our trad- ing factories, and our economy in presents have rendered us "39 The American factories were often no match contemptible to them. for foreign or private traders, and they frequently lowered the pres- tige of the American government in the eyes of the Indians. Cass's opposition to the factory system was motivated in part by his admiration for John Jacob Astor and his American Fur Company. Cass was openly friendly with Astor and undoubtedly believed that his company would be useful in forestalling foreign trade and interven- tion in Michigan and would encourage the settlement and development of the territory. With Cass's help, Astor secured exemptions from the prohibitions against the use of foreigners in the fur trade, a practice that greatly increased his power and helped him to eliminate competitors. Although personally opposed to the use of liquor in the Indian trade, Cass instructed his agents to allow Astor's men to utilize spirits in their dealings with the Indians to counteract similar measures by the British. Already politically influential in Washington, Astor was aided on several occasions by Cass in securing 40 the passage of legislation favorable to his company. In spite of 38Dunbar, Michigan, 192; Gilpin, The Territory of Michigan, 39. In 1822 the entire Indian factory system was abandoned. 39Cass to the Secretary of War, September 3, 1814, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 60, FRC, Chicago. 40Kenneth Wiggins Porter, John Jacob AstorgiBusiness_Man (2 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931), II, 686-718. Hereafter cited as Porter, Astor. 200 this assistance, Cass told Calhoun in 1821 that Astor's firm enjoyed no privilege in Michigan that could not be enjoyed by any citizen of the United States. "If their means and their Capacity to exert them, give them advantages over other traders, embarked in the same pursuit," he said, "if furnishes no just cause of complaint to any one."41 When William Puthuff, Indian agent at Michilimackinac, came into conflict with the American Fur Company, Cass did not come to his defense and stood by while he was removed from his post. Puthuff zealously restricted the issuance of trading licenses to foreigners, a move that upset Astor. Puthuff told Cass in October of 18I6 tnat it was a "most difficult task to counteract the secret machinations of private and deeply self interested mercinary Enemies . . . ."42 Cass advised Puthuff to grant Astor's men the licenses they needed, while granting only a small number to other traders. In effect, the Michigan governor was merely following acting Secretary of War George Graham's instructions to afford Astor's agents "every facility in your power consistent with the laws and regulation."43 Puthuff took Cass's advice, granted licenses more liberally to foreigners, and incurred the displeasure of other factors and Indian agents in the Great Lakes region. Meanwhile the American Fur Company accused him of obstructing 4ICass to the Secretary of War, September 3, 1814, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 60, FRC, Chicago. 42William Puthuff to Governor Cass, October 29, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 668-669. 43George Graham to Governor Cass, May 4, 1817, quoted in Porter, Astor, II, 702. 201 their business operations, of giving preferential treatment to other traders, of illegally seizing company trade goods, and of dereliction of duty as Indian agent. Astor encouraged Washington officials to investigate Puthuff's activities, a move which eventually led to Put- 44 Cass did little to prevent Puthuff's removal. huff's removal. However, he did appoint him chief justice of the county court, judge of probate, commissioner, and auctioneer for the county of Michili- mackinac in 1818.45 In spite of his favorable actions toward Astor's agents and his treatment of Puthuff, there is little evidence to support the charge that Cass was merely the tool of the American Fur Company.46 Cass saw the need for competent American traders among the Indians, and favored Astor's agents over foreigners. He supported Astor's use of foreign boatmen and interpreters, not only because of his instructions from the War Department to do this, but also because competent American replacements could not be found. He believed 44Porter, Astor, II, 703-707. George Boyd succeeded Puthuff as Indian agent at Michilimackinac. 45Executive Proceedings of Michigan Territory, July 1, 1818 to December 31, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 804. 46There have been charges that Cass received a bribe of $35,000 for granting special privileges to Astor's agents. Kenneth Porter's examination of Astor's account books around 1930 revealed no such entry. Porter, Astor, 11, 723-725. Willis Dunbar notes that "there is no solid evidence that Cass took a bribe from Astor. Even the newspaper accounts, if taken at face value, do not prove Cass accepted a bribe, but only that he took the money from Montreal to Michigan for Astor. To assume that Cass accepted a bribe from AStor is not consonant with the character of this great statesman . . . ." Dunbar, Michigan, 228. 202 that a total exclusion of foreigners from the Indian lands would be "very desirable," but realized that this could not take place until a "portion of our own Citizens can be found, trained by education & habit to this business. Any partial change in this system will be useless until then, and would only occasion difficulties at the sev- eral Agencies, without any corresponding advantage."47 Cass continued to call for an enlightened and realistic In- dian policy by the federal government. He reminded acting Secretary of War George Graham in 1817 that the duties of the various superin- tendents of Indian affairs and of Indian agents were "badly defined" 48 In 1820 he spoke out against a proposed and needed clarification. Indian superintendency at St. Louis, particularly if its jurisdiction was to extend into Michigan. He believed that a territorial governor 49 He advo- should retain control of Indian affairs in his own area. cated a stricter enforcement of the trade and intercourse laws, while noting defects in their structure. New laws were needed to prevent Indians from trading their cattle to whites for whiskey and to prevent crimes by whites on Indian lands. Many whites had committed offenses against Indians, paid a small fee, and then simply returned to Indian lands to commit new offenses. Cass was convinced that friendly 47Cass to Secretary of War John C. Calhoun, October 26, 1821, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 92, FRC, Chicago. 48Cass to the Acting Secretary of War, February 21, 1817, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 691-692. 49Cass to Charles Lanman, January 19, 1820, in Cass Papers, BHC. Lanman was probate judge and prosecuting attorney for Monroe County, Michigan. 203 relations between Indians and whites would be difficult unless the federal government took steps to correct these and other abuses.50 Friendly relations between Indians and whites in Michigan were threatened not only by poor American Indian policies but also by British machinations. Following the War of 1812 Cass regarded many Michigan Indians as "hollow and deceitful." Many tribes re- mained sympathetic to the British, who had successfully established a system for winning their loyalties. English agents and interpreters were to be found in many parts of Michigan. These agents had been in the habit of selecting certain influential chiefs for awards of from ten to twenty dollars per month each. Cass recommended that the United States government undertake a similar program to supplant British influence. This would help the United States win the loyalty of the Michigan Indians. "There are some,“ he told Armstrong in 1813, "who have exhibited traits of fidelity, which, I wish, were more prevalent among some of our own citizens."51 Cass believed that a respectable force of United States 501- diers maintained at Detroit would be valuable both in preserving order and in discouraging British intrigues among the Michigan In- dians. He recognized that northern Michigan and the upper peninsula were particularly vulnerable to British traders and agitators. He told the legislative board in 1814 that a considerable proportion 0f the northern and western Indians had openly or secretly adherred \ 50Cass to Secretary of War, November 11, 1820, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 69-71; Woodford, Cass, 142-145. 5'13ass to Armstrong, December 4, 1813, in MPHC, XL, 544-546. 204 to the cause of the enemy and would continue to do so unless their communications with the British were broken. A sizeable force of professional soldiers from the United States Army would be an impor- tant step in reducing the British influence among the Indians.52 Upon occasion Cass asked the British to aid him in preventing Canadian Indians from committing depredations in Michigan. Indians from the Fort Malden area had been coming into Michigan in 1815 and had driven several of the residents at Hickory Island from their homes. He warned the British authorities at Malden that if they did not check this unlawful behavior, Indian troubles might "involve our "53 He also expressed the hope that both respective countries in war. sides could work together to restrain the Indians, and thus preserve peace. While Cass was hopeful that the British would keep Canadian Indians out of Michigan, he reminded British officials that the jurisdiction of the United States and Great Britain within their territorial limits was exclusive. If the Indians residing under the protection of either country were injured, they must apply for redress to the government of the country in which they lived and could only gain compensation according to the laws of that country. If an lxldian committed a crime in the United States, he would be subject to 52Statement of Lewis Cass, December 1, 1814, in Executive Acts j-Record of Acts & Proceedings of the Executive Department of Mich- igan, October, 1814-March, 1830, MSA, 5. Hereafter this collection Will be cited as Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. 53Cass to the Commander at Malden, July 28, 1815, in Cass Correspondence Book, 1814-1820, Sec. of State Records, MSA. 205 American laws. Michigan would not permit British interference in such a case. If an outrage was committed in British territory, the United States would not interfere.54 Outrages by Michigan Indians in 1814 forced Cass to resort to military force. He reported to the Secretary of War that he had been engaged in operations with the militia against a party of Chippewa Indians who had been preying on the settlements, murdering the people and plundering their property. He added that "we have fortunately 55 He noted that it was the prac- succeeded in killing some of them." tice of these and other Michigan Indians to drive the inhabitants from a particular settlement, leaving their fields and crops abandoned. The Indians then seized the crops, as well as available livestock, thus impoverishing the settlers and enabling the Indians to continue their hostilities. Cass urged Congress to provide blockhouses for the various settlements as a means of protection against the Indians.56 Cass expressed fears early in 1815 that Indian hostilities would again break out. He informed the War Department that the British had reduced much of the hereditary enmity between the Chippe- wa and the Sioux, and that they were attempting to direct these Indians against Michigan's frontiers. He believed that the Wyandots, 54Cass to Lieutenant-Colonel Reginald James, October 26, 1815, Ibid. 55Cass to the Secretary of War, September 16, 1814, Ibid. 56Ibid. On Indian troubles in Michigan, see also Cass to the Secretary of War, September 15, 1814, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Ind. Aff., M271 , roll 1, CHL. 206 Delawares, Senecas, and Shawnees would remain faithful to the United States, but that many Ottawas and Chippewas would be untrustworthy and possibly hostile. He suggested that a naval blockade around Michilimackinac and the northern parts of Michigan would reduce Brit- ish influence through the denial of British supplies to the Michigan Indians. If this influence was not reduced, there would be new Indian attacks against the Michigan frontier.57 American practices and policies upset the Michigan Indians in 1815. Cass complained to Monroe that in his absence Indians who had come into Detroit with no hostile intentions were frequently arrested. More than ten different officers had been in command of the Detroit garrison in less than a year. During that time they had interfered with civilian Indian agents, occasionally imprisoned Indians without cause, and discouraged Indian visits to Detroit.58 Other Indians were upset with the way in which their land was acquired by whites. They also complained to Cass that many Indian agents did not understand their problems and had no knowledge of their manners 59 and customs. Cass told Monroe that an appropriate officer should 57Cass to the Secretary of War, February 17, 1815, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 507-512. 58Cass to Monroe, February 14, 1815, in Cass Papers, BHC. While Cass often deplored the actions of the Detroit garrison regarding In- dians, he found it necessary to place a sentinel at the door of his Quarters to keep out drunk and disorderly Indians who chose to call Upon him at all hours of the night. "It is a literal fact," he told Mondroe, "that I have been compelled, more than twenty times to hide myself, to avoid their importunities." Cass to the Secretary of War, February 17, 1815, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 507-512. 59Cass to the Secretary of War, December 15, 1815, in Carter, m. Papers, X, 611-612. 207 be appointed to visit all the Michigan agencies to investigate the grievances of the Indians.60 The uncertain fate of settlers lost to Indians in the War of 1812 caused many whites to look unfavorably on the Michigan Indians. Settlers whose relatives had been lost or captured continued to hope for their return, and repeatedly asked Cass for assistance. The governor reported to Secretary Crawford in 1816 that every effort had been made to locate such prisoners and to secure their release. These efforts had proved fruitless, although many citizens continued to hold false hopes. Cass was convinced, however, that whites cap- tured by Indians had been treated "with an unsparing hand," and the few prisoners who had survived had long since been brought to Detroit and released. He had even employed Indians and promised to reward them if they could locate any white persons still being held. This approach had not been successful.61 New Indian trouble broke out on the River Rouge in 1816. Settlers in that area complained to Congress that Indians had forcibly entered their homes, menaced and abused their families, destroyed and carried away furniture, and driven off over six hundred luorses. A local church had been entered, despoiled of its ornaments. and the organ smashed. Many families were forced to flee inland, or to Detroit. These petitioners pointed out that in their flight to fWruj safety from the Indians, they were forced to leave behind many 60Ibid. 61 620- 621 . Cass to the Secretary of War, February 2, 1816, Ibid., 208 valuables, implements, buildings, orchards, and improvements. Many of these had been damaged or destroyed because they were not there to protect them.62 1819 was also a year of considerable Indian unrest in Michi- gan. Cass reported to Calhoun that a man living near the River Raisin had been shot and stabbed by Indians, two settlers had been murdered near the mouth of the Portage River, and a man had been shot in his home within seven miles of Detroit. Indian raids on the livestock of settlers were numerous. Cass reminded Calhoun that there were not more than eight thousand inhabitants in Michigan, and that they were not formed into compact settlements that supported each other. In- stead they were thinly scattered along the principal streams and pre- sented an exposed frontier to the Indians. Fortified posts seemed to have little effect on the Indians, who merely slipped away into the forests after attacking a remote farm or cabin. "I have already stated that this is an exposed and defenceless frontier," he told Calhoun; "it is the only part of the Union, which is in direct con- tact with the British and the Indians."63 The British continued to exert an important influence on the Indians in 1819. Large quantities of clothing, arms, and ammunition, as well as other goods, were distributed by the British at Malden to Indians living in American territory. The Indians often made the trip to Malden to receive such gifts. Cass complained to Calhoun y 62Petition to Congress by Inhabitants of the Territory. December 30, 1816, Ibid., 680-682. 63Cass to John C. Calhoun, May 27, 1819, in Cass Papers, BHC. 209 that on their return trip they would often assault Michigan settlers, steal their horses, kill their cattle and hogs, and keep the frontier in a continual state of alarm. Most of these assaults on Americans had been committed by Indians recently influenced by English presents and preachments. Cass lamented that before the Americans could assemble an adequate force to pursue such lawbreakers, they were beyond discovery.64 Cass feared that the British planned to revive Tecumseh's old plan of an Indian confederacy. Indians passing through Detroit spoke of belts passed among them large enough for many braves to sit upon. The governor had noticed that most Indians coming from Canada brought back a suit of clothes, powder, shot and ball, arms, kettles, and other useful articles.65 Kiskankon, a principal chief of the Chippewa tribe, told Cass that when he had been invited to Canada, the Shawnee Prophet had told him that a great council would soon be held. The Prophet had also Shown him boxes of pistols, swords, guns, and rifles to be distributed among the Indians. He had refused the Prophet's advances, however, and returned to Michigan.66 No Indian confederacy materialized, and by the end of 1819 Cass's fears concerning Indian unrest began to subside. Although the frontier was quiet, Cass was convinced that the British would continue to agitate the Indians and attempt to use them for their own purposes. 64Cass to the Secretary of War, August 3, 1819, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, Roll 84, FRC, Chicago. 65Ibid. 66Cass to the Secretary of War, November 21, 1819, Ibid. 210 He told Calhoun that until British interference among the Michigan Indians was finally ended, settlers would continue to live under the threat of Indian attack.67 Undoubtedly one of Cass's most important accomplishments as Michigan's superintendent of Indian affairs was the acquisition for the United States of several million acres of Indian land. He believed that public land sales in Michigan were important for the territory. In 1816, he told Josiah Meigs, Commissioner of the General Land Office in Washington, that public land sales in Michigan would turn the current of emigration toward the territory, strengthen Michigan's defenses by increasing its population, and help to erect a barrier between the British and the Indians. In these ways, pub- lic land sales would affect the growth and security of Michigan.68 Cass successfully completed the Treaty of Fort Meigs in Sep- tember of 1817 with representatives from the Wyandot, Seneca, Dela- 69 ware, Shawanese, Potawatomi, Ottawa, and Chippewa tribes. The United States received a small cession of land in southern Michigan.70 In return, the United States agreed to pay over ten thousand dollars 67Cass to the Secretary of War, December 25, 1819, Ibid. 68Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X. 633-635. 69 See Cass to Duncan McArthur, September 31, 1817, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Ind. Aff., RG75, M271, roll 2, CHL. 7oBeginning at the southwest corner of the cession obtained in the Treaty of Detroit, this new cession involved an area extending forty-five miles up the 1807 boundary, westward to a line extended north from Ohio's western boundary, south along that line, and east to the 1807 boundary. C3. 0 .133 TREATY OFOSAULT STE. MARIE 1820 P 4.3 TREATY OF A CC» ‘9 o 6‘ 00 LA POINTE 1842 t) 5. s (“<32 TREATY 6F SAomAw L/ 1819 TREATY OUF DETROIT IOOT TREATY OF FORT MEIGS 1817\ l , o \ F‘ ' TREATY or cchoo 1821 TREATY OF CAREY MISSION I828 Figure 6. Indian Cessions Source: Adapted from Richard Welch, County Evolution in Michigan (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1972), 16. 212 in annuities, as well as other direct payments to the Indians for property destroyed during the War of 1812. The treaty provided for reservations not only for Indians but also for certain whites who had suffered at the hands of these tribes. The United States reserved the right to make roads and to establish taverns and ferries for the accommodation of travellers through any of the lands ceded by or reserved to the Indians.71 Early in 1819 Cass informed Calhoun that he believed the time was right to secure a land cession from the Chippewas in the Saginaw Bay area. The land in that region was extremely rich and would attract American settlement. The Chippewas had proved troublesome in the past, committing frequent depredations on Michigan establish- ments. Troubles between Indians and white settlers could be reduced by securing this land. In addition, Cass told Calhoun that the Chip- pewas would be further removed from British interference and intrigues.72 After receiving instructions from Washington to negotiate for Indian lands in the Saginaw Valley, Cass met with members of the Chippewa and Ottawa tribes in September of 1819 at the site of present-day Saginaw. Louis Campau, a local trader, had constructed a council house to accommodate the negotiators. Logs were placed in rows to provide seating, while a large platform of squared logs and a table were provided for Cass and his aides. The governor had sent _¥ 71Kappler, Indian Treaties, 145-151. 72Cass to the Secretary of War, January 6, 1819, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, ro11 80, FRC, Chicago. 213 a schooner to the Saginaw River, loaded with blankets, trinkets, five barrels of rum, and three thousand dollars in silver to be employed in the treaty negotiations. The schooner also carried a company of soldiers from Detroit, dispatched to protect Cass and his party. Over a thousand Indians, mostly Chippewas, traveled to Saginaw for the meeting with the governor. Speeches, discussions, and festivities continued for nearly two weeks before the Indians finally agreed to cede their land.73 The Treaty of Saginaw was completed on September 24, 1819. The United States gained about six million acres of Indian land, located north and west of the cession provided for in the Treaty of Detroit.74 In return, the United States agreed to pay the Indians an immediate three thousand dollars in cash and the promise of an annuity of one thousand dollars in Silver. The treaty provided for a number of Indian reservations, permitted the Indians hunting rights on the ceded land as long as it remained public property, and granted the United States authority to build roads through reservations. The United States agreed to pay the Indians for any abandoned improve- ments to the land, and promised to provide a blacksmith, farming 73Ephraim Williams, "The Treaty of Saginaw in the Year 1819," in MPHC. VII, 262-270. 74The boundary line for the Saginaw cession began at the west- ern boundary of the 1807 tract, six miles below the base line, and ran westward for nearly sixty miles, then proceeded in a northeasterly «direction to the source of the Thunder Bay River and down that river to Lake Huron. Hull's 1807 purchase formed the southern boundary of the Saginaw tract. 214 utensils, and cattle for Indian use.75 After the treaty was completed, Cass ordered the five barrels of whiskey to be opened. Campau opened another ten of his own stock, and the Indians drank to excess, brand- ishing tomahawks and whooping in the process. Cass finally appealed to Campau to help restore order.76 Cass informed Calhoun of his efforts at Saginaw soon after the conclusion of the treaty. Even though the Chippewas had ceded a large part of their territory, the governor was concerned that the final survey of this new cession might include lands in the south- eastern corner of Michigan belonging to the Grand River Indians. If that proved true, he was sure that their claims could be quieted. He reported that no Indian land had been set aside for the purposes of education, because the Chippewa could see no value in it.77 In concluding the Treaty of Saginaw, Cass had some concern for the welfare of the Indians involved. He was somewhat upset that the Chippewas had demanded so large a sum in cash and were anxious to dissipate their newly gained wealth in "childish and useless pur- chases." He refused to name a specific sum in relation to agricul- tural improvements for the Indians, but left the figure to the discretion of the President. "In taking this course," he told 75Kappler, Indian Treaties, 185-187. 76Fred Dustin, "The Treaty of Saginaw," Michigan History, IV, 243-278. Campau had expected to be paid immediately f0r his services and supplies from the three thousand dollars in silver granted to the Indians. When the Indians received the entire sum, he had his revenge (N1 Cass by temporarily turning the council into a drunken melee. 77Cass to the Secretary of War, September 30, 1819, in Carter, Lerr. Papers, x, 863-866. 215 Calhoun, "1 was influenced by the consideration, that the negotiator of an Indian treaty is not always the best judge of the value of the 78 He believed purchase or of the amount which should be paid for it." that it was not his duty to wring the lowest possible price from ignorant savages, even though this afforded financial savings to his government. He was convinced that the white man owed the Indian a "great moral debt," which could only be discharged by patient for- bearance and genuine concern.79 When Illinois became a state in 1818, Michigan Territory was expanded by having attached to it the remaining lands in the North- west Territory north of Illinois and west of Lake Michigan. In October of that year Cass extended Michigan civil authority to this new area.80 Cass was eager to explore the new acquisition. He told Cal- houn that a tour along the southern shore of Lake Superior would pro- vide the United States with important information concerning plant and animal life, mineral resources, facilities for water communication, and areas for settlement. He believed that such a trip would also be valuable in determining the sizes and strengths of the various 78Ibid. For Cass's views concerning the dangers of giving the Indians too much money at one time, see Cass to Calhoun, June 19, 1818, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Ind. Aff., RG75, M271, roll 2, CHL. 79 Ibid. 80Proclamation by Lewis Cass, October 26, 1818, in Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. 216 81 Indian tribes living in that region. Calhoun agreed and approved the venture. Cass began his expedition in May of 1820, setting out from Detroit with three large canoes. He was accompanied by forty-one men, including soldiers, Indian guides and interpreters, voyageurs, a physician, a reporter, and a private secretary. Henry Schoolcraft, a young geologist, also accompanied the expedition. In two weeks the party reached Michilimackinac, where twenty-three soldiers joined the expedition. Schoolcraft observed that Michilimackinac was an important trading cetner for the norther Indians, who exchanged their furs for knives, blankets, and other articles. After six days at Michilimackinac, Cass and his party headed for Sault St. Marie.82 At Sault Ste. Marie, Cass ran into difficulty with the Chip- pewas. In the Treaty of Greenville in 1795, they had agreed to cede a tract of land along the St. Mary's River. When Cass pointed this out to a group of Indians, Sassaba, a Chippewa chief, wearing the red coat of a British officer, angrily spoke against the Americans, kicked aside their presents, and left the council. Soon a party of Indians raised a British flag over his wigwam. This was too much for Cass. Accompanied only by an interpreter, he entered the Indian 8'Cass to John C. Calhoun, November 18, 1819, in Am. State Papers, Indian Affairs, II, 318-319. 82Henry Schoolcraft, Narrative Journal of Travels Through the Iflmrthwestern Regions of the United States Extendingifrom Detroit Ifluwough the Great Chain of American Lakes to the Soprces of the Mississi i River in the Year 1820 (East Lansing: The Michigan State (Rfllege Press, 1953 , 88. Hereafter cited as Schoolcraft, Journal. 217 camp, pulled down the flag, and told Sassaba that no foreign flag would fly over American territory. "This intrepid conduct struck the Indians with astonishment," Schoolcraft observed, "and produced an effect,--which we were not at the moment sensible, was all that pre- vented an open rupture."83 When tempers cooled, the chiefs sat down with Cass. After further negotiations, they signed the Treaty of Sault Ste. Marie, ceding some sixteen square miles near the rapids of the St. Mary's River. The Indians, however, retained fishing and camping rights in the area.84 Two years later the Americans built Fort Brady on this cession. Cass's expedition covered over four thousand miles before it finally returned to Detroit in September of 1820. His party followed the southern shore of Lake Superior westward to the St. Louis River, and then, after a portage, reached the Mississippi. He ascended it for several hundred miles in search of its source, but eventually turned downstream as the end of summer approached. At Prairie du Chien the expedition turned eastward along the Wisconsin River, portaged to the Fox, and soon arrived at Green Bay. Cass then pro- ceeded along the western shore of Lake Michigan by canoe to Fort Dearborn, and then returned to Detroit on horseback.85 83Ibid., 99. 84Kappler, Indian Treaties, 187-188. After Cass had left lWichilimackinac for the rest of his tour, George Boyd, Puthuff's successor as Indian agent, signed a treaty on July 6 at Michili- Inackinac and L'Arbre Croche with the Chippewa and Ottawa ceding the SE. Martin Islands to the United States. Kappler, Indian Treaties, 8-189. 85 Woodford, Cass, 134-138; Dunbar, Michigan, 244. 218 Cass was favorably impressed by his contacts with the Indians on this western expedition. He found them friendly to the United States and peacefully disposed toward one another. He observed that Indian affinity for the United States was most evident when there was little interference by the British. He believed that if this interference could be prevented in the future, there was hope that the frontier would remain at peace.86 In August of 1821, Cass negotiated the Treaty of Chicago with representatives of the Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomie nations, who assembled at Fort Dearborn. By this treaty, the United States gained that region in Michigan south of the Grand River, except for a small triangle to the extreme southwest, bounded on the east by the St. 87 Joseph River. In return, the Ottawas received an annuity of one thousand dollars for ten years, while the Potawatomies received five thousand dollars for twenty years. In addition, a blacksmith and a teacher of agriculture were to be provided for the benefits of these tribes. Certain Indian reservations were provided for in the treaty, with the United States retaining the usual rights of road construction through these lands.88 As superintendent of Indian affairs for Michigan, Cass 86Cass to the Secretary of War, October 21, 1820, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Ind. Aff., RG75, M271, roll 3, CHL. . . 87Part of the land in the triangle west of the St. Joseph River became the site of the Carey Mission, run by Reverend Isaac NCCcnu The remaining small segment was acquired by the United States ‘Hl'the Treaty of Chicago in 1833. 88kappTer, Indian Treaties, 198-201. 219 maintained peace between red men and white, and acquired millions of acres of Indian land for American settlement, while retaining a genu- ine concern for the welfare of the Indians. This concern was based in part on his belief that the white man owed a moral debt to the Indian. When the Winebago Indians went to war with the Chippewa and the Menominees in Wisconsin in the spring of 1821, he suggested to Calhoun that Indian agents be used as mediators to terminate the conflict. He believed that because of the social and moral degrada- tion of the Indians, the whites were duty bound to uplift and to pre- serve the various tribes. "In fact we must think for them," he 89 He remained convinced that civilization was the best concluded. hope for the future of the Indian. He believed that if the red man could not grasp that lesson for himself, it remained the responsibil- ity of the white man to teach him. 9 89Cass to the Secretary of War, April 6, 1821, in Letters Rec'<1., WD,Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 88, FRC, Chicago. CHAPTER VII THE LEGISLATIVE BOARD REBUILDS THE TERRITORY Michigan emerged from the War of 1812 in a weakened and dis- tressed condition. Early in 1814 President Madison informed Congress that at the recovery of Michigan Territory from the temporary posses- sion of the enemy, the inhabitants were left in such a destitute con- dition that it was necessary to give them supplies from the public stores to insure their survival.1 Woodward told Acting Secretary of War Monroe that "the desolation of this territory is beyond all con- ception."2 Flour and meat were scarce, and more than half the popu- lation lacked any animals for domestic or agricultural purposes. The fencing for farms was almost entirely destroyed, and the damage to personal dwellings had been extensive. In some instances the inhab- itants of the River Raisin had been forced to eat "chopp'd hay, boiled" for subsistence.3 General Duncan McArthur, the American commander at Detroit in 1814,was concerned about Michigan's defenseless and devastated 1Annals of Congress, Thirteenth Congress, First Session, XXVI, 644. 2Woodward to the Acting Secretary of War, March 5, 1815, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 513-514. 3Ibid. 220 221 frontier. Detroit was short of supplies, and communications with Ohio were precarious. McArthur was also upset because white settlers were giving material support to the Indians. "These settlers, from choice, and others probably to save their scalps, feed, harbour, and commun- icate every information to them [the Indians] and through them to the British," he complained.4 To retard future British influence, he suggested that settlers friendly to the United States be moved to the interior of Michigan, while those friendly to Britain be sent to the enemy. He even advocated laying waste to parts of Canada to erect a "desert" between that country and the United States. William Woodbridge became territorial secretary in the fall of 1814. Born in Connecticut in 1780, he had gone to Ohio with his parents at an early age, returned to the East for an education, and then was admitted to the Ohio bar in 1806. Woodbridge served as a prosecuting attorney and as a member of the Ohio legislature before accepting a post in Michigan Territory. A personal friend of Cass, he was to provide strong leadership when the governor was absent from the territory.6 General McArthur had warned Woodbridge that after a few months in Michigan, Ohio would look very good to him.7 Undaunted, 4Duncan McArthur to the.Secretary of War, February 6, 1815, Ibid., 503-505. 51bid. 6Gi1pin, The Territory_of Michigan, 66; Dunbar, Michigan, 277. When Reuben Attwater failed to return to Michigan after the War of 1812, Cass recommended the appointment of Woodbridge. 7McArthur to William Woodbridge, December 21, 1814, in William Woodbridge Papers, BHC. Hereafter cited as Woodbridge Papers, BHC. 222 Woodbridge made the move to Detroit. He later informed his wife Julia that he was "extremely pleased" with the Michigan country.8 Michigan's governmental machinery was in disarray after the War of 1812. In 1817 Acting Governor Woodbridge issued a proclama- tion calling for all territorial officials to return either their original commissions or properly authenticated copies to the secre- tary of the territory. Many of Michigan's executive records had been lost or destroyed during the war, and Woodbridge had no accurate record of territorial officials.9 Woodbridge also found it necessary to ask Secretary of State John Quincy Adams for entire sets of the legislative acts of the various states, as the Michigan officers could only adopt laws from such states. In 1818 Michigan did not possess the entire code of any one state. Similarly, it had no copy of the laws of the United States. He told Adams that the British had destroyed books, records, and original papers, severely restricting territorial government. Wood- bridge wanted copies of state and federal laws not only for the use of the governor and judges but also for concerned citizens who wished to examine them.10 Adams was unable to help Woodbridge. He informed him that his own department had failed to secure such sets for its own use, 8voodbridge to his wife Julia, January 23, 1815, Ibid. 9Proclamation of Acting Governor Woodbridge, February 14, 1817, in Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. 10Woodbridge to the Secretary of State, January 15, 1818, in Mich. Terr. Papers, I, 335-336, R659, NA. 223 and that copies of the laws requested were not available. He also told Woodbridge that it was somewhat doubtful if there was any law authorizing an expenditure for such a purpose even if sets of the statutes could be found.]] In spite of initial governmental disorder, Michigan's terri- torial legislative board--Woodward, Witherell, Griffin, and Cass-- managed to function both smoothly and efficiently after the War of 1812. While Woodward continued to play a dominant role in the board's activities, this period was not characterized by the bitter feuds of the previous administration. The leadership of both Cass and Woodbridge was instrumental in maintaining harmony among the territorial officials. Woodbridge was evidently unimpressed with the high court judges. He labeled Woodward as a "wild Theorist," best fitted for "exhorting sunbeams from Cucumbers . . . oftentimes a malevolent 012 maniac. Griffin was "notoriously the willing Dupe of his Senior Judge [Woodward]."13 Witherell he considered to be "opinionated and prejudiced and opposed to the English Origin of the Common Law."14 About the only Michigan official Woodbridge really respected was Cass. HJohn Quincy Adams to Woodbridge, March 9, 1818, in Dom. Letters, SD, R659, M40, roll 15, NA. In a letter to J. 0. Adams in August of 1818, Woodward acknowledged the reception of a package of the Laws of the United States. Woodward to the Secretary of State, August 22, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 780. 12Woodbridge to James Lanman, December 12, 1822, in Woodbridge Papers, BHC. l3 Ibid. MIbid. 224 Secretary of the Treasury A. J. Dallas responded in a limited way to Michigan's distressed condition in 1815. He asked Cass to verify the extent of suffering on the River Raisin, and to submit his report to Washington. He empowered Cass to supply those in actual need with provisions and necessaries as long as his total expenses did not exceed fifteen hundred dollars. He authorized Cass to draw upon the War Department for this sum, and asked him to submit reports as to how the money was spent.15 Two years later the War Department informed Cass that it would take action concerning Michigan claims for damage suffered in the War of 1812. The Secretary of War instructed Cass to compile claims arising before June 1, 1815, and to forward them to an auditor in Washington. These materials would be compared to lists compiled by the army, and just and deserving claims would be satisfied. At the end of every month Cass was to transfer any reported claims to Washington.16 The governor and judges realized that they would have to attract new settlers to Michigan Territory if that area was to grow and to prosper. To encourage new settlement, it was necessary to survey the public lands and to offer them for sale. In 1812 Congress had set aside six million acres of land in several western states and territories for military bounties. Two million acres were to be 15A. J. Dallas to Lewis Cass, May 25, 1815, in Cass Corres- Pondence Book, 1814-1820, Sec. of State Records, MSA. 16The Secretary of War to Lewis Cass, May 12, 1817, in Carter, Er. Papers, X, 698-699. 225 located in Michigan.17 Surveys for this land had been prevented by the War of 1812, but with the end of that conflict, Cass demanded that this land be placed on the market. Surveyor-general Edward Tiffin experienced no small diffi- culty in 1815 in attempting to survey bounty lands in Michigan. He complained to Josiah Meigs, Commissioner of the General Land Office in Washington, that Indians continually drove his surveyors from the field and retarded their progress. The government would have to take steps to prevent these outrages by Indians if his men were to complete their assigned tasks. Tiffin estimated that considerable surveying could be completed before the coming of winter if the Indians caused no further trouble.18 Tiffin's surveyors also experienced other difficulties. Ben- jamin Hough complained about the thick underbrush and impassable swamps. He considered the land generally poor, and found his prog- ress occasionally impeded by large lakes. He decided that the countryside was in "no ways inviting--it is true there is some good spots, but a large proportion is either useless swamps, or poor and barren."19 Alexander Holmes was equally disenchanted with Michigan. '70. S. Stats., II, 728-730. 18Edward Tiffin to Josiah Meigs, June 12, 1815, in Letters Sent by the Surveyor General of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio, Record Group 49, M477, roll 2, CHL. Hereafter Letters Sent by the Surveyor General Of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio will be cited as Letters Sent, 56, NW Terr. '9Benjamin Hough to Edward Tiffin, October 12, 1815, in Let- ters Received by the Surveyor General of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio, Record Group 49, M479, Roll 5, CHL. Hereafter Let- ters Received by the Surveyor General of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio will be cited as Letters Rec'd., 56, NW Terr. 226 "We have suffered almost every hardship," he said, "and encountered almost every difficulty that could be expected of mortals to endure, but amidst all have been blessed with good health."20 Problems with surveying in Michigan and the reported condi- tion of the territory's southern lands caused Tiffin to recommend a transfer of Michigan's two million acres of bounty land to the Illi- nois Territory. Upon receiving Tiffin's report, Meigs informed the Secretary of War that the Illinois tract contained over nineteen d."2' million acres and was believed to be "good lan Congress ac- cepted Tiffin's report, and cancelled the Michtgan bounty lands, transferring them to the Illinois country.22 Cass was upset by this action. "The quality of the land in this Territory, I have reason to believe, has been grossly misrepre- sented," he told Meigs.23 Government surveyors had visited Michigan in the wettest part of the season, had seen only a small part of the country, and had stayed only a short time. Furthermore, Cass believed that the surveys should have started near Detroit and the lake shores. He was disappointed that Tiffin's men had surveyed lands distant from the larger streams and the settled areas, lands unattractive to new settlers.24 20A1exander Holmes to Edward Tiffing, November 23, 1815, Ibid. 2IJosiah Meigs to the Secretary of War, January 22, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 617. 220. S. Stats., III, 332. 23Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X : 633'635 o 24 Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, Ibid., 635-636. 227 While Cass was wrestling with the problems of land surveys, he received a new setback in 1816 when the War Department informed him that it would no longer issue rations to Michigan inhabitants. Crawford told Cass that "things must now have returned to their regular channels," so that any who did not own property could at least find employment and obtain an easy and comfortable living. Therefore, rations were to be restricted in the future to United States troops and to any Indian visitor to Detroit.25 Cass was not convinced that Michigan had returned to normal in 1816. "This territory is weaker in itself, more liable to be attacked & with greater difficulty defended than any other section in the Union," he told Meigs.26 Unless public lands were placed on the market in Michigan, the territory's population would not increase. Furthermore, settlers coming to Michigan and finding little public land offered for sale, were adopting the practice of settling ille- gally on the public lands. Cass believed that unless they could purchase their own lands, they would continue this practice.27 In a further attempt to convince Washington of the neces- sity of public land sales in Michigan, Cass revealed many of Mich- igan's weaknesses in 1816. He reminded Crawford that the territory's early economy had been founded on the fur trade, while agricultural pursuits had been badly neglected. Many settlers had no concept of ZSSecretary Crawford to Lewis Cass, May 7, 1816, Ibid., 633. 26Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, Ibid., 635-636. 27Ibid. 228 correct farming procedures. There were practically no spinning wheels or looms in the entire territory. Farmers Often piled their manure upon the ice of the river in winter, that it "might be carried into the lake in the Spring.“ The wool of the sheep was often thrown away, and Cass doubted that even one pound of wool was manufactured by any person of Canadian descent, a group that composed four-fifths of the population of the territory. Since 1805 only a few settlers had learned how to make soap.28 Cass told Crawford that it Should come as no surprise that many in Michigan remained unemployed and destitute, considering the backgrounds and poor work habits of most of the inhabitants. He pointed out that until a radical change took place in the manners and customs of the people, or until a migration of new settlers into the territory changed the character of the population, there would be a number of "indigent helpless people" in Michigan, whose wants would far exceed the means available for their support. He again implored Washington to market the public lands in Michigan, a measure that would encourage new population, strengthen the defenses of the territory, and teach the Canadians the American virtues of industry and enterprise.29 The federal government finally agreed to market the public lands in Michigan, partly as a result of the persistence of Cass. Meigs told the governor in July of 1816 that surveys would begin 28Cass to Secretary of War Crawford, May 31, 1816, in Letters Rec'd., WD, Main Series, R6107, M221, roll 68, FRC, Chicago. 29Ibid. 229 again in Michigan and that as soon as they were completed, sales would begin at Detroit.30 Cass was pleased with this report, and advised Meigs to survey those lands most attractive for new settle- ment. He also apologized for his spirited interest in the land ques- tion. "The interest, which I naturally feel for the prosperity of the Territory, and the tendency which the proposed measure would have to promote that prosperity," he said, "must be my apology for troubling you thus often upon the Subject."31 While federal surveyors prepared to resume the survey of Michigan public lands, Cass took steps to place the Ten Thousand Acre Tract near Detroit on the market. This land had been granted to Michigan by Congress in 1806. The governor hired Joseph Fletcher, one of Edward Tiffin's surveyors, to survey the area into one hun- dred and sixty and eighty acre plots. In September of 1816 this land was put up for sale at auction.32 This survey of the Ten Thousand Acre Tract, by ignoring Woodward's grand plan for the city of Detroit, caused new friction among the territorial officials. While Woodward was making a visit to Washington in 1817, Witherell convinced Cass that the original city plan was too fanciful and impractical. Woodward's total plan 30Josiah Meigs to Governor Cass, July 16, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 659. 31 666-667. 32Jenks, "Woodward," Michigan History, III, 538-539; Gi1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 130. Governor Cass to Josiah Meigs, October 4, 1816, Ibid. 230 was destroyed when streets were cut off to accommodate existing 33 farms. Back in Detroit, Woodward protested this action at a meet- ing of the legislative board in 1818. "By the present operations, confusion and irregularity," he said, "a permanent sacrifice of future and present interests; the convenience of succeeding and even of existing inhabitants, the rights of the people, the sanctity of the laws, are violated, prostrated, and trampled under foot by the demons of opposition, of discord and of prejudice. In spite of his eloquent pleas, he saw his grand plan for Detroit go down to defeat.35 In March of 1818 President Monroe issued a proclamation open- 36 ing public land sales in Michigan. According to the Act of 1800, the minimum purchase was to be one hundred and sixty acres at a min- imum cost of two dollars an acre. Persons buying on credit could 37 pay one fourth down and the rest in four annual payments. Public land sales in Michigan in 1818 amounted to over seventy thousand 33George Catlin, "The Regime of the Governor and Judges of Michigan Territory," Michigan History, XV, 39-40. Hereafter cited as Catlin, "The Regime of the Governor and Judges," Michigan History, XV. 34Protest by Judge Woodward against the sale of certain lands in Detroit, June 1, 1818, in Woodward Papers, BHC. See also MPHC XII, 473-483. 35Dunbar notes that "in later years the abandonment of Wood- ward's plan was to cost Detroit millions of dollars spent in widening streets." Dunbar, Michigan, 197. 36Proclamation of Land Sales at Detroit, March 31, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 739-740. 37 U. S. Stats., II, 73-78. 231 38 dollars. By 1823 more than three million acres had been surveyed and offered for sale in Michigan, although only a little more than one hundred and twenty thousand had been sold.39 Michigan's early land sales were not entirely successful in encouraging individual settlement on small holdings. Transportation to Michigan remained difficult. Those settlers who did come often found surveyed lands far away from the settled areas. The auction system often attracted speculators with enough capital to bid up the price of land, squeezing out the small purchaser. While speculators were not a major problem in this early period, settlers still found it beyond their means to acquire one hundred and sixty acre tracts. John Biddle, the register of the land office at Detroit informed Commissioner John McLean of the General Land Office in 1822 that "the settlers in this territory are generally persons who buy the smaller divisions of the public lands and as the fractions in question are all above one hundred & sixty acres entire they are virtually out of t."40 marke In 1820 Congress provided for the sale of the public lands in eighty-acre tracts and reduced the minimum price per acre 38Am. State Papers, Pub1ic Lands, VIII, 423. 39Ibid., IV, 27. See also Dallas Lee Jones, "The Survey and Sale of the Public Land in Michigan, 1815-1862" (unpublished M.A. thesis, Cornell University, 1952), 9-23;75-83; 129-131. Hereafter cited as Jones, "Public Land in Michigan." 40John Biddle to John McLean, November 13, 1822, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 294. McLean, formerly a justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, succeeded Josiah Meigs as commissioner when the latter died in September of 1822. McLean served as commissioner for only nine months, accepting an appointment as Postmaster General. He was succeeded by George Graham. Malcolm Rohrbough, The Land Office Bus- iness (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), 158-159. 232 to a dollar and a quarter. While credit was eliminated from the land code, some credit was extended for land purchased previously to 1820.4' In spite of these changes in the land laws, land sales in Michigan remained slow. A boundary dispute with Ohio discouraged settlement south of Detroit in this period. In 1802 the Ohio Constitutional Convention had established Ohio's northern boundary to include the mouth of the Maumee River. In 1805, however, when Michigan became a terri- tory, Congress provided that its southern boundary would be a line drawn due east from the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan, as pro- vided by the Northwest Ordinance. This line disregarded the provi- sion of the Ohio constitution, and established a line several miles further south of the Ohio line. In January of 1818 the territorial officials addressed a lengthy memorial to Congress in defense of the Michigan line. They pointed out that it was relatively unimportant to Ohio whether or not its boundary would, or would not, be extended seven miles further north. On the other hand, the matter did con- cern Michigan Territory, which was small in extent and weak in 42 population. Congress failed to act on the matter, and the debate 4'0. 5. Stats., III, 566-567; Rohrbough, The Land Office Business, 141-143. 42Memorial to Congress by the Governor and Judges, January 3, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 747-754. The area in dispute contained less than five hundred square miles and was about eight miles wide on the east and five miles wide on the west. The corres- pondence between William Woodbridge and Governor Ethan Brown of Ohio in 1820 on the dispute in this early period is in Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. 233 between the two parties continued to rage until Michigan became a state. Financial problems were a concern of the governor and judges after the War of 1812. Michigan continued to be an expensive place to live, even though the territory was in a devastated condition. Woodbridge told his wife Julia in 1815 that he had been unable to purchase any comfortable home in Detroit for less than five thousand dollars. He noted that when the war with Britain had ended, "the news was received with joyous acclamation, and most unfortunately too it was followed by an immediate rise in real property."43 A continuing problem in Michigan was a shortage of specie, which forced many territorial residents to resort to barter. Since there was no bank in Michigan, money had to be brought from the East at considerable risk. Petitioners to the governor and judges com- plained that gold, silver, and paper were being carried away from the territory by "foreign speculators of all descriptions," and that it was difficult to transact business. They lamented that the territory was in a deplorable financial condition. Unless something was done for the relief of the people, they believed that many would "fall "44 prey to the iron grasp of their unrelenting creditors. Still other memorialists from Detroit called for the erection of a 43Woodbridge to his wife Julia, February 17, 1815, in Wood- bridge Papers, BHC. 44Petition to the Governor and Judges, March 3, 1820, in Petitions and Recommendations, Civil Affairs, Secretary of State Records, 1820-1821, MSA. Hereafter cited as Petitions and Recommenda- tions, 1820-1821, MSA. 234 territorial bank to help prevent the flood of foreign and unchartered paper in circulation.45 In December of 1817 the legislative board made provision for the incorporation of the Bank of Michigan. This bank was established at Detroit with an initial capitalization of one hundred thousand dollars, to be divided into one thousand shares of one hundred dollars each. One tenth of the amount of each share was to be paid immediately to the bank directors in specie, with the balance being made in in- stallments. This act named the first directors--Stephen Mack, Abra- ham Edwards, Solomon Sibley, Henry Hunt, Philip Lecuyer, John Williams, and William Brown--but provided for future directors to be elected 46 annually. Williams became the first president and James McCloskey the cashier of the bank.47 This act also established rules for the operation of the bank. The bank was required to produce a statement of its affairs to the legislative board upon request, and the territory reserved the right to subscribe any number of shares in the bank up to five hundred. The institution was prohibited from trading in goods and merchandise, and could receive such goods only as security for debts. If bills of credit or obligation were not paid in the legal coin of the United 45Petition from Detroit Citizens, May 5. 1817. in Petitions and Recommendations, Undated to 1819, MSA. 46Terr. Laws, 1, 438-447. 47Gi1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 102. 235 States when they were due or demanded, the bank was to be dissolved.48 In a further effort to bring financial stability to Michigan, the legislative board adopted an act in September of 1819 providing for a supervisor of territorial taxes. This officer was to make out separate assessment roles for each county except Michilimackinac on which all persons subject to taxation would be listed. These roles would then be turned over to the treasurer, who would make out his warrants for each county and deliver them to the sheriff. This new law placed a tax of twenty dollars on each merchant and trader in Detroit; ten dollars on every Detroit tavernkeeper; five dollars on all other tavernkeepers; and six dollars on all auctioneers. Ferry operators in Detroit were required to pay eight dollars; all others in the territory were assessed four dollars.49 Michigan residents frequently called upon the governor and judges to adopt legislation to correct existing evils in the terri- tory. A Michigan grand jury in 1815 complained of many social prob- lems. There were too many taverns in Detroit, the Sabbath was not Observed, and a law was needed to "suppress immorality." Roads were poor, and the destitute wandered about the city without relief. Animals were slaughtered near Detroit, and their carcasses were often thrown into the river. Stray animals trampled crops and churned up 48Terr. Laws, 1, 438-447. In November of 1815, the legisla- tive board adopted a law making anyone subscribing to or becoming a member or a proprietor of an unincorporated bank liable to a penalty of one thousand dollars. Terr. Laws, I, 139. 49Ibid., 427-431. 236 the already impassable city streets. Finally, Detroit was still without an adequate jail.50 The legislative board tried to deal with growing citizen complaints. An effort was made to regulate gambling, a common occur- rence in Michigan. An act adopted in 1819 declared that any bonds, bills, or securities obtained by gambling were to be declared void. Anyone who had gambled away his mortgage or securities was to be considered "dead," and his holdings were to go to his next of kin. If a man had lost money at gambling, he could by suit recover from the winner up to treble the amount lost. Professional gamblers were required to post bonds with the local authorities guaranteeing their good behavior.51 52 A person placing a bet on a horse risked a hundred dollar fine. Tavern owners were the object of new legislation in 1819. A tavern owner could not even obtain a license unless the county de- cided that his particular establishment was necessary to accommodate travellers. These establishments were required to have at least two spare beds for guests, and there were to be accommodations and feed for the animals of guests. Billiards, cards, dice, or other games of chance were forbidden in taverns; drunkenness, quarreling, fight- ing, and revelling were similarly prohibited.53 50Presentment of the Grand Jury of Michigan, September 26, 1815, in Mich. Exec. Acts, 1805-1820, MSA. 5ITerr. Laws, 1, 412-417. 52Ibid., 417-419. 53Ibid., 407-412. 237 The legislative board attempted to deal with drunk and dis- orderly persons by adopting measures permitting authorities to whip them or to turn them over to a local constable to be hired out at 54 forced labor for up to three months. The Detroit Gazette reported the fate of a drunken vagabond in late 1821. When his services were put up for sale in the Market House at Detroit, some of the passen- gers from the steamboat Walk-in-the-Water talked a black boathand into buying the man's contract for ten days. The Gazette stated that many Detroit citizens had derived great benefits from this law, and had 1K) desire to part with it. It had had the effect of "send- ing from the territory very many drunkards and vagabonds that thronged into it from Canada, Ohio, and the state of New York."55 The territorial officials even made special provisions for enforcing the observance of the Sabbath in Michigan, "considering that in every community, some portion of time ought to be set apart for relaxation from worldly labors and employments, and devoted to the social worship of Almighty God . . . ."56 Business pursuits, general manual labor, sports, plays, and secular public assemblies were all forbidden, and anyone caught disturbing a religious assembly was liable for a fine of up to forty dollars. Parents were liable for the misdeeds of their children. This act also stated that on the Sabbath no person could serve or execute, or 54Ibid., 588-589. 55Detroit Gazette, November 23, 1821. 56Terr. Laws, 1, 643-645. 238 cause to be served or executed, any writ, process, warrant, order, judgment, or decree, except in cases of crimes or misdemeanors.57 These laws concerning strict moral behavior reflected the eastern backgrounds of the judges, and were not generally popular in Michigan. In a frontier community like Detroit, gambling, drinking, and brawling were all accepted as routine occurrences by the popu- lace. Many citizens found it difficult to change the habits of a lifetime, even though the governor and judges attempted to do this by law. Judge Woodward in particular was often impatient with ter- ritorial residents who failed to act like civilized easterners and who could not appreciate his plans for improving conditions in Mich- igan. His biographer notes that the "slow pace of territorial ad- vancement discouraged him; he had a tendency to sulk when his vision was not immediately shared by others."58 Woodward hoped to improve conditions in Michigan by laying the foundation for an education system for the territory. As early as 1806 he had submitted a resolution to the legislative board calling for the establishment of one or more seminaries of learning in the territory. He believed that this measure would eventually improve the standard of living for many territorial residents because they would learn new methods of agriculture, business, and industry. Eventually, Woodward devised a plan for an educational system in Michigan, with a university at the center, to be followed by 57Ibid. 58Woodford, Woodward, 74. 239 subordinate colleges, schools, academies, libraries, museums, and other educational institutions.59 In August of 1817 the legislative board established the "Cath- olepistemiad" or University Of Michigania, primarily because of the insistence of Woodward. George Catlin Observes that "here was a golden opportunity for Judge Woodward to bring to the surface the most polysyllabic words in his astonishing vocabulary and, like a turtle when it lays its eggs, having once started on this route he "60 The Cathol- seemed unable to stop his raid on the dictionaries. epistemiad was to contain thirteen "didaxiim" or university depart- ments, presided over by an equal number of "didactors" or professors, who would conduct classes in such fields as "anthropoglossica" (lit- erature), "Oeconomica" (agriculture), and "Ennoeica" (intellectual sciences). Professors were to be appointed and commissioned by the governor, and supported by a fifteen percent increase in public taxes, by public lotteries, and by various land grants.6] Woodward's plan for a new university was not popular in Mich- igan. Territorial inhabitants petitioning the governor and judges for relief from the ravages of the War of 1812 could see little use 59C. M. Burton, “Woodward," in MPHC, XXIX, 658-659. 60Catiin, The Story_of Detroit, 223. 6'Terr. Laws, II, 104-106. John Monteith, a Presbyterian min- ister, was appointed president, and Gabriel Richard vice-president. Monteith received twenty-five dollars a year, and Richard eighteen dollars and seventy-five cents. Detroit citizens raised over three thousand dollars in private contributions for the new institution. For the contribution list, see the Detroit Gazette for October 10, 1817. See also E. B. Isbell, "The Catholepistemiad of Michigania," Michigan Alumnus Quarterly Review, XLIII, 590-602. 240 for such a grandiose scheme. Cass is said to have referred to the 52 While it proposed institution as the "Cathole-what's its name." is true that Woodward's contrived and unfortunate language describing the new university offended and mystified many territorial residents, his basic educational plan was both sound and ahead of its time. It set forth principles commonly accepted in education today--state sup- port of education from elementary to university level, taxation for educational support, low tuition fees for higher education, and non- sectarian control.63 In 1821 the legislative board abolished the Catholepistemiad and established the University of Michigan. The new law named twenty- one trustees to direct and control the university; they included the governor, John Biddle, Gabrie1 Richard, Solomon Sibley, Austin Wing, and William Woodbridge. These trustees were to control the township of land granted by Congress for educational purposes in 1804, as well as three sections of land ceded by the Indians in the Treaty of Fort Meigs, also for educational purposes. None of these sections of land had as yet been selected. Trustees were authorized to establish necessary schools and colleges if they could find the funds for such projects. Individuals were not to be prevented from either attending or administering the university because of their religious convic- 64 tions. While this new act attempted to improve education in 6ZDunbar, Michigan, 281. 63Woodford, Woodward, 162-164; Catlin, The Story,of Detroit, 225. 64Terr. Laws, I, 879-882. 241 Michigan, there was no real university until Michigan became a state. Although Michigan remained an isolated frontier in 1819, De- troit was developing into a bustling little community. The Detroit Gazette reported that over a thousand whites and seventy free Negroes lived in the city. Detroit contained one hundred and forty-two houses and one hundred and thirty-one stores, mechanic shops, public buildings, and houses of business. Professional people included two Catholic clergymen, one Protestant minister, twelve attorneys, and three physicians and surgeons. There were eighteen blacksmiths, sixty carpenters and joiners, five wheelwrights, twelve shoemakers, three printers, and one gunsmith. Culturally, Detroit boasted a Bible Society, a Moral and Humane Society, a Mechanics' Society, an Agricultural Society, and a 1yceum. In 1819 the city exported nearly seventy thousand dollars worth of goods, while importing materials worth over fifteen thousand dollars.65 The legislative board adopted new legislation in 1819 to regulate goods and materials offered for sale in the territory. An inspector and his deputies were empowered to examine beef, pork, flour, butter, and lard to determine its fitness for sale. Barrelled fish were to be well salted and pickled and free from rust. Boards, timber, or planks for use in boats or rafts were to be inspected, 66 measured, and marked. Spiritous beverages were also subject to 65Detroit Gazette, January 29, 1819. 66Terr. Laws, 11, 156-160. 242 inspection. Anyone adulterating spirits or liquors with "any poison- ous or unhealthy drug or substance" was guilty of a misdemeanor and could be fined five hundred dollars and receive four years in jail.67 The governor and judges frequently relied on local Officials to supervise trade and commerce within the territory. An act adopted in 1820 empowered county clerks to inspect weights and measures and to award treble damages to those cheated by persons using faulty 68 Inspectors were appointed in 1822 to determine whether standards. leather offered for sale was "well-tanned, dressed, dried, and fit for market," and whether saddles, bridles, and harnesses were of suit- able quality.69 The legislative board also made provision for supervising the medical profession. While there were a number of doctors available in the territory, few of these had studied at medical school, the majority having learned their skill as apprentices to an established doctor. Many were "part-time physicians" and spent most of their time engaged in farming or in business. In many cases, their remedies were no better than thoSe concocted by the settler and his wife.70 In 1819 the legislative board created a medical society to supervise physicians and surgeons. Similar societies were also 67Ibid., 163-164. 68Ibid., 171-173. 69Ibid., 1, 252-254. 70 Northwest 497-520. R. C. Buley, "Pioneer Health and Medical Practices in the Old Prior to 1840," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XX, 243 encouraged at the county level. Members of medical societies were exempt from militia duty in time of peace, and from serving on juries. These societies were to examine students desiring to enter the med- ical profession, and to present them with diplomas upon satisfactory completion of a course of study. Students unable to qualify at the county level retained the right to appeal to the territorial society. No one was allowed to practice medicine without a suitable diploma. No one from another state was to be prevented from practicing medicine in the territory provided he was in possession of a diploma or license from a recognized medical society. Medical societies were authorized to assess their members up to three dollars each for funds to obtain medical apparatus and to construct libraries for their members.71 Lawyers were also regulated by law. Any young man desiring to practice in Michigan was required to be examined and admitted to the profession by any two judges of the Territorial Supreme Court. A potential lawyer must be of "good character" and a citizen of the United States. The Supreme Court retained the power to suspend any attorney from practice for misconduct. Attorneys were expected to reside in the territory. If clients were forced to pay costs or damages in court because of a lawyer's absence, the lawyer was liable for those costs.72 The governor and judges adopted a series of acts in 1818 7ITerr. Laws, I, 431-438. 72Ibid., 681-683. For a role of the attorneys admitted to Practice before the Territorial Supreme Court between 1814 and 1824, see Blume, Transactions, III, 17-24. 244 respecting wills, estates, and the disposition of property of deceased persons. According to an act passed in July of that year, a copy of a will filed in Michigan in a court of probate, where the original had been allowed in a court outside the territory, was to have as much force as the original. If a will was challenged, a probate judge was instructed to provide a period of thirty days in which wit- nesses could appear both for and against it. After hearing such testi- money, the court would make its ruling.73 The legislative board also adopted an act allowing children to share equally in an estate not otherwise disposed of by will; if there were no children, the next of kin were to share equally. If an estate was too meager to pay funeral expenses, the widow was still to be allowed her personal possessions and a suitable amount for subsistence, to be determined by the judge. Guardians were to be appointed by a judge for minors or persons incapacitated or incompetent who stood to inherit an es- tate.74 Occasionally, the territorial officials took time off from their official responsibilities to mix socially with the Michigan community. There were picnics, horseraces, banquets, balls, and assemblies to attend, as well as weddings, funerals, political meet- ings, and church gatherings. Cass enjoyed dancing and was a welcome guest at Detroit parties. Woodford notes that because his official position made it "politic that he dance with each lady present," 73Terr. Laws, 1, 354-356. 74Ibid., 356-366. 245 Cass occasionally complained that he was "unable to get home until late."75 Woodbridge wrote to his wife Julia that he had attended a "beef stake party" on the River Rouge, together with thirty ladies and gentlemen. He noted that the inhabitants of Detroit played cards at all their parties and that the officers gambled a great deal. During the winter there was usually at least one party a week, with sleighing a popular pastime.76 In 1819 the legislative board adopted legislation regarding di- vorce in the territory. This new law provided that a marriage could be dissolved if adultery was proved in a court of law, but that such dis- solution was not to affect the legitimacy of the children. Under the act a complainant, after obtaining a divorce, could marry again, as though the defendant were dead. On the other hand, a defendant who had been convicted of adultery could not remarry before the death of the complainant. A husband who was a complainant in a divorce case could, if successful in his suit, possess the wife's estate as if he were not divorced. A wife convicted of adultery lost her share in her husband's estate upon his death. Husbands found guilty of adultery could be ordered to pay support for the wife and children]7 75Woodford, Cass, 167. 76Woodbridge to his wife Ju1ia, February 17, 1815, in Wood- bridge Papers, BHC. 77Terr. Laws, I, 494-499. Buley notes that in the Old Northwest, "the importance of matrimony was impressed upon the minds of girls; there was no niche for the unmarried woman in a society in which a woman was comparatively useless except as wife and housekeeper. Failure to get married was more than a personal disappointment; it was more or less an economic calamity." R. C. Buley, The Old Northwest, Pioneer Period, 1815-1840 (2 vols.; Bloomington: Indiana University Press,’l962), I, 332. Hereafter cited as Buley, The Old Northwest. 246 The legislative board also made provision for mothers of illegitimate children. Any unmarried woman bearing an illegitimate child could bring suit against the accused father before a justice of the peace. Both the complainant and the accused could confront each other in the presence of the justice, and if the alleged father agreed to pay for the maintenance of the child, he was to be dis- charged. If the man in question failed to acknowledge paternity, he was to be bound over to the county court for jury trial. The mother of the illegitimate child was to be admitted as a competent witness, provided she had not been convicted of any crime which by law would disqualify her. If the defendant was found to be the legal father, he was compelled to pay support according to the ruling of the judge, or face a jail sentence.78 Transportation was a continuing problem for the territorial Officials. In 1814 General Duncan McArthur had complained to Monroe that communications between Ohio and Michigan were primitive. Rivers, creeks, and swamps made travel by teams and carriages extremely hazardous. It was both difficult and expensive to bring supplies to Detroit from Ohio because of the rugged terrain.79 Four years later, Oliver and Alpheus Williams led a party of Detroiters northward towards Saginaw along Indian trails. After traveling three or four days, the party returned to Detroit and told of their exploits. Oliver's son, Ephriam, later noted that "their report electrified the staid, quiet 78Terr. Laws, I, 640-643. 79Duncan McArthur to the Secretary of War, December 10, 1814, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 497-498. 247 inhabitants of Detroit, among whom the belief was general that the interior of Michigan was a vast impenetrable and uninhabitable wilder- ness and morass."80 New settlers were often discouraged from coming to Michigan because of the difficulty in reaching the territory. The Detroit Gazette reported in 1818 that "the greatest obstacle to emigration to this territory is the difficulty of access; by land it is certainly, at present, difficult, but the lake navigation presents a mode of travelling generally cheaper and more expeditious than by good roads."81 The Black Swamp, south of Detroit, was virtually impassable in rainy weather and was a major hazard to travelers journeying from Ohio to Detroit by land. Immigration continued to bypass Michigan during this period, focusing instead on the new land in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois.82 Cass recognized the serious need for improvements in trans- portation, particularly because improved communications with Ohio would increase Michigan's intercourse with the rest of the United States and strengthen the defenses of the territory. Concerned about the isolating influence of the Black Swamp, he called for a military road through the area. He was convinced that such a road could be built only with financial help from Washington. This road would also 80"Personal Reminiscences of Ephriam S. Williams," in MPHC. VIII. 233-259. 8IDetroit Gazette, May 22, 1818. 82 Dunbar, Michigan, 245; Gilpin, The Territory_of Michigan, 136-137. 248 help to strengthen a territory whose weakened condition was "calcu- lated to invite rather than to repel attack." Transportation to the territory by water was uncertain and for many important purposes, inconvenient. By land it remained difficult, tedious, and expensive. Cass believed that Michigan's future security and her potential for growth and development would only be realized when the territory had gained adequate connections with the rest of the United States.83 With some federal assistance assured, the legislative board authorized several road projects after 1816. That year troops from the Detroit garrison began to build a road between Toledo and Detroit. In the fall of 1818 General Alexander Macomb informed Calhoun that nearly seventy miles of a "truly magnificent road" had been completed. Macomb was convinced that the new road would not only strengthen Michigan's defenses, but also increase the value of her public lands 84 by making them more accessible to new settlers. In 1816 the legislative board also launched a project to construct a road north- ward from Detroit, but the work proceeded slowly and by 1822 it had 85 reached only as far as Pontiac. In 1822 the territorial officials appropriated two hundred dollars to build a road from Pontiac to 83Mich. Exec. Acts. 1814-1830, MSA. Concerning Michigan's defenseless position, see Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 633-635. 84Alexander Macomb to the Secretary of War, November 2, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 785. 85Catlin, "Michigan's Early Military Roads," Michigan History, XIII, 196-207; Dunbar, Michigan, 247. 248 help to strengthen a territory whose weakened condition was ”calcu- lated to invite rather than to repel attack." Transportation to the territory by water was uncertain and for many important purposes, inconvenient. By land it remained difficult, tedious, and expensive. Cass believed that Michigan's future security and her potential for growth and development would only be realized when the territory had gained adequate connections with the rest of the United States.83 With some federal assistance assured, the legislative board authorized several road projects after 1816. That year troops from the Detroit garrison began to build a road between Toledo and Detroit. In the fall of 1818 General Alexander Macomb informed Calhoun that nearly seventy miles of a "truly magnificent road" had been completed. Macomb was convinced that the new road would not only strengthen Michigan's defenses, but also increase the value of her public lands 84 by making them more accessible to new settlers. In 1816 the legislative board also launched a project to construct a road north- ward from Detroit, but the work proceeded slowly and by 1822 it had 85 reached only as far as Pontiac. In 1822 the territorial officials appropriated two hundred dollars to build a road from Pontiac to 83Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. Concerning Michigan's defenseless position, see Cass to Josiah Meigs, May 11, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 633-635. 84Alexander Macomb to the Secretary of War, November 2, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 785. 85Catlin, "Michigan's Early Military Roads," Michigan History, XIII, 196-207; Dunbar, Michigan, 247. 249 Saginaw.86 Seven years later Congress finally provided the funds to complete its construction. In an effort to improve transportation by road, the legisla- tive board granted county commissioners the power to open, repair, alter, or vacate all roads and highways in their respective counties. Commissioners could make arrangements for the erection of needed bridges, and secure funds from the county treasury for workmen if the nearest hamlet was not large enough to supply its own workers. Males over twenty-one could be assessed up to twenty days a year for service on the roads.87 Under this legislation twelve residents in a particular county could petition the county commissioner for a new road. The county commissioner would then appoint three disinterested residents as "viewers." These viewers were instructed to look at the proposed route for a new road to determine if it was necessary. If they sub- mitted a favorable report, the commissioner could then instruct the territorial surveyor or one of his deputies to mark out the proposed road. Road supervisors were authorized to cut timber and to dig ditches on lands adjacent to the highway on either side while the road was being b0i1t.88 The legislative board also sought better transportation by authorizing several toll bridges in the Detroit area. Solomon Sibley, 86Terr. Laws, 1, 265-266. 87Ibid., 449-461. 88Ibid. 250 Henry Hunt, and Benjamin Woodworth were permitted to build toll bridges over the River Rouge and the River Ecorces, leading from Detroit to the Miami Rapids. The bridges were to be at least six- teen feet wide, with a strong railing on each side.89 Gabriel God- froy was authorized to build a toll bridge over the River Huron on the road from Detroit to the Miami Rapids. He was allowed to charge twelve cents for a man and horse, three cents for every cow, twenty- five cents for a cart or carriage drawn by one horse or ox, and fifty cents for a carriage drawn by two horses. Mail carriers, public expresses, United States troops, and all vehicles and persons in the service of the territory were to be permitted free use of the bridge. After twenty-five years the bridge and its equipment were to revert to the territory.90 Michigan's communications with the outside world were im- proved in 1818 with the advent of the Walk-in-the-Water, the first steamboat on the Great Lakes. Over three-hundred tons, and rigged with sails to supplement steam power, the ship plowed the waters between Buffalo and Detroit in a little over forty hours. The French marveled at this display of Yankee ingenuity, while many Indians be- lieved it was pulled through the water by a giant sturgeon. Cabin fare between Buffalo and Detroit was eighteen dollars, while steer- age was available for seven. While the ship had a carrying capacity of nearly one hundred passengers, she seldom carried more than 89Ibid., 290-294. 90Ibid., 295-298. 251 half that number. In 1821 the ship was wrecked in a storm, but her machinery was salvaged and placed in the Superior, which also trav- eled the Great Lakes. These ships made passage to Michigan both faster and more comfortable.91 The governor and judges realized that if they hoped to attract new settlement, they would have to maintain peace in the territory. They continued to rely on the territorial militia as an important instrument of defense and took steps to improve its effec- tiveness. Following the War of 1812, Cass discovered that no regular record had been kept concerning militia commissions in Michigan, and that these commissions had often been issued under "peculiar circum- stances." To remedy the confusion concerning these commissions, and to ascertain exactly who held rank in the militia, he decided to revoke all commissions issued previous to July of 1818.92 In 1820 the legislative board adopted rules regarding the militia. While priests, ministers, physicians, and schoolmasters were exempted from militia duty, other free, white males between eighteen and forty-five were liable for service, and were expected to arm themselves with a musket, ammunition, and bayonet. Officers were required to have a sword, a pair of pistols, and sufficient ammunition. Volunteer companies without at least thirty privates were to be dis- banded. Companies were to rendezvous on the first Mondays of June 9IDunbar, Michigan, 245; Catlin, The Story of Detroit, 232- 248. See also Joe L. Norris, "The Walk-in-the-Water." Detroit Historical Society Bulletin, XIX, 4-11. 92 Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. 252 and September for the purpose of "training, disciplining and improv- ing in martial exercise." The commissioned and non-commissioned officers and the musicians of each regiment and batallion were to meet two days in every year for the purpose of training.93 The authorities expected militiamen to take their training seriously, and provided penalties for those who failed to do so. Militiamen were instructed to appear at drills with all their equip- ment. If a soldier forgot his weapon, he forfeited one dollar; if he forgot his horse, he lost two dollars. From sunrise to sunset on the days of formal drill, the militia was considered as "under arms, and subject to military law and control. Militiamen who bought liquor from bystanders witnessing military drill were to be fined. Militiamen were also subject to fines and discipline for behavior unbecoming a soldier.94 The territorial officers experienced some difficult in sup- plying arms and ammunition to the militia. Cass told Calhoun that many militia officers had asked him to approach the public for the loan of their arms to equip the militia. After the surrender of Detroit to the enemy in 1812, the British had seized all the public and private arms in the country. These weapons had never been 93Terr. Laws, I, 542-559. 94Ibid. Petitioners to the governor and judges complained that an act preventing the sale of liquor to soldiers was unfair as well as unconstitutional. They claimed that no such statute could be found in the laws of any other state. In spite of this protest, the act remained in force. Petition to the governor and judges, March 29, 1820, in Petitions and Recommendations, 1820-1821, MSA. 253 replaced and the militia was poorly armed.95 The federal government eventually responded to Michigan's request for arms. Decius Wadsworth, a member of the Ordnance Depart- ment in Washington, wrote Calhoun in 1820 that a deposit of two thou- sand stands of arms with accouterments, flints, and two hundred thou- sand musket cartridges would be made at the arsenal at Detroit within the next year. Wadsworth believed that these supplies would ade- quately supply Michigan's militia with weapons. He also promised to send some artillery to Detroit, but this was not to be distributed to the militia.96 Occasionally, Michigan residents called upon the governor and judges for protection from territorial soldiers and militiamen! In a petition to Acting Governor Woodbridge in 1817, James May com- plained that soldiers from Fort Shelby outside of Detroit were steal- ing poultry, pigs, and sheep, as well as taking small articles of clothing and other valuables. Bands of from six to ten soldiers had been wandering up and down the settlements, armed with guns, swords, and bludgeons trying to force open the doors of houses and outhouses. The problem was compounded by the fact that many of these soldiers claimed to have passes allowing them out at all hours of the night.97 95Cass to Secretary of War Ca1houn, June 12, 1819, in Letters Rec'd., Main Series, RG 107, M221, roll 8, FRC, Chicago. 96Decius Wadsworth to Secretary of War J. C. Calhoun, Feb- ruary 25, 1820, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 836. 97Petition to William Woodbridge from James May, April 18, 1817, in Woodbridge Papers, BHC. Michigan residents were also upset over wandering bands of soldiers because smallpox had been reported among the soldiers of Detroit. 254 Although Cass later warned the commander at Detroit to exercise greater vigilance in controlling his men, relations between citizens and soldiers remained strained. As late as 1820 residents near Detroit and the River Raisin were still seeking compensation from Congress for the destruction of their property by American soldiers during the War of 1812. While defending Michigan in 1812, soldiers had taken over private dwellings and barns for barracks and stables and had cut down trees and picket fences for fuel. They had stripped orchards of their fruit and had seized the crops in the fields for food for themselves and their ani- mals.98 While the governor and judges were sympathetic to the plight of these citizens, they were unable to influence Congress, and their petition was denied.99 Cass attempted to aid Michigan residents not only by plead- ing their case in Washington, but also by involving them in the government of the territory. He was a sincere believer in the demo- cratic process and encouraged the citizenry to assume a greater responsibility in directing their own affairs. One of his biographers notes that he "never considered himself as the master of the people, but rather as their servant . . . . Self-government was second na- ture to him, and instead of fastening his new authority more tightly 98Petition to Congress by Terr. Inhabitants, February 7, 1820, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 7-11. 99In rejecting the petition, Congress decided that there was not enough evidence to support the claims of the petitioners. Annals of Congress, Sixteenth Congress, First Session,XXXV, 466-467. 255 about him, he deliberately 'diminished his own powers.'"100 Cass encouraged citizen participation in government by erect- ing new counties as fast as settlement permitted, and by appointing officials to administer local affairs. Wayne County was reduced to its present Size in 1815, and in 1817 Monroe County was established. Macomb, Michilimackinac, Brown, and Crawford counties all come into being in 1818. Oakland County was erected in 1819, and St. Clair in 1820. Lapeer, Sanilac, Saginaw, Shiawassee, Washtenaw, and Len- awee counties were all laid out in 1822, but were not organized until after 1824.101 The Detroit Gazette said in 1822 that Michigan's prosperity would increase in proportion to the rapidity of its settle- ments. "We know of no measure," the Gazette stated, "at the present moment, which would, in a greater degree, hasten the settlement of the country than the laying out of the new counties."102 The governor and judges also encouraged citizen awareness and participation in government by publishing the territorial statutes. No provision for this had been made before 1820, primarily because of the cost involved. In 1815 the legislative board complained to President Monroe that Michigan citizens were governed by laws exist- ing primarily in manuscripts and that the majority of the population 100Woodford, Cass, 149. 1OICampbell, The Political History_of Michigan, 382, 383, 388- 389, 407; Gi1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 100, 102-104. See also William Hathaway, "County Organization in Michigan," Michigan History, II. 573-629. 102Detroit Gazette. September 13. I822- MACOMB Brown County, as set off and organized, was to lie to the south of the headwaters of the rivers that flow into Lake Superior. Figure 7. Michigan Counties, 1818 Source: Richard Welch, County Evolution in Michigan (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1972), 21. 257 OAKLAND MONROE " Figure 8. Michigan Counties, 1822 Source: Richard Welch, County Evolution in Michigan (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1972), 22. 258 103 had no knowledge of them. In 1820 Congress appropriated $1,250 for the publication of the territorial laws, and the legislative lO4 board began a process of compilation and revision. In 1822 the board provided for the publishing of over two hundred and fifty ‘05 While these first ef- copies of the territorial acts in force. forts were far from satisfactory, they were a step in the right direction. From the close of the War of 1812 to the coming of a repre- sentative assembly in Michigan in 1823, the governor and judges per- formed valuable legislative and executive services to the territory. Through their efforts many Michigan residents were able to recover from the ravages of the War of 1812. The legislative board passed important laws promoting internal improvements, education, and the growth of commerce, as well as regulating goods and services within the territory. Chiefly through the efforts of Cass, Michigan's pub- lic lands were finally placed on the market as an important incentive to new settlement. Equally important, the Michigan frontier remained at peace in this period, primarily because of the diligence of the territorial officials. When Michigan's new representative assembly finally convened in 1824 to assume the legislative responsibilities 103Memorial to President Monroe from the Governor and Judges, December 22, 1815, in Cass Correspondence Book, 1814-1820, Sec. of State Records, MSA. 104Campbe11, The Po1itica1 History of Michigan. 405. 105Terr. Laws, II, 180. 259 of the governor and judges, it also inherited a sound legislative foundation upon which to build. CHAPTER VIII THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE--1814-1823 After the War of 1812 the governor and judges faced the task of rebuilding and maintaining a system of law and order for Michigan Territory. As the supreme court judges had refused to exercise their offices under the British, it was necessary to reconvene the high court and to continue its important work. During this period the governor and judges adopted needed legislation broadening the Michi- gan court system, clarifying and enlarging the criminal code, and protecting the rights of those accused of crimes in the territory. Crime was no stranger to Michigan, even though the territory contained fewer than nine thousand people by 1820. Unprincipled whites illegally sold liquor to Indians, while Indians occasionally raided white settlements in search of livestock. In Detroit there were reports of robbery, counterfeiting, assault, and murder. In 1818 the Detroit Gazette complained that a gang of criminals was passing counterfeit bills and "plundering the inhabitants during the silent watches Of the night."1 Detroit citizens were upset over drunken and abusive strangers, unruly soldiers, gambling dens, and "those infamous and disorderly houses, which, to the prejudice of every good interest still continue to disgrace our town."2 1Detroit Gazette, May 29, 1818. 21bid. 260 261 In an effort to control crime in Michigan, the governor and judges took steps to enlarge the territorial court system. In l815 the legislative board adopted an act establishing county courts.3 This new court was to be composed of one chief and two associate justices, any one of whom was a quorum. The county court was to have original and exclusive jurisdiction in all civil cases not within the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace but involving less than one thousand dollars. All civil matters could be appealed to the Supreme Court.4 The governor and judges also established a probate court for each county by an act adopted in l8l8. An "able and learned" person in each county was to be appointed judge of the probate court. All sheriffs, deputies, or constables were required to serve and execute legal warrants and summons directed to them by any probate judge.5 A later act allowed probate judges to approve guardians that had been chosen by minors of fourteen years of age, and to appoint guardians 3At the time this act was passed, there was only the county of Wayne, but provision was made for the adoption of an act fixing the time for holding a county court for any new county that might be created. 4Terr. Laws, 1, l84-l86. This act also stated that a person could appeal to a county court from a justice of the peace within twenty days. For officers of the early county courts, see Farmer, History of Detroit, l92. 5Terr. Laws, 1, 341-344. 262 for those under that age. If a minor over fourteen years refused or neglected to choose a guardian, the probate judge could do it for him. Probate judges could also make provision for guardians for idiots, lunatics, or other incapable persons.6 In addition to enlarging the court system, the legislative board also adopted a new act for the punishment of crimes in 1816. This new act contained sixty-eight sections, twenty more than the act of l808. Murder was still punishable by death by hanging. One of the most striking changes in this new legislation was section sixty-one, which stated that "if any offender sentenced to imprison— ment at hard labor, for manslaughter, sodomy, rape, arson, burglary, robbery, or forgery, shall be convicted of a second offence of the 7 In 1808 the maximum like nature, such offender shall suffer death." penalty for rape was life imprisonment, while that for forgery was three years imprisonment. The governor and judges evidently believed that the repetition of these specific crimes would be prevented if the penalty was severe enough. Whipping as a punishment appears only once in this act. Section fifty-nine provided that the court or justices could impose on any "negro, indian, or mulatto slave," con- victed of a noncapital offense, "instead of the punishment by this 61bid., 375-380. 71bid., 109-135. 263 act prescribed, such corporal punishment, not extending to life or limb, as such Court or Justices, in their discretion, shall direct."8 The court was not allowed to substitute whipping for another punish- ment, however, if the offender was white. There are some interesting changes in punishment in l8l6 from those adopted in l808. The penalty for manslaughter was reduced from ten years to three years maximum for a first offense. The penalty for rape was changed from life imprisonment to a maximum of fifteen years. The penalty for burglary was lowered from twelve years to ten years. Two crimes, robbery and forgery, received an increased punishment, possibly because of an increase in the number of such offenses. The penalty for robbery increased from ten to fifteen years, while that for forgery was increased from three to ten years. The punishment for adultery was changed from a five hundred dollar fine to a one hundred dollar fine and six months in jail.9 This criminal act of l8l6 also contained a number of new offenses not previously mentioned in the act of l808. Anyone con- victed of polygamy could be fined or imprisoned for up to ten years. Women pregnant with bastard children could be fined one hundred dollars and imprisoned for four months. Apprentices or servants attempting to steal from or defraud their mistresses or masters could 8mm. Ibid. Bond notes that in the Old Northwest, "crime was in- evitable in a newly settled section, and robbery was perhaps the most common offense, as was to be expected where settlement was so scattered." Bond, The Old Northwest, 498. 264 be fined one hundred dollars, or receive two years imprisonment. Officials falsifying, stealing, or destroying records of the judicial system which affected the outcome of a case could be fined $7,000 and receive seven years in jail. Kidnapping carried a penalty of a thousand dollar fine or five years in jail.10 Territorial residents greeted this new criminal act with mixed emotions. Some considered it too severe, while others felt that it did not go far enough. One group of petitioners complained to the governor and judges that imprisonment for debt could not be justified by principles of "religion, morality, or reason." 0n the frontier the blameless wife and the innocent child would be made to suffer with the unfortunate husband. The continuance of this law would leave poor Michigan residents at the mercy of "implacable creditors" who would degrade and distress their debtors "almost to the level of malefactors."H Many Michigan residents found the legislative board's system for the punishment of crime unworkable because there were no suitable facilities for confining prisoners at hard labor. The territory was still without an adequate jail. Petitioners complained to Cass in l818 that prisoners could neither be maintained nor controlled in present facilities. They asked the governor and judges to substitute 10Terr. Laws, 1, l09-l35. HPetition to the Governor and Judges, March 2l, 1822, in Petitions and Recommendations, l822, Sec. of State Records, MSA. Hereafter cited as Petitions and Recommendations, l822, MSA. 265 corporal punishment for all crimes not capital and called for up to thirty-nine lashes, as well as confinement to the pillory or stocks, 12 in proportion to the seriousness of the offense. Residents at Michilimackinac reported that the criminal laws of the territory ‘3 While could not be enforced because there was no suitable jail. Detroit had a jail of sorts, its facilities were deplorable. The Detroit Gazette reported in l8l7 that "criminals of every description and debtors, male and female, are promiscuously huddled together, and confined in a small space, whereby the air is rendered very unwhole- "14 The inmates some and dangerous to the health of the prisoners. easily obtained liquor, and engaged in gambling and card playing and other "unwholesome pursuits." In response to growing complaints about the treatment of prisoners, the legislative board adopted an act in l8l7 allowing those imprisoned for debt "the privilege of the bounds, which are or may be laid off and assigned by metes and bounds, around or adjoining "15 each county jail, by the judges of the county courts. These bounds 12Petition to Governor Cass, July, l818, in Petitions and Recommendations, Undated to 18l9, MSA. 13Petition to the Governor and Judges, l8l6, in Mich. Exec. Acts. 1805-1820, MSA. 14Detroit Gazette, July 25, 1817. From l8l3 to 18l9 the jail at Detroit was first an old stone building, then an old wooden struc- ture, and then a two-story blockhouse. A jail was finally completed in 1819 at a cost of nearly $5,000. See Farmer, History of Detroit, 215, and Catlin, The Story of Detroit, 261-263, on early Detroit jails. 15Terr. Laws, 11, 89-90. 266 were not to extend in any direction from a jail more than five hundred yards, and no prisoner was to pass over these limits. No prisoner was entitled to the privilege of the bounds until he had posted bond for double the sum described by his offense.16 A new act for regulating prisons was adopted in l8l9. The commissioners of the respective counties were to erect jails in each county when necessary and were to keep them in good repair. As there was still no territorial prison, prisoners in Michigan continued to be confined in local and county jails. If there was no suitable jail in the county where a crime was committed, a prisoner could be placed in the jail of another county, to be supported by the treasury of the county wherein he committed the offense. Sheriffs were to keep an accurate record of all prisoners committed to their care, which was to include the prisoner's name, place of residence, time of commit- ment, for what cause, and by what authority. This record was also to include the date of a prisoner's departure from jail, whether legally or by jail break. At the openings of the Supreme Court and the county courts, the sheriff was to return a list of all prisoners within his custody. All warrants, writs and instructions by which prisoners were committed or freed were to be regularly filed.17 This act of l8l9 also specified procedures to be followed in Michigan prisons. Debtors were to be kept separate from criminals in 16 Ibid. 17 b1d.. I, 469-476. 267 the county jails, and prisoners were not to be allowed to use spiritous liquors except in cases of sickness. Persons sentenced to solitary confinement were to be fed only bread and water. The sheriff was to furnish the tools and materials for any convict sentenced to hard labor, with the county treasury paying for such materials. Convicts working outside the jail were to be confined with a ball and chain. The sheriff was required to keep an account of the articles produced by convicts and also a record of the sale of such articles. Convicts who behaved in an unruly manner could be kept on bread and water and in solitary confinement. Literate convicts who requested a Bible were to be furnished with one.18 Legislation was adopted in 18l9 to protect the rights of those accused of crimes in the territory. This act instructed officers of the law to surrender prisoners to the Supreme Court when they were served with a writ of habeas corpus, and those refusing to comply faced a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars and the loss of their offices. Prisoners freed by writs of habeas corpus were not to be imprisoned again for the same offense. No person was to be removed from the county in which he committed a crime, except by legal process, and no Michigan citizen was to be sent out of the territory for an offense committed in Michigan. Anyone falsely imprisoned could re- cover up to treble costs and damages, which were not to be less than five hundred dollars.19 181 U" id. 191 CT id., 422-426. 268 General proceedings in criminal cases for the several courts were defined in an enactment of 1820. In part this legislation was designed to protect those persons accused of criminal offenses. It provided that in cases not capital a justice of the peace could set bail for those accused of crimes until the county court convened. The Supreme Court was empowered, however, to set bail for anyone accused of a crime, capital or otherwise. Any person standing mute and refusing to plead was to be regarded as having pleaded not guilty. A person charged with a crime punishable by death could challenge up to thirty-five prospective jurors. The defense could compel wit- nesses to appear on behalf of the defendant, and counsel was to be assigned to prisoners who could not afford their own. Anyone indicted for a capital crime was to have a copy of the indictment and a list 20 It is evident that while the of the jury that would try him. governor and judges desired to establish stiff penalties to discourage crime in Michigan, they were equally concerned with insuring justice to the accused. A law concerning time limitations for the prosecution of crimes and misdemeanors was adopted in l820. Any prosecutions for crimes and misdemeanors (except theft, robbery, burglary, forgery, arson, and murder) were to be commenced and prosecuted within three years. Suits and complaints for theft, robbery, burglary, and forgery were to be commenced and prosecuted within six years. With the exception 201bid., 604-625. 269 of arson and murder, for which there was no time limit, any crimes or misdemeanors not commenced or prosecuted within six years were to be "void and of no effect.“ Actions for slander were limited to two years. Such limitations, however, did not refer to persons already imprisoned or out of the territory and thus unavailable for such prosecution.2] In l820 Michigan received a new criminal code. Congress had appropriated over twelve hundred dollars for the publication of the existing Michigan laws; the legislative board accordingly compiled and revised their legislation to put it in the best possible form. They made several important changes in the act of l8l6 and increased its length from sixty-eight to seventy-three sections. Noticeably absent from this new criminal code was the provision for the death penalty for such crimes as sodomy, manslaughter, rape, burglary, arson, robbery, or forgery. Murder remained the only crime punishable by death. The only direct mention of second offenses concerned a criminal sentenced to hard labor who had escaped. If he was captured and convicted, he could be sentenced to additional confinement at hard labor, not exceeding the term for which he was first sentenced.22 There were some other interesting changes in the punishment for crimes. The penalty for rape dropped from fifteen years to a three hundred dollar fine or two years imprisonment. The punishment 21Ibid., 625-631. 221bid., 561-588. 270 for burglary was reduced from ten to five years. Apprentices or servants stealing from or defrauding their mistresses or masters could now be punished by a fifty dollar fine and six months in jail instead of a one hundred dollar fine or two years in jail. The penalty for forgery changed from ten years imprisonment to a three hundred dollar fine and two years imprisonment. In each of these last three offenses, however, the law also provided that a prisoner could receive up to "thirty nine lashes on the bare back." While the l816 act contained only one penalty of corporal punishment and provided the death penalty for eight offenses, the l820 act contained eight crimes punishable by whipping, with the death penalty reserved exclusively for murder. It is evident that the legislative board found corporal punishment a more satisfactory answer than jail terms or fines when dealing with certain crimes, particularly in light of the poor prison facilities in Michigan.23 The criminal code of 1820 contained a number of new offenses not included in the act of 18l6. Anyone convicted of blasphemy-- cursing, denying or reproaching Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, God, the Christian Religion or the Bible--could be fined one hundred 23Ibid. The public whipping post stood at the old market on Woodward Avenue, and was shaped like a "T" and was five feet high. Farmer, History‘of Detroit, 191. Campbell notes that "it was not creditable to the Territory that public whipping was allowed to be inflicted on Indians and negroes convicted of various offences, and by the order of a single justice, on disorderly persons, and those convicted of small offences." Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 405. The Supreme Court records make little mention of whipping as a punishment, however, and its use was not common. 271 dollars or sentenced to a year in jail. For conspiracy to indict falsely another person, the penalty was a five hundred dollar fine and two years imprisonment. For sending a threatening letter to extort or harm another, the punishment was a three-hundred-dollar fine and one year in jail. Anyone who obstructed creeks or rivers to prevent the passing of fish could be fined up to five dollars, and have his net destroyed.24 The new criminal code was rather long and involved consider- ing Michigan's frontier condition in 1820. Detroit had few cases involving extortion, embezzlement, and the bribing of officials; court cases there and elsewhere in the territory frequently concerned petty larcenies and simple assaults. The governor and judges were looking to the future; they believed that a comprehensive criminal code was necessary for the growth and development of Michigan. One of the first cases to come before the Supreme Court when it convened in l8l4 after a two year recess was a continuation of the suit brought by Joel Thomas against James McPherson. Thomas had originally filed in lBll, seeking the recovery of damages from McPherson. Solomon Sibley, McPherson's lawyer, pointed out that while his client's case had been pending, Michigan had been occupied by the British and the Supreme Court inactive. Furthermore, Sibley argued, when Henry Procter had placed the territory under martial law, he had suspended and abrogated the civil and criminal laws of Michigan. 24Terr. Laws, 1, 561-588. 272 Thus, the suit brought by Thomas against his client was also abrogated and suspended.25 The question confronting the court was important in that it would determine the status of all cases still pending that had originated before the War of l812. In October the court ruled in favor of the defendant, declaring all cases originating before the War of lBlZ to be in abatement.26 The Transactions of the Supreme Court of Michigan Territory reveal that between lBl4 and 1823 the high court handled nearly six hundred cases involving civil suits and criminal cases. Most of the cases were civil in character; crimes of violence were rare. The county courts and the justices of the peace aided the Supreme Court by handling many small civil suits and misdemeanors. Nearly half of all the cases to come before the Supreme Court in this period were civil cases involving a breach of contract or assumpsit. An important and revealing case was the property dispute between John Roby and Alexis Luc Reaume. This case dragged on for several years, and demonstrated Woodward's firm control of the court and his determination to interpret the law in his own fashion. The case resulting from a dispute between Roby and Reaume first came before the Supreme Court in September of l8l6. Reaume had 25Plea of Joel Thomas, September 29, lBl4, in Blume, Trans- actions, II, 330-332. 26"Supreme Court Transactions," 1, 420. Blume notes that "after the war [of lBlZ] no action was taken in any of the other cases which were pending in the Supreme Court before the War." Blume, Transactions, I, 222. 273 given Roby a promissory note for over two hundred dollars in lBl4, with a promise to pay it off in several months. The following year, the two men entered into another agreement by which Roby would sell and deliver to Reaume all the goods and merchandise he had on hand in his store in Detroit. Reaume agreed to pay for most of these goods in certificates to be verified by the commander at Detroit, and for the rest in cash. When Roby failed to receive payment for his goods, he took Reaume to the Supreme Court.27 Reaume's case came to trial in lBl9. A jury decided in Roby's favor and Woodward ordered Reaume to repay Roby over two thousand dollars in damages.28 William Woodbridge, Reaume's lawyer, immediately petitioned for a new trial. Woodbridge claimed that he had not been able to defend Reaume properly because Roby's lawyer had given Woodbridge one bill of particulars, only to file a new one at a later date. Because of this action, Woodbridge had not been adequately prepared for the first trial. He also noted that the court had told the jury that it was “fair and reasonable" to presume that Roby had presented his certificates to the commander at Detroit, and that they had been unacceptable. "The inference itself was not only unwarranted," he 27Blume, Transactions, III, 537-546. 28”Supreme Court Transactions," II, 689-690. 274 complained, "but it was also incompetent for the court to direct them what the inference should be. It was a matter solely for the con- sideration of the jury."29 Woodbridge also sought a mistrial on the grounds that the jury in his client's case was not a legally constituted jury. Accord- ing to a Michigan statute adopted from a Virginia law, the Supreme Court was to issue a venire or writ to a sheriff, ordering him to summon prospective jurors.30 A jury would then be selected from this group. In this case, however, the jury had been assembled by the verbal order of the court to the sheriff: Woodbridge accused Woodward of putting his own personal interpretation on the Michigan statute, which changed the original meaning of the law. Woodward spoke for the court in denying Woodbridge's motion for a new trial. The Supreme Court had been unmoved by the defendant's arguments in the original trial, and had seen little evidence to warrant a mistrial. Woodward dismissed as absurd the charge that the court had interfered with the jury, and pointed out that the evidence presented had proved that any certificates offered by Reaume in payment of his debt had not been acceptable. The chief justice maintained that the jury in this case had been empaneled both within the letter and the 29"Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, James Duane Doty, Detroit, 18l9," ms. journal in the Law Library of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 38-42. Hereafter cited as "Doty's Reports." Doty served as the clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court from 18l9 to l820. 30A law was adopted in February of l820 in Michigan requiring the issue of venires. Terr. Laws, I, 49l. 275 meaning of the original statute, and that it was both regular and legal.31 He stated that there had been no surprise on the part of the defendant respecting the introduction of evidence, as all the evidence in the case had been available to both parties. He labeled Woodbridge's objections as "technical and frivolous," and ruled that judgment be entered for the plaintiff.32 The Supreme Court heard nearly one hundred cases in this period concerning civil matters other than assumpsit suits. Leading the list were cases involving debt and tax penalties, followed by mortgage disputes. There were also a few cases concerned with divorce, libel, and slander. One important case involving both slander and divorce affected one of Michigan's most prominent citizens, Father Gabriel Richard. In lBl7 Francois Labadie, a Frenchman who had settled in Detroit, accused Richard of destroying his good name and brought suit before the Supreme Court, asking damages of five thousand dollars.33 The confrontation between Labadie and Richard was triggered by an earlier divorce proceeding before the same court. Labadie had accused his wife Apolline of adultery and of bearing illegitimate 3100ty wrote that the Michigan act was not a copy of the Vir- ginia statute, and that the Virginia law required that "different juries shall be summoned on different days of each Term--the Law of Michigan authorises the summoning of but one set of Jurors for each term." "Doty's Report," 45. 32"Supreme Court Transactions," III, 41. 33Complaint of Francis Labadie, September, lBlB, in Blume, Transactions, III, 598—60l. 276 children, and had sued for divorce.34 In 1816 Woodward granted Labadie his divorce.35 Labadie subsequently married an attractive widow named Marie Ann Griffard. Richard refused to recognize Labadie's divorce and openly criticized and berated his parishoner in the presence of his neighbors and friends. The angry priest labeled Labadie a "shameful sinner," accused him of adultery and polygamy, and called his actions "concubinage and open lewdness."36 Richard did not stop at simple threats in making life miser- able for Labadie. He obtained from his Bishop an edict excommuni- cating Labadie. Furthermore, the Detroit priest urged the French in that city to refrain from trading with Labadie. His mercantile business soon felt the effect of Richard's interference, and he found that he was unable to obtain the necessary field hands to harvest the crops on his farm. In lBl7 Labadie brought suit against Richard.37 The case dragged on for several years, probably because of Woodward's friendship for Richard and his desire to give him every opportunity for defense. The chief justice even sought the advice of eastern luminaries, including Daniel Webster, Edward Livingston, 34Bill of Complaint by Francis Labadie, November 4, 1816, Ibid., 55l-552. 35"Supreme Court Transactions," II, 512. 36Complaint of Francis Labadie, September, lBlB, in Blume, Transactions, III, 598-601. 277 and Henry Clay, who concurred with Woodward's opinion that there were many cases in which words were spoken before Ecclesiastical Juris- dictions, or in the exercise of ecclesiastical discipline, which could not be made the subject of a suit for slander, although they might be actionable if spoken maliciously for some other purpose.38 In spite of Woodward's efforts, the dispute was settled in favor of Labadie in 1821. Richard was ordered to pay over eleven hundred dollars in damages.39 His lawyers immediately appealed the decision. Woodward again spoke out for Richard when the appeal was heard by the Supreme Court in 1823. Recognizing that Richard had, indeed, accused Labadie of concubinage and adultery, the chief justice pointed out that the action constituted an exchange between a clergyman and his parishoner. As such, it fell outside the scope of the civil law. He declared that Richard had accused Labadie of an act of adultery which was not considered a crime according to civil law. It remained a church matter, as Richard's words to Labadie had an "evident relation to the discipline and doctrines of his profession." Woodward urged the court to support Richard's appeal. He did succeed in gaining Richard a postponement in the case, as the chief justice and Witherell could come to no agreement and the case remained deadlocked.40 38woodford and Hyma, Gabriel Richard, 121. 39"Supreme Court Transactions," III, 240. Richard had been advised by his attorneys that the case would be dropped if he would shift the blame for the excommunication of Labadie to his Bishop and plead that he had only been acting under the orders of his superior. Richard refused, recognizing that the principle concerning the privilege of a clergyman to admonish his parishoner was involved. Woodford and Hyma, Gabriel Richard, lZl. 40Opinion of Judge Woodward, October 7, 1823, in Blume, Trans- actions, III, 598—60l. 278 The verdict against Richard was finally confirmed in l824, after Woodward had left the territory. While he was preparing to return to Washington to resume his duties as territorial representa- tive, Richard was taken to jail by Detroit Sheriff Austin Wing and forced to remain there for three weeks. After Detroit citizens had posted bond, the rebellious priest was ordered to remain within the limits of Wayne County. This posed a new problem, as Richard was expected in Washington for the next session of Congress. Detroit officials finally allowed Richard to attend to his duties in Washing- ton, but limited him to the boundaries of Wayne County when he returned to Michigan in 1825.4] Michigan's most important robbery in this period was never solved. Richard Smyth, Collector of Internal Taxes had accumulated over five thousand dollars in l8l8. As there was no Michigan bank at this time, he kept the money in a desk in a bedroom of his Detroit home. One April night someone sawed a hole through the side of Smyth's house, removed the back of the desk, and departed with the money. Un- fortunately for Smyth, a paper containing the numbers and description of the bills was tied up in the bundle of notes that were taken. He offered a three hundred dollar reward and appealed to Congress to 41Woodford and Hyma, Gabriel Richard, 122-l24. Woodford and Hyma note that "except for the few months he [Richard] was in Wash- ington in l824-25, he was never again allowed to pass the bounds of Wayne County." Woodford and Hyma, Gabriel Richard, 124. 279 assume his loss.42 Congress finally did aid Smyth, but the stolen money was never recovered.43 In dealing with cases of burglary and larceny, the Supreme Court occasionally found the same people appearing before it again and again for the same offense. Henry Hudson was indicted seven times for larceny between l8l4 and 1823, but was never punished. In 1815 he was accused of stealing six bars of iron from Richard Smyth, but was freed by the high court.44 In lBl7 he was convicted by the Wayne County Court of feloniously buying and receiving seven barrels of salt, and sentenced to three years at hard labor, together with a three hundred dollar fine. Hudson sued for a new trial, and when that failed, sought to arrest the sentence by claiming that an error had been committed by the county court. He charged that the indictment against him was uncertain and unclear, and that improper 42Petition to Congress by Richard Smyth, February 5, lBl9, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, Bll-8l2; Detroit Gazette, May l, 1818. Smyth claimed that he took all possible precautions in protecting the money and that he would be financially ruined if Congress did not come to his aid. 43In May of l820 Smyth was credited with the amount lost. U. S. Stats., VI, 253. 44"Supreme Court Transactions," II, 500. Between l805 and lBlZ Hudson was indicted five times--three times for larceny, once for assault, and once for allegedly keeping a disorderly house. He was not convicted of any of these offenses, but was required to post bond on several occasions. See Blume, Transactions, 1, cases 6, 97, l96, 252, and 258 for Hudson's activities in this early period. 280 procedure was used in selecting his jury. The Supreme Court considered the proceedings in Hudson's case, agreed that an error had been com- mitted, and set him free.45 While the Supreme Court's treatment of Hudson reveals a genuine concern for the rights of the accused in Michigan, its decision to free him was not popular in some quarters of Detroit. A writer for the Detroit Gazette in l8l7 reported that since l803 Hudson had been present many times in Michigan courts on charges including assault and battery, larceny, and disturbing the peace, but "in some way or other" had always managed to escape punishment. While admitting that the Michi- gan judges were all "honorable men," this writer wondered if the same "quibbles that have wrested him [Hudson] from Justice . . . would 46 There is no evidence produce the same results in future trials?" that the Supreme Court afforded Hudson any special treatment. In 1824 he was still unpunished. During this period nine men were indicted for murder. Seven of these men, who were white, were acquitted, primarily because of insufficient evidence to secure a conviction. Two other men, both Indians, were also indicted for murder. Both were convicted and executed. Kewabiskim, a Menomini, was accused of murdering a white trader named Charles Ulrich at Green Bay in l820. His attorney, George 45"Supreme Court Transactions," II, 547. 46Detroit Gazette, October l0, l8l7. 281 O'Keffee, introduced a motion to set aside the indictment, claiming that his client should have been tried in Brown County, site of the alleged attack. O'Keffee also stated that the indictment failed to specify the time of the attack and had not been signed by the clerk 47 of the court. The Supreme Court rejected O'Keffee's motion point- ing out that its jurisdiction involved the entire Michigan Territory. In 1821 a Detroit jury found Kewabiskim guilty of murder.48 Ketaukah, a Chippewa, was indicted in l821 for the murder of an army surgeon, Dr. William Madison, who had been traveling from Fort Howard to Fort Dearborn. James Doty and Benjamin Witherell, defense attorneys, maintained that as the crime occurred in Indian territory, the United States did not have jurisdiction. Solomon Sibley, prosecuting for the Territory, denied this, pointing out that as the Indian lands were within the limits of the United States, the government retained jurisdiction.49 Sibley was correct in his interpretation of the law. An lBl7 federal act provided that if an Indian or other person committed a crime in Indian Country which would be punishable in areas under the jurisdiction of the United States, he was to suffer the same punishment as if the crime had 47Motion for arrest of Judgment by George O'Keffee, in Blume, Transactions, III, 633-635. 48”Supreme Court Transactions," III, 244. In addition to prescribing death by hanging, the Supreme Court asked the Great Spirit to "purify, pardon and receive" the soul of Kewabiskim. 49Detroit Gazette, October 19, 1821. 282 50 been committed in those areas. The Supreme Court supported Sibley's position and claimed jurisdiction in the case. Ketaukah was con- victed.5] Woodward was careful to see that both Kewabiskim and Ketaukah obtained justice when they came before the Supreme Court. As neither could speak English, he assigned them interpreters to advise them of their legal rights and to assist them in the trial. Woodward refused to have the prisoners appear before the court in chains, and he instructed their attorneys to counsel them not to admit to anything. “Instruct the prisoner that whatever passes between him and the counsel shall not injure him," he told Ketaukah's interpreter; "he is to tell them only what he chooses--and if he does, the court will not allow him to be harmed on that account."52 Kewabiskim and Ketaukah were executed together in late l821. Both Indians had prepared themselves for their fate, and had put aside any presents given to them, such as pipes and tobacco, as a gift to the Great Spirit. They had fashioned a drum by pulling a piece of leather over their water container, and both performed the death dance in their cell. They painted the figures of men, horses, and reptiles on the wall of their cell with red paint. They also painted a gallows with two Indians hanging by the neck. On the day 50u. 5. Stats., III, 383. 5lDetroit Gazette, October l9, 182l. 5281ume, Transactions, III, 485-496. 283 of their execution they were first taken to the Protestant church to listen to a sermon. They were then taken to the gallows on Market Street where a large crowd had gathered to witness the execution. A regiment of the territorial militia was under arms for the occasion, as well as a guard of United States troops. The two Indians, after shaking hands with several people including the marshal, asked the pardon of the crowd through their interpreter.53 "They then shook hands and gazed for a few minutes on the assemblage and the heavens," wrote a reporter for the Detroit Gazette, "when their caps were drawn over their faces, and they were launched into eternity."54 There were some people in Detroit who disapproved of the Supreme Court's decision to execute the two Indians. Critics charged that the tribes lived over nine hundred miles from Detroit, and that their punishment would have no effect on the morals of their kinsmen.55 Furthermore, there was some doubt that the thought of hanging had frightened the two condemned Indians. One Detroit citizen had pointed out the gallows to them several days before their execution. "Instead of exciting in them those painful sensations which would have been felt by almost any civilized being," he later wrote, "they pointed to it, looked at me, and laughed."56 Still other citizens feared that the 53 262-263. 54 Farmer, History of Detroit, 180; Catlin, The Story of Detroit, Detroit Gazette, December 28, l82l. 55I CT 0. .i 56 H U- _.| Q. 284 execution of these two would spark new Indian unrest in the territory. The executions, however, had no noticeable effect on the Michigan tribes. Occasionally both Cass and the Michigan Supreme Court became involved in criminal cases affecting the British across the Detroit River. The death of a Kickapoo Indian near the Detroit River in 1815 produced a clash between the British and the Americans, and raised the question of criminal jurisdiction between the two parties. Colonel Reginald James, the British commander at Malden, informed Cass that the Indian had been ”murdered under the most aggravated circumstances" 57 by a group of American soldiers. Cass immediately notified James that if any crime had been committed by Americans, it had taken place 58 After in United States territory and would be punished by her laws. investigating the matter, the Michigan governor discovered that the Indian had been killed on the American bank of the Detroit River. Furthermore, he had not been killed by soldiers but by an American settler acting in self-defense. "The Indian was killed within the Territorial jurisdiction of the United States," Cass told James, "and a British officer has consequently no right to require nor ought an 57Lieutenant Colonel James to Governor Cass, October 5, 1815, in MPHC, XVI, 313. James told Cass that he would hold an inquest and rather ominously reminded him that "this murder has been committed on the body of an unoffending Indian and my pointing out the custom of savages to you in the present instance would be needless." James to Cass, October 5, 1815, in MPHC, XVI, 313. 58Governor Cass to Lieutenant Colonel James, October 5, 1815, Ibid., 313-314. 285 American officer to give any explanation upon the subject."59 James, however, refused to let the matter end there. He turned the inquest over to Canadian civil magistrates who offered a reward of $500 for the murderer of the Indian.60 Cass considered this latest action by the British as an in- fringement of territorial sovereignty. He reminded James that the jurisdiction of the United States and of Great Britain within their territorial limits was exclusive. If the Indians residing under the protection of either were injured, they were to apply for redress to A: the government of the country within which they 1ived.6] To counter the British reward, Cass issued a proclamation warning citizens to be alert for British incursions into the territory and to repel by 62 This force anyone trying to remove a person from their soil. action upset the British. Anthony St. John Baker, the British charge d'affaires in Washington told Secretary of State James Monroe that "it is greatly to be regretted that this proclamation, which is couched in language neither temperate nor pacific, should have been issued."63 Cass stood firm. The British reward was never collected. 59Governor Cass to Lieutenant Colonel James, October 7, 1815, Ibid., 314. 60Woodford, Cass, 101; Gilpin, The Territory of Michigan, 114. 61Governor Cass to Lieutenant Colonel James, October 26, 1815, in MPHC, XVI. 363-364. 62Proclamation by Governor Cass, October 7, 1815, in Mich. Exec. Acts, lBl4-1830, MSA. 63Anthony Baker to James Monroe, January 10, 1816, in MPHC, XVI, 423-424. 286 A new incident soon increased the tension between the British and the Americans. In 1815 several British crew members of the Confiance jumped ship while it was anchored in the St. Clair River, took two of the schooner's boats, and escaped with a large quantity of British goods. Lieutenant Alexander Vidal, one of the ship's officers, followed them with an armed detail to Grosse Pointe, where he recovered some of the goods and apprehended one of the deserters, Thomas Rymer, who was drunk. Vidal placed Rymer in a boat offshore and continued his search. This aroused the anger of the Americans who charged Vidal with removing a man from American soil by force. When Vidal refused to hand over his prisoner to local militia officers, he was arrested.64 The British protested Vidal's arrest by Michigan authorities. Commodore Sir Edward Owen, commanding the British naval forces on the Great Lakes, sent a note to Detroit asking for Vidal's immediate re- lease. He informed Cass that no offense against the laws of the United States had been intended or in fact committed. Therefore, it seemed unnecessary to let the matter go any farther. If he or Cass was forced to bring the matter to the attention of their respective govern- ments, it would “keep alive those irritable feelings which it is so desirable shall be forgotten."65 64Materials relating to the Vidal case can be found in MPHC, XVI, 238-239, 241, 247, 257, 267, 277, 304, 350, 383, 386-387; XXXVI, 321-328; Blume, Transactions, III, 56-59, 522-526. 65E.W.C.R. Owen to Governor Cass, September 6, 1815, in MPHC, XXXVI, 321-322. 287 Cass defended American actions in the arrest of Vidal. He reminded Owen that there were no treaty stipulations between the United States and Great Britain for the restoration of persons desert- ing from the service of one country and seeking refuge in the terri- tory of the other. According to the principles of international law, no British officer had the right to enter United States territory and forcibly to apprehend any person, regardless of the crime or circum- stances. For his actions, Vidal was accountable to the civil authorities of Michigan Territory.66 Vidal's fate was eventually decided by the Michigan Supreme Court. After deliberating less than an hour, a jury composed of six Americans and six aliens found him guilty of "riotously and wantonously" leading an armed party to seek deserters, of illegally searching an 67 American house, and of disturbing the peace. He was acquitted of taking Rymer forcibly from land. The Supreme Court ordered Vidal to 68 pay over six hundred dollars in fines. In December of 1815 James 66Governor Cass to Commodore Owen, October 16, 1815, Ibid., XVI. 239-240. 67Lieutenant Vidal to Commodore Owen, October 16, 1815, Ibid., 350-351. Vidal told Owen that "The termination of this business causes me much regret, as I had reason from the aversion I manifested at breeding anything like a disturbance to expect a very different treat- ment." Vidal to Owen, October 16, 1815, in MPHC, XVI, 350-351. Wood- ford notes that after his trial, Vidal was "so angry that when he scratched his signature at the bottom of this letter, he misspelled his name, signing it 'Vindall.'" Woodford, Cass, 106. 68"Supreme Court Transactions," 11, 488. 288 Monroe, apparently feeling that justice had been served, asked Cass to remit Vidal's fine. He was too late. The fine had already been paid.69 By his actions in the Vidal affair, Cass took a firm stand regarding the inviolability of American sovereignty. He had earlier made that point to Lieutenant Colonel James, and he repeated it to Commodore Owen. His firmness and determination were recognized by the British. "I regret the Governor [Cass] did not think it right to meet me cordially in the wish to give this affair a turn which might be satisfactory to both," Owen told Anthony Baker in Washing- ton, "but preferred a method of proceeding which whilst it serves to cherish individual animosity, can answer no good public purpose."70 The Supreme Court was involved in a case between a British subject and an American in 1818. Thomas, Earl of Selkirk, was a prominent Canadian businessman who engaged in the fur trade in the Red River district of what is now Manitoba. An American named James Grant entered Selkirk's territory in 1818 and proceeded to set up his own trap lines. At Selkirk's insistence, British authorities arrested Grant in Canada, seized his goods worth over $10,000, and transported him to Montreal where he was imprisoned. Released that same year, Grant returned to Detroit where he swore out a warrant 69Lewis Cass to James Monroe, February 2, 1816, in MPHC, XXXVI, 338-339. 70 386-387. Commodore Owen to Anthony Baker, November 6, 1815, Ibid., 289 for Selkirk's arrest, claiming that he had been falsely arrested within the boundaries of the United States. Selkirk was arrested in Detroit in September when he arrived to transact some business. He promptly posted $30,000 in sureties and returned to Canada.71 The Supreme Court was confronted with two questions in the Selkirk case--whether his arrest on Sunday was legal, and whether the court was competent to discharge him on motion. Concerning the first question, Woodward, speaking for the court, decided that the Sunday arrest was not legal, and cited historical precedents from the Bible, the actions of Emperor Constantine, Pope Gregory IX, and the rulers of England to prove his point. As to the second question, he admitted that there had been some instances in British law where the defendant, although arrested illegally, had been retained for trial. He believed, however, that such proceedings in a free country where the laws were presumed to govern were extremely dangerous, and would place the individual and arbitrary decisions of men above the 72 law. The court decided that Selkirk should be discharged because he had been illegally arrested.73 7lMaterials relating to the Selkirk case can be found in MPHC, XII, 483-505; XXXVI, 346-349; Blume, Transactions, III, 91-92; Detroit Gazette, June 15, 1821; June 22, 1821, July 20, 1821; August 24, 1821; July 11, 1824. Selkirk had planted a colony of Highlanders in Canada to raise sheep, but his project was a failure. He then turned to the fur trade to recover his fortune. 72 485-505. Opinion of Judge Woodward in the Selkirk Case, MPHC, XII, 73”Supreme Court Transactions," II, 616. 290 The Selkirk case renewed Woodward's interest in the American acquisition of Canada. After discharging Selkirk, the justice con- fided that he actually believed that the trespass might have taken place on the Canadian side of the border. It was time for such geographical uncertainties to be settled for good. "I entertain the idea that it is the duty of the American administration to make a serious effort to obtain the whole of the British possessions on this continent, by negotiation," he wrote to Secretary of State John Quincy Adams in 1818.74 The chief justice had made the same plea to Washington four years earlier. He told Secretary of State James Monroe that a peace with England without obtaining Canada would be regrettable, and that it could be obtained "only by arms, not by 75 He believed that if the United States was to re- negotiations." main strong and future friction with Britain was to be averted, then Canada must become American. Michigan's Supreme Court handled two cases of treason be— tween 1814 and 1823, both related to the War of 1812. Louis Campeau was indicted for joining the British Army under General Procter in 74Woodward to J. 0. Adams, December 5, l8l8, in MPHC, XXXVI, 346-347. Going beyond Canada, Woodward also noted that "the present era is, certainly, not unfavorable for a complete absorption of all foreign claims on our continent." Woodward to J. 0. Adams, December 5, 1818, in MPHC, XXXVI, 346-347. 75Woodward to President James Monroe, March 7, 1814, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 291 the District of Erie and waging war on the United States.76 Ignace Morasse, from the District of Huron, was accused of contracting with John McGregor, a British subject, to furnish masts, spars, and timber for the British Navy, to be used during the war.77 Both Campeau and Morasse were acquitted, and were ordered discharged. The Supreme Court did not conduct its affairs in this period without experiencing some criticism from territorial residents. A common complaint was that the Supreme Court justices were often absent from the territory and the business of the court suspended. The grand jury of Wayne County complained in 1817 that although the high court judges were paid to reside in the territory, their repeated absences were "very injurious to the best interests of the good people of this territory.”78 Although Witherell, Griffin, and Woodward in particular were occasionally absent from the territory, the work of the court need not have suffered as long as one of them remained in Michigan. Any one of the three judges was authorized to hold court by himself.79 76Indictment of Louis Campeau, October 17, 1814, Case A—3l, Box 20, Michigan Territorial Court Records, Bentley Library, Ann Arbor. Hereafter this collection will be cited as Mich. Terr. Court Records, Ann Arbor. 77Indictment of Ignace Morasse, October 17, 1814, Case 511, Box 9, Ibid. 78Detroit Gazette, July 25, 1812. 79See Terr. Laws, I, 9-16 for the act authorizing the establish- ing of a Supreme Court in Michigan, and outlining the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the justices. 292 Part of Michigan's judicial difficulties resulted from the reluctance of Witherell and Griffin to hold court by themselves.80 Luckily for Michigan, Woodward had no qualms about holding sessions in the absence of his two colleagues. If he had not presided when the others were not present, there would have been long periods when the court could not have functioned. A second frequent complaint concerning the Supreme Court was the tremendous distance and difficult travel involved in attending its sessions. Petitioners from Wayne, Macomb, and St. Clair Counties complained to Congress in 1822 that the Michigan high court compelled witnesses, suitors, and jurors to come to Detroit from remote parts of the territory for unimportant reasons at "an enormous and ruinous 8] Memorialists expense" and kept them in long and useless attendance. at Michilimackinac had similar complaints. Many of these people were engaged in the mercantile business, a trade that required constant attention. As Michilimackinac was over three hundred miles from Detroit, and communications were difficult in summer and practically impossible in winter, attendance at court was an evident hardship. These petitioners requested a Congressional act erecting a separate 80For the views of Griffin and Witherell concerning a single justice holding court, see John Griffin to A. B. Woodward, July 25, 1816, in Woodward Papers, BHC, and "Doty's Reports," 85-86. 81Petition to Congress by the Inhabitants of Wayne, Macomb, & St. Clair Counties, February 19, 1822, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 227-230. 293 judicial district for the counties of Crawford, Brown, and Michili- mackinac, with its own judge whose authority and jurisdiction would not be subject to the Michigan Supreme Court.82 Congress responded to the need for an additional judge in Michigan by creating the judicial district of Michilimackinac, Brown, and Crawford Counties in 1823. James Duane Doty was appointed to hold a district court in that region, having all the ordinary juris- diction of the county and the Supreme Court, but subject to the Supreme Court on a writ of error. This court was to have full criminal powers and jurisdiction over all transactions and offenses concerning commercial or other dealings with the Indians.83 Doty had come to Michigan in 1818, been admitted to the bar, served as clerk of the Supreme Court, been a member of the Cass Expedition, and had been postmaster at Prairie du Chien before assuming his new office. It was chiefly through his efforts in Washington that Congress created the new judgeship.84 Doty had little affection for either Woodward or Griffin. In 1822 he told his friend, Henry Schoolcraft, that "the good work has commenced here. Woodward & Griffin are likely to have 82Petition to Congress by the Inhabitants of Michilimackinac, July 24, 1821, Ibid., 140-142. 83U. S. Stats., III, 722-723. For Doty's commission, see Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 344-345. 84Campbell, Political History of Michign, 408; Gilpin, Ih_e_ Territory_of Michigan, 104-105. 294 something happen to them. . . .A petition will probably be presented to Congress praying for a repeal of the Ordinance under which they hold their offices. This is a modest way of turning a man out of office."85 A third complaint concerning the Supreme Court was that its sessions were often conducted at inconvenient times and under im- proper conditions. Residents of Wayne County complained to Congress in 1822 that the Supreme Court held its sessions at night for nearly four months and failed to provide adequate seating for either suitors 86 Other Detroit citizens noted that or officers of the court. "during the night-sittings suppers of meat and bottles of whiskey were brought into court, and a noisy and merry banquet partaken at the bar by some while others were addressing the court in solemn argument."87 Still other inhabitants complained that the judges occasionally adjourned a judicial session to adopt legislation, and then reconvened as the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was occasionally conducted in an unconven- tional manner that reflected the frontier community in which it operated. Woodford notes that "the prevailing atmosphere when court 85James Doty to Henry Schoolcraft, October 25, 1822, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 270-271. 86Report of a Committee of Inhabitants of Wayne County, 1822, Ibid., 324-328. 87Memorial of Michigan Citizens to Congress, January 3, 1823, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 295 was in session was one of easy-going 'republican' informality."88 While some visitors to the court may have been surprised at the casual procedure, it is doubtful that this conduct hampered the administration of justice. Jonathan Kearsley, the receiver of public monies at the land office in Detroit visited the Supreme Court during one of its sessions. Meat, bread, and some spirits were placed upon the sheriff's desk, but Kearsley did not observe the judges partake. He later reported that he "saw no want of decorum in the judges . . . ."89 He also noted that the late hour of the court on that occasion was due to the "number of counsel engaged on either side or the great length of their several and repeated arguments . . . ."90 Proceedings in the Supreme Court were also hampered by the large number of cases confronting the judges and the fact that they also served the territory in other equally important capacities. In 1816 Woodbridge informed Peter Hitchcock, president of the Ohio Senate, that at their last session the Michigan judges "did not do one half the business which was before them."91 In 1819 a Congressional Judiciary Committee investigated the Michigan high court and recommended that it hold more than one session a year. This report also noted, 88Woodford, Woodward, 94. 89Statement of Jonathan Kearsley, December 26, 1823, in Wood- ward Papers , BHC. golbid. 91Woodbridge to Peter Hitchcock, January 1, 1816, in Michigan Papers, Clements Library, Ann Arbor. 296 however, that the Michigan judges served as the territorial legis- lature, as commissioners for the erection of public buildings, and as members of the land board. The committee concluded that "with- out attending to other business they cannot live decently for much less than double their present small salaries."92 While some Michigan residents may have objected to the suspension of the court proceedings while the judges adopted needed legislation, the judges were acting with propriety. Occasionally the Supreme Court would reach an impasse because an issue would arise for which there was no suitable Michigan law. Without leaving their seats, the judges would resolve themselves into legislators and adopt an act to clarify the issue. Court would then reconvene and the judges would continue with their business. Although the exercise of legislative and judicial powers by the same officers may have offended some in Michigan, it was necessary for the judges to do this in the absence of a legislative assembly. Throughout this period Woodward continued to exert the dominant influence on the court, and wrote the majority of its opinions. As chief justice he was both reviled and admired. "I think Woodward grows worse and worse," Cass told Woodbridge in 1820; n93 "he is as unprincipled a man as I ever knew. A writer in the Detroit Gazette found Woodward to be a "sound and erudite scholar," who was 92Detroit Gazette, November 17, 1817. 93Cass to Woodbridge, January 9, 1820, in Woodbridge Papers, BHC. 297 94 Much of the court's both profound and original in his views. success in this period can be attributed to Woodward, chiefly from his willingness to hold sessions alone and to render forceful and impartial decisions. ”Judge Woodward is an eccentrick man," Wood- bridge told his wife, “but possessed of singular & extensive acquirements."95 Witherell continued to do his share of the court's work and was an able and popular justice. Solomon Sibley labeled him a 96 In his own way, "revolutionary character and an honest man." Witherell could be as eccentric as Woodward. While presiding during a particular warm session in 1821, he rose in the middle of a court case, marched out of the courtroom, and proceeded to a wharf at the river's edge. He sat down, dangled his feet over the water, and amused himself for more than an hour throwing sticks and pebbles at the fish. After refreshing himself in this manner, he got up, returned to the courtroom, and continued the trial as if nothing had happened. During this time the other members of the court had not stirred from their places. "I learned that with all 94Detroit Gazette, December 29, 1820. 95Woodbridge to his wife Julia, February 8, 1815, in Wood- bridge Papers, BHC. 96Solomon Sibley to Joseph Anderson, November 3, 1823, in Sibley Papers , BHC. 298 his eccentricities he failed not of securing the confidence of the people, both of the bar and the suitors," wrote General William Ellis, who witnessed the episode.97 Griffin was not an important member of the Supreme Court during this period. He frequently followed the lead of Woodward and left no record of a written opinion while on the bench. He continually complained of ill health while in Michigan, and asked without success to be transferred to a more pleasant climate. William Jenks observes that Griffin's "birth and breeding made him averse to the rough pioneer methods and habits of the new country of Michigan, and he lacked the mental force either to adapt himself to his surroundings "98 or change them for the better. Woodbridge told his wife that Griffin was a "good scholar--but for law or for mind I imagine but indifferent."99 Griffin was never very happy in Michigan, and his selection as a Supreme Court justice was unfortunate. From 1814 to 1823 the territorial officers successfully rebuilt and maintained a system of law and order for Michigan. They 97"6enera1 Ellis's Recollections," June, 1821, in Collections of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin (31 vols.; Madison: Wisconsin Historical Society, 1903-193T), VII, 212. 'Hereafter this collection will be cited as Wis. Hist. Coll. Cass appointed Ellis inspector of provisions for the District of Green Bay in 1827. In 1828 he was appointed a deputy surveyor of government lands by Edward Tiffin. 98Jenks, "Griffin," Michigan History, x1v, 221-225. 99Woodbridge to his wife Julia, February 8, 1815, in Woodbridge Papers, BHC. 299 accomplished this both through their roles as members of the legis- lative board and as justices of the Supreme Court. Blume observes that the work of the court was "conducted in a careful and orderly manner according to the orthodox procedure of the time. The opinions of Judge Woodward reveal a knowledge of law and procedure that was both extensive and penetrating."100 Through their role as legislators, they adopted important statutes safeguarding the rights and the free- dom of Michigan citizens. Through their service as members of the Supreme Court they maintained justice in the land. 100Blume, Transactions, I, liv. CHAPTER IX THE END OF THE BEGINNING In 1823 Michigan finally entered the second stage of terri- torial development. From 1814 to 1823 the governor and judges encouraged Michigan residents to take a more active role in directing their own affairs. During this period many territorial inhabitants petitioned Congress for a change in their form of government. Both groups played an important part in bringing to an end the exclusive rule of the governor and judges. According to the Ordinance of 1787, a territory would enter a second stage of government as soon as it had five thousand free adult males. An assembly was to be elected, with one member for each five hundred free male inhabitants. Electors were to own fifty acres of land, reside in the district, and be a United States citizen; or own fifty acres of land and reside in the district for two years. Representatives were required to own two hundred acres of land, be United States citizens, and reside in the district; or own two hundred acres of land and reside in the district for three years. An upper house or council, of five members, was to be selected by Congress, from ten persons nominated by the representatives. The governor, the legislative council, and the assembly were to constitute the territorial legislature. During this second stage of government, 300 301 the territory could also elect a nonvoting delegate to Congress. When the territory had sixty thousand free inhabitants, it was to become a state "on an equal footing with the original states in all respects whatever."1 Cass was a strong supporter of democratic rule and favored a second stage of government for Michigan because it would mean a popularly elected legislature and a territorial delegate to Congress. “The people of the [Michigan] Country have no voice in the adminis- tration of the Government," he told Secretary of War Crawford in 1816.2 The next year Cass apologized to Congressman Henry Baldwin of Pennsylvania for "troubling you on subjects connected with the interests of this territory, as we have no representative in Congress."3 Cass realized that both an elected assembly and a Congressional dele- gate were important elements in the future growth and development of Michigan. Woodward also favored citizen participation in the government of Michigan Territory. He headed a petition to Congress that called for a change in the Michigan government. He wanted two houses, 1U. S. Stats., I, 51. ZCass to Secretary of War Crawford, May 31, 1816, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 642-645. 3Lewis Cass to Henry Baldwin, December 5, 1817, in MPHC, XXXVI, 398-401. On this occasion Cass was concerned with the Michigan-Ohio boundary controversy. 302 elected annually, to make the laws instead of the executive and the three judges. The first house would consist of five representatives, and the second of three councillors, with the executive having a qualified veto on their acts. The chief justice also asked for a territorial delegate to Congress, to be elected by the people.4 Detroit residents asked President Monroe for a second stage of territorial government when he visited Michigan in 1817. After he had been escorted to Detroit from the River Ecorce by a multitude of Michigan citizens and treated to a fireworks display, he listened to an oration by Charles Larned, a Detroit attorney. After describing Michigan's rich soil, favorable climate, and increasing commerce, Larned pointed out that Americans would not be tempted to a land where they did not share in the governing process. He told Monroe that a second grade of government for Michigan would be "productive of immediate and beneficial results to our territory."5 Monroe later responded to requests for a change in the terri— torial government. He admitted that Michigan was an exposed frontier but added that she remained under the "watchful eye" of the national government. In the future, under conditions that were "just and 4Petition to Congress by Michigan Citizens, Undated, Ibid. XII, 544-545. In addition to Woodward, James Henry, Solomon Sibley, (Seorge Hoffman, and James May subscribed to this petition. 5Detroit Gazette, August 16, 1817. 303 reasonable, she would become a member of the Union, with all the rights of the original states. In the meantime Washington would keep a close check on the fortunes of Michigan Territory.6 Some residents were not content to wait for changes in their territorial government. The grand jury of Wayne County told Cass in 1817 that a representative assembly would be "more consistent with the people's habits of self-government, and more congenial to their ideas of freedom."7 A writer in the Detroit Gazette calling himself ”Cincinnatus" told territorial inhabitants that same year that they had suffered enough under their present form of government and that a second grade of government was necessary.8 Other inhabitants urged a change in government because they considered the concentration of power in the governor and judges a despotism. One writer in the Detroit Gazette calling himself "Rousseau" claimed that "perhaps in no community under heaven can there be found among its public functionaries, three personages with feelings and interests more distinct from the people, than the 9 judges as they are called of the Supreme Court." In a later message 6Speech of James Monroe, August, 1817, Ibid. 7Petition by the Grand Jury of Detroit to the Governor and Judges, January 11, 1817, in Petitions and Recommendations, Undated to 1819. MSA. 8Detroit Gazette, November 21, 1817. 9Ibid., December 5, 1817. 304 he warned that the concentration of the legislative and judicial powers in the same body was despotism.10 Other writers, principally English or American in background, took an equally dim view of the conduct of the judges. Some citizens, however, took issue with the charge that their territorial officers had acted with impropriety. One writer calling himself an "Anti-Demagogue," posed several questions to the critics of the government. First, had the legislative board adopted any laws injurious to the people of Michigan? Secondly, could it be proved that they had failed to amend or revise any law that the citizens upon request had demanded? Finally, what laws could be passed under a representative assembly to benefit the people of the territory that could not be adopted by the present legislative board? This writer concluded that critics of the government had partaken I'too much of the random ebullitions of petty partizans, who have long distracted and disturbed the tranquility of communities to deserve notice."H It is interesting to note that prior to 1818 there were very few petitions to the governor and judges from those of French back- grounds in Michigan requesting a change in the territorial government. Most of the petitions originated from citizens of English or American 10 H U- .4 0.. 11 H U- _| Q. 1““ r” _‘ A A: 305 backgrounds, who lived mainly in Detroit. After 1818, most of the petitions to the governor and judges from those of French extraction were in support of the administration of the territorial officials. After receiving petitions from 145 citizens calling for a representative assembly, Cass issued a proclamation in 1818 for an election to determine whether Michigan should have an elected general assembly and a non-voting delegate to Congress. He said that this election could be held "whenever satisfactory evidence 1 a '9- A : shall be given to the Governor thereof, that such is the wish of a majority of the freeholders, notwithstanding there may be therein five thousand free male inhabitants of the age of twenty one years and upwards."12 Even though Michigan did not have five thousand free adult males, Cass felt justified in holding the election be— cause the act establishing Indiana Territory had dropped this requirement for entering a second stage of territorial government.13 There is little evidence that a "majority of the freeholders" in Michigan requested a second stage of government. Nevertheless Cass made preparations for the election. Voting was to be done by ballot at designated polling places. Poll books were to be kept, listing the names of each freeholder voting. Poll books and ballots were 12Proclamation by Lewis Cass, January 5, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 769-771; Mich. Exec. Acts, l8l4-1830, MSA. '30. 5. Stats., 11, 108. 306 to be sealed after the completion of voting, and transmitted to the office of the secretary of the territory within ten days of the completion of the election.14 Cass was disappointed when the people of Michigan rejected his plans for a second stage of government in the territory. He had overlooked the fact that most of the people voting were French habitants unfamiliar with self-government and accustomed to being ruled by others. In a sense they were voting for Cass by rejecting a representative assembly. They admired his leadership and had faith in his abilities. They had no reason to believe that life would be better with a change in government. W. L. G. Smith observes that in rejecting Cass's plan, they paid "a most flattering compliment to the competency and faithfulness of their governor."15 Michigan residents also voted against the plan because they feared a change in their government would mean new taxes, a financial burden they had no wish to accept.16 Even though a plan for a second stage of government for Michigan had been defeated, some residents continued to petition Congress for a territorial representative. Memorialists from Macomb 14Proclamation by Lewis Cass, January 5, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 769-771; Mich. Exec. Acts, 1814-1830, MSA. '5w. L. 6. Smith, The Life and Times of Lewis Cass (New York: Darby & Jackson, 1856), 113. Hereafter cited as Smith, Cass. '56i1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 74; Woodford, Cass, 153. Wit-e:- _ I . d 1‘ A a . _. _ ‘ 307 County in 1818 pointed out that even though the territory had been ravaged by the British in the War of 1812, the people of Michigan had remained loyal to the United States. This steadfastness should be rewarded by a representative in Washington "upon an equal foot- ing and with the same privileges as the delegates of other Terri- ]7 Congress answered this petition in 1819 tories have enjoyed." by authorizing the election of a Michigan delegate to Congress. Free, white males over the age of twenty-one who had resided in the territory a year and paid county or territorial taxes were eligible to vote.18 The governor and judges provided for the election of a territorial delegate by an act adopted in March of 1819. The election was to be held on the first Thursday in September at every county seat, and was to be supervised by the judges, commissioners, and sheriffs of each county. Voting was to be completed before the end of October. Anyone attempting to interfere with the election faced a fine of one thousand dollars.19 Woodward had high hopes of becoming Michigan's first terri- torial delegate to Congress. He told a Detroit audience in 1819 that the opportunity to represent the territory in Washington would be "too high an honor to be relinquished from any light considerations, 17Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of Macomb County, November 7, 1818, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 786-787. '80. 5. Stats., 111, 482-483. '9Terr. Laws, 11, 149-154. mi 308 or whatever nature they may be."20 If elected, he promised to resign as a justice of the Supreme Court. Woodward's supporters in Wayne County decided that the only objection to the chief justice was that he was a man of "too conspicuous talents," and that if he was sent to Washington, he might reach beyond the wishes of his constituents by an "overflow of his extensive knowledge, or from an exercise of his superior mental faculties."2] Many Michigan residents refused to take an interest in the election. Some reasoned that Michigan's delegate would be unimportant as he would have no vote in Congress. Others simply found it too much trouble to become involved in the democratic process. In April of 1819 the Detroit Gazette lamented that the general apathy among Michigan inhabitants concerning matters of a public nature would prevent a proper consideration of the importance of the election of a territorial delegate to Congress.22 Woodbridge became Michigan's first delegate to Congress, 23 with the aid and support of Cass. He was already secretary of 20Pub1ic Address of A. B. Woodward, July 22, 1819, in Woodward Papers, BHC. 21Address to the Electors of the Territory of Michigan, MPHC, XII, 580-582. 22Detroit Gazette, April 9, 1819. 23Woodford notes that Woodbridge's followers circulated voting lists among the Frenchmen claiming that they were really pledges of support for his campaign. "Backed by these pledges," Woodford observes, "they declared the secretary was as good as elected. Transparent as this trick was, it worked." Woodford, Woodward, 168. 309 the Territory and collector of the port of Detroit. When it became apparent that he intended to hold these three offices simultaneously, Woodward objected. Earlier he had warned Detroit citizens that if Woodbridge refused to give up his other offices, the public had a right to know and to pass judgment on whether or not one person should be allowed to hold so many positions.24 Cass immediately came to Woodbridge's defense. "A careful examination of the Consti- tution and acts of Congress," he wrote to President Monroe,"irresist- ably leads to the conclusion, that there is nothing in the tenure of these offices legally incompatible with the station and duties of a Delegate."25 Woodbridge's tenure in office was brief and unimportant. In Washington he urged the House to consider Michigan's claims for war damage, while advocating improvements to the Territory in the way of better roads and improved communications with Ohio. He also restated Michigan's case in her boundary dispute with Ohio. Six months after his election, however, he had had enough of Washington. He decided that he preferred his territorial duties to those in Congress, and believed that Michigan needed a representative who would devote his full attention to the territory's needs. This would be impossible 24Address to the Electors of the Territory of Michigan, MPHC, XII, 529-533. 25Governor Cass to the President, September 11, 1819, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 859-860. 310 for him if he was to remain collector and secretary.26 He announced his resignation as delegate and asked Cass to make preparations for holding a new election.27 Woodward was unsuccessful in his next two attempts to be elected territorial delegate. In 1820 he lost to Solomon Sibley, who had the support of Cass's followers, by only seven votes. Woodward challenged the voting results from Michilimackinac, claim- ing that they should be voided because the election was supervised by only three inspectors instead of five as required by law. Wood- bridge and Attorney General Charles Larned admitted that the election at Michilimackinac had been improperly conducted, but decided to let it stand, lest "the rights of a whole community shall be sacrificed."28 Woodward decided to run again at the regular election in 1821. "Griffin has not been at the legislative board this month, but Wood- ward has taken his place for the purpose of electioneering for himself against next year," Sibley wrote to his friend, Andrew Whitney in 1820; ”every movement he makes has a bearing 8 Reference to the next Election, and many undertake to prophesy that he 'must' succeed."29 26Gi1pin, The Territory of Michigan, 79; Catlin, The Story of Detroit, 268; C. M. Burton, "Woodward," MPHC, XXIX, 660. 27Woodbridge to Cass, May 10, 1820, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X, 859-860. 28 Woodford, Woodward, 169. Secretary Woodbridge and Attorney General Charles Larned reported that 527 votes had been recorded in the counties of Wayne, Monroe, Michilimackinac, and Oakland. See Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 82-91. 29Solomon Sibley to Andrew Whitney, November 4, 1820, in Sibley Papers, BHC. 311 This time Sibley defeated Woodward by nearly two hundred votes.3O He was to serve as territorial delegate until 1823, when he was succeeded by Gabriel Richard. Even though Michigan had gained a territorial representative, critics of the rule of the governor and judges continued to demand an elected representative assembly. By now the criticisms had be- come familiar to the territorial officers. The Wayne County Grand Jury complained that laws had been adopted and signed by individual members of the legislative board when that body had not been called into session. This group decided that “nothing but a legislature constituted by the people can be a radical cure for the evils com- plained of."3] Memorialists from Wayne, Monroe, and Oakland counties were upset that the judges possessed both legislative and judicial powers, and were "empowered by the Ordinance to hold a court, and to determine cases arising under the very laws which they themselves 32 have enacted!” Inhabitants of Wayne County maintained that the Supreme Court continued to act with impropriety, engaging in actions 301,096 votes were counted in this election. Sibley received 514, while Woodward had 308. The only other candidate with many votes was James McCloskey, with 268. Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 189-205. 31Presentment of the Wayne County Grand Jury, January 7, 1820, Ibid., 329-330. 32Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of Wayne, Monroe, and Oakland Counties, November 1, 1822, Ibid., 271-277. 312 that were "producing great irregularities in the business of the court and tending to bring into derision and contempt, the highest Judicial Tribunal in the Country."33 The abuse suffered by members of the legislative board in this period can be explained in part by the political atmosphere at Detroit. "1 have scarcely heard since I have been here, any one person speak well of another," Woodbridge wrote to Cass in 1815; "34 . there is certainly much slander afloat in this country. Anonymous writers frequently criticized the conduct of the judges through the pages of the Detroit Gazette, which refused space to Woodward and Griffin to defend themselves from the attacks. C. M. Burton observes that "probably few papers in America have been per- mitted to upbraid and chastise the judiciary in a more virulent manner than was employed by the [Detroit] Gazette in the cases of these judges."35 New demands for a change in Michigan's territorial govern- ment produced new memorials in defense of the governor and judges 33Report of a Committee of Inhabitants of Wayne County, November, 1822, Ibid., 324-328. 34Woodbridge to Lewis Cass, March 7, 1815, Woodbridge Papers, BHC. 35c. M. Burton, "Woodward," MPHC, xx1x, 638-665. In 1820 the Detroit Gazette observed that many writers, "too anxious to appear in print to give themselves time to examine the offspring of their phrenetic inspiration, hasten to the poor publisher, who, perhaps too much occupied to give them a due examination, sends them forth to his readers with all their faults.” Detroit Gazette, December 29, 1820. 313 and the status quo. A petition to Congress signed by citizens principally of French descent asked that body to "protect us, a population of nine thousand inhabitants, from being precipitated prematurely, into a system of government, which it is neither our interest, nor our inclination, for the present, to enter into."36 These petitioners also observed that the legislative board had manifested a great willingness to please the people by adopting any law that was thought expedient, or by repealing or altering 37 Memorialists from Wayne County other laws when it was necessary. informed Congress that it was a matter of regret to a majority of Michigan's citizens that a group of inhabitants residing principally in Detroit had "manifested an absolute determination, to precipitate us prematurely, into a system of Government, which would operate very prejudicially, both to the interests of the United States, as well as those of the people of this Territory . . . ."38 It is evident that before the coming of a representative assembly in 1823, many Michigan citizens were not demanding a second stage of territorial government because of abuse suffered under the rule of the governor and judges. Indeed, many residents were fearful of the changes that might result from an elected assembly. Cass was 36Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of the Territory, November 11, 1822, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 278-291. 37Ibid. 38Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of Wayne County, January 2, 1823, Ibid., 320-322. 314 aware of this fear. "A general opinion prevails that it is not advisable to attempt any change," he wrote to Sibley in Washington in 1821; " . . . there is little doubt, but the French part of our population would oppose any alteration, which might be suggested. It is my decided conviction, that it is better not to agitate the subject again and at present."39 Many of the memorials to Congress between 1814 and 1823 reveal dissatisfaction, not with the rule of the governor and judges, but with the provisions of the Ordinance of 1787 regarding terri- torial government. Citizens from Wayne, Monroe, and Oakland counties told Congress that they believed that "were the subject of forming a territorial government, now to arise for the first time, before the legislature of the union, a system, in which so many contradictory powers are absurdly blended would not be applied to any portion of American people."40 A group of Detroit citizens headed by John Lieb and James McCloskey asked Congress to change the existing govern- mental structure in Michigan, to assure a separation of legislative and judicial powers. This group wanted a legislative body consisting of nine representatives to be elected annually from the several counties, and a senate composed of five councilors. Each county should then be allowed the right to tax its inhabitants for the support of its own representatives.4] 39Cass to Solomon Sibley, January 20, 1821, in Sibley Papers, BHC. 40Memorial to Congress by Inhabitants of Wayne, Monroe, and Oakland counties, November 1, 1822, in Carter, Ierr;_Papers, XI, 271—277. 41 Detroit Gazette, March 22, 1822. 315 The Detroit Gazette also voiced its disapproval of the terri- torial system as established by the Ordinance of 1787. Michigan, like other territories, had been erected in a "hasty and inconsiderate manner." The Ordinance was a compact and did not seek the consent of the people of the territory. "It requires no argument to show the erroneous and anti-republican nature of such a doctrine," the Gazette reported in 1823, "and that it comports neither with the known principles of the federal government, nor its interests, nor the welfare of the people upon whom it operates . . . ."42 Congress ended the rule of the governor and judges in 1823 by passing an act that provided for a legislative council for Michigan. Qualified electors were to select eighteen persons from the territory, nine of whom the President and Senate would appoint to form the new legislative council. This new council, acting with the governor, would enact Michigan's laws. The governor was granted a veto power over the legislative council and any act passed by the new council was subject to the approval of Congress. Three territorial judges were to be appointed to four-year terms beginning in 1824, instead of having indefinite tenure, and were to be restricted to judicial functions. The legislative council was authorized to submit the question of a 43 general assembly to the people at any time. Technically, this 1823 act did not put Michigan into a second stage of territorial government, 421bid., January 24, 1823. 430. 5. Stats., III, 769-770. 316 but is usually considered as having done so. No action was taken during the territorial period to provide a general assembly for Michigan according to the provisions of the Northwest Ordinance, and Michigan had a unicameral legislature until it became a state.44 Witherell, Sibley, and John Hunt were appointed the new Supreme Court justices for Michigan in 1824. Witherell had been a popular figure in Michigan. Citizens of St. Clair County told Secretary of State John Quincy Adams that Witherell possessed "all the qualifications which constitute a learned & upright Judge, such 45 As territorial delegate, he has proved himself in Michigan." Sibley had proved himself one of the most capable men in Michigan. Hunt had moved to Michigan from Massachusetts in 1818 and had become the law partner of Charles Larned. His selection as judge was un- doubtedly due to the influence of his friends, Woodbridge and Judge Doty.46 There was little support among Michigan citizens for Griffin's re-appointment as a judge. Members of the Michigan Bar told Secretary Adanm that Griffin had "uniformly exhibited an imbecility of character 44Dunbar, Michigan, 275-276; Gilpin, The Territory of Michigan, 84. 45Territorial Officers of St. Clair County to the Secretary of State, November 23, 1823, in Carter, Terr. Papers, X1, 421. 46Campbell, Political History of Michigan, 411; Dunbar, Michigan, 279; Burton, History of Name County, I, 559-563. 317 47 Plagued which has rendered him worse than useless as a Judge." with ill-health, Griffin had no desire to remain in Michigan. In December of 1823 he informed President Monroe that he had no wish to be re-appointed.48 Woodward's chances for re-appointment were destroyed by a campaign to discredit him. "It is with much concern that I under- stand a combination is formed at this place [Detroit] to prevent your re-appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court of the Terri- 48 tory," James May wrote to Woodward early in 1824. Friends of Woodbridge and Doty accused Woodward of collaborating with the enemy during the War of 1812, of showing favoritism while sitting as chief justice of the Supreme Court, and of being "destitute of honor, "50 probity and respect for established law. One of the most serious charges was that Woodward was drunk while holding court. When a mild epidemic of typhus fever in Detroit in 1823 caused him to be- come ill, his doctor prescribed liberal draughts of "aether, wine, 51 brandy, spirits, opium and mercury." Too weak to walk to court, 47Members of the Michigan Bar to the Secretary of State, December 16, 1823, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 434-435. 48Judge Griffin to Monroe, December 30, 1823, Ibid., 444. 49James May to A. B. Woodward, January 21, 1824, in Wobdward Papers, BHC. 50Memorial to the Senate by James McCloskey and Others, January 6, 1824, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 493-495. 5lWoodford, Woodward, 177. See also the affidavits of Robert Abbott and Philu Judd regarding this matter in Carter, Terr. Papers, 5 524-525. 318 he had to be assisted to the bench, where he publicly took his medicine. Critics immediately informed the President that their 52 chief justice was making a drunken spectacle of himself. This was too much for Monroe, who removed Woodward's name from the list of candidates. There is little evidence to support the charges against Woodward. "I have been officially connected with him [Woodward] in the transaction of publick business almost ten years," Cass wrote to Gabriel Richard in Washington in 1824; "during that time I have never seen him intoxicated, nor have I in fact ever observed the 53 slightest appearance of intemperance." Detroit attorney Alexander Fraser found Woodward's talents "superior to what generally falls to the lot of man and his legal acquirements . . . to be such as would 54 adorn the Bench of any Country." Other memorials in defense of Woodward arrived in Washington too late to influence Monroe's decision. When he learned that he had been misled, he appointed Woodward to a vacancy in the Federal court for the middle district of the Territory of Florida.55 52Jenks, "Woodward,“ Michigan History, IX, 515-546; Dunbar, Michigan, 279; Woodford, Cass, 151-152. 53Governor Cass to Rev. Gabriel Richard, February 16, 1824, in Carter, Terr. Papers, XI, 520-521. 54Affidavit of Alexander 0. Fraser, February 17, 1824, in Woodward Papers , BHC. . 55Jenks, "Woodward," Michigan History, IX, 515-546; Burton, jilstory of Wayne County, I, 560. 319 In 1823 Michigan was still a frontier area with a population of slightly more than nine thousand, centered at Detroit, Michili- mackinac, and along the River Raisin, and scattered throughout the southeastern corner of the Lower Peninsula. Fourteen counties had been laid out, although six of these would not be organized for several years. Over seventy miles of road had been completed be- tween Toledo and Detroit, while another finished road stretched northward from Detroit to Pontiac. There was also a regular stage route between Detroit and Mt. Clemens. There were several private schools in Detroit, including a primary school, all supported by the contributions of townspeople. The first school supported by public taxation would come in 1827. Detroit also boasted a classical academy with over a hundred students by 1822. The academy was main- tained by contributions and the payment of tuition by the parents of the students. There were nearly four hundred homes and places of business in Detroit.56 The rule of the governor and judges from 1805 to 1823 was beneficial and important to Michigan Territory. During this period the legislative board adopted laws necessary to promote the growth and development of the territory and to protect the freedom of its citizens. Sitting as the Supreme Court, the judges maintained law 1and order and administered justice to Michigan inhabitants. Two 56C. N. Burton, The City of Detroit ( 5 vols.; Detroit: The S. \J. Clarke Co., 1922), I, 673-677, 729-730; Detroit Gazette, January 29, 1819; Dunbar, Michigan, 265, 280-282; Farmer, History SI: Detroit, 372-373, 715—716, 720, 769-770. 320 successive governors worked diligently to guide and direct a frontier community of heterogeneous elements and were generally successful, despite a disastrous war with England that devastated the territory. Both were instrumental in improving relations with the Indians. While a vocal minority of citizens criticized the efforts of their officials, the majority were pleased with their leadership and actually resisted their efforts to involve the citizenry in self-government. In 1819 Woodward told Detroiters that Michigan citizens had a "redeeming spirit, which only requires to be awakened to a correct view of their public rights, in order to produce those results which will, at once, "57 By 1823 the fortify their liberties and advance their happiness. governor and judges had successfully awakened that spirit, and had advanced a frontier community to the point where it could begin to manage its own affairs. 57Address to the Electors of the Territory of Michigan, August 30, 1819, in MPHC, XII, 529-533. WITHSTIi in m 1 - i. eNm_ .eemeeowz to am: ease zpwga .m oc=m_u 81 BL IOGRAPHICAL ESSAY BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY Any understanding of the founding and administration of Michigan Territory must begin with a knowledge of the French and English regimes which preceded it. Louise P. Kellogg's [133511 Regime in Wisconsin and the Northwest (Madison: 1925) is a useful work with which to begin concerning the French influence in the Northwest. C. M. Burton, "Detroit Rulers--French Commandants in this Region from 1701-1760," MPHC, XXXIV, 303-340; Catherine F. Babbitt, “Jesuit Influences in the Development of Michigan," Michigan History, XI, 570-580; and D. L. Crossman, "Early French Occupation of Michigan," MPHC, XIV, 651-668 give brief accounts of the French influence in Michigan. Documents on the French occupa- tion of the Northwest can be found in Theodore C. Pease and Raymond C. Werner, eds., The French Foundations, 1680-1693 (Springfield, Ill., 1934). Materials relating to the British occupation of what is now Michigan can be found in "Copies of Papers on File in the Dominion Archives at Ottawa, Canada, Pertaining to the Years, 1788-1799," MPHC, XII, 1-315, and "Copies of Papers on File in the Dominion .Archives at Ottawa, Canada, Pertaining to Michigan, as Found in the Colonial Office Records," MPHC, XXIV, l-699. These collections in- cfhdde official British correspondence regarding the Northwest and Inaterials relating to the Indians in that area. An important 322 323 collection is The John Askin Papers, 2 vols. (Detroit: 1931), edited by Milo Milton Quaife. Askin, a prominent British merchant in Detroit, became an influential member of Detroit society when Michigan Territory was established. Narratives giving a picture of Detroit and Michigan before 1805 include "Journal of Captain Henry Hamilton from August 6, 1778, to June 16, 1779, on his Expedition from Detroit to Vincennes," MPHC, IX; Joseph Moore, "Journal of a tour to Detroit in order to attend a Treaty, proposed to be held with the Indians at Sandusky," MPHC, XVII; and Isaac Weld, Jr., Travels Through the States of North America and the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada During the Years 1795, 1796, and 1797, 2 vols. (London: 1807). Several secondary works deal with Michigan under the British. Louise P. Kellogg, The British Regime in Wisconsin and the Old North- !e§t_(Madison: 1935), and Jack M. Sosin, Whitehall and the Wilderness: The Middle West in British Colonial Poliay, 1760-1775 (Lincoln, 1 Nebraska: 1961) are two good general treatments of British western policies. Two very useful works dealing with the British in Michigan are William Riddel, Michigan Under British Rule: Law and the Law Courts, 1760-1796 (Lansing: 1926), and Nelson Russell, The British Regime in Michigan and the Old Northwest, 1760-1796 (Northfield, Minnesota: 1939). Riddel's work is particularly important for an understanding of the complexity of British civil and criminal codes used in Michigan before 1805. A discussion of Pontiac's rebellion can be found in Francis Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, 2 vols. (Boston: 1851), and Howard Peckham, Pontiac and the Indian pprisipg (Princeton, New 324 Jersey: 1947). Parkman contends that the rebellion was a well- organized conspiracy, while Peckham argues that it was not a care- fully planned operation under the direction of Pontiac. Myles M. Platt, "Detroit under Siege, l763,‘I Michigan History, XL, is a description of Pontiac's activities at that post. The beginnings of American occupation in Michigan are treated in F. Clever Bold, Detroit's First American Decade, 1769-1805 (Ann Arbor: 1948), an important work which demonstrates the difficulty many Americans had adjusting to the French and British cultures already firmly established in Michigan. Of lesser value are George N. Fuller, Economic and Social Beginnings of Michigan (Lansing: 1916), and Carter Goodrich, The First Michigan Frontier (Ann Arbor: 1940). Bela Hubbard, "The Early Colonization of Detroit," MPHC, I, 347-368 discusses the impact of earlier cultures on Americans, particularly the French. George Catlin, "Early Settlement in Eastern Michigan," Michigan History, XXVI, 319-345 describes the importance of the fur trade in the development of Detroit and eastern Michigan. Wade Millis, "When Michigan Was Born," Michigan History, XVIII, 208-224, is rather superficial, but does have useful information on the tarigins of the Michigan-Ohio boundary controversy. The Public Statutes_at large of the United States of America ccnrtain the provisions of the Ordinance of 1787, and the acts erect- iru; the Indiana and Michigan Territories. William Jenks, "The Creation of the Territory of Michigan," Michigan History, II, 270—288 is ii useful article describing the Congressional debate regarding the 325 erection of Michigan Territory. There is no recent history of the Ordinance of 1787. Jay A. Barrett, Evolution of the Ordinance of _Z§Z_(New York: 1901) is out of date. There are several key collections necessary to understand the legislative and administrative efforts of the governor and judges. "The Michigan Territorial Papers," 4 vols., found in the General Records of the Department of State at the National Archives have useful material on petitions, recommendations, and correspondence affecting the territorial officials. The Laws of the Territory of Michigan, 4 vols. (Lansing: 1871-1884) contain both the acts as adopted by the governor and judges and information on appropriations and a record of the states from which a particular act was adopted. Clarence Carter, ed., The Territorial Papers of the United States: Michigan Territory, X-XI (Washington: 1942-1943) contain valuable correspondence between territorial officials and their superiors in Washington regarding legislation, military affairs, and relations with the Indians, as well as petitions to Congress from territorial inhabitants. The Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, 40 vols. (Lansing: 1877-1929) has a wealth of information on all aspects crf territorial development. The Collections of the State Historical §gyciety of Wisconsin, 31 vols. (Madison: 1903-1931) are also useful. There are important collections in the National Archives inelative to legislation and administration by territorial officials. TTua General Records of the Department of State, Record Group 59, were vergl useful, particularly The Domestic Letters of the Department of State, 1784-1906, microfilm publication number M40. Two valuable 326 collections included in the Records of the Office of the Secretary of War, Record Group 107, are Letters Received by the Secretary of War, Main Series, 1801-1870, M221, and Miscellaneous Letters Sent by the Office of the Secretary of War, 1800-1809, M370. There are important documents in the Records of the Bureau of Land Management, Record Group 49, particularly the Letters Sent by the Surveyor General of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio, M477, and Letters Received by the Surveyor General of the Territory Northwest of the River Ohio, M479. As the State and War Departments had the primary responsibility for overseeing the administration of American terri- tories in this early period, their records are crucial to any study of Michigan Territory. There is a valuable collection of materials relating to the administration of Michigan Territory at the State Archives in Lansing, a collection that has been ignored by many writers dealing with this period of Michigan history. Pertinent to the legislative efforts of the territorial officials is the "Journal of the Transactions of the Governor and Judges of the Territory of Michigan in their Legislative Capacity, 1805-1815," which deals with the actions of the legislative board in adopting acts for the territory. Equally important are the "Michigan Executive Acts, 1805-1820," and "Michigan Executive .Acts, 1814-1830," which include proclamations by the governor, corres- inondence by the territorial officials, and reports and proceedings of the governor and judges in their legislative and administrative capacities. There is also a series of petitions to the governor and 327 judges which include "Petitions and Recommendations, Undated to 1819;" "Petitions and Recommendations, 1820-1821;" and "Petitions and Recommendations, 1822." These are important in evaluating citizen response to the rule of the governor and judges and shed valuable light on conditions in the territory in this period. Also useful is the "Cass Correspondence Book, 1814-1820,“ which includes materials on legislation, military affairs, and relations with the Indians. There is a small but worthwhile collection of Michigan Papers relating to this period at the Clements Library at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. This collection has some very useful items relating to the administration of Governor Cass. Printed sources extremely useful in investigating the 1egis- 1ative and administrative efforts of the governor and judges include American State Papers, Public Lands, 1, IV, and VII, and American State Papers, Miscellaneous, I, which provide information on land sales in Michigan and the difficulty in settling conflicting 1and claims. The Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections contain many valuable documents relating to early territorial development: Charles Moore, ed., "The Beginnings of Territorial Government in inichigan: Manuscripts in the Department of State, Washington, D.C.," fiEfifl;, XXXI, 510-612; "Territorial Records, 1803-1815 from the Wood- laridge and John R. Williams Papers in the Burton Library,‘l MPHC, XXXVII, l7-3l, 38-131; "Woodbridge Papers," MP_l-_1_C_, XXXII, 524-573; '“Terw~itorial Records from 1805-1823," MPHC, 100-467; and "Documents Relating to Detroit and Vicinity, 1805-1813," w, XL. John R. 328 Williams was the first elected mayor of Detroit and the adjutant general of the territorial militia. M. Agnes Burton, ed., Proceedings of the Land Board of Detroit (Detroit: 1915) is an important source of information concerning the distribution of land to Michigan resi- dents after the fire of 1805. Secondary accounts dealing with the legislative and adminis- trative activities of the territorial officials include George Catlin, "The Reign of the Governor and Judges of Michigan Territory," Michigan History, XXVIII, 572-583, a superficial and critical treatment, and Alec Gilpin, The Territoryrof Michigan, 1805-1837 (East Lansing: 1970), which lacks detail and is at times awkwardly organized. Attracting new settlement to Michigan was an early problem of the governor and judges. Several secondary accounts are useful in examining governmental land policies. Malcolm J. Rohrbough, The Land Office Business: The Settlement and Administration of American Public Lands, 1789-1837 (New York: 1968) is a scholarly work. Other signifi- cant works on the public domain include Payson J. Treat, The National Land System, 1785-1820 (New York: 1910); Roy M. Robbins, Our Landed Heritage: The Public Domain, 1776-1936 (Lincoln, Nebraska: 1962), and Benjamin H. Hibbard, A History of the Public Land Policies (Madison: 1965 reprint). Dallas Lee Jones, "The Survey and Sale of 'the Public Land in Michigan, 1815-1862," (unpublished M.A. thesis, (Harnell University, 1952), is also worthwhile. Other secondary accounts deal with county organization in Micfliigan and problems of settlement. William Hathaway, "County Organi- zaticni in Michigan," Michigan History, II, 573-629 demonstrates how 329 county organization kept pace with actual settlement. George N. Fuller, "Settlement of Southern Michigan, 1805-1837," Michigan History, XIX, 179-214 discusses the organization of individual counties and the groups who settled them. Two articles dealing with the Michigan-Ohio boundary controversy are Tod B. Galloway, "The Ohio-Michigan Boundary Line Dispute," Ohio Archaeological and Histori- cal Publications, IV, 199-230, and Claude Larzelere, "The Boundaries of Michigan," MPHC, XXX, 1-27. Articles giving useful information on transportation problems in Michigan Territory include: Joe L. Harris, "The Walk-in-the-Water," Detroit Historical Society Bulletin, XIX, 4-11; Lewis Cass, "The Black Swamp Road-~Winter of 1814-1815," MPHC, XXXVI, 369—378; George Catlin, “Michigan's Early Military Roads," Michigan History, XIII, 196-207; and A. N. Bliss, "Federal Land Grants for Internal Improve- ments in Michigan," MPHC, VII, 52-68. The need for an educational program in Michigan was an early concern of the territorial officials. Useful articles on education include: E. B. Isbell, "The Catholepistemiad of Michigania," Michigan ‘AiynmusQuarterly Review, XLIII, 590-602; William J. Cameron, "John Monteith, First President of the University of Michigan," Michigan liistory, XXVIII, 572-583; Fred Dustin, "Education During the Terri- torial Period," MPHC, VII, 36-51; and Shelby 8. Schurtz, "Gabriel lkichard and the University of Michigan,” Michigan History, XIX, 5-18. A useful discussion of Michigan's economic problems in this perjcnd is Floyd Russell Dain, EveryrHouse a Frontier: (Detroit's Eonomic Progress, 1815-1825 (Detroit: 1956). A good survey of banks 330 and banking in the territorial period is Alpheus Felch, "Early Banks and Banking in Michigan," MPHC, 11, 111-124. William Jenks, "The First Bank in Michigan," Michigan History, I, 41-62 absolves the governor and judges from any blame in the failure of the territory's first bank. Any discussion of the Michigan Territorial Supreme Court must begin with the "Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Terri- tory of Michigan." Volume one of this manuscript collection is in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library. The four remaining volumes are in the Bentley Library of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Also at the Bentley Library are the files of the various cases appearing in the "Transactions." William Wirt Blume has edited Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, 1805-1836, 6 vols. (Ann Arbor: 1935-1940), but the published Transactions do not include all the material available at the Bentley Library. Blume's introduction to the Transactions is an excellent discussion of the problems of law courts in Michigan and is a good starting point for one unfamiliar with the court system under the British and the French. Blume's charts showing the changes in judicial districts and the specific officials who made up Michi- gan's early court system are particularly useful. Also important is the "Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, James Duane Doty, Detroit, 1819," ms .journal in the Law Library of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Dotgrserved as clerk for the Supreme Court in 1819 and later became a judge in Michigan. 331 Valuable material relating to the Michigan Territorial Supreme Court can be found in the papers of Augustus B. Woodward, Solomon Sibley, Benjamin F. Witherell, and William Woodbridge in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library. As chief justice, Woodward was the most important member of the court, and his papers contain opinions regarding many of his cases as well as his observations on other members of the court. Sibley was an influential lawyer in Detroit and often represented the territory in important cases. Benjamin Witherell was the son of Judge James Witherell. Woodbridge served as secretary of the territory and also served as acting governor after the War of 1812. Robert Ross, The Early Bench and Bar of Detroit (Detroit: 1907) is a useful work on the early territorial courts. Two articles dealing with capital punishment in Michigan are Louis Burbey, "History of Executions in Michigan," Michigan History, XXII, 442-457, and Albert Post, "Michigan Abolishes Capital Punishment,“ Michigan History, XXIX, 44-50. William Potter discusses the history of the Michigan judiciary in two articles: "The Michigan Judiciary; 1664-1805," Michigan History, XXVII, 418-433; and "The Michigan Judiciary Since 1805," Michigan History, XXVII, 644-660. Also useful is C. M. Burton, "Relation of Probate and District Courts," MPHC, XXXVII, 32-38. Governors Hull and Cass also served as Superintendent of Indian Affairs in Michigan. Several valuable government collections relate to this role. Letters Sent by the Secretary of War Relating to Indian Affairs, 1800-l824, Record Group 75, M15, and Letters Re- ceived by the Office of the Secretary of War Relating to Indian Affairs, 332 1800-1823, Record Group 75, M27 are very useful. There is also pertinent information concerning Indians in Letters Received by the Secretary of War, Main Series, 1801-1870, M221, and Miscellaneous Letters Sent by the Office of the Secretary of War, 1800-1809, M370. Important for Michigan are the Records of the Michigan Superintendency: 1814-1851, Ml. Also useful is the collection designated as Documents Relating to the Negotiation of Ratified and Unratified Treaties with Various Indian Tribes, 1801-1869, T494. Letters Sent by the Superin- tendent of Indian Trade, 1807-1823, M16, does not have a great deal of information concerning Michigan, but does help to understand the problems of maintaining a fair trade with the Indians. The Statutes at Large include legislation affecting Indians. Also useful for Michigan Indians is American State Papers, Indian Affairs, II. Basic works for the study of the government's dealings with Indians are Charles Kappler, ed., Indian Treaties: 1778-1883 (New York: 1972 reprint), and Felix S. Cohen, Federal Indian Law (Albuquerque, New Mexico: 1973 reprint). Still useful is Charles C. Royce, comp., Indian Land Cessions in the United States (Washington: 1899). There is a great deal of information regarding Michigan Indians in The Territorial Papers of the United States, X-XI. Secondary works are of value for an understanding of the government's relationship to the Indians. Francis Paul Prucha, American Indian Policy in the Formative Years: The Indian Trade and Intercourse Acts, 1790-1834 (Lincoln, Nebraska: 1970) is a scholarly account of the emergence of a national Indian policy. An older but still useful study is George D. Harmon, Sixty Years of Indian Affairs: 333 Political, Economic, and Diplomatic,ij789-1850 (Chapel Hill, 1941). Ora Brooks Peake, A History of the United States Factory System: 1795-1822 (Denver: 1954) is somewhat disorganized but still useful. An older work dealing with the same topic is Royal 8. Way, "The United States Factory System for Trading with the Indians, 1792-1822," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, VI (September, 1919). The governors of Michigan Territory often attempted to obtain land for the United States from the Indians by treaty. A number of secondary works are useful in examining this aspect of the rule of the governor and judges. Alpheus Felch, "The Indians of Michigan and the Cession of Their Lands to the United States by Treaties," MPHC, XXVI, 274-297, is brief but worthwhile. Francis Paul Prucha, Lewis Cass and American Indian Polipy_(Detroit: 1967) is an excellent short study of Cass's relations with the Indians not only as Governor of Michigan but also as Secretary of War. Fred Dustin, "The Treaty of Saginaw," Michigan History, IV, 243-278, is a good account of the treaty negotiations. Dustin maintains that the Indians did not know what they were signing. Henry Naegely, "Lewis Cass and the American Indian," Michigan History, XXXVII, 286-298 praises Cass's efforts to protect the Indians. Ephriam S. Williams, "The Treaty of Saginaw, 1819," MPHC, VII, 262-269 is a brief treatment of the negotiations. Benjamin F. Comfort, Lewis Cass and the Indian Treaties (Detroit: 1923) is useful for details but is somewhat dated. Sue Silliman, "The Chicago Indian Treaty of 1821," Michigan History, VI, 194-197, con- tends that avaricious whites undermined the intent of the treaty. Land cessions in Ohio and Michigan are discussed in Dwight L. Smith, 334 "Indian Land Cessions in Northern Ohio and Southeastern Michigan, 1805-1808," Northwest Ohio Qparterly, XXIX, 27-45. Trade with the Indians was an important concern of the governor and judges. The fur trade was particularly important in Michigan. A valuable source on the fur trade in the upper Great Lakes region after the War of 1812 is the Mackinac Letter books, 1816-1830, of the American Fur Company, available on microfilm at the Clarke Historical Library of Central Michigan University at Mt. Pleasant. Also useful is "The Fur Trade in Wisconsin, 1812-1825," Collections of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, XX, 1-393. Kenneth W. Porter, John Jacob Astor: Business Man, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1931) while presenting a sympathetic view of Astor's activities in Michigan, also provides useful informa- tion on Cass's dealings with the Indians and the importance of the fur trade in Michigan. David Lavender, The Fist in the Wilderness (Garden City, New York: 1964), is a popular but careful study of Astor's fur empire. Ida Amanda Johnson, The Michigan Fur Trade Lansing: 1919) is useful for details on the Michigan fur trade but is dated. Wayne E. Stevens, "The Michigan Fur Trade," Michigan History, XXIX, 489-505 is a short but scholarly treatment of the subject. John Harold Humins, "George Boyd: Indian Agent of the Upper Great Lakes, 1819-1842" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1975) is useful for its discussion of the importance of the fur trade in Michigan and Astor's influence on Cass. Boyd was Indian agent at Michilimackinac from 1819 to 1832. 335 Henry Rowe Schoolcraft left useful memoirs and reminiscences concerning Indians in Michigan and his journey with Cass in 1820 to the headwaters of the Mississippi. These include Personal Memoirs of a Residence of Thirty Years with the Indians on the American Frontier . . . 1812 to 1842 (Philadelphia: 1845), and Narrative Journal of Travels Through the Northwestern Region of the United States . . . to the Sources of the Mississippi in theryear 1820, edited by Mentor L. Williams (East Lansing: 1953). Schoolcraft served as Indian agent at Sault Ste. Marie from 1822 to 1832, when he became agent for the combined agencies of Sault Ste. Marie and Michilimackinac. General articles that have been written on Michigan Indians are not very satisfactory. Melvin D. Osbond, "The Michigan Indians," MPHC, XXIX, 697-709, is brief and superficial. Claude S. Larzelere, "The Red Man in Michigan," Michigan History, XVII, 344-376 is a- shallow discussion, while Emerson Greenman, "The Indians of Michigan," Michigan History, XLV, 1-35 is for school children. Certain general works on Indians were useful for this study. Two fine works on the Indians of the upper Great Lakes are William W. Warren, A History of the Ojibway Nation (Minneapolis: 1957 re- print), and W. Vernon Kinietz, The Indians of the Western Great Lakes, 1615-1760 (Ann Arbor: 1940). An excellent anthropological study of upper Great Lakes Indians is George Irving Quimby, Indian Life in _the Upper Great Lakes: 11,000 B.C. to A.D. 1800 (Chicago: 1960). 336 Two valuable handbooks on Indians are John R. Swanton, The Indian Tribes of North America (Washington: 1953), and Frederick Webb Hodge, Handbook of American Indians,_North of Mexico (New York: 1959 reprint). One of the most devastating blows to the development of Michigan Territory was the War of 1812. A very useful collection of materials on Michigan's involvement in the war is the series of documents in volume XL of the MPHC, which contains a great many Hull papers and correspondence between Hull and the Secretary of War. See also "Copies of Papers on File in the Dominion Archives at Ottawa, Canada, Pertaining to the Relations of the British Govern- ment with the United States during the Period of the War of 1812," MPHC, XV, 1-751, and XVI, 1-746, and "Papers and Orderly Book of Brig. Gen. James Winchester," MPHC, XXXI, 253-312. Winchester was the American commander whose troops were killed by Indians in the infamous "River Raisin Massacre" in 1812. Three collections in the National Archives useful for a study of the war are Records of the Secretary of War, Letters Received, Main Series, 1801-1870, M221; Letters Sent Concerning Military Affairs, 1800-1889, M6; and "War of 1812 Papers" of the Department of State, 1789-1815, M570. A useful documentary compilation on the War of 1812 is Ernest A. Cruikshank, ed., Documents Relatingito the Invasion of Canada and _the Surrender of Detroit, 1812 (Ottawa: 1913). For the account of 337 a participant in the Detroit phase of the war, see Milo Milton Quaife, ed., War on the Detroit, the Chronicles of Thomas Vercheres de Boucherville and The Capitulation by_an Ohio Volunteer (Chicago: 1940). A number of secondary accounts were useful in a study of the War of 1812. Alec Gilpin, The War of 1812 in the Old Northwest (East Lansing: 1958) is the standard account of the war on the Detroit frontier. Two general accounts of the war are Harry L. Coles, Ihe_ War of 1812 (Chicago: 1965), and Reginald Horsman, The War of 1812 (New York: 1969). Fred Hamil, Michigan in the War of 1812 (Lansing: 1960), is a short work with emphasis on Hull's activities. Levi Bishop describes two battles in Michigan in the "Battle of Brownstown," MPHC, VI, 464-466, and the "Battle of Monquagon," MPHC, VI 466-469. "Battle and Massacre at Frenchtown, Michigan, January, 1813,“ MPHC, XII, 436-443 is by one of the survivors of that episode, Rev. Thomas P. Dudley. Josephine 0. Elmer, "The Raisin River Massacre and Dedi- cation of Monuments," MPHC, XXXV, 200-238 is a narrative of that massacre. Indians played an important role in the War of 1812. The best biography of the Indian leader, Tecumseh, is Glenn Tucker, Tecumseh: Vision of Glory (Indianapolis: 1956). Reginald Horsman, "British Indian Policy in the Northwest, 1807-1812," Mississippi galley Historical Review (June, 1958) maintains that while the British did not incite the Indians, they did capitalize on Indian unrest to foment discontent among the red men to insure the preservation of Canada. A useful article is George F. G. Stanley, "The Indians in the War of 1812," Canadian Historical Review, XXXI, 145-165. 338 William Hull is a central character in Michigan's involvement in the War of 1812. Two articles by John Van Deusen which are sympathetic to the general are "Detroit Campaign of General William Hull," Michigan History, XII, 568-583, and "Court-Martial of Gen. William Hull," Michigan History, XII, 668-694. Hull's own court- martial defense is found in MPHC, XL. Also useful is Milo Milton Quaife, "General William Hull and His Critics," Ohio Archeological and Historical Qparterly, XLVII, 168-182. The papers of the territorial officials in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library are the most valuable source of information on the public and private lives of the governor and judges. They include the Woodward Papers, the Hull Papers, the Benjamin F. Witherell Papers, and the Cass Papers. There is also a small collection of Cass papers at the Clements Library of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. A number of books and articles depict the lives of the governor and judges. Maria Campbell, Revolutionary Services and Civil Life of General William Hull (New York: 1847), written by Hull's daughter, is a defense of Hull, but offers useful details on his private life. A brief but objective treatment of Hull's life is William Jenks. ''Sketch of the Life of William Hull," MPHC, XL. Frank Woodford, Mr. Jefferson's Disciple,_A Life of Justice Woodward (East Lansing: 1953) is a useful biography of the chief justice, but lacks citations. Articles on Woodward's life include: William Jenks, "Augustus Elias Brevoort Woodward," Michigan History, IX, 515-546; 339 Sister Marie Heyda, "Justice Woodward and the Michigan Territory," Michigan History, LI, 43-55; Elizabeth Gaspar Brown, "Judge Augustus Brevoort Woodward, Man of Property,” Michigan History, XL, 190-202; and C. M. Burton, "Augustus Brevoort Woodward," MPHC, XXIX, 638-664. The best work on Frederick Bates is Thomas M. Marshall, ed., Ihe_ Life and Papers of Frederick Bates, 2 vols. (St. Louis: 1926). Also useful are William Jenks, "Frederick Bates," Michigan History, XVII, 15-19, and Edward Bates, "Sketch of Frederick Bates," MPHC, VIII, 563-565. Edward Bates, the brother of Frederick, served as a member of Lincoln's cabinet. Thomas W. Palmer, "Sketch of Life and Times of James Witherell," MPHC, IV, 103-107 is a brief but important pic- ture of Witherell's private life. A short treatment of John Griffin is William Jenks, "Judge John Griffin," Michigan History, XIV, 221- 225. Biographies of both Griffin and Witherell would be very useful. Much has been written on Lewis Cass. Two older biographies include W. L. G. Smith, The Life and Times of Lewis Cass (New York: 1856), and Andrew McLaughlin, Lewis Cass (New York: 1892). Both are lauda- tory accounts. More modern biographies include Frank B. Woodford, Lewis Cass: The Last Jeffersonian (New Brunswick, New Jersey: 1950), and Willis F. Dunbar, Lewis Cass (Grand Rapids: 1970). Woodford's book is a full treatment of Cass's life but lacks citations. Dunbar's work is short but scholarly. The papers of several contemporaries of the territorial officials are important aids in understanding the public and private lives of the governor and judges. These include the William Woodbridge 340 Papers, the Solomon Sibley Papers, the John R. Williams Papers, and the Henry Rowe Schoolcraft Papers, all in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library. There are also valuable printed Schoolcraft Papers in MPHC, XXXVII, 207-419. Secondary works on the contemporaries of the territorial officials also contributed to this study. Two studies of territorial secretaries by William Jenks are "Stanley Griswold," Michigan History, XV, 5-18 and "Reuben Atwater," Michigan History, XXIII, 262-264. A useful work is Louis Rau, "Solomon Sibley, the Public Servant, 1768- 1845," ms. on microfilm in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library. Sibley was an important lawyer who became a territorial delegate to Congress. The best work on Gabriel Richard, territorial delegate and influential Detroit priest, is Frank B. Woodford and Albert Hyma, Gabriel Richard: Frontier Ambassador (Detroit: 1958). A brief article on Richard is J. A. Girardian, "Life and Times of Gabriel Richard," MPHC, I, 481-496. Alice E. Smith, James Duane Doty: Frontier Promoter (Madison: 1954) is a solid work on a Michigan judge who became a political enemy of Wood- ward and Griffin. Charles Lanman, The Life of William Woodbridge (Washington: 1867) is eulogistic. A new biography 0f Woodbridge is needed. Lanman was Receiver of the land office at Monroe, Michigan in 1830 and a friend of Woodbridge. Other secondary works provided general background and informa- tion concerning Michigan Territory. They include Willis Dunbar, .Miphigan: A History of the Wolverine State (Grand Rapids, Michigan: 341 1965); James Campbell, Outlines of the Political History of Michigan (Detroit: 1876); George Catlin, The Story of Detroit (Detroit: 1921); Clarence M. Burton, The Ciiy of Detroit, Michigan, 6 vols. (Detroit: 1922) and History of Wayne County_and the City of Detroit, 5 vols. (Detroit: 1930); Silas Farmer, History of Detroit and Michigan (Detroit: 1884); Henry M. Utley and Byron M. Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory, and State, 4 vols. (New York: 1906; Alec Gilpin, The Territory_of Michigan (East Lansing: 1970); F. Clever Bald, Michigan in Four Centuries (New York: 1961); Beverly Bond, Jr., The Civilization of the Old Northwest (New York: 1934); and R. Carlyle Buley, The Old Northwest, 2 vols. (Bloomington: 1951). Typed and Printed in the U.S.A. Professional Thesis Preparation Cliff and Paula Haughey 144 Maplewood Drive . ' ' East Landng, Michigan 48823 Telephone (617) 337-1627 TAT "11111111111111111111111111111111“ 3 031