Thomas Worthington and the Great Transformation: Land Markets and Federal Power in the Ohio Valley, 1790–1805

Thomas Worthington and the Great Transformation: Land Markets and Federal Power in tbe Obio Valley,17901805 GAUTHAM RAO ntheOhioValleyoftheearly republic.thevolatile interaction between econoniies of gor 21 n.ince and ecc, ii() mies of the fr() iitier tratistornied both the capacity of the federal government and the landscape of the Ohio frontien At the center of this interaction lay cotiipeting notic, lis about ho, v best to admi n ister markets in America's first national conitiioditylincl . Tc) the south of the Ohio River,Kentuck>· possessed a relativel>· unregulated land market,inherited from colonial Virginia. North c) f the river,in the Ohio lands of the Northwest Territory ,however,the federal gc, vernment regulated . ind administered a very different type of latid market . As the unregulated system in Kentucky 6 1 + . t fell prey to political prc, fiteering and judicial instrumentalism, key act(, rs in national polities and law articulated the need for what would become the federal government' s inore uniform, heavily regulated land system. In moving frotii the Kentucky Bluegrass to the -. 1, chambers of the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress ,and then to the frontier of the Old Northwest ,Thomas Worthington,best known for serving as one of Ohio's first senators and its sixth gov- M 179() s, Worthingtc, n was a successful spectilatc, r specializitig in brokering lands iii Ketit,icky to wealthy clients iii Virgitiia. 1 cars of accitinulation, however,W(, rthington's linds were not quite profitable. lii 1796 Wc,rthington would abruptly sever his invc, lvemeiit in the Kentucky niarket by dumping all his Kentucky holdings at any price.no matter how low: W orth i iigtoil's hasty retreat frotii the Kentucky land market has rightly been explained away , is a case of " Ohio Fever,an affliction that iiiotivated many a speculator to seek out prc,fitliter ally ' greener' pisturesby ilivesting rashly on the frotit lines of westward niigration: In Thomas Worthington's case, those greener pastures la> in Ohio. But the state of the Keiitucky land busi,iess prc, ved as inuch a reason for Wc, rthington's decision as any " Ohio Fever." These problems were an amalgam of cc), iimercial, legal, and political devel(, pmetits within carly Kentticky's land business; mc, re generall>, that is. ther were probletiis of the Kentucky latid niarket of the early republic. The white settlement of " Cantuckey"began iii earnest around 17805 as Virgiiiia, followiiig its colonial policy, paid war veteratis with 1: ind bounties to be redeenied iii the vast, " unsettled-hinds tc, the west. i Over the years, the Virginian process tc, rclaiming Kentucky lands attained uniforniity:claimants gave deeds t, suracrors, who " located- ( i.e. surveyed and marked) land for the claimant using the oId " nietes alid botinds"iliethod of surveying, initialing physical landinarks,approximating acreage,and very rotighly mapping out the prc,perty boundaries."Surveyors then, in theorv at least, forwarded the survey plat to the land office at Harrodsburg, Kentlicky,where the state stored the claims alid maps. In 1795. tlie legal underpinnings,political machinery,and economic desirability of the Kentucky lind market began to collapse under the weight of co11 fl i cti ng property claims of squatters,legally sanctioned settlers,and speculatc , rs. Initially,the Kentucky judiciary turned awa> from its traditional emphasis on the pioperty i-ights of those 'first in time,' or of the pal-ty with the 22 OHI O VALLEY HISTORY earliest claim to a plot of land. In Ammons v.Spears 1787), the Supreme Court for the District of Kentucky found against the squatter George Spears, arguing that an older claim to a piece of contested propertv was " the better right to the land." About a decade later, however, the same court changed its tune. In Frye v. Essry 1795) the court confirmed that the defendant John Essry's claim to a piece of contested property was indeed of " prior date." Yet whereas they may have based their decision solely on this criterion ten years before , they now found WayS to undermine the old doctrine. They asserted that the relationship between Essry's warrant for land and his actual survey was uncertain, that, in effect, Essry lost his " better rights...