This text was obtained via automated optical character recognition.
It has not been edited and may therefore contain several errors.

---

The Pirate House and Jean Lafitte « Russell Guerin
http://www.russguerin.com/history/pirates/the-pirate-house-and-jean-laf..
forty acres appears to have been located east of the Pirate House site, perhaps as distant as the shore of the bay. Another involves the date of death of Lafitte the pirate as probably 1825 or 1826, depending on which historian is selected. Believed to have been bom about 1780, the pirate would have been about 45 years old at the time of the 1825 purchase. This does not square with the first mention of John la Fito, found in the 1820 census. At that time, he was between the ages of 16 and 26. The 1850 census is consistent with this, showing an age of John Lafiteaux as being between 40 and 50. Something very intriguing, however, is to be found in the 1830 census, that being the inclusion of another male in that household, whose age was between 40 and 50. This would have been the right age bracket for Lafitte the Pirate. This fact, coupled with the deed of 1825, invites speculation. The 1825 deed is very curious. It has been preserved in the county deed book even though it long preceded the fire that destroyed the Hancock County courthouse. It is written in French, and a translation seems to evidence that this Jean Lafito was held in high esteem. Whereas two important personages, Noel Jourdan and Charles Nicaise are referred to as simply “misters,” Lafito’s appellation is translated as “sir” or “lord.” It is unlikely that such honor would have been paid to a very young local resident, but to a noted pirate, a hero in some respect at the battle of New Orleans only ten years before? Not proof, of course, of anything, but it can hardly be argued that the difference in referring to these people was accidental. There is reason also to speculate about the time of Lafitte’s death. Most historians seem to agree that he died about 1825. Alcee Fortier wrote that he died at Cilan in the Yucatan in 1826 and “was buried in consecrated ground.” The “Handbook of Texas Online” states that Lafitte “abandoned Galveston early in May 1820 and sailed to Mugeres Island, off the coast of Yucatan....In 1825, mortally ill, he went to the mainland to die.” Lyle Saxon wrote in Lafitte the Pirate that he died of fever and is buried at Silan, Yucatan, in 1826. He cites several letters as evidence, dated 1838 and 1843, written by people who made no claim to firsthand knowledge of the matter. At first blush, the most convincing argument is to found in a book published in 1843, Incidents of Travel in the Yucatan, written by an American explorer. This was John L. Stephens, who had hacked through Mayan jungles in the Yucatan for some time before the publication date. The objective of his travel had nothing to do with pirates in general and certainly not Lafitte particularly, and it is for this reason that evidence that Stephens gave might be considered trustworthy. In short, he had no axe to grind. Stephens reported that the Isle of Mugeres had been the home of the pirate Lafitte, known locally as Monsieur Lafitta, where he was well respected by the townspeople. In the area, he met a local patron who had been a “prisoner” of Lafitte for two years. It was suspected that he actually had served with him in his piracies, as he was certainly fond of his memory. He told Stephens that Lafitte had died “in his arms, and that the widow, a senora del Norte from Mobile, was then living in great distress in Silan.” After journeying to Silan, Stephens sought out the local padre, who did not know whether Lafitte “was buried in the campo santo or the church, but supposed that, as Lafitte was a distinguished man, it was the latter.” But the grave was not found in the church, and so the padre inquired of some of the locals who had been there at the time of Lafitte’s burial. It is here that Stephens’ testimony, while believable, curiously lends to the possibility that Lafitte may have mysteriously vanished. It is therefore in order to quote directly the passage: “The sexton who officiated at the burial was dead; the padre sent for several of the inhabitants, but a cloud hung over the memory of the pirate: all knew of his death and burial, but none knew or cared to tell [italics by this author] where he was laid.” And so a new question arises out to Stephens, and causes one to ponder whether Lafitte’s death and burial may have been faked, thus allowing him to continue his life elsewhere without notoriety. Why must a reader allow for the possibility of such a death being feigned? Lafitte had returned to piracy after New Orleans, thus voiding his pardon. He organized a large band at what is now Galveston in 1817, but two years later, Congress enacted laws making a capital offense of piracy. Called the “beginning of a crackdown,” fourteen men were sentenced accordingly under the terms of the act of Congress (Louisiana, Yesterday and Today, Walter J. Cowan). Lafitte left Galveston as a consequence of attacks made by some of his pirates against U.S. ships. As he was no longer welcome there, he burned his village and went to Yucatan. He was then hunted by both American and Spanish officials. It is not out of the realm of possibility that a man growing older and less adventurous might have returned to close ties made many years before in a little populated area like Shieldsborough and environs. It is not out of the realm of possibility that John La Fito, who may have been as young as 16 when listed in the 1820 census, might have been the pirate’s son. While it may be that the Lafitte who made the real estate purchases in Hancock County was not the pirate, one cannot help but wonder whether there was a family connection. Besides Jean and Clarisse, Shieldsborough had Auguste and Marie Laffitte, also property owners. They had at least three children bom in the mid-1800’s, all baptized in the local Catholic church. There was also a slave of Auguste named Polomie, whose son was baptized in the same church and was christened Victor Laffitte. Mrs. Lafiteau (whether she was Marie or Clarisse is not known) had a slave named S Rosine, who fathered a child also christened in the church; she named him Jean Wilfrane Lafiteau. Relatives of the pirate? At best, we can only say perhaps. The disparity of ages does militate against any stronger assumption, but it is still instructive to follow Clarisse to her death, just in case she might have been the right Mrs. Lafitte. Her will,
3 of 4
2/26/2015 9:56 AM