The settlement of Illinois, 1778-1830

by Arthur Clinton Boggess

I. The Land and Indian Questions. 1790 to 1809.

A proclamation issued by Estevan Miro, Governor and Intendant of the Provinces of Louisiana and Florida in 1789, offered to immigrants a liberal donation of land, graduated according to the number of laborers in the family; freedom of religion and from payment of tithes, although no public worship except Catholic would be allowed; freedom from taxation; and a free market at New Orleans for produce or manufactures. All settlers must swear allegiance to Spain.[146] This proclamation came at a time when the West was divided in opinion as to whether to make war upon Spain for her closure of the Mississippi or to secede from the United States and become a part of Spain.[147] It tended to continue the emigration from the Illinois country to Spanish territory, for public land was not yet for sale in Illinois.

To the professional rover, the inability to secure a title to land was the cause of small concern, but the more substantial and desirable the settler, the more concerned was he about the matter. Settlement and improvements were retarded. Before the affairs of the Ohio Company had progressed far enough to permit sales of land to settlers, the little company at Marietta saw, with deep chagrin, thousands of settlers float by on their way to Kentucky, where land could be bought.[148] Squatters in Illinois were constantly expecting that the public lands [pg 072] would soon be offered for sale. The natural result was petitions for the right of preëmption, because without such a right, the settler was in danger of losing whatever improvements he had made. In 1790, James Piggott and forty-five others petitioned for such a right. The petitioners stated that they had settled since 1783 and had suffered much from Indians. They could not cultivate their land except under guard. Seventeen families had no more tillable land than four could tend. The land on which they lived was the property of two individuals.[149]

Petitions from various classes of settlers, not provided for by the acts of June 20, August 28, and August 29, 1788, led Congress to pass the act of March 3, 1791. By this act, four hundred acres was to be given to each head of a family who, in 1783, was resident in the Illinois country or at Vincennes, and who had since moved from the one to the other. The same donation was to be made to all persons who had moved away, if they should return within five years. Such persons should also have confirmed to them the land they originally held. This was intended to bring back persons who had gone to the Spanish side of the Mississippi. Grants previously made by courts having no authority should be confirmed to persons who had made improvements, to an extent not exceeding four hundred acres to any one person. As these lands had in some cases been repeatedly sold, the parties making the improvements were frequently guiltless of any knowledge of fraud. The Cahokia commons were confirmed to that village. One hundred acres was to be granted to each militiaman enrolled on August 1, 1790, and who had received no other grant.[150] This act throws considerable light on the causes of discontent then prevailing among [pg 073] the settlers and on the conditions to which immigrants came.

This same spring, about two hundred and fifty of the inhabitants of Vincennes had gone to settle at New Madrid.[151] It is not strange that the act of March 3, 1791, made provisions intended to induce the Americans who had emigrated to the Spanish possessions to return. The history of the threatened Spanish aggression upon the western part of the United States is known in essence to anyone who has made the slightest special study of the period at which it was at its height. Morgan's scheme for a purchase of land in Illinois was not carried out, and he turned his attention to peopling his settlement at New Madrid. Down the Mississippi to New Orleans seemed the natural route for Illinois commerce. Slavery flourished unmolested west of the Mississippi. In 1794, Baron de Carondolet gave orders to the governor of Natchez to incite the Chickasaw Indians to expel the Americans from Fort Massac. The governor refused to obey the order, because Fort Massac had been occupied by the Americans in pursuance of a request by the Spanish representative at the capital of the United States that the president would put a stop to the proposed expedition of the French against the Spanish. The claim was advanced by Carondolet that the Americans had no right to the land on which the fort stood, but that the land belonged to the Chickasaws, who were independent allies of Spain. Two other reasons given for not obeying the order were that it would preclude the successful issue of the Spanish intrigue for the separation of Kentucky from the United States, and would hinder negotiations, then pending, for a commercial treaty between Spain and the United States.[152] [pg 074] Carondolet regarded the Indians as Spain's best defence against the Americans,[153] yet the whites prepared for defence, and in anticipation of the proposed French expedition of George Rogers Clark, a garrison of thirty men and an officer was placed at Ste. Genevieve, opposite Kaskaskia. Carondolet said: “This will suffice to prevent the smuggling carried on by the Americans of the settlement of Kaskaskias situated opposite, which increases daily.”[154]

Early in 1796, a petition was sent from Kaskaskia to Congress. The petitioners desired that they might be permitted to locate their donation of four hundred acres per family on Long Prairie, a few miles above Kaskaskia, on the Kaskaskia River, and that the expense of surveying the land might be paid by the United States. The act granting the donation-land had provided for its location between the Kaskaskia and the Mississippi. This land the petitioners declared to be private land and some of it was of poor quality.[155] Confirmation of land claims directed to be made upon the Governor's visit in 1790 were delayed by the lack of a surveyor and the poverty of the inhabitants.[156] The petition was signed by John Edgar, William Morrison, William St. Clair, and John Demoulin[157] “for the inhabitants [pg 075] of the counties of St. Clair and Randolph”[158]—the Illinois counties. The petitioners ranked high in the mercantile and legal life of the Illinois settlements, but they must have been novices in the art of petitioning if they thought that a petition signed by four men from the Illinois country, with no sign of their being legally representative, would be regarded by Congress as an expression of the opinion of the Northwest Territory. The part of the petition relating to lands was granted, but the major part, which related to other subjects, was denied on the ground that the petitioners probably did not represent public sentiment.[159] During this same year Congress denied a number of petitions for the right of preëmption in the Northwest Territory, because such a right would encourage illegal settling. It was also during this year that the first sales of public land in the Northwest Territory were authorized. The land to be sold was in what is now Ohio. No tract of less than four thousand acres could be purchased.[160]

In 1800, two hundred and sixty-eight inhabitants of Illinois, chiefly French, petitioned Congress that Indian titles to land in the southern part of Illinois might be extinguished and the land offered for sale; that tracts of land at the distance of a day's journey from each other, lying between Vincennes and the Illinois settlements, might be ceded to such persons as would keep taverns, and [pg 076] that one or two garrisons might be stationed in Illinois. The petitioners state that the Kaskaskia tribe of Indians numbered not more than fifteen members and that their title to land could be easily extinguished; that not enough land is open to settlement to admit a population sufficient to support ordinary county establishments; that roads are much needed, and that many of the inhabitants are crossing the Mississippi with their slaves. The petition was not considered.[161]

A new factor now appears in the forces affecting Illinois settlement. The Northwest Territory having advanced to the second grade of territorial government, in December, 1799, its delegate took his seat in Congress. The step was an important one for the struggling colony. Before this time such petitions as were prepared by inhabitants of the territory for the consideration of Congress had been subjected to all the vicissitudes of being addressed to some public officer or of being confided to some member of Congress who represented a different portion of the country. Up to this time the public lands could only be bought in tracts of four thousand acres. Largely through the influence of the delegate from the Northwest Territory, a bill was passed which authorized the sale of sections and half-sections. In consequence, emigration soon began to flow rapidly into Ohio. Land in Illinois was not yet offered for sale, but this bill is important because the policy of offering land in smaller tracts was to continue.[162]

The territorial delegate was also active in procuring the passage of a bill for the division of the Northwest Territory. While the bill was pending, a petition from Illinois, praying for the division and for the establishment of such [pg 077] a government in the western part as was provided for by the Ordinance of 1787, was presented. The act for division was signed by the President on May 7, 1800; it formed Indiana Territory, with Vincennes as its capital.[163]