KENTUCKY'S STRUGGLE WITH ITS
LOYALIST PROPRIETORS
Mississippi Valley Historical Review
Vol. VII, No. 2, Sept., 1920
KENTUCKY'S STRUGGLE WITH ITS LOYALIST
PROPRIETORS
Contrary to the traditional view, Virginia had among its people
a large proportion of tories or loyalists in the revolutionary
days, besides many who behaved like loyalists when the British
forces were at hand. This has been fully demonstrated by Mr.
John A. George in his dissertation for the master's degree submitted
to the faculty of Richmond college in June, 1913, and
published in part in the Richmond college historical papers in
June, 1916. The conclusions of Mr. George are fully confirmed
by Professor H. J. Eckenrode of the same institution in his
volume, The revolution in Virginia, also published in 1916.
As Kentucky formed a part of the old dominion in those stirring
times, this paper becomes supplementary to the valuable
treatises just mentioned. Lord Dunmore, as is well known, was
the leader of the loyalists in eastern Virginia until he and hundreds
of his followers sought refuge aboard the king's ships at
Norfolk on December 14, 1775. For several years before that
disastrous episode his lordship had been issuing patents for
more or less extensive tracts of land in the county of West Fincastle,
including Kentucky, to numerous persons, among whom
may easily be identified at least a few loyalists. One of these
was Dr. John Connolly, who lived near Fort Pitt, where he seems
to have owned a "patrimonial estate." According to his own
account he sold this estate and bought land in Virginia. At any
rate, he acquired 4,000 acres of land opposite the falls of the
Ohio in December, 1773, and entered upon a project with Colonel
John Campbell, who obtained an adjoining tract, to found a
town at the falls. In fact, the plat for this town — the future
city of Louisville — had been surveyed in the previous August
by Captain Thomas Bullitt, and lots were first advertised for
sale by the proprietors in the following April.1
Other loyalists who acquired land in Kentucky about the same
time were Captain Alexander McKee, the deputy superintendent
of Indian affairs at Fort Pitt; Simon Girty, the interpreter to
the Six nations at the same post; and Joseph Browster of Westmoreland
county, Pennsylvania. McKee secured his grant of
2,000 acres on the south branch of Elkhorn creek in June, 1774;
Girty became the possessor of three tracts of 300 acres each,
according to his own sworn statement, but he does not mention
their locations; and Browster purchased 1,000 acres of improved
land on a visit to Kentucky before the revolution, but his widow,
who tells of the transaction, fails to state where the purchase
lay. She relates, however, that in removing to the west her
family was attacked and forced to take refuge at St. Vincent, and
that her husband was soon after killed by an Indian guide who
was conducting him to Detroit, a fact referred to in a testimonial
which she had from Dr. Connolly, who had known Browster
and had on one occasion suffered imprisonment with him.2
Besides these few loyalists who held land in Kentucky but
never lived there, the names are known of but two others who
appear in the revolutionary annals of the state. One of these
was the Reverend John Lythe, the Anglican missionary at Harrodsburg,
who served as a member of the house of delegates of
the Transylvania company and read the customary prayers for
the king and the royal family of England on Sunday, May 27,
1775, at the end of the session of the delegates. It must be
added that Lythe's loyalism was promptly dissipated within
a week by the arrival of the news of the battle of Lexington.
The other loyalist was Dr. John F. D. Smythe, who came on
horseback to Boonesborough a few days later as an emissary of
Dunmore, though he did not divulge this to his host, Judge
Richard Henderson, the head of the Transylvania company. To
him he explained only that he was collecting material for a book
of travels. Thus he gained the opportunity during the several
weeks of his sojourn to go among the Shawnee and other Ohio
Indians for the purpose of securing their cooperation with the
loyalists in suppressing rebellion in the west. In his notes
Smythe recorded his conviction that the Kentucky woodsmen
were too proud and insolent "to be styled servants even of His
Majesty."3
The mission of Dr. Smythe to Boonesborough and the region
north of the Ohio river was ominous for the future. Naturally,
the savages resented the occupation of their favorite hunting
grounds by the white men and, although a treaty of peace and
neutrality was signed between the western tribes and the commissioners
of congress at Pittsburgh in the autumn of 1775,
"Captain" Pluggy', the Mohawk leader of a band of miscreants
living on the upper Olentangy, accompanied by several braves
and two Shawnee guides, appeared on the Kentucky river and
fired upon three persons near Boonesborough, December 23,
1775.4
In the following May and June the inhabitants of "Transylvania"
presented petitions to the Virginia convention asking
that steps be taken "to prevent the inroads of Savages" and to
erect West Fincastle into a new county, despite the king's proclamation
excluding settlers therefrom. The expressed fear of
the petitioners was that if left under royal control the region in
question might "afford a safe asylum to those whose principles
are inimical to American liberty." In answer to these petitions
three new counties were created in December, 1776, one of these
being Kentucky county.5
Meantime, some of the Ohio Indians had been committing
depredations in Kentucky to such an extent that McClelland's
station, the last fort north of the Kentucky river, was abandoned
in the same month in which the new counties were erected.
That the red men had been incited to these hostilities was not
doubted by many, for the report had gained wide currency in
May that the Wyandot, Ottawa, and other Indians had recently
been at Detroit, where they had received presents from the
British commandant. Lieutenant Governor Henry Hamilton.
With the opening of the spring of 1777 the attacking war bands
only increased in size and daring. Late in April Boonesborough,
"the big fort," which had been left unassailed hitherto,
was attacked by a party of fifty or more warriors, and early in
July it was besieged during two days and nights by 200 Indians.
Conditions were surely not improved by the murder late in September
of the Shawnee chief. Cornstalk, and three of his tribesmen
at Fort Randolph (Point Pleasant) by members of the garrison
in hasty revenge for the death of a comrade stricken outside
the post by the stealthy shot of lurking savages. Hamilton
at Detroit was not slow in taking advantage of the outraged feelings
of the Shawnee tribe. Before the winter had passed he
sent two French Canadians to engage eighty or more of the
Shawnee in another attempt to seize Boonesborough. They
readily consented, and on their way southward, February 7,
1778, had the good fortune to capture Daniel Boone, who had a
camp of salt-makers near by at the lower Blue licks. The
tribesmen easily secured the rest of the campers through the
intervention of Boone, who saw the folly of resistance and persuaded
his men to surrender.6
The Shawnee at once gave up their expedition against Boonesborough,
returned with their captives to their villages at Little
Chillicothe, and on March 10 started with eleven of their prisoners,
including Boone, for Detroit. Here the famous Kentuckian
was well received by Hamilton, to whom he told a pitiful
tale of the starving and nearly naked condition of the settlers
south of the Ohio, who, he added, were without the prospect of
relief from congress. The commandant offered a large price
for Boone and, failing to effect the purchase, sought his favor
by presenting him with a horse and trappings.
On April 28, not long after the departure of Boone and the
Indians, Hamilton wrote to Sir Guy Carleton in regard to the
Keutucklans: "Their dilemma will probably induce them to
trust to the savages, who have shown so much humanity to their
prisoners, and come to this place before winter." In the following
June Boone escaped from his captors upon the horse he had
received from Hamilton. At the end of the same summer the
British commandant undertook to win over the inhabitants of
Boonesborough for the king or, if necessary, to capture them,
he therefore dispatched Lieutenant Antoine de Quindre and
other French Canadians, with a supply of ammunition and the
English and French flags, to assist Chief Black Fish in assembling
a force of over four hundred Indians, mostly Shawnee, to
proceed to the big fort. On arriving there, September 7, a
messenger advanced to ask a parley over letters which he had
brought from Governor Hamilton to Captain Boone. The negotiations
lasted three days, on the last of which the principal
men of the fort signed a treaty renouncing their allegiance to
the United States and renewing their fealty to the king, on condition
that the Indians, who outnumbered the garrison eleven to
one, would withdraw immediately. But instead, the treacherous
red men attempted to seize and detain the whites, though
without success. After repeated assaults on the stronghold the
Indians tunneled from the bank of the Kentucky river to within
twenty yards of the fort, but successive rains stopped their operations
and filled their mine with sunken earth. Having failed
in their nine days' siege, the Shawnee army broke into detachments,
which had to content themselves with ravaging about
other stations. Such was the dismal outcome of Hamilton's
plan to convert the inhabitants of Boonesborough into loyalists
preparatory to their reception at Detroit.7
Captain Boone, indeed, did not escape the open accusation of
being a tory and a traitor. Colonel Richard Callaway, and
probably others, charged him with having sought to aid the
British by favoring the peace treaty at Boonesborough and having
caused the surrender of the salt-makers at the lower Blue
licks. Boone was accordingly tried by court-martial at Logan's
station, but maintained that these acts were stratagems
dictated by military necessity and was acquitted. He was further
vindicated a little later by being promoted to the rank of
major.8
The years 1779 and 1780 witnessed a remarkable emigration
from the communities on the upper Ohio and to the eastward
into Kentucky. In May of the latter year one observer of this
movement. Colonel Daniel Brodhead at Pittsburgh, estimated
that the Kentucky settlements would be able to turn out 15,000
men and ventured the opinion that the villainous Shawnee and
their allies would soon find troublesome neighbors in that quarter.
It is not to be supposed that all these newcomers were
patriots, especially as tory plots were being disclosed and suppressed
from time to time in the regions from which they came.
Late in 1780 one visitor to Kentucky went so far as to say in a
letter to Colonel George Morgan: "Should the English go
there and offer them protection from the Indians, the greatest
part will join." It was not to Kentucky, however, but to Detroit
that Captain McKee and Simon Girty, together with several
of their fellow loyalists, fled from Fort Pitt on the night of
March 28, 1778. They passed through the intervening Indian
country and arrived at their destination about two months later.
They thus escaped the penalties which their discovered plotting
entailed and, being taken into the Indian department, they supplanted
the French Canadians as leaders of loyalist and Indian
war parties against the frontier. For the next seventeen months
they carried on their depredations in the region they had recently
left and then turned their attention to that into which the
tide of settlers was now pouring.9
The first report that Simon Girty was with the Indians on the
Kentucky border gained credence in the latter part of May, when
John Bowman, lieutenant of Kentucky county, led 250 volunteers
against the Shawnee town of Little Chillicothe on the Little
Miami river. The rumor that Girty was approaching at the
head of 100 Shawnee threw Bowman's men into general disorder
for a brief time, but they recovered themselves, defeated the
enemy, and burned most of the village and crops. In the following
autumn Simon Girty's brothers, James and George, advanced
with about 170 Wyandot warriors down the Little Miami
to the spot where Cincinnati now stands and there, on October
4, engaged Colonel David Rogers' flotilla of five boats, which
was on its way from St. Louis up the Ohio with a store of goods
and ammunition. The Indians killed some forty of the whites,
took a few prisoners, and carried off much booty. Thereafter
small skirmishes with the Indians appear to have become more
common on the border than ever.10
The capture of Hamilton by Colonel George Rogers Clark at
Vincennes in February, 1779, and the appointment of Major A.
S. de Peyster as the former's successor at Detroit did not change
the policy of employing loyalists to lead the expeditions against
Kentucky. In the early summer of that year De Peyster sent
from his post a force of 150 tories and Canadians with two cannon
and 100 tribesmen from the upper lakes under the command
of Captain Henry Bird, a Virginian, with the three Girtys
as aides. On the Miami they were joined by Captain McKee
and 600 more Indians. These combined forces were to proceed
against Clark, who was now stationed at the falls of the Ohio.
The Indians, however, refused to go and confront the victor of
Hamilton, choosing rather to attack the forts up the Licking.
On June 22, Ruddle's station, with its 300 inmates, surrendered
at the sound of the enemy's fieldpieces. Fifty more prisoners
were secured at Martin's station five miles farther on. Famine
now ensued and drove the invaders home. Captain Bird took
with his contingent Captain Isaac Ruddle and his company, all
of whom remained in captivity at Detroit until November 3,
1782. The Indians, with their share of the prisoners, scattered
to their several villages. There may be some justice in the
criticism made at the time that widespread disaffection among
the settlers was responsible for the surrender of the two stations.
At any rate, many of the pioneers are said to have moved into
the interior rather than volunteer for offensive operations
against the Indians and the tories.11
During the first week of August, 1780, Colonels Clark, Slaughter,
and Logan led forth their respective divisions, which together
numbered about one thousand men, to take vengeance on
the Shawnee for the descent upon the two Licking stations. They
found Little Chillicothe partly deserted and still burning, the
Indians having been forewarned by a deserter from Logan's
division. James Girty and 300 warriors made more than a show
of defense, but could not withstand the determined fighting of
the borderers and retreated.12
We may pass over the numerous raids into Kentucky during
the next twelvemonth or more. One only, about the middle of
September, 1781, was conducted by a loyalist, namely. Captain
McKee, who was accompanied by Chief Brant, head of the Six
nations. With a large following of Hurons and Miami these
experienced fighters appeared at Boone's station and there defeated
Colonel John Floyd and a company of men from the
stations on Bear Grass creek.13
Under tory leadership the savages had thus far won an almost
unbroken series of successes over the Kentuckians. If
they had obeyed the orders of their white captains, they might
no doubt have gained more sweeping victories, but again and
again they had willfully turned back when their campaign was
but half finished. At length, in June, 1782, they threw away
their final chance of spreading desolation among the settlements
south of the Ohio. At that time 1,100 Indians of eight different
nations were assembled at Wakitamiki — now Zanesfield, Logan
county, Ohio — under the command of Captain William Caldwell
and were there joined by Captain Andrew Bradt and sixty
loyalist rangers from Detroit, Captain McKee, Simon and
George Girty, and Matthew Elliott of the Indian department at
the northern post. This host is said to have outnumbered the
whole force of fighting men in Kentucky at the time. Its size
is doubtless explained by the fact that it was to be employed
in destroying an invading force led by George Rogers Clark.
When intelligence was brought in that Clark's army was nowhere
about, three-fourths of the tribesmen returned to their
towns and villages. The other fourth and the loyalist rangers
crossed the Ohio river with Simon Girty, defeated Captain John
Holder and his men at the upper Blue licks on August 15, and
then laid siege to Bryant's station. While the Indians occupied
themselves with burning several cabins, killing cattle, and destroying
crops, Girty proclaimed pardon and protection to all
inmates of the fort who would swear allegiance to the king, on
condition that they would capitulate. Unlike the garrison of
Boonesborough, which had been offered similar terms nearly
four years before, the men at Bryant's flatly refused the offer,
and Girty with his tories and Indians took the trail back to the
Blue licks on the night of August 16. At this time, according
to Girty, nearly 100 warriors left him. On August 19 about 180
Kentuckians crossed the Licking river in pursuit of the invaders,
who were now lying in ambush in the wooded ravines surrounding
the open ridge in front. Most of the advancing party had
dismounted and were ascending the ridge on foot, when they
received a volley which killed perhaps forty of them. The savages
then threw themselves upon the Kentuekians' animals and
succeeded in cutting down thirty more victims and capturing
others. The rest of the borderers fled back across the river,
those in the lead being halted by Major Benjamin Netherland
long enough to turn and fire on the pursuing Indians, who were
thus driven to cover for a brief interval, while the fugitives
escaped into the woods and so to their several stations. On the
next day the loyalists and Indians crossed the Ohio, the latter
going on to their camps and the former to Wakitamiki. A few
days later Caldwell and McKee sent reports to Detroit in which
the number of Kentuckians killed and captured was doubled. In
reply came an order from De Peyster, in conformity with the recent
manifesto of the commander in chief of the British forces,
Sir Guy Carleton, to make no more incursions into the enemy's
country. Nevertheless, during the next fourteen years, or as
long as the northern posts remained in British hands, Kentucky
suffered from occasional forays and outrages at the hands of the
savages. The sequel of the massacre at the Blue licks was enacted
in the early days of November, 1782, when George Rogers Clark
with 1,050 men destroyed the town and the winter stores of the
Miami, while the Indians took to their heels despite Captain
McKee's efforts to persuade them to stay and fight.14
It has been seen above that the Kentuckians suffered the cruelties
of border warfare in greater degree than before, after the
leadership of the tribes to the northward passed to those loyalists
who owned lands in "Transylvania." In May, 1779, the
Virginia assembly enacted the law of escheats and forfeitures,
under which such estates were liable to confiscation and sale for
the profit of the state. This policy might easily work out in
such a way as to yield no benefit, if it did not do actual injustice,
to some of the inhabitants of Kentucky. Representative Kentuckians,
however, were alive to their local interests and,
through their skillful advocacy of those interests, were able to
gain immediate or prospective advantages at the expense of the
loyalist proprietors, whose destruction in battle would have been
a more welcome recompense.
It was not until a year after the passage of the act of escheats
and forfeitures that the inhabitants of Kentucky took measures
to secure to themselves the estates in question. The land at the
falls of the Ohio surveyed and patented for Dr. Connolly, who
had been Lord Dunmore's chief ally at Pittsburgh and a prisoner
in the hands of the Americans from November, 1775, until
his exchange in October, 1780, was brought to the attention of
the Virginia assembly by a petition on May 1 of the latter year.
This petition came from the settlers at the falls, who desired an
act establishing their town as planned by them and validating
the titles to their lots, which would otherwise be liable to confiscation
and sale under the act of escheats and forfeitures
passed in May, 1779. Accordingly, the assembly enacted a law
one year later, vesting 1,000 acres of Connolly's survey in a
board of trustees for the town of Louisville, and authorizing the
sale of lots at auction. Curiously enough, an escheating jury,
of which Daniel Boone was a member, met at Lexington on the
same day and rendered a verdict of forfeiture against Connolly
for joining the subjects of the king of his own free will.15
In December, 1780, Lieutenant Colonel Connolly had sailed
from New York with the Queen's rangers, a well-known tory
corps, for Yorktown, and soon after had been placed in command
of the loyalists of Virginia and North Carolina on the
peninsula formed by the James river and the Chesapeake bay.
In September, 1781, he had again been taken prisoner and had
been sent to Philadelphia three months later. In the following
March he had been paroled and sent to New York, on condition
that he would depart for England. He appears to have spent
the next five years in Great Britain, but by 1788 he was in Detroit,
having returned by way of Quebec. He had not yet given
up hope of recovering the west for the English crown, and was
therefore ready to believe the tale that the people of Kentucky
wished to free themselves from the United States government.
Under the pretext that he had come to look after his confiscated
estate, Connolly appeared at Louisville on October 25, 1788.
He revealed the real object of his visit a day or two later in a
joint interview with Colonel Thomas Marshall and Judge George
Muter. He told these two men in substance that the Canadian
governor-general. Lord Dorchester, formerly Sir Guy Carleton,
was ready to aid the westerners by arming and paying any force
they might raise for the purpose of wresting the control of the
Mississippi and of New Orleans from the Spaniards, that he
would send from 5,000 to 10,000 men to join them, and that he
would dispatch a fleet to cooperate with this land force in the
conquest of Now Orleans. Colonel Marshall states that he informed
Connolly that as long as the savages continued to commit
cruelties on the defenseless frontier of Kentucky and to be
"received as friends and allies by the British at Detroit," it
would be impossible to convince the people of the good intentions
of Lord Dorchester. From General James Wilkinson, with
whom Connolly conversed on November 8, the latter learned not
only that "the British were greatly disliked in Kentucky," but
also that he might be killed if his mission were discovered. The
emissary from Detroit now begged for an escort, which was
provided, and he recrossed the Ohio river, November 20, on his
return journey.16
The clearing of the titles of the early settlers of Louisville
was accomplished at the expense of Dr. Connolly, as already
noted. This was a simple act of justice to those who had bought
their lots in good faith from an original proprietor. At almost
the same moment that these purchasers were presenting their
petition for relief to the Virginia assembly — a petition in which
they stated with clearness and force the commercial and other
benefits to be secured by the establishment of their town — the
Reverend John Todd of Virginia and his nephew. Colonel John
Todd of Kentucky, persuaded the assembly to set aside other
loyalist estates for the cause of public education. It was in
May, 1780, that the assembly passed the "act to vest certain
escheated lands in the County of Kentucke in trustees for a
Publick School." The lands thus applied were Captain Alexander
McKee's 2,000 acres on the south branch of Elkhorn creek,
Henry Collins' 3,000 acres near Lexington, and Robert McKenzie's
3,000 acres, called the military survey, at the mouth
of Harrod's creek. McKenzie was an officer of the Forty-third
regiment of foot in the British army when he was wounded at
Bunker hill.17
Even at the end of the revolution not all the confiscated estates
in Kentucky had been disposed of and, although the school had
not yet been started, there was still opportunity to increase its
endowment from this source. Colonel Caleb Wallace, a Kentuckian
in the assembly, saw the opportunity, and in 1783 secured
the passage of an act granting all escheated lands in the
district of Kentucky "not to exceed twenty thousand acres" to
the proposed school, thus adding 12,000 acres to the earlier grant
of 8,000 acres. The new act conferred by regular charter upon
an enlarged board of trustees "all the powers and privileges
that are now enjoyed by the visitors or governors of any college
or university within the State." The school when established
was to bear the name "Transylvania seminary" and, evidently
in view of the fact that Indian hostilities had not ceased, both
teachers and students were to be exempt from militia duties.
Another reminder of the subsiding struggle is to be found in
the presence on the board of trustees of Colonel George Rogers
Clark.18
Something more than the "guarantee of permanency" furnished
by the land grants was needed before Transylvania seminary
could be opened to students. The trustees found it necessary,
therefore, to appoint a committee to solicit funds, books,
and apparatus, and they also received one-sixth of all surveyor's
fees collected in the Kentucky district. They were thus enabled
to employ a master and open the seminary in a private house
near Danville, February 1, 1785. Several years later the trustees
decided to remove the school to Lexington, where it first
received students June 1, 1789. Here in Lexington the institution
was to find its abiding place, erect buildings to meet its
growing needs, develop new departments, combine with other
institutions, graduate thousands of students, become almost
dormant during the civil war, and, after discontinuing its several
departments, survive as Transylvania college. Thus the beginnings
of the city of Louisville and of the famous old college at
Lexington, "the oldest permanent institution of learning west of
the Alleghenies," may be ascribed to the struggle of Kentucky
with its loyalist proprietors. The lands confiscated from these
proprietors by the Virginia assembly were in both cases, chiefly
through the efforts of Kentuckians, turned to excellent and enduring
uses.
Wilbur H. Siebert
Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
——————————
1. Clarence M. Burton, "John Connolly, a tory of the revolution," in Proceedings of the American antiquarian society, new series, 20:71 ff.; Reuben T. Durrett, The
centenary of Louisville (Filson club publications number 8 — Louisville, 1893), 23-27, 131, 133.
2. Durrett, The centenary of Louisville, 28; Reuben T. Durrett, Bryant's station and the memorial proceedings held on its site under the auspices of the Lexington chapter,
D. A. R., August the 18th, 1896, in honor of its heroic mothers and daughters (Filson
club publications number 12 — Louisville, 1897), 30, note; 111, note; George W.
Ranck, Boonesborough. Its founding, pioneer struggles, Indian experiences, Transylvania
days, and revolutionary annals (Filson club publications number 16 — Louisville,
1901), 180-183; Report of the bureau of archives for the province of Ontario
(Toronto, 1904-1914), number 2, part 2, p. 1282; part 1, p. 477.
3. Rank, Boonesborough, 28, 31-33.
4. Biennial report of the department of archives and history of the state of West Virginia. 1911-1914 (Charleston, 1914), 40; The revolution on the upper Ohio, 1775-
1777, edited by Reuben G. Thwaites and Louise P. Kellogg (Madison, 1908), 100,
102, 143; Ranck, Boonesborough, 45, 46.
5. Petitions of the early inhabitants of Kentucky to the general assembly of
Virginia, 1769 to 1792, edited by James B. Robertson {Filson club publications number
27 — Louisville, 1914), 38, 39; William W. Hening, Statutes at large, being a
collection of all the laws of Virginia, 1619 to 1792 (Richmond, 1819-1823), 9: 257;
Ranck, Boonesborough, 48, 54.
6. The revolution on the upper Ohio, 177S-1777 (Thwaites and Kellogg, eds.), 175, note 6; 177, note 11; 187, 188, 236, 242, 247; James G. M. Kamsey, The annals of
Tennessee, to the end of the eighteenth century: comprising its settlement, as the
Watauga association, from 1769 to 1777; a part of North Carolina, from 1777 to 1784;
the state of Franklin, from 1784 to 1788; a part of North Carolina, from 1788 to
1790; the territory of the U. States, south of the Ohio, from 1790 to 1796; the state
of Tennessee, from 1796 to 1800 . . . (Philadelphia, 1853), 148 ff.; Ranck,
Boonesborough, 49-52, 54, 56-61; Alexander S. Withers, Chronicles of border warfare;
or, a history of the settlement by the whites of northwestern Virginia, and of the
Indian wars and massacres in that section of the state; with reflections, anecdotes.
. . . edited by Reuben G. Thwaites (Cincinnati, 1903), 173, 209, 211-214, 236,
266; Frontier defense on the upper Ohio, 1777-1778, edited by Reuben G. Thwaites
and Louise P. Kellogg (Madison, 1912), 149, passim.
7. Ranck, Boonesborough, 68-104; Petitions of the early inhabitants of Kentucky to the general assembly of Virginia, 1796 to 1798 (Robertson, ed.), 44, 45; Withers, Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 268-270; Frontier defense on the upper
Ohio, 1777-1778 (Thwaites and Kellogg, eds.), 283, 284.
8. Ranck, Boonesborough, 104, 105.
9. Frontier retreat on the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 , edited by Louise P. Kellogg (Wisconsin historical collections, volume 24 — Madison, 1917), 21, 22, 41, 149, 163, 164, 168, 176, 209, note I; 277; Wilbur H. Siebert, "The tory proprietors of Kentucky
lands," in Ohio archaeological and historical quarterly, 28: 48-71.
10. Withers. Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 271-273; Consul W. Butterfleld, History of the Girtys; being a concise account of the Girty brothers —
Thomas, Simon, James and George, and of their half-brother John Turner — also of
the part taken by them in Lord Dunmore's war, in the western border war of the
revolution, and in the Indian war of 1790-95; with a recital of the principal events
in the west during these wars . . . (Cincinnati, 1890), 113; Frontier retreat on
the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 17, 79-94, 105, 123.
11. Withers, Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 254, note; 285, 286, 294-299; Ranck, Boonesborough, 118, 119; Petitions of the early inhabitants of Kentucky
to the general assembly of Virginia, 1769 to 1792, p. 168; Frontier retreat on the
upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 22, 186, 187, 192, 265, 266.
12. Withers, Chronicles of border warfare (Thwaites, ed.), 305-308; Frontier retreat on the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 374, 375.
13. Durrett, The centenary of Louisville, 57-59; Durrett, Bryant's station and the memorial proceedings held on its site, 84; Frontier retreat on the upper Ohio, 1779-1781 (Kellogg, ed.), 374, 375.
14. Durrett, Bryant's station and the memorial proceedings held on its site, 87-90, 91-123, 134-209, 211-215; George W. Ranck, "Girty, the white Indian; a study in
early western history," in Magazine of American history, 15:256-277; Butterfield,
History of the Girtys, 193, 194, 198, 200, 205, 208.
15. Durrett, The centenary of Louisville, 50-56, 149-154; Petitions of the early inhabitants of Kentucky to the general assembly of Virginia, 1769 to 1792 (Robertson,
ed.), 53-55; Hening, Statutes at large, 10: 293-295.
16. Burton, "John Connolly, a tory of the revolution," in Proceedings of the
American antiquarian society, new series, 20: 71 ff.; Siebert, "The tory proprietors
of Kentucky lands," in Ohio archaeological and historical quarterly, 28:48-71; John
M. Brown, The political beginnings of Kentucky (Filson club publications number 6
— Louisville, 1889), 182-184; Mann Butler, A history of the commonwealth of Kentucky,
from its exploration and settlement by the whites, to the close of the northwestern
campaign, in 1813; with an introduction exhibiting the settlement of western
Virginia . . . in 1736, to the treaty of Camp Charlotte . . . in 1774 (Cincinnati
and Louisville, 1836), 184.
17. Transylvania college bulletin, 40: 16, 17; Robert and Johanna Peter, Transylvania university. Its origin, rise, decline, and fall (Filson club publications number
11 — Louisville, 1896), 20-22, 38-41.
18. Transylvania college bulletin, 40: 17-20, 22-25; Kentucky Gazette, June 6, 1789, April 26, 1790; Peter, Transylvania university, 49-52, 64, 66-71, 175-177.