wmmmmmmmimh 
 
 UBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 ODOQB^bQT^T 
 
 •i 
 

 *' ^n '* "-"^^ i' n-' 
 
 '^ 
 
 
 
 .^''*.."'«'^-*t 
 
 ■.'?•'' ^ J 
 
 
 ^*^ 
 
 .0^ ..l/,^7^. q 
 
 
 '^O 
 
 - ■ - At "^ \. 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 «7 IV 
 
 
 1;°. ^v- 
 
 < , c 
 
 "^O. 
 
 
KENTUCKY'S STRUGGLE WITH ITS 
 LOYALIST PROPRIETORS 
 
 BY 
 
 WILBUR H. SIEBERT 
 
 Reprinted from the Mississippi 
 Valley Historical Review 
 Vol. VII, No. 2, Sept., 1920 
 
t-Z^ 
 
 7 
 
 2^G^ 
 
KENTUCKY'S STRUGGLE WITH ITS LOYALIST 
 PROPRIETORS 
 
 Contrary to the traditional view, Virginia had among its peo- 
 ple a largo proportion of torios or loyalists in tho revolutionary 
 days, besides many who behaved like loyalists when the British 
 forces were at hand. This has been fully demonstrated by Mr. 
 John A. George in his dissertation for the master's degree sub- 
 mitted to the faculty of Richmond college in June, 1913, and 
 l)ul)lishe(l in part in the Riclniwud college historical papers in 
 June, li)lG. The conclusions of Mr. George are fully confirmed 
 by Professor H. J. Eckenrode of tho same institution in his 
 volume, The revolution in Virginia, also published in 1916. 
 
 As Kentucky formed a part of the old dominion in those stir- 
 ring times, this paper becomes supplementary to the valuable 
 treatises just mentioned. Lord Duimiore, as is well kno^\^l, was 
 the leader of the loyalists in eastern Virginia until he and hun- 
 dreds of his followers sought refuge aboard the king's ships at 
 Norfolk on December 14, 1775. For several years before that 
 disastrous episode his lordship liad been issuing patents for 
 more or less extensive tracts of land in the county of West Fin- 
 castle, including Kentucky, to numerous persons, among whom 
 may easily be idontifiod at least a few loyalists. One of these 
 was Dr. John Connolly, who lived near Fort Pitt, where he seems 
 to have owned a "jjatrimonial estate." According to his own 
 account he sold this estate and bought land in Virginia. At any 
 rate, he acquired 4,000 acres of land opposite the falls of the 
 Ohio in December, 1773, and entered upon a project with Colonel 
 John Campbell, who obtained an adjoining tract, to found a 
 town at the falls. In fact, the plat for this town — the future 
 city of Louisville — had been surveyed in the previous August 
 by Captain Thomas Bullitt, and lots wore first advertised for 
 sale by the proprietors in the following April.' 
 
 > Clarence M. Burton, "John Connolly, a fory of the revolution," in Proccedinrjs 
 of the American antujuttrUm societi/, now scrips, 20:71 ff. ; Reuben T. Durrett, The 
 oentrnary of LouiitUlc (FiUon club publications number 8 — Louisville, 1893), 23-27, 
 131, 133. 
 
114 Wilbur H. Siebert ^- ^'- H- «• 
 
 Other loyalists who acquired land in Kentucky about the same 
 time were Captain Alexander ]\IcKee, the deputy superintendent 
 of Indian affairs at Fort Pitt; Simon Girty, the interpreter to 
 the Six nations at the same post ; and Joseph Browster of West- 
 moreland county, Pennsylvania. ]\IcKee secured his grant of 
 2,000 acres on the south branch of Elkhorn creek in June, 1774; 
 Girty became the possessor of three tracts of 300 acres each, 
 according to his own sworn statement, but he does not mention 
 their locations ; and Browster purchased 1,000 acres of improved 
 land on a visit to Kentucky before the revolution, but his widow, 
 who tells of the transaction, fails to state where the purchase 
 lay. She relates, however, that in removing to the west her 
 family was attacked and forced to take refuge at St. Vincent, and 
 that her husband was soon after killed by an Indian guide who 
 was conducting him to Detroit, a fact referred to in a testimo- 
 nial which she had from Dr. Connolly, who had known Browster 
 and had on one occasion sutfered imprisonment with him.- 
 
 Besides these few loyalists who held land in Kentucky but 
 never lived there, the names are known of but two others who 
 appear in the revolutionary annals of the state. One of these 
 was the Reverend John Lji;he, the Anglican missionary at Har- 
 rodsburg, who served as a member of the house of delegates of 
 the Transylvania company and read the customary prayers for 
 the king and the royal family of England on Sunday, ]\Iay 27, 
 1775, at the end of the session of the delegates. It must be 
 added that Lythe's loyalism was promptly dissipated within 
 a week by the arrival of the news of the battle of Lexington. 
 The other loyalist was Dr. John F. D. Smythe, who came on 
 horseback to Boonesborough a few days later as an emissary of 
 Dunmore, though he did not divulge this to his host, Judge 
 Richard Henderson, the head of the Transylvania company. To 
 him he explained only that he was collecting material for a book 
 
 2 Durrett, The centenary of Louisville, 28; Reuben T. Durrett, Bryant's station and 
 the memorial proceedings held on its site under the artspices of the Lexington chapter, 
 D. A. E., August the 18th, 1896, in honor of its heroic mothers and daughters (Filson 
 club publications number 12 — Louisville, 1897), 30, note; 111, note; George W. 
 Banck, BoonesborougK Its founding, pioneer struggles, Indian experiences, Tran- 
 sylvania days, and revolutionary annals (Filson club publications number 16 — Louis- 
 ville, 1901), 180-183; licport of the bureau of archives for the province of Ontario 
 (Toronto, 1904-1914), number 2, part 2, p. 1282; part 1, p. 477. 
 
 Gift 
 Author 
 
Vol. VII, No. 2 Kentucky's Loyalist Proprietors 115 
 
 of travels. Thus he gained the opportunity during the several 
 weeks of his sojourn to go among the Shauniee and other Ohio 
 Indians for the purpose of securing their cooperation with the 
 loyalists in suppressing rebellion in tiie west. In his notes 
 Smythe recorded his conviction tliat the Kentucky woodsmen 
 were too proud and insolent "to be styled servants even of His 
 Majesty."^ 
 
 The mission of Dr. Smythe to Boonesborough and the region 
 north of the Ohio river was ominous for the future. Naturally, 
 tile savages resented the occupation of their favorite hunting 
 grounds by the white men and, although a treaty of peace and 
 neutrality was signed between the western tribes and the com- 
 missioners of congress at Pittsburgh in the autumn of 1775, 
 "Captain" Pluggj', the Mohawk leader of a band of miscreants 
 living on the upper Olentangy, accompanied by several braves 
 and two Shawniee guides, appeared on the Kentucky river and 
 fired upon three persons near Boonesborough, December 23, 
 1775.* 
 
 In the following May and June the inhabitants of "Transyl- 
 vania" presented petitions to the Virginia convention asking 
 that steps be taken "to prevent the inroads of Savages" and to 
 erect "West Fincastle into a new county, despite the king's proc- 
 lamation excluding settlers therefrom. The expressed fear of 
 the petitioners was that if left under royal control the region in 
 question might "afford a safe asylum to those whose principles 
 are inimical to American liberty." In answer to these petitions 
 three new counties were created in December, 1776, one of these 
 being Kentucky county.' 
 
 Meantime, some of tlie Ohio Indians had been committing 
 depredations in Kentucky to such an extent that McClelland 's 
 station, the last fort north of the Kentuckj^ river, was aban- 
 
 > RanoJi, Boonesborough, 28, 31-33. 
 
 * Biennial report of the department of archives and history of the state of West 
 Virpinia. 10111914 (Charleston, 1914), 40; The revolution on the upper Ohio, 1775- 
 1777, piiiteil by Roubcn G. Thwaites and Louise P. Kellogg (Madison, 1908), lOO, 
 102, 143; Ranck, Boonesborough, 45, 46. 
 
 ^Petitions of the early inhabitants of Keniuely to the general assembly of 
 Virginia, 1769 to 179!, edited by James B. Robertson {Filson club publications num- 
 ber 27 — Louisville, 1914), 38, 39; William W. Hening, Statutes at large, being a 
 collection of all the laws of rirginia, 1619 to 179S (Richmond, 1819-1823), 9: 257; 
 Banck, Boonesborough, 48, 54. 
 
116 Wilbur H. Siebert m.v.h.r. 
 
 doned in the same month in which the new counties were erected. 
 That the red men had been incited to these hostilities was not 
 doubted by many, for the report had gained wide currency in 
 May that the Wyandot, Ottawa, and other Indians had recently 
 been at Detroit, where they had received presents from the 
 British commandant. Lieutenant Governor Henry Hamilton. 
 With the opening of the spring of 1777 the attacking war bands 
 only increased in size and daring. Late in April Boonesbor- 
 ough, "the big fort," which had been left unassailed hitherto, 
 was attacked by a party of fifty or more warriors, and early in 
 July it was besieged during two days and nights by 200 Indians. 
 Conditions were surely not improved by the murder late in Sep- 
 tember of the Shawnee chief. Cornstalk, and three of his tribes- 
 men at Fort Randolph (Point Pleasant) by members of the gar- 
 rison in hasty revenge for the death of a comrade stricken out- 
 side the post by the stealthy shot of lurking savages. Hamilton 
 at Detroit was not slow in taking advantage of the outraged feel- 
 ings of the Slla^\^lee tribe. Before the winter had passed he 
 sent two French Canadians to engage eighty or more of the 
 Shawnee in another attempt to seize Boonesborough. They 
 readily consented, and on their way southward, February 7, 
 1778, had the good fortune to capture Daniel Boone, who had a 
 camp of salt-makers near by at the lower Blue licks. The 
 tribesmen easily secured the rest of the campers through the 
 intervention of Boone, who saw the folly of resistance and per- 
 suaded his men to surrender.® 
 
 The Shawnee at once gave up their expedition against Boones- 
 borough, returned with their captives to their villages at Little 
 Chillicothe, and on March 10 started with eleven of their pris- 
 
 The revolution on the upper Ohio, 177S-1777 (Thwaites and Kellogg, eds.), 175, 
 note 6; 177, note 11; 187, 188, 236, 242, 247; James G. M. Kamsey, The annals of 
 Tennessee, to the end of the eighteenth century: comprixinii its settlement, as the 
 Watauga assoeiation, from 1769 to 1777 ; a part of North-Carolina, from 1777 to 17S4 ; 
 the state of Franklin, from 1784 to 1788; a part of North-Carolina, from 1788 to 
 1790; the territory of the U. States, south of the Ohio, from 1790 to 1796; the state 
 of Tennessee, from 1796 to 1800 . . . (Philadelphia, 1853), 148 S.; Ranck, 
 Boonesborough, 49-52, 54, 56-61; Alexander S. Withers, Chronicles of border warfare; 
 or, a history of the settlement by the whites of northwestern Virginia, and of the 
 Indian tears and massacres in that section of the state; with reflections, anecdotes. 
 . . . edited by Reuben G. Thwaites (Cincinnati, 1903), 173, 209, 211-214, 236, 
 266; Frontier defense on the upper Ohio, 1777-1773, edited by Reuben G. Thwaites 
 and Louise P. Kellogg (Madison, 1912), 149, passim. 
 
Vol. VII, No. 2 Kentucky's Loyalist Proprietors 117 
 
 oners, including Boone, for Detroit. Here the famous Ken- 
 tuckian was woU roceivod by Ilaniiltitii, to whom he told a pitiful 
 tale of the starviufj and nearly naked condition of the settlers 
 south of the Ohio, who, he added, were without the prospect of 
 relief from congress. The commandant offered a large price 
 for Boone and, failing to effect the jiurchase, sought his favor 
 by presenting him with a horse and trappings. 
 
 On April 28, not long after the departure of Boone and the 
 Indians, Hamilton wrote to Sir Guy Carleton in regard to the 
 Keutucklans: "Their dilemma will probably induce them to 
 trust to the savages, who liave shown so much humanity to their 
 prisoners, and come to this place before winter. ' ' In the follow- 
 ing June Boone escaped from his captors upon the horse he had 
 received from Hamilton. At the end of the same summer the 
 British commandant undertook to win over the inhabitants of 
 Boonesborough for the king or, if necessary, to capture them, 
 lie therefore dispatched Lieutenant Antoine de Quindre and 
 other French Canadians, with a supply of ammunition and the 
 English and French flags, to assist Chief Black Fish in assem- 
 bling a force of over four hundred Indians, mostly Shawnee, to 
 proceed to the big fort. On arriving there, September 7, a 
 messenger advanced to ask a parley over letters which he had 
 brought from Governor Hamilton to Captain Boone. The ne- 
 gotiations lasted three days, on the last of which the principal 
 men of the fort signed a treaty' renouncing their allegiance to 
 the United States and renewing their fealty to the king, on con- 
 dition that the Indians, who outnumbered the garrison eleven to 
 one, would withdraw immediately. But instead, the treacher- 
 ous red men attempted to seize and detain the whites, though 
 without success. After repeated assaults on the stronghold the 
 Indians tunneled from the bank of the Kentucky river to within 
 twenty yards of the fort, but successive rains stopped their oper- 
 ations and filled their mine with sunken earth. Having failed 
 in tiieir nine days' siege, the Shawnee army broke into detach- 
 ments, whieii had to content themselves with ravaging about 
 other stations. Such was the dismal outcome of Hamilton's 
 plan to convert tiie inhabitants of Boonesborough into loyalists 
 preparatory to their reception at Detroit.^ 
 
 ' Ranck, Boonesborough, 68-104 ; Petitions of the early inhabitants of Kentucky to 
 th« general assembly of rirginia, 1796 to 179S (Bobertson, ed.), 44, 45; Withers, 
 
118 Wilbur H. Siebert m.v.h.b. 
 
 Captain Boone, indeed, did not escape the open accusation of 
 being a tory and a traitor. Colonel Richard Callaway, and 
 probably others, charged him with having sought to aid the 
 British by favoring the peace treaty at Boonesborough and hav- 
 ing caused the surrender of the salt-makers at the lower Blue 
 licks. Boone was accordingly tried by court-martial at Lo- 
 gan's station, but maintained that these acts were stratagems 
 dictated by military necessity and was acquitted. He was fur- 
 ther vindicated a little later by being promoted to the rank of 
 major.* 
 
 The years 1779 and 1780 witnessed a remarkable emigration 
 from the communities on the upper Ohio and to the eastward 
 into Kentucky. In May of the latter year one obser\'er of this 
 movement. Colonel Daniel Brodhead at Pittsburgh, estimated 
 that the Kentucky settlements would be able to turn out 15,000 
 men and ventured the opinion that the villainous Sha^\^lee and 
 their allies w^ould soon find troublesome neighbors in that quar- 
 ter. It is not to be supposed that all these newcomers were 
 patriots, especially as tory plots were being disclosed and sup- 
 pressed from time to time in the regions from which they came. 
 Late in 1780 one visitor to Kentucky went so far as to say in a 
 letter to Colonel George Morgan: "Should the English go 
 there and offer them protection from the Indians, the greatest 
 part will join." It was not to Kentucky, however, but to De- 
 troit that Captain McKee and Simon Girty, together with sev- 
 eral of their fellow loyalists, fled from Fort Pitt on the night of 
 March 28, 1778. They passed through the intervening Indian 
 country and arrived at their destination about two months later. 
 They thus escaped the penalties which their discovered plotting 
 entailed and, being taken into the Indian department, they sup- 
 planted the French Canadians as leaders of loyalist and Indian 
 war parties against the frontier. For the next seventeen months 
 they carried on their depredations in the region they had recent- 
 ly left and then turned their attention to that into which the 
 tide of settlers was now pouring.' 
 
 Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 268-270; Frontier defense on the upper 
 Ohio, 1777-1778 (Tliwaitca and Kellogg, eds.), 283, 284. 
 
 8 Ranck, Boone.ihorouffh, 104, 105. 
 
 9 Frontier retreat on the upper Ohio, 1770-1781 , edited by Louise P. Kellogg {Wis- 
 consin historical collections, volume 24 — Madison, 1917), 21, 22, 41, 149, 163, 164, 
 
Vol. VII, No. 2 Kentucky's Loyalist Proprietors 119 
 
 The first report that Simon Girty was with the Indians on the 
 Kentucky border gained credence in tlie latter part of May, when 
 John Bowman, lieutenant of Kentucky county, led 250 volun- 
 teers against the ShawTiee town of Little Chillicothe on the Little 
 Miami river. The rumor that Girty was approaching at the 
 head of 100 Sliawnee threw Bowman's men into general disorder 
 for a brief time, but they I'ecovered themselves, defeated the 
 enemy, and burned most of the village and crops. In the fol- 
 lowing autumn Simon Girty 's brothers, James and George, ad- 
 vanced with about 170 Wyandot warriors down the Little Miami 
 to the spot where Cincinnati now stands and there, on October 
 
 4, engaged Colonel David Rogers' flotilla of five boats, which 
 was on its way from St. Louis up the Ohio with a store of goods 
 and ammunition. The Indians killed some forty of the whites, 
 took a few prisoners, and carried off nmch booty. Thereafter 
 small skinnishes with the Indians appear to have become more 
 common on the border than ever." 
 
 The capture of Hamilton by Colonel George Rogers Clark at 
 Vincennes in February, 1779, and the appointment of Major A. 
 
 5. de Peyster as the former's successor at Detroit did not change 
 the i)olioy of emi)loyiiig loyalists to lead the expeditions against 
 Kentucky. In the early summer of that year De Peyster sent 
 from his post a force of 150 tories and Canadians with two can- 
 non and 100 tribesmen from the upper lakes under the com- 
 mand of Captain Henry Bird, a Virginian, with the three Girtys 
 as aides. On the Miami they were joined by Captain McKee 
 and 600 more Indians. These combined forces were to proceed 
 against Clark, who was now stationed at the falls of the Ohio. 
 Tiie Indians, however, refused to go and confront the victor of 
 Hamilton, choosing rather to attack the forts up tlie Licking. 
 On June 22, Ruddle's station, with its 300 inmates, surrendered 
 at the sound of the enemy's fieldpieces. Fifty more prisoners 
 
 168, 176, 209, note 1; 277; Wilbur H. Siobert, "The tory proprietors of Kentucky 
 lands," in Ohio archaeological and historical quarterly, 28: 48-71. 
 
 '" Withers. Chrnniclex of border warfare (Thwaites, e(i.), 271-27.'?; Consul W. 
 Butterfleld, History of the Girtys; bein<j a concise account of the Girty brothers — 
 Thomas, Simon, James and George, and of tlicir half-brother John Turner — also of 
 the part taken by them in Lord Dunmore's war, in the western border war of the 
 refolution, and in the Indian war of 1790-95; with a recital of the principal events 
 in the west during these wars . . . (Cincinnati, 1890), 113; Frontier retreat on 
 the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (KeUogg, ed.), 17, 79-94, 105, 123. 
 
120 Wilbur H. Siebert m.V.h.e. 
 
 were secured at Martin's station five miles farther on. Famine 
 now ensued and drove the invaders home. Captain Bird took 
 with his contingent Captain Isaac Euddle and his company, all 
 of whom remained in captivity at Detroit until November 3, 
 1782. The Indians, with their share of the prisoners, scattered 
 to their several villages. There may be some justice in the 
 criticism made at the time that widespread disaffection among 
 the settlers was responsible for the surrender of the two stations. 
 At any rate, many of the pioneers are said to have moved into 
 the interior rather than volunteer for offensive operations 
 against the Indians and the tories." 
 
 During the first week of August, 1780, Colonels Clark, Slaugh- 
 ter, and Logan led forth their respective divisions, which to- 
 gether numbered about one thousand men, to take vengeance on 
 the Shawnee for the descent upon the two Licking stations. They 
 found Little Chillicothe partly deserted and still burning, the 
 Indians having been forewarned by a deserter from Logan's 
 division. James Girty and 300 warriors made more than a show 
 of defense, but could not withstand the determined fighting of 
 the borderers and retreated.^^ 
 
 We may pass over the numerous raids into Kentucky during 
 the next twelvemonth or more. One only, about the middle of 
 September, 1781, was conducted by a loyalist, namely. Captain 
 McKee, who was accompanied by Chief Brant, head of the Six 
 nations. With a large following of Hurons and Miami these 
 experienced fighters appeared at Boone's station and there de- 
 feated Colonel John Floyd and a company of men from the 
 stations on Bear Grass creek." 
 
 Under tory leadership the savages had thus far won an al- 
 most unbroken series of successes over the Kentuckians. If 
 they had obeyed the orders of their white captains, they might 
 no doubt have gained more sweeping victories, but again and 
 
 n Withers, Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 254, note; 285, 286, 294- 
 299; Ranck, Boonesborough, 118, 119; Petitwns of the early inliabitants of Kentucky 
 to the general assembly of Virginia, 1769 to 1792, p. 168; Frontier retreat on the 
 upper Ohio, 1779-17S1 (Kellogg, ed.), 22, 186, 187, 192, 265, 266. 
 
 12 Withers, Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 305-308; Frontier retreat 
 on the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 374, 375. 
 
 i3Durrett, The centenary of Louisville, 57-59; Durrett, Bryant's station and the 
 memorial proceedings held on its site, 84; Frontier retreat on the upper Ohio, 1779- 
 1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 374, 375. 
 
VoLVll,No.2 Kentucky's Loyalist Proprietors 121 
 
 again thoy had willfully turned back when their campaign was 
 but half finished. At lonf^th, in June, 1782, they threw away 
 their final chance of spreading desolation among the settlements 
 south of the Ohio. At that time 1,100 Indians of eight different 
 nations were assembled at Wakitamiki — now Zanesfield, Logan 
 county, Ohio — under the command of Captain William Cald- 
 well and were there joined by Captain Andrew Bradt and sixty 
 loyalist rangers from Detroit, Captain McKee, Simon and 
 (roorge Oirty, and Mattliew Elliott of the Indian department at 
 the northern post. This host is said to have outnumbered the 
 whole force of fighting men in Kentucky at the time. Its size 
 is doubtless explained by the fact that it was to be employed 
 in destroying an invading force led by George Rogers Clark. 
 Wlien intelligence was brought in that Clark's army was no- 
 where about, three-fourths of the tribesmen returned to their 
 to\vus and villages. The other fourth and the loyalist rangers 
 crossed the Ohio river with Simon Girty, defeated Captain John 
 Holder and his men at the upper Blue licks on August 15, and 
 then laid siege to Bryant's station. While the Indians occupied 
 themselves with burning several cabins, killing cattle, and de- 
 stroying crops, Girty proclaimed pardon and protection to all 
 inmates of the fort who would swear allegiance to the king, on 
 condition that they would capitulate. Unlike the garrison of 
 Boonesborough, which had been offered similar terms nearly 
 four years before, the men at Bryant's flatly refused the offer, 
 and Girty with his tories and Indians took the trail back to the 
 Blue licks on the night of August 16. At this time, according 
 to Girty, nearly 100 warriors left him. On August 19 about 180 
 Kentuekians crossed the Licking river in pursuit of the invaders, 
 who were now lying in ambush in the wooded ravines surround- 
 ing the open ridge in front. Most of the advancing party had 
 dismounted and were ascending the ridge on foot, when they 
 received a volley which killed perhaps forty of them. The sav- 
 ages then threw themselves upon the Kentuekians' animals and 
 succeeded in cutting down thirty more victims and capturing 
 others. The rest of the borderers fled back across the river, 
 those in the lead being halted by Major Benjamin Netherland 
 long enough to turn and fire on the pursuing Indians, who were 
 thus driven to cover for a brief interval, while the fugitives es- 
 
122 Wilbur H. Siebert m.v.h.e. 
 
 caped into the woods and so to their several stations. On the 
 next day the loyalists and Indians crossed the Ohio, the latter 
 going on to their camps and the former to Wakitamiki. A few 
 days later Caldwell and McKee sent reports to Detroit in which 
 the number of Kentuckians killed and captured was doubled. In 
 reply came an order from De Peyster, in conformity with the re- 
 cent manifesto of the commander in chief of the British forces, 
 Sir Guy Carleton, to make no more incursions into the enemy's 
 comitry. Nevertheless, during the next fourteen years, or as 
 long as the northern posts remained in British hands, Kentucky 
 suffered from occasional forays and outrages at the hands of the 
 savages. The sequel of the massacre at the Blue licks was enacted 
 in the early days of November, 1782, when George Eogers Clark 
 with 1,050 men destroyed the town and the winter stores of the 
 Miami, while the Indians took to their heels despite Captain 
 McKee 's efforts to persuade them to stay and fight." 
 
 It has been seen above that the Kentuckians suffered the cruel- 
 ties of border warfare in greater degree than before, after the 
 leadership of the tribes to the northward passed to those loyal- 
 ists who o-wned lands in "Transylvania." In May, 1779, the 
 Virginia assembly enacted the law of escheats and forfeitures, 
 under which such estates were liable to confiscation and sale for 
 the profit of the state. This policy might easily work out in 
 such a way as to yield no benefit, if it did not do actual injustice, 
 to some of the inhabitants of Kentucky. Eepresentative Ken- 
 tuckians, however, were alive to their local interests and, 
 through their skillful advocacy of those interests, were able to 
 gain immediate or prospective advantages at the expense of the 
 loyalist proprietors, whose destruction in battle would have been 
 a more welcome recompense. 
 
 It was not until a year after the passage of the act of escheats 
 and forfeitures that the inhabitants of Kentucky took measures 
 to secure to themselves the estates in question. The land at the 
 falls of the Ohio surveyed and patented for Dr. Connolly, who 
 had been Lord Dunmore's chief ally at Pittsburgh and a pris- 
 oner in the hands of the Americans from November, 1775, until 
 
 i-> Durrett, Bryant's station and the memorial proceedings held on its site, 87-90, 
 91-123, 134-209, 211-215; George W. Ranck, "Girty, the white Indian; a study in 
 early western history," in Maqasine of American history, 15:256-277; Buttcrfield, 
 History of the Girtys, 193, 194, 198, 200, 205, 208. 
 
Vol. VII, No. 2 Kentuckij's Lotjalist Proprietors 123 
 
 his excliaiige in October, 1780, was brought to the attention of 
 the Virginia assembly by a petition on May 1 of the latter year. 
 This petition came from the settlers at the falls, who desired an 
 act establishing their town as planned by them and validating 
 the titles to their lots, which would otherwise be liable to con- 
 liscation and sale under the act of escheats and forfeitures 
 passed in May, 1771). Accordingly, the assembly enacted a law 
 one year later, vesting 1,000 acres of Connolly's survey in a 
 board of trustees for the town of Louisville, and authorizing the 
 sale of lots at auction. Curiously enough, an escheating jury, 
 of which Daniel Boone was a member, met at Lexington on the 
 same day and rendered a verdict of forfeiture against Connolly 
 for joining tlie subjects of the king of his owni free will.'" 
 
 in December, 1780, Lieutenant Colonel Connolly had sailed 
 from New York with the Queen's rangers, a well-known tory 
 corps, for Yorkto^\^l, and soon after had been placed in com- 
 mand of the loyalists of Virginia and North Carolina on the 
 peninsula formed by tlie James river and the Chesapeake bay. 
 In September, 1781, lie had again been taken prisoner and had 
 been sent to Philadelphia three months later. In the following 
 March he had been paroled and sent to Now York, on condition 
 tiiat he woulil di'itart for England. lie appears to have spent 
 the next five years in Great Britain, but bj^ 1788 he was in De- 
 troit, having returned by way of Quebec. He had not yet given 
 up hope of recovering the west for the English cro^\■n, and was 
 therefore ready to believe the tale that the people of Kentucky 
 wished to free themselves from the United States government. 
 Under the pretext that he had come to look after his confiscated 
 estate, Connolly appeared at Louisville on October 25, 1788. 
 Ho revealed the real object of his visit a day or two later in a 
 joint interview with Colonel Thomas Marshall and Judge George 
 Muter. lie told these two men in substance that the Canadian 
 governor-general. Lord Dorcliester, formerly Sir Guy Carleton, 
 was ready to aid the westerners by arming and paying any force 
 they might raise for the purpose of wresting the control of the 
 Mississippi and of New Orleans from the Spaniards, that he 
 would send from 5,000 to 10,000 men to join them, and that he 
 
 I'Durrett, The centenary of LotiisviUe, 50-56, 149-154; Petitions of the early in- 
 habitants of Kentucly to the general assembly of Virginia, 1769 to 1791 (Bobertson, 
 ed.), 53-55; Hening, Statutes at large, 10: 293-295. 
 
124 Wilbur H. Siebert ^- ^'- h. R. 
 
 would dispatch a fleet to cooperate with this land force in the 
 conquest of Now Orleans. Colonel Marshall states that he in- 
 formed Connolly that as long as the savages continued to com- 
 mit cruelties on the defenseless frontier of Kentucky and to be 
 "received as friends and allies by the British at Detroit," it 
 would be impossible to convince the people of the good inten- 
 tions of Lord Dorchester. From General James Wilkinson, with 
 whom Connolly conversed on November 8, the latter learned not 
 only that "the British were greatly disliked in Kentucky," but 
 also that he might be killed if his mission were discovered. The 
 emissary from Detroit now begged for an escort, which was 
 provided, and he recrossed the Ohio river, November 20, on his 
 return journey.^* 
 
 The clearing of the titles of the early settlers of Louisville 
 Avas accomplished at the expense of Dr. Connolly, as already 
 noted. This was a simple act of justice to those who had bought 
 their lots in good faith from an original proprietor. At almost 
 the same moment that these purchasers were presenting their 
 petition for relief to the Virginia assembly — a petition in which 
 they stated with clearness and force the commercial and other 
 benefits to be secured by the establishment of their towai — the 
 Eeverend John Todd of Virginia and his nephew. Colonel John 
 Todd of Kentucky, persuaded the assembly to set aside other 
 loyalist estates for the cause of public education. It was in 
 May, 1780, that the assembly passed the "act to vest certain 
 escheated lands in the County of Kentucke in trustees for a 
 Publick School." The lands thus applied were Captain Alex- 
 ander McKee's 2,000 acres on the south branch of Elkhorn creek, 
 Henry Collins' 3,000 acres near Lexington, and Robert Mc- 
 Kenzie's 3,000 acres, called the military survey, at the mouth 
 of Harrod's creek. McKenzie was an officer of the Forty- third 
 
 16 Burton, "John Connolly, a tory of the revolution," in Proceedings of the 
 American antiquarian society, now series, 20: 71 ff.; Siebert, "The tory proprietors 
 of Kentucky lands," in Ohio archaeological and hi-Ktorical quarterly, 28:48-71; John 
 M. Brown, The political heyinnings of Kentucky {Filson club publications number 6 
 — Louisville, 1889), 182-184; Mann Butler, A history of the commonwealth of Ken- 
 tucky, from its exploration and settlement by the whites, to the close of tlie north- 
 western campaign, in 1813 ; with an introduction exhibiting the settlement of western 
 Virginia . . . in 17S6, to the treaty of Camp Charlotte . . . in 1774 (Cin- 
 cinnati and Louisville, 1836), 184. 
 
Voi.vn,No.2 Kentucliifs Loyalist Proprietors 125 
 
 regiment of foot in the British army when he was wounded at 
 Bunker hill.'' 
 
 Even at the end of the revolution not all tHe confiscated estates 
 in Kentucky had been disposed of and, although the school had 
 not yet been started, there was still opportunity to increase its 
 endowment from this source. Colonel Caleb Wallace, a Ken- 
 tuckian in the assembly, saw the opportunity, and in 1783 se- 
 cured the passage of an act giaiitiiig all escheated lands in the 
 district of Kentucky "not to exceed twenty thousand acres" to 
 the jiroposed school, thus adding 12,000 acres to the earlier grant 
 of 8,000 acres. The new act conferred by regular charter upon 
 an enlarged board of trustees "all the powers and privileges 
 that are now enjoyed by the visitors or governors of any college 
 or university within the State." The school when established 
 was to bear the name "Transylvania seminary" and, evidently 
 in view of the fact that Indian hostilities had not ceased, both 
 teachers and students were to be exempt from militia duties. 
 Another reminder of the subsiding struggle is to be found in 
 the presence on the board of trustees of Colonel George Rogers 
 Clark.'' 
 
 Something more than the "guarantee of permanency" fur- 
 nished by the land grants was needed before Transylvania sem- 
 inary could be opened to students. The trustees found it neces- 
 sary, therefore, to appoint a committee to solicit funds, books, 
 and apjiaratus, ajid they also received one-sixth of all sui-veyor's 
 fees collected in the Kentucky district. They were thus enabled 
 to employ a master and open the seminary in a private house 
 near Danville, P^'bniary 1, 1785. Several years later the trus- 
 tees decided to remove the school to Lexington, where it first 
 received students June 1, 1789. Here in Lexington the institu- 
 tion was to find its abiding place, erect buildings to meet its 
 growing needs, develop new departments, combine with other 
 institutions, graduate thousands of students, become almost 
 dormant during the civil war, and, after discontinuing its several 
 
 if Transylvania college hyUletin, 40: 16, 17; Robert and Johanna Peter, Transyl- 
 vania university. Its origin, rise, decline, and fall {Filson club publications number 
 11 — Louisville, 1896), 20-22, 38-41. 
 
 IS Transylvanui college bulletin, 40: 17-20, 22-25; Kentucky Gazette, June 6, 1789, 
 April 26, 1790 ; Peter, Transylvania imivcrsity, 49-52, 64, 66-71, 175-177. 
 
126 Wilhur H. Siehert m.v.h.r. 
 
 departments, sundve as Transylvania coUege. Thus the begin- 
 nings of the city of Louisville and of the famous old college at 
 Lexington, "the oldest permanent institution of learning west of 
 the Alleghenies," may be ascribed to the struggle of Kentucky 
 with its loyalist proprietors. The lands confiscated from these 
 proprietors by the Virginia assembly were in both cases, chiefly 
 through the efforts of Kentuckians, turned to excellent and en- 
 during uses. 
 
 Wilbur H. Siebert 
 
 Ohio State University 
 Columbus, Ohio 
 
 ZS W 
 
-fu. ^ ►*« 
 
 
 
 -ov^' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . "^0' o 
 
 '»>,1.* 
 
 
 I' *> 
 
 h.". U <^ *^lfe'- ^.p -i*^ 
 
 ^..^^ ;^M^"» "^-^..^^ 
 
 
 

 / J''\ ,'^^•V ^s'^'V, 
 
 
 ."-CCyN r f 
 

 mn 
 
 mmmmnm