7 ?• King^ 
 
 When ‘V^y kVTjom 
 
 Cincmnat"i Fb< 
 
 & 
 
 Hatt 
 
 nc/ed f* 
 
 % 
 
Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 tP 
 
 University of Illinois Library 
 
 Irfi 
 
 b I95S 
 
 m 15 1956 
 
 OCT 13 
 
 AUG 5 
 
 1099 
 
 1 0 1999 
 
When, and by Whom, was Cincinnati Founded? 
 
 i ?i' AN" ADDRESS to the Pioneer Association of Cin- 
 cinnati, April 7th, 1882. By Rufus King. 
 
 4 
 
 O 
 
 f-J 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 For the brief contribution, which I shall offer you 
 to-day, I have selected a subject not only without novelty, 
 but which, indeed, may long since have become a settled 
 point with many of you. Nevertheless, I trust it may he 
 deemed appropriate to this interesting occasion, and, possi- 
 bly, productive of some practical result. 
 
 When and by whom was Cincinnati founded, is the 
 subject proposed. 
 
 This Association, it is understood, recognizes the 28tli 
 of December, 1788, as the date of the first settlement of 
 the town : and why, you may ask, is there any further 
 question about it ? 
 
 In reply, it is to be said that the Association is not un- 
 derstood ever to have formally considered or decided the 
 question, even for themselves, but have accepted this date 
 rather in deference to the supposed authority of William 
 McMillan, one of the first settlers of the town, and a man 
 of intelligence and high standing. On the other hand we 
 have Judge Burnet’s statement that the landing of the 
 first settlers, here, was on the 24th of December, 1788 : and 
 Doctor Drake and Governor Chase, highly respectable au- 
 thorities, who must be presumed to have informed them- 
 selves whereof they spoke, both fixed the date on December 
 26th in that year : which day, fifty years ago, was recog- 
 nized and publicly celebrated here as the anniversary. — But 
 Col. Patterson and Col. Israel Ludlow, the two leaders 
 of the party, distinctly stated, as we shall see, that they 
 landed here in January 1789. 
 
 Writers, in later years, have taken sides for each and 
 all of these dates. The Bev. James H. Perkins, in his 
 
“Western Annals,” — a work by all odds more full, more 
 accurate, and more generaUy satisfactory than any other 
 one book on the early history of the West — after compar- 
 ing these conflicting statements, sums it up as a curious 
 fact that the date of the settlement of Cincinnati is un- 
 known, even though we have the testimony of the very 
 men who made it. — Western Annals , 308. 
 
 But it will not do to give it up. In the grand round 
 of Centennials which is passing over the country, Cincin- 
 nati also must have her day. It will not be many years 
 before our turn will come ; and it becomes our citizens to 
 adopt timely measures for ascertaining and establishing 
 our city’s birthday. 
 
 In such an investigation it is not assuming too much 
 to believe that there is no portion of the community who 
 may more properly lead the way, or to whom the others 
 will more willingly defer the lead, than this Association. 
 
 What I would, therefore, beg leave to propose is that 
 this Association shall undertake this office; and that, after 
 gathering all the light which their means and opportunities 
 can bring to bear upon it, they shall formally announce 
 their conclusion, as to the day we should celebrate, for the 
 guidance or benefit of our fellow-citizens, when they come 
 to determine the proper time. 
 
 To this practical object my remarks to-day will be di- 
 rected, and I shall simply present to you a sketch of some 
 facts and dates which may serve as a beginning of the in- 
 quiry, hoping to show where the difficulty lies in deter- 
 mining it : and if it really be insuperable, then to point 
 out a solution which may, perhaps, answer the purpose in 
 view of fixing our Centennial. 
 
 It seems, at this day, a wonder, considering the fertili- ' 
 ty and beauty of the Miami Valley, and the attractions 
 which this particular spot presented to the eyes of the har- 
 dy pioneers, as they floated past on the gentle current of the 
 Ohio, that the settlement here was not made sooner than it 
 happened; and especially that the Marietta Colony, whose 
 anniversary we keep to-day, should have given the prefer- 
 ence to the hilly and broken region which they chose. 
 
[ 3 ] 
 
 There is a tradition that they consulted Zane, who was one 
 of the foremost and most sagacious of the land operators 
 North-west of the Ohio, and that he advised them to try 
 the Miami country. But, according to the story, they were 
 under a shrewd impression that as his interests were chiefly 
 on the upper Ohio, he wanted a barrier between himself 
 and the Indians, and they concluded to plant themselves on 
 the Muskingum. 
 
 The truth is that immediately after the cession of the 
 North-west Territory to the United States by the treaty of 
 peace with Great Britain, a fierce and bloody conflict, large- 
 ly instigated by British emissaries and agents, arose between 
 the Indian tribes in that Territory and the settlers of Ken- 
 tucky. In this war the Miami Valley, and particularly the 
 lower part, along the Ohio, became exceedingly dangerous 
 ground, and indeed was a sealed book, little known to the 
 whites. The constant raids and incursions by the Indians 
 across the Ohio, at this point, and the retaliatory expedi- 
 tions by which the Kentuckians, under bold leaders like 
 George Rogers Clarke, struck back at their savage foe, had 
 given to this vicinity the significant appellation of the 
 44 Miami Slaughter House.” 
 
 It might be interesting, but our time will not now admit 
 of it, to go back to various early glimpses of these rich and 
 luxuriant landscapes, which we get from the narrative of 
 Christopher Gist, the expert woodsman, who in March, 1751, 
 traveled down the Little Miami, prospecting for choice 
 lands for his employers, the Ohio Company, and who 
 speaks of the fertile meadows on its banks, where he saw 
 herds of buffalo feeding in the white clover, wild rye and 
 blue grass; or the grander pageant of three hundred French 
 and Indians, under the command of DeCeloron, who were 
 sent by the Governor of Canada, in 1749, across Lake Erie 
 and Lake Chautauqua and down the waters of the Alleghe- 
 ny and the Ohio rivers, to assert the dominion and posses- 
 sion of this country for the French Government; burying 
 at the mouth of the chief tributaries of the Ohio, as they 
 passed along, leaden plates inscribed with the purpose of 
 their mission, and which turned its fleet of batteaux’s up 
 
 f n s'* r m 
 
 v 
 
the Great Miami (marked on their map as the river 
 LaRoche) and in September, 1749 navigated that stream 
 up to Loramie, thence crossing the portage to the Maumee 
 and returning to Canada; or what must have been the far 
 more imposing display, in 1780, of sixty-three boats carry- 
 ing 1,000 men with their families down the Ohio to the falls, 
 so graphically described by General Lytle, then a youth, 
 and one of the adventurers, and in which an exciting epi- 
 sode occurred by an encounter with the Indians on the site 
 of Cincinnati. 
 
 These are digressions which must be passed over. But 
 finally there came an incident which broke the spell resting 
 upon the Miamis, and which I wish I could notice more 
 fully, not only for its romance, but being so closely con- 
 nected with our subject; for upon it the foundation of 
 Cincinnati followed and depended. 
 
 Observe, that as late as the year 1786, this valley con- 
 tinued to be not only untenanted by the emigrant, but 
 otherwise than as the great war-path was comparatively 
 unknown. 
 
 John Cleves Symmes, of New Jersey, as is well known, 
 applied to Congress, at New York, on the 29th of August, 
 1787, for the Miami Purchase, encouraged, his petition 
 stated, by their action in the previous month in favor of 
 the Marietta Colony of Messrs. Sargent, Cutler and Com- 
 pany. 
 
 But how or w T hy Judge Symmes became inspired with 
 this enterprise is not so generally known. And the incident 
 to which I allude was the bold exploit of Major Benjamin 
 Stites, also a hardy son of New Jersey, so well described 
 by your respected President, Daniel Gano, in his address 
 at your annual meeting in April, 1871 — an exploit which 
 entitles him to be distinguished as the man who opened 
 the way to the Miami Purchase. I need only remind you 
 that, as a volunteer, merely, he joined a party of Ken- 
 tuckians in the pursuit of some Indian horse-thieves across 
 the Ohio and up the Little Miami river, but being unsuc- 
 cessful they crossed over and returned by way of the Great 
 Miami. Delighted with his view of the land, Major Stites 
 
returned immediately to .New Jersey and made known his 
 discovery to Judge Symmes, a leading citizen of that state, 
 but not, as is commonly supposed, a member of Congress 
 at that time, his term of office having expired in the pre- 
 vious year. He saw at once the value and importance of 
 the information, but before entering into the project, he 
 descended the Ohio river as far as the Falls, stopping and 
 carefully examining the northern shore between the Miamis. 
 Thoroughly satisfied that Stites had not overdrawn the pic- 
 ture, Judge Symmes, on his return, applied in behalf of 
 himself and his associates for the purchase of the entire 
 body of land on the Ohio river, between the Great and Lit- 
 tle Miami rivers. 
 
 Belying that this grant would be made, and without 
 awaiting the answer, he entered into a contract with Stites 
 on the 9th of November, 1787, to sell him ten thousand 
 acres on the Ohio and Little Miami rivers; and in January, 
 1788, contracted with Matthias Denman, of Essex county, 
 New Jersey, to sell him the entire section of land situated 
 opposite the mouth of the Licking river, reserving for him- 
 self a large tract at the mouth of the Great Miami. Each 
 of them had the same object in view in putting themselves 
 at the mouth of these rivers, and three rival towns were at 
 once projected at these points. 
 
 But the Treasury Board, which had charge of sales of 
 the public lands, would not grant the entire front on the 
 Ohio between the Miamis, their policy being to extend the 
 grants more into the interior; and after delaying the con- 
 tract until the 15th of May, 1788, they then limited its 
 width to twenty miles only, on the Ohio, to be measured 
 by its meanders, from the mouth of the Great Miami. This 
 was a disappointment, which for years made much difficulty 
 and loss to Judge Symmes, though the entire distance was 
 finally conceded by the Government. 
 
 Thus we have the inception and the dates, introducing 
 the several schemes which were now coming forward to bid 
 for the favor of posterity ; and during the summer of 1788, 
 Symmes and Stites and Denman were all busy with organ- 
 izing and preparations for the start. 
 
Symmes having been appointed one of the judges in 
 the Territorial Government established by Congress, was de- 
 layed, but 8tit.es and Denman were at Limestone, now known 
 as Maysville, in August; the former, with his strong party 
 of friends and followers, vigorously making everything ready 
 for building and equipping his settlement immediately on 
 reaching the ground. Thus he was foremost, and on the 
 18th of November, 1788, despite the alarm of Indian oppo- 
 sition, which had been raised against him, he landed them 
 safely at Columbia, and in a few days had them housed for 
 the winter and fortified against the enemy. 
 
 Judge Symmes, with his large party, had reached Lime- 
 stone early in September. Denman, with whom our fortunes 
 were now to be more particularly involved, had brought 
 no party with him, but by skillful generalship he executed 
 a flank movement, which brought him new elements of 
 strength, and, no doubt, much of his subsequent success. 
 
 Passing over to Lexington, Kentucky, he there united 
 himself in partnership with two citizens of that pflace : 
 Colonel Kobert Patterson, a native of Bedford county, Penn- 
 sylvania, who about the year 1780 founded the City of Lex- 
 ington, a gentleman of high character, standing, and in- 
 fluence among the people of Kentucky, and distinguished 
 as a gallant soldier; and John Filson, a native of Chester 
 county, Pennsylvania, who had begun life as a schoolmaster, 
 but had early emigrated to Kentucky. Besides being a 
 surveyor and considerable dealer in lands, he was the author 
 of the first history of the adventures of Daniel Boone and 
 of the settlement of Kentucky, published in 1784. A for- 
 mal contract by these three associates, headed u with refer- 
 ence to Losantiville,” was executed at Lexington, on the 
 25th of August, 1788, by which Denman, in consideration 
 of twenty pounds, Virginia currency, to be paid to him by 
 Patterson and Filson, sold to them two-thirds of his pur- 
 chase under Symmes; and it was solemnly stipulated that 
 “every institution, determination, and regulation respect- 
 ing the laying-off a town, and establishing a ferry upon the 
 premises, should be the result and united advice and concert 
 of the parties.” 
 
Thus was Cincinnati incubated, and it was by the name 
 and style of Losantiville, There is no doubt of this fact, 
 though stoutly disputed by some of our distinguished an- 
 tiquarians. The paper proves it. 
 
 Next appeared an advertisement in the Kentucky Ga- 
 zette, at Lexington, August 30th, 1788, signed by the three 
 proprietors, announcing that they have “ determined to lay 
 off a town ” opposite the mouth of Licking river, and that 
 an inlot of half an acre and an outlot of four acres will be 
 given to each of the first thirty settlers who become resi- 
 dents before the 1st day of April following. They also 
 announce that on September 15th a large company was to 
 assemble at Lexington, and proceed to mark out a road to 
 the mouth of Licking, provided Judge Symmes arrived, he 
 being expected daily. 
 
 By a subsequent advertisement in the Kentucky Ga- 
 zette, September 13th, Col. Patterson announced, that the 
 day of departure was changed to the 18th, so as to meet 
 Judge Symmes at the mouth of Licking, on Monday, the 
 22d, “agreeable to his appointment, and the business will 
 then go on as proposed.” Please observe the words for 
 they were exactly followed up and fulfilled. 
 
 Col. Patterson and Filson rode over at the head of an 
 armed company of Kentuckians. Judge Symmes, Denman 
 and Israel Ludlow, with their company, came down the 
 Ohio river from Limestone. 
 
 On Monday, the 22d day of September, in the year 
 1788, these different interests assembled on the ground so 
 designated, pursuant to the covenant and determination so 
 drawn up and signed, and the public announcement and 
 invitation so advertised. 
 
 Then and there, I submit, was the foundation of Cin- 
 cinnati ; solemnized by this demonstration, never relin- 
 quished, but executed and carried out, even in the name of 
 the town, as we shall find, in conformity with the original 
 design concluded at Lexington, on the 25th of August. 
 
 Here, on his part, that day stood Symmes, recognized 
 as the representative of the Government title, ready to 
 make the project good : and there with him was Israel 
 
Ludlow, his head surveyor and adviser in the laying out of 
 the Miami Purchase. There, on the other part, were Den- 
 man, Patterson and Filson, the recognized proprietors by 
 purchase from Symmes, of the town site : Filson holding the 
 projected plat in his hand. And there, also, were the ex- 
 pectants of the half acre in-lots and four acre out-lots prom- 
 ised to the brave thirty who, before the 1st day of April fol- 
 owing were to venture in as residents; saying nothing of 
 the other attendants who on such occasions always take an 
 interest on behalf of the public. Surely this was worthy 
 enough to he dignified as the foundation of the town. 
 
 But before the actual settlement could be formed two 
 things had to be ascertained : first, where was the twenty 
 mile point above the mouth of the Great Miami; second, and 
 still more important, where were the lines of the section up- 
 on which the town plat was to be laid off. In other words, 
 while it was pretty well understood that Losantiville fell 
 within the twenty mile limit, no lots could be donated or 
 settled upon until they were located upon the ground. 
 
 Part of the assembly, therefore, remained in camp. It 
 would seem there was already a block-house on the spot, 
 erected by some previous party campaigning against the 
 Indians. Another party under Messrs. Denman and Lud- 
 low proceeded to measure the courses and meanders of the 
 Ohio and about ten miles up the Great Miami. Another 
 and larger party of armed men, under Judge Symmes, Col. 
 Patterson and Filson, went back into the country to exam- 
 ine the interior and its topography. A number of the Ken- 
 tuckians, in this party, for some reason not explained, pos- 
 sibly that which is referred to by Mr. Perkins, in his An- 
 nals, pp. 307, 308, and by Judge Symmes in his report 
 May 18th, 1789, hereinafter mentioned, turned back on the 
 second or third day. Whether Filson was with them does 
 not appear, though Judge Symmes intimates not, but in 
 some way he became separated. When all the various par- 
 ties, after a few days, reassembled at the camp opposite the 
 Licking, Filson was missing; and though reported and 
 always since understood to have been killed by an Indian, 
 I can not discover that any one saw it, or that his body 
 
was found ; and to this day the actual fate of the unfortun- 
 ate man is a mystery. 
 
 But it is a mistake to suppose that Filson’s loss broke 
 off or defeated the project. It became necessary, of course, 
 to suspend the settlement until his right and interest in the 
 purchase could be disposed of and a surveyor put in his 
 place, and, fortunately, the right man was at hand. Whether 
 if Filson had not perished, it was intended, or even possible 
 to have effected the laying off and settlement of the town, 
 at that time, seems questionable. The surveys and compu- 
 tations necessary for adjusting the townships and sections, 
 and thus locating the lines of the town section and plat, 
 with its streets and squares and lots, could hardly have 
 been compjeted at once : and even had this been practica- 
 ble, it is evident, from the extended time given for settlers 
 to come in and secure the donations of lots, that a settle- 
 ment was not expected to follow immediately. 
 
 The meeting adjourned, hut “the business” was not 
 abandoned. Messrs. Denman and Patterson went to Lime- 
 stone, where they were soon after joined by Messrs. Symmes 
 and Ludlow. Negotiations took place by which the brother 
 of Filson, who was the executor of his will, surrendered 
 his right, and Israel Ludlow became the purchaser, and by 
 agreement of all parties took Filson’s place as one of the 
 three proprietors of the town. All legal arrangements hav- 
 ing been satisfactorily adjusted for going on to complete 
 and lay off’ the town according to the original agreement, 
 and, in fact, very nearly in accordance with Filson’s origi- 
 nal plat, Mr. Denman returned to New Jersey, leaving full 
 power and authority to his two associates to act, Mr. Lud- 
 low being his special agent, in perfecting the project with 
 the public as first proposed. 
 
 During the months of October and November Mr. 
 Ludlow, who now was to be the active man in the Losan- 
 tiville scheme, revised Filson’s plat, introducing some 
 changes, but, what was more material, he had ascertained 
 the precise location of the section (and fractional section 
 intervening between it and the river) which the proprietors 
 of the town were entitled to have under the purchase from 
 
[ 10 ] 
 
 Judge Symmes; and by which the east line of the section 
 and of the town plat became fixed where the intersection 
 of Broadway and Front street now is ; Broadway on the 
 plat being sixteen feet wide and called Eastern liow, as the 
 oldest inhabitants will remember. 
 
 Thus far facts and dates, notwithstanding some dis- 
 crepancies here and there in the authorities, are quite clear. 
 But at this juncture the history of the “ Settlement ” runs 
 into a fog of contradictions which, as Mr. Perkins tells us, 
 is all but impenetrable; and we shall therefore have to 
 move with great caution among the snags which surround 
 us in our exploration. 
 
 We have the authority of Judge Symmes, in along 
 letter or report to his associates in New Jersey* written at 
 North Bend, May 18th, 1789, that “ on the 24th of Decem- 
 ber last/ 5 using his words, “ Col. Patterson, of Lexington, 
 who is concerned with Mr. Denman in the section at the 
 mouth of the Licking river, sailed from Lirnestone in com- 
 pany with Mr. Tuttle, Capt. Henry, Mr. Ludlow and about 
 twelve others, in order to form a station and lay out a town 
 opposite Licking.” 
 
 If this were all there would be little difficulty in as- 
 suming that this party may have reached their destination 
 by the 28th, as Mr. McMillan is supposed to have stated. — 
 But Judge Symmes proceeds to say, — “they suffered much 
 from the inclemency of the weather and floating ice, which 
 filled the Ohio from shore to shore. Perseverance, how- 
 ever, triumphed over difficulty : they landed safe on a most 
 delightful high bank of the Ohio, where they founded the 
 town of Losantiville, — which populates considerably.” 
 
 But when? unhappily the Judge omits the present 
 desideratum : not disclosing when it was that this party 
 landed safe from this perilous and evidently protracted pas- 
 sage. The compliment which he pays to that “delightful 
 high bank” will be appreciated from the fact that in the 
 meanwhile the great flood of the Ohio, in January, 1789, 
 had submerged his metropolis at the mouth of the Great 
 Miami, and also Major Stites’ embryo city at Columbia, 
 whilst Losantiville had proudly stood high and dry, and 
 
[ 11 J 
 
 thereby gained a, prestige, which justly entitled it, as Judge 
 Symmes quaintly said, to “ populate considerably,” and 
 tended most materially to secure its triumph over its rivals. 
 
 Here we miss the pen of the unfortunate Filson, who 
 being a ready writer, and fond occasionally of his diary, 
 would never have missed the opportunity for a note such 
 as this occasion afforded. 
 
 So far as yet made known, the only direct information 
 which we have as to the time of the arrival of this party, 
 is the testimony taken in a chancery suit, which arose some 
 fifteen years afterward between the town and Mr. Joel 
 Williams, concerning “ the common,” or what is now called 
 the Public Landing. 
 
 The town plat was not recorded until April, 1802. 
 Mr. Williams, who had purchased the rights of Denman 
 and Patterson, proposed to divide the Common into lots 
 and sell them : and with that view took possession and pro- 
 ceeded to erect buildings and fences upon a part of it. 
 Mr. Ludlow resisted this and put upon record his plat, 
 founded upon Filson’s plat, showing that from the very be- 
 ginning the Common had been left open and public as to all 
 the space from Front street down to the Ohio river between 
 Broadway and Main street. 
 
 The suit for an injunction against Mr. Williams was 
 brought by Judge Burnet, in the name of the town. To 
 establish the fact that the Common had been dedicated by 
 the proprietors to public use, the depositions of all three of 
 them, and of six others of the earlier settlers, were taken 
 by Judge Burnet himself, as stated by him in a subsequent 
 document. 
 
 William McMillan was the first who testified, and his 
 statement was that “ he was one of those who formed the 
 settlement of Cincinnati on the 28th day of December, 
 1788” 
 
 The testimony of Israel Ludlow was taken subsequent- 
 ly. After stating his purchase of one-third of the town 
 site, he said that “ in the month of January, 1789, this de- 
 ponent together with Robert Patterson, Esq., who was also 
 a proprietor, etc., landed on said ground with a number of 
 
t 12 ] 
 
 others to lay out the town of Cincinnati and form a settle- 
 ment thereon.” On the same day Col. Patterson made his 
 deposition, agreeing almost literally with Mr. Ludlow in 
 the passage above quoted, his words being that “ in the 
 month of January, 1789, he, together with Israel Ludlow, 
 who was also a proprietor of one-third, and agent of Mat- 
 thias Denman, landed on the ground for the purpose of 
 laying off the town of Cincinnati.” Matthias Denman, in 
 his deposition, stated that the town was laid out in 1789, 
 but this is vague and merely hearsay, as he had returned to 
 New Jersey. Ephraim Kibby, who was one of the party, 
 testified that “ sometime in the year 1789 Israel Ludlow 
 and Robert Patterson, with many others, met at what is 
 now called Cincinnati, for the purpose of settling the said 
 town,” and he adds, “ then called Losantiville. ” 
 
 Without presuming to express an opinion as to the 
 time when these first settlers did arrive and land here, yet 
 upon these statements, if compared by the rules usually ap- 
 plied in weighing testimony, the 28th of December can not 
 be confidently or even satisfactorily adopted as the anni- 
 versary of that event. It may be that Mr. McMillan’s date 
 is right, but, as the matter now stands, his statement can 
 not outweigh the joint testimony of Messrs. Patterson and 
 Ludlow. Eor whilst they state clearly and unequivocally 
 that they “landed on the ground in January, 1789,” Mr. 
 McMillan’s expression that he was one of those “who 
 formed the settlement on the 28th of December, 1788,” is 
 somewhat ambiguous, and may or may not have referred 
 to the arrival and landing. 
 
 Mr. Cist had no doubt that Mr. McMillan has given us 
 the proper date, for the reason that he was an intelligent 
 lawyer and magistrate, and a man of scrupulously exact 
 habits of business. No doubt this was so, but as to intelli- 
 gence and accuracy he had no advantage over either Pat- 
 terson or Ludlow. Mr. Cist further remarks that Judge 
 Burnet had assured him that he never entertained a doubt 
 that this was the correct date ; but evidently there was 
 some misunderstanding here, for the Judge, in his “Notes 
 on the Early Settlement of the North-western Territory,” 
 
[ 13 J 
 
 p. 46, distinctly states that this party “landed on the north 
 hank of the Ohio, opposite the month of Licking, on the 
 24th of December, 1788.” This upsets all the depositions. 
 
 Having thus landed you, my venerable friends, upon 
 this very high, though not delightful bank, I will not dis- 
 tress you further with the .fatiguing dispute, but, in con- 
 clusion, will, venture to offer the following suggestions for 
 your consideration, or for action, if any appear to you to 
 be proper in the matter : 
 
 First. That the City of Cincinnati should justly and 
 gratefully recognize Matthias Denman, Robert Patterson, 
 John Filson, and Israel Ludlow, as its founders. 
 
 Second. That the foundation of the town, proclaimed 
 and inaugurated by the formal meeting held here for that 
 purpose, on the 22d day of September, 1788, and never for 
 a moment relinquished, renders that anniversary appro- 
 priate for celebration as the original institution of the city. 
 
 Third. If, however, the settlement of the town, instead 
 of its foundation, be preferred as more worthy of celebra- 
 tion, that the Association take measures for obtaining fur- 
 ther evidence on the subject, by causing a thorough search 
 for letters or other documents of the first settlers, among 
 their families or others who may have possession or knowl- 
 edge of any such evidence, and that a committee of the 
 Association be appointed for that purpose. 
 
 Upon the question of adopting the settlement of the 
 town, rather than its first formal foundation, as most worthy 
 of commemoration, permit me to add a few words. 
 
 The mere landing of this party from Limestone, whether 
 it occurred in December, 1788, or January, 1789, has but little 
 significance or relevancy to the main consideration. In 
 other words, their arrival and landing was merely incidental 
 to the previously settled plan, and, moreover, by no means 
 made a “ settlement.” This is best proved by showing 
 what Cincinnati really was a month afterwards, as described 
 in an interesting little sketch by Mrs. Rebecca Reeder, ad- 
 dressed by her to this Association many years ago, and from 
 which I take this extract : 
 
[ 14 ] 
 
 “ My father, mother, and seven children landed at Cincinnati, 
 then called Lasantiville , on the 8th of February, 1789. The first per- 
 sons we saw after landing were Mr. McMillan and Mr. Israel Ludlow, 
 one of the proprietors of the place. These two gentlemen were the 
 surveyors of the Miami Purchase. There were three little cabins here 
 when we landed, where the surveyors and chain-carriers lived. They 
 had no floors in their cabins. There were three other women here be- 
 side my mother. Their names were Miss Dement, Mrs. Conney Zenes 
 (afterwards married to Mr. McMillan), Mrs. Pesthal, a German woman, 
 and my mother, Mrs. Rebecca Reeder. There were but two families 
 that had small children : they were the German family and my father’s 
 family. 
 
 “ Mr. Ludlow came down to our boat and invited my father and 
 family up to stay in their cabin’until we could get one built; but my 
 mother thought they could remain more comfortable with their small 
 children in their boat. So we lived in our boat until the ice began to 
 run, and then we were forced to contrive some other way to live. What 
 few men there were here got together and knocked our boats up and 
 built us a camp. W e lived in our camp six weeks. Then my father built 
 us a large cabin, which was the first cabin large enough for a family to 
 live in. We took the boards of our camp and made floors in our 
 house. Father intended to have built it on the corner of Walnut and 
 Water streets, but not knowing exactly where the streets were, he built 
 our house right in the middle of Water street. The streets were laid 
 out, but the woods were so very thick, and the streets were not opened, 
 so it was impossible to tell where the streets would be. 
 
 “At the time we landed here the army was stationed at North 
 Bend. The army was in a suffering condition from the want of bread. 
 * * r pp e fi rs t summer after we came here, which was 1789, the people 
 suffered very much for want of bread, and as for meat, they had none 
 at all, only just as they killed it in the woods; that was all they had 
 to eat. 
 
 “ I will close by saying my name, which was Rebecca Kennedy, 
 daughter of Francis Kennedy, now is Rebecca Reeder, widow of Reuben 
 Reeder.” 
 
 The following extract is from a letter by Thomas Ir- 
 win, of Butler county, published in Cist’s “ Miscellany,” 
 Vol. II., p. 22: 
 
 “ When I was about seventeen years of age, James Burnes and I, 
 from Washington county, Pennsylvania, landed at Cincinnati between 
 the 1st and I Oth of April, 1789, and remained there until the second 
 week in June. * * There were but four families there when we 
 
 landed : Mr. McHenry and his family, a largo family, two sons and 
 two daughters, all grown ; Mr. Kennedy and a small (young) family ; 
 
[ 15 ] 
 
 Mr. Dement and -a small family; Mr. Ross and a small family. Mr. 
 McMillan, John Vance, David Logan, Mr. Reeves, Hardesty, Van Eaton, 
 and McConnell, all lived in one shahty, being, perhaps, the first that 
 was put up in the place, as nearly all of them had been out with the 
 surveyors surveying Symmes’ Purchase, and were there when the town 
 was laid out, and all had lots in it.” 
 
 These reports indicate that in the first half of the year 
 1789, there was very little settlement here to boast of ; and 
 if in celebrating the first settlement we would pay honor 
 to the fact rather than an ideality, I think it will he found, 
 upon investigation, that it amounted to little or nothing 
 until the occupation of this point as a military post by 
 Major Doughty, with two companies of United States troops 
 under Captains Strong and Ferguson. This event usually 
 figures in the annals as having occurred in June, 1789, but 
 it was certainly later. By an extract from the diary of 
 Major Denny, then an officer at Fort Harmar (Marietta), it 
 appears that Major Doughty left that post on the 11th of 
 August, 1789, “ for the purpose of choosing ground and 
 laying out a new work for the protection of persons who 
 have settled in Judge Symmes’ purchase.” General Har- 
 mar, in a letter to the Secretary of War, September 12, 
 1789, reports : 
 
 “ Major Doughty informs me in his letter dated the 27th ultimo, 
 that he arrived at the Little Miami on the 16th, and after reconnoiter- 
 ing for three days from thence to the Big Miami for an eligible situa- 
 tion, whereon to erect the works for headquarters, he had at length de- 
 termined to fix upon a spot opposite Licking river, which he represents 
 as high and healthy, abounding with never-failing springs, etc., and 
 the most proper position he could find for the purpose.” 
 
 This settled the town and its future. The ground 
 chosen was the tract of fifteen acres adjoining the town, at 
 the East End, and extending from Fourth street down to 
 the Ohio river. Here Fort Washington was erected in the 
 autumn of 1789. General Harmar, with three hundred ad- 
 ditional troops, arrived and occupied it on the 29th of De- 
 cember. 
 
 On the 2d of January, 1790, General St. Clair, Gover- 
 
I 16 ] 
 
 nor of the Territory, with the judges, arrived here on an 
 official visitation, which k. ted only three days. During 
 this visit, and by his authority and order, as appears from 
 a letter written in the following week by Symrnes, he being, 
 as already mentioned, one of the judges, the County of 
 Hamilton was established, and the county-seat fixed at this 
 town, to which the Governor then gave the name of 
 Cincinnati. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 A Committee of the Pioneer Association has been appointed to obtain 
 further information as to the date of the settlement of Cincinnati, They 
 respectfully request the co-operation of all persons who may have it in their 
 power to contribute or point ( ii.t, < a.uy means of information. 
 
 The list of the first settlers of the town, which was published in the 
 Directory of 1819, contains the following names, besides those of Messrs. 
 Patterson and Ludlow. 
 
 NOAH BADGELY, 
 SAMUEL BLACKBURN, 
 THADDEUS BRUEN, 
 ROBERT CALDWELL, 
 JAMES CARPENTER, 
 WILLIAM CONNELL, 
 MATTHIAS FOWLER, 
 THOMAS GIZZELL, V 
 FRANCIS HARDESTY, 
 EPHRAIM KIBBY, 
 
 HENRY 
 
 WILLIAM McMILLAN, 
 SAMUEL MOONEY, 
 JOHN PORTER, 
 
 EVAN SHELBY, 
 DANIEL SHOEMAKER, 
 JOSEPH THORNTON, 
 SCOTT TRAVERS, 
 JOHN VANCE, 
 SYLVESTER WHITE, 
 JOEL WILLIAMS, 
 LINDSEY. 
 
 Cist’s “Cincinnati in 1859” adds the names of Matthias Campbell, 
 Henry, Luther Kitchell, Elijah Martin, and Isaac Tuttle. 
 
 The families of the persons above named, or persons acquainted with 
 any of them, will confer a favor by communicating to John D. Caldwell, 
 Esq., Secretary of the Pioneer Association, Cincinnati, concerning any 
 letters, documents, or other means for determining the time when the party 
 from Limestone, under Messrs. Patterson and Ludlow, arrived at Cincinnati. 
 
 Families of the first settlers at Columbia, or their acquaintances, may 
 also have means for answering thc'same inquiry.