Chapter IX: The West, (22)

[1414] As early as 1774 the minds of the colonists were turned inquiringly towards this question. Joseph Reed wrote on Sept. 25, 1774, to the Earl of Dartmouth, that "the idea of bringing down the Canadians and savages upon the English colonies is so inconsistent, not only with mercy, but justice and humanity of the mother country, that I cannot allow myself to think that your lordship would promote the Quebec Bill, or give it your suffrage, with such intention" (Reed's _Reed_, i. p. 79). The "full power to levy, arm, muster, command, and employ all persons whatsoever residing within our said province", and to "transport such force to any of our plantations in America", with which Carleton was commissioned, was but a renewal of the authority conferred upon James Murray in 1763 (_Parl. Reg._, iv., App., "The New Commission of the Governor of Quebec", etc., pp. 8, 26). The same language was used in the commission of Sir Danvers Osborn, Bart., to be captain-general of New York in 1754 (_Ibid._ p. 48). In the XV. section of the charter granted by Charles II. to the Lords Proprietors of South Carolina, the grantees were authorized to levy, muster, and train "all sorts of men, of what condition, or wheresoever born", and to pursue enemies, "yea, even without the limits of the said province" (_Ibid._ p. 64). The clause is repeated in the second charter of Charles II. to the Lords Proprietors of Carolina (_Ibid._ p. 79). Lord Baltimore was authorized by Charles I. with the same general powers to levy and arm, and "to make war and pursue the enemies and robbers aforesaid, as well by sea as by land, yea, even without the limits of the said province, and (by God's assistance) to vanquish and take them." (Cf. _The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters_, etc., Washington, 1877, part ii. p. 1388, "Charter of Carolina, 1663, § 15.")

[1415] Samuel Kirkland was born at Norwich, Conn., Dec. 1, 1744; graduated at Princeton, 1765; became a missionary among the Indians. The hostility of Guy Johnson bore testimony to the influence of the missionary among the natives. Kirkland was afterward a chaplain in the army. In 1789 he received a grant of land two miles square, now the town of Kirkland, N. Y. He died in 1808. His life, by S. K. Lothrop, was published in Sparks's _American Biography_.

James Deane was born at Groton, Conn., Aug. 20, 1748; graduated at Dartmouth in 1773; and then went as missionary among the Indians. He was employed to pacificate the Northern Indians, and acted as interpreter on many important occasions. He was afterward a judge in Oneida County, N. Y., where he died in 1823. He was much esteemed. Gov. Trumbull said: "The abilities and influence of Mr. Deane to attach the Six Nations to the interest of these colonies is an instance of Divine favor."

[1416] See incidents of this border warfare in James Banks's _Hist. Address_ (Fayetteville, N. C., 1859).

[1417] The rank of this officer is sometimes given as colonel. The expedition is stated by Haywood, in his _History of Tennessee_, to have been led by Col. Leonard McBury. Capt. Leonard Marbury, who at that time commanded a company under Major Jack, is probably the officer referred to.

[1418] The experience of South Carolina in these border wars is exemplified in Alexander Gregg's _History of the old Cheraws: containing an account of the aborigines of the Pedee, the first white settlements, their subsequent progress, civil changes, the struggle of the revolution, and growth of the country afterward; extending from about A. D. 1730 to 1810, with notices of families and sketches of individuals_ (N. Y., 1867).—ED.

[1419] In a letter from Col. Charles Robertson, trustee of the Watauga Association, to his excellency Richard Caswell, etc., April 27, 1777, it is stated that on the 27th of March last Col. Nathaniel Guess brought letters from the governor of Virginia soliciting the Indians to come in to treat for peace. The Indians, in reply to pressure brought to bear upon them, said "they could not fight against their Father King George", etc. (Ramsey's _History of Tennessee_, p. 171).

[1420] _Calendar of Virginia State Papers_, i. 415.

[1421] See Vol. V. p. 280.

[1422] The definitive treaty is in Hansard, xv. (1753-65) p. 1291; _Lond. Mag._, 1763, p. 149; and the preliminary articles signed at Fontainebleau, Nov. 3, 1762, are in Hansard, xv. p. 1240; _Lond. Mag._, 1762, p. 657. There are in the archives of the Dept. of Foreign Affairs in Paris several vols. (nos. 444-449) of papers respecting the negotiation between France and England which led to the treaty of 1763. Cf. _Report_, 1874, on the Canadian archives. Cf. Vol. V. 614.—ED.

[1423] See Parkman's _Montcalm and Wolfe_, ii. 383-413; Green's _Hist. of the English People_ (Lond., 1880), iv. 193; Macaulay's "Earl Chatham", _Ed. Rev._, lxxx. 549, also in his _Essays; Olden Time_, i. 329. Cf. Vol. V. ch. viii.—ED.

[1424] "The treaty of cession to Spain was never published, and the terms of it remain a secret to this day" (Stoddard's _Louisiana_, 1812, p. 72).

[1425] Monette, _Discovery and Settlement of the Valley of the Mississippi_ (New York, 1848), vol. i., has a map showing the territorial possessions before the treaty. For later maps showing the treaty lines, see Vol. V. p. 615.—ED.

[1426] The Duc de Choiseul, in conducting the negotiations on the part of France, suggested that the English colonies would not fail to shake off their dependence the moment Canada should be ceded (Parkman's _Montcalm_, ii. 403); and Kalm, the Swedish botanist, who visited America in 1748-49, made a similar prediction in his _Travels_: "The English government has, therefore, the sufficient reason to consider the French in North America as the best means of keeping the colonies in their due submission" (London, 1772, i. 207). As to the spurious Montcalm letters, see Vol. V. p. 606.—ED.

[1427] A satirical article on restoring Canada to the French appeared in _Gentleman's Mag._, 1759, p. 620, which has the flavor of Dr. Franklin's style: "Canada ought to be restored in order that England may have another war; that the French and Indians may keep on scalping the colonists, and thereby stint their growth; for otherwise the children will be as tall as their mother; that, though we ought to keep faith with our allies, it is not necessary with our children. We must teach them, according to Scripture, not to 'put trust in princes.' Let 'em learn to trust in God. If we should not restore Canada, it would look as if our statesmen had courage like our soldiers. What have statesmen to do with courage? Their proper character is wisdom." Franklin's serious and avowed tract is considered in Vol. V. p. 615.—ED.

[1428] This document is in the _London Mag._, 1763, p. 541; _Amer. Archives_, 4th ser., i. 172, and in other places [given in Vol. V. p. 615.—ED.] Its terms were the subject of constant reference and discussion for the next twenty years.

[1429] "Many reasons may be assigned for this apparent omission. A consideration for the Indians was, we presume, the principal, because it might have given a sensible alarm to that people if they had seen us formally cantoning out their whole country into regular establishments" (_Annual Register_, 1763, p. 20). The writer of the very able and interesting political articles in this volume was Edmund Burke (Robertson's _Burke_, p. 18).

[1430] Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 303-323. Dr. Franklin made an extended and vigorous reply to this report (_Idem_, iv. 324-374); and when the matter came up for action in the Privy Council, and his reply was read, the prayer of the petitioners was granted. Lord Hillsborough was so much offended by the decision that he resigned. The Doctor, writing to his son, July 14, 1773, said: "Mr. Todd told me, as a secret, that Lord Hillsborough was much chagrined at being out of place, and could never forgive me for writing that pamphlet against his report about the Ohio" (_Works_, viii. 75).

[1431] See _ante_, chap. i.

[1432] Sir William Johnson, the superintendent of Indian affairs, writing to Secretary Conway, June 28, 1766, said: "Our people in general are very ill calculated to maintain friendship with the Indians, they despise in peace those whom they fear to meet in war. This, with the little artifices used in trade, and the total want of that address and seeming kindness practiced with such success by the French, must always hurt the colonists. On the contrary, could they but assume a friendship, and treat them with civility and candor, we should soon possess their hearts, and much more of their country than we shall do in a century by the conduct now practiced" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 836). The outrageous conduct of the English traders towards the Indians is a constant theme of complaint by Sir William Johnson in his letters to the Lords of Trade (see _Idem_, vii. 929, 955, 960, 964, 987). He speaks (vii. 965) of the contrast between the French and English traders. The former are gentlemen in character, manners, and dress; the latter, "for the most part, men of no zeal or capacity; men who often sacrifice the credit of the nation to the basest purposes. Can it otherwise happen but that the Indians' prejudices must daily increase, when they are on the one side seduced by men of abilities, influence, and address; and on the other, see such low specimens of British abilities, honor, and honesty? What, then, can be expected but loss of trade, robbery, murder of traders, and frequent general ruptures?" See also _Diary of Siege of Detroit_, ed. by Hough, preface, xiii., and Dr. Hall's tract on _The Dutch and the Iroquois_.

[1433] Sir William Johnson, writing Dec. 26, 1764, to the Lords of Trade, said: "Indeed, it is not to be wondered that they should be concerned at our occupying that country, when we consider that the French (be their motive what it will) loaded them with favors, and continue to do so, accompanied with all outward marks of esteem, and an address peculiarly adapted to their manners, which infallibly gains upon all Indians who judge by externals only; and in all their acquaintance with us [the English] upon the frontiers, have never found anything like it; but, on the contrary, harsh treatment, angry words, and, in short, everything which can be thought of to inspire them with a dislike for our manners and jealousy of our views. I have seen so much of these matters, and am so well convinced of the utter aversion our people have for them in general, and of the imprudence with which they constantly express it, that I absolutely despair of ever seeing tranquillity established until I may have proper persons to reside at the posts, whose business it shall be to remove their prejudices, and whose interests it becomes to obtain their esteem and friendship" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 689).

[1434] Cf. Major Robert Rogers's _Concise Account_, 1765, pp. 240-243. It was the opinion of Rogers that if the English had used common sagacity in their treatment of Pontiac, the colonies would have been spared the horrors of the Pontiac War.

[1435] The fort at Detroit was a stockade on the west side of the Detroit River, twenty-five feet high, with a bastion at each corner, and a block-house over each gateway, the whole enclosing about a hundred small houses. A few pieces of light artillery were mounted on the bastions. The garrison consisted of eight officers, one hundred and twenty soldiers, and forty-five fur traders, under the command of Major Henry Gladwin, an experienced and gallant officer. Two small armed schooners were anchored in the stream. The white cottages of the Canadian farmers lined both banks of the river. About a mile below the fort, on the western bank, was a village of the Pottawattamies, and on the opposite shore a Wyandot village. Four miles above the fort were the lodges of the Ottawas (Parkman's _Pontiac_, i. 212-222). Parkman's, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_ is one of the most entertaining monographs in American history; and no writer can treat the subject without acknowledging his indebtedness to the accurate and scholarly investigations of that distinguished historian. The reader of this brief summary of events will find full details in the charming narrative of Parkman. He says of the Bouquet and Haldimand Papers, in the British Museum, that they contain "several hundred letters from officers engaged in the Pontiac War, some official, others personal and familiar." These he availed himself of in his last revision (1870), but he had collected 3,400 MS. pages of unprinted documents for his original edition (1851). All these MS. collections are now in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society.—ED.

[1436] A biographical notice of Major Gladwin (who became major-general in 1782) by Dr. O'Callaghan is in _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 961. Parkman spells the name "Gladwyn." Detroit was now the chief post of this new Northwestern government. Amherst, in a letter to Egremont, Nov. 30, 1762, had recommended the place as the proper headquarters (Shelburne Papers, vol. 48, _Hist. MSS. Com. Report_, v. 217).—ED.

[1437] See plan in Vol. V. p. 532.

[1438] Some years later, an Indian who was present described the scene to Sir William Johnson. A party of Senecas gained admission to the fort by treachery, and murdered all the garrison except the commander, and him they later put to death by roasting over a slow fire (Parkman, ii. 20).

[1439] Capt. Simeon Ecuyer was in the English service during the Revolutionary War, and is mentioned with high terms of praise, as "Major" Ecuyer, in "Journal of the most remarkable Occurrences in Quebec, from Nov. 14, 1775, to May 7, 1776" (_N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1880, p. 232).

[1440] A biographical sketch (in French) of Col. Bouquet, by C. G. F. Dumas, is prefixed to the Amsterdam edition, 1769, of Bouquet's second expedition, 1764. The same (in English) is prefixed to Robert Clarke's reprint in the _Ohio Valley Series_, 1868. A different and fuller translation of Dumas's sketch is in _Olden Time_, i. 203, and is preceded (p. 200) by a sketch by another writer. George H. Fisher, in _Penna. Mag._, iii. 121-143, gives the life, with an excellent portrait, of Col. Bouquet, and his letters to Anne Willing, a young lady with whom he had tender relations, but whom he did not marry. J. T. Headley, in _Harper's Mag._, xxiii. 577 (Oct., 1861), has an illustrated article on Col. Bouquet. The Bouquet Papers, 1757-1765, were given by the heirs of Gen. Haldimand, in 1857, to the British Museum. There is a synopsis of them in Brymner's _Report on the Canadian Archives_, 1873.—ED.

[1441] Brymner, the Canadian archivist, in examining the papers in the Public Record Office in London, was denied access to the volume of the "America and West Indies" series, which contains the correspondence of Amherst, Jan.-Nov., 1763.—ED.

[1442] Sir Wm. Johnson (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 962) gives the number of men in Bouquet's command as 600.

[1443] He soon found that even they had the bad habit of losing themselves in the woods. He wrote to Amherst, July 26th: "I cannot send a Highlander out of my sight without running the risk of losing the man, which exposes me to surprise from the skulking villains I have to deal with" (Parkman, ii. 56).

[1444] The reports of Colonel Bouquet to General Amherst, Aug. 5th, 6th, and 11th, give the losses in both actions as 50 killed, 60 wounded, and 5 missing (_Gent. Mag._, 1763, p. 486; _Lond. Mag._, 1763, p. 545; _Mag. of Western Hist._, ii. 650; _Annual Register_, 1763, p. 31). Parkman (ii. 68) makes the losses "8 officers _and_ 115 men." The officers were included in the above enumeration. Of the losses by the Indians, General Amherst wrote (_Gent. Mag._, 1763, p. 489): "The number of the savages slain was about 60, and a great many wounded in the pursuit. The principal ringleaders who had the greatest share in fomenting the present troubles were killed." As to the number of Indians engaged, Sir William Johnson (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 962) states on the best authorities of white men who were with the Indians, and of several different Indians, who all agree, that the true number of Indians who attacked Colonel Bouquet at Bushy Run was only ninety-five. This statement seems hardly probable, in view of the number killed and the accounts given by the officers engaged.

[1445] "His Majesty has been graciously pleased to signify to the commander-in-chief his royal approbation of the conduct and bravery of Col. Bouquet and the officers and troops under his command in the actions of the 5th and 6th of August" (General Orders from headquarters in New York, January 5, 1764).

An excellent description of Bouquet's expedition of 1763 and of the battle of Bushy Run is in _Annual Register_, 1763, pp. 27-32. It was doubtless written by Edmund Burke from authentic information furnished by some of the officers engaged. Another account is in the introduction to Bouquet's second expedition of 1764, in which the writer (Dr. William Smith) uses freely the account in the _Annual Register_. Cf. T. J. Chapman on the siege of Fort Pitt in _Mag. of Western Hist._, Feb., 1886.

[1446] See Parkman's _Pontiac_, i. 305-317; _Annual Register_, 1763, p. 26; and General Amherst's report in _Gent. Mag._, 1763, p. 486; _Lond. Mag._, 1763, p. 543; _Mag. of West. Hist._, ii. 648. He concludes his detailed "Return of killed and wounded" with "Total, 19 killed and 42 wounded." The name of Captain Dalzell, whom he had previously reported as killed, is not included in the return, and the wounded named number only 39. The _Annual Register_ gives the loss as "only seventy men killed, and about forty wounded"!

[1447] An orderly-book of Bradstreet's campaign, June-Nov., 1764, is in the library of the American Antiquarian Society.

[1448] Bradstreet sent Capt. Thomas Morris on a mission to Pontiac, and an account of Morris's experience and his capture by the Indians is given in his _Miscellanies in prose and verse_ (London, 1791). See Field, _Ind. Bibliog._, no. 1,095, and Thomson's _Bibliog. of Ohio_, no. 854. Morris's original journal, sent to Bradstreet, is in the Public Record Office, London. He extended the copy from which he printed. A letter from Morris to Bradstreet is among the papers of Sir William Johnson in the State Library at Albany (Parkman, ii. 195). The Parkman MSS. (Mass. Hist. Soc.) have minutes of the council held by Bradstreet with the Indians at Detroit, Sept. 7, 1764, and the Shelburne Papers (vol. 50) show similar records (_Hist. MSS. Com. Rept._, v. 218).—ED.

[1449] Sir William Johnson (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 686), writing to the Lords of Trade, Dec. 26, 1764, and having spoken with much severity of Bradstreet's bad management of his expedition, says: "On the other hand, Col. Bouquet, under all the disadvantages of a tedious and hazardous land march with an army little more than half that of the other, has penetrated into the heart of the country of the Delawares and Shawanese, obtained above two hundred English captives from amongst them, with fourteen hostages for their coming here [Johnson Hall] and entering into a peace before me in due form; and I daily expect their chiefs for that purpose." A touching account of the English captives, the reluctance of some of them to part from their captors and savage life, and the joy of others again to meet their relatives, is in Dr. Smith's _Historical Account_, pp. 75-80 (ed. 1868), and in Parkman, ii. 231-240. An engraving, after Benj. West, representing the delivery of the English captives at the forks of the Muskingum, is in some of the editions (p. 72) of the _Historical Account_, described in a following note.

[1450] Cf. a paper on the forks of the Muskingum in the _Mag. of West. Hist._, Feb., 1885, p. 283.

[1451] _Pennsyl. Mag._, iii. 134. An obituary notice of him appeared in the _Pennsyl. Journal_, Oct. 24, 1765. In the Haldimand Coll. (Canadian Archives), p. 21, appears: "June 5, 1765. Bouquet waiting for a vessel to Florida. Nov. 17. Gen. Gage appoints Lieut.-Col. Taylor to act as Brig.-Gen. in room of Brig. Bouquet, deceased." Among army promotions, in _Gent. Mag._, Jan., 1766, is "Aug. Provost, Esq., Lieut.-Col. of the 60th Reg., in room of H. Bouquet, deceased."

[1452] _An Historical Account of the Expedition against the Ohio Indians in the Year 1764, under the command of Henry Bouquet, Esq., Colonel of Foot, and now Brigadier-General_, appeared from the press of William Bradford, Philadelphia, in 1765 (Wallace's _William Bradford_, p. 85). The authorship has been ascribed by Rich, Allibone, and others to Thomas Hutchins, later geographer of the United States; but it is now known that the writer was Dr. William Smith, Provost of the College of Philadelphia. It is a quarto, pp. xiii+71, with three maps by Thomas Hutchins, Asst. Engineer, viz.: (1) "Map [of the route of Col. Bouquet's expedition of 1763, and] of the country on the Ohio and Muskingham Rivers; also, on the same sheet, separated by a line, a map of the country traversed in his expedition of 1764;" (2) plan of the Battle of Bushy Run; and (3) the order of march. The work has been several times reprinted: (I.) In London, 1766, 4^o, pp. xiii+71, with the plates named reëngraved, and two additional plates inserted, after designs by Benj. West, viz.: (4) conference of Indians with Col. Bouquet, engraved by Gregnion; and (5) Indians delivering up the English captives to Col. Bouquet, engraved by Canot (II.) At Amsterdam, 1769, 8^o, pp. xvi+147+ix, a French translation, with the same plates very neatly reëngraved, the two maps on the first plate being engraved separately, making in all six plates. (III.) At Dublin, 1769, by John Millikin, pp. xx+99, no plates. (IV.) In _Olden Time_, i. 203-221, 241-261, no plates. (V.) In the _Ohio Valley Series_, Cincinnati, 1868, with preface by Francis Parkman, and photo-lithographic copies of the plates in the London edition. The last two editions have translations (not the same, however) of C. G. F. Dumas's biographical sketch of Col. Bouquet, which is prefixed to the Amsterdam edition. The first two maps are prefixed to Hildreth's _Western Pioneer_, and extracts from the work are given (pp. 46-64). The map of the expedition of 1763 is in Parkman's _Pontiac_ (ii. 199). (Cf. Thomson's _Bibliog. of Ohio_, nos. 1,065, etc.)

The _Historical Account_ has an introduction giving a summary of Col. Bouquet's expedition of 1763, and supplementary matter, viz., Reflections on the War with the Savages in North America; and five appendixes: (I.) Construction of Forts in America; (II.) Account of the French Forts ceded to Great Britain in Louisiana; (III.) Route from Philadelphia to Fort Pitt; (IV.) Indian Towns on and near the Ohio River; (V.) Names of Indian tribes in North America. The supplementary matter, and doubtless some of the narrative, were furnished by Col. Bouquet himself, as Dr. Smith, in writing to Sir William Johnson, said: "I drew up [the work] from some papers he favored me with." Cf. on the expedition of 1764, Col. Whittlesey's _Cleveland_, p. 105; Darlington's ed. of Col. James Smith's _Remarkable Occurrences_, pp. 107, 177; Hildreth's _Pioneer Hist. of Ohio Valley_, p. 46; _Western Reserve Hist. Soc. tracts_, nos. 13, 14, 25.

[1453] M. D'Abbadie died in February, 1765. Pittman, p. 16.

[1454] The Pontiac War is treated in Doddridge's _Notes_ (ed. 1876), p. 220; Kercheval (taken largely from Doddridge), p. 258; Monette, i. 326; Stone's _Sir William Johnson_, ii. 191; Perkins's _Western Annals_ (ed. 1851), p. 66; Davidson and Struve's _Illinois_, p. 137; Silas Farmer's _Detroit and Michigan_ (1884); Sheldon's _Michigan_; Blanchard's _North West_, 119, with a map; Schweinitz's _Zeisberger_, p. 274; and in an illustrated article by J. T. Headley, _Harper's Mag._, xxii. 437. Munsell published at Albany in 1860, as edited by F. B. Hough, and no. 4 of Munsell's "Historical Series", a _Diary of the siege of Detroit in the war with Pontiac_. _Also a narrative of the principal events of the siege, by Major R. Rogers; a plan for conducting Indian affairs, by Col. Bradstreet; and other authentick documents, never before printed._ Rogers MS. diary is noted in the _Menzies Catal._, no. 1,715. There was a _Life of Pontiac_ published in N. Y. in 1860. See also _Poole's Index_ for reviews of Parkman's admirable work.—ED.

[1455] Gage's despatch, May 27, 1764 (_Haldimand Coll._, p. 18). Major Loftus arrived at New Orleans from Mobile with the 22d regiment, Feb. 12, 1764. The French governor "gave him a very bad account of the disposition of the Indians towards us [the English], and assured him, unless he carried some presents to distribute amongst them, that he would not be able to get up the river" (Gage to Earl Halifax, _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 619). The attack on the command of Major Loftus was made on the 20th of March, 1764, by the Tunicas Indians, a few miles above the mouth of the Red River: first from the west bank, and later from the east bank, of the Mississippi. The spot is indicated on Lieut. Ross's _Map of the Mississippi_, 1765 (pub. 1775), by the legend "Where the 22d regiment was drove back by the Tunicas, 1764;" and on Andrew Ellicott's _Map of the Mississippi_, 1814 (_Journal_, p. 25), by "Loftus's Heights", on the east bank. Pittman (p. 35) gives some particulars of the attack, and says, "They killed five men and wounded four."

[1456] Capt. Pittman was the author of _The Present State of the European Settlements on the Mississippi, with a Geographical Description of that River; illustrated by [eight] plans and draughts_ (London, 1770, 4to). It is the earliest English account of those settlements, and, as an authority in early Western history, is of the highest importance. He was a military engineer, and for five years was employed in surveying the Mississippi River and exploring the Western country. The excellent plans which accompany the work, artistically engraved on copper, add greatly to its value. They are: (1) Plan of New Orleans; (2) Plan of Mobile; (3) Draught of River Ibbeville to Lake Ponchartrain; (4) Plan of Fort Rosalia; (5) Plan of Cascaskies [Kaskaskia]; (6, 7, 8) Draught of the Mississippi River from the Balisle to Fort Chartres (in three sheets). Cf. Vol. V. pp. 47, 71.—ED.

[1457] Sir William Johnson, hearing of the failure of the English troops to reach the Illinois country by way of the Mississippi, attributed the result to a conspiracy existing between eighteen tribes of Indians to prevent it, which he charged to the intrigue of the French residing in New Orleans and the Illinois (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 776).

[1458] Fraser, "being too zealous", as Sir William Johnson wrote in July, 1765, "set out before Mr. Croghan had effected the necessary points with the Indians;" and "with two or three attendants" (Stone's _Life of Johnson_, ii. 247) floated down the Ohio, and arrived at Fort Chartres without casualty. Here he was courteously received by the French commander; but he and his attendants were ill treated by drunken Indians, and their lives were saved by the interposition of Pontiac in their behalf. The story of Fraser's troubles came to Sir William in another form, and he wrote: "From late accounts from Detroit there is reason to think that Fraser has been put to death, together with those that accompanied him, by Pontiac's party" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 746). Fraser, finding the Illinois country at that time an unsafe place of residence, took a passage in disguise down the Mississippi to New Orleans, and thence to Mobile.

[1459] _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 746, 765. The Shawanese, in their treaty of July 7, stipulated to send ten deputies (_Ibid._ 752); and the Delawares, in their treaty of May 8, agreed "to send with Mr. Croghan proper persons to accompany and assist him" (_Ibid._ 739).

[1460] Then called Post Vincent, and later simply "The Post" and "O'post." It was often erroneously written "_St._ Vincent."

[1461] The savages apologized, saying they supposed the Indians of the party were Cherokees.

[1462] Now Lafayette, Indiana.

[1463] George Croghan's journals (for there are several) of his journey to the Illinois country in 1765 are important documents in the history of the West. "This journal", says Parkman (ii. 296), "has been twice published,—in the appendix to Butler's _History of Kentucky_, and in the _Pioneer History_ of Dr. S. P. Hildreth",—implying that they were publications of the same journal. Dr. Hildreth, in a note appended to his version (p. 85), makes a statement from which it is evident that he supposed they were the same journal: "The above journal was copied from an original MS. among Col. [George] Morgan's papers, and not copied from Butler's _History of Kentucky_, which had not been seen by the writer at that time." It is an important fact that these journals are not the same, no paragraph in one being the same as a paragraph in the other. Their subject matter is different, and yet they are in no instance contradictory. The one printed by Dr. Hildreth may be regarded as an official report, and the one printed by Butler as a descriptive account. The former gives the details of the official business which he was sent to transact; the latter is such a journal as any traveller would keep, giving from day to day the incidents of the journey, describing the scenery and topography of the country, the fertility of the soil, the game, and omitting wholly to speak of public business, or what was done at councils with the Indians. He describes his being wounded and captured by the Indians, near the Wabash, as a personal misfortune, but makes no mention of conferences with the Indians at Ouatanon, or of his meeting Pontiac and making peace with him. Butler (p. 365, ed. 1834; p. 459, ed. 1836) states that "the following journal, so curious and little known, is extracted from the _Monthly American Journal of Geology and Natural Science_, December, 1831, by G. W. Featherstonhaugh, Esq., Philadelphia, and purports to be from the original, in possession of the editor." This text was reprinted at Burlington, New Jersey, 1875, in a tract of 38 pages (Thomson's _Bibliog. of Ohio_, no. 285). A third version of Croghan's journal is in the letters of Sir William Johnson to the Lords of Trade (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 779-788). With some variations it is the same as that printed by Dr. Hildreth. Each contains passages and paragraphs which are not in the other. In the Johnson text, words and passages are omitted, as illegible, which are given in the _Pioneer History_. Sir William, writing Nov. 16, 1765, says: "A few days ago [Oct. 21] Mr. Croghan arrived here, and delivered me his journal and transactions with the Indians, from which I have selected the principal parts, which I now inclose to your lordships. The whole of his journal is long and not yet collected; because after he was made prisoner and lost his baggage, etc., he was necessitated to write it on scraps of paper procured with difficulty at Post Vincent [Vincennes], and that in a disguised character, to prevent its being understood by the French, in case through any disaster he might again be plundered" (_Ibid._ 775). Sir William, from May 8 to Sept. 28, 1765, frequently reports that he has heard from Croghan, and mentions incidents and details which are not contained in either of the three versions named (_Ibid._ 746, 749, 765). Being at Post Ouatanon on the 12th of July, Croghan said: "I wrote to Gen. Gage and Sir William Johnson, to Col. Campbell at Detroit, Major Murray at Fort Pitt, and Major Farmar at Mobile, or on his way up the Mississippi, and acquainted them with everything that had happened since my departure from Fort Pitt" (Hildreth's _Pioneer History_, p. 71; _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 781). In the Butler journal, writing from the same place, July 15, he said: "From this post the Indians permitted me to write to the commander at Fort Chartres [St. Ange]; but would not suffer me to write to anybody else (this, I apprehend, was a precaution of the French, lest their villainy should be perceived too soon), although the Indians had given me permission to write to Sir William Johnson and to Fort Pitt on our march, before we arrived at this place." In the summary of his report to Sir William, he said: "In the situation I was in at Ouatanon, with great numbers of Indians about me, and no necessaries, such as paper and ink, I had it not in my power to take down all the speeches made by the Indian nations, nor what I said to them, in so particular a manner as I could wish." It is evident that Croghan wrote many accounts of his journey, and only three of them, as now appears, are accessible. A biographical sketch of George Croghan, by Dr. O'Callaghan, is in _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 982, 983. For earlier traces of Croghan see Vol. V. 10, 596, 610.—ED.

[1464] _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 783; Hildreth's _Pioneer History_, p. 75. Pontiac kept his promise, visited Sir William Johnson in the spring, concluded a peace, and departed laden with presents. He returned to his village on the Maumee, and little is known of him for the next three years. He then reappeared in the Illinois country, and visited his old friend M. St. Ange, who was in command of the post of St. Louis, then under Spanish rule. Like other Indians, Pontiac indulged at times in the excessive use of intoxicating liquors. Against the advice of his friend, St. Ange, he attended an Indian drinking carousal, at which he was waylaid and brained with a hatchet by a Kaskaskia Indian, who had been paid a barrel of rum by an English trader, named Williamson, to commit the deed. St. Ange claimed the body, and buried it with the honors of war, in an unknown grave near the fort of St. Louis. J. N. Nicollet, in his sketch of St. Louis (p. 82), says: "This murder, which roused the vengeance of all the Indian tribes friendly to Pontiac, brought about the successive wars and almost total extermination of the Illinois nation. Pontiac was a remarkably well-looking man, nice in his person, and full of taste in his dress and in the arrangement of his exterior ornaments. His complexion is said to have approached that of the whites. His origin is still uncertain, for some have supposed him to belong to the Ottawas, others to the Miamis, etc.; but Col. P. Chouteau, senior, who knew him well, is of the opinion that he was a Nipissing." (Reprinted in _Olden Time_, i. 322.)

[1465] _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 808.

[1466] The account of St. Ange's "Surrender of Fort Chartres to M. Stirling on the 10th of Oct., 1765", with a detailed description of the fort, from the French archives, is in _N. Y. Col. Doc._, x. 1161-1165. See also Stone's _Life of Sir Wm. Johnson_, ii. 252. [There are documents about Fort Chartres referred to in the _Hist. MSS. Com. Report_, v. 216. Cf. _Hist. Mag._, viii. 257, and H. R. Stiles's _Affairs at Fort Chartres, 1768-1781_ (Albany, 1864), being letters of an English officer at the close of the war.—ED.]

[1467] Nicollet (p. 81) states that "Capt. Stirling, at the head of a company of Scots, arrived unexpectedly in the summer of 1765;" and Parkman (ii. 298), that "Capt. Stirling arrived at Fort Chartres just as the snows of early winter began to whiten the naked forests." The articles of surrender are conclusive as to the fact that the English troops arrived and took possession of the Illinois country, October 10. Capt. Stirling was relieved by Major Robert Farmar, of the 34th regiment, about the time of which Parkman speaks. Sir William, writing March 22, 1766, says: "Just now I have heard that Major Farmar, who proceeded by the Mississippi, arrived there [the Illinois] the 4th of December, and relieved Capt. Stirling" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 816; Stone's _Johnson_, ii. 251). Monette (i. 411) states that "Capt. Stirling died in December; that St. Ange returned to Fort Chartres, and not long afterward Major Frazer, from Fort Pitt, arrived as commandant." These errors have been repeated scores of times, and the last repetition I have seen is in F. L. Billon's _Annals of St. Louis in early Days_, 1886, p. 26. Capt. Stirling lived until 1808: served in the Revolutionary War, became colonel in 1779, and later brigadier, major-general, lieut.-general, general, and was created a baronet. For a biographical sketch of him, by Dr. O'Callaghan, see _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 786; and for one of Major Farmar, _Ibid._ 775. F. S. Drake (_Biog. Dict._) records Capt. Stirling's extraordinary feat of marching his company of Highlanders overland 3,000 miles, from Fort Chartres to Philadelphia, without losing a man. The facts were that Capt. Stirling floated his company in boats down the Mississippi to New Orleans; thence they sailed to Pensacola, and later to New York, where they arrived June 15, 1766. Gen. Gage, in a letter of that date, wrote to Gov. Penn announcing their arrival, stating that they would march on the 17th for Philadelphia, and asking that quarters be assigned them (_Penna. Col. Rec._, ix. 318). No officer of the name of Frazer was ever in command at Fort Chartres. Fort Chartres, built by the French in 1720, was in its time the strongest fortress in America. Its ruins are on the left bank of the Mississippi, now a mile from the river, in Randolph County, Ill., 50 miles south of St. Louis, and 16 miles northeast of Kaskaskia. It was abandoned in 1772, in consequence of a portion of it being undermined by a Mississippi flood. See Edw. G. Mason's _Old Fort Chartres_, in Fergus's Historical Series, no. 12; Pittman, p. 45; Reynolds, _My own Time_, p. 26, ed. 1879; also his _Pioneer History_, p. 46, ed. 1887, with plan, from Beck's _Gazetteer of Illinois and Missouri_. For a plan of the fort, see Vol. V. p.54; and Mr. Davis's collation of authorities regarding its position, p. 55.—ED.

[1468] _N. Y. Col. Doc._, vii. 775.

[1469] The Six Nations claimed by conquest the supremacy of all the tribes west of the Alleghanies and as far south as the Cherokees, with whom the Northern tribes were in perpetual warfare. See Monette, i. 323; and Huske's map in Vol. V. p. 84.—ED.

[1470] A fac-simile of this map is in _N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. 31; and of the map as the treaty was finally made, _Ibid._ 136. See _ante_, p. 610.—ED.

[1471] _Ibid._ ii. 2.

[1472] _Haldimand Col._, p. 103.

[1473] Stone's _Life of Johnson_, ii. 306. "I was much concerned", Sir William wrote, "by reason of the great consumption of provisions and the heavy expenses attending the maintenance of those Indians, each of whom consume daily more than two ordinary men amongst us, and would be extremely dissatisfied if stinted when convened for business" (_N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. 105).

[1474] Sir William's full report of the council at Fort Stanwix, with the treaty, which he transmitted to Lord Hillsborough, is in _N. Y. Col. Doc._, viii. 111-137. In the appendix to Mann Butler's _History of Kentucky_, 1834, p. 378-394, is an abstract of the proceedings of the council, with the treaty, for which the author expresses his obligations to Hon. Richard M. Johnson. The treaty and map are also in _N. Y. Doc. History_, i. 587.

[1475] In this interval between 1765 and 1774 there was a revival of the purpose of settlements in the country watered by the Ohio and its tributaries. The breaking up by the war of the earlier enterprise of the Ohio Company (see Vol. V., _ante_; Sparks in his _Washington_, ii. 483, says its papers were entrusted to him fifty years ago by Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia) had led to a plan to buy out the French settlers in Illinois (Sparks's _Franklin_, vii. 356; Bigelow's _Franklin_, i. 537, 547; ii. 112); and this being abandoned, the earlier project had been merged in the scheme known at first as Walpole's Grant, and subsequently as the Colony of Vandalia, which had derived some impetus immediately after the conclusion of peace in 1763 by the publication in London of _The Advantages of a Settlement upon the Ohio_ (now rare; copies in Harvard College library; in _Carter-Brown Catal._, iii. 1363; Thomson's _Bibliog. of Ohio_, no. 7), and in Edinburgh of _The Expediency of securing our American Colonies by settling the Country adjoining the Mississippi River and the Country upon the Ohio Considered_ (Harvard College library, 6373. 33). The scheme had the countenance of Lord Shelburne, and the Shelburne MSS., as calendared in the _Hist. MSS. Com. Report_, v. p. 218 (vol. 50), show various papers appertaining. Professor H. B. Adams, in the _Maryland Fund Publications_, no. xi. p. 27, has marked the growth of the perception of the importance of these lands.

The grant was not secured till 1770, nor ratified till 1772 (account in Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 233, and _Washington_, ii. 483). Franklin had interested himself in securing the grant against the opposition of Hillsborough. See Franklin's letters in _Works_, iv. 233; the adverse report of the Lords of Trade (p. 303), and Franklin's reply to it (p. 324). These last papers are also included in _Biog. lit. and polit. Anecdotes of several of the most Eminent persons of the present Age_ (London, 1797), vol. ii. Provision was made for securing out of this grant the lands promised to the Virginia soldiers, in which Washington was so much interested. The coming on of the Revolution jeopardized the interests of the grantees, and in 1774 they petitioned the king that the establishment of a government for Vandalia be no longer delayed. Walpole, in May, 1775, was anxious at the turn of affairs (_Hist. Mag._, i. 86), and in 1776 the plan was abandoned. A memorial of Franklin and Samuel Wharton, dated at Passy, Feb. 26, 1780, tracing the history of these lands, is in the _Sparks MSS._, no. xvii.

On the early settlers of Ohio at this time, see S. P. Hildreth's _Biog. and Hist. Memoirs of the Early Pioneer Settlers of Ohio_ (Cinn., 1852); James W. Taylor's _Hist. of Ohio_, 1650-1787 (Sandusky, 1854); and a paper by Isaac Smucker on the first pioneers, in _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Aug., 1885, p. 326. The position of the Delawares in this region during the war is discussed by S. D. Peet in the _American Antiquarian_, ii. 132.

The Filson Club of Louisville has published (1886) Thomas Speed's _Wilderness road, a description of the route of travel by which the pioneers and early settlers first came to Kentucky_, their previous publication having been Reuben T. Durrett's _Life and Writings of John Filson, the first historian of Kentucky_ (1884), which gives in fac-simile the earliest special map of Kentucky, after a copy in Harvard College library,—most copies of the book being without it,—for while the _Discovery, Settlement, and Present State of Kentucke_ was printed in 1784, at Wilmington, Del., the map was printed in Philadelphia, and was an improvement upon the general maps of Charlevoix, Evans, Hutchins, Pownall, and others. Filson's book was issued in French, at Paris, in 1785, and reprinted in English in Imlay's _Topog. Description of North America_ (London, 1793 and 1797), in conjunction with Imlay; again by Campbell in New York, in 1793. Filson first presented to the world the story of the adventures of Daniel Boone in the appendix of his book, and from that it has been copied and assigned to Boone himself, in the _Amer. Museum_, Philadelphia, Oct. 1787, and in Samuel L. Metcalfe's _Collection of some of the most interesting narratives of Indian Warfare in the West_ (Lexington, Ky., 1821,—Thomson's _Bibliog. of Ohio_, no. 818). The life of Boone embodies much of the history of the pioneer days of Kentucky. His subsequent biographers, J. M. Peck (in Sparks's _Amer. Biog._), E. S. Ellis, G. C. Hill, H. T. Tuckerman (in his _Biog. Essays_), C. W. Webber (in _Hist. and Rev. Incidents_, Phil., 1861), Lossing (in _Harper's Mag._, xix.), and others, have depended upon Filson. E. C. Coleman has told the story as it is centred about Simon Kenton (_Ibid._ xxviii.), and J. H. Perkins has given it more general bearings in his "Pioneers of Kentucky", in _No. Amer. Rev._, Jan., 1846, included in his _Memoir and Writings_, ii. 243. Cf. Marshall Smith's _Legends of the War of Independence and of the Earlier settlements in the West_ (Louisville, 1855), and the old fort at Lexington, Ky., in _Mag. Amer. Hist._, Aug., 1887, p. 123.

What is now Tennessee was known after 1769 as the Settlements of the Watauga Association, and so continued till 1777, when, during the rest of the Revolutionary War, it was a part of North Carolina (J. E. M. Ramsey's _Annals of Tennessee_, Charleston, 1853; Philad., 1853, 1860; Sabin, xvi. no. 67, 729).

There are documents on the Illinois country during this quiet interval among the Shelburne Papers, as noted in the _Hist. MSS. Com. Report_, v. pp. 216, 218 (vols. 48 and 50). Cf. John Reynolds, _Pioneer Hist. of Illinois_ (1852); Breese's _Early Hist. of Illinois_, and the other later histories (see Vol. V., ante, p. 198). Cf. Arthur Young's _Observations on the present State of the waste lands of Great Britain, published on occasion of the establishment of a new Colony on the Ohio_ (London, 1773).

Several journals of voyages and explorations along the Ohio and its tributary streams, which were made during this period, are preserved to us, such as that of Capt. Harry Gordon, from Fort Pitt to the Illinois in 1766, which is printed in Pownall's _Topog. Description_ (London, 1776), and of which the original or early copy seems to be noted in the English _Hist. MSS. Com. Report_, v. p. 216; that of Washington, who visited the Ohio region in 1770 to select lands for the soldiers of the late wars, and which is printed in Sparks's _Washington_ (vol. ii. 516, beside letters in Ibid. 387, etc. Cf. Irving's _Washington_, i. 330, and some letters in Read's _George Read_, p. 124); and those of Matthew Phelps, who was twice in this Western country between 1773 and 1780, and whose account is given in the _Memoirs and adventures, particularly in two voyages from Connecticut to the river Mississippi, 1773-80_. _Compiled from the original journal and minutes kept by Mr. Phelps. By Anthony Haswell_ (Bennington, Vt., 1802).

The diary of Rufus Putnam, who explored the lower regions of the Mississippi Valley between Dec. 10, 1772, and Aug. 13, 1773, is preserved in the library of Marietta College. (Cf. _Mag. Amer. Hist._, vii. 230.)—ED.

[1476] Connolly was arrested as a Tory in November, 1775, and held as a prisoner until exchanged in the winter of 1780-81. He then planned a scheme with Tories and Indians to capture Fort Pitt. See _Olden Time_, i. 520; ii. 93, 105, 348; Craig's _Pittsburg_, 112, 124; Perkins's _West. Annals_, 140, 148; Jacob's _Cresap_, 75-91; _Am. Archives_, 4th ser., i. 774.

[1477] Botta's _Am. War_, i. 250; Doddridge's _Notes_, (ed. 1876), 238; _Olden Time_, ii. 43.

[1478] Concerning this controversy, see Craig's _Pittsburg_, 111-128. The right of Pennsylvania to land beyond the Alleghanies is examined in a paper (1772) entitled "Thoughts on the situation of the inhabitants on the frontier", by James Tilghman, printed in the _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, x. 316. Cf. also Daniel Agnew's _History of the Region of Pennsylvania north of the Ohio and west of the Allegheny River, of the Indian purchases, and of the running of the southern, northern, and western State boundaries; also, an account of the division of the territory for public purposes, and of the lands, laws, titles, settlements, controversies, and litigation within this region_ (Philadelphia, 1887).—ED.

[1479] No Indian tribes had their homes in Kentucky. The territory was the common hunting and fighting ground of the Ohio Indians on the north and the Cherokees and Chickasaws on the south. See Butler's _Kentucky_, p. 8.

[1480] Brantz Meyer's _Logan and Cresap_, 1867, p. 149. Clark's letter is also printed in _The Hesperian_ (Columbus, Ohio), 1839, ii. 309; Jacob's _Life of Cresap_, pp. 154-158, and portions of it in Perkins's _Western Annals_, 143-146.

[1481] Capt. Cresap was then thirty-two years of age, was a trader, and had had no experience in a former war. His father, however,—Col. Thomas Cresap,—was a noted Indian fighter. Clark and his party evidently supposed it was the father, and not the son, they were sending for. The Cresaps were a Maryland family, and the party who wanted a leader were Virginians.

[1482] A few days before, a canoe from Pittsburg, coming down the river, was fired on by Indians, near Baker's Bottom, two white men killed and one wounded. Baker's family had been warned, and were preparing to leave for one of the forts. Baker kept tavern, sold rum, and the Indians across the river were his habitual customers. Fearing an attack, he called in his neighbors. Twenty-one of them responded, but kept out of sight. A party of Indians appeared, and all with the exception of Logan's brother became very drunk. Logan's brother was drunk enough to be insolent, and he attempted to strike one of the white men. As he was leaving the house with a coat and hat which he had stolen, the white man whom he had abused shot him. The neighbors rushed from their concealment and killed the whole Indian party, except a half-breed child whose father was Gen. John Gibson. The Indians on the opposite shore, hearing the firing, came over in canoes. They were also fired on, and twelve of them were killed. (See the statements of John Sappington and others in Jefferson's _Notes on Virginia_, App. iv., 1800, and later editions; and Withers's _Border Warfare_, p. 113.)

[1483] This comment Jefferson cancelled in his edition of 1800.

[1484] "I appeal to any white man to say if ever he entered Logan's cabin hungry and he gave him not meat; if ever he came cold and naked and he clothed him not.... Col. Cresap, the last spring, in cold blood and unprovoked, murdered all the relations of Logan, not sparing even my women and children. There runs not a drop of my blood in the veins of any living creature", etc.