Some thoughts on Genesis chapters 37 & 39

The narrative about Joseph in Genesis chapters 37 and 39 brings up some interesting concerns. Joseph seemed to be a good guy, doing the right things, honoring God, and, yet, all of these bad things were happening. Of course, we know what happens in the end, but up to the end of chapter 39 things just seem to keep getting worse for Joseph. His brothers were jealous and hated him (Genesis 37:4, 5, 8, 11) and wanted to kill him (Genesis 37:18, 20). They opted, however, not to kill him outright, but to leave him to die in a cistern (Genesis 37:24). Opportunism won out, though, and Joseph was sold as a slave to the Ishmaelite/Midianite merchants (Genesis 37:28). Joseph was taken to Egypt and was sold to Potiphar, the captain of the guard (Genesis 39:1). Things began to look up for Joseph and he prospered (Genesis 39:2-6). He was promoted by Potiphar and he excelled at all that he did. But then Potiphar's wife lusted after Joseph and tempted him (Genesis 39:7). When Joseph refused her advances and she could not get what she wanted, she lied about him to strike back at him (Genesis 39:13-18). Potiphar believed his wife's lies and put Joseph in prison (Genesis 39:19-20). Even though Joseph was in prison, the LORD blessed him and Joseph prospered even there (Genesis 39:20-23). He was promoted from a mere prisoner to the prison warden's operations manager and he excelled at all that he did.

Now, here is the interesting thing in this narrative.

Did God make these bad things happen to Joseph or, at least, allow them to happen? Well, what do the scriptures say that God did? When Joseph was sold as a slave, the LORD was with Joseph and he prospered (Genesis 39:2). The LORD was with him and gave him success in everything he did (Genesis 39:3). The LORD blessed the household of the Egyptian because of Joseph. The blessing of the LORD was on everything Potiphar had, both in the house and in the field (Genesis 39:5). While Joseph was in the prison, the LORD was with him; he showed him kindness and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden (Genesis 39:20-21). The LORD was with Joseph and gave him success in whatever he did (Genesis 39:23). All that is attributed to the LORD appears to me to be good things.

So where do all of these bad things come from? Well, let's see. Jacob loved Joseph more than any of his other sons (Genesis 37:3). That is, Jacob showed favoritism. As a result, Joseph's brothers hated him and could not speak a kind word to him (Genesis 37:4). A choice made by the father, caused a reaction in the other sons. They chose to hate Joseph. When Joseph had the dreams and told his brothers about them, his brothers recognized the implications of the dreams and were jealous and hated him all the more (Genesis 37:5, 8, 11). Now, Joseph may not be completely innocent in this situation, because he surely recognized the implications of the dreams, too, and may have been less than humble in the telling of them, being seventeen and second from the youngest of the brothers. So, his own choices may have played a part in the eventual outcome. The brothers then plotted to kill him (Genesis 37:18). First, they planned to kill him and discard his body in a cistern (Genesis 37:20). Then Reuben convinced them to just throw Joseph in the cistern alive (Genesis 37:21-22). Of course, Reuben may have had his own selfish motives, since he had fallen out of favor with his father (Genesis 35:22). Ultimately, the brothers decided to sell Joseph as a slave (Genesis 37:26-27). "What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? ... after all, he is our brother, our own flesh and blood." I'm sure the twenty shekels of silver soothed their guilty consciences. To cover up their deed they fabricated a lie for their father (Genesis 37:31-32). In Egypt, when the situation began to improve for Joseph, Potiphar's wife sought to satisfy her own lust (Genesis 39:7). When Joseph remained steadfast in his integrity and refused her advances, she chose to strike back with an elaborate lie, knowing that nothing good could come from it for Joseph (Genesis 39:13-18). And so, Joseph ended up in prison.

Again, where do all of these bad things come from? Certainly, the bad things that happened to Joseph did not come from God. As we can see from the scriptures, God blessed a faithful Joseph and showed him kindness in the midst of the bad things happening. What God did do, however, was give all human beings a free will and the responsibility to make their own choices. Unfortunately, our choices as human beings are often influenced by our own self-interest to the detriment of others. Our choices are our own, though, and we cannot blame God for the choices that we make ourselves or for the choices that other people make. And so, it appears to me that all of the bad things that happened to Joseph were the result of choices made by others and perhaps some of his own choices. Jacob showed favoritism. His brothers were jealous and chose to hate Joseph. They chose to do harm to Joseph to be rid of him and eventually sold him as a slave. Potiphar's wife chose to pursue her own lust and when she was not satisfied, she chose to lie. And so, Joseph ended up a slave in Egypt as a direct result of the choices of his brothers and he ended up in prison as a direct result of the choices of Potiphar's wife.

Why do bad things happen to good people? Often (not always, but often) bad things happen to us as a consequence of the choices that we make ourselves and/or the choices that other people make. We can't blame God for that. Each of us has to take responsibility for his own choices. We can't control the choices that other people make. We can, however, control the choices that we make ourselves and how we react to the choices of other people and other circumstances beyond our control. If we are faithful, God is faithful. God works in the midst of the bad things that happen.


----------------------------------------
original composition by Steven E. Weible

Silas Bent: Principal Deputy Surveyor - Part Two

This article has been modified. See Chapter 7 of "It Was Not Quick and It Was Not Simple: The Saga of Private Land Claims in Missouri". (Go to book now.)

Silas Bent, having been appointed Principal Deputy Surveyor for the Territory of Louisiana, reported for duty at St. Louis on September 17, 1806 only to find himself in the difficult position of being compensated on the basis of orders for survey from a Board of Commissioners that had ceased to function. He had made several appeals to Jared Mansfield, Surveyor General of the United States, but after several months on the job without orders for survey or compensation, he was beginning to feel some desperation at not being able to provide for his family.

Relief finally came by way of a provision in the Act of March 3, 1807, chapter 36, An Act respecting claims to land in the territories of Orleans and Louisiana (U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 440). Section nine of the act provided for an annual compensation of five hundred dollars in addition to the fees previously established. The annual compensation was effective from the time the principal deputy entered into the duties of the office.

Section seven of the act also provided that any claim to land that was approved by the board of commissioners that had not previously been surveyed was to be surveyed under the direction of the principal deputy surveyor at the expense of the claimants. The board of commissioners was also authorized to direct the principal deputy surveyor to re-survey any tract at the expense of the United States. General and particular plats were to be prepared and sent to the proper register or recorder and the Secretary of the Treasury.

A relieved Silas Bent wrote to Jared Mansfield on June 1, 1807, thanking him for his intervention and requesting more particular information and instructions as to how the surveys were to be conducted (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 127). Mansfield responded on July 20, 1807 with the following specifications (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 137):

1st I think that it would be well that Our General Instructions for marking of lines Be Observed by the Surveyors of private, tracts, particularly that they be blazed well, & a sufficient Number of Sight trees be taken; also that bearing trees be taken for the Corners, & that the Course & distance from the last Corner, in the Order of the surveying, be marked on one or more of the bearing trees, or some other tree near the Corner, instead of the Number of section Lot &c. as in the public Surveys.

2d The Field notes, & two plats of each survey, together with the Description of bearing trees quality of Land; &c. should be returned to Your office. The Contents of the tract ought to be calculated by the tables of Latitude & Defraction.

3– By General Plats, I understand a map of the Country embracing the Claims. The Use of this is to know how they lie in respect to One Another, & thereby to form a judgment of the intermediate Vacant Lands; I know no way while the Country Generally is not surveyed, whereby this can be done correctly. The Water Courses however & the Natural Marks must be your guide, as well as the estimated distances of One place from Another. The Common map of the Country will Also assist you.

4th Ritenhouse’s Compass, or one which will enable the Surveyor to give the Courses According to the true Meridian should be used in private as well as the public surveys. All Courses should be put down according to the true Meridian, & the variation of the Compass, ought to be noted on the plat of each survey, as well as the average Variation in the General Plat.

Meanwhile, Frederick Bates was appointed Recorder of Land Titles in place of James L. Donaldson and the Board of Commissioners reconvened as a Board of Revision. By May 1807 they had begun receiving testimony in support of land claims (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 134). They would continue to receive testimony without rendering any decisions until the time for receiving evidence had expired. On December 8, 1808 they began examining the evidence and making decisions. Claims that were confirmed by the Board, but which had not yet been surveyed, were not issued a certificate until a survey could be completed (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 366).

Survey by Silas Bent, dated July 29, 1807, of a tract
claimed by Calvin Adams at Portage des Sioux.
The survey was made pursuant to an order of the
Board of Commissioners, dated July 13, 1807.
(Courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey)

Plat of survey of 1390 arpents 3 perches made for Auguste Chouteau
by James Mackay on May 29, 1803. Text is French.
(Courtesy of the Missouri State Archives, Missouri Digital Heritage)

Survey by Silas Bent or one of his deputies, dated November 29, 1809,
of the tract of land claimed by Auguste Chouteau.
This survey was made pursuant to an order of the Board of Commissioners,
dated October 26, 1809. The claim was approved by the Board of
Commissioners on June 7, 1810 for 1031 acres, based on this survey.
(Courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey)

Silas Bent reported to Jared Mansfield in letters, dated May 24, 1810 and July 30, 1810, that when the orders for survey began to come, the Commissioners of the Board of Revision expected the surveys to be executed immediately, giving a due date that did not allow enough time to perform the work or to make arrangements with a deputy. In addition, the tracts ordered to be surveyed were not grouped by locality, but were scattered across the territory. In cases where the claimants were responsible for payment, the claimants often refused to pay and some prevented the execution of the surveys by force. The Commissioners, nonetheless, insisted that the work be done as ordered and expressed the belief that payment should be pursued through the courts. Mr. Bent was also perplexed by orders for surveys in which the quantity of land to be confirmed was less than the quantity claimed. He was, apparently, expected to use his discretion in defining the tract to satisfy the quantity to be confirmed. Older claims were not to be disturbed, but many of the old lines had never actually been run and marked in the field. There existed no map or drawing indicating the position of any one claim relative to another, so that it often took more time to figure out where and how the tract was to be surveyed than the time it took to do the actual survey (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 405, 408, 423).

Mr. Bent had previously observed in a letter to Jared Mansfield, dated December 21, 1806, that the surveys in the former province of Upper Louisiana had “been executed in the most careless manner, seldom more than half the lines run at all and where they are no corner established or bound defined – no field Notes taken and the courses all laid down 7° varient from what they were run ... and from the extraordinary forms & situations of the private Claims it will be very difficult ever to bring the surveys into any regularity” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 51).

Mr. Bent reported to Jared Mansfield in a letter, dated November 12, 1810, that he had tried to recruit deputies to assist with the surveys, but few were interested when prompt payment and a profit could not be assured. He also observed that it appeared the Commissioners of the Board of Revision had changed their approach and were now issuing certificates of confirmation without a survey. The confirmation certificates, however, noted that a survey was required before a patent could issue. It was almost certain then that there would be pressure from the claimants to have their claims surveyed so that they could get their patents (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 423).

Frederick Bates noted in an update to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin, dated June 20, 1811, that the Board of Revision had examined and approved “many hundred confirmations and grants which include Orders of survey.” The Board had been holding the orders so that they could deliver them all together to the principal deputy surveyor (Marshall, Vol. 2 pg 180). In a letter dated, September 5, 1811, Silas Bent reported to Jared Mansfield that the Commissioners of the Board of Revision had suspended requests for surveys as a result of the failure of Congress to provide compensation for the continuing work of the Board (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 470). Mr. Bent later noted in a letter to Mansfield, dated January 30, 1812, that he had made repeated requests to the Board of Revision for the orders of survey that had been made, but not yet delivered, so that he could execute the surveys in a more efficient manner and not have to repeatedly travel to the same area to survey individual tracts. His requests were denied, however, until October 1811, when the Clerk of the Board of Revision delivered “6 or 8 hundred ” of the confirmation certificates with orders for a survey (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 515).

As if Mr. Bent was not hindered enough in the prosecution of his duties, he and his deputies were subjected to unnecessary difficulties in trying to execute the orders given them. Some orders for survey specified that the survey was to be made “conformable to the concession,” which was written in the French or Spanish language. Neither a copy of the concession nor a translation of the text was provided, however. Other orders for survey called for a bound, such as a road or an older claim, but no information regarding the location of that specified bound was provided. Other orders of survey were limited by a condition that couldn’t be determined until after the survey was performed and some tracts could not even be located for lack of sufficient information from the Board of Revision. When Mr. Bent or his deputies requested more specific direction from the Board as to how a tract was to be surveyed, the Commissioners refused to provide further direction, stating that their orders were as complete as they were required to be. Requests made to the Board, the Recorder of Land Titles, the Clerk of the Board or the translator for translated copies of needed information from records within their possession were all denied. They did not consider themselves obligated to provide copies or translations, since no provision existed for their compensation. In some instances, the claimants, at their own expense, were able to provide the needed copies or translations so that the survey could be completed (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 508, 514, 515).

Once the Board of Revision had completed its work in January 1812 and submitted the transcripts and reports, it appears that no more surveys were attempted as a result of the lack of access to the appropriate information. Secretary Gallatin notified Frederick Bates, the recorder of land titles, on April 18, 1812 that he would not issue any more patents for approved land claims until the surveys were completed. Without the surveys, the tracts could not be definitively located, so Mr. Gallatin wanted the principal deputy surveyor to survey all of the tracts, connecting them relative to one another (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 546).

Congress addressed the quandary of the principal deputy surveyor in his need for access to information by inserting an appropriate provision in the Act of June 13, 1812, chapter 99, An Act making further provision for settling the claims to land in the territory of Missouri (U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 748)(the Territory of Louisiana had been renamed the Territory of Missouri by the Act of June 4, 1812, chapter 95, U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 743). Section six of the act directed the recorder of land titles to provide the principal deputy surveyor free access to the records in his office and copies or extracts of anything relating to land claims that the surveyor may need to complete the work required of him. The recorder of land titles was allowed twenty-five cents for the description of each tract provided to the principal deputy surveyor.

Section three of this act approved several classes of claims that were determined by the Board of Revision to have merit, but which had not satisfied the strict requirements of the previous legislation. Section five of the act specified that these new confirmations were to be surveyed along with those claims already approved by the Board of Revision that had not yet been surveyed. Also authorized to be surveyed were a sufficient number of townships so as to encompass all of the private claims. Upon completion of the surveys, a “general and connected plat” was to be prepared, showing the relative position of all of the tracts directed to be surveyed.

Survey by Silas Bent, dated February 3, 1813,
of Fort Belle Fontaine, the location of the U.S. military encampment.
(Courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey)

The amount of survey work for which the principal deputy surveyor was now responsible continued to grow with the passage of the Act of March 3, 1813, chapter 44, An Act allowing further time for delivering the evidence in support of claims to land in the territory of Missouri, and for regulating the donation grants therein (U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 812). Section five of the act directed the principal deputy surveyor to survey or cause to be surveyed a tract of 640 acres for each claim that had been confirmed on the basis of settlement right for a quantity less than 640 acres. In cases where competing claims did not permit a full 640 acres to each claimant, the principal deputy surveyor was to determine an equitable division of the land.

If the task had been daunting before, it had now become quite monumental for Silas Bent. The problem remained that there was, as yet, no framework in the Territory of Missouri to which the surveys could be referenced. The Spanish had conceded lands without a plan, allowing the petitioner to choose where his tract was to be located and how it was oriented. The result was a hodgepodge of disconnected clusters of tracts of land scattered over an extensive area. The only sensible solution would be to survey the public lands at the same time as the confirmed private claims. The Act of June 13, 1812, chapter 99, authorized townships to be surveyed, but how and where should these commence? There were many details that needed to be decided and it would take a considerable amount of time to accomplish all that had been ordered (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 681).

In addition to his duties as principal deputy surveyor, Silas Bent had taken on other responsibilities that would now make it difficult for him to participate directly in the surveys to be performed. He had been appointed 1st Justice of the Courts of Quarter Sessions and Common Pleas for the district of St. Louis on June 14, 1807 (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 321) and was reappointed on September 2, 1811 (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 193). On January 5, 1811 he was appointed Auditor of territorial accounts for the Territory of Louisiana (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 190) and, apparently, also served as a District Auditor. On February 18, 1813 he was appointed a Judge of the Superior Court of the Territory of Missouri by the President of the United States, James Madison (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 626, 631).

In November 1813 Silas Bent gladly relinquished the burden of Principal Deputy Surveyor to his successor, William Rector (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 707, 709).

SOURCES

Marshall, Thomas Maitland, The Life and Papers of Frederick Bates, Missouri Historical Society, 1926

American State Papers: Public Lands (ASP:PL)

The Territorial Papers of the United States, compiled by Clarence Edwin Carter, 1948

U. S. Statutes at Large

----------------------------------------

original composition by Steven E. Weible

Claims to Land and the Board of Revision

This article has been modified. See Chapter 6 of "It Was Not Quick and It Was Not Simple: The Saga of Private Land Claims in Missouri". (Go to book now.)

The work of the first Board of Commissioners for the adjustment of land titles in the Territory of Louisiana may as well have been a trial run, given the numerous changes throughout the process and the ultimate failure to complete the task. From the outset the United States government was suspicious of attempts to fraudulently acquire land. As a result, Congress passed legislation consistent with what they believed the Spanish regulations to have been, honoring the claims of bona fide settlers, while trying to exclude the fraudulent claims. The plan seemed to be one of strict application in the beginning with the option to revise the legislation as more information became available about the merit of the claims (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 79). Thus the Board of Commissioners began with insufficient instructions, attempted to identify and work through the deficiencies, were challenged by legislative changes throughout the process and when they believed they were nearly done, were presented with new rules that would require a revision of nearly all of the claims examined to that point.

In an effort to incorporate all of the lessons learned and to address all of the concerns identified up to that time, Congress passed the Act of March 3, 1807, chapter 36, An Act respecting claims to land in the territories of Orleans and Louisiana (U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 440).

The first section of the act repealed that part of the first section of the Act of March 2, 1805, chapter 26 (U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 324), that required the claimant to be the head of a family or over the age of twenty-one years.

The second section of the act provided for the confirmation of tracts of land not exceeding two thousand (2000) acres (equal to 2351 arpents), that had been possessed for ten consecutive years prior to December 20, 1803 by a person or persons actually resident in the territory of Louisiana and still in possession of the tract of land. Lead mines and salt springs could not be confirmed under this section of the act.

The fourth section of the act gave the Board of Commissioners full powers to decide upon claims to land not exceeding one league square (equal to 7056 arpents or 6002.5 acres) according to the laws and established usages and customs of the French and Spanish governments. The claimant had to have been an inhabitant of Louisiana on December 20, 1803 and the tract could not contain a lead mine or a salt spring.

The fifth section of the act extended to July 1, 1808 the time for filing written notice and evidence of a claim to land with the recorder of land titles.

The sixth section of the act provided that a transcript of confirmations was to be transmitted to the Secretary of the Treasury and the surveyor-general. The Board of Commissioners was to deliver to each claimant a certificate stating the circumstances of the case with notice that the claimant is entitled to a patent for the tract of land designated in the certificate. The claimant was then to file the certificate with the recorder of land titles within twelve months. The recorder of land titles would then issue another certificate, which was to be submitted to the Secretary of the Treasury. A patent would then be issued in the same manner as for the public lands.

The eighth section of the act required the commissioners to prepare a report of the claims that were not confirmed by the fourth section of the act. The report would be submitted to Congress for their final determination.

James L. Donaldson, who had abandoned the office of Recorder of Land Titles for the Territory of Louisiana, was replaced by Frederick Bates, who was commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson on February 4, 1807 (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 91). Mr. Bates was also commissioned as the Secretary of the Territory of Louisiana on the same date (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 117). He had previously served as receiver of public monies, a land commissioner and a judge in various courts in the Territory of Michigan (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 9). Meriwether Lewis was commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson as Governor of the Territory of Louisiana on March 3, 1807, but he did not begin to function in that capacity until March 8, 1808 (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 107, 171). Consequently, Frederick Bates, as Secretary of the Territory, also performed the functions of the governor until the arrival of Lewis.

Frederick Bates arrived at St. Louis on April 1, 1807 and soon thereafter joined with Judge John B. C. Lucas and Clement B. Penrose to resume the work of the Board of Commissioners as a Board of Revision (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 102, 134). The Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, sent a letter, dated April 2, 1807, providing updated instructions for their proceedings as a result of changes enacted by the latest Act of Congress (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 93).

All of the decisions of the former Board of Commissioners had to be reexamined under the new provisions of the legislation. The instructions that Secretary Gallatin had previously sent under date of September 8, 1806 were still applicable, unless they conflicted with the new legislation, in which case the new legislation would take precedence. Restrictions were still in force as to claims on which the commissioners were not authorized to decide.

Certificates issued for approved claims were to be numbered progressively in the order in which they were issued, beginning with No. 1. Each certificate was to specify the name(s) of the original claimant, the present owner, the nature of the claim (i.e., concession, order of survey, settlement right, etc.) and the location of the tract of land. If a survey had already been executed, it was to be appropriately referenced. If a survey had not yet been performed, precise directions were to be given as to where and how the tract was to be surveyed. The area was to be stated in either acres or arpents. The Clerk of the Board was to keep a register of the certificates that were issued and he was to send to the Secretary of the Treasury a list of certificates issued each month. The Recorder of Land Titles was also to keep a separate register for the patent certificates to be issued by him and he was to send a monthly report to the Secretary of the Treasury. The patent certificate was to include the description from the survey and it had to specify by whom the survey was performed.

In a letter, dated May 30, 1807, Frederick Bates informed Mr. Gallatin, that he had received the instructions and that the Board of Revision was then meeting every third day to receive testimony in support of land claims (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 134).

The Commissioners of the Board of Revision passed a resolution on June 13, 1807, stating their plan to make a circuit of the Territory in order to receive testimony from the land claimants in the distant settlements (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 158; Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 130, 142, 182). They planned to visit St. Charles in August 1807, Sainte Genevieve in November 1807, Cape Girardeau and New Madrid in March 1808 and Camp Esperance in April 1808. During the intervening periods of time, they planned to continue their sessions in St. Louis.

Frederick Bates reported to Secretary Gallatin on February 9, 1808 that the Board of Revision had only received testimony and had not yet made any decisions. They first wanted to settle all the principles upon which their decisions were to be made to avoid the problems encountered by the first Board of Commissioners (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 280, 300). In addition, the specifications for confirmation in the various acts of Congress were such that some claims were considered as having higher merit than others. It was, therefore, imperative to ensure that those of higher merit were given the senior right where a conflict may exist. This could only be accomplished by delaying their decisions until after all testimony had been received (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 366).

The trips to St. Charles and Sainte Genevieve were completed as planned in 1807 (Marshall, Vol. 1, pg 283). The travel plans for 1808, however, were modified due to the inconvenience of traveling at such an early time of the year. The Commissioners of the Board of Revision decided to delay until May 1808 and to send only one member of the Board to receive testimony instead of all three. Frederick Bates, the Recorder of land titles, was selected to make the trip. Since he could not read or understand French or Spanish, Marie Philippe LeDuc, the translator, was to accompany him. Judge Lucas and Clement Penrose were to remain in St. Louis and continue the sessions of the Board there (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 182).

Frederick Bates, accompanied by Marie Philippe LeDuc, began his circuit of the southern settlements in late May 1808 (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 190). He reported to Secretary Gallatin on July 22, 1808 from the Village of Arkansas that he had visited all of the settlements between there and Cape Girardeau, collecting evidence and testimony (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 7). On August 15, 1808 he made report to the Board of Commissioners and submitted the records for their consideration (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 11). It was later reported that he had collected testimony on 1121 claims (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 366).

The Board of Revision posted notice on August 24, 1808 that they intended to meet every day, except Sunday, until the first of November 1808 to receive testimony and continue the business of the Board (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 222). Finding, however, that the business could not be completed by that time, they extended the date to December 1, 1808 and subsequently pushed the date back to January and then March 1809 to give claimants every opportunity to present testimony in support of their claims (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 231, 241, 249, 366). In a letter, dated November 26, 1808, the Board notified Secretary Gallatin that with the amount of work yet to be done they would not be able to complete a report for the current Session of Congress. They also reminded him that provision for their compensation would end on January 1, 1809 (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 42).

On February 1, 1810 the Commissioners of the Board of Revision reported to Secretary Gallatin that they had received 3056 claims for land and that they had begun rendering decisions on December 8, 1808. Of the 3056 claims, 2699 claims had supporting testimony, while the remaining 357 claims had none. Only 8 claims were determined to have complete titles. Claims that were confirmed by the Board, but which had not yet been surveyed, were not issued a certificate until a survey could be completed. They reported that they had so far finally decided on 638 claims. Certificates had been issued on 323 claims, surveys were ordered for 167 claims and 139 claims had been rejected. The Board noted that there was still much work to be done and they again reminded the Secretary that compensation was still an issue (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 366).

Secretary Gallatin reported in a letter, dated May 5, 1810, that Congress had failed to pass legislation providing for continued compensation for the commissioners, the clerk of the board and the translator. He urged them, however, not to be discouraged by a lack of compensation, but to continue with all haste so that their final report could be submitted to the next session of Congress (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 404).

In a letter, dated November 7, 1810, Thomas Riddick, the Clerk of the Board of Revision, reported to Secretary Gallatin that the Board had so far finally decided on 1692 claims. Certificates had been issued on 524 claims, surveys were ordered for 423 claims and 745 claims had been rejected. He also reminded the Secretary that he continued to labor without compensation (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 421).

Congress finally made provision for compensation in passing the Act of March 3, 1811, chapter 46, An Act providing for the final adjustment of claims to lands, and for the sale of the public lands in the territories of Orleans and Louisiana (U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 662). Each commissioner and the clerk of the Board were allowed 50 cents for each duly filed claim that remained undecided on July 1, 1809 and on which a decision was finally made, whether confirmed or rejected. A further compensation of 500 dollars was to be paid after all of the work was completed and the transcripts and reports had been submitted to the Secretary of the Treasury. The translator was allowed 600 dollars per year, not to exceed a term of 18 months.

Secretary Gallatin informed the Commissioners of the Board of Revision in a letter, dated April 24, 1811, that compensation for the claims that were ultimately rejected could not be paid until their final report was submitted. Compensation for the claims that were confirmed and on which certificates had been issued, however, could be paid when the report of certificates issued each month was submitted as previously directed (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 172).

The plan for compensation was not well received by the commissioners, the clerk or the translator and there were rumblings of resignation that threatened to bring a halt to the proceedings (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 178, 180). Nevertheless, they labored on and the Clerk of the Board reported to Secretary Gallatin on January 20, 1812 that the business of the Board of Revision had been completed (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 214). Frederick Bates reported on January 27, 1812 that the final report of the Board of Revision had been entrusted to Clement Penrose for delivery to the Secretary of the Treasury (Marshall, Vol. 2, pg 216).

The Board of Revision issued 1342 confirmation certificates, one of which was determined to be a duplicate and was declared void. The final report identified about 2055 claims that were not approved according to the provisions of the existing legislation (ASP:PL Vol. 2, pg 388). At the time that he delivered the final report, Clement Penrose offered a classification of the claims that were not approved and included his personal recommendations. He acknowledged that there were claims that lacked merit and should never be confirmed, but that many claims, although not meeting the requirements of the existing legislation, did have merit and in all justice should be approved by some future legislation (ASP:PL Vol. 2, pg 377).

SOURCES

Marshall, Thomas Maitland, The Life and Papers of Frederick Bates, Missouri Historical Society, 1926

American State Papers: Public Lands (ASP:PL)

The Territorial Papers of the United States, compiled by Clarence Edwin Carter, 1948

U. S. Statutes at Large

----------------------------------------

original composition by Steven E. Weible

Silas Bent: Principal Deputy Surveyor - Part One

This article has been modified. See Chapter 5 of "It Was Not Quick and It Was Not Simple: The Saga of Private Land Claims in Missouri". (Go to book now.)

Article II of the Treaty Between the United States of America and the French Republic, dated April 30, 1803, provided that, “the archives, papers, and documents, relative to the domain and sovereignty of Louisiana, and its dependences, will be left in the possession of the commissaries of the United States” (U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 8, pg 200). Spain, however, not being a party to the agreement between the United States and the French Republic, apparently, did not feel compelled to relinquish the records in its possession. As a result, some officers of the Spanish government caused records to be removed from the Province of Louisiana, depriving the United States of the information contained within them (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 432).

Because of this infidelity on the part of some of the Spanish officials, the United States Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, was very concerned about the Archive of Surveys that was still in the custody of Antoine Soulard, the former Surveyor General of the Spanish Province of Upper Louisiana. Mr. Gallatin urgently wanted to replace Soulard and to recover the records in his possession (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 432-435).

After the United States had taken possession of Upper Louisiana on March 10, 1804, Captain Amos Stoddard, exercising the functions of civil commandant, chose to retain Soulard as the temporary depository of the Survey Archives (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 533 & Vol. 14, pg 32). William Henry Harrison, governor of the Indiana Territory, had subsequently commissioned Soulard in October 1804 to continue in the capacity of Surveyor General for the district of Louisiana (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 71, 81). General James Wilkinson, who had become governor of the Territory of Louisiana in July 1805 (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 98), chose to continue Soulard in the office to which he had been appointed by Governor Harrison (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 175), so that Soulard continued in possession of the Survey Archives.

Meanwhile, the Board of Commissioners for ascertaining and adjusting land titles that was assembled in accordance with the act of March 2, 1805, chapter 26, had commenced their work in December 1805. Within months several issues pertaining to surveys were identified that needed legislative attention. First, the act of March 26, 1804, chapter 38, prohibited surveys from being performed, while the act of March 2, 1805, chapter 26, required a plat to be filed with the recorder of land titles. What if a survey had not yet been performed, so that none could be filed with the recorder of land titles? Next, the Recorder of Land Titles, James L. Donaldson, had refused to accept surveys performed by private surveyors, believing that the fourth section of the act of March 2, 1805, chapter 26, required a plat prepared by a duly appointed officer (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 497-498). Governor Wilkinson had in fact issued a proclamation on November 4, 1805, prohibiting surveys by anyone but those authorized by the Surveyor General of the Territory (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 264). Were private surveys to be accepted or not? It was anticipated that surveys would be needed, but who was the proper person to perform them? (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 432-435).

In response to these concerns Congress passed the act of February 28, 1806, chapter 11, An Act extending the powers of the Surveyor-general to the territory of Louisiana; and for other purposes (U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, pg 352). This act provided for a principal deputy surveyor to reside in the territory of Louisiana and to operate under the superintendence of the surveyor-general of the United States, who was then in Ohio. The principal deputy surveyor was to execute, or cause to be executed by deputies, surveys as may be authorized by law or as requested by the Board of Commissioners. He was also to take possession of all of the records of the Surveyor General of the Spanish Province of Upper Louisiana. The Board of Commissioners was authorized to request surveys as they deemed necessary for the purpose of deciding upon claims before them. Any such survey was considered a private survey only and a re-survey under the authority of the surveyor-general would be required, if the claim was confirmed. The Act also repealed the requirement of a plat of survey as evidence, if a survey had not been performed before December 20, 1803.

Compensation was to be paid for surveys actually run, an amount not to exceed 3 dollars per mile. The principal deputy surveyor was also entitled to receive a fee for examining and recording surveys performed by deputies and for providing a certified copy of any plot of survey in his office. Those fees were 25 cents for every mile of boundary for examination and recording and 25 cents for each certified copy. While the bill for this act was being considered by the U.S. Senate, an amendment was added to provide a salary for the principal deputy surveyor. The amendment, however, was rejected and the act was passed without it (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 448; Senate Journal, Vol. 4, pg 38, 45).

In a letter, dated March 25, 1806, Mr. Gallatin urged Jared Mansfield, Surveyor General of the United States, to immediately appoint a principal deputy surveyor for the Territory of Louisiana. Mr. Gallatin wanted the new appointee to proceed to St. Louis without delay so as to recover the records from Antoine Soulard as soon as possible (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 461).

In a letter to the Board of Commissioners of the same date, Mr. Gallatin informed them that as a result of the recent act a plat of survey was no longer required, if a tract had not been surveyed under the authority of the proper Spanish Officer before December 20, 1803. He also advised them that they were authorized to direct the principal deputy surveyor to perform any surveys that they deemed necessary in order to complete their business. He cautioned them, however, to request surveys only when necessary so as not to harass the claimants with repeated surveys. Also, since any surveys that had already been done and any surveys to be done by the principal deputy surveyor were to be considered private surveys subject to resurvey, it did not matter whether a previous survey was performed under the authority of the proper Spanish Officer or by a private surveyor (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 460).

Jared Mansfield responded to Mr. Gallatin on June 14, 1806, expressing his intent to appoint Silas Bent of Belprie, Washington County, Ohio as principal deputy surveyor for the Territory of Louisiana. Mr. Bent had previously been employed by Mansfield in surveying the public lands and was serving as a judge of the Court of Common Pleas in the county of his residence (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 519). Mr. Gallatin responded on July 3, 1806, approving the appointment and expressing dissatisfaction that his directive had not been carried out immediately upon receipt (Territorial Papers, Vol. 13, pg 536).

Silas Bent reported to Jared Mansfield in a letter, dated September 22, 1806, that he had arrived in St. Louis on September 17 and had visited Antoine Soulard to recover the records that had been in his possession. Soulard had been ordered on May 3, 1806 by Governor Wilkinson to cease operation as Surveyor General of the Territory of Louisiana (ASP:PL, Vol. 8, pg 866) and had already surrendered the records to the Board of Commissioners. Bent next visited the Board of Commissioners, advised them of his office and requested that the appropriate records be delivered to him. At the leisure of the Board and their clerk the records were eventually released to him, but no requests for surveys were forthcoming. This put Mr. Bent in a difficult position, since his compensation relied upon requests for surveys from the Board of Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners, however, had been cautioned by Mr. Gallatin to request them only when necessary. Mr. Bent concluded his letter of September 22, 1806 to Jared Mansfield with the statement that “This afords but a dark prospect for the present support of my young family in this most expensive Country” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 8).

Silas Bent wrote to Jared Mansfield again on September 28, 1806, reporting that “Nothing relative to my Official duties has taken place since I wrote You – Judge Lucas wishes resurveys made and a general investigation, but the other Commissioners pass the Business over” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 12). In a letter, dated October 13, 1806, he further stated to Jared Mansfield that “I have had no Business for which the Law entitles me to a single Cent and have no prospect of any – I do not know what to do in this unfortunate situation – my children remain unwell ” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 14).

By late October 1806 James L. Donaldson, the Recorder of Land Titles, had left the Territory (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 21, 27, 64). Following his departure, the remaining commissioners, Judge John B. C. Lucas and Clement B. Penrose, received new instructions from the Secretary of the Treasury that would necessitate a revision of nearly all of the decisions that had already been made (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 19). As a result of these circumstances, the Board of Commissioners essentially ceased operation until they received further direction from the Secretary as to how to proceed (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 27, 36, 40).

Jared Mansfield attempted to intercede on Mr. Bent’s behalf by informing Mr. Gallatin of the circumstances in letters, dated October 16, 1806, October 30, 1806 and November 1, 1806 (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 15, 22, 25). He even advocated for Mr. Bent to the President of the United States in a letter, dated October 31, 1806 (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 23).

William Carr, the agent for the United States in the Territory of Louisiana, also chipped in his comments to Mr. Gallatin in a letter, dated November 20, 1806, in which he observed that “If the power of the surveyor general is by law to be extended to this territory; a principal deputy surveyor appointed, who by his instructions is urged in the most pressing manner to repair immediately to St. Louis, to open and keep, an office there; & the Commissioners are not to continue their sessions, this act of Congress will remain inefficient and without execution – This principal deputy Surveyor, as an officer of the government certainly could not be expected to remove his family to this place; open an office and Continue it here entirely at his own expence; & that too for the expectation of obtaining the compensation allowed by law, whenever it should please the board of commissioners, to afford him any employment – which compensation will be found upon reflection and examination not to be half equivalent to the expences attendant on the discharge of the duties assigned him by Law. More especially in this country where the Tracts of land to be surveyed are scattered over the whole face of the territory and many of them situated at a great distance from the surveyor’s place of residence; where no travelling expences to and from the land to be surveyed are allowed and where labour and expences of every kind are excessively high” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 36).

In a letter to Jared Mansfield, dated December 9, 1806, Silas Bent remained hopeful that appropriate intervention would “perhaps turn what has been unfavorable hitherto, very much to my advantage in the end ” (Territorial Papers, Vol. 14, pg 51).

Signature of Silas Bent, Principal Deputy Surveyor
(image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey)

SOURCES 

American State Papers: Public Lands (ASP:PL)

The Territorial Papers of the United States, compiled by Clarence Edwin Carter, 1948

U. S. Statutes at Large

----------------------------------------

original composition by Steven E. Weible

Survey 144 of the Sainte Genevieve & New Bourbon Lands

Plat and description of the survey of a lot in Block number three of the town of Sainte Genevieve, in Township thirty eight, north of the base line, Range nine, east of the fifth principal Meridian, in the State of Missouri, executed on the twenty third day of October eighteen hundred and forty, by Jos. C. Brown, Deputy Surveyor, under instructions from the Surveyor of the public lands in the States of Illinois and Missouri, dated the third of September eighteen hundred and forty; It being the lot of "about fifty six by about ninety feet," confirmed to Veuve Leclere's legal representatives by the act of Congress of the thirteenth of June eighteen hundred and twelve; the extent and boundaries whereof were proven before Theodore Hunt, United States Recorder of land titles in the State of Missouri, on the twenty seventh of October eighteen hundred and twenty five, under the provisions of the act of Congress of the twenty sixth of May eighteen hundred and twenty four, entitled: "an act supplementary to an act passed on the thirteenth day of June one thousand eight hundred and twelve, entitled: 'an act making further provision for settling the claims to land in the Territory of Missouri' ".

Description:  Begin at a lime stone, at the intersection of the eastern edge of Gabori Street with the northern edge of Third Street, the south west corner of this lot and Block number three.

Thence north seventy seven degrees and ten minutes east along the southern boundary of this lot and the northern edge of Third Street, at one hundred and forty two feet and six inches a lime stone, the south east corner of this lot, and a corner of another lot of Veuve Leclere's legal representatives, survey numbered one hundred and forty three.

Thence north fourteen degrees and forty five minutes west along the eastern boundary of this lot, at forty nine feet and six inches the north east corner of this lot, and a corner of the said other lot of Veuve Leclere.

Thence south seventy six degrees west along the northern boundary of this lot, at one hundred and thirty six feet, a lime stone, on the eastern edge of Gabori street, the north west corner of this lot, and a corner of the said other lot of Veuve Leclere.

Thence south six degrees and fifteen minutes east along the western boundary of this lot, and the eastern edge of Gabori street, at forty seven feet and six inches the beginning corner.

Surveyor's Office, St. Louis  March 19th 1845

The foregoing plat and description of survey numbered one hundred and forty four of Sainte Genevieve and New Bourbon lands are correctly copied from pages 264 and 265 of the Book of Record of the said surveys in this Office.

Silas Reed
Surveyor of the public lands in the
States of Illinois and Missouri

To F. R. Conway Esquire
U. S. Recorder of land titles
   St. Louis, Mo


Transcriber's Note:
Gabori Street is now Main Street
Third Street is now Merchant Street

(Transcribed from Missouri State Land Survey scan file: Y0820071.pdf)

-------------------------------
transcribed by Steven E. Weible

Survey 143 of Sainte Genevieve & New Bourbon lands

Plat and description of the survey of a lot in Block number three of the town of Sainte Genevieve, in Township thirty eight, north of the base line, Range nine, east of the fifth principal Meridian, in the State of Missouri, executed on the twenty third day of October eighteen hundred and forty, by Jos. C. Brown, Deputy Surveyor, under instructions from the Surveyor of the public lands in the States of Illinois and Missouri, dated the third of September eighteen hundred and forty. It being the lot of "about half an arpent by about one arpent" confirmed to Veuve Leclere's legal representatives by the act of Congress of the thirteenth of June eighteen hundred and twelve; the extent and boundaries whereof were proven before Theodore Hunt, United States Recorder of land titles in the State of Missouri, on the twenty seventh of October eighteen hundred and twenty five, under the provisions of the act of Congress of the twenty sixth of May eighteen hundred and twenty four, entitled: " an act supplementary to an act passed on the thirteenth day of June one thousand eight hundred and twelve, entitled: ' an act making further provision for settling the claims to land in the Territory of Missouri ' ".

Description: Begin at a lime stone on the eastern edge of Gabori Street, the north west corner of this lot, and the south west corner of the lot of Louis Leclere, survey numbered one hundred and forty one.

Thence south six degrees and fifteen minutes east along the western boundary of this lot and the eastern edge of Gabori Street, at one hundred and thirty four feet and six inches a lime stone, a corner of this lot and the northwest corner of another lot of Veuve Leclere's legal representatives, survey numbered one hundred and forty four.

Thence north seventy six degrees east along a southern boundary line of this lot, and the northern boundary of said other lot of Veuve Leclere; at one hundred and thirty six feet the north east corner of the last said lot, and a corner of this lot.

Thence south fourteen degrees and forty five minutes east along a western boundary line of this lot and the eastern boundary of said other lot of Veuve Leclere, at forty nine feet and six inches a lime stone on the northern edge of Third street, the south east corner of the last said lot, and a corner of this lot.

Thence north seventy seven degrees and ten minutes east along the most southern boundary line of this lot, and the northern edge of Third street; at sixty five feet and eight inches a lime stone, the south east corner of this lot, and the south west corner of the lot of Vital Beauvais' legal representatives, survey numbered one hundred and forty two.

Thence north four degrees and thirty minutes west along the eastern boundary of this lot and the western boundary of the lot of Vital Beauvais; at one hundred and seventy four feet and six inches a lime stone, on the southern boundary line of the lot of Louis Leclere, the north east corner of this lot, and the north west corner of the lot of Vital Beauvais.

Thence south seventy nine degrees and fifteen minutes west along the northern boundary of this lot and the southern boundary of the lot of Louis Leclere; at two hundred and thirteen feet the beginning corner.

Surveyor's Office, St. Louis  March 19th, 1845

The foregoing plat and description of survey numbered one hundred and forty three of Sainte Genevieve and New Bourgon lands are correctly copied from pages 263 and 264 of the "Book of Record" of the said surveys in this Office.

Silas Reed
Surveyor of the public lands in the
   States of Illinois and Missouri

To F. R. Conway Esquire
U. S. Recorder of land titles
   St. Louis, Mo


Transcriber's note:
Gabori Street is now Main Street
Third Street is now Merchant Street

(transcribed from Missouri State Land Survey scan file: Y0820070.pdf)

-------------------------------
transcribed by Steven E. Weible

Survey 142 of Sainte Genevieve & New Bourbon Series

Plat and description of the survey of a lot in Block number three of the town of Sainte Genevieve, in Township thirty eight, north of the base line Range nine, east of the fifth principal Meridian, in the State of Missouri, executed on the twenty third day of October eighteen hundred and forty, by Jos. C. Brown, Deputy Surveyor, under instructions from the Surveyor of the public lands in the States of Illinois and Missouri, dated the third of September eighteen hundred and forty. It being the lot of one hundred and eighty feet front by one hundred and eighty feet deep, confirmed to Vital Beauvais or his legal representatives, by the act of Congress of the thirteenth of June eighteen hundred and twelve; the extent and boundaries whereof were proven before Theodore Hunt, United States Recorder of land titles in the State of Missouri, on the twenty first of October eighteen hundred and twenty five, under the provisions of the act of Congress of the twenty sixth of May eighteen hundred and twenty four, entitled: "an act supplementary to an act passed on the thirteenth day of June one thousand eight hundred and twelve, entitled: 'an act making further provision for settling the claims to land in the Territory of Missouri' ".

Description: Begin at a lime stone, the south east corner of this lot and of Block number three, at the intersection of the northern edge of Third street with the western edge of Common Field street.

Thence North two degrees and thirty five minutes west, along the eastern boundary of this lot and the western edge of Common Field street, at one hundred and sixty six feet and eight inches a lime stone, the north east corner of this lot and the south east corner of the lot of Louis Leclere, Survey numbered one hundred and forty one.

Thence South seventy nine degrees and fifteen minutes west along the northern boundary of this lot, and the southern boundary of the lot of Louis Leclere; at two hundred and thirteen feet a lime stone, the north west corner of this lot, and the north east corner of a lot of Veuve Leclere's legal representatives, survey numbered one hundred and forty three.

Thence South four degrees and thirty minutes East along the western boundary of this lot and the eastern boundary of the lot of Veuve Leclere; at one hundred and seventy four feet and six inches a lime stone, the south west corner of this lot, and the south east corner of the said lot of Veuve Leclere, on the northern edge of Third street.

Thence North seventy seven degrees and ten minutes East along the southern boundary of this lot and the northern edge of Third street; at two hundred and eight feet and two inches the beginning corner.

Surveyor's Office, St. Louis  March 18th 1845

The foregoing plat and description of survey numbered one hundred and forty two of Sainte Genevieve and New Bourbon lands are correctly copied from pages 262 & 263 of the Book of Record of the said surveys in this Office.

Silas Reed
Surveyor of the public lands in the 
States of Illinois and Missouri

To: F. R. Conway Esqr
U. S. Recorder of land titles
St. Louis, Mo.


Transcriber's Note:
Common Field Street is now Front Street
Third Street is now Merchant Steet

(transcribed from Missouri State Land Survey scan file: Y0820069.pdf)

-------------------------------
transcribed by Steven E. Weible