Jean Lafitte Historic Resource Study (Chalmette Unit)

C. The Chalmet Plantation

The plantation that became known as "Chalmette Plantation" measured slightly over twenty-two arpents front on the Mississippi River. The nineteenth century history of this property may be viewed archivally in a sequence of land tenure that illustrates not only trends in the settlement and economic history of the region, but also that provides insight into changing lifeways of the period. The lowermost six arpents of the twenty-two-plus-arpent front plantation can be traced directly to the early French Colonial Period. This portion of the plantation granted to or purchased by Francois Philippe de Marigny prior to 1728, was a larger tract that included the other portions of the Chalmette plantation for which no direct chain of title from the French colonial period survives today. [17] After Marigny's death, his landholdings in the area passed to his widow, Marie Madeleine Le Maire, who married the Chief Engineer of the Louisiana colony, Captain Ignace Francois Broutin. [18] Ownership of these lands eventually passed to Marigny's son, Antoine Philippe de Marigny de Mandeville. the census of 1770 recorded Antoine Philippe's ownership of ten arpents of land, fifty slaves, sixty head of cattle, fourteen horses, one hundred sheep, twelve hogs, and two muskets. [19]

On July 13, 1794, Antoine Philippe's widow sold ten arpents of land to Charles Antoine de Reggio. [20] Reggio subsequently sold six arpents of this ten arpent parcel to Ignace de Lino de Chalmet in 1805. The property conveyed was described as having been located about 1.75 miles below New Orleans, bounded on the lower side by lands of Antoine Bienvenu and on the upper side by lands owned by Laurent Sigur. [21] De Lino (or Delino) de Chalmet was the grandson of Marie Madeleine Le Maire and of Broutin. [22]

The other sixteen arpent parcel of what became Chalmet plantation appears to have formed part of the Marais concession. [23] However, as noted previously, no direct chain of title remains to demonstrate this original land tenure. Reeves states that part of this property was owned during the early Spanish colonial period by Francois Pascalis de La Barre, yet there is no direct evidence of this. [24]

Nonetheless, this area may be characterized using data from the 1770 census. During the Spanish period (1769-1803), indigo was the major crop in the area, followed by sugar, maize, and rice. Lumbering also was a common occupation. Cattle comprised the primary stock, although sheep were plentiful. Hogs and horses were relatively scarce. Domesticated fowl included turkey, geese, chicken, ducks, and pigeons. The substantial wealth of the area's occupants can be judged from the three to one ratio of slaves to owners. [25] These data present a general impression of a relatively wealthy resident planter population below New Orleans during the years before the turn of the eighteenth century.

The fact that indigo was the chief crop in the area is not surprising. France had encouraged the production of indigo in the Louisiana colony, and this policy was continued during the Spanish period. Indigo was a particularly labor efficient crop; one slave could plant and tend two acres of the plant and still have ample time to attend to his own provisions. [26] Each plantation generally had its own indigo processing facility, since the manufacture of dye from indigo was relatively easy and required no expensive machinery. The cut plant was placed in a vat called a "steeper," and the indigo then was covered with water until fermentation occurred, the liquid by-product then was drawn off into another vat called a "beater," where it was agitated much like the churning of butter. A precipitate was formed in the solution by adding lime water. The water was drawn off, and the indigo solids were placed in cloth bags to dry. [27]

Pedro de Marigny de Mandeville, a Knight of the Royal and Military Order of St. Louis, acquired the sixteen arpents in question from Louis Boisdore late during the Spanish period. On February 10, 1798, Marigny de Mandeville exchanged this parcel for another with Laurent Sigur, a captain in the Spanish militia. That transactions specified that:

The Sieur Sigur sells to Monsieur Marigny the land... from the line of Monsieur Daunoy Treme and the fortification of the city, the said vendor reserving all the rights on the portion which has been withdrawn by Monsieur de Carondelet, former Governor of this Province, in order to establish the fortification, as well as the land situated at Gentilly which he has sold to Monsieur Reano.... [28]

The only improvements noted on the transferred property at this time were fences and "small huts." The land acquired by Marigny later was subdivided into the Faubourg Marigny.

Beginning in the 1790s and continuing into the early nineteenth century, major change took place in Louisiana's economy. The impetus to this change was the economic failure of indigo production. By the 1790s, indigo was becoming unprofitable. In terms of production costs, Louisiana's indigo could not compete in the world market with indigo produced in India. Indigo also was susceptiable to insect blights, and it was sensitive to the weather. Consequently, crop losses could be severe. Furthermore, the crop exhausted the soil. And, an increase in the price of slaves in Louisiana made it difficult to obtain the labor necessary for indigo production on the plantations. Finally, the terrible smell of indigo production attracted disease-carrying insects, and the production of indigo polluted the streams between Pointe Coupee and the Yazoo River. [29] During the 1790s, the cotton gin was invented, and Etienne de Bore developed a process enabling the commercially successful production of sugar from cane. Cotton and sugar rapidly became Louisiana's two major money crops.

During this period, Sigur made a number of improvements to the property he had acquired from Marigny, including outfitting it for production of the new cash crop. When he sold the property in 1805 to Jean Baptiste Prevost, a judge of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Orleans, the property was a fully functioning sugar plantation, complete with a great house, a sugar house, a refinery, a storehouse, slave cabins, and a variety of outbuildings and attendant structures. Thirty-five slaves (Table 1) also were conveyed in this sale, as were horses, pigs, about fifty sheep, wagons, plows, and other agricultural implements. The price of the sale was $50,000.00. [30]

Illustration 14 depicts the property during Prevost's ownership. The great house and two garconnieres are shown facing the river, and behind the residence two smaller buildings were present. It appears that the scale of these structures is not accurate, so their precise historic location also is somewhat suspect. However, their former location either was in the area of the present military cemetery, or, as is more likely, they were located immediately downriver.

Table 1: Slaves Conveyed in 1805 Sale of Land to Jean Baptiste Prevost (P. Pedesclaux, June 12, 1805, NONA)

Three years later, Prevost sold the plantation to William Brown, the collector of customs for the port of New Orleans. [31] During his ownership of the property, Brown registered his claim to the land with the United States government:

William Brown claims a tract of land, situated on the east side of the Mississippi in the County of Orleans, containing sixteen arpents, eleven toises, and three feet in front with a depth extending back as far as Lake Borgne and bounded on the upper side by land of J. M. Pintard and on the lower by land of Chalmet Delino.... It appears that the front and first depth of forty arpents of this land was actually inhabited and cultivated on the 20th day of December, 1803, and for more than ten consecutive years prior thereto. So much the Board confirms, but rejects the claim to the remaining extension of depth. [32]

Brown's operation of the plantation was short-lived and less than successful:

William Brown the collector has ran off, and taken with him a large sum of public money. [33]

There is no longer room to doubt the villainy of William Brown the collector; he arrived at the Balize on board of the vessel called the Kingston on the afternoon of the 16th instant, and having obtained a pilot, put to sea on the same evening. [34]

Brown's hasty departure appears to have resulted in part from the overextension of his financial resources:

[Brown's] purchase of a sugar plantation and of so many negroes, I was [convinced] would involve him, and I thought it probable, that he would ultimately become a public defaulter.

But I never supposed that a man who had given no previous symptoms of depravity would at once have covered himself with Infamy. [35]

The United States filed suit against William Brown (#2324 on the docket of the Superior Court for the Territory of Orleans). Unfortunately, that suit has been lost. Nevertheless, the net result was the acquisition of the property by the United States. On March 15, 1811, Phillip Grymes, the Attorney General of the United States, sold the property to Thomas H. Williams for $1.00, "for use and benefit of the United States." [36] Prior to this sale, on June 11, 1811, Grymes had arranged for the property to be sold to Charles Mynn Thruston, known as the "fighting parson of the Revolution," and to Henry Daingerfield, Thruston's son-in-law. The two purchased the plantation from the agent T. H. Williams for $44,000.00, and Thruston took up residence there even before the act of sale was passed before the notary on April 24, 1813.

Thruston died at and was buried on his St. Bernard plantation in 1812. After his death, the plantation was advertised for sale:

There is on this land the following buildings: to wit, a very pretty house with a story, American construction style, and very livable; another house located near the first, very livable and in good condition. Moreover, there are kitchens with ovens, a chicken yard, negro cabins, latrines, wells, stables and a good carriage house for two carriages. None of these buildings suffered from the last hurricane. [37]

On June 14, 1813, Henry Daingerfield and Thruston's heirs sold the plantation to Ignace Delino de Chalmet for $65,000.00. The plantation was described as comprising sixteen arpents, eleven toises, and three feet front on the Mississippi. This purchase brought Chalmet's holdings to a total of more than twenty-two arpents front. Twenty-five slaves also were purchased at that time. [38] Sometime after this purchase, Chalmet moved his family to the great house on the new, upriver parcel. [39]

The British occupied the Chalmet plantation on December 27, 1814. Jackson subsequently ordered all buildings on the plantation destroyed. The destruction of these buildings left the Chalmet family with a small house on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. Shortly thereafter, on February 10, 1815, Chalmet died. His widow, in filing Chalmet's succession, stated that:

... all the furniture and papers belonging to the said succession and which were located on the plantation where her said late husband dwelt, have been reduced to ashes by the fire wich the American General judged necessary to have set to the principal house, and other establishments which were located on the said plantation, for the defense of Louisiana against the English. [40]

Illustration 15 depicts the Chalmet Plantation at the time of the battle. The complex of structures there included the great house (nearest the river), slave quarters, and various other buildings. One of the larger structures near the quarters area no doubt was the sugar house. It is likely that the Chalmet great house (Illustration 15) was the same structure as the Prevost residence (Illustration 14). Illustration 20 displays a projection of the Latour map on the contemporary landscape. As stated above, this map is unreliable in regard to the placement of structures with respect to the present course of the river. However, the structures are clearly located downriver of the present park boundaries. Thus, remains associated with the Chalmet occupation are not expected within the project area. Furthermore, it is not likely that remains from previous occupations will be represented, since the major habitation and activity areas of the latter probably are the same as those mapped on the Chalmet Plantation.

Chalmet's half brother, Pierre Denis de la Ronde, owned the plantation immediately downriver. De la Ronde also held a mortgage on the Chalmet plantation, [41] and he filed suit against Chalmet's widow and heirs (#1306, First Judicial District Court). De la Ronde purchased the plantation when it was offered at a sheriff's sale on February 20, 1817.

Two months later, de la Ronde sold the property to two brothers, Hilaire and Louis St. Amand, who were free men of color and residents of New Orleans. The lowermost six arpents of the plantation extended back to the lake, while the upper parcel had a "known" depth. The property was bounded above by the Rodriguez parcel, and the two properties were separated by the Rodriguez canal. The property below was the plantation of Antoine Bienvenu. No description was given in the act of sale of any structures or improvements on the property, since the St. Amands had visited the plantation and were "content and satisfied with the same and do not desire a more ample description." [42] However, it is unlikely that any of the structures previously standing there survived the fires set by General Jackson's troops.

The price of this sale was $55,000.00. Instead of paying cash, the buyers signed over to de la Ronde six notes by Pierre St. Amand, a resident of St. Charles Parish. Pierre St. Amand pledged his plantation in St. Charles Parish as security for his notes. It is likely that Pierre was Louis and Hilaire's brother. The St. Amand family apparently included several wealthy plantation and slave-owning free men of color; in addition to land holdings in St. Charles Parish, the St. Amand family was connected with the 120-arpent Rigaud plantation on Grand Isle. [43]

In fact, free colored families such as the St. Amands were not uncommon in antebellum Louisiana. Throughout this period, Louisiana benefited economically from a relatively large population of free people of color. [44] The free colored population grew by three means: manumission of slaves; immigration of free blacks, primarily from the West Indies; and from natural reproduction. Although relatively few slaves were freed during the French period, the mechanism for doing so was established early in the French Code Noir. With some exceptions, free people of color enjoyed the same economic privileges as whites. However, free men of color could be reduced to slavery for aiding runaway slaves, whereas whites were merely fined for such activities. The Spanish expanded the means by which a slave could be freed. The most notable of these was "self purchase." [45]

The beginning of the American period in Louisiana coincided with slave insurrections in Haiti. From 1804 to 1809, Louisiana's free colored population more than doubled as free blacks fled the violence in Haiti. One result of this wave of immigration was the creation of federal laws restricting free black immigration and manumission. Free men of color were forbidden to serve in the militia, and they were denied the right to vote or to hold political office.

Nevertheless, Louisiana's free colored population continued to grow throughout the nineteenth century. The census of 1852 listed 242 free people of color as large, medium or small planters. A few owned very large sugar and cotton plantations where labor was provided by negro slaves. In 1830, there were 212 slave-owning free men of color in the rural parishes of Louisiana, and twenty-five of those owned 20 to 75 slaves. Most owned three to five slaves. This widespread ownership of slaves by free men of color underscores the identification of free colored planters with their white counterparts. The wealthy elite among the free men of color "espoused the ideology of the planter class." [46]

It is significant that the St. Amands bought the large St. Bernard parish property at a time when sugar production was increasingly rapidly in south Louisiana. Sugar production was not feasible for small planters, because of the large capital investments it required. According to Mark Schmitz, [47] in 1860 the average investment in sugar producing machinery on a Louisiana plantation was $9,900.00. This contrasts sharply with a $830.00 average investment for equipment on a cotton plantation. Sugar yielded a nine percent return, whereas cotton's return averaged about seven percent. [48]

The planting cycle on sugar plantations began with the preparation of the soil and the planting of the cane in late January or early February. Corn also was planted in March and April, and peas and potatoes were planted in May and June. As in the case of cotton cultivation, field hands continued to hoe the crops until they were "laid by" around July 4. From then until the harvest, slaves gathered wood for the fuel needed in sugar production; levees were repaired, and ditches were cleaned. Harvesting of the crop began in October, and work continued virtually twenty-four hours a day until harvesting. Sugar production was completed in late December or early January. During this time, cane was cut and milled, seed cane was put up, and the ground was plowed. [49]

Structures usually found on residential plantations included a great house, kitchen, offices, garconnieres, pigeonniers, and carriage houses. The overseer had his own house, and the slaves lived in whitewashed, one or two-room cabins set in rows. Often there was a separate kitchen where the slaves' food was prepared. [50] Barns, stables, storage sheds, and privies also were present on sugar plantations. The major industrial structure and major investment on a sugar plantation was the sugar house. In the early nineteenth century, these structures generally were made of wood; by 1850, most sugar houses were constructed of brick. Sugar houses generally were 100-150 feet long and about 50 feet wide. [51] The mill usually was powered by a steam engine. The mill was used for expressing juice from the cane, and it usually was housed within the sugar house, although detached structures for the mill also were utilized on Louisiana plantations. [52] The most common method of cane juice clarification and evaporation was the open pan method. This method involved the use of a set of four kettles of decreasing size called, respectively, the grande, the flambeau, the syrup, and the battery. The kettles were set into a masonry structure usually about thirty feet long by seven feet wide, within which was the furnace and the flue for conveying heat to the kettles. The furnace was under the battery, and an ash pit would have been outside of the sugar house, adjacent to that structure. Both coal and wood were used to fuel the furnaces. The flue, at the opposite end of the kettle set, would have turned a right angle to the set and passed to the outside of the sugar house where it connected to the chimney. [53]

After the clarification and evaporation of the cane juices, they were emptied from the battery into shallow wood troughs, or coolers, and the sugar granules formed as the juice cooled. The coolers were ten to twelve feet long, four feet wide, and eighteen inches deep. [54] There usually were about sixteen coolers in a sugar house. [55] After the completion of granulation, the sugar and molasses in the coolers were packed into hogsheads, or barrels of approximately 1,000 pounds. The packing was done in the purgery, a room in the sugar house containing a large cement cistern overlain by timbers on which the hogsheads were placed. The hogsheads had holes in the bottom through which the molasses could drain into the cistern, leaving the granulated sugar. [56] A cane shed for storing cane as it was brought in from the field usually was attached to the sugar house on the same end as the mill. [57]

Thus, the St. Amands had both equipment and building expenses when they took ownership of the property in question. It may be assumed that the St. Amands had to rebuild the plantation's standing structures. In 1822, the St. Amands contracted to have a canal built to Bayou Bienvenu. The contract for this work was specific and detailed:

... to be ten feet wide and four feet deep in all its length to begin from the back fence which now stands near the wood and to run down as far back as to reach Bayou Bienvenu in a straight direction, each side of the canal to be parallel and at an equal distance from both the side lines of said plantation... the parties will throw two feet of earth coming out... digging on side of the canal nearer the city and make therewith a causeway or levee to be two feet wide all along the canal, the other eight feet of earth on the other side of the canal as to have on that side of the canal a space at least two feet clear and free of said earth. Also, the mechanics will build a small house near the said back fence where the canal is to begin for them to live in during all the time they shall be working on the canal... everyone [of the workmen]... shall keep off from the dwelling house, outhouses, yard and negro camp [of the St. Amands]... and shall not meddle, nor have any intercourse or communication with the slaves and the workmen.... [58]

Illustration 21 shows the location of this canal, as well as the location of the St. Amand plantation complex. As was the Chalmet plantation complex, the St. Amand complex was located downriver from the present park area (Illustration 21). It is not unlikely that the St. Amands utilized the foundations of the Chalmet plantation structures; such reuse of structural remains is common in the New Orleans area. [59]

Louis and Hilaire borrowed more than $22,000.00 for construction on their property from their sister Marie Manette St. Amand. They also borrowed a like amount from another sister, Genevieve. [60] These debts were capitalized by mortgages on the St. Amand brothers' land, described as "a plantation made into a sugar refinery." [61] By 1832, the St. Amands found it necessary to subdivide and offer part of their plantation for sale to repay debts totaling more than $70,000.00. [62] The sale was advertised in the Louisiana Courier, March 7, 1832:

Ten arpents of the Plantation of Messrs. Hilaire and Louis St. Amand five miles below New Orleans, and known by the name of Battle Ground. Of these ten arpents, six are situated at the upper limit of the plantation on the side of the city—the two first arpents contiguous to the boundary of Mr. Edward Prevost's property, reach only fifteen arpents more or less in depth; and the four other arpents go to 80 arpents in depth. The four arpents at the lower limit are contiguous to the plantation of Antoine Bienvenu. They are entitled to the double concession of eighty arpents and conformably to the act of sale of Mr. Denis de la Ronde, reach as far as Lake Borgne. The sellers do not warrant this prolongation. On the six arpents of the upper part is found the line of defense of the American Army in 1815, and on the four arpents of the lower part are the four majestic oaks, where all those who come to visit the field of battle generally end their walk.

The auction sale took place on March 23, 1832. Despite their original intention to offer only ten arpents of the plantation for sale, twelve lots of one arpent each, six at each limit of the plantation, were sold. A plan of the subdivision was drawn by d'Hemecourt, and Louis and Hilaire deposited it in the offices of the notary Carlisle Pollock:

And being desirous to grant unto the said purchasers all proper facilities for the conveyances which they have this day made to them respectively for the lots by them respectively purchased at said sale, the said appearers have produced and delivered unto me notary the afore recited plan... this day made before me have been at the request of said appearers deposited in the margin of this minute in this my current register.... [63]

Unfortunately, this plat has been lost. However, by utilizing the property descriptions given in the acts of sale, along with Zimpel's 1834 map of New Orleans and environs, it has been possible to reconstruct d'Hemecourt's plat (Illustration 22). The lot numbers assigned each of the parcels indicate that the lots numbered 11 and above were subdivided and sold as an afterthought, since they appear out of sequence. It is unlikely that any structures were present on the lots sold at that time. Rather, any such structures probably were constructed immediately after the subdivision sale. Thus, the reconstruction shown in Illustration 22 only shows structures on lands not formerly part of the Chalmet, or St. Amand, plantation, and those on land retained by Hilaire and Louis St. Amand. The plantation complex built by the St. Amands included a large quarters area, behind which the sugar house probably was located, as well as a great house surrounded by garconnieres, offices, a kitchen, and other attendant structures (Illustrations 16 and 22).

Table 2 shows the purchasers of the lots during the 1832 sale; the plots acquired are shown in Illustration 22. Illustration 16, Zimpel's plan, which was drafted in 1833, suggests that structural improvements on the various lots were undertaken rapidly after the 1832 sale. Comparison of Illustrations 16 and 22 also shows that some of the properties changed hands shortly after the sale. For example, papers relating to the settlement of debts show that Joseph Sauvinet sold lot 12 to Frederick Formento almost immediately after the sale described above. [64] Since they were not incorporated as part of the park, the lowermost six parcels are no longer of concern here.

Table 2: Purchasers of Lots at the Public Auction on March 23, 1832 (C. Pollock, April 10, 1832, NONA)

The subdivision and sale of the St. Amand holdings brought Louis and Hilaire a total of $73,600.00. This allowed them to pay off most of their debts. Three days later, Joseph Sauvinet released the brothers from their debt to him, and their sister Genevieve did likewise. [65] Nevertheless, Louis and Hilaire continued to owe their sister Manette over $18,000.00. Perhaps to settle this remaining debt, Manette purchased Louis one-half share in the remaining plantation. Zimpel's 1834 plan shows "H. and M. St. Amand" as owners of the property (Illustration 16). To facilitate this sale, Louis and Hilaire divided the slaves they held together on the plantation. Table 3 shows the results of this division. Since Louis' share was valued higher than Hilaire's, the former paid the latter $1,000.00. It also was noted in this partition that the St. Amand brothers owed one obligation of over $9,000.00 in favor of Hilaire's wards Louis Ovide and Marie Mirthee St. Amand. [66] Clearly, the St. Amands still were having financial difficulties at that date.

Table 3: Division of Slaves between Louis and Hilaire St. Amand in 1833
(C. Pollock, February 18, 1833, NONA)

In 1834, one of the auctioned lots, lot 6, was reacquired by Louis St. Amand. That lot apparently was sold by Sauvinet back to Hilaire St. Amand, who died in 1833. The property (Illustrations 16 and 22) then was sold to Louis Bartholemy Chauvin Delery. [67] Delery sold it to Dame Celeste Destrehan, the wife of Prosper Marigny, shortly thereafter. Louis St. Amand purchased the parcel, including buildings and improvements, from Dame Destrehan. [68]

As indicated by the name "Battle Ground" Plantation, [69] the area was recognized as an important historic landmark, and visited by travelers to the New Orleans area. One such visitor was Harriet Martineau, who came to the site of the battle of New Orleans subsequent to the St. Amand subdivision:

We were taken to the Battle ground, the native soil of General Jackson's political growth. Seeing the Battle ground was all very well; but my delight was in the drive to it, with the Mississippi on the right hand, and on the left gardens of roses which bewildered the imagination.... One villa, built by an Englishman, was obstinately inappropriate to the scene an climate;—red brick, without gallery, or even eaves or porch,—the mere sight of it was scorching. All the rest were an entertainment to the eye as they stood, white and cool, amidst their flowering magnolias, and their blossoming alleys, hedges, and thickets of roses. In returning, we alighted at one of these delicious retreats, and wandered about, losing each other among the thorns, the ceringas, and the wilderness of shrubs. We met in a grotto, under the summer-house, cool with a greenish light, and veiled at its entrance with a tracery of creepers.... The canes in the sugar grounds were showing themselves above the soil; young sprouts that one might almost see grow.... The Battle-ground is rather more than four miles from the city. We were shown the ditch and the swamp by which the field of action was bounded on two sides, and some remains of the breast-work of earth which was thrown up. [70]

Louis died several years after Hilaire. Unfortunately, the Civil Court records in New Orleans do not contain the successions of either brother. However, the partition of Louis' real property in 1841 among his three surviving sisters is recorded. This document shows that by the time of his death, Louis' land was reduced to two one-arpent tracts, one of which was the parcel purchased from Dame Destrehan in 1834. A plat of this partition shows that by 1841, much of the former plantation of Louis and Hilaire was in the possession of two of their sisters: Manette, and Felicite Orsol, widow of Antoine Paillet. This no doubt resulted from the settlement of the St. Amand brothers' debets to their sister Manette, as well as from the earlier settlement of Hilaire's estate.

As shown in Illustration 23, each of three surviving sisters received two-thirds of an arpent as a result of this partition. The act also specified that the "house, the buildings, the negro cabins, and other dependencies" were located on lot 4, which was partitioned between Manette and Genevieve. [71] Illustration 24 shows that these structures actually were on both lots 4 and 5. It also shows that the great house complex was downriver on the land held by Manette, and that the house referred to in the act probably was the overseer's dwelling. During these proceedings, Manette acted as attorney-in-fact for her sisters living in St. Landry Parish and in France.

The property descriptions for the partitioned parcels also are notable, as the properties are measured off of the public road rather than the river:

One of said lots, bounded, according to said map, on one side by the property of Eulalie Peyroux, and on the other by that of the said Manette St., designated on said map under No. One, measuring 180 feet fronting on the public road.... And the other lot, designated on said map as No. 4, measuring 182 feet fronting on the public road... plus the rights of the succession of said Louis St. Amand to the Batture which exists before said two lots and which do not appear on the plan....

This indicates that by 1841 the public, or levee road was a significant feature in the landscape. Unfortunately, no details as to its construction could be found.

By the end of 1841, then, all of what had been the Chalmet plantation had been divided into small tracts, none of which was large enough for profitable cane cultivation. These tracts subsequently were used for residential purposes, for gardens, and for commercial uses. The ownership and use of these subdivided parcels is discussed below.

1. Lot 1: The Alice Cenas Beauregard Parcel

Lot 1 of the subdivision of Louis and Hilaire St. Amand's plantation (Illustration 22) was purchased by Theophile Wiltz on April 10, 1832. [72] Wiltz did not retain ownership for long, and the following January he sold it to Auguste and Etienne Villavaso for $3,900.00. [73] Illustration 16 shows the structural improvements to the property during Villavaso's ownership; these probably included a residence and two attendant structures. Unfortunately, at this point in the property history there is a break in the chain of title for lot 1, probably due to the loss of early. St. Bernard parish conveyance records. The next owner recorded for the property was Mrs. Celeste Cantrelle; the Cantrelle and Villavaso families were related. Members of both families are recorded as owning the adjoining downriver property during the mid-1800s. In addition, Lise Cantrelle, the granddaughter of Michel Cantrelle of St. James Parish, married Etienne Villavaso. [74] Thus, it may be assumed that Celeste Cantrelle received the property from Villavaso, probably after 1849 when the latter purchased the Rodriguez tract. [75]

Octave Cantrelle, the administrator of the succession of Celeste Cantrelle, sold the property to Jose Antonio Fernandez Lineros in St. Bernard parish on September 24, 1866. The year before, Fernandez Lineros had purchased the adjoining downriver parcel, lot 2, from the Michel B. Cantrelle family. This latter parcel included the structure that would become known as the Beauregard House, and it was there that Fernandez Lineros made his home. Fernandez Lineros both expanded and renovated this residence during the late 1860s.

Fernandez Lineros' fortunes declined during the 1870s, and in 1873 he sold lot 1 to Carmen Ribas, the wife separated in property from Auguste Lesseps. Ribas was a relative, since Fernandez' wife was Carmen Lesseps. The consideration for the sale was $4,000.00. [76] The Lesseps family resided in Plaquemines Parish, rather than on the property acquired from Fernandez Lineros.

Two years later, Ribas sold the parcel to her son, Auguste Lesseps, Jr., for $4,000.00. [77] During his ownership, Auguste evidently let the property decay, since nine years later, at the date of its sale to A. E. Livaudais, the property brought only $2,500.00. [78] Livaudais sold the property one year later to Octave Toca for the same price. [79] On September 24, 1888, Toca sold the property to the wife of the owner of the Beauregard House, Rene T. Beauregard. [80] Beauregard was the son of the Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard. This purchase of lot 1 enabled the two lots to be rejoined, as they had been during Fernandez' ownership. The two lots remained in the possession of the Beauregard family until 1904, when both parcels were sold to the New Orleans Terminal Co. The consideration for this sale was $9,500.00, a $6,500.00 increase over its price of sixteen years before. [81] Illustrations 17 and 25 suggest that one small residential structure survived on lot 1 into the twentieth century.

2. Lot 2: The R.T. Beauregard Parcel

Lot 2 was sold to Alexander Baron (Illustration 22) by the St. Amands. [82] This is the parcel on which the Beauregard House still stands. Its history has been described thoroughly in Francis Wilshin, "The Rene Beauregard House" (1952), and in Samuel Wilson, Jr., "The Rene Beauregard House" (1956).

3. Lots 3, 4, and 5: The Battle Ground Saw Mill

Lots 3 and 4 of the St. Amand plantation, each one arpent front by eighty arpents in depth, were purchased by Michel Bernard Cantrelle, a member of one of the first families of St. James Parish. The lots (Illustration 22) were purchased for $7,300.00 and for $7,900.00, respectively. [83] Zimpel's 1834 plan of New Orleans and vicinity shows that although the property title was held by Cantrelle, the property was utilized both by Cantrelle and by Villavaso. In fact, Villavaso and Cantrelle also were related. It was during this period of land tenure that the "Battle Ground Saw Mill" was established and began operation. Illustration 16 shows the structures on the Cantrelle and Villavaso lots; the two largest structures probably represent the mill and warehouse, while the smaller structure that fronts the public road was probably an office.

Michel Martin Villavaso received this property from the succession of Michel B. Cantrelle in 1845, along with slaves and certain bank shares. Cantrelle's succession was opened in St. James parish, and the property was purchased there by Villavaso from Joseph Cantrelle. Prior to this purchase, Villavaso possessed an undivided one-quarter share of the two properties. [84] The record of this former act was destroyed by fire, as was the record of a 1868 Sheriff's Sale ordered by the Second Judicial District Court in the matter of the succession of Marie Josephine Cantrelle, the wife of Michel Martin Villavaso (#584). The result of this latter sale was the purchased by Charles Dahlgren of the "Battle Ground Saw Mill," which, by that time, also included lot 5. The consideration for this sale was $30,500.00. [85]

Lot 5 originally had been purchased by Pierre Oscar Peyroux, a New Orleans merchant, from Louis and Hilaire St. Amand for $6,900.00 (Illustration 22). On March 16, 1835, Peyroux sold the property to Constance Peyroux, along with 132 shares of stock in the Citizens Bank of Louisiana, for 18,000.00. [86] On February 16, 1844, the Citizens Bank of Louisiana brought suit against Constance Peyroux. [87] The Citizens Bank of Louisiana held a mortgage against lot 5; in addition, Constance Peyroux had taken additional loans against her stock. After she refused repayment of these notes, a writ of Fieri Facias was ordered and the property was sold at a Sheriff's Sale to Marie Aimie Caraby, the wife of Pierre Oscar Peyroux. [88] Caraby then sold the property to Michel Martin Villavaso on March 31, 1853, for $3,590.00. [89] The great reduction in the value of the property in the twenty years following subdivision suggests that much of the original value of the property derived from stands of timber, and that structural improvements, if any, were relatively insignificant assets. This hypothesis is supported by Illustration 16, which shows only one small structure on the property.

When the saw mill property was sold during settlement of the succession of Marie Josephine Cantrelle, the property measured three arpents front by eighty in depth. Illustration 26 shows the three arpents tract about the time of Cantrelle's death. Improvements to the property included a large steam-driven saw mill, which also had a grist and flour mill and a lathe. There was a storehouse for corn, a forge, a house for the engineer, a house for the clerks, and housing for the mill's employees. There was a large hospital on the site, and a substantial residential complex that included a very large great house, a kitchen, two pigeonnaires, servants quarters, a wash house, a coach house, a hen house, and privies. [90] It should be added that the sawmill was very successful, and that it was patronized by prominent New Orleans architects such as James Gallier, Jr., who ultimately married the Villavasos' daughter.

Dahlgren, who purchased the sawmill property and following the death of Marie Cantrelle, sold both in 1868 to Mary A. C. Packwood for $30,500.00, his original purchase price. [91] Packwood donated both the stock and the property to Sarah Ainsworth Packwood, the wife of Dr. Richard Packwood. [92]

Once again, the property was held only for a short time, and Packwood sold it, along with remaining shares in Citizens Bank, to Mary Atkins Lynch in January, 1871. The price of this sale was $22,500.00, indicating devaluation in the stock, the real property, or both. [93] It is possible that the sawmill had not been maintained adequately during this period of rapid change in ownership.

Mary Atkins Lynch, the wife of John Lynch, the Surveyor General of Louisiana, sold the Battle Ground Sawmill to the Board of Control of Louisiana Agricultural and Mechanical College on March 30, 1875, for $20,555.00. [94] The following June, an advertisement in the New Orleans Times solicited proposals for buildings to be erected on the site. This suggests that few of the structures formerly located on the property survived into the 1870s. At that time, then, the name for the property, the "Battle Ground Sawmill," no longer described the property per se, but rather referred to its history.

Structures were not built on the property by the college, though, and the Citizens Bank of Louisiana, which held many of the Agricultural and Mechanical College's mortgages during the period brought suit against the school. [95] The bank acquired the property at public sale on October 1, 1881. In November of that year, the bank sold the property for $10,000.00 to Lycurgus Holt Wooten. [96] In June, 1885, Wooten sold the property to Pamela Rentrop, the wife of Dr. John Rhodes. The Rhodes were separate in property, according to a judgment by the District Court for the Parish of St. Mary in 1873. Both resided in Caldwell Parish. [97] Illustration 17, dated 1874 but drafted during the 1890s, shows the property under Pamela Rhodes' ownership. A fenced yard is shown surrounding what probably were the Rhodes residence and two dependencies. Five small buildings are shown immediately upriver from the residential complex, some, if not all of these were built during the operation of the mill by Cantrelle and Villavaso. These smaller structures were located on lot 3, and no improvements are shown on lot 5.

In 1896, Captain LaFayette Jacks of Plaquemines Parish brought suit against Dr. John Rhodes before the Twenty-Second Judicial District Court of the Parish of St. Bernard (#453). At that time, the Rhodes were residents of St. Bernard. Dr. Rhodes had borrowed money from Captain Jacks, mortgaging his wife's property as security. Since Rhodes could not meet his debt, the property was seized and sold at a Sheriff's Sale on November 14, 1896, for $7,000.00. [98]

Jacks later donated the property to his daughter, Anna Jane, the wife of James M. McMillan. [99] However, in 1903 the New Orleans Terminal Company, formerly known as the New Orleans and San Francisco Railroad Company, decided to build a terminal for the handling of its export and import business in St. Bernard parish. The tract for the terminal was to extend from the "lower side of the New Orleans Belt and Terminal Company, known as "Chalmette," to the lower limits of the City of New Orleans. [100] The Jacks property was part of this area, which comprised:

A certain tract of land known as the "Battle Ground Saw mills," together with all the buildings and improvements thereon....situated in the Parish of St. Bernard in this state on the left bank of the Mississippi River at about 3/4 of a mile below the City of New Orleans, measuring three arpents front on the said Mississippi River by eighty arpents in depth between parallel lines, and composed of three lots designated by the numbers three, four, and five on a plan drawn by A. d'Hemecourt... each of said lots has one arpent front on said river, three being bounded on the upper line by the lot Number two, now the property of R.T. Beauregard, to which it is continguous as far as the point marked "D" on said plan and thence to its rear line by the Prevost Plantation now owned by the State of Louisiana, and known as "Chalmette Monument Property,"... and lot number five being bounded. .. on the lower side by the property formerly belonging to H. C. Delery and now to Fazende Lane and by the property now owned by Jean Marie Couget.... [101]

Structures on the property consisted of a frame building where the overseer apparently resided, and several small outbuildings. Illustration 25 shows a small residence in a grove of pecan trees on the property. This may represent the frame structure mentioned above.

Anna Jacks agreed to sell the property to the New Orleans Terminal Company, but her asking price was high. The New Orleans Terminal Company petitioned the Court that

[the] petitioner cannot agree with the owners of said property as to the price to be paid for the purchase thereof, and the said Mrs. Anna J. McMillan cannot make title thereto on account of the dangers resulting from the possible revindication of this said donation at the death of the donor.... [102]

The company requested that the property be expropriated, and that the owners be paid for any damages resulting from the expropriation. The court found in favor of the plaintiffs, and Anna and Captain Jacks were paid $27,500.00 for the property. [103] The New Orleans Terminal Company almost immediately leased sixteen acres of the land to Vincent and Paul Guerra for the calendar year 1904. [104]

4. Lot 6: Fazendeville

The chain of title for Lot 6 is unclear for the first half of the nineteenth century. It was numbered Lot 6 and sold to Joseph Sauvinet in 1832 by the St. Amand brothers (Illustration 22), [105] but it almost immediately was returned to Hilaire St. Amand. The latter died in 1833; as Zimpel's 1834 map indicates, the tract was sold to Louis Bartholemy Chauvin Delery soon after (Illustration 16). At that time, a new house stood on the property. It had six apartments, five of them with fireplaces (Sam Wilson, personal communication 1984). Illustration 16 indicates that there were at least four other structures. The property passed to Celeste Destrehan, wife of Prosper Marigny, and it was repurchased by Louis St. Amand in 1834. [106] The property devolved to the possession of Felicite Orsol, the widow of Antoine Paillet, in 1841, at the partition of Louis St. Amand's estate among his three sisters and heirs (Illustration 23). [107] However, Felicite only received two thirds of the property at this date, while the other third was adjudicated to Manette St. Amand. The latter undoubtedly had control of the property, since, as noted previously, she was attorney-in-fact for Felicite, who resided in St. Landry Parish. The next indication of ownership dates from 1854, when the entire one arpent tract, including the parcels of both Felicite and Manette, is listed as part of the succession of Jean Pierre Fazende, a free man of color who was a resident of New Orleans and who died in Plaquemines Parish. Fazende's wife pre-deceased him; she was Catiche Paillet, Felicite's daughter. In the absence of positive documentation, Catiche Paillet appears to have received two-thirds of the property from her mother, and the other or lowermost third either through purchase or from her mother's prior inheritance of the parcel from her Aunt Manette.

Fazende's succession provides every indication that a inventory of his estate was taken, but it is not included in the probate record. [108] His son, Jean Pierre Fazende, a New Orleans grocer, received the parcel as part of his inheritance when the estate was settled ca. 1857. [109] There is no indication that the younger Fazende took any interest in the property prior to the late 1860s, when he had that portion of his property nearest to the river subdivided (Illustration 21). He began selling the lots in the 1870s. Illustration 17 shows that residences were constructed on these lots before the end of the nineteenth century, and Illustration 27 demonstrates that these were extant until relatively recently. The following year he sold the back portion of his property to Joseph Altamar Fazende, a New Orleans baker, for $1,200. [110]

This latter tract was turned over rapidly during the next few years. J. A. Fazende sold it in March, 1887, to Henry Thoele, a New Orleans grocer, for $350.00. [111] The following year, Thoele made a profit of $150.00 when he sold the land to Jayme Frigola. [112] Frigola then sold the property to Jean Marie Couget in 1894. [113] Couget held the property until 1904 when she sold it to the New Orleans Terminal Co. [114] The property was described as improved; its location was specified:

At about three arpents above the U. S. Military Chalmette Cemetery, and forming part of the property known as "Fazende's property" and which Fazende's property is designated by the letter B on a plan drawn by A.J. d'Hemecourt (viz Illustration 28, shaded section)... on 20th March 1878, now in the possession of P.A. d'Hemecourt... said tract of land measures 191'10" front on a line parallel with the public road, said line being at a distance of 2031'10" from the fence at the public road and having a depth of 13315'2".... [115]

The property was located between those of Wooten (upriver side) and Hager (downriver side).

The vast majority of development took place, however, on the southern tract which included the "Fazendeville" subdivision. Illustration 25 shows that in 1927 there was a house to the west of Fazendeville Road, to the south (riverward) of the subdivision. This was the residence of Harry Colomb. [116] This structure probably was built during the twentieth century, since it is not shown on the 1874 Mississippi River Commission Map (Illustration 17). Colomb's house stood at least until 1940 (Illustration 19). Across the road from Colomb's house was another residence and a store (Illustration 29); no further information on these structures could be found, but they had been extant at least from the 1890s. This area is presently occupied by the St. Bernard Sewage Treatment Plant.

The Fazendeville subdivision survived well into the twentieth century as a black residential community (Illustration 27). This property was acquired and incorporated into the Chalmette Unit, Jean Lafitte National Historical Park (Figure 16). [117]

5. The Old Battle Ground Store

This one arpent tract originally was numbered "11" in the 1832 St. Amand subdivision, but it was not sold at the auction sale (Illustration 22). Instead, it remained in the possession of the St. Amands. In 1833, Manette St. Amand bought her brother Louis' one half share of the property. [118] In July of 1833, Manette and Hilaire St. Amand sold a small portion of this tract to Joaquim Dominguez for $1,000.00 (Figure 10):

That piece or parcel of ground situate, lying and being part of the said Parish of St. Bernard, about five miles below the city, on the left Bank of the River Mississippi having french measure of sixty feet front on the public road by one hundred and twenty feet commencing at the upper limit of the plantation belonging to said sellers, where it adjoins land belonging to Mr. Delery and running downriver for a distance... together with all the improvements of said thereon, and all right of said Sellers to the Batture in front of said lot. [119]

After Hilaire's death in 1833, Manette became sole owner of the remainder of this tract; she held it until at least 1841 (Illustration 23). Subsequently, Dominguez acquired the property from her estate. [120] However, all the improvements to the property were on the tract Dominguez purchased in 1833. Illustration 16 (lot 11 and 11 (lot 1) shows that two structures were located on this property at least as early as the 1830s.

After Dominguez died, an inventory of his estate was made by the Second Judicial District Court of St. Bernard. Unfortunately, that record was destroyed in the courthouse fire. However, other records indicate that a family meeting was called in 1856 for the benefit of the deceased's minor children: Joaquim, Gilbert, Hypolite, and Oneida. At this time, it was decided to adjudicate the property to Dominguez's widow, Marie Estopinal, for the price given in the inventory, that is, $5,000.00 for the two lots and $150.00 for the furniture. Clearly, the Dominguezs were in residence on the property at this time, and they apparently continued to live there. [121] On August 30, 1867, Estopinal sold the property to Mrs. Clara Menttel Bitterwolf for $3,900.00.

Xavier Bitterwolf and his wife, Clara, were separate in property by judgment of the Fifth District Court of New Orleans on October 18, 1856. However, it seemed that they both had ownership in this property, since in 1871 they sold both parcels to John Smith. [122] Smith sold the property to Peter Henry Grun of New Orleans in 1878. [123] Grun sold the larger portion of the property, which was unimproved, to Gottlieb Christian Friedrich Grun in February of 1880, but then rescinded the sale the following November. [124] Two years later, Peter Henry Grun sold the property to John Hager, Sr., a manufacturer's agent in New Orleans. [125]

Hager apparently took up residence on the property, and opened a store there. On his death, the property became vested in his widow, Mary Baden, and his children: John Jr., William, Adolphe, Robert, George, and Mary, the wife of Frank Kraemer. Rather than undertake the expense of a partition, Hager's heirs held a compromise sale in 1896 where this St. Bernard property came into the possession of John, Jr., and William Hager. [126] The Hager brothers subsequently offered the property for sale:

Business Stand
Garden & Timber Land
The Celebrated
"Old Battle Ground Store"

This property is one of the best patronized stores in St. Bernard parish. It contains a large store, one room, kitchen, and two small storerooms downstairs, and four plastered rooms above. There is a fine stable, chicken-house and all other building. The property fronts on the Mississippi River for 197 feet, and runs back to a depth of eighty arpents. Twenty-eight acres are clear, and twelve under cultivation; the balance finely timbered with maple and cypress. There are about three acres of standing corn, okra, and young sweet potatoes. The property is further enhanced by five fig trees, fifteen pecans,, orange, plum, and grapes. The water supply is drawn from a fine well, curbed and bricked, and cisterns. The Port Chalmette and Shell Beach Roads run through the property. Only one mile from the slaughter house, and one from the new and growing port of Chalmette. [127]

Illustration 17 shows two structures on this tract; these undoubtedly are the store and an outbuilding. It seems that the store did not survive into the twentieth century. Although a store is shown in Illustration 25, it is adjacent to the Fazendeville road, and therefore is located on Lot 6, the Fazendeville tract, and thus upriver from the site of the Battle Ground Store. The property was sold to John B. Esnard, a New Orleans lottery agent, on August 26, 1896, and a plat was attached to this act of sale (Illustration 30). [128] On September 21, 1903, the property was acquired by Louis L. Stanton, Jr., who subsequently sold this and other lands to the New Orleans Terminal Co. [129]

6. The Bertrand Tract

Louis St. Amand died sometime prior to the end of 1841, leaving three heirs: Manette St. Amand, Genevieve St. Amand, and Felicite Orsol. Genevieve was the wife of Jacques Julien Charles Claude Quelquejue; Manette acted as her attorney-in-fact because the former resided in France. Felicite Orsol presumably was half-sister to the St. Amand siblings. She was the widow of Antoine Paillet, a free man of color, and she lived in St. Landry Parish. [130]

The partition of Louis's estate among his sisters included a plat showing the landholdings of each (Illustration 23). This plat shows that lot 2 (Illustration 24) was in the possession of the widow of Antoine Paillet (Illustration 23) in 1841, and she probably received it as part of Hilaire St. Amand's succession after 1833. She continued to hold this property in absentia until her death, and it was part of her succession which was settled in St. Landry Parish in 1869. There, the probate court ordered Thomas L. Maxwell, Sheriff of Orleans Parish, to auction the widow Paillet's property. [131]

The lot was acquired by Juan Fernandez at the estate sale on July 26, 1869. The property was described as being one arpent front on the Mississippi River, by a depth of eighty arpents. The property was bounded on the upper side by the land belonging to the heirs of Joaquim Dominguez, and on the lower side by the land of Charles Rixner. [132]

Fernandez's wife, Marie Salvant, died in St. Bernard Parish, and on December 21, 1893, the 22nd Judicial District Court for St. Bernard placed her estate, including her husband's St. Bernard Parish property, in possession of her heirs. "Building and improvements" of unspecified types were located on the property at this date, although no structures are shown on the 1874 Mississippi River Commission Map, which was drafted in the 1890s (Illustration 17). [133] The only structures that were built on this property, according to map data, are two twentieth century residences (Illustrations 25 and 31), one of which was removed in 1927 (Illustration 32).

Fernandez did not long survive his wife, however, and on May 16, 1896, his children and heirs were placed in possession of his estate. [134] Later that same year, Josephine Fernandez, the wife of Jean Baptiste d'Auterive, Juana Fernandez, the wife of John Hier, Eve Fernandez, the wife of Louis Bollinger, Philomena Fernandez, the wife of (Enguerand) d'Auterive, and Innocented Fernandez, the widow of Anthony Frenchus sold to Thomas Leo Bertrand, a resident of Plaquemines Parish, the one by eighty tract of land they had inherited from their parents. [135] In 1903, the property was purchased by L.L. Stanton, who subsequently sold this and other property to the New Orleans Terminal Company. [136]

7. The National Military Cemetery

This parcel, which measured slightly less than three arpents, remained in the possession of the St. Amands after the 1832 partition. It included the land on which a residence and slave quarters complexes stood (Illustrations 16 and 22). Louis St. Amand's undivided half of this property passed to his sister Manette in 1833. [137] Later that year Hilaire died. It was probably at the time of settling of Hilaire's succession that the three approximately one arpent parcels that became the military cemetery were purchased/inherited by different individuals. The parcel which was the farthest upriver of these three, lot 3 in Illustration 24 had no structure on it, and came into the possession of Etienne Villavosa, one of the owners of the Battle Ground Saw Mill. The adjacent property, lot 4 in Illustration 24, included a plantation house and several slave cabins. This came into the possession of Louis St. Amand. Lot 5 in Illustration 24 included slave cabins and may have been the sugar house. This came into the possession of Manette St. Amand. In 1841, both Villavosa and Manette still held their respective lots (Illustration 23). Louis St. Amand's one arpent tract had been partitioned between his two sisters, with Genevieve Quelquejue receiving the upper two thirds arpent, and Manette receiving the lower one-third arpent (Illustration 23). As stated before, Genevieve lived in France, and Manette was her agent in Louisiana, and had control over both of these tracts. Since she also possessed the adjacent downriver property (Illustration 23), which included the St. Amand great house complex (Illustration 16), it is probable that Manette continued to manage this land as a farm, as indicated by her listing as a "gardener" in the 1842 New Orleans City Directory.

The next indication of the ownership of these properties occurs in 1859, when J.G. Bienvenue, a New Orleans notary public, sold all three properties to Charles Rixner. Two years later, on November 11, 1861, Rixner sold these three lots, measuring a total of about two and two thirds arpents, to the City of New Orleans. The property was eighty arpents deep, and was bounded by the properties of the Widow Paillet, and the late C.V. Hurtubise. [138] The price of the sale was $11,520.00. As no conveyances in Orleans Parish record a sale by Manette St. Amand, or sale to J.G. Bienvenue, we must assume that the intervening conveyances were lost in the St. Bernard Parish Court House fire.

Illustration 21 shows the present park area in 1867. The land which composed the lots marked "United States Military Cemetery" and "Property of the City of New Orleans" included Lots 3, 4, and 5 (Figure 11). Clearly, the three lots have been bisected, hence, that lot mark as the "Property of the City of New Orlens" (Illustration 21) is comprised of lots 3 and the western half of 4 (Illustration 24), while the cemetery parcel is comprised of the eastern half of lot 4 and lot 5 (Illustration 24). Thus, the sites of the St. Amand slave quarters, overseers' house, and industrial complex, lie within the present boundaries of the park, and the majority of the cabins and the postulated "sugar house" are within the present site of the military cemetery. The remains of the St. Amand great house complex can be seen downriver from the Military Cemetery (Illustration 24).

Illustration 17 shows these properties at the end of the nineteenth century. four structures are shown on the cemetery tract; these included the cemetery caretaker's house and dependencies. [139] This former structure remained in existence until 1928, when a levee set back removed the southernmost portion of the cemetery (Illustrations 25 and 32).

Three structures were on the property owned by the City of New Orleans in the late nineteenth century (Illustration 17). None of these are related to the St. Amand structures formerly located on lot 4 (Illustration 24). One of the two southernmost structures apparently was a powder magazine that had been extant at least since 1872. [140] A plat of the property from this date shows the magazine as the only structure on the parcel. However, directly to the north of the powder house was a cemetery used by the Freedmen's Bureau for the burial of black soldiers. [141] The remaining two structures shown on the 1874 Mississippi River Commission map (Illustration 17), therefore, must have been constructed at the close of the nineteenth century, and are undoubtedly functionally associated with the magazine and/or the cemetery.

8. Summary of Twentieth Century Consolidation

The majority of lots from the original Chalmet plantation ultimately became the possession of the New Orleans Terminal Company in the first few years of the twentieth century, except Fazendeville, and the National Military Cemetery, here including the property formerly listed as belonging to the City of New Orleans (Illustration 33). The company had the intention of building terminals on the site, and acquired these extensive landholdings for that reason. In 1949, the New Orleans Terminal Company sold the properties in Lots 1 through 5 (Illustration 22) to the State Parks Commission of Louisiana for $100,000.00. [142] By the end of the year, the State Parks Commission of Louisiana turned the property over to the U.S. government. [143]

The downriver parcels that had been acquired by the New Orleans Terminal Company were sold to Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation in 19S3. [144] Kaiser Aluminum later donated this property to the U. S. government. [145] With the acquisition of the Fazendeville subdivision, all the property from the Rodriguez plantation to the National Cemetery came under government control.