the Union. Both sides of the exciting question were largely represented, and the contest between them was violent and bitter. For a time the specious compromise of neutrality was regarded as the panacea for the troubles of the State by the less violent of the people on both sides. Home Guards were enlisted and organized to protect the territory from invasion by either the Federal or the Confederate forces.

The occupation of Columbus and Hickman on the Mississippi River by Southern troops, immediately followed by the taking of Paducah by General Grant with two regiments of Union soldiers from Cairo, practically dissolved the illusion of neutrality. The government at Washington never recognized this makeshift of those who loved the Union, but desired to protect slavery. It was honestly and sincerely cherished by good men of both parties, who desired to preserve the Union and save the State from the horrors of civil war.

The government did not regard the seceded States as so many independent sovereignties, as the Secessionists claimed that they were, but as part and parcel of a union of States forming one consolidated nation, with no provision in its Constitution for a separation of any kind, or for the withdrawal of one or more of the individual members of the Union. The States which had pretended to dissolve their connection with the other members of the compact were considered as refractory members of the Union, in a state of insurrection against the sovereign authority of the nation, who were to be reduced to obedience and subjection by force of arms; for they had appealed to the logic of bayonets and cannon-balls in carrying out their disruption.

With the duty of putting down the insurrection and subduing the refractory elements in the South on its hands, the government could not respect or even tolerate a neutrality which placed the State of Kentucky, four hundred miles in extent from east to west, between the loyal and the disloyal sections of its domain. If for no other purpose, armies of Federal troops must cross the country south of the Ohio in order to reach the seat of the Rebellion.

The Home Guards were powerless to prevent the passage of the loyal armies through the State; and any attempt to do so would have been to fight the battle of the Confederate armies, and would have at once robbed neutrality of its transparent mask. A portion of these military bodies were doubtless honest in their intentions. Those who were not for the Union in this connection were practically against it. Later in the course of events, the Home Guards were incorporated in the armies of the Rebellion; and no doubt these organizations were used to a considerable extent to recruit the forces of the enemy.

For a period of several months the State was not in actual possession of either party in the conflict. One was struggling within its territory to keep it in the Union, and the other to force it into the Southern Confederacy. Irresponsible persons formed what they called a "Provisional Council," elected a governor, and sent delegates to the Confederate Congress, who were admitted to seats in that body.

During this chaotic state of affairs, Kentuckians were joining both armies, though the great body of them enlisted in the forces of the Union. At the close of 1861 it was estimated that Kentucky had twenty-six thousand men, cavalry and infantry, enrolled to fight the battles of the loyal nation, including those who had joined the regiments of other States.

Deeds of violence were not uncommon in many parts of the State, growing out of the excited state of feeling. Confederate emissaries were busy in the territory, and armed bodies of them foraged for provisions and fodder in the southern portions. Unpopular men were hunted down and shot or hanged, and the reign of disorder prevailed. Such was the condition of Kentucky soon after the Lyon family took possession of Riverlawn; and some account of its several members becomes necessary.

The first of the name in America had been one of the earliest English settlers in Massachusetts; but one of his descendants, more than a hundred years later, had moved to the colony of New Hampshire. Early in the present century, one of his grandchildren was a farmer in Derry, in that State. This particular Lyon had four sons, two of whom have already been mentioned in this story.

Duncan Lyon was the eldest of them, and seems to have been the most enterprising of the four; for he emigrated to Kentucky, and purchased the extensive tract of land which now formed the estate of Riverlawn. He became a planter in due time from his small beginnings, raising hemp, tobacco, and horses, without neglecting the productions necessary for the support of his household. He was very prosperous in his undertakings; and being a man of good sense and excellent judgment, he became a person of some distinction in his county. He was known as "Colonel Duncan Lyon," though he never held any military position; but his title clung to him, and even his brothers in New Hampshire always spoke of him as the "colonel."

He never married; but he made a modest fortune of one hundred thousand dollars, including the value of his estate, though not including the value of about fifty negroes, men, women, and children, which for some reason he never disclosed, he did not put into the inventory that accompanied his will.

The colonel's estate was on Bar Creek, at its junction with Green River. One mile from Riverlawn was the village of Barcreek, a place with three churches, several stores, a blacksmith's and a wheelwright's shop, with a carpenter and a mason. It supplied the needs of the country in a circuit of eight or ten miles. In fact, it was a sort of market town.

There was not a great deal of building done in this region; but the mason residing there had made a comfortable living, jobbing and erecting an occasional chimney, till he died in 1852. The colonel notified his brother, Titus Lyon, who was a mason in Derry, that there was an opening for one of his trade in Barcreek, but he could not advise him to move there.

Titus was not a prosperous man; for he was rather lazy, and greatly lacking in enterprise. The colonel did not believe he would do any better in a new home than in the old one, and he bluntly wrote to him to this effect. The planter had a suspicion that his brother drank too much whiskey, for he could not account for his poverty in any other way; but he had no evidence on the point. Titus decided to move to Kentucky; and he did so, though he had to borrow the money of his brother Noah to enable him to reach his new home.

Business in his trade happened to be usually good after his arrival, and for several years he did tolerably well. Then he desired to buy a house and some land which were for sale in Barcreek. The colonel loaned him five thousand dollars for this purpose, and to pay off his note to Noah, mortgaging the estate he had purchased as security.

From this time Titus did not do as well as before. He seemed to regard himself as a landed proprietor, and the equal of the planters of Kentucky. He neglected his work, feeling rather above it, negroes doing most of the jobs in his line. He employed a couple of them, but they did not earn their wages. The colonel had to help him out several times.

As a planter in good standing among his neighbors in the county, Colonel Lyon, who was not a profound thinker, fell in with the views and opinions of those in his grade of society. He was not a strong pro-slavery man, but he owned half a hundred negroes, who had been necessary to enable him to carry on his planting operations; but he treated them as well as though he had paid them wages.

He was not inclined to make any issue with his neighbors on the labor question, though some of them thought he was not entirely reliable on this subject. He attended to his business, and did not vex his spirit over extraneous matters. When the protection of the South against the aggressions of the North in connection with slavery was agitated, he followed his