Biographical and Pictorial History of Arkansas, Chapter III

***********************************************************
Submitted by: Joy fisher < >
        Date: 14 Dec 2007
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
***********************************************************

BIOGRAPHICAL AND PICTORIAL HISTORY OF ARKANSAS.
BY JOHN HALLUM.
VOL. I.
ALBANY: WEED, PARSON'S AND COMPANY, PRINTERS.
1887.

Entered according to act of Congress in the year eighteen hundred and eighty-seven,
BY JOHN HALLUM, 
In the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington.


BIOGRAPHICAL AND PICTORIAL
HISTORY OF ARKANSAS.

HISTORICAL.

CHAPTER III.

CUSTOMS AND HABITS OF THE OLD FRENCH AND SPANISH INHABITANTS OF LOUISIANA
TERRITORY - SETTLEMENT.

THE old French inhabitants, by whom both lower and upper Louisiana were chiefly
settled, selected the richest lands and most eligible sites, fronting the
navigable streams, for settlement. Their system of settling and dividing up the
royal domain was essentially different from that adopted by the English
colonists.

  France and Spain were very liberal with their colonists. They gave them without
  stint all the land they wanted, without price.

  Self-interest and self-protection prompted them to settle in as compact form as
  possible; and to give all a frontage on the water-courses, their lands were laid
  off in narrow strips, and extended back at right angles from the river from one-
  half to three miles. That is the agricultural lands outside of the village or
  town commons.

  French and Spanish land measure is computed by arpents; an arpent is eighty-five
  one-hundredths of an English acre. The agricultural tracts of land were
  generally from one to three arpents wide.

  When the husbandmen were cultivating these lands and harvesting their crops,
  they strapped each a carbine to his shoulder and worked back and forth abreast
  of each other, so as to be in supporting distance in case attacked by the
  Indians. This was never departed from, and the wisdom of the imperative rule is
  attested by the well-known fact that the French and Spanish colonists did not
  suffer half so much from Indian depredations as their brother English colonists,
  who often took their families and settled miles away from the block-houses and
  forts.

  Another distinctive feature lies in the universal custom of these early settlers
  to lay off a large tract of land adjacent to their towns and villages, called
  the town commons, in which every inhabitant had an equal interest and right to
  herd their cattle and cut timber. These commons were granted by the crown in
  perpetuity.

  This custom has been maintained by Spain in all of her colonial possessions in
  the new world. Her colonies have extended it to the Pueblo, or semi-civilized
  Indians, who have settled and lived in villages and towns.

  When one of these primitive colonists wanted a piece of land segregated from the
  crown lands and given to him he addressed a short petition, in French times to
  the viceroy or commandant of the nearest military post, and under Spanish rule
  to the governor-general of Louisiana, setting forth what manner of man he was,
  for what purpose he wanted the land, and asking a title from the crown.

  The local representative or deputy of the governor-general or viceroy examined
  the application, and if it appeared to be right he so indorsed on the back of
  the petition with directions to the public surveyor to survey and segregate the
  land from the public domain and to put the applicant in possession.

  This was the initiative step and when advanced thus far was called a
  "concession." But the title never became perfect until it was approved and
  granted by the crown, under Spanish rule, but the commandant of a post under
  French rule could make title when Law and his associates held the fee to
  Louisiana.

  There were many thousands of these equitable titles when we acquired Louisiana,
  and it was said by the supreme court of the United States that in all there were
  but ten perfect titles in 1803.

  The treaty of St. Ildefonso for reasons already stated was kept a profound
  secret, and no change whatever was made in the officers or administration of the
  local affairs of Louisiana. To have done so would have defeated the secret
  object of the treaty by apprising England, the arch enemy of Bonaparte.

  The statu quo was maintained until the 30th day of November, 1803.

  On that day by previous concert between France, Spain and the United States, the
  surrender was made simultaneously at St. Louis and New Orleans and other points
  to the envoys of France, who received the insignia of sovereignty from the
  Spanish authorities.

  The Spanish flag, with great pomp and ceremonial, was lowered and the French
  flag ascended the flag-staff, which in turn, after having symbolized the
  dominion of France, was lowered and the flag of the United States was run up,
  emblematic of the dominion we still maintain.

  Some months after the United States took possession of Louisiana, the king of
  Spain issued a solemn protest against the cession on the ground that it was in
  violation of the seventh article of the treaty of St. Ildefonso by which France
  agreed not to cede it to any other power. But he was not able to keep his seat
  on his throne at home much less to disturb the title or destiny of the United
  States. But his protest added fuel to the already inflamed population.

  The old French and Spanish inhabitants were wild with excitement when the
  Spanish flag gave place to that of the United States, and they threatened
  revolution. They greatly feared the loss of all their landed possessions, and in
  addition to this they had no patriotic love for the United States. Both congress
  and the executive took immediate steps to allay the fears and it was the part of
  wisdom to do so, because as a nation we were weak and much exhausted, and the
  excited population of Louisiana either by combination with Indians or foreign
  powers could have inflicted incalculable injury.

  There was at this time in the United States a political refugee from Normandy,
  of great culture and force of character, who President Jefferson supposed would
  have more influence in allaying the fears of the French population than any
  other man he could appoint in upper Louisiana on the land commission to inquire
  into titles; and, as a stroke of policy, justified by the times, he appointed J.
  B. C. Lucas, and with him another gentleman of French descent, James Penrose,
  and as the third, commended alike for wisdom and integrity, he appointed Edward
  Bates.

  The work, reports and labors of this commission fill eight large volumes of
  "American State Papers," which have been characterized by the supreme court of
  the United States as "imparting absolute verity" in contests before that
  tribunal.

  The common-law system of conveyancing was unknown to these primitive
  inhabitants. With them no written contract or conveyance was necessary to impart
  title to land. They made valid oral dispositions with as much facility as an
  American could dispose of a cow or horse. A written conveyance of land was not
  then, nor is it yet required under Spanish law.

  When a man died his estate was not ground through the cumbrous and desolating
  machinery of a probate court where the vulture sprouts his golden wings and
  screams defiance to creditors, widows and orphans.

  Proclamation was made at the parish church, and all parties in interest, heirs,
  widow and creditors came to church at the appointed time, and after the morning
  services were over the parish priest made quick, honest and satisfactory
  disposition of the estate. The estate was never too small nor too large, nor too
  cumbrous nor too complicated for honest and speedy disposition, which was
  regarded when so ordered, as under the seal of God.