the official record of the arrest of the masons at little prairie and their trial at new madrid is still in existence. the whereabouts of this old document has been noted by a few historians who briefly state that “there is in the mississippi department of archives and history a record in french of the trial of mason for robbery, by the military authorities of new madrid, dated january, 1803.” but no writer has heretofore penetrated into this manuscript to discover what the trial revealed or how it ended. it was found among the papers belonging to j. f. h. claiborne, the historian, and is now preserved in jackson.25
the document covers one hundred and eighty-two pages. many of the leaves are badly faded. although the penmanship is far from good, every word, with few exceptions, can be deciphered. it is filled with interesting facts and equally interesting perjury. from the beginning of legislation down through the pioneer days humanity has ever been the same, and facts and fabrications have been paraded together before officials who are to pass judgment on the evidence presented. the mason trial is no exception to this old practice in courts, but is rather an exaggerated instance of the tendency, as common in the “good old days” as in our own times.
the manuscript gives a complete history not only of
208
the proceedings during the trial, but also of the arrests that preceded it. it begins with the day new madrid officials were notified that the masons were seen at little prairie, thirty miles down the river. a clerk then, and every day thereafter, carefully noted what action had been taken by the pursuers and what evidence had been gathered against the suspects, and continued the record through all the other proceedings.
the commandant at new madrid, by whom the pursuit was ordered and before whom the captives were tried, evidently did not understand english, which was the only language spoken by nearly all the persons who appeared before him. questions and answers were transmitted through an official interpreter.
there were fifteen witnesses. eight made declarations regarding their knowledge of mason and his family; the other seven were the prisoners themselves, who testified in their own behalf. every witness took “an oath on the cross of his sword” to speak the truth. in a few instances “and by the holy scriptures” was added. as a witness was being heard the substance of his statements was recorded in french and after he finished, his testimony was read to him, transposed into english, and he, “maintaining it contained the truth to which nothing could be added or unsaid,” signed it as did the presiding officials. four of these signatures are here reproduced in facsimile.
samuel mason
in the official document many statements and legal phrases are often repeated; they add to its length but
209
throw no new light on the subject. in the following more or less paraphrased condensation the number of words is greatly reduced but the substance of the original is, in the main, retained.
john mason
thomas mason
john setton
the first entry in the old record is dated january 11, 1803. it shows that one pierre dapron, a citizen of new madrid, appeared in court and made a declaration before three officials: the commandant, don henri peyroux de la coudreniere, “captain of the army, civil and military commander of the district of new madrid;” don pierre antoine laforge, “commissioner of police and officer of the militia,” and don joseph charpentier, “interpreter for his majesty in the english language.” dapron explained to these officials that he had returned from little prairie and considered it his duty to declare that ignace belan had informed him that on his way to new orleans with a cargo of salt pork he had seen four persons at little
210
prairie whom he suspected of being members of the mason band and although they did not attempt to rob his boat, he felt their presence should be reported.
george ruddell, a citizen of little prairie, appeared before the court the same day and “told us by means of the interpreter that a party of eight men and one woman,” well armed and mounted, had arrived in town about two weeks before and had taken possession of an empty house belonging to an american citizen, lesieur, who had not been consulted by them nor had they shown any passports. in the meantime, they rented a ten-acre tract from john ruddell and bought a cow and sundry provisions. among other things that aroused the suspicion of the neighborhood was the careful manner in which the house was guarded by the occupants. ruddell expressed the opinion that if this was not the mason band, then it was probably a part, explaining that “since the governor of natchez had the militia on the lookout for these robbers, the original crowd may have separated into smaller groups.” he was inclined to think that although the man called “father” was not the exact size of samuel mason, whom he had seen some years before, he nevertheless felt confident that “father” mason was among the members of this gang. he concluded his declaration by stating that he was acting in behalf of the citizens of little prairie who suggested that these suspects be arrested and their effects examined.
the next day, “in view of the above cited declarations,” the commandant ordered four persons, joseph charpentier, laforge, george ruddell, and don robert mccoy, “captain of the militia,” to proceed to little prairie—a distance of about thirty miles—and there meet a division of regulars commanded by corporal
211
felipo canot, who had been ordered to the scene. upon their arrival at the place further investigation convinced the officers that the new suspects were samuel mason and some of his followers, and that about half the number had left the lesieur house and moved over to a house owned by francois langlois. realizing that the pursuing party would soon be scented by the suspects, it was decided to invade the two houses early in the morning.
at six o’clock in the morning george ruddell informed captain mccoy that the masons had their horses saddled and loaded with baggage and were on the point of leaving for new madrid, but samuel mason, known as “father mason,” hearing that the interpreter was in town, expressed a desire to see him and explain that he wished to go to new madrid to “justify himself” and clear himself of the crimes of which he was “falsely accused.” captain mccoy, george ruddell, and the interpreter walked to the house occupied by samuel mason and suggested to him that, in view of his intention to volunteer a justification, he and those of his people with him would do well to go over to the house occupied by his other associates where he would be given a hearing and could make explanations which would be forwarded to the commandant at new madrid. to this mason consented and by eight o’clock his party, consisting of six men, one woman, and three children, was assembled in the lesieur house which, unsuspected by the masons, was guarded by concealed militia. samuel mason, turning to captain mccoy, immediately referred to the “unjust imputations” made against him and his people. the captain expressed the opinion that his explanation and justification had better be made in person to the commandant. a signal was
212
given by captain mccoy, and before the masons realized it, they were “in handcuffs and chains.”
then, in the words of the clerk, “we immediately asked said prisoners their names and the father or oldest gave his as samuel mason;” those of his four sons, in order of age, were given as thomas, john, samuel jr. (about eighteen years of age) and magnus mason (about sixteen years of age). another man called himself john taylor (later in the trial known as john setton). the woman had three children with her and gave her name as marguerite douglas, wife of john mason. upon being questioned by mccoy and charpentier, samuel mason answered that they had come from nogales (vicksburg) and intended to establish themselves in or near little prairie, in accordance with a passport given him. when asked to produce a passport issued “by the authorities of the locality from whence he came,” it was discovered he had “none other than the one we ourselves had given, dated new madrid, march 29th, 1800.” this he surrendered to captain mccoy, who agreed with the other officials present that it was genuine.
facsimile of passport issued to samuel mason
written in french and issued by the spanish commandant of the district of new madrid, march 29, 1800
the original passport was inserted between two leaves of the record book where it has ever since remained. the following is a translation:
“new madrid, march 29th, 1800.
“whereas samuel masson, esqr. has expressed a wish to settle in this district and wishes to arrange his business affairs, we, don henri peyroux de la coundreniere, captain of the armies of his majesty, civil and military commander of this post and district of new madrid, hereby grant permission to said samuel masson to proceed to natchez per boat, and on his
215
return from there, said samuel masson may select a suitable place in this district for himself and family. he, samuel masson, having by oath attested his loyalty and fidelity to us, we pray that no hindrance be placed to his proposed journey.
“henri peyroux
“approved and marked with the flourish of our signature.”
“we told them,” continues the record, “in order that none of their effects be lost or strayed an inventory of same would be made at once ... and at two o’clock in the afternoon we proceeded with the above-named inventory.” this work required almost two days. every item was carefully examined and tabulated. there were eight horses, new and old clothes, many yards of silk, muslin and cotton, old and new pistols and guns, “a field stove,” a box of salt, three horns of powder, six barrels of flour, english cutlery, various other imported goods and more than a hundred other items, and seven thousand dollars in united states money of various denominations, of which the series number and amount of each was noted.
the following morning, while the inventory was being made, samuel mason, on behalf of his people, applied for the return of certain utensils and clothing of which his people had immediate need, and asked for “a pro and con settlement” with the citizens of little prairie. these requests were granted. on the 16th, the prisoners, with their property and a military guard, arrived at new madrid. how they were transported is not stated.
the trial began the morning of the 17th. “the commandant having learned of the conversation captain
216
mccoy and charpentier had with the prisoners, called on these two officers to make declarations.”
