The Board of Commissioners met at the house of Thomas Gwynne, the temporary seat of Justice, on the 11th of June, 1810, and established the following license rates for taverns in the several townships of Madison County: Union Township, $4; Deer Creek, $7; Jefferson, $4; Stokes, $5; Pleasant, $4; and Darby, $4. In 1811, the tavern license was: Darby Township, $4; Jefferson, $4; Deer Creeek, $6; Union, $6; Stokes, $4, and Pleasant, $4. In 1812, each of the above townships paid $4, excepting Union, in which the rate was $5; and in 1813 Union Township paid $6, Deer Creek $5, and the balance $4.
On the 30th of July, 1810, the Court of Common Pleas granted a license to Thomas Gwynne for one year to keep a tavern at his house in Deer Creek Township. On the following day, the court granted a license to Elias Langhain, to keep a tavern at his house in Union Township. In March, 1811, Thomas Gwynne was issued a license "to vend merchandise where he now lives in Deer Creek Township, for one year." Thus it will be seen that Mr. Gwynne was the first licensed tavern-keeper, as well as the first merchant of Madison County after its erection.
At the same session, Nathaniel Hunter was granted a six months' license "to vend merchandise as a peddler," which was re-issued in 1812. In October, 1813, Hunter, who was an alien, applied "for the benefit of the naturalization laws to bo extended to him," which the court granted, and, taking the oath as provided under the Constitution, he was admitted as a citizen of the United States. This is the first naturalization case upon record in Madison County, and as such we deem it worthy of a place in its history.
In November, 1811, Peter Outright was granted a license to keep a tavern for one year in Stokes Township, and John Turner, of Stokes Township, was issued a similar permit, "to keep a public house for the accommodation of travelers where he lives in said township." In July, 1812, the Court of Common Pleas issued licenses to Joseph Russell and Philip Lewis to keep taverns in London, the newly laid out county seat. In March, 1813, Robert Hume was granted a license to keep a tavern at his dwelling in London, and in June, John Gwynne obtained a license for the same purpose. At the October term of 1813, William Wilson and Joseph McKelfish secured a license "to vend merchandise in the town of London for one year." In February, 1815, William and Eli Gwynne were granted similar favors; in 1816, Thomas Needham and Robert Hume, under the firm name of Needham & Hume, and John Brodrick & Co.; in 1817, John Moore and Elias N. De Lashmutt; in 1819, Thomas Gwynne & Co., E. W. Gwynne and William Nelson being members of this firm. In June, 1815, William McCormick was issued a license to keep a tavern in London for one year; and, in May, 1816, James Ewing, of Darby Township, was granted a license to vend merchandise for one year at his house in said township. In January, 1817, the court issued him a license to keep a tavern at the same place. Most of these licenses were renewed again and again, and many whose names appear here kept stores or public houses of entertainment "for man and beast" during the greater part of the early history of Madison County.
As a matter of historical interest to the descendants of the pioneer fathers and mothers of Madison County, we transcribe the following items from the records of the Court of Common Pleas. At the November term, 1811, "on application of the Rev. Forgus Graham, minister in the church of Christ, license is granted him to solemnize marriage agreeable to law." At the October term, 1814, Stephen English, "a regular ordained minister of the Baptist Church" was granted a license to solemnize marriage throughout Ohio. In February, 1815, Richard E. Pearson, "an Elder of the Christian Church regularly ordained," was granted a license to celebrate the bond of marriage all over the State. In 1816, John M. Foster, an Elder of the Christian Church, and Jeremiah Converse, a minister of the Methodist Church, were issued licenses to perform marriages any place in Ohio. Many others got similar authority, but these are the earliest found upon the records, and demonstrates that ministers had to obtain the consent of the State ere they could lawfully perform the marriage ceremony therein.