Matson Family Cemetery
This cemetery is located
on the Harold Shaw farm on Ed Mosley Road about a mile west of Matson Switch
in Fulton Co., Kentucky.
|
There are only one headstone in this cemetery. It is new headstone obtained from the Veterans Administration. It is setting in front of the base for his original headstone, which was damaged and is now kept indoors for protection.
The original headstone is inscribed; "General Robert Matson born in Bourbon Co., Ky. January 1796, died January 26, 1859 aged about 64 years old as a soldier he was brave and as a legislator incorruptible. An affectionate husband, an indulgent parent, and a good citizen, he died contented and by all respected as an honest man".
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Ashmore v. Matson"
One of the top 5 Legal Cases in Coles Co., Illinois History.
Matson v. Ashmore et. al. for the use of Bryant,
took place in October 1847. This case came about when a slave family led
by Anthony and Jane Bryant fled from General Robert Matson's farm, which
was affectionately known as Black Grove. General Matson was a landowner
in both Kentucky and Illinois. When he came to Illinois to harvest his
crops for the year he usually brought a few slaves with him to accomplish
the task. Upon this occasion, five slaves fled Robert Matson's farm. These
slaves were taken in by Gideon Ashmore and Dr. Hiram Rutherford two well
known, and respected citizens of Coles County. Sources dealing with this
case have charged that Rutherford and Ashmore were adamant abolitionists,
who were seeking to press the issue of slavery. Slavery, in their eyes,
had been banned by the Illinois State Constitution, and had been outlawed
by the Land Ordinance of 1785. Illinois, to these two men, had been, by
law, a free state. These two were simply seeking to ensure that the state
remained free of bondsmen.
This set the stage for the case to be brought
to court. Each side believed their interpretation of Illinois and Federal
slave laws were the accurate portrayal. This case was more than a fight
over slavery. Slaves in the United States had been considered property,
and not human beings. Matson charged that he was allowed to move his property
anywhere he wanted. The implications about the extent slavery extended
made this case an interesting one in the first place. What
makes this case even more fascinating is that Abraham Lincoln was retained
by Mr. Matson to be his defense attorney.
Many historians have used this case to imply
that Lincoln took the case because he believed in the slave owner's cause.
Other historians have charged that Lincoln simply took the case because
he had obligations to his client to do so. Either way, this page will not
attempt to define Abraham Lincoln's reasons for getting involved. Instead,
our institution has sought to present the facts of the case for educational
purposes.
In a very real way, this case represents more
than just slavery or the involvement of Abraham Lincoln. This case brings
to light the real discussions about property ownership and the limits American
society had adopted to protect those interests. Since slaves were considered
to be chattel, they were not entitled to the same rights as other citizens.
This is why Dr. Rutherford and Mr. Ashmore decided to harbor the slaves.
They knew that Matson would have to sue them to regain the slaves he had
lost. In suing Mr. Matson hoped to establish that farmers who owned property
in different states were allowed to retain their right without state intervention.
He wanted the state to recognize federal protection offered to those whom
transported property across state lines. Matson was only intent on keeping
his slaves in Illinois for a short time. Ashmore and Rutherford charged
that the laws of Illinois stipulated that slaves were freed upon entrance
into a free territory. In the end, the argument of Ashmore and Rutherford
ended up winning the case.
The law was forced to interpret the rights and
practices slave owners enjoyed within Illinois. This case challenged the
pre-existing interpretations of property ownership by calling into question
the reliability of those laws. The plaintiff asserted that slavery was
to be allowed as long as they only remained in free territory for a short
time. In this argument Lincoln, invoked the right of transit, allowing
slave holders to take their slaves temporarily into free territory. The
defendants cited that slavery could not be shown preferential treatment.
Ashmore and Rutherford wanted to establish the banishment of slavery from
the state was not subject to debates about property. Instead, all slaves
entering the state lost their distinction of being property.
By examining this case it is easy to see why
the system of slavery presented real challenges to American society. This
case is the most interesting case of Coles County history because the substance
and the characters made for a stellar trial. In the end, this case represents
debates about property, slavery, and character as no other has in the history
of the County.
Copyright © 2000-03 by Localités/Localities, all rights
reserved.
This work may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper
credit is given to
Localités/Localities and/or Coles County Legal History Project.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
1850 Fulton County, Kentucky Census
Matson, Robert, 54, Farmer, Ky.
Mary, 32, Ky.
Mary, 14, Ky.
Robert, 12, Ky.
Mildred, 4, Ill.
Henrietta, 3/12, Tn.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Use your Back Button to Return to the Main Menu