in»p#_,,
Historical Sketch
how they left are subjects still debatable by ethnologists. (1)
Although, as a result of an act of the Virginia Legislature in 1779
V setting aside most of Kentucky’s land for officers and soldiers of the Revo-
C lution, the richest sections of land in this territory were entered, survey-
o ed, and patented, few claims were made to the rolling wooded lands of Hopkins
I County. A nu ber of grants covering land in this section were made, however,
many of which were later surveyed, but there is no record that any of the
grantees settledthere permanently. Two such grants are mentioned here be-
cause of the prominence of the grantees · Baron Steuben and General Daniel
Morgan, both of whom are entitled to fame for services rendered during the
Revolution. These grantees never became residents of Hopkins County, however, 1
nor improved their grants. (2)
’ Concerning the pioneers who settled the county but little is known.
l Possibly a reason may be drawn from Mr. Maurice K. Gordon's History gf Hopkins {
County in which he stated: "The settlers were chiefly those who took up the i
waste and outlying lands upon land office warrants or bought from military g
grantees. All who were financially able to regard the comfort or convenience j
of their families acquired lands from Henderson & Company, or others, as i
_ close to the river as they could, leaving the hinterland chiefly to the more
daring and adventurous, and the restless, to desperately poor immigrants, to V
fugitives from debt, victims of suretyship . . . and to a small class of U
r fugitives from justice." (5)
1. W} H. Perrin et al, Kentucky: A History of the State, p. GOO; Maurice K.
' Gordon," History of lk§§ZEE§—CouEty§Tr7}hich—y£E;}£H;FiEhed serially in ( E
Madisonville Bally Messenger, May 1951, hereinafter cited as Gordon,V"V l '
2. Starling, gp. git., p. 40i \ y » _ _ ,
3. Gordon, hay 22, 195lp p\, —
z