History and Genealogy of the Robards Family
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Print Entire Chapter

This application to the Legislature of Virginia was not made, it seems, without Jackson's knowledge, and as a lawyer, practicing in the courts of Kentucky and Virginia, he knew the natural process of the law. If the charges were not true, ready as he afterward proved himself to be, to resent any insult to her, he certainly would have come forward and done her the justice to disprove the charge. His partisans do not claim that he did not know of it, but, on the contrary, Jackson, supposing that the divorce had been granted, "married Rachael Donaldson in July, 1791." (See miscellaneous.)

Meanwhile the Virginia Legislature passed the act as before mentioned (copied from their records). It required then some time, the country being a wilderness with no mails established to convey the official notice to Kentucky and await the convening of the Supreme Court, to take depositions and serve notice, etc., all of which Jackson knew and had abundant time to defend the woman, for it was not until 1793, the April term of the Mercer Circuit Court, that the case was called and set for hearing in the June court. This is a copy, the first which appears on the Mercer clerk's records. Lewis Robards complains of Rachael Robards in custody, etc., of a plea of adultery, for this, to-wit: "That, whereas, the said Rachael Robards on the - day of - in the year - was, in due form, according to law, united in the holy bonds of matrimony with the said Lewis Robards, nevertheless, the said Rachael, in violation of her most solemn promise did, on the - day of July, in the year 1790, elope from her husband, said Lewis, and live in adultery with another man, and still continues with the adulterer. Therefore, the said Lewis prays that the said marriage between said Rachael and Lewis may be dissolved according to an act of the Assembly in that case made and provided.

"J. BROWN."

(This John Brown, Lewis Robards' attorney, was at that time a distinguished lawyer, and was afterward the first representative of Kentucky in the United States Senate.)

Right here is a discrepancy in Overton's story and court records which show that she eloped from her husband in July, 1790, while Overton represents her as living with her husband at her mother's in Nashville, in the fall of 1790 and early in 1791, and as going to Natchez with Jackson and the Starks, while in point of fact she had eloped in July, 1790. This record also settles the manner of her leaving.

On account of the absent witnesses the suit was not over until the September court, third day, as the following paper copied from the records shows: The Commonwealth of Kentucky, to the sheriff of Mercer county, greeting: You are hereby commanded to summon Hugh McGarey and John Cowan, to appear before the justice of our court of quarter sessions at the court house, to testify and the truth to say in behalf of Lewis Robards in a certain matter of controversy in our said court, depending and undetermined between the said Lewis Robards, plaintiff, and Rachael Robards, defendant, and this they shall in nowise omit, under penalty of $100 each, and have then and there these witnesses.

THOMAS ALLEN,
Clerk of said court, at the courthouse, August 6,
1793.

As the law required the due notification of Rachael Robards and she made no answer; the jury bringing the verdict, of which the following is a copy:

We, the jury, do find that the defendant, Rachael Robards, both deserted her husband, the plaintiff, Lewis Robards, and hath and doth still live in adultery with another man.

JOHN LIGHTFOOT.

The following transcript from the records of Mercer County, Kentucky, shows the final results of this proceeding. At the court of Quarter Sessions held for Mercer county at the court house in Harrodsburg on the 27th day of September, 1793, this day came the plaintiff, by his attorney, and thereupon came a jury, to-wit: James Bradbury, Thomas Smith, Gabriel Slaughter, John Lightfoot, Samuel Work, Harrison Davis, John Ray, Obediah Wright, John Mills, John Means, Joseph Thomas, and Benjamin Sanders, who, being elected, tried and sworn, well and truly to inquire into the allegation in plaintiff's declaration, specified, upon oath, do say that the defendant, Rachael Robards, hath and doth still live in adultery with another man, it is therefore considered by the court that the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant is dissolved.

Thus ended this celebrated case. Jackson had been living with her as his wife over two years when it was closed. They never were heard from in regard to it while it was pending, and never would have been heard from again if he had never become a great man with the eyes of the nation upon him. That Jackson, a lawyer, did not know of or keep track of the proceedings is preposterous. Yet, Overton states that at the end of two years Jackson was surprised to learn that it had just been decided, and upon his suggestion was again married publicly.

Near Natchez, Mississippi, there used to stand a ruined log hut, which was pointed out to strangers as the spot where they had spent their honeymoon. This was no doubt the spot to which he carried her when they first ran away, for she was kept in a "place of safety," says one historian, until after "Robards" applied for a divorce.

Over thirty years they lived together quietly and without question, perfectly unconcerned about the irregularity of their union, so far as anyone knew, until he was put forward as the candidate of the Democratic party for president, when this episode of his private life was brought forward by the Whigs, and it became necessary for his friends to put as good a face upon the matter as could be made, then disregarding the well known facts of the case and records of the courts, they proceeded to justify the conduct of Jackson and his wife by vilifying her wronged husband, whose home Jackson had destroyed by the alienation of the affections of his wife and robbing him of her. His own sensitiveness concerning the good name of his wife is the strongest proof which can be brought to the weakness of his cause. He was well aware of the inconsistencies of the explanation concerning their marriage, and by way of strengthening it kept his pistol ready for any person who questioned it, his readiness to defend her was chivalrous heroic, but painful in its results. Dickenson, a prominent young lawyer, was killed by him, his friends freely admit, because he committed the unpardonable sin of speaking disrespectfully of Mrs. Jackson's past life. His beautiful young wife, to whom he bade a fond goodbye in the early dawn, promising to return soon, was widowed a few hours later by a pistol shot from Andrew Jackson for this cause. It is said that he regretted this more than any act of his life, and well he might, for in his heart of hearts he knew that Dickerson was justified in criticising this indiscretion of their youth. Mrs. Jackson died before inauguration only a few days, of a broken heart, it was said - certainly of heart disease. It was fortunate for her and the nation, for she could not have presided at the White House without serious social complications. Luckily, also, there were no descendants of this ill-starred union. Capt. Lewis Robards, several years after obtaining the divorce, was married to a very handsome and estimable lady of Jefferson county, Kentucky, with whom he lived happily to a good old age, and their descendants may be found occupying positions of honor and trust in various parts of the country, in Kentucky and Missouri chiefly.

[The writer of this article is unknown.]

1 | 2 | 3 | 4