out of the mass of perjury and counter-accusations brought out at this examination only one thing was clear—that is that mason and his gang, as far as testimony and confession went, were not guilty of any crime on the spanish side of the mississippi. whatever crimes they may have committed it was essential to their present safety to locate them on the american or eastern side of the river. the spanish authorities had no power to punish them for violations of law on american territory, but the spanish intendant salcedo at new orleans had the power under the comity existing between the spanish and american governments to deliver them up to the american authorities. the new madrid court, therefore, ordered the prisoners to be transferred to new orleans and brought before the intendant.
at that point in the march of events fate took relentless grip on samuel mason and little harpe, alias setton, for their crimes. the way of atonement was as swift as its end was to be terrible. it might be quickly summarized, but there is the better way of pursuing the astonishing and dramatic story through the faded records and old scraps of publications of those times, thus getting into actual touch with the persons and with the primitive conditions under which this strange duel of two master criminals was fought out. each feared the other; mason, perhaps, not knowing his antagonist.
242
the grim headsman was silently stalking both. in the language of crime fate was double-crossing both.
from new madrid to new orleans was a distance of about nine hundred miles and to travel it by boat in those days required more than two weeks. it was as if it had been decreed that mason should make a farewell tour through a part of the country in which he had become so execrated. new orleans was then the capital of the spanish province of louisiana, the seat of the highest court, and had been for more than three-quarters of a century the most important town on the mississippi.
in 1803 new madrid was a frontier settlement about fourteen years old. it was a military post occupied by a small force of soldiers and a town with a population of about eight hundred who were french, american, canadian, and spanish, or an extraction of these peoples. new madrid remained under spanish rule until 1804 when, as a part of the province of louisiana, it became a part of the territory of louisiana acquired by the united states.29
if an official account of what followed mason’s trial at new madrid was kept it may now exist among the archives in old madrid in spain and may contain data relative to the transfer of the prisoners. at any rate, captain mccoy and his guard evidently started for new orleans early in february, 1803. it is more
243
likely that, as a matter of economy and convenience, they traveled down the mississippi in a flatboat. the records show that some of the goods found in the possession of the masons were carried along as evidence.
there is neither written history nor oral tradition telling of captain mccoy’s departure for new orleans or how he held his prisoners on board during the trip. at least one very probable scene, however, presents itself, and in it john setton is the central figure. samuel mason was then the most widely known bandit in the mississippi valley. but in the eyes of the law setton now suddenly became the most important character of all the outlaws. he was likely to turn state’s evidence, reveal many robberies that were long standing mysteries, and thus convict not only samuel mason and his family, but also point out clues that would lead to the extermination of all river pirates.
the boat was necessarily crowded, for even under the most encouraging circumstances room on a flatboat was limited. there were about seventeen persons on board: captain mccoy, the interpreter, some five men who constituted the guard and crew, the seven prisoners, and the three children. setton was probably chained in the most conspicuous place where he could be carefully watched. this must have been done not only to prevent his escape, but also to prevent samuel mason from trying to persuade him to act in a plot against the crew, or to dictate to him a forthcoming “confession.”
one can easily imagine that captain mccoy and his men frowned at setton as they would at a chained sheep-killing dog. there was nothing about him to attract them. on the contrary, he was repulsive. setton’s countenance, according to one writer, was always downcast and fierce, his hair red, his face meager and
244
his stature below that of the average man. this combination gave him, as judge james hall puts it, “a suspicious exterior.” he was about thirty years of age and looked the part of a man who was too much of a villain to smile and thereby try to hide some of his villainy. to his captors he was nothing more than a vicious dog whose life was being spared solely that he might later give mason a long-deserved, fatal bite.
they not only looked upon him as a thief and murderer, but also as a fool not fit to live. if he were guilty of the crimes mason laid at his feet, then hanging was too mild a punishment for him. by the same token, if guilty, he was a fool to permit a notorious outlaw to dictate to him just what to confess and whom to implicate. and if he were innocent of the crimes he was even a greater fool for submitting to mason’s demand and declaring in an affidavit that he, not mason, was the guilty man.
with captain mccoy and his guards on one side, and samuel mason and his family on the other, setton stood alone between “the devil and the deep blue sea.” he and mason were figuratively and literally in the same boat, but mason had at least the consolation of knowing that the members of his family on board were also with him in sympathy and ready to obey his command, even though it led to certain death.
judged by their morals samuel mason and john setton were very much alike, but in their physical aspect they differed greatly. mason was then about fifty-five years old, possibly sixty. swaney, the old mail-carrier, who saw him often, described him to guild: “he weighed about two hundred pounds, and was a fine looking man. he was rather modest and unassuming,
245
and had nothing of the raw-head-and-bloody-bones appearance which his character would indicate.”
henry howe refers to him as “a man of gigantic stature and of more than ordinary talents.” william darby says: “mason at any time of his life or in any situation, had something extremely ferocious in his look, which arose particularly from a tooth which projected forwards, and could only be covered with his lip by effort.”
regardless of the difference in their physical size and physiognomy, and regardless of the extent of their guilt, both men were held for the same crimes and were now on their way to new orleans to appear before the spanish authorities. less than a dozen towns and forts were then scattered along the river and all were small ones. as the boat slowly floated and sailed down the wide stream between seemingly endless forest and jungle covered shores, mason had ample time to view the various places where he had committed robberies, and to recall how successfully he had carried out all his attempts. the scenes along the mississippi have undergone many changes since mason’s day. nevertheless, many of the views have retained enough of their primitive grandeur to create in the imagination a landscape of continuous virgin forests and a vivid picture of what river life was in pioneer days. but, by searching the old records pertaining to mason’s career, one discovers facts that could never have been foreseen by the wisest prophet nor imagined by the wildest fictionist.
how and when captain mccoy and his prisoners arrived at new orleans has not been ascertained, although an effort has been made to find newspaper or
246
other accounts giving details on the subject. there is, however, an unpublished official letter in spanish, in the mississippi department of archives and history, which shows that upon captain mccoy’s arrival in new orleans the record of the proceedings of the trial held at new madrid was submitted to the governor general of louisiana and his secretary of war. these two spanish officers, after going over the proceedings, concluded that since the evidence taken did not prove that mason had committed any crime on the spanish side, the prisoners should be handed over to the americans. in due time, therefore, they ordered them sent to natchez.
the official letter referred to is dated new orleans, march 3, 1803. it was written by vidal, the secretary of war, approved by manuel salcedo, the last spanish governor of louisiana, and forwarded to governor claiborne. it briefly reviews the trial and points out to the governor of the mississippi territory that the case falls under american and not spanish jurisdiction.
governor claiborne, in all probability, answered this communication and requested that the masons be turned over to him, for captain mccoy and his men, taking the prisoners and some of their stolen property, left new orleans the latter part of march for natchez. what occurred when their boat stopped near point coupee, louisiana—some two hundred and forty miles above new orleans and about one hundred miles below natchez—is told in the following news item quoted in full from the western spy, published at cincinnati, may 4, 1803:
“extract of a letter from the reverend john smith
247
to a gentleman in this town, dated point coupee, march 28, 1803.
“‘you no doubt have received the account of old sam mason’s arrest, with three or four of his sons, some other villains, a woman and three children, about thirty miles below new madrid, by captain mccoy, the king’s interpreter and a small party. captain mccoy has since taken them to new orleans in irons, but as no crime could be charged upon them as being committed in the spanish government, the governor general ordered them to be taken to natchez and delivered to our government. the day before yesterday as they were passing this place the mast of their vessel broke, a part of the men were sent on shore to make a new one, and the rest were left to guard the prisoners. in a short time they threw off their irons, seized the guns belonging to the boat and fired upon the guard. captain mccoy hearing the alarm ran out of the cabin, old mason instantly shot him through the breast and shoulder; he with the determined bravery of a soldier, though scarcely able to stand, shot him in the head. mason fell and rose, fell and rose again, and although in a gore of blood, one of his party having shot a spaniard’s arm to pieces, he drove off mccoy’s party and kept possession of the boat till evening, when, discovering a superior force they left the boat, the woman and children following with great precipitation. there is a party of caroles [sic] after them and it is supposed they will succeed in taking them. the commandant at this place has offered one thousand dollars for taking old mason dead or alive. they will be pursued with the utmost diligence by a set of determined fellows.’”
mason escaped march 26, 1803. the report of his
248
flight spread fast. the same facts that were published in the western spy were sent out from natchez as a news item, dated april 2, and printed with less detail in various papers, among them the tennessee gazette of april 27, the kentucky gazette of may 3, and the palladium of may 5. in the same news item appears a brief statement to the effect that governor claiborne had received “official information of the arrival at new orleans of the french prefect for the colony of louisiana.”
mason hoped, as already stated, that by showing he had committed no crimes on the spanish side of the mississippi he would not be punished by the spanish authorities. he evidently did not foresee the possibility of their turning him over to the americans. at any rate, the french were taking possession (in form at least) of louisiana, and since they had never been implicated in any strained relations with the states relative to the free navigation of the mississippi, mason was now in equal danger of pursuit on either side. by choice or circumstance he risked the american side. two months after his thrilling escape from the boat he was seen about fifteen miles northeast of natchez. this is shown in a report dated natchez, june 6, 1803, published in the palladium july 14, from which weekly it was copied by various other papers:
“on tuesday last the notorious samuel mason and several of his party, all well armed, were seen on the choctaw trace near cole’s creek. two detachments of the militia of jefferson county were immediately ordered out by his excellency, the governor, in pursuit of them. we have not yet been informed of the result of this expedition.”
the expedition was a failure. about two months
249
after it was first reported that mason had been seen near cole’s creek, james may came to greenville, mississippi—a place formerly called hunston, some twenty-five miles in a northeasterly direction from natchez, and now extinct—and gave an account of his recent contact with mason. james may, it will be recalled, was among the rough characters who were driven out of henderson county, kentucky, about the time mason made his departure from there for cave-in-rock. may’s past career was not yet known by the citizens to whom he made this report. the palladium, ever reliable but sometimes late, in its issue of september 8, 1803, says:
“by a gentleman from natchez, we are informed that about the 25th or 26th of july, a man by the name of james may, came to hunston, near natchez, and made oath before a magistrate, that sundry articles of property and money, which he then delivered up, he had taken from the notorious samuel mason, after shooting him in the head just above the eye. may had been robbed and taken by mason on his passage down the river, and had joined that party. a few days after which, the company hearing a firing of guns, mason ordered his party, may excepted, to hide the horses. may he directed to hide a skiff. he took his gun with him, and on his return, whilst mason was counting his money to divide with the party, he shot him, put the money and property on board the skiff, and conveyed it to hunston.
“a letter from natchez, published in the natchez paper, confirms the above account. a letter to a gentleman in this town from his correspondent at natchez dated the 25th instant, makes no mention of the above circumstance, but says: ‘the masons have removed
250
to mississippi where they have of late committed many robberies, but no murders that i have heard of.’”
no complete file of any of the newspapers published in natchez from 1800 to 1805 has been found. the few stray copies, located in various large libraries, contain nothing about mason’s career. all are too late or too early to embrace any current news pertaining to him. thus it was without success that an effort was made to verify, by “the natchez paper” which “confirms the above account,” the statement regarding may’s appearance in greenville in july, 1803, or to draw on any natchez paper for any contemporary reports relative to mason.
there is nothing in history or tradition to indicate what action was taken by the authorities after they received james may’s report. he evidently left greenville, but for what purpose can only be surmised. it is highly probable that, after may presented the “money and property” he claimed he had taken from mason as evidence of his having shot the outlaw for whom a reward was offered, he was soon convinced that he had produced no positive evidence at all. judging from what took place a few months later, he left for the purpose of bringing in mason, dead or alive.
may probably had been “robbed and taken” by mason for the same purpose that john setton had been detained—to be used as a witness upon whom he might try to shift the mason robberies. if so, may’s pursuit of mason for the offered reward was stimulated by a spirit of revenge. he sallied forth, reconnoitered, and returned; but he did not return to greenville, nor alone. he appeared at natchez and was accompanied by john setton. setton shortly thereafter was recognized as one of mason’s band and both men were taken
251
and committed to jail some time during the latter part of october. when they were arrested setton, as shown by later records, claimed he came to natchez for the purpose of turning state’s evidence. the kentucky gazette, of november 22, 1803, briefly touches on the situation as it was about a month before that paper went to press:
“a letter from a gentleman at natchez, to his correspondent in this town, dated 20th october, contains information that the men who robbed mr. elisha winters, on his way from new orleans, have been taken and committed to jail; so that there is a probability of his getting his money. they had in their possession sundry articles taken from the party who were robbed near bayou pierre. one of the robbers has turned state’s evidence against the rest; and says that if he can be suffered to go out with a guard, he will take them where all the papers were hid and a number of other things with some money. the place is not more than two days’ ride, and application has been made to the governor for the above purpose, which will doubtless be granted.”
the hunt for mason was now continued with even greater enthusiasm. besides the militia stationed at natchez and fort gibson many men were on watch for the notorious outlaw and his band. the woods were full of robber-exterminating and reward-seeking soldiers and civilians. mason’s capture was inevitable. may and setton evidently formed a pursuing party of their own. according to one tradition, the two men discovered samuel mason near rodney, jefferson county, mississippi, and, according to another, they found him near lake concordia, louisiana, not far from natchez. they gained mason’s confidence and
252
succeeded in convincing him that they had returned in order to follow him as their leader. then it was that mason met the fate he had himself invited.
monette says: “two of his band, tempted by the large reward, concerted a plan by which they might obtain it. an opportunity soon occurred, and while mason, in company with the two conspirators, was counting out some ill-gotten plunder, a tomahawk was buried in his brain. his head was severed from his body and borne in triumph to washington, the seat of the territorial [mississippi] government.” daniel roe, in a letter published in the port folio, august, 1825, states that the two men “took mason’s head to natchez in the bow of a canoe, rolled up in blue clay, or mud, to prevent putrefaction.” resuming monette’s account: “the head of mason was recognized by many, and identified by all who read the proclamation, as the head entirely corresponded with the description given of certain scars and peculiar marks. some delay, however, occurred in paying over the reward, owing to the slender state of the treasury. meantime, a great assemblage from all the adjacent country had taken place, to view the grim and ghastly head of the robber chief. they were not less inspired with curiosity to see and converse with the individuals whose prowess had delivered the country of so great a scourge.”30
253
one version, which first appeared in print about 1876, has it that “many fully identified the head by certain marks thereon, except his wife who as positively denied it.... the governor had sent his carriage for her expressly to come down and testify ... and many believed mason fled the country and died in his bed in canada.... mason’s family [probably his wife and youngest son] then resided in this county, not far from old shankstown, and his wife was generally respected as an honest and virtuous woman by all her neighbors, and one of her sons was a worthy citizen of warren county not many years ago.” this is quoted in claiborne’s history from a “centennial address” delivered by captain w. l. harper, of jefferson county, mississippi. in 1891 robert lowry published a statement in his history of mississippi, without citing any authority, that “one of mason’s gang killed an innocent man, cut off his head, carried it to the governor of mississippi and claimed the reward.”
may, as already seen, claimed that he had been a victim of mason and, a few months previous, had declared he could find and capture the notorious robber. setton, on the other hand, having expressed a desire to
254
turn state’s evidence, admitted having been connected with the outlaw. the situation was interesting, for it was an unusual one. the head, having been identified as samuel mason’s, the two heroes of the occasion went before a judge to make an affidavit and to get an order on the governor for the payment of the reward. “but just as the judge was in the act of making out a certificate,” writes claiborne in his history of mississippi, “a traveler stepped into the court room and requested to have the two men arrested. he had alighted at the tavern, had repaired to the stable to see his horse attended to, and there saw the horses of the two men who had arrived just before him. he recognized the horses (principally because each had a peculiar blaze in the face) as belonging to parties who had robbed him and killed one of his companions some two months previous on the natchez trace, and going into the court house, he identified the two men.”
suspicion was immediately aroused. this declaration not only showed that may, who complained of being robbed, was a robber himself, but it also indicated that the “reformed” setton as well as the “victimized” may, had committed at least one robbery since they left greenville in search of mason. who are may and setton, and where do they come from, and what have they been doing for a living? such questions were asked. absolutely nothing was known about may. as to setton, their information was limited to the report that he had been “badly treated” by mason; some may
255
have known that he had traveled under assumed names, but evidently none yet suspected he was little harpe.
the next step in the development of their careers is given in one of draper’s manuscripts written after an interview with colonel john stump, who was born in 1776: “in the winter of 1803–4 old captain frederick stump, commanding a company under colonel george doherty, went as far as natchez to aid in taking possession of louisiana. there captain stump, by invitation of governor claiborne, an old friend, made his quarters, and was present when setton and may came with mason’s head to claim the reward of one thousand dollars. the governor told them to call at a stated time and the check would be ready for them. after they had gone captain stump said he believed that setton was really little harpe.... the description of little harpe so well corresponded with setton’s appearance that it was agreed to arrest them both.... it was proclaimed at the landing of natchez that it was believed that wiley harpe was taken, and if any kentucky boatman had any personal knowledge of him, they were desired to examine the prisoner. five boatmen recognized him and gave in their evidence to that effect. some of them were witnesses in the harpe case when they broke from the danville jail. said one of these boatmen before seeing him: ‘if he is harpe he has a mole on his neck and two toes grown together on one foot.’ and so it proved, and the fellow with such positive proof against him shed tears.” [121]
shortly after this, john bowman, of knoxville, tennessee, called in to see the two men. he recognized little harpe. “little harpe denied the name, but bowman persisted and said, ‘if you are harpe you have a scar under your left nipple where i cut you in a difficulty
256
we had at knoxville.’ bowman tore the man’s shirt open and there was the scar.” [26]
up to this time, little harpe, under the names of john taylor, john setton, and wells, had succeeded in concealing his identity. he now realized that even though he turned state’s evidence against the masons, the history of his own terrible career in tennessee and kentucky and at cave-in-rock was too well and widely known for him to expect any mercy, no matter how important his revelations regarding the masons might be. at new madrid he had a narrow escape from being identified. after he and the masons were captured and taken to the spanish prison, it was rumored that one of the prisoners was “a fellow who calls himself taylor but who is supposed to be that notorious villain and murderer harpe.” a statement to that effect was written in a letter dated january 24, 1804, and published six weeks later in the western spy. but, as already seen, he had sworn before the new madrid court, as john setton, that he had met a man by the name of harpe who had been killed and, when further questioned, declared that he knew nothing regarding the whereabouts of little harpe. although his identity was now well established, he, in self-defense, persisted in denying the name. escape was his only hope.
nothing was then known about james may’s past other than his recent acts connected with the beheading of mason and his attempted apprehension of the mason band. these acts in themselves exposed him as a man of such a treacherous character that he could expect no mercy nor any reward. on the other hand, should he be identified as one of the men who had been driven out of henderson county, kentucky, and be accused of cave-in-rock murders and robberies, then nothing but
257
the severest punishment that could be inflicted upon him might be expected. with him, as with little harpe, escape was his only hope. and both escaped.31
how little harpe and may escaped is not known. while at natchez they may have been indicted for mason’s murder. if so, having killed mason in compliance with the governor’s proclamation to capture the outlaw dead or alive, they were acquitted. william darby, then living near natchez, writes that the two prisoners “learning their danger fled from natchez, but were taken in jefferson county, mississippi, and confined in jail and in due time, tried and convicted....” they were tried before the circuit court in greenville, in january, 1804, as is shown by the few existing entries made in the now mutilated docket book of that court. no record of the court proceedings was found, although a careful search was made.
the first entry found in the docket book is dated friday, january 13, 1804. the court was presided over by peter b. bruin, david ker, and thomas rodney, who were among the best known men in mississippi. it is an interesting fact that when aaron burr was arrested the following year on cole’s creek, near greenville, he was tried in washington, mississippi, before two of these same judges, the third, judge ker, having died of pneumonia contracted while serving at the trial of harpe and may. william downs, as foreman of the grand jury, brought in “an indictment of robbery” against each of the prisoners: “the territory against james may” and “the territory against john setton.”
258
little harpe, alias setton, and his co-worker may were represented by mr. breazeale and mr. parrott. these attorneys evidently made every possible effort to save their clients. a plea of “not guilty” had been entered. then followed much sparring over technicalities. they first attempted to quash the indictment; they next claimed the court did not have jurisdiction; and finally presented a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. but all these contentions were overruled.32 “and for trial (each) put himself upon the country and general poindexter, attorney general.” each was tried by separate jury, james may being the first, and each was found guilty. then the two attorneys came forward with “a plea of former acquittal,” but the court rendered a decision that “the plea of former acquittal is not sufficient in law to be considered a sufficient bar to this indictment.” this plea of “former acquittal” leads one to infer that when mason’s head was brought to natchez both men were tried there and elsewhere for murder, and having been “acquitted” of that charge they, in all likelihood, argued that they were therefore also acquitted of highway robbery which was incidental to the murder.
as already stated, the record of the proceedings containing all these and other details of the case cannot now be found. there is nothing to indicate who the witnesses were, except elisha winters, who was “allowed the compensation allowed by law for his attendance at this term and for traveling to and from said court one thousand miles.” among the few available
261
pages of the docket book bearing on this case is one containing two entries dated february 4, 1804. they show that the sentence passed was in the same words for each prisoner. james may’s is the first on the record, and is immediately followed by little harpe’s:
gallows field, jefferson county, mississippi
here, in 1804, two cave-in-rock outlaws were hanged
(from a drawing by j. bernhard alberts, made in 1917)
“john setton who has been found guilty of robbery at the present term was this day set to the bar and the sentence of the court pronounced upon him as follows, that on wednesday the eighth day of the present month he be taken to the place of execution and there to be hung up by the neck, between the hours of ten o’clock in the forenoon and four in the afternoon, until he is dead, dead, dead. which said sentence the sheriff of jefferson county was ordered to carry into execution.”
on wednesday afternoon, february 8th, little harpe and james may were taken from the jail to a field about a quarter of a mile north of the village of greenville. there, on what has ever since been known as “gallows field,” they received their well deserved reward, but not the one they had planned to procure. they paid, with their lives, what was, considering the atrocity of their crimes, a light penalty.
in pioneer days the official executioner usually prepared a gallows by fastening one end of a long beam or heavy pole in the forks of a tree and placing the other end similarly in another tree. on this cross timber he tied the rope with which the condemned man was to be hanged. the prisoner, as a rule, was put on a wagon, his coffin serving as a seat, and driven to the place of execution. upon his arrival the same wagon and coffin on which he rode were used as the platform and trap of his gallows. after the suspended rope was properly looped around his neck the condemned man was made to stand erect on his coffin. when all details had been
262
attended to the horses were rushed forward, leaving the human body hung suspended in the air. in some instances the gallows was a frame-work with a platform in which a trap door was built.
in the hanging of harpe and may the procedure was somewhat unusual even for a frontier country. two ropes were tied to a heavy pole placed high between two trees. the two men walked from the jail to the gallows. each with his hands tied behind him was made to mount a ladder; his feet were then bound and the noose fastened around his neck. when the ladders were dropped the two bodies fell as far as the suspended rope permitted, and thus each was “hung up by the neck” until, as prescribed by law, he was “dead, dead, dead.” [54]
the news that samuel mason had at last been killed was a great relief to the country. the fact that little harpe and james may were actually hanged was a matter of equally widespread interest. the guardian of freedom, february 20, 1804, published the following, which was copied by a number of papers, including the kentucky gazette of a week later:
“extract of a letter from a gentleman in mississippi territory to his friend in this town (frankfort) dated february 8, 1804: ‘there have been two of sam mason’s party—which infested the road between this country and kentucky—in jail at greenville for trial. they were condemned last term and executed this day. one of them was james may; the other called himself john setton but was proved to be the villain who was known by the name of little or red-headed harpe, and who committed so many acts of cruelty in kentucky.’”
the palladium, march 3, published a news item dated natchez, february 9, 1804: “setton and may
263
were executed at greenville yesterday between three and four o’clock, pursuant to their sentence. we are informed that setton made some confession at the place of execution which has a tendency to implicate several persons not heretofore suspected as parties concerned with masons in their depredations. may complained of the hardship of his fate; said he had not been guilty of crimes deserving death and spoke of the benefit he had rendered society by destroying old mason.”
the hanging of little harpe and james may for highway robbery was a fulfillment of the written law of pioneer times as well as the unwritten law of frontier communities. but many of the enraged citizens felt that the law of pioneer justice had not been satisfied for the known and unknown murders committed by these two offenders. there is nothing in history or tradition to indicate that an attempt was made to lynch the two condemned outlaws. but the lynch spirit evidently raged. in the words of franklin l. riley, an authority on early mississippi history: “after their execution on the gallows field their heads were placed on poles, one a short distance to the north and the other a short distance to the west of greenville, on the natchez trace.” [105]
how long these gruesome warnings to highwaymen stood along the road and what finally became of them is not known. each doubtless met with a fate befitting a head so ignoble. it is not probable that they were ever interred in the grave with the two headless bodies. tradition has it that the two bodies were placed in a box and buried in a new grave yard about one hundred yards east of the greenville jail and court house and about the same distance north of the hotel in the central part of the village.
264
this new grave yard was on the natchez trace and contained less than half a dozen graves. tradition says that an effort was made by a number of people who had kinsmen buried in it to influence the officials to bury elsewhere the decapitated remains of these despised desperadoes. their request was not granted, and the burial was held late on the night of the execution within a few yards of where stood one of the head-surmounted poles. the next day the indignant men who had opposed this as a burial place for the two villains, exhumed their dead and removed the remains about a half mile south of greenville and there began a new burying ground which today is known as bellegrove church yard.33
what attempts were made to collect the reward offered for the capture of mason? what became of the masons? it is probable these questions can never be fully answered. the court records showing the total expense involved in the trial and transportation of the masons, and in the trial and execution of little harpe and james may, have not been found. these expenses were paid by the territorial and federal governments. one of governor claiborne’s letters [113] shows that in january, 1806, one seth caston “exhibited demands for one hundred dollars for apprehending and bringing
265
to justice” these two notorious outlaws. there is nothing indicating the character of caston’s claim; nor is there anything to show whether or not he received any money. harpe and may were entitled to the reward offered in governor claiborne’s proclamation; it doubtless would have been granted to them in full had they not proven that above all other rewards they best deserved that which they received on the gallows.
neither history nor tradition tells what became of the mason family after samuel mason met his fate and little harpe and james may received their reward. samuel mason’s wife, who evidently did not approve of her husband’s lawlessness—at least not in her later years—made her home, as we have already seen, not far from old shankstown, in jefferson county, mississippi. there, according to claiborne, the historian, she was “generally respected as an honest and virtuous woman by all her neighbors, and one of her sons [probably magnus or samuel mason jr.] was a worthy citizen of warren county.” monette says that “the mason band being deprived of their leader and two of his most efficient men, dispersed and fled,” and thus terminated the greatest terror to travelers which had infested the country.34
in the meantime, the headless bodies of little harpe and james may continued to lie in their double grave near the natchez trace. as time rolled on the narrow trace widened and, as roads frequently do, it wore deeper into the slight elevation over which it led. about the year 1850 this widening and deepening process reached the fleshless bones in the solitary grave, and
266
the two skeletons, protruding piece by piece from the road bank, were dragged out by dogs and other beasts until the highway widened beyond the grave and the burial site became part of the ditch along the natchez trace.
some twenty years ago, upon straightening out a part of the natchez trace, the small section of the old road of which the burial place was a part, was discarded as a highway, and today the old road bed, including the site of the grave, is a mere jungle of briars and brush.
thus the last vestige of these two villains disappeared on the very highway upon which they had committed so many crimes, and possibly on the very spot where one of their victims breathed his last. the ocean of time has closed over every one of the personal relics of all these enemies of society, but the waves that their activities started still carry on as ripples of human interest.
