Chapter VII (2)

There is on a previous page a view of the town and fort of Annapolis at the upper end of the basin. Various papers respecting Annapolis Royal, as it was called after coming into English possession, can be found in the _Belknap Papers_ (MSS.) in the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society, including letters from Governor Richard Phillips, Lieutenant-Governor John Doucett, and Paul Mascarene. The history of Nova Scotia so much centres in Annapolis, previous to the founding of Halifax, that all the histories of Acadia and Nova Scotia tell the story of the picturesque and interesting region in which the town is situated. (Cf. Vol. IV. p. 156.)

Jacques Nicolas Bellin, the maker of the opposite map, as he was of all the maps given by Charlevoix, was born in Paris in 1703, and died in 1772. He was one of the principal hydrographers of his time in France, and was the earliest to hold a governmental position in the engineer department of the Marine. He has left a large mass of cartographical work, chiefly given on a large scale in his _Neptune Français_ (1753 in folio) and his _Hydrographie Française_ (1756 in folio). The same, with other maps reproduced on a smaller scale, constitute his _Petit Atlas Maritime_ (1764, five volumes in quarto). All of these publications contain maps of American interest, and in 1755 he printed a special contribution to the study of American cartography, _Mémoires sur les cartes des côtes de l’Amérique septentrionale_.]

The uneasy disposition of the times upon the conclusion of the peace may be followed in Gov. Shute’s letter to the Jesuit Father Rasle, Feb. 21, 1718 (_Mass. Hist. Coll._, v. 112); in the conference with the Penobscots[935] and Norridgewocks, at Georgetown, Oct. 12, 1720 (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 68); and in the letter of the eastern Indians (in French) to the governor, July 27, 1721 (_Mass. Hist. Coll._, xviii. 259).

=C.= LOVEWELL’S OR GOV. DUMMER’S WAR.—There are documents from the Penhallow Papers relative to the Indian depredations at the eastward in the _N. E. Hist. and Gen. Register_, 1878, p. 21. Some of them antedate the outbreak of the war. Charlevoix (Shea’s ed., vol. v. 268) tells the story of the counter-missions of the French and English; and the Indians, incited by the French, made demands on the English, who held some of their chiefs as hostages in Boston. (_Mass. Hist. Coll._, 2d ser., viii. 259; _N. Y. Col. Docs._, x. 903; Kip, _Jesuit Missions_, 13.) The seeming truce with the Abenakis was further jeopardized by the act of seizing (Dec., 1721) the younger Baron de St. Castin, when he was taken to Boston for examination. After a detention of five months he was set at liberty.[936] A more serious source of complaints with the Indians before the war was the attempt to seize Father Rasle in Jan., 1722, by an expedition sent to Norridgewock under Col. Westbrook, but in the immediate charge of Capt. Harmon. (_N. Y. Col. Docs._, ix. 910; Rasle in Kip, 15.) Rasle was warned and escaped, but the party found letters from Vaudreuil in his cabin, implicating the Quebec governor as having incited the increasing depredations of the Indians.[937]

The war began in the summer of 1722. Gov. Shute made his declaration, July 25, 1722 (_Mass. Archives_, xxxi. 106), and the Rev. Benjamin Wadsworth, at the Thursday lecture, Aug. 16, made it the subject of his discourse. (Brinley, i. no. 429.)

In March, 1723, Col. Thos. Westbrook made a raid along the Penobscot. (_Mass. Hist. Coll._, xxii. 264; _N. Y. Col. Docs._, ix. 933.)

Capt. Jeremiah Moulton, under orders of Col. Westbrook, made a scouting expedition in the early summer of 1723, and dated at York, July, 4, his report to Lieut.-Gov. William Dummer, which is printed in the _Maine Hist. and Genealog. Recorder_, i. p. 204. (Cf. Penhallow, 96; Niles in _Mass. Hist. Coll._, xxxv. 345; Williamson, ii. 120.) In 1723 there was an Indian raid on Rutland, in which the Rev. Joseph Willard and two children were killed, and two others were carried off. (Cf. Israel Loring’s _Two Sermons_, Boston, 1724, cited in Brinley, i. no. 1,928.)

A conference was held at Boston, August 22, 1723, of which there is a printed account among the _Belknap Papers_ (MSS.), in the Mass. Hist. Soc. library.

On the 21st July, 1724, there was another conference with the Indians held at St. Georges fort. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 154.)

In Aug., 1724, Moulton and Harmon were sent to make an end of Rasle’s influence. They surprised the Norridgewock settlement, and Rasle was killed in the general slaughter. The opposing chroniclers do not agree as to the manner of his death. Charlevoix (Shea’s ed., v. 279) says he was shot and mutilated at the foot of the village cross. The English say they had intended to spare him, but he refused quarter, and had even killed a captive English boy in the confusion. His scalp and those of other slain were taken to Boston.[938]

In Nov., 1724, Capt. John Lovewell and two others had petitioned to be equipped to scour the woods to the eastward after Indians, and, the legislature acceding (Nov. 17) to their request, Lovewell enrolled his men and made three campaigns in quick succession. The journal of his second expedition (Jan.-Feb., 1724-5) is in the _Mass. Archives_, vol. lxxxvi., and is printed by Kidder in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Jan., 1853, and in his _Expeditions of Capt. John Lovewell_. It was on the third of these expeditions, May 9, 1725, that Lovewell encountered the Indians near a pond in Fryeburg, Maine, now known as Lovewell’s pond, upon whose wood-girt surface the summer tourist to-day looks down from the summit of the Jockey-Cap. Their leader was killed early in the action, which lasted all day, and only nine of the English who remained alive were unwounded when the savages drew off.

The news reached Boston on the 13th of May. Kidder gives the despatches received by the governor, with the action of the council upon them. On the 17th an account was printed in the _Boston Gazette_, which is also in Kidder. The day before (May 16) the Rev. Thomas Symmes, of Bradford, who had gathered his information from some of those who had escaped, delivered a sermon in that town, which, when printed with an “historical preface or memoirs of the battle at Piggwacket,” became popular, and two editions were printed at Boston during the same year. Both editions are of the greatest rarity. The first is called: _Lovewell lamented, or a Sermon occasion’d by the fall of the brave Capt. John Lovewell and several of his valiant company in the late heroic action at Piggwacket_. Boston, 1725.[939] The other edition was entitled: _Historical memoirs of the late fight at Piggwacket; with a sermon occasion’d by the fall of the brave Capt. John Lovewell and several of his valiant company.... The second edition, corrected_. Boston, 1725.[940] A third edition was printed at Fryeburg, with some additions, in 1799. The narrative, but not the sermon, was later printed in Farmer and Moore’s _Historical Collections_, i. 25. At Concord (N. H.), in 1861, it was again issued by Nathaniel Bouton, as _The original account of Capt. John Lovewell’s Great Fight with the Indians at Pequawket, May 8, 1725_.[941] Mr. Frederic Kidder, in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._,[942] Jan., 1853 (p. 61), printed an account of Lovewell’s various expeditions, with sundry documents from the _Massachusetts Archives_, which, together with the second edition of Symmes, were later, in 1865, embodied in his _Expeditions of Capt. John Lovewell and his encounters with the Indians, including a particular account of the Pequauket battle_.[943] This is a faithful reprint of the Symmes tract, while those of Farmer and Moore, and of Bouton, introduce matters from other sources. The bibliography of Symmes’s sermon is traced in Dr. S. A. Green’s _Groton during the Indian Wars_, p. 134.

The relations of the French to the Abenaki war during 1724-25 are shown in various documents printed in the _N. Y. Coll. Docs._, vol. ix., as when the French ministry prompts the governor of Canada to sustain the savages in their struggle with the English (p. 935); a memoir is registered upon their condition (p. 939); Intendant Begon reports on the war (p. 941); other letters are written (p. 945); and the ministry again counsel the governor to instigate further hostilities (p. 956).

A journal of a scout by Westbrook, beginning June 23, 1725, is among the _Belknap Papers_ (MSS.).

Four eastern sagamores came to Boston, Nov. 10, 1725 (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 191; Murdoch’s _Nova Scotia_, i. 429), and a treaty with them was signed Dec. 15, 1725, known as “Dummer’s treaty” (_Mass. Archives_, xxxiv.), which was ratified at Falmouth, Aug. 6, 1726. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 230; xxxiv. See also Penhallow, 117; _N. H. Hist. Coll._, i. 123; _N. H. Prov. Papers_, iv. 188; Niles in _Mass. Hist. Coll._, xxxv. 360; Williamson, ii. 145, 147; Palfrey, iv. 443.)

This treaty was separately printed under the title of _Conference with the Indians at the ratification of peace held at Falmouth, Casco Bay, by Governour Dummer, in July and August, 1726_. Boston, 1726, pp. 24. It was reprinted in 1754. (Cf. Brinley, i. 432, 434; Harvard College library, 5325.32.)

There was another Indian treaty at Casco Bay, July 25, 1727. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 256.) In Akins’s _Pub. Doc. of Nova Scotia_ is a fac-simile of a copy of this treaty, attested by Dummer, evidently made to be used by Cornwallis in 1749, in negotiating another treaty. (Cf. _N. H. Hist. Coll._, ii. 260, where the treaty is printed; and the explanation of the Indians in _N. Y. Col. Docs._, ix. 966.)

This treaty of 1727 was separately printed as _Conference with the Eastern Indians at the further ratification of the peace, held at Falmouth, in Casco Bay, in July, 1727_. Boston, 1727, pp. 31. It was reprinted in 1754. (Cf. Brinley, i. 433, 434.)

Cf. also _Conferences of Lieut.-Gov. Dummer with the Eastern Indians in 1726 and 1727_. Boston, 1754. For the treaties of 1726-27, see also _Maine Hist. Coll._, iii. 377, 407; _N. H. Prov. Papers_, iv. 255-258; Palfrey, iv. 444.

There is in the _Mass. Archives_ (xxix. 283) the document which resulted from a conference with the Eastern Indians in the council chamber in Boston, Dec. 9-Jan. 15, 1727-28.

Dr. Colman’s memoir of the troubles at the eastward in 1726-27 is in the _Mass. Hist. Coll._, vi. 108. (Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, x. 324.)

The French were disconcerted by the treaty of 1727, as sundry papers in the _N. Y. Col. Docs._, vol. ix., show. They reiterate their complaints of the English encroachments on the Indians’ lands (p. 981); observe great changes in the Abenakis since they made peace with the English (p. 990); and the king of France tells the Canadians he does not see how the Indians could avoid making the treaty with the English (p. 995).[944]

The letters of caution, which Belcher was constantly writing (1731-1740) to Capt. Larrabee, in command at Fort George, Brunswick, indicate how unstable the peace was. (_N. E. Hist. & Gen. Reg._, Apr., 1865, p. 129.) The continued danger from French intrigue is also shown in Colman’s memoir, etc., in _Mass. Hist. Coll._, vi. 109, and in the repeated conferences of the next few years: _Conference of his Excellency Governor Belcher with the chiefs of the Penobscot, Norridgewock, and Ameriscoggin tribes at Falmouth, July, 1732_. Boston, reprinted at London. (Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 428; Carter-Brown, iii. 482; Harv. Coll. lib., 5325.33; Brinley, i. no. 435.)

_A Conference held at Deerfield, the 27th of August_ [to Sept. 1], 1735, _by his Excellency, Jonathan Belcher, and Ountaussoogoe and others_, etc. [Boston, 1735]. (Brinley, i. no. 437.) This tract is reprinted in the _Maine Hist. Coll._, iv. 123.

From the map in Bouton and Kidder.]

Conference with the Penobscots at the council chamber in Boston, June, 1736. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 317.)

The nine Penobscot chiefs who held this conference were lodged with one John Sale in Boston, who renders an account of his charges for twenty-four days’ entertainment of them, which is suggestive. He charges for three half-pints of wine, per day, each; for twelve pence worth of rum per day, each; for 120 gallons of cider; for damage done in breaking of sash doors, frames of glass, China bowl, double decanter, and sundry glasses and mugs; for two gross of pipes and tobacco; for candles all night; for showing them the rope-dancers; for washing 49 of their “greasy shirts;” and “for cleaning and whitewashing two rooms after them.” The following “memorandum” is attached: “They eat for the most part between 50 and 60 pounds of meat per day, beside milk, cheese, etc. The cider which they drank I sold for twelve shillings per quart. Besides, they had beer when they pleased. And as for meat, they had the best, as I was ordered.”

Conference with the Penobscots and Norridgewocks, June 28-July 6, 1738. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 336.)

Conference with the Penobscots at the council chamber in Boston, Aug. 25-Sept. 2, 1740. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 364.)

Conference with the Penobscots, Dec. 3, 1741. (Mass. Archives, xxix. 376.)

“Projets sur la prise de l’Acadie, 1741.” (Parkman MSS. in Mass. Hist. Soc., _New France_, i. p. 1.)

_Conference held at the Fort at St. George in the County of York, the 4th of August, 1742, between William Shirley, Governor, and the Chief Sachems and Captains of the Penobscott, Norridgewock, Pigwaket or Amiscogging or Saco, St. John’s, Bescommonconty or Amerescogging and St. Francis tribes of Indians, August, 1742._ (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 703; Brinley, i. no. 440. Cf. Williamson, ii. 209.)

=D.= KING GEORGE’S, SHIRLEY’S, OR FIVE YEARS’ WAR.—France had declared war against England, Mar. 15, 1744 (_Coll. de Manuscrits_, Quebec, iii. p. 196), and the capitulation of Canso had taken place, May 24. (_Ibid._, iii. p. 201.) In July, 1744, Pepperrell and others, including some chiefs of the Five Nations, met the Penobscots at St. Georges and agreed to join in a treaty against the Cape Sable Indians. The Penobscots did not keep the appointment. War was declared against the Cape Sable and St. John’s Indians, Oct. 19, 1744. The General Court of Massachusetts offered a reward for scalps; and a proclamation was made for the enlistment of volunteers, Nov. 2, 1744. (_Mass. Archives_, xxxi. 506, 514; printed in W. W. Wheildon’s _Curiosities of History_, Boston, 1880, pp. 107, 109.)

The most brilliant event of the war was impending.

The French had begun the construction of elaborate defences at Louisbourg in 1720. A medal struck in commemoration of this beginning is described in the _Transactions_ (1872-73, p. 75) of the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec.

It has always been open to question from whom came the first suggestion of the expedition of 1745. The immediate incentive seems to have been a belief, prompted by the reports of prisoners released from Canso, that Louisbourg could be captured, if attacked before relief could reach it from France. Judge Robert Auchmuty, of Roxbury, developed a plan for the capture in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_ for July, 1745,—the same number in which was also printed the news of the attack and capture. When the paper was reprinted in a thin folio tract shortly afterwards, he or some one for him emphasized his claim to the suggestion in the title itself as follows: _The importance of Cape Breton to the British Nation, humbly represented by Robert Auckmuty_ [sic], _Judge, &c., in New England. N. B. Upon the plan laid down in this representation the island was taken by Commodore Warren and General Pepperill the 14th of June, 1745_. London, 1745.[945]

It is claimed on behalf of William Vaughan that he suggested the expedition to Governor Wentworth, of New Hampshire, who in turn referred him to Governor Shirley. An anonymous tract, published in London in 1746, _The Importance and Advantage of Cape Breton truly stated and impartially considered_,[946] often assigned to William Bollan, and believed by some to have been inspired by Vaughan, says that Vaughan had “the honor of reviving, at least, if not of having been the original mover or projector,” of the expedition, since it is claimed that Lieutenant-Governor Clarke, of New York,[947] had suggested the attack to the Duke of Newcastle as early as 1743. Douglass (_Summary_, etc., i. 348) says that Shirley was taken with the “hint or conceit” of Vaughan, “a whimsical, wild projector.” Hutchinson says that Vaughan “was called the projector of the expedition,” and Belknap accords him the priority in common report.[948] When Thomas Prince came to dedicate his sermon, preached on the Thanksgiving day following the triumph, he inscribed it to Shirley as the “principal former and promoter of the expedition;” but the language hardly claims the origination, though Shirley was generally recognized as the moving spirit in its final determination.[949]

After a painting, now owned by Mrs. Anna H. C. Howard, of Brooklyn, N. Y., and which has descended from Pepperrell. (Cf. _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, iii. p. 358.) This likeness, painted in London in 1751 by Smibert, is also engraved in Parsons’ _Life of Pepperrel_l, in Drake’s _Boston_, and in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Jan., 1866, where Dr. Parsons gives a genealogy of the Pepperrell family. There is in the _Memorial Hist. of Boston_ (ii. 114) an engraving after an original full-length picture in the hall of the Essex Institute at Salem,—artist unknown. See also Higginson’s _Larger History_, p. 188.]

A sword of Pepperrell is shown in the group of weapons engraved in Vol. III. p. 274. (Cf. _Catal. Cab. Mass. Hist. Soc._, p. 123; _Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc._, v. 373; and Parsons’ _Life of Pepperrell_.) Views of the Pepperrell mansion at Kittery, where considerable state was kept, are given in Parsons (p. 329), and in a paper on Pepperrell by J. A. Stevens in the _Mag. of Amer. History_, vol. ii. 673. Cf. also Lamb’s _Homes of America_ (1879), and _Appleton’s Journal_, xi. 65.]

The earliest account of this mettlesome enterprise, which showed special research and opportunities, was that of Dr. Belknap in his _History of New Hampshire_, which was written in 1784, less than forty years after the event, and when he might have known some of the participants. The most important of the _Pepperrell Papers_ had fallen into his hands, and he made good use of them, after which he deposited them in the cabinet of the Massachusetts Historical Society, where they now are, bound in two volumes, covering the years 1699-1779, but chiefly concerning the Louisbourg expedition.

This cut of the Pepperrell arms is copied from one in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Nov., 1878, p. 684.]

With them in the same depository are the _Belknap Papers_, three volumes,[950] as well as a composite volume, _Louisbourg Papers_, devoted entirely to the expedition.[951] Others of the scattered papers of Pepperrell have since been found elsewhere. Dr. Usher Parsons, in his _Life of Pepperrell_,[952] beside using what Belknap possessed, sifted a mass of papers found in an old shed on the Pepperrell estate. This lot covered the years 1696-1759, and some of them were scarcely legible. The mercantile letters and accounts among them yielded little, but there was a smaller body of Pepperrell’s own letters and those of his correspondents, which proved of more or less historical value.

Unremitting search yielded gain to Dr. Parsons in other directions. Some manuscripts coming from a Kittery house into the hands of Capt. Luther Dame, of Newburyport, were reported upon by Col. A. H. Hoyt in the _New England Hist. and Geneal. Reg._ (Oct., 1874, p. 451), in a paper afterwards reprinted by him, separately, with revision; but they throw no considerable light upon the Louisbourg siege. They would add little to what Parsons presents in chronologically arranged excerpts from letters and other records which make up his account of the expedition.[953]

Of all other contemporary accounts and aids, most, so far as known, have been put into print, though George Bancroft quotes a journal of Seth Pomeroy,[954] not yet in type; and there are papers which might still be gleaned in the _Mass. Archives_. There are in print the instructions of Shirley, and a correspondence between Pepperrell and Warren (_Mass. Hist. Collections_, i. 13-60); letters of Wentworth and Shirley on the plan of attack, and other letters of Shirley (_Provincial Papers of New Hampshire_, vol. v. pp. 931, 949, etc.); and many others of Pepperrell, Warren, Shirley, etc. (_Rhode Island Colonial Records_, vol. v.). The _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (vol. ix.) for this period give full details of the legislative enactment regarding the part that colony bore in the expedition; but the absence of most of the illustrative documents from her archives during that interval deprives us, doubtless, of a correspondence similar to that which is included in the Rhode Island printed _Records_.

Shirley’s letters to Governor Thomas, of Penna., respecting the preparations for the Louisbourg expedition, are in _Penna. Archives_, i. 667, etc.

Stray letters and documents of some interest, but throwing no essential light upon historical events, are found in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, v. 88; xii. 263; xix. 225, etc.

Various accounts of the siege, of no great extent were published soon after its close. Chief among them was an _Accurate journal and account of the proceedings of the New England land forces, during the late expedition against the French settlements on Cape Breton to the time of the surrender of Louisbourg_, Exon, 1746 (40 pp.). The manuscript of this journal was sent to England by Pepperrell to his friend Capt. Henry Stafford; and as printed it was attested by Pepperrell, Brig.-General Waldo, Col. Moore, Lieut.-Col. Lothrop, and Lieut.-Col. Gridley.[955] This journal was printed, with some curious verbal differences, as an appendix to a _Letter from William Shirley, Esq., to the Duke of Newcastle, with a Journal of the Siege of Louisbourg_, London, 1746. It was by vote of the legislature, Dec. 30, 1746, reprinted in Boston, once by Rogers and Fowle, and again by J. Draper.[956] An account by Col. James Gibson, published in London in 1745, as a _Journal of the late siege by the troops of North America against the French at Cape Breton_,[957] contained a large engraved plan of the siege, of which a reduced fac-simile is annexed.[958] The narrative was edited in Boston in 1847 by Lorenzo D. Johnson, under the misleading title _A Boston merchant of 1745_. Other diaries of the siege, of greater or less extent, have been printed, like Wolcott’s,[959] in the _Collections_ (vol. i.) of the Connecticut Historical Society; Curwen’s in his letters (_Hist. Collections Essex Institute_, vol. iii. 186), and in his _Journal_, edited by Ward (p. 8); Craft’s journal (_Hist. Coll. Essex Inst._, iv. p. 181); that of Adonijah Bidwell, the chaplain of the fleet (_N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, April, 1873); and the folio tract entitled _A particular Account of the taking of Cape Breton by Admiral Warren and Sir William Pepperell, with a description of the place ... and the articles of capitulation, By Philip Durell, Esq., Capt. of his majesty’s ship “Superbe_.” _To which is added a letter from an officer of marines_, etc., etc., London, 1745. Durell’s account is dated June 20, 1745, in Louisbourg harbor. Douglass gives the force by sea and land before Louisbourg. _Summary_, etc., i. 350.

A list of the commissioned officers of the expedition, drawn from the _Belknap Papers_, is edited by Charles Hudson in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, Oct., 1870.[960] In _Ibid._, April, 1868, a list of 221 names of the common soldiers had been printed; but in July, 1871, a much longer enumeration is made out by Mr. Hudson from the Pepperrell papers, the Council Records, and other sources. Potter in the _N. H. Adj.-General’s Report_, ii. (1866, pp. 61-76), afterwards published as _Mil. Hist. of N. H._, gives the New Hampshire rolls of Louisbourg soldiers.

On the occasion of a Thanksgiving (July 18, 1745) in Boston, two sermons preserve to us some additional if slight details. That of Thomas Prince, _Extraordinary events the doings of God and marvellous in pious eyes_, Boston and London, 1745 (Harv. Coll. lib., 4375.42 and 43), is mainly reprinted in S. G. Drake’s _Five Years’ French and Indian Wars_, p. 187; and that of the Rev. Charles Chauncy, the brother-in-law of Pepperrell, _Marvellous Things done by the right hand and holy arm of God in getting him the victory_, was printed both in Boston and London.[961]

* * * * *

The capture of Louisbourg and the question of the disposition of the island at the peace led to several expositions of its imagined value to the British Crown, among which may be named:—

_The importance and advantage of Cape Breton considered, in a letter to a member of Parliament from an inhabitant of New England_, London, 1746. (Brinley, no. 69.) This is signed “Massachusettensis.”[962]

_Two letters concerning some farther advantages and improvements that may seem necessary to be made on the taking and keeping of Cape Breton_, London, 1746. (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 822.)

_The importance and advantage of Cape Breton, truly stated and impartially considered. With proper maps_, London, 1746. (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 823.) The maps follow those of Bellin in Charlevoix. Its authorship is usually ascribed to William Bollan. (Sabin, ii. 6,215.)

_The great importance of Cape Breton demonstrated and exemplified by extracts from the best writers, French and English_, London, 1746. This is a plea against the surrender of it to the French. It is dedicated to Governor Shirley, and contains Charlevoix’s map and plan. (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 821.)

_An accurate description of Cape Breton, Situation, Soil, Ports, etc., its Importance to France, but of how much greater it might have been to England; with an account of the taking of the city by the New England forces under General Pepperell in 1745_, London, 1755.

_Memoir of the principal transactions of the last war between the English and French in North America, from 1744 to the conclusion of the treaty at Aix-la-Chapelle, containing in particular an account of the importance of Nova Scotia and Cape Breton to both nations_ (3d ed., London, reprinted, Boston, 1758.)

Douglass (_Summary_, etc.), the general historian nearest the time, was an eager opponent of Shirley, and in his account of the expedition he ascribes to good luck the chief element in its success. He calls it “this infinitely rash New England Corporation adventure, though beyond all military or human probability successful.” (_Summary_, etc., 1751, ii. p. 11.) “Fortified towns are hard nuts to crack, and your teeth have not been accustomed to it,” wrote Benjamin Franklin from Philadelphia to his brother in Boston. (_Franklin’s Works_, vii. 16.)[963]

Accounts of the expedition enter necessarily into the more general narratives, like those of Hutchinson (_Mass. Bay_); Chalmers (_Revolt_, etc.); Minot (_Massachusetts_); Gordon (_Amer. Rev._); Marshall (_Washington_); Bancroft (_United States_); Grahame (_United States_); Williamson (_Hist. of Maine_); Murdoch (_Nova Scotia_, ii. ch. 5); Haliburton (_Nova Scotia_); Stone (_Sir Wm. Johnson_, vol. i.); Palfrey (_Compendious Hist. of New England_, iv. ch. 9); Bury (_Exodus of the Western Nations_, ii. ch. 6); Gay (_Pop. Hist. United States_); Drake (_Boston_). The _Memorial Hist. Boston_ (ii. 117) and Barry’s _Massachusetts_ (ii. 140, etc.) give numerous references. Joel T. Headley has a popular narrative in _Harper’s Monthly_, xxviii. p. 354. Garneau (_Hist. du Canada_, 4th ed., ii. 190) offers the established French account. Cf. _Lettre d’un habitant de Louisbourg contenant une relation exacte de la prise de l’Ile Royale par les Anglais_, Quebec, 1745. (Sabin, x. no. 40,671.)[964]

The present condition of the site of Louisbourg is described by Parsons (_Life of Pepperrell_, 332); by Parkman (_Montcalm and Wolfe_); by J. G. Bourinot in his “The old forts of Acadia” in _Canadian Monthly_, v. 369; and in the _Canadian Antiquarian_, iv. 57.

* * * * *

Maps, both French and English, showing the fortifications and harbor of Louisbourg are numerous.

Both editions of Charlevoix’s _Histoire de la Nouvelle France_, the duodecimo in six volumes, and the quarto in three volumes issued in 1744, the year before the siege, have plans of Louisbourg and its fortifications, and the same are reproduced in Dr. Shea’s translation of Charlevoix. They are the work of Nicholas Bellin, and to the same draughtsman belongs _Le Petit Atlas Maritime_, 1764, in the volume of which devoted to North America, there are other (nos. 23, 24) plans of the harbor and fortifications.

Following French sources is a _Plan des fortifications de Louisbourg_, published at Amsterdam by H. de Leth about 1750. A “Plan special de Louisbourg” is also to be found on the map published by N. Visscher at Amsterdam, called “_Carte Nouvelle contenant la partie de l’Amérique la plus septentrionale_.”

Among the French maps is one “levé en 1756,” after a plan of Louisbourg, preserved in the Dépôt des Cartes de la Marine in Paris. This appeared in 1779 in the _Neptune Americo-Septentrional_, “publiée par ordre du Roi;” and another, dated 1758, “levé par le ch^{ev.} de la Rigaudiere,” was accompanied by a view, of which there is a copy in the _Mass. Archives; Docs. collected in France, Atlas_, ii. 5. In this last (composite) Atlas (ii. nos. 44, 45) are maps of the town and harbor, and a large plan of the fortifications, marked “Tome i. no. 23,” which can probably be identified.

Reduced fac-simile of the “Map of the Island of Cape Breton as laid down by the Sieur Bellin, 1746,” annexed to _The Importance and Advantage of Cape Breton, truly stated and impartially considered_, London, 1746. A general map of the island of Cape Breton, with Bellin’s name attached, is found in the several editions of Charlevoix and in the _Petit Atlas maritime, par le S. Bellin_, 1764. The earliest more elaborate survey of this part of the coast was the one published by J. F. W. Des Barres, in 1781, in four sheets, _The South East Coast of Cape Breton Island, surveyed by Samuel Holland_. A map by Kitchen was published in the _London Mag._, 1747.]

Richard Gridley,[965] of Massachusetts Bay, who was present as an officer of the artillery, made a plan of the fortifications after the surrender, and this, called a _Plan of the City and Fortifications of Louisbourg from surveys made by Richard Gridley in 1745_, was engraved and published by Jefferys, in 1758, and was used by him in his _History of the French Dominions in America_, London, 1760 (p. 124), and in his _General Topography of North America and the West Indies_, London, 1768 (no. 25).[966]

From a survey made by Richard Gridley, lieut.-col. of the train of artillery. A fac-simile of part of the plate in Jeffery’s _French Dominions in America_, p. 125.]

Gridley’s surveys have been the basis of many of the subsequent English plans. The draught reduced from Gridley in Richard Brown’s _History of the Island of Cape Breton_ (London, 1869) is herewith given in fac-simile, and is understood by the following key:—

A. Dauphin bastion and circular battery.
B. King’s bastion and citadel.
C. Queen’s bastion.
D. Princess’ bastion.
E. Bourillon bastion.
F. Maurepas bastion.
G. Batterie de la Gréve.
1, 1, etc. Glacis.
2, 2, etc. Covered way.
3, 3, etc. Traverses.
4, 4, etc. Ditch.
5, 5, etc. Parapet.
6, 6, etc. Ramparts.
7, 7, etc. Slopes of same.
8, 8, etc. Places of arms.
9, 9, etc. Casemates.
10, 10, etc. Guard houses.
11, 11, etc. Wooden bridges.
12. Governor’s apartments.
13. Church.
14. Barracks.
15. Powder magazine.
16. Fortification house.
17. Arsenal and bake-house.
18. Ordnance.
19. General storehouse.
20. West gate.
22. East gate.
23. Gates in quay curtain (_b. b. b._).
24. Parade.
25. Nunnery.
26. Hospital and church.
_a. a._ Palisade, with ramparts for small arms.
_c. c._ Picquet (raised during the siege).

Another plan of an early date is one, likewise annexed, which appeared in _A set of plans and forts in America, reduced from actual surveys_, 1763, and published in London.[967] The plan which George Bancroft added to his _History of the United States_, in one of the early editions, was used again by Parsons in his _Life of Pepperrell_.

A reduced sketch from a painting owned by Mrs. Anna H. C. Howard of Brooklyn, N. Y., which came to her by descent from Sir William Pepperrell. The canvas is very dark and obscure, and the artist may have missed some of the details, particularly of the walls along the shore. The point of view seems to be from the northwest side of the interior harbor, near the bridge (seen in the foreground), which spans one of the little inlets, as shown in some of the maps. This position is near what are called “Hale’s Barracks” in the draft of the town and harbor on the preceding page. The dismantled ships along the opposite shore are apparently the French fleet, while an English ship is near the bridge.

The following letter describes the present condition of the ground:—

BOSTON, June 4, 1886.

MY DEAR MR. WINSOR,—It gives me great pleasure to comply with your request, and to give my recollections of Louisburg as seen in September last.

The historical town of that name, or rather the ruin of the old fortress, lies perhaps three miles from the modern town, which is a small village, situated on the northeasterly side of the bay or harbor. The inhabitants of the neighborhood live, for the most part, by fishing and other business connected with that branch of industry, eking out their livelihood by the cultivation of a rocky and barren soil. The road from the village to the old fortress runs along the western shore of the bay, passing at intervals the small houses of the fishermen and leaving on the left the site of the Royal Battery, which is still discernible. This was the first outpost of the French taken at the siege, and its gallant capture proved subsequently to be of the greatest service to the English. From this point the ruins of the fortress begin to loom up and show their real character. Soon the walls are reached, and the remains of the former bastions on the land side are easily recognized. This land front is more than half a mile in length, and stretches from the sea on the left to the bay on the right, forming a line of works that would seem to be impregnable to any and all assaults. From its crown a good idea can be gained of the size of the fortifications, which extend in its entire circuit more than a mile and a half in length, and inclose an area of a hundred and twenty acres, more or less. The public buildings within the fortress were of stone, and, with the help of a guide, their sites can easily be made out. The burying-ground, on the point of land to the eastward, where hundreds of bodies were buried, is still shown; and the sheep and cattle graze all unconscious of the great deeds that have been done in the neighborhood. Taken all in all, the place is full of the most interesting associations, and speaks of the period when the sceptre of power in America was balancing between France and England; and Louisburg forms to-day the grandest ruin in this part of the continent.

Very truly yours,

SAMUEL A. GREEN.]

It follows an English plan procured by Mr. Bancroft in London, and closely resembles the sketch owned by a descendant of Pepperrell, and herewith given. Haliburton in his _History of Nova Scotia_ gives a similar plan, as well as a draught of the harbor. The plan of the town and the vicinity which is given by Brown in his _Cape Breton_ is also reproduced herewith. The earliest of the more elaborate charts of the harbor is that published by Des Barres in Oct., 1781. We find a rude sketch of the Island battery in _Curwen’s Journal_ as edited by Ward (Boston, 4th ed. 1864), which was sent by that observer from Louisbourg, July 25, 1745. A reproduction of this sketch, herewith given, needs the following key:—

“The embrasures in the front are not more than three feet above the ground.

1. Fronting mouth of harbor: 22 embrasures;
21 guns, 36 and 48 pounders.

2. Barracks.

3. Sally-ports.

4. Wall framed of timber, and covered with
plank, and filled with stone and lime,
in which is an embrasure with a 48
pounder.

5. Wall, defended with two small swivels.

6. The place at which whale-boats might
easily land 500 men.

7. One entire rock, perpendicular on the face,
and absolutely impossible to be climbed.

8. Piquet of large timber, fastened by iron
clamps, drilled into the solid rock.

9. Commandant’s apartment, five feet high.

10. The gate under the wall, about four feet
wide, formed like a common sally-port;
not straight, but made an angle of 160
degrees. Ten men can prevent ten hundred
making their way; this wall has but
four guns and two swivels.

“I paced the island, and judged it to be about 56 yards wide and 150 long at the widest part, nearly.”

There is in the _Collections_ of the Maine Hist. Soc. (viii. p. 120) a life of Lieut.-Col. Arthur Noble, who, by order of Brigadier Waldo, led on May 23 the unsuccessful attack on this battery.

The _Catalogue of the king’s maps in the British Museum_ (vol. i. 718, etc.) shows plans of the town and fortifications (1745) in MS. by Durell and Bastide; others of the town and harbor (1755) by William Green; with views by Bastide (1749), Admiral Knowles (1756), Ince (1758, engraved by Canot, 1762), and Thomas Wright (1766).

Jefferys also published in copperplate _A view of the landing of the New England forces in the expedition against Cape Breton_, 1745. (Carter-Brown, iii. p. 335.) A copy of this print belongs to Dr. John C. Warren of Boston.

* * * * *

Three months after the fall of Louisbourg there was another treaty with the eastern Indians, Sept. 28-Oct. 22, 1745. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 386.) The renewed activity of the French is shown in the _N. Y. Col. Docs_., x. p. 3.

A little later, Dec. 12, 1745, Shirley made his first speech to the Massachusetts Assembly after his return to Boston, and communicated the King’s thanks for “setting on foot and executing the late difficult and expensive enterprise against Cape Breton.”[968]

* * * * *

The next event of importance in the Acadian peninsula was the attack of the French upon an English post, which is known as the “battle of Minas.”

The English _accounts (Boston Weekly Post Boy_, March 2 and 9, 1747), which give the date Jan. 31, old style, and the French (official report), Feb. 11, new style, are edited by Dr. O’Callaghan with the articles of capitulation, in the _New Eng. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, April, 1855, p. 107. For general references see Haliburton’s _Nova Scotia_, ii. 132; Williamson’s _Maine_, ii. 250; Hannay (p. 349) and the other histories of Nova Scotia.

One of Des Barres’ coast views 1779. (In Harvard College library.)]

Douglass (_Summary_, etc., i. 316) says: “Three companies from Rhode Island were shipwrecked near Martha’s Vineyard; two companies of New Hampshire went to sea, but for some trifling reason put back and never proceeded. The want of these five companies was the occasion of our forces being overpowered by the Canadians at Minas with a considerable slaughter.”

One of Des Barres’ coast views, marked _A view of Cate Baptist in the entrance into the basin of Mines, bearing W. by N., two miles distant_. (In Harvard College library.)]

The French account of these transactions of the command of Ramezay is in a “Journal de la compagne du détachement de Canada à l’Acadie et aux Mines en 1746 et 1747” (June, 1746, to March, 1747). It is in the Parkman MSS. in the Mass. Hist. Society, _New France_, i. pp. 59-153. For the attack at Minas in particular see the “Relation d’une expédition faite sur les Anglois dans les pays de l’Acadie, le 11 Fév., 1747, par un détachement de Canadiens,” dated at Montreal, 28 Sept., 1747, and signed Le Chev. de la Corne. (_Ibid._, pp. 155-163.) Cf. also _N. Y. Col. Docs._, x. 78, 91.

The treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, Oct., 1748, was proclaimed in Boston, May 10, 1749, and a reprint of it issued there.

Shirley (June 3, 1749) writes to Gov. Wentworth that he had agreed with nine Indian chiefs, then in Boston, to hold a conference at Casco bay, Sept. 27. (_N. H. Prov. Papers_, v. 127.)

Meanwhile the English government, in pursuance of an effort to anglicize the peninsula,[969] had planned the transportation to Nova Scotia of an equipped colony under Edward Cornwallis, which arrived at Chebucto harbor in the summer of 1749, and founded Halifax. A treaty with the Indians was held there Aug. 15, 1749. (_Mass. Hist. Coll._, ix. 220.) There is a full-size fac-simile of the document in Akins’s _Public Doc. of Nova Scotia_. It was in confirmation of the Boston treaty of Dec. 15, 1725, which is embodied in the new treaty.

Another treaty with the eastern Indians was made at Falmouth, Oct. 16, 1749. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 427; xxxiv.; _Mass. Hist. Coll._, ix. 220; _N. H. Hist. Soc. Coll._, ii. 264; Williamson’s _Maine_, i. 259, taken from Mass. Council Records, 1734-57, p. 108; Hutchinson, iii. 4.)

This treaty was proclaimed in Boston, Oct. 27. Cf. _Journal of the proceedings of the commissioners appointed for managing a treaty of peace at Falmouth, Sept. 27, 1749, between Thomas Hutchinson, John Choate_ [and others], _commissioned by Gov. Phips, and the eastern Indians_, Boston [1749]. (Brinley, i. no. 441; Harv. Col. lib. 5325.39.) This tract is reprinted in _Maine Hist. Coll._, iv. 145.

There was another conference with the Penobscots and Norridgewocks, Aug. 3-8, 1750. (_Mass. Archives_, xxix. 429.)

A tract to encourage emigration to the new colony at Halifax was printed in London in 1750, and reprinted in Dublin: _A genuine account of Nova Scotia, to which is added his majesty’s proposals as an encouragement to those who are willing to settle there_. Cf. the German tract: _Historische und Geographische Beschreibung von Neu-Schottland_, Franckfurt, 1750. (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 935.) Counter-statements not conducive to the colony’s help, appeared in John Wilson’s _Genuine narrative of the transactions in Nova Scotia since the settlement, June, 1749, till Aug. 5, 1751 ... with the particular attempts of the Indians to disturb the colony_, London, 1751. (Carter-Brown, iii. no. 966.)

There are papers relating to the first settlement of Halifax in Akins’s _Documents_, 495; and a paper on the first council meeting at Halifax, by T. B. Akins, in the _Nova Scotia Hist. Soc. Coll._, vol. ii. See also Murdoch’s _Nova Scotia_, ii. ch. 11. Various maps of Halifax and the harbor were made during the subsequent years. The _Catalogue of the king’s maps_ (i. 483) in the British Museum shows several manuscript draughts. A small engraved plan was published in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_, 1750, p. 295. A large map, dedicated to the Earl of Halifax, is called: _Carte du havre de Chibucto avec le plan de la ville de Halifax sur la coste de l’Accadie ou Nova Scotia, publiée par Jean Rocque, Charing Cross_, 1750.[970]

A smaller _Plan des havens von Chebucto und der stadt Halifax_ was published at Hamburg, 1751. Jefferys issued a large _Chart of the Harbor of Halifax_, 1759, which was repeated in his _General Topography of North America and West Indies_, London, 1768. A “Plan de la Baye de Chibouctou nommée par les Anglois Halifax,” bears date 1763. Another is in the _Set of plans and forts_ (No. 7) published in London in 1763. In the Des Barres series of coast charts of a later period (1781) there is a large draft of the harbor, with colored marginal views of the coast.

* * * * *

In 1752-54 there were other conferences with the eastern Indians.

_Instructions for treating with the eastern Indians given to the commissioners appointed for that service by the Hon. Spencer Phips ... in 1752_, Boston, 1865. Fifty copies printed from the original manuscript, for Samuel G. Drake. (Sabin, xv. 62,579; Brinley, i. no. 443.)

_Journal of the proceedings of Jacob Wendell, Samuel Watts, Thomas Hubbard, and Chamber Russel, commissioners to treat with the eastern Indians, held at St. Georges, Oct. 13, 1752, in order to renew and confirm a general peace_, Boston, 1752. (Sabin, ix. 36,736; Brinley, i. no. 442.) The original treaty is in the _Mass. Archives_, xxxiv.

_A conference held at St. George’ s on the 20th day of September, 1753, between commissioners appointed by_ [Gov.] _Shirley and the Indians of the Penobscot_ [and Norridgewock] _tribes_, Boston, 1753. (Brinley, i. no. 444; Sabin, no. 15,436; Harv. Coll. lib., 5325.42.) Cf. the treaty in _Maine Hist. Coll._, iv. 168. The original treaties with the Penobscots at St. Georges (Sept. 21) and the Norridgewocks at Richmond (Sept. 29) are in the _Mass. Archives_, xxxiv.

_A journal of the proceedings at two conferences begun to be held at Falmouth_, 28_th June_, 1754, _between William Shirley, Governor, etc., and the Chiefs of the Norridegwock Indians, and on the 5th of July with the Chiefs of the Penobscot Indians_, Boston, 1754. (Brinley, i. no. 444; Sabin, ix. 36,730; _N. H. Prov. Papers_, vi. 292.) The original treaties with the Norridgewocks, July 2, and Penobscots, July 6, 1754, are in the _Mass. Archives_, xxxiv.

=E.= OLD FRENCH WAR.—This was begun in April, 1755. There was a declaration of war against the Penobscots, Nov. 3, 1755. (_Mass. Archives_, xxxii. 690.)

Meanwhile, towards the end of April, 1755, Cornwallis at Halifax had sent Lawrence[971] to the neck of the peninsula[972] of Nova Scotia to fortify himself on English ground, opposite the French post at Beauséjour. Instigated by the French priest, Le Loutre, the Micmacs[973] were so threatening and the French were so alarmingly near that the English, far outnumbered, withdrew; but they returned in the autumn, better equipped, and began the erection of Fort Lawrence. The French attempted an “indirect” resistance through the Indians and some indianized Acadians, and were, in the end, driven off; but not until the houses and barns of neighboring settlers had been burned, with the aim of compelling the Acadians to fly to the French for shelter and sustenance.[974] The French now began a fort on the Beauséjour hill. A petty warfare and reprisals, not unmixed with treachery, became chronic, and were well set off with a background of more portentous rumors.[975] It happened that letters crossed each other, or nearly so, passing between Lawrence (now governor) and Shirley, suggesting an attack on Beauséjour. So the conquest was easily planned. Shirley commissioned Col. John Winslow to raise 2,000 men, and but for delay in the arrival of muskets from England this force would have cast anchor near Fort Lawrence on the first of May instead of the first of June. Monckton, a regular officer, who had been Lawrence’s agent on the Boston mission, held the general command over Winslow, a provincial officer. The fort surrendered before the siege trains got fairly to work. Parkman, who gives a vivid picture of the confusion of the French, refers for his authorities to the _Mémoires sur le Canada_, 1749-1760; Pichon’s _Cape Breton_, and the journal of Pichon, as cited by Murdoch in his_ Hist. of Nova Scotia_.[976] The captured fort became Fort Cumberland; Fort Gaspereau, on the other side of the isthmus, surrendered without a blow. Rouse, the Boston privateersman, who had commanded the convoy from Boston, was sent to capture the fort at the mouth of the St. John, and the Indians, whom the French had deserted on Rouse’s approach, joyfully welcomed him.

Part of a folding map, “Fort Beauséjour and adjacent country, taken possession of by Colonel Monckton, in June, 1755;” in Mante’s _Hist. of the Late War_ (London, 1772), p. 17. Cf. Des Barres’ Environs of Fort Cumberland, 1781, and various drawn maps in _Catal. King’s Library_ (Brit. Mus.), i. 281.]

Three hundred of the young Acadians, the so-called “neutral French,” were found among the defenders of Beauséjour.[977] The council at Halifax had no easy question to solve in determining the next step to be taken.

After a mezzotint preserved in the Amer. Antiq. Soc. library, in which he is called “Major-General, and Colonel of the Seventeenth Foot, and Governor of New York,” as he later was. Cf. other mezzotints noted in J. C. Smith’s _Brit. Mezzotint Portraits_, ii. 883; iv. 1,525, 1739. There is a portrait in Entick’s _Hist. of the Late War_, v. 355. See account of Monckton in Akins’s _Nova Scotia Docs._, 391.]

With the documentary evidence now in hand, chiefly the records of the French themselves, we can clearly see the condition which the English rather suspected than knew in detail.[978] They indeed were aware that the neutrals of Chignecto in 1750 had been in effect coerced to crossing the lines at the neck, while the burning of their houses and barns had been accomplished to prevent their return. They further knew that this gave an increased force of desperate and misguided men to be led by priests like Le Loutre, and encouraged by the French commanders, acting under orders of the central government at Quebec. They had good reason to suspect, what was indeed the fact, that the emissaries of the Catholic church and the civil powers in Canada were confident in the use they could in one way and another make of the mass of Acadians, though still nominally subjects of the British king.[979] Their loyalty had always been a qualified one. A reservation of not being obliged to serve in war against the French had been in the past allowed in their oath; but such reservation had not been approved by the Crown, though it had not been practically disallowed. It was a reservation which in the present conjunction of affairs Governor Lawrence thought it inexpedient to allow, and he required an unqualified submission by oath. He had already deprived them of their arms. The oath was persistently refused and the return of their arms demanded. This act was in itself ominous. The British plans had by this time miscarried in New York and Pennsylvania, and under Braddock the forces had suffered signal defeat. The terms of the New England troops in Acadia were fast expiring. With these troops withdrawn, and others of the Acadian garrisons sent to succor the defeated armies farther west, and with the Canadian government prompted to make the most of the disaffection toward the English and of the loyalty to the French flag which existed within the peninsula, there could hardly have been a hope of the retention of the country under the British flag, unless something could be done to neutralize the evil of harboring an enemy.[980] “In fact,” says Parkman, “the Acadians, while calling themselves neutrals, were an enemy encamped in the heart of the province.”[981] Colonel Higginson (_Larger History_, etc.) presents the antithesis in a milder form, when he says, “They were as inconvenient as neighbors as they are now picturesque in history.” It has been claimed that the cruelty of deportation might have been avoided by exacting hostages of the Acadians. That involves confidence in the ability of an abjectly priest-ridden people to resist the threats of excommunication, should at any time the emissaries of Quebec find it convenient to sacrifice the hostages to secure success to the French arms. Under such a plan the English might too late learn that military execution upon the hostages was a likely accompaniment of a military disaster which it would not avert. The alternative of deportation was much surer, and self-preservation naturally sought the securest means. Simply to drive the Acadians from the country would have added to the reckless hordes allured by the French in 1750, which had fraternized with the Micmacs, and harassed the English settlements. To deport them, and scatter them among the other provinces, so that they could not combine, was a safer and, as they thought, the only certain way to destroy the Acadians as a military danger. It was a terrible conclusion, and must not be confounded with possible errors in carrying out the plan. The council, taking aid from the naval commanders, decided upon it.[982]

The decision and its execution have elicited opinions as diverse as the characters of those who have the tender and the more rigid passions mixed in them in different degrees. The question, however, is simply one of necessity in war to be judged by laws which exclude a gentle forbearance in regard to smaller for the military advantages of larger communities.

After an original formerly in the gallery of the Mass. Hist. Soc., but now in Pilgrim Hall, Plymouth. Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xx. 192, and _Mem. Hist. Boston_, ii. 123. The sword of General Winslow, shown in the cut (Vol. III. p. 274), has also been transferred to Plymouth, as well as the portraits of Governor Edward and Governor Josiah Winslow. (_Ibid._, pp. 277, 282.) Other engravings of General Winslow are given in Raikes’ _Hon. Artillery Co. of London_ (1878), i. p. 348, and in Gay’s _Pop. Hist. U. S._, iii. 276.]