St. Louis - The Fourth City, Volume 1. Walter Barlow Stevens

we have no subject of complaint to allege against the manner in which we were governed by his excellency, the late Governor Don Pedro Piernas; that he rendered us all the justice to which we were entitled; that neither he nor the company of soldiers he commanded in this post ever committed any excess or extortion, or were guilty of any wrong on any of the inhabitants; that said company occasioned no trouble, nor gave any scandal or bad example; that no one received any violence or bad treatment without cause; that we are not aware that he had any pecuniary agreement or understanding with any one whomsoever, on this or the other side in regard to business. It was never perceived by any one that he had injured the public by restricting trade. He never exacted anything from merchants and traders for licenses or passports necessary for their affairs, either in setting out or on their return. He never excluded any one from this trade, which he distributed alternately each year to the beat of his judgment for the public interest and the number of traders. No one received any ill treatment from the Indian tribes for having been badly received by him at this post. They never heard from said Indians any complaint of him, his behavior, or of the Spanish government, and they are peaceable and contented, as well as we ourselves. In short we can only speak well of him and with respect and gratitude.

      As the result of considerable research, Pierre Chouteau, the third of that name, has fixed the terms of the Spanish governors at St. Louis. It will be observed that the length of service was from two to seven years:

      Piernas, from May 20, 1770 to May 19, 1775.

      Cruzat, from May 20, 1775 to June 17, 1778.

      De Leyba, from June 18, 1778 to June 28, 1780.

      Cruzat, from September 24, 1780 to November 25, 1787.

      Perez, from November 25, 1787 to July 24, 1792.

      Trudeau, from July 21, 1792 to August 28, 1799.

      De Lassus, from August 29, 1799, to March 9, 1804.

      De Leyba died and the gap between the end of his administration and the beginning of Cruzat's second term was filled by the lieutenant, Don Silvio de Cartabona. The record shows a loss of three days between the terms of Perez and Trudeau. The St. Louisans had long before shown a capacity for taking care of themselves; the discrepancy in the dates is considered by Mr. Chouteau "not important."

      The government which Spain applied to St. Louis was mild. That is the descriptive term the historians apply. The more definite truth is the governors imposed very limited government. Spanish laws were presumably operative. In fact, few of them were in force. Those relating to land and to government organization were invoked by the governors. In business affairs, in court contracts, in the practical essentials, the people of St. Louis went on governing themselves, much as they had done under Laclede and St. Ange. The legal customs of the French colonies continued to prevail. Arbitration was common in business differences. The governor sometimes appointed the arbitrators. He conducted the arbitration. He might enforce the finding of the arbitrators. It was seldom this extremity was needed. The principle of arbitration was recognized by the community. When the decree was given, it was accepted. The governor had a few soldiers. He seldom called on them to enforce Spanish authority over the community. The military presence was looked upon rather as protection against Indian trouble. On a very few occasions in the period of Spanish government, undesirables were escorted by soldiers to the bank of the river, put in boats and sent over to Illinois. In these cases the action was taken on the complaint of the habitants of St. Louis. The governors did not initiate radical reforms or impose oppressive measures. The only shadow of despotism in the Spanish government of St. Louis was that cast by the flag floating in front of Laclede's house.

      About the only regulations which the Spanish governors enforced rigidly were those which public sentiment sustained as for the common good. In the case of the banishment of Amable Latourneau, it is said that Don Pedro acted only when the officers of the St. Ange administration furnished the evidence and urged the show of authority as desirable for the good order of the community.

      Habitants looked well to their reputations in early St. Louis. A strict code of respectability was enforced by public sentiment. Joseph Robidou came with his father, who was a shoemaker, from Montreal when St. Louis was about half through the first decade. Even then antecedents were scrutinized. Joseph Robidou courted Mademoiselle Becquet, the daughter of the blacksmith. The young lady was responsive. The young man went to the blacksmith and asked for the daughter. The blacksmith, young Robidou said in his complaint to the Spanish governor, "appeared pleased with the proposal and asked for three days to consider it. Your petitioner was very much surprised at the expiration of the time that Mr. Becquet should say to him he would not give his consent to the marriage because he had learned there were some in your petitioner's family who had surrendered their souls to the devil. As there were no wicked ones in the Becquet family, he would not introduce any."

      The blacksmith did not go into the particulars when pressed, but Miss Becquet did. An uncle of the young lady had told her sister that he had learned Joseph Robidou had an uncle who had killed his wife. This uncle, according to the report, had also killed the man for whom he had worked.

      Robidou became busy with the old habitants and with some recent comers from Canada. They gave him certificates that there was no blemish on the character of his family. One of those who testified was old Mr. Tabeau, a Canadian before he became a St. Louisan.

      "Of what are you accused?" asked Mr. Tabeau, according to the statement which Robidou filed with the governor, "There is nothing to repeat about your family. I know them and it is only through mischief that these things are said." Robidou told Mr. Tabeau that the story was "one Demer, an uncle, had killed his wife and his employer." Tabeau replied he "knew of no stain on the family of Robidou."

      Robidou demanded of Becquet the authority for the statements reflecting upon him. Becquet refused to tell but Madame Becquet gave the young man two names. To Governor De Leyba went Robidou for satisfaction. Both of the men whose names had been given to Madame Becquet denied that they had said anything to the detriment of Robidou. The governor's decision was that there had been too much talk and that the case was not one which called for a penalty on anybody. He advised Robidou to obtain from Montreal certificates as to the respectability of his family. Robidou went into the business of fur trading and became wealthy. He ceased to mourn for the blacksmith's daughter. Three years after his first affair he wooed and won Catharine Rollet. When he died in 1809, he left a considerable estate and six sons who were men of affairs. Auguste Chouteau administered upon the estate, which was evidence of the excellent position Robidou had obtained in the community.

      The wisdom of Solomon was in some of the decisions of the Spanish governors of St. Louis. Before De Leyba, in 1780, was brought a suit for slander. Estimable ladies living in one of the best neighborhoods of the settlement, Main and Elm streets, only a square away from the government house, within sight of Father Valentin's church, talked about one another. The talk was carried. One of the ladies complained to the governor. De Leyba called all of them before him and took their affidavits. Then he settled the case in this way:

      "All attentively considered and examined, it appears that there are no grounds for a suit in this case, it being at most but the idle scandal of babbling women, which took place long since and is now revived by dissensions and broils among themselves. I throw the matter out of court as too trivial, and impose silence in the future on the subject on all implicated therein, strictly forbidding any reflection on each other that might tend to the injury of their reputations, under the utmost vigor of the law to be imposed upon the first transgressor. I condemn the two parties in the case each to one-half the costs and expenses of the suit."

      De Leyba came in state to enter upon the duties of governor at St. Louis. He traveled up the river from New Orleans in a batteau with two swivel guns. He was received, as he described the arrival, "by all the habitants with extraordinary signs of rejoicing." When he had been here a short time he wrote to the governor-general at New Orleans:

      "Since this district is commanded by a person chosen by your lordship, they have whatever is necessary for their progress and happiness."

      De Leyba made a good record as a judge in