The Hatfields and the McCoys Read online

  THE HATFIELDS

  AND THE McCOYS

  The Hatfields

  and

  the McCoys

  OTIS K. RICE

  THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF KENTUCKY

  This edition was made possible in part by a grant

  from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

  Copyright © 1982 by The University Press of Kentucky

  Scholarly publisher for the Commonwealth, serving Bellarmine University, Berea College, Centre College of Kentucky, Eastern Kentucky University, The Filson Historical Society, Georgetown College, Kentucky Historical Society, Kentucky State University, Morehead State University, Murray State University, Northern Kentucky University, Transylvania University, University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, and Western Kentucky University.

  All rights reserved.

  Editorial and Sales Offices: The University Press of Kentucky

  663 South Limestone Street, Lexington, Kentucky 40508-4008

  www.kentuckypress.com

  12 11 10 09 08 12 11 10 9 8

  Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

  Rice, Otis K.

  The Hatfields and the McCoys.

  Bibliography: p.

  Includes Index.

  1. Hatfield-McCoy feud. I. Title.

  [HV6452.K42H35 1982] 975.4′4804 82-1916

  ISBN-10: 0-8131-1459-4 (hard cover : alk. paper) AACR2

  ISBN-13: 978-0-8131-1459-0 (hard cover : alk. paper)

  This book is printed on acid-free recycled paper meeting the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence in Paper for Printed Library Materials.

  Manufactured in the United States of America.

  TO MY SISTERS

  Alma and Rosalie Rice

  AND MY GRANDNEPHEW

  David Neal Thomas

  Contents

  Preface

  1 / The Feudists and Their Society

  2 / The Legacy of the Civil War

  3 / Election Days on Blackberry Creek

  4 / The Smoldering Fires

  5 / An Era of Violence

  6 / Inflammatory Politics

  7 / New Year’s Day 1888

  8 / The Hatfields on the Defensive

  9 / The Governors Intervene

  10 / Victory for Kentucky

  11 / Hawkshaws in the Hills

  12 / The Hatfields Stand Trial

  13 / The War Spirit Abates

  14 / The Habit of Violence

  Epilogue

  Notes

  Bibliographical Note

  Index

  Preface

  WITHOUT QUESTION, the Hatfield-McCoy feud has excited more interest than any of the late nineteenth-century vendettas of the southern Appalachian Mountains. Scores of books and articles have related its history, and novels, motion pictures, and outdoor dramas have drawn their inspiration from it. Unfortunately, too many of the depictions have been more given to sensationalism than to accuracy and objectivity.

  At the outset, it must be recognized that the origins of the feud were complex and cannot be identified with one particular event. Moreover, many of the details of events in the feud may never be known with certainty, for accounts, even by participants, were often so contradictory that there is no way of determining precisely where the truth ended and fabrication began. In addition, many newspaper accounts were so biased or so grossly inaccurate that they must be used with considerable discrimination. Reminiscences in which long conversations were recalled verbatim, used by some writers, are by their very nature suspect.

  The present study makes no claim to the discovery of the ultimate truth of every detail of the feud. I have tried, however, to separate myth from known facts, to present as dispassionate and balanced an account as available sources will afford, and to place the feud in the social, economic, political, and cultural context in which it occurred. I have drawn as much as possible from contemporary sources, including court records, public documents, and other materials, including newspapers, that offer a degree of reliability. Above all, I have sought to weigh evidence carefully and to avoid the partisanship and condescension that have characterized much of the writing on the feud.

  In my research and writing I have incurred the usual debts that any author accumulates. As always, I have found librarians and their staffs ready to respond to my calls with the kind of assistance that only they can render. I must acknowledge special debts to Mr. William Marshall and the staff of the Special Collections of the University of Kentucky Library; Mr. Jeffrey M. Duff of the Kentucky Division of Archives and Records; Miss Linda Anderson of the Kentucky Historical Society; Mrs. Carol Warner of the West Virginia Department of Archives and History; and the staffs of the West Virginia Collection of the West Virginia University Library and the Vining Library of West Virginia Institute of Technology. Dr. Thomas D. Clark drew my attention to the collection of Pike County records in the University of Kentucky Library. My niece, Mrs. Martha Ellen Thomas, photocopied materials in the University of Kentucky Library. Leonard McCoy of Phelps, Kentucky, generously allowed me to use photographs in his possession, and Leonard W. Roberts kindly arranged with the Pike County Historical Society and the Preservation Council of Pike County, Inc., for others. My secretary, Mrs. Connie Alexander, assisted with the typing.

  I especially appreciate a grant from the Research and Publications Committee of West Virginia Institute of Technology, which facilitated last-minute research. Two student assistants, Ray E. Woods, Jr., and David Hardy, assisted me in checking references and photocopying needed materials. My colleague Dr. Stephen W. Brown read the entire manuscript and, as usual, made a number of useful suggestions.

  1

  THE FEUDISTS AND THEIR SOCIETY

  A STORY CARRIED by numerous newspapers in June 1977 reported great agitation among residents of the eastern Kentucky town of Pikeville over a proposal to move the graves in the Dils Cemetery to make way for a civic center and sports arena. The outcry against what ordinarily might have seemed the march of progress arose from the fact that the cemetery provided the last resting-places of Randolph McCoy, his wife Sarah, and other members of the famous Kentucky feuding family. Some of the opponents of removal of the graves must have reasoned that those whose lives had known so little peace should be left undisturbed in death. As usual, many newspaper allusions to the famous vendetta contained gross errors, among them the assertion that more than one hundred men, women, and children were killed during the feud. Only in declaring that “the cause of the feud was never clear” did some of them get closer to the truth.1

  Nearly a century has passed since the trouble between the Hatfields and the McCoys broke the quiet of the hills along the Kentucky-West Virginia border. When they finally laid aside their weapons, members of both families preferred to forget an ugly chapter in their history. In later years battle-scarred veterans of the feud seldom spoke of it. When they did reflect upon the troubles between the two families they often disagreed about their origins and details of the principal events.

  Any serious study of the Hatfield-McCoy feud requires more than a mere retelling of the events which drew the conflict to national attention. Of considerable importance to an understanding of the vendetta are the characteristics and backgrounds of the two families, the nature of the environment in which they lived, the social mores of the Kentucky and West Virginia mountains, the prevailing economic patterns, the viability of political and social institutions, and even the impact of outside influences in perpetuating the feud once it started.

  Let us begin with the land itself. The valley of the Tug Fork of the Big Sandy River, in which the feud occurred, is one of the most rugged and forbidding sections of th
e Appalachian Highlands. The Tug Fork draws its waters from scores of small tributaries that have carved deep, narrow valleys from the surrounding sandstone and limestone rocks. At Louisa, Kentucky, the Tug Fork joins the Levisa Fork to form the Big Sandy River proper, which, in turn, flows into the Ohio at Catlettsburg, Kentucky. Like much of the surrounding territory, the watershed of the Tug Fork consists of a maze of secluded valleys that long remained almost inaccessible, where men might live virtually undisturbed by outside influences. The river provided a geographical unity for the region, but, as the boundary between Kentucky and West Virginia, it divided it politically, thereby aggravating some of the conditions that nourished the Hatfield-McCoy feud.

  The paths of men go everywhere, and by the beginning of the nineteenth century settlers, mostly from Montgomery, Washington, and Russell counties in southwestern Virginia, began to filter into the Tug Valley. Many of these pioneers claimed descent from Scottish stock, both Highland and Lowland, and were drawn from the great stream of European immigrants who reached American shores in the early eighteenth century and moved westward by way of the Valley of Virginia. They bore such names as Hatfield, McCoy, Smith, Vance, Chafin, Cline, Evans, Weddington, Staton, Trent, and Varney.

  The progenitor of the Hatfield family of Kentucky and West Virginia was Ephraim, who appeared in Russell County, Virginia, about 1774. He and his second wife, Anne Musick, lived to advanced years, and at their deaths in 1855 they were buried on Blackberry Creek in Pike County, Kentucky, where they had made their home. Valentine, a son of Ephraim, married Martha Weddington and settled on Horse Pen Creek in present Mingo County, West Virginia, where he founded the West Virginia branch of the Hatfield family. His brother Joseph, who resided in Kentucky, established the Kentucky branch.

  The immediate ancestor of the principal feudists of the Hatfield family was another Ephraim, the son of Valentine. Over seven feet tall and weighing more than three hundred pounds, he was generally referred to as “Big Eaf.” When he was about sixteen years old, “Big Eaf” married Nancy Vance, a sister of Zebulon Vance, the Civil War governor of North Carolina. “Big Eaf” and Nancy made their home on Mate Creek, a West Virginia tributary of the Tug Fork. Ten of their eighteen children lived to maturity, including six sons, Valentine, William Anderson, Elias, Ellison, Smith, and Patterson.

  William Anderson Hatfield, the recognized leader of the clan in its feud with the McCoys, was born September 9, 1839. Throughout his life he used the second of his given names, or the nickname of Anse, from which later derived the appellation of “Devil Anse.” Shortly after the outbreak of the Civil War he married Levicy Chafin, and they eventually established their home at the mouth of Peter Creek, at the present town of Delorme, West Virginia. They became the parents of thirteen children, including Johnson, or Johnse, William Anderson, Jr., or Cap, Robert E. Lee, Elliott, Elias, Detroit, or Troy, Joseph, Emanuel Willis Wilson, Nancy B., Mary, Elizabeth, Rosada, and Tennyson, or Tennis.2

  The forefather of the McCoy family, William, lived for a time, according to family tradition, in Maryland on the site of the battlefield at Antietam. Later McCoy resided in Montgomery County, Virginia, and in 1804 he and his family settled on Johns Creek, in Kentucky, at present Gulnare. His son Daniel married Margaret Taylor in Floyd County, Kentucky, probably in the part that in 1821 became Pike County. Among the thirteen children of Daniel and Margaret was Randolph, the leader of the McCoy side of the famous feud. In 1840 Daniel McCoy and his wife moved to Logan County, (West) Virginia, where they lived until their deaths.

  Randolph McCoy, usually called Randall or Ran’l, was born October 30, 1825, in Pike County. On December 9, 1849, he married Sarah, better known as Sally, McCoy, his first cousin. For a time the couple resided in Logan County, but they later returned to Pike County. They made their home on Blackberry Fork of Pond Creek, a tributary of Tug Fork, on property that was willed to Sarah by her father in 1855. Randolph and Sarah became the parents of sixteen children, including Josephine, James H., Floyd, Tolbert, Samuel, Lilburn, Ali-fair, Rose Anna, Calvin, Pharmer, Randolph, Jr., or Bud, William, Trinvilla, Adelaide, Fanny, and an unnamed child.3

  The Hatfields, more numerous in West Virginia than in Kentucky, probably constituted the largest clan in the Tug Valley. One political rally in the Tug region in the 1880s attracted over three hundred persons who either bore the name of Hatfield or had Hatfield blood in their veins.4 The McCoys also lived on both sides of the Tug Fork, but most of them resided in Pike County, Kentucky. Both families were extensively related to other residents of the Tug Valley.

  In their physical attributes and their attitudes the Hatfields and the McCoys showed striking similarities. The McCoys have been described as “in general tall and lithe and handsome.” Possibly of Lowland Scottish stock, but intermarried with the Highland Celtic strain, some of them had a slightly olive complexion and either dark or auburn hair.5 The Hatfields tended to be large and to possess great physical strength. One contemporary writer described the Hatfields of the late nineteenth century as “a high spirited family, but … kind, neighborly, and just to all who treat them justly.” He went on, however, to declare that “an enemy … might as well kick over a bee-gum in warm weather, and expect to escape the sting of the insect, as to tramp on the toes of one of these spirited, tall sons of the mountains, and not expect to be knocked down.”6 His words applied equally well to the McCoys.

  The Hatfield and McCoy families belonged to the southern yeoman class. Devil Anse Hatfield and Randolph McCoy both owned considerable land and livestock.7 They and their relatives lived chiefly by farming and hunting, and in later years many of the menfolk engaged in logging operations. Like many dwellers in the hills, some members of the two families carried on the agriculturally related business of making whiskey, which they considered a legitimate way of marketing grain crops. They put up a stiff resistance to the law of 1862 which made illicit distilling a federal offense and which appeared to them a gross violation of individual rights and an unwarranted infringement upon the economic prerogatives of self-sustaining citizens. In this respect, their attitudes were precisely those which in 1794 had spurred Pennsylvania farmers to armed resistance of the whiskey tax imposed by the federal government as part of Alexander Hamilton’s financial plans.8

  Casual visitors sometimes had difficulty in reconciling the independent economic circumstances of families of the Tug Valley, such as the Hatfields and the McCoys, with the crude-ness of their dwellings. In 1888 T. C. Crawford, a reporter for the New York World, visited Devil Anse at his house on Island Creek, a tributary of the Guyandotte River. The clan leader had recently moved there after disposing of five thousand acres of land on the Tug River. The correspondent described Hatfields residence, which was similar to the one which he had left, as a two-room dwelling, one room of which served as a kitchen and dining area and the other as sleeping quarters. A narrow passageway between the two rooms was lined with beds and the loft provided additional sleeping space. The McCoy dwelling on Blackberry Fork was also a double log house, with the two parts connected by a roofed passageway. The main part of the house, commonly called the big house, was a story and a half high, and the other, used as a kitchen and bedroom, was but one story.9

  The isolation of the Tug Valley fostered a prolongation of frontier conditions in which education and organized religion suffered. In 1881 Logan County, which included present Mingo County, had seventy-eight schoolhouses, mostly one-room log structures, but as late as 1890 only 44 percent of the children of school age were enrolled in a primary school. A mere 24 percent of those enumerated were in average daily attendance.10 In an effort to provide an opportunity for learning, the Hatfields built a small log schoolhouse on Mate Creek. Its teacher, Charles Carpenter, was a staunch Hatfield partisan in their feud with the McCoys. Boasting that he had been shot at at least once a year for seventeen years, Carpenter impressed others more with his penetrating stare and eternal watchfulness than with devotion to learning.11

  Simila
r conditions prevailed in Pike County, where the superintendent of schools reported in 1884 that “the greatest part” of the schoolhouses had been condemned under recent legislation and that the best teachers had left the county because of inadequate pay. Most of the Pike County school buildings, like those of Logan County, were constructed of logs.12 School terms in both counties lasted about three months each year, which was about average for the Appalachian sections of their respective states. Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that the leaders of the Hatfield and McCoy clans and many of their supporters used their marks on legal documents, a forceful reminder of the high rate of illiteracy in the mountains.

  The weakness of the common school in Pike and Logan counties was matched by that of another civilizing influence, organized religion. Most of the Hatfields and McCoys appear to have leaned toward the Primitive, or Hardshell, Baptist Church. The Reverend Anderson (“Deacon Arise”) Hatfield, a Kentucky cousin of the feud leader of the same name, pastured a church near the junction of Hatfield Branch and

  Blackberry Creek in Pike County. At the time of the feud, however, neither of the clan leaders showed much interest in religion. The New York World correspondent who visited Devil Anse in 1888 asked his host about his religious views. Devil Anse allegedly replied, “I belong to no Church unless you say that I belong to the one great Church of the world. If you like you can say it is the devil’s Church that I belong to.”13 Randolph McCoy, according to a recent chronicler of the McCoy family, believed in God and was certain that no man in his right mind could doubt the existence of the devil, especially if he had lived near the Hatfields.14

  The weaknesses of the school and the church in the Tug Valley contrasted sharply with the strong bonds that united families. Where the first two languished, family solidarity and loyalty to the clan assumed a special importance in the hearts of isolated mountaineers. The Hatfields and the McCoys exhibited many of the qualities of family life commonly associated with the southern Appalachians. Both families were large, and children were welcome additions. “Seems like a body ought to have at least twelve,” a statement attributed to an unidentified mountain woman, might very well have been uttered by Levicy Hatfield or Sarah McCoy.15 Equally applicable to the feudists was the observation of one writer, “There is always a welcome for the new little son or daughter, while the affection of the older members of the family for the Teast one’ is beautiful and touching.”16 At the same time there existed a profound deference to the aged. Hatfields, for example, referred to Sarah McCoy as “Aunt Sally” and to James McCoy, her eldest son, as “Uncle Jim,” while the McCoys spoke of Valentine Hatfield, the brother of Devil Anse, as “Uncle Wall.”