Matthew Lyon (1749 - 1822), Part 5: Kentucky Duel

Part 1: Obituary of Matthew Lyon

Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face

Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword

Part 4: Duel with Griswold

Part 5: Lyon's Kentucky Duel

I decided it's time to wrap up these posts along with the month of March with one last post.  It was either this anecdote or his Sedition trial, and when in doubt I always go with the duel.  I may do a post on his Sedition trial sometime in the future, maybe, but I'm not sure.  How specific of me, I know--don't hold your breath for it...

This article on Matthew Lyon comes from the Greenfield Gazette of Massachusetts on December 15, 1806.

We have heard it reported from a gentleman who was an eye witness to "the scene of action" that on the night of the election at Eddyville, Kentucky, a misunderstanding took place between the Hon. Matthew Lyon and a Mr. Cofield, in consequence of the latter's not voting for the former.  The circumstance as related to us, was, that Mr. Cofield was introduced to Mr. Lyon, but Mr. L. instead of greeting him as one of his own kidney; observed, he did not wish to be acquainted with him as he did not vote for him, consequently Mr. C. could not be his friend--this roused the passions of Mr. C and some few hard words ensued; among them Mr. C. asked Mr. L. if he was acquainted with a certain Roger Griswold, and mentioned the "scene of action" that once took place between a certain Matthew Lyon and him, concerning the spitting in the latter's face.  Mr. L immediately cracked away at Mr. C. but Mr. C. so completely defended himself that he parried off the blow and the "scene of action" commenced hot and hard--Mr. C. at last knocked the honorable gentleman down, and made an essay to gouge him--in the attempt, however, the honorable gentleman got Mr. C's thumb in his mouth and completely amputated it at the first joint.

From the New York Balance on December 8, 1806:

A serious fracas took place at Eddyville, Kentucky, on the night of the late election, between Matthew Lyon and a Mr. Cofield, who, it seems, had refused to vote for Lyon.  Cofield attempted to gouge--but his thumb was caught in Lyon's mouth, and bitten off at the first joint. --So that Matthew is not only a spitting, but a biting Lyon.

Matthew Lyon (1749 - 1822), Part 4: Duel with Griswold on House Floor

Part 1: Obituary of Matthew Lyon
Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face
Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword
Part 4: Duel with Griswold
Part 5: Lyon's Kentucky Duel

From the book Matthew Lyon, the Hampden of Congress: A Biography by James Fairfax McLaughlin, published in 1900 (available online), comes this early political cartoon of the Lyon-Griswold duel:

There are quite a few contemporary newspaper accounts of the second altercation between Lyon and Griswold, and I read through dozens before choosing which to post.  This one is by far the most entertaining that I found. From Porcupine's Gazette of Pennsylvania, on February 16, 1798:

A Burning Shame.

The affair which took place in Congress yesterday was but imperfectly related in my Gazette of last night; I shall therefore now endeavor to give it more in detail.

After the House had decided that nothing should be done to Lyon for spitting in Mr. Griswold's face, it seems that the former had the prudence to avoid the fight of the latter, til yesterday, when he came and took his seat.  He was sitting alone, involved in deep contemplation, when Mr. Griswold first spied him.  No sooner did this happen than he catched up a thick hickory stick, made towards the man of spittle, and in the twinkling of an eye, without giving him time either to eject his saliva or say "my a--fe," began to belabour him.  Poor Lyon got out of his seat, made at his assailant, and endeavoured to grapple with him, but the supple New Englander, who is as active as he is strong, beat him from him with his left hand, while he thrashed him with the right, and thus did the member, from Vermont, receive a shower of blows, such as never fell on the devoted hide of Don Quixote or his incontinent steed Rosinante.  You must needs think the man was not very much at his ease in this situation.  He ran to the fireplace and catched up a pair of tongs just like a lady, and attempted to use them; but his antagonist presently disarmed him, and continued to beat away as regular a stroke as did the drummers of General Gates, on a former occasion.  At last Lyon made shift to close in with him, when Mr. Griswold immediately kicked him up, and made him measure his length on the floor.  Here several gentlemen came and took off the enraged New Englander, or, it is reasonable to suppose, that he would have continued to pummel away for some time longer.

The poor man of saliva was most dreadfully cut and bruized, and had not nature (foreseeing perhaps this re counter[?]) taken particular care to fortify his head, it must have been smashed to pieces.--It is said, that several connoisseurs, from the West Indies and from the Southward, have declared that never [a] negro suffered such a drubbing.

Lyon stopped an hour or two to wash and bathe, and then retired from the House, accompanied by his friend and countryman Blair McClenachan[?].  They walked down towards Fourth-street, followed by a crowd of boys; and, would you believe it, the naughty little rascals, hollowed and shouted, "there goes the Lion and Blair!" -- Whatever may be said, or thought, of the ribroasting, I am persuaded that every one will agree with me, that it is highly disgraceful to the police of Philadelphia, that these little blackguards be allowed thus to follow and mock a member of Congress, like so many small-birds at an owl that happens to change her roost by day-light.

Matthew Lyon (1749 - 1822), Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword

Part 1: Obituary of Matthew Lyon
Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face
Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword
Part 4: Duel with Griswold
Part 5: Lyon's Kentucky Duel

Continuing with the subject from my last post, here is Matthew Lyon's explanation of the story alluded to by Roger Griswold when he asked Lyon if he would fight the people of Connecticut with his wooden sword.  From the Massachusetts Spy on February 21, 1798 (I believe this text can also be found in the Annals of Congress):

HISTORY of the WOODEN SWORD,

By Matthew Lyon, Esq.

Massachusetts Spy, Worcester Mass, February 21, 1798
[click to enlarge]

The following Narrative was given by Mr. Lyon in the course of his Defence before the Committee of Privileges, on Thursday, February 1st, 1798.

Gentlemen of the Committee,

After having heard so much about Wooden Swords, as expression, the repetition of which, in an indignant manner, has caused you this present trouble, I hope you will indulge me with a patient hearing to a short narrative of the circumstances which awakes my feelings, and utterly disables me from hearing such reflections.  After living ten years in Connecticut, from my 15th to my 25th year, I removed to a new settlement in Vermont, then called Newhampshire Grants, about 30 miles from Ticonderoga.  On the first attempts of the British government to enslave this country, I joined with about twenty other young men to form a minute company and learn military exercise; we made proficiency, and on the first news of active war we hastened to join Ethan Allen in taken Ticonderoga, Crown Point and St. John's.  I continued in that service, without pay, or prospect of it, until the Connecticut forces came on to keep the forts; when I returned home to take care of my affairs, which had suffered in my absences.  In the same summer, 1775, the military were organized, and I was appointed adjutant of my regiment.

In 1776, after the retreat from Canada, Colonel Seth Warner being out of employ, applied to the commander in chief in the Northern Department, for some defence for the frontier of the Newhampshire Grants, which became exposed by the retreat of the army.  The General recommended to the committee of the Newhampshire Grants, of which I was a member, to nominate the commission officers for six companies, and he promised to commission them, and that they should be entitled to continental pay.  In one of those companies I received a commission as a second lieutenant.  I set about enlisting my men, and immediately obtained my quota, and, at my own expense, marched them to the rendezvous at Pittsford, about 20 miles southeast from Ticonderoga, which by this time had become head quarters.  At the rendezvous I found the captain and first lieutenant of my company had raised no men, and that there were but two companies and a part of another, besides mine, raised, and that Col. Warner, who was expected to have commanded our six companies, and received a commission and orders from Congress for raising a regiment on the continental establishment during the war, and that in his endeavors to raise his regiments the raising of our companies was wholly impeded.  Finding the business falling into supineness[?] I applied to the  General to discharge me and my men in order that I might join Warner's regiment.  The General once agreed to discharge and pay me and my men, and ordered me to make up my pay roll for the purposes.  But at this juncture application was made to the General by some people who had bought the crops of the whigs, who had removed from Onion River, and he was induced to order our party to march to Jericho and take post at a certain house on the north side of Onion River, at least 60 miles in advance of the army towards Canada, from whence the army had retreated, and about the same distance from any body of inhabitants; and the General instead of discharging, ordered me to join one of the other companies.

The idea of the people and of the committee of the Newhampshire Grants was, that these six companies, if they had all been raised, would have been stationed some where near Middlebury, which is opposite to Crown Point; and about 12 miles east therefrom, and near forty miles southward of the place appointed by the General.

The commanding officer wrote to the General representing the situation of the country, and the impossibility of our being of any service at Onion River, and as all the well affected people were moved away.  This letter was either neglected or answered with a fresh order for marching.  The order was obeyed; but the soldiers considered themselves sacrificed to the interest of those persons who bought the crops for a trifle; and wanted to get our party there to eat them at the public expense.  I opposed these murmurs with all the arguments in my power.  I used frequently to urge with them, that the absolute government of the army must be with the general; he could not be omniscient, and we ought to submit with cheerfulness, and hope for the best.  In this situation our little garrison, which contained about 60 men, besides invalids, were alarmed by the Indians taking some persons from a house about a mile distant.  Consternation prevailed; I immediately called for volunteers, and went with about 20 men to the house where the prisoners had been taken; from thence took a circuit in the woods round the garrison, in order to see if there were any parties or appearances of the enemy.  Finding none, I returned and obtained leave to take about five and twenty of the best men and pursue the enemy towards the lake; where we supposed they had gone.  I had proceeded about two miles, when two runners from the commanding officer brought me positive orders to return, with intelligence that a [?] officer had returned from a scout to the lake Champlain, about twelve miles distance, where he saw five or six hundred Indians.

Matthew Lyon (1749 – 1822), Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face

Part 1: Obituary of Matthew Lyon

Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face

Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword

Part 4: Duel with Griswold

Part 5: Lyon's Kentucky Duel

In 1798, Matthew Lyon got into an altercation with Roger Griswold on the House floor.  From the Annals of Congress for the 2nd session of the 5th Congress:

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. 

Mr. Venable, from the Committee of Privileges, made the follow report: 

The Committee of Privileges, to whom was referred a resolution on the 30th of January, charging Matthew Lyon with disorderly behaviour, with instructions to inquire into the whole matter thereof, and to report the same, with their opinions thereon, to the House, having examined several witness on oath touching the subject, report:  That, during the sitting of the House of Representatives on the 30th day of January, 1798, the tellers of the House being engaged in counting the ballots for Managers of the impeachment against William Blount, the Speaker had left his Chair, and many members their seats, as is usual on such occasions; the Speaker was sitting in one of the member's seats, next to the bar of the House, and several members near him, of whom Mr. Griswold was one. 

Mr. Lyon was standing without the bar of the House, leaning on the same, and holding a conversation with the Speaker.  He spoke loud enough to be heard by all those who were near him, as if he intended to be heard by them.  The subject of his conversation was, the conduct of the Representatives of the State of Connecticut, (of whom Mr. Griswold was one.)  Mr. Lyon declared that they acted in opposition to the interests of the people; that they were seeking offices, which they were willing to accept, whether yielding $9,000 or $1,000.  He further observed that the people of that State were blinded or deceived by those Representatives; that they were permitted to see but one side of the question in politics, being lulled asleep by the opiates which the members from that State administered to them; with other expressions equally tending to derogate from the political integrity of the Representatives of Connecticut.

On Mr. Lyon's observing, that if he should go into Connecticut, and manage a press there six months, although the people of that State were not fond of revolutionary principles, he could effect a revolution, and turn out the present Representatives--Mr. Griswold replied to these remarks, and amongst other things, said "If you go into Connecticut, you had better wear your wooden sword," or words to that effect, alluding to Mr. Lyon's having been cashiered in the army. 

Mr. Lyon did not notice the allusion at this time, but continued the conversation on the same subject.  Mr. Griswold then left his seat, and stood next to Mr. Lyon, leaning on the bar, being outside the same. 

On Mr. Lyon's saying he knew the people of Connecticut well, having lived among them many years--that he had frequent occasion to fight them in his own district, and that he never failed to convince them--Mr. Griswold asked, if he fought them with his wooden sword, on which Mr. Lyon spat in his face. 

The Committee having attentively considered the foregoing state of facts, and having heard Mr. Lyon in his defence, are of opinion that his conduct in this transaction was highly indecorous, and unworthy of a member of this House. 

They, therefore, recommend the adoption of the resolution submitted to their consideration by the House, in the words following, to wit: 

"Resolved, That Matthew Lyon, a member of this House, for a violent attack and gross indecency, committed upon the person of Roger Griswold, another member, in the presence of the House while sitting, be for this disorderly behavior expelled therefrom."

The following is an editorial piece the Federalist paper Gazette of the United States based in Philadelphia on 1st of February, 1798 about the above described incident:

PHILADELPHIA,

THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 1: 

Mr. Griswold,--Lyon,--and a hint to Mr. Baldwin. 

It seems as if the Editors of some Newspapers cannot tread the path of truth even on the most recent occurrence.  A truth lodged in their minds immediately undergoes some horrid distortion, and is cast forth the vile abortion of falsehood and malice.  Such is Bachs’s account of the affair between Mr. Griswold and Lyon, the one a man as respectable, so honorable, and useful to his country, as the other is the reverse.  In your Gazette of this evening, you have given a correct statement of the facts relative to this business, as I learn from several sources of authentic testimony.  A most unmanner’d ruffian has offered Mr. Griswold an insult never to be endured.  With a presence of mind not to have been expected from his strength and spirit, but highly honorable, he refrained from striking him to his feet, even to the destruction of that respect and order which should ever be observed to the Representatives of America.  The House have taken, as they ought, the affront upon themselves; but as they have not done it upon Mr. Griswold’s application, it cannot be supposed he has relinquished his right to redress himself, if they shall fall short of doing him justice.  If the House then, shall be so lost or indifferent to their own dignity; if they shall be so tame or so timid, under the most gross and unprecedented outrage that has ever been offered to a public body; or if they shall be so sunk in the filth of party and dishonour, as still to suffer this so base an example to influence him, or restrain his resentment.  As Lyon has received every species of insult, and been used to nothing else all his life, from the days of his servitude to his highest exaltation; as dishonor and contempt have been heaped upon him for years without effect, or any excitement of feeling; it must be taken for granted that he has no feeling for such punishment.  His vile and worthless carcase is all that knows sensibility about him; and an appeal must be made to that.  I therefore am of opinion that Mr. Griswold should most inflexibly resolve to beat this fellow daily and every day, until one or the other of them shall be compelled to leave that house; for surely Mr. Griswold should never sit again with him as an equal and a gentlemen.  If Lyon is to be protected and justified, and He is to be expelled for [r?]isking a just vengeance on his brutality, he will have little cause of regret at having a body so insensible to its own dignity, and so unjust to his injuries. 

How happens it that Mr. Baldwin, who, some time since, made such a piteous petition to the House, to protect him from a fair meeting with Gen. Gunn has so changed his opinion about privilege, and that sanctity of the persons of the members, as, throughout, to vote in favor of this brutal assault upon Mr. Griswold, and to protect the offender from punishment.  I wish some member would call on Mr. Baldwin for his opinion on this subject.

From the Massachusetts Independent Chronicle on 1798-02-12 is Matthew Lyon's side of the story:

MATTHEW LYON,

vs.

ROGER GRISWOLD. 

In addition to what is given under our Congress head, upon the late disagreeable occurrence in our national legislature, we extract the following from the narrative given by Col. Lyon in the course of his defence before the Committee of Privileges: 

Gentlemen of the Committee, 

"I shall conclude with making some observations on the testimony; all of which corroborates, that I was standing without the bar conversing with the speaker who sat on an outside chair, the subject I believe it is apparent was Mr. Nicholas motion, I did not like the opposition given to it by the Connecticut members.  I insisted they did not act according to the [?] understanding of the people of that state.--This led to saying many other things, though my discourse was directed to the speaker, it appears I had the wit and raillery of five or six gentlemen from New York and Connecticut to withstand and reply to, it appears that I supported this with good humor. 

"It appears also by the testimony, that Mr. Griswold, in Mr. Harper's seat, gave me a must cutting insult.  The speaker who I was in conversation with, heard it as well as some others; they testify that I did not appear to hear it.  Why not hear it as well as they?  for no other reason than to keep up the good humour.  But Mr. Griswold not satisfied with the insult already given, says to one of the witnesse's "He does not hear me," and removes and intrudes himself to my side, pulls me by the arm to call my attention, and their more particularly and more deliberately repeats the insult; knowing it to be the most provoking abuse that one gentlemen could possibly offer another. 

"Under all these circumstances, I cannot but entertain the fullest assurance that I stand justified for the repulse of that deliberate insult offered me by Mr. Griswold, int he view of the committee of the house of Representatives and of every man of honor or feeling who shall ever hear the story."

From Volume 52 (Dec 1875) of Harper's Magazine:

The two members were standing near one another outside the bar, when Griswold made taunting allusion to an old "campaign story" of Matthew Lyon's having been sentenced to wear a wooden sword for cowardice in the field.  Lyon, in a fury, spat in Griswold's face.  Instantly the House was in an uproar; and although the impetuous Lyon apologized to the House, he only escaped expulsion, after eleven days' debate, through the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds vote.  This affair called forth a caricature in which the Irish member was depicted as a lion standing on his hind-legs wearing a wooden sword, while Griswold, handkerchief in hand, exclaims, "What a beastly action!"

Matthew Lyon (1749 – 1822), Part 1: Obituary

This is the first part of several consecutive posts on Matthew Lyon.  I'll begin at the end with his obituary, in hopes it will serve as an introduction to those unacquainted with him.

Part 1: Obituary of Matthew Lyon
Part 2: Spitting in Roger Griswold's Face
Part 3: History of the Wooden Sword
Part 4: Duel with Griswold
Part 5: Lyon's Kentucky Duel

From page 3 of the Arkansas Weekly Gazette of Little Rock, Arkansas on August 13, 1822:

OBITUARY.

Died, at Spadre Bluff, Arkansas Territory, on Thursday, the 1st of Agust, after a short illness, Colonel MATTHEW LYON, United States Factor, for the Cherokee Nation on the Arkansas, aged about 76 years.

Colonel Lyon was born in Ireland, but emigrated to America, at a very early period of his life.  He was one of the first settlers in Vermont, and married a daughter of one of the early governors of that state.  During the Revolutionary War, he took an active part in support of the liberties and independence of his adopted country.  After the war, he was chosen to fill several important civil offices.  He was a member of the Convention that formed the Constitution of Vermont, and was several times elected to the Legislature of that state.  About the year 1796, he was elected a Representative to Congress by the people of Vermont.  In 1797, General Washington having retired from the helm of state, he was succeeded by Mr. Adams.  This gentlemen unfortunately permitted himself to be influenced by certain members of his cabinet, who evidently aimed at the destruction of our republican institutions; and with a view to silence all opposition, a standing army was raised, and a fatal blow was given to the liberty of speech and the freedom of the press, by the passage of an act, commonly called the SEDITION LAW.  Colonel Lyon not only voted against those unconstitutional measures, but exerted all his influence to render them unpopular.  On his return to his constituents, he expressed his sentiments freely and openly respecting the conduct of the administration, and caused to be published, a letter addressed to him by a distinguished American then in France, which contained severe animadversions on the measures pursued by the General Government.   For these "high crimes and misdemeanors" he (although a Representative chosen by the people) was arrested, brought before a Federal Marshall, and sentenced to be imprisoned for three months, and to pay a fine of one thousand dollars.

At the time this unjust and disgraceful sentence was carried into effect, Colonel L. was on the eve of his departure for the seat of Government, to attend to his duties as a Representatives in Congress.  He was taken to prison during an inclement season, and for some time was treated with as much rigor as though he had been a malefactor.  A general burst of indignation was evinced in every part of the Union, at this arbitrary and vindictive conduct; and Colonel Lyon, amid his sufferings, had the satisfaction to find that his constituents had not abandoned him--on the constrary, while in prison, he was re-elected to a seat in Congress.

Having been unsuccessful in an extensive manufacturing establishment in which he was engaged in Vermont, and having a young and growing family to provide for, Colonel L. determined to emigrate to the western Country.  Accordingly, about the year 1802, he removed to Eddyville, Kentucky, on the Cumberland river, where he was for some time extensively engaged in the exporting and ship building business.

In 1803, he was elected a Representative in Congress from Kentucky, and was re-elected during the succeeding twelve years.  He was, also, several times elected to the Legislature of that state.

While in Congress, no member was more attentive to the interests of his constituents than Colonel Lyon; he likewise evinced his usual zeal and patriotism on all important national question. During 20 years of his life, he has been a member of different state Legislatures, was a member of Congress during 14 sessions, and has been a member of 7 or 8 Conventions raised for revolutionary purposes, or for forming or amending state Constitutions.

Having embarked his all in promoting improvements in his new settlement on the Cumberland, he, like many othe renterprizing and useful men, was unfortunate, and in the decline of life, had the misfortune to find himself reduced from affluence to poverty.  His friends have made his misfortunes known to the Executve, he was, in 1820, appointed to the situation which he filled at the time of his death.

About 6 or 7 months after his arrival in this Territory, an election took place for Delegate to Congress.  He announced himself as a Candidate, and nontwithstanding his advanced age, the short time he had been in the Territory, and the respectable standing of his opponent, he nearly succeeded in being elected.

In private as well as public life, the character of Colonel Lyon stood fair; his manners were calculated to make friends; he was frank, generous and sincere, and never evinced any thing like a vindicitve disposition even toward his enemies.