diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/56320-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/56320-0.txt | 3265 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 3265 deletions
diff --git a/old/56320-0.txt b/old/56320-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index d27ea46..0000000 --- a/old/56320-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,3265 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of British Policy in the Illinois Country, 1763–1768, by Clarence Edwin Carter - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: British Policy in the Illinois Country, 1763–1768 - -Author: Clarence Edwin Carter - -Release Date: January 5, 2018 [eBook #56320] -[Most recently updated: August 24, 2021] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: Christian Boissonnas and The Online Distributed Proofreading Team - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH POLICY IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY *** - - - - - BRITISH POLICY IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY - 1763–1768 - - BY - CLARENCE EDWIN CARTER - A. M., 1906 (UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN) - - THESIS - SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS - FOR THE - DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN HISTORY - - IN THE - GRADUATE SCHOOL - OF THE - UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS - 1908 - - - - - UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS - - June 1 1908 - - THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION BY - Clarence Edwin Carter, A.M. - - ENTITLED British Policy in the Illinois Country, 1763-1768 - - IS APPROVED BY ME AS FULFILLING THIS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS - FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy in History - - Evarts B Greene - - HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF History. - - - - -BRITISH POLICY IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY - -1763-1768 - - - CHAPTER I.—Introductory Survey. - - CHAPTER II.—The Occupation of Illinois. - - CHAPTER III.—Status of the Illinois Country in the Empire. - - CHAPTER IV.—Trade Conditions in Illinois, 1765-1775. - - CHAPTER V.—Colonizing schemes in the Illinois. - - CHAPTER VI.—Events in the Illinois Country, 1765-1768. - - BIBLIOGRAPHY.— - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -INTRODUCTORY SURVEY. - - -In 1763 Great Britain was confronted with the momentous problem of -the readjustment of all her colonial relations in order to meet the -new conditions resulting from the peace of Paris, when immense areas -of territory and savage alien peoples were added to the empire. The -necessity of strengthening the imperial ties between the old colonies -and the mother country and reorganizing the new acquisitions came to -the forefront at this time and led the government into a course soon -to end in the disruption of the empire. Certainly not the least of the -questions demanding solution was that of the disposition of the country -lying to the westward of the colonies, including a number of French -settlements and a broad belt of Indian nations. It does not, however, -come within the proposed limits of this study to discuss all the -different phases of the western policy of England, except in so far as -it may be necessary to make more clear her attitude towards the French -settlements in the Illinois country. - -The European situation leading to the Seven Years War, which ended so -disastrously to French dominion, is too familiar to need repetition. -That struggle was the culmination of a series of continental and -colonial wars beginning towards the close of the seventeenth century -and ending with the definitive treaty of 1763. During the first quarter -of the century France occupied a predominating position among the -powers. Through the aggressiveness of Louis XIV and his ministers -her boundaries had been pushed eastward and westward, which seriously -threatened the balance of power on the continent. Until 1748 England -and Austria had been in alliance against their traditional enemy, while -in the Austrian Succession France had lent her aid to Prussia in the -dismemberment of the Austrian dominions,—at the same time extending -her own power in the interior of America and India. In the interval of -nominal peace after the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748, preparations -were begun for another contest. The astute diplomacy of Kaunitz won -France from her traditional enmity and secured her as an open ally for -Maria Theresa in her war of revenge.[1] While the European situation -was giving occasion for new alignments of powers, affairs in America -were becoming more and more important as between France and England. -Here for over a century the two powers had been rivals for the -territorial and commercial supremacy. - -In North America the pioneers had won for her the greater part of -the continent,—the extensive valleys of the St. Lawrence and the -Mississippi with all the land watered by their tributaries. The -French claim to this region was based almost entirely upon discovery -and exploration, for in all its extent less than one thousand -people were permanently settled. Canada at the north and the region -about New Orleans on the extreme south containing the bulk of the -population, while throughout the old Northwest settlements were few and -scattering.[2] Trading posts and small villages existed at Vincennes -on the Wabash River, at Detroit on a river of the same name, at -St. Joseph near Lake Michigan and other isolated places. Outside of -Detroit, the most important and populous settlement was situated along -the eastern bank of the Mississippi, in the southwestern part of the -present state of Illinois. Here were the villages of Kaskaskia, St. -Phillippe, Prairie du Rocher, Chartres village and Cahokia, containing -a population of barely two thousand people. - -In contrast to this vast area of French territory and the sparseness -of its population were the British colonies, with more than a million -people confined to the narrow strip between the Alleghany mountains and -the Atlantic ocean. These provinces were becoming comparatively crowded -and many enterprising families of English, Scotch Irish, and German -extraction were pushing westward towards the mountains. Each year saw -the pressure on the western border increased; the great unoccupied -valley of the Ohio invited homeseekers and adventurers westward in -spite of hostile French and Indians. By the fifth decade the barriers -were being broken through by constantly increasing numbers, and the -French found their possession of the West and their monopoly of the fur -trade seriously threatened. - -To prevent such encroachments the French sought to bind their -possessions together with a line of forts extending from the St. -Lawrence down the Ohio valley to the Gulf of Mexico. It had indeed been -the plan of such men as La Salle, Iberville, and Bienville to bring -this territory into a compact whole and limit the English colonies to -the line of mountains. New Orleans and Mobile gave France command of -the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi River; Louisburg, Niagara, and -Frontenac afforded protection for Canada. The weak point for France was -the Ohio valley, in the upper part of which Virginia and Pennsylvania -settlers had already located. Celoron, who went down the Ohio in 1749, -burying plates of lead to signify French dominion, warning English -settlers and traders, and persuading the Indians to drive out the -invaders of their hunting grounds, saw the inevitableness of the -conflict. The American phase of the final struggle for colonial empire -was to begin in this region.[3] - -In the early years of the war Great Britain and her ally met with -serious reverses every where, and it seemed probable that France would -be able to hold her line of defense in America. The French colonies, -however, were fundamentally weak. Being wholly dependent upon the -mother country, when the latter became absorbed in the continental -struggle to the exclusion of her interests in her colonial possessions, -defeat was inevitable. By 1758 the tide was turning in America; this, -together with the victories of Clive in India and Frederick the Great -at Rossbach and Leuthen, started France on her downward road to ruin -as a world power, and with the transference of the American struggle -to Canada by the capture of Montreal and Quebec the war was at an end. -In 1762 the financial condition of France became so desperate that -Choiseul was anxious for peace and he found George III and Lord Bute -ready to abandon their Prussian ally, and even to give up the fruits -of some of the brilliant victories of 1762 which brought Spain to her -knees.[4] - -The definitive treaty of Paris was signed February 10, 1763,[5] by -the terms of which France ceded to Great Britain all of Canada and gave -up her claim to the territory east of the Mississippi River, except the -city of New Orleans, adding to this the right of the free navigation of -the Mississippi. Spain received back Havana ceding Florida to England -in return. A few weeks before signing the definitive treaty, France, in -a secret treaty with Spain ceded to her the city of New Orleans and the -vast region stretching from the Mississippi towards the Pacific. Thus -was France divested of practically every inch of territory in America. - -The French colony in the Illinois country had been originally -established with the view of forming a connecting link between the -colonies in Louisiana on the south and Canada at the northeast. La -Salle himself had recognized the possible strategic value of such -an establishment from both a commercial and military standpoint.[6] -Before any settlements had even been made on the lower Mississippi, -he and his associates had attempted in 1682 the formation of a colony -on the Illinois River, near the present site of Peoria.[7] This the -first attempt at western colonization was a failure. The opening of the -following century saw the beginning of a more successful and permanent -colony, when the Catholic missionaries from Quebec established their -missions at Kaskaskia and Cahokia,[8] near the villages of the Illinois -Indians. They were soon followed by hunters and fur traders, and -during the first two decades of the eighteenth century a considerable -number of families immigrated from Canada, thus assuring the permanancy -of the settlement. - -Meanwhile the contemporaneous colony of Louisiana had grown to some -importance, and in 1717, when the Company of the West assumed control -of the province, the Illinois country was annexed. Prior to this time -it had been within the jurisdiction of Quebec. This gave the Illinois -country a period of prosperity, many new enterprizes being undertaken. -Shortly after its annexation to Louisiana, Pierre Boisbriant was given -a commission to govern the Illinois country, and among his instructions -was an order to erect a fort as a protection against possible -encroachments from the English and Spanish. About 1720 Fort Chartres -was completed and became thereafter the seat of government during the -French regime. In 1721 the Company of the West divided Louisiana into -nine districts,[9] extending east and west of the Mississippi River -between the lines of the Ohio and Illinois rivers. In 1732 Louisiana -passed out of the hands of the Company of the West Indies, and, -together with the Illinois dependency, became a royal province.[10] It -remained in this status until the close of the Seven Years War. During -this period its relation with Louisiana had become economic as well as -political, all of its trade being carried on through New Orleans, and -the southern colony often owed its existence to the large supplies of -flour and pork sent down the river from the Illinois country.[11] - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -THE OCCUPATION OF ILLINOIS. - - -By the treaty of Paris the title to the Illinois region passed to Great -Britain, but Fort Chartres was not immediately occupied. Detachments -of British troops had taken possession of practically every other post -in the newly ceded territory as early as 1760. The occupation of the -forest posts of Green Bay, Mackinac, St. Joseph, Ouitanon, Detroit, -Fort Miami, Sandusky, Niagara and others seemed to indicate almost -complete British dominion in the West. The transfer of the Illinois -posts, however, remained to be effected, and although orders were -forwarded from France in the summer of 1763 to the officers commanding -in the ceded territory to evacuate as soon as the English forces -appeared,[12] almost three years elapsed before this was accomplished; -for soon after the announcement of the treaty of cession, that broad -belt of Indian tribes stretching from the fringe of the eastern -settlements to the Mississippi rose in open rebellion.[13] This -unexpected movement had to be reckoned with before any thought of the -occupation of the Illinois could be seriously entertained. - -Of the two great northern Indian families, the Iroquois had generally -espoused the English cause during the recent war, while the Algonquin -nations, living in Canada, and the Lake and Ohio regions, had supported -the French. At the close of the war the greater portion of the French -had sworn fealty to the English crown; but the allegiance of their -allies, the Algonquins, was at best only temporary. It was thought -that, since the power of France had been crushed, there would be no -further motive for the Indian tribes to continue hostilities; but from -1761 there had been a growing feeling of discontent among the western -Indians. So long as France and Great Britain were able to hold each -other in check in America, the Indian nations formed a balance of -power, so to speak, between them. England and France vied with each -other to conciliate the savages and to retain their good will. As soon, -however, as English dominion was assured, this attitude was somewhat -changed. The fur trade under the French had been well regulated, but -its condition under the English from 1760 to 1763 was deplorable.[14] -The English traders were rash and unprincipled men[15] who did not -scruple to cheat and insult their Indian clients at every opportunity. -The more intelligent of the western and northern Indians perceived -that their hunting grounds would soon be overrun by white settlers -with a fixed purpose of permanent settlement.[16] This was probably -the chief cause of the Indian uprising. There remained in the forests -many French and renegade traders and hunters who constantly concocted -insidious reports as to English designs and filled the savage minds -with hope of succor from the King of France.[17] Many of the French -inhabitance had since 1760 emigrated beyond the Mississippi, because, -as the Indians thought, they feared to live under English rule.[18] -This doubtless contributed something toward the rising discontent of -the savages. Finally the policy of economy in expenses, which General -Amherst entered upon, by cutting off a large part of the Indian -presents, always so indispensable in dealing with that race, augured -poorly for the Indians's future. - -On the part of the mass of the Indians the insurrection was probably -a mere outbreak of resentment; but Pontiac, the great chief of the -Ottawas, had a clearer vision. He determined to rehabilitate French -power in the west and to reunite all the Indian nations into one great -confederacy in order to ward off the approaching dangers. During the -years 1761-1762 the plot was developed. In 1762 Pontiac dispatched -his emissaries to all the Indian nations. The ramifications of the -conspiracy extended to all the Algonquin tribes, to some of the -nations on the lower Mississippi and even included a portion of the -Six Nations. The original aim of the plot was the destruction of the -garrisons on the frontier, after which the settlements were to be -attacked. The attack on the outposts, beginning in May, 1763, was -sudden and overwhelming; Detroit, Fort Pitt, and Niagara alone held -out, the remainder of the posts falling without an attempt at defense. -Had the proclamation of 1763, which aimed at the pacification of the -Indians by reserving to them the western lands, been issued earlier -in the year, this devastating might have been avoided. Peaceful -pacification was now out of the question. During the summers of 1763 -and 1764 Colonel Bouquet raised the siege of Fort Pitt, penetrated into -the enemy's country in the upper Ohio valley region and completely -subdued the Shawnee and Delaware tribes upon whom Pontiac had placed -every dependence. Previous to Bouquet's second campaign, Colonel -Bradstreet had advanced with a detachment along the southern shore of -Lake Erie, penetrating as far west as Detroit, whence companies were -sent to occupy the posts in the upper lake region. In the campaign -as a whole the Bouquet expedition was the most effective. After the -ratification of a series of treaties, in which the Indians promised -allegiance to the English crown, the eastern portion of the rebellion -was broken. - -It now remained to penetrate to the Illinois country in order to -relieve the French garrison. Pontiac had retired thither in 1764, -after his unsuccessful attempt upon Detroit; there he hoped to rally -the western tribes and sue for the support of the French. But as we -shall see, his schemes received a powerful blow upon the refusal of the -commandants to countenance his pleas. - -To what extent Pontiac was assisted by French intriguers in the -development of his plans may never be positively known. As has already -been pointed out, French traders were constantly among the Indians, -filling their minds with hopes and fears. That the plot included French -officials may be doubted; although Sir William Johnson and General -Gage seemed convinced that such was the case.[19] Their belief, -however, was based almost wholly upon reports from Indian runners, -whose credibility as witnesses may well be questioned. A perusal of the -correspondence of the French officials[20] residing in Illinois and -Louisiana, and their official communications with the Indians during -this period goes far to clear them of complicity in the affair.[21] - -General Gage, who succeeded Amherst as commander-in-chief of the -British army in America in November, 1763, was convinced that the early -occupation of the western posts was essential,[22] since it would in -a measure cut off the communication between the French and Indian -nations dwelling in that vicinity. The Indians, finding themselves -thus inclosed would be more easily pacified. But the participation in -the rebellion of the Shawnee and Delaware tribes of the upper Ohio -river region precluded for a time the possibility of reaching the -Mississippi posts by way of Fort Pitt, without a much larger force than -Gage had at his command in the east; and the colonies were already -avoiding the call for troops.[23] The only other available route -was by way of New Orleans and the Mississippi River whose navigation -had been declared open to French and English alike by the treaty of -Paris. Little opposition might be expected from the southern Indians -toward whom a much more liberal policy had been pursued than with the -northern tribes. Presents to the value of four or five thousand pounds -had been sent to Charleston in 1763 for distribution among the southern -nations which counter-acted in a large measure the machinations of the -French traders from New Orleans.[24] The Florida ports, Mobile and -Pensacola, were already occupied by English troops, and Gage and his -associates believed, that with the co-operation of the French Governor -of Louisiana a successful ascent could be made.[25] - -Accordingly in January, 1764, Major Arthur Loftus, with a detachment -of three hundred and fifty-one men from the twenty-second regiment -embarked at Mobile for New Orleans, where preparations were to be made -for the voyage.[26] A company of sixty men from this regiment were to -be left at Fort Massac on the Ohio River, while the remainder were to -occupy Kaskaskia and Fort Chartres.[27] At New Orleans boats had to be -built, supplies and provisions procured, and guides and interpreters -provided.[28] The expedition set out from New Orleans February 27. -Three weeks later the flotilla was attacked by a band of Tonica Indians -near Davion's Bluff, or Fort Adams,[29] about two hundred and forty -miles above New Orleans. After the loss of several men in the boats -composing the vanguard, Loftus ordered a retreat, and the expedition -was abandoned. Depleted by sickness, death and desertion the regiment -made its way from New Orleans back to Mobile.[30] - -Major Loftus placed the blame for the failure of his expedition upon -Governor D' Abadie and other French officials at New Orleans.[31] There -is probably sufficient evidence, however, to warrant the conclusion -that his accusations against the Governor were without foundation. -The correspondence of D' Abadie, Gage, and others indicates that -official aid was given the English in making their preparations for -the journey,[32] and letters were issued to the commandants of the -French posts on the Mississippi to render the English convoys all the -assistance in their power[33]. There may have been some justification -for the suspicion of Loftus that the intriguers were at work, for the -French as a whole were not in sympathy with the attempt; the success -of the English meant the cessation of the lucrative trade between New -Orleans and Illinois. They were no doubt delighted at the discomfiture -of the English officer, for when some of the chiefs engaged in the -ambuscade entered New Orleans they were said to have been publicly -received.[34] - -Granting, however, the machinations of the French, the reason for -the failure of Loftus may be found in part in the almost total lack -of precautions adopted before undertaking the journey. Governor D' -Abadie had given the English officer warning of the bad disposition -of a number of tribes along the Mississippi River, among whom Pontiac -had considerable influence, and had assured him that unless he carried -presents for the Indians, he would be unable to proceed far up the -river.[35] The policy of sending advance agents with convoys of -presents for the Indians was successful the following year when the -Illinois posts were finally reached from the east; but no such policy -was adopted at this time.[36] No action was taken to counter-act any -possible intrigues on the part of the French. D' Abadie's advice -was not heeded, and his prophecy was fulfilled. General Gage in his -official correspondence implied that he did not think sufficient care -had been exercised to insure success, and expressed his belief that if -Loftus would make use of the "necessary precautions" he might get up -to the mouth of the Ohio with little interruption.[37] This want of -judgement, therefore, accounts in a large degree for the unfortunate -termination of the plans of an approach from the south. - -The news of the defeat of Loftus had two results. First, it gave -Pontiac renewed hope that he might be able to rally again the western -and northern Indians, and, with French assistance, block the advance -of the English. In the second place it led General Gage to determine -upon an advance from the east, down the Ohio River, which was made -practicable by the recent submission of the Delaware Indians. - -Meanwhile the Illinois country in 1764 presented an anomalous -situation. St. Ange was governing, in the name of Louis XV, a country -belonging to another king. He was under orders to surrender the place -as soon as possible to its rightful owner; but the prospect for such an -event seemed remote. He was surrounded by crowds of begging, thieving -savages; and the emissaries of the greatest of Indian chieftains, -Pontiac, were constantly petitioning for his active support against -the approaching English. A considerable portion of the French traders -of the villages were secretly, and sometimes openly, supporting the -Indian cause, which added greatly to the increasing embarrasment of the -commandant. So distressing became the situation that Neyon de Villiers, -St. Ange's predecessor, called the latter from Vincennes on the Wabash, -and left the country in disgust, taking with him to New Orleans sixty -soldiers and eighty of the French inhabitants.[38] He had shortly -before indignantly refused to countenance the proposals of Pontiac, and -had begged the Indians to lay down their arms and make peace with the -English.[39] - -The news of Loftus' defeat aroused Pontiac the thought of the -possibility of meeting and repelling the advance from the east as -it had been met and repelled in the south. In spite of the news of -the defeat of his allies by Bouquet and the report that preparations -were being made by his victorious enemy to advance against him, -Pontiac determined to make a last supreme effort. By a series of -visits among the tribes dwelling in the Illinois, on the Wabash and -in the Miami country, he succeeded in arousing in them the instinct -of self-preservation, in firing the hearts of all the faltering -Indians and in winning the promise of their co-operation in his plan -of defense. He was in this temper when he met and turned back Captain -Thomas Morris in the Miami country early in the autumn of 1764. Morris -had been sent by Bradstreet from the neighborhood of Detroit with -messages to St. Ange in the Illinois country, whence he was to proceed -to New Orleans.[40] After being maltreated and threatened with the -stake, Morris effected an escape and made his way to Detroit.[41] It -was during his interview with Pontiac that the latter informed Morris -of the repulse of Loftus, of the journey of his emissaries to New -Orleans to seek French support, and of his determination and that of -his Indian allies to resist the English to the last.[42] - -A few months later, in February, 1765, there arrived at Fort Chartres -an English officer, accompanied by a trader named Crawford. They were -probably the first Englishmen to penetrate thus far into the former -French territory since the beginning of the war.[43] They had been sent -from Mobile by Major Farmer, the commandant at that place, to bring -about the conciliation of the Indians in the Illinois.[44] Instead of -following the Mississippi, they worked their way northward through the -great Choctaw and Chicksaw nations to the Ohio, descended the latter -to the Mississippi and thence to the Illinois villages.[45] Although -St. Ange received them cordially[46] and did all in his power to -influence the savages to receive the English,[47] the mission of Ross -was a failure. The Indians had nothing but expressions of hatred and -defiance for the English; even the Missouri and Osages from beyond -the Mississippi had fallen under the influence of Pontiac.[48] Ross -and his companion remained with St. Ange nearly two months; but about -the middle of April they were obliged to go down the river to New -Orleans.[49] - -During the winter of 1764-1765 preparations were made to send a -detachment of troops down the Ohio from Fort Pitt to relieve Fort -Chartres. To pave the way for the troops Gage dispatched two agents -in advance. He selected George Croghan, Sir William Johnson's deputy, -for the delicate and dangerous task of going among the Indians of -that country to assure them of the peaceful attitude of the English, -to promise them better facilities for trade and to accompany the -promise with substantial presents.[50] The second agent was Lieutenant -Fraser,[51] whose mission was to carry letters to the French commandant -and a proclamation for the inhabitants.[52] January 24, 1765, Fraser -and Croghan set out from Carlisle, Pennsylvania,[53] followed a few -days later by a large convoy of presents.[54] During the journey, the -convoy was attacked by a band of Pennsylvania borderers,[55] and a -large part of the goods destined for the Indians were destroyed,[56] -together with some valuable stores which certain Philadelphia merchants -were forwarding to Fort Pitt for the purpose of opening up the trade -as early as possible.[57] Croghan therefore found it necessary to -tarry at Fort Pitt to replenish his stores and to await the opening of -spring.[58] But another matter intervened which forced him to postpone -his departure for more than two months. A temporary defection had -arisen among the Shawnee and Delaware Indians.[59] They had failed to -fulfil some of the obligations imposed upon them by Bouquet in the -previous summer, and there was some fear lest they would not permit -Croghan to pass through their country. His influence was such, however, -that, in an assembly of the tribes at Fort Pitt, he not only received -their consent to a safe passage, but some of their number volunteered -to accompany him.[60] - -Meanwhile Lieutenant Fraser, Croghan's companion, decided to proceed -alone, inasmuch as Gage's instructions to him were to be at the -Illinois early in April.[61] On March 23 he departed, accompanied -by two or three whites and a couple of Indians,[62] and reached the -Illinois posts in the latter part of April, shortly after the departure -of Lieutenant Ross and his party. Here Fraser found many of the -Indians in destitution and some inclined for peace.[63] Nevertheless, -instigated by the traders and encouraged by their secret supplies, -the savages as a whole would not listen to Fraser; they threatened -his life, and threw him into prison, and he was finally saved by the -intervention of Pontiac himself.[64] Fraser felt himself to be in a -dangerous situation; unable to hear from Croghan, whom he was expecting -every day, and daily insulted and maltreated by the drunken savages, -he took advantage of his discretionary orders and descended the -Mississippi to New Orleans.[65] Although the French traders continued -to supply the Indians with arms and ammunition, and buoy up their -spirits by stories of aid from the king of France, Pontiac himself -was being rapidly disillusioned. He had given Fraser the assurance that -if the Indians on the Ohio had made a permanent peace, he would do -likewise.[66] St. Ange continued to refuse the expected help,[67] and -when the news came of the failure of the mission to New Orleans and of -the transfer of Louisiana to Spain, the ruin of the Indian cause was -complete. - -Having adjusted affairs with the Indians at Fort Pitt, Croghan set out -from there on May 15th with two boats, accompanied by several white -companions and a party of Shawnee Indians.[68] In compliance with -messages from Croghan, representatives of numerous tribes along the -route met him at the mouth of the Scioto and delivered up a number of -French traders who were compelled to take an oath of allegiance to -the English crown, or pass to the west of the Mississippi.[69] The -only other incident of importance on this voyage was the attack of -the Kickapous and Mascoutin Indians near the mouth of the Wabash on -June 8th,[70] which contributed greatly to the success of the mission. -After the attack in which two whites and several Shawnees were killed, -the assailants expressed their profound sorrow, declaring that they -thought the party to be a band of Charokees with whom they were at -enmity.[71] Nevertheless, they plundered the stores and carried Croghan -and the remainder of the party to Vincennes, a small French town on -the Wabash. Croghan was now separated temporarily from his companions -and carried to Fort Ouiatanon, about 210 miles north of Vincennes. The -political blunder of the Kickapous in firing upon the convoy now became -apparent;[72] they were censured on all sides for having attacked -their friends the Shawnees, since the latter might thus be turned into -deadly enemies.[73] During the first week of July deputations from all -the surrounding tribes visited Croghan, assuring him of their desire -for peace and of their willingness to escort him to the Illinois where -Pontiac was residing.[74] July 11th, Maisonville, whom Fraser had a -few weeks before left at Fort Chartres, arrived at Ouiatanon with -messages from St. Ange requesting Croghan to come to Fort Chartres to -arrange affairs in that region.[75] A few days later Croghan set out -for the Illinois, attended by a large concourse of savages; but he had -advanced only a short distance when he met Pontiac himself who was on -the road to Ouiatanon. They all returned to the fort where, at a great -council, Pontiac signified his willingness to make a lasting peace and -promised to offer no further resistance to the approach of the English -troops.[76] There was now no need to go to Fort Chartres; instead -Croghan turned his steps toward Detroit, where another important Indian -conference was held in which a general peace was made with all the -western Indians.[77] - -Immediately after effecting an accomodation with Pontiac at Ouiatanon, -Croghan sent an account of the success of his negotiations to Fort -Pitt.[78] Here Captain Stirling with a detachment of about one hundred -men of the 42d or Black Watch regiment, had been holding himself in -readiness for some time, waiting for a favorable report before moving -to the relief of Fort Chartres. Although the 34th regiment under Major -Farmer was supposed to be making its way up the Mississippi to relieve -the French garrison in Illinois, General Gage would not depend upon -its slow and uncertain movements.[79] Upon receipt of the news, on the -24th of August, Stirling left Fort Pitt[80] and began the long and -tedious journey. Owing to the season of the year the navigation of the -Ohio was very difficult, forty-seven days being required to complete -the journey.[81] The voyage, on the whole, was without incident until -about forty miles below the Wabash River. Here Stirling's force -encountered two boats loaded with goods, in charge of a French trader, -who was accompanied by some thirty Indians and a chief of the Shawnees, -who had remained in the French interest.[82] On account of the -allegations of a certain Indian that his party had planned to fire on -the English before they were aware of the latters' strength, Stirling -became apprehensive lest the attitude of the Indians had changed since -Croghan's visit. He therefore sent Lieutenant Rumsey, with a small -party by land from Fort Massac to Fort Chartres, in order to ascertain -the exact situation and to apprise St. Ange of his approach.[83] Rumsey -and his guides, however, lost their way and did not reach the villages -until after the arrival of the troops.[84] Sterling arrived on the 9th -of October; and it is said that the Indians and French were unaware of -his approach until he was within a few miles of the village, and that -the Indians upon learning of the weakness of the English force, assumed -a most insolent and threatening attitude.[85] On the following day St. -Ange and the French garrison were formally relieved,[86] and with this -event, the last vestige of French authority in North America, except -new Orleans, passed away. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -STATUS OF THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY IN THE EMPIRE. - - -Before entering upon the more detailed study of events in the Illinois -country during the period of the British occupation, it is necessary -to take into consideration certain general aspects of the subject -which will enable us to understand more clearly the bearing of those -events. The relation of that country to the empire and the view held -by British statesmen of the time relative to its status are problems -which naturally arise and demand solution. What was the nature of the -government imposed upon the French in Illinois after its occupation? Is -the hitherto prevailing opinion that the British government placed the -inhabitants of those villages under a military government any longer -tenable? Was the government de jure or de facto? - -The treatment received by the settlements in the Northwest and West -in general was fundamentally different in nature from that accorded -other portions of the new empire. By the terms of the Proclamation -of 1763,[87] civil governments were created for the provinces of -Quebec, East Florida, West Florida, and Grenada, while all the western -territory outside the prescribed limits of those colonies, including -a large portion of southern Canada of today, was reserved as a vast -hunting ground for the Indian nations. No mention whatsoever is made -in the Proclamation concerning the settled portions of the West and -since it is, therefore, impossible to ascertain in this document their -governmental status, we will examine the official correspondence of the -ministry which immediately proceeded the issuance of the Proclamation -to find, if possible, what the directors of the British colonial policy -had in mind. - -When the question of the Proclamation was under discussion by the -Ministry in the summer of 1763, two opposing views with reference -to the West were for a time apparent in the ministry. It appears to -have been the policy of Lord Egremont, at that time Secretary for the -Southern Department, which included the management of the colonies, to -place the unorganized territory within the jurisdiction of some one of -the colonies possessing a settled government, preferably Canada.[88] -It was at least his aim to give to the Indian country sufficient -civil supervision so that criminals and fugitives from justice from -the colonies might be taken. That he did not intend to extend civil -government to the villages or any of the French inhabitants of the -West seems clear: his only reference is to the "Indian country" and to -"criminals" and "fugitives from justice." - -Lord Shelburne, President of the Board of Trade and a member of the -Grenville ministry, and his colleagues were of the opinion that the -annexation of the West to Canada might lend color to the idea that -England's title to the West came from the French cession, when in -fact her claim was derived from other sources; that the inhabitants -of the province to which it might be annexed would have too -great an advantage in the Indian trade; and finally that such an -immense province could not be properly governed without a large -number of troops and the governor would thus virtually become a -commander-in-chief.[89] Shelburne then announced his plan of giving -to the commanding general of the British army in America jurisdiction -over the West for the purpose of protecting the Indians and the fur -trade.[90] Lord Halifax, who succeeded to Egermont's position at the -latter's death in August, 1763, fell in with Shelburne's views. But -the commission to the commanding general does not appear to have been -issued; for Hillsborough, who succeeded Shelburne as President of the -Board of Trade in the autumn of 1763, favored a different policy. There -is nothing, however, to indicate that Shelburne and his advisers had -any thought of the government of the French colonies. There is no hint -in any of this correspondence that the ministry had any idea of the -existence of the several thousand French inhabitants of the West.[91] - -There remain one or two documents in which we might expect to find some -reference to the government of the French settlers. The authors of that -part of the Proclamation of 1763 which provided for the reservation -of the Indian lands and the regulation of the trade,[92] had in -contemplation the formation of an elaborate plan comprehending the -management of both in the whole of British North America.[93] It was -left to Hillsborough, Shelburne's successor as President of the Board -of Trade, to direct the formulation of the plan, which was finished -in 1764. The details of this program will be taken up in a later -chapter,[94] and it will therefore suffice to note the presence or -absence of any provisions for the French. The chief object of the plan -seems to have been to bring about a centralization in the regulation -of the trade and the management of the Indians, and in no place is -there any intimation that its provisions have any application to the -government of the French residing at the various posts.[95] - -Turning to another source we find a document addressed directly to the -inhabitants of the Illinois country, dated in New York, December 30, -1764 and signed by General Thomas Gage.[96] Mention has already been -made in another connection of the unsuccessful mission of Lieutenant -Fraser to Illinois in the spring of 1765, when he carried this -proclamation to the inhabitants. But its contents were not announced -until the entry of Captain Sterling in October of that year. This -proclamation related solely to guarantees by the British government -of the right of the inhabitants under the treaty of Paris: freedom of -religion, the liberty of removing from or remaining within English -territory and the requirements as to taking the oath of allegiance made -up its contents. As to whether the inhabitants were to enjoy a civil -government or be ruled by the army there is no intimation. - -Laying aside the barren papers of 1763-1765 and giving attention to the -documentary material after those dates proves much more productive. -We are thereby enabled to arrive at some pretty definite conclusions. -Fortunately there were a few men in authority during that period who -had some interest in the interior settlements, and who, from their -official positions realized the difficulties of the problem. Such -men have left expressions of opinion and stray bits of information -which leave us in little doubt as to the governmental status of the -Illinois country. General Thomas Gage, Sir William Johnson, and Lord -Hillsborough are perhaps the most representative examples. Gage, who -was commander-in-chief of the American army throughout this period, -with headquarters in New York City, was in direct communication both -with his subordinates in Illinois and the home authorities. He was in -a position to know, in general, the state of affairs in the West -as well as to keep in touch with ministerial opinion. Sir William -Johnson, by virtue of his office as Superintendent of Indian affairs -for the northern district, was in a peculiarly strategic position -to acquire information. His Indian agents were stationed at all the -western posts and he was in constant correspondence with the Board of -Trade relative to Indian and trade conditions. From the ministry itself -the correspondence of Lord Hillsborough best reflects the prevailing -opinion of the government. He was one of the few governmental -authorities who took any considerable interest in the western problem -and information coming from him must, therefore, have some weight. - -That the British commandant of the fort in the Illinois country had no -commission to govern the inhabitants, except perhaps that power, which, -in the absence of all other authority, naturally devolves upon the -military officer, seems amply clear from a recommendation transmitted -by General Gage to his superior shortly after the occupation of Fort -de Chartres. "If I may presume to give my opinion further on this -matter, I would humbly propose that a Military Governor should be -appointed for the Ilinois (sic) as soon as possible. The distance of -that Country from any of the Provinces being about 1400 Miles, making -its Dependance upon any of them impractical, and for its Vicinity to -the French Settlements, no other than a Military Government would -answer our purpose."[97] In the following year he took a similar point -of view in a communication to his co-laborer in America: "I am quite -sensible of the irregular behavior of the Traders and have intimated to -his Majesty's Secretary of State what I told the Board of Trade four -or five years ago: That they must be restrained by Law, and a Judicial -Power invested in the officer Commanding at the Posts to see such Law -put in force. And without this, Regulations may be made, but they will -never be observed."[98] - -With the condition of comparative anarchy in the Illinois country -during this period and indeed at all the western posts and throughout -the Indian country the authorities seemed unable to combat -successfully. Had all the regulations outlined in the plan for the -management of Indian affairs,[99] been put into operation the Indian -department would have been able to cope more successfully with that -phase of the situation. But neither military nor Indian departments had -legal authority to take any action whatsoever. As Johnson, in speaking -of his inability to handle the situation for lack of sufficient power, -declared in 1767 that "the authority of commissaries is nothing, and -both the Commanding Officers of Garrisons and they, are liable to -a civil prosecution for detaining a Trader on any pretence."[100] -Probably more emphatic still the commanding general four years later -in writing of the disturbances, said: "And I perceive there has been -wanting judicial powers to try and determine. There has been no way -to bring Controversys & Disputes properly to a determination or -delinquenents to punishment."[101] - -There is probably some justification for the current belief that the -government placed the inhabitants under a military rule, inasmuch as -the actual government proved in the last analysis to be military. -But that the British ministry consciously attached the interior -settlements to the military department is far from the truth. Such a -system was probably contemplated by no one, particularly between the -years 1763 and 1765 when the re-organization of the new acquisitions -was under discussion. The greater part of the new territory was the -seat of the fur trade and the desire for the development of that -industry controlled in the main the policy of the ministry relative -to the disposition of the peltry districts and the interests of the -settlements were completely ignored. Secretary Hillsborough, who -helped formulate the western policy in 1763 and 1764 doubtless gave -the most adequate explanation when in 1769, he wrote: "With regard to -the Posts in the interior Country considered in another view in which -several of your letters have placed them; I mean as to the settlements -formed under their protection, which, not being included within the -jurisdiction of any other Colony are exposed to many Difficulties -& Disadvantages from the Want of some Form of Government necessary -to Civil Society, it is very evident that, if the case of these -Settlements had been well known or understood at the time of forming -the conquered Lands into Colonies, some provision would have been -made for them, & they would have been erected into distinct Governments -or made dependent upon those Colonies of which they were either the -offspring, or with which they did by circumstances and situation, stand -connected. I shall not fail, therefore, to give this matter the fullest -consideration when the business of the Illinois Country is taken -up."[102] - -That the occupation of Fort Chartres became anything more than -temporary was due to the necessity of being prepared to crush a -possible uprising of the savages and to repel the constant invasion of -the French and Spanish traders[103] from beyond the Mississippi, whose -influence over the Indians, it was feared, would be detrimental to the -peace of the empire. In its policy of retrenchment owing to the trouble -with the colonies, the government at various times contemplated the -withdrawal of the troops, but each time the detachment was allowed to -remain the sole reason given was to guard that portion of the empire -against the French and Indians. - -In the course of this inquiry relative to the legal status of Illinois -no mention has been made of the extension or non-extension of English -law and custum to the West after its cession. This is one of the more -important general aspects of the western problem and deserves some -attention inasmuch as it may throw some light on the legal position of -the settlements. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the -great era of English colonization, the necessity of fixing definitely -the legal status of the colonies called forth a series of judicial -opinions and legal commentaries; it is to these we have to look to -determine the theory held regarding the application of English law -to the colonies and particularly to conquered provinces. In general -it may be said that Blackstone represents the usual view taken by -jurists during these two centuries. In his commentaries published in -1765 he declared that "in conquered or ceded countries, that have -already laws of their own, the king may indeed alter and change those -laws, but till he actually does change them, the ancient laws of the -country remain.[104]" This opinion is supported by the authority of -Lord Mansfield in his decision in the case of Campbell vs Hall,[105] -rendered in 1774, which involved the status of the island of Granada, a -conquered province. He laid down in this decision the general principle -that the "laws of a conquered country continue in force until they are -altered by the conquerer. The justice and antiquity of this maxim are -incontrovertible:——"[106] - -The Proclamation of 1763 which had definitely extended the laws of -England to the new provinces,[107] made no such provisions for the -West, nor did the crown ever take such action. We may, therefore, lay -down the general principle that the British Government was obliged -to govern her new subjects in this region according to the laws -and customs hitherto prevailing among them; any other course would -manifestly be illegal. The commanding general of the army in America -and his subordinates, who were embarrassed by the presence of this -French settlement for which no provision had been made by the ministry, -and who found it necessary to assume the obligation of enforcing some -sort of order in that country, had no power to displace any of the -laws and customs of the French inhabitants. It will be pointed out in -succeeding chapters that this general principle, while adhered to in -many respects, was not uniformly carried out. - -It is apparent from the foregoing considerations that the government -of the Illinois people was de facto in nature. It had no legal -foundations. Every action of the military department was based on -expediency; although this course was in general acquiesced in by the -home authorities, all the officials concerned were aware that such a -status could not continue indefinitely. But it did continue for about a -decade, during which time the inhabitants were at the mercy of some six -or seven different military commandants. In 1774, however, Parliament -passed the Quebec Act, which provided, among other things, for the -union of all the western country north of the Ohio River, and which but -for the cataclysm of the American revolution meant civil government for -the whole region. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -TRADE CONDITIONS IN ILLINOIS, 1765-1775. - - -The peltry trade had been one of the elements which had accentuated, -throughout the eighteenth century, the difficulties between France and -England in the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. It was the chief support -of the French government in Canada and now that the English were in -undisputed possession of the great peltry districts it became apparent -that the management of the trade deserved most serious consideration. -It was becoming of increasing importance to the manufacturing monopoly -of the mother country, and therefore, in the minds of English -statesmen, deserved far more attention than did the few thousand French -colonists scattered throughout the West. The desire to increase this -branch of commerce dictated in a large measure those clauses in the -Proclamation of 1763 which forbade the formation of settlements or the -purchase of lands within the Indian reservation, but at the same time -declared that the trade with the Indians should be free and open to -all English subjects alike. Again, the plan proposed in 1764 related -solely to the management of the Indians and to the regulation of the -trade with a view to making the English monopoly of intrinsic value to -the empire. Even towards the close of the period under consideration -there is little or no change of policy so far as official utterances -are concerned. In 1772 in a report to the crown, the Lords of Trade -made the following declaration: "The great object of colonization upon -the continent of North America has been to improve and extend the -commerce and manufactures of this kingdom. It does appear to us that -the extension of the fur trade depends entirely upon the Indians being -undisturbed in the possession of their hunting grounds, and that all -colonization does in its nature and must in its consequence operate to -the prejudice of that branch of commerce. Let the savages enjoy their -deserts in quiet. Were they driven from their forests the peltry trade -would decrease."[108] - -Under the French regime the western Indians and their trade had been -managed with greater success than had the tribes living under English -influence. The success of France was due largely to her policy of -centralization combined of course with the genial character of the -French fur trader and the influence of the missionary. The English, -on the contrary, had managed their relations with the Indians through -the agency of the different colonies, without a semblance of union or -co-operation: each colony competed for the lion's share of the trade, a -policy which resulted disastrously to the peace of the empire. - -In 1755 the English government under the influence of Halifax, -president of the Board of Trade, took over the political control of -the Indians, and superintendents were appointed by the crown to reside -among the different nations.[109] A little later in 1761 the purchase -of Indian lands was taken out of the hands of the colonies and placed -under the control of the home government.[110] No further change is -to be noted until after the issue of the war was known, when the -whole question was taken under consideration. The most important step -yet taken respecting the Indian and his concomitant, the fur trade, -appeared in the Proclamation of 1763, issued in October following the -treaty of cession. Some of its provisions for the West have already -been noted. In addition to reserving for the present the unorganized -territory between the Alleghany mountains and the Mississippi River -for the use of the Indians, the government guaranteed the Indians -in the possession of those lands by announcing in the Proclamation -that no Governor or Commander-in-chief would be allowed to make land -grants within their territory, and further all land purchases and -the formation of settlements by private individuals without royal -consent were prohibited. Trade within this reservation was made, -however, free to all who should obtain a license from the Governor or -Commander-in-chief of the colony in which they resided.[111] - -The policy was now for the central government to take the Indian -trade under its management; and in the course of the year following -the issuance of the Proclamation an elaborate plan was outlined by -Hillsborough[112] comprehending the political and commercial relations -with all the Indian territory. - -According to the proposed scheme[113] British North America was to be -divided, for the purpose of Indian management, into two districts, -a northern and a southern, each under the control of a general -superintendent or agent appointed by the crown: the Ohio River being -designated as the approximate line of division. In the northern -district, with which we are here concerned, the regulation of such -Indian affairs as treaties, land purchases, questions of peace and -war, and trade relations were to be given into the hands of the -superintendent who was to be entirely free from outside interference: -without his consent no civil or military officer could interfere with -the trade or other affairs of any of the Indian tribes. Three deputies -were to be appointed to assist the superintendent and at each post a -commissary, an interpreter, and a smith were to reside, acting under -the immediate direction of the superintendent and responsible only -to him for their conduct. For the administration of justice between -traders and Indians and between traders themselves, the commissary -at each post was to be empowered to act as justice of the peace in -all civil and criminal cases. In civil cases involving sums not -exceeding ten pounds an appeal might be taken to the superintendent. -The Indian trade was to be under the direct supervision of the general -superintendent. Traders who desired to go among the Indians to ply -their trade could do so by obtaining a license from the province from -which they came. The region into which the trader intended to go was -to be clearly defined in the license and each had to give bond for -the observance of the laws regulating the trade. The superintendent, -together with the commissary at the post and a representative of the -Indians were to fix the value of all goods and traders were forbidden -to charge more than the price fixed; for the still better regulation -of the trade, it was to be centered about the regularly fortified and -garrisoned forts. Regulations for the sale of land were also proposed; -outside the limits of the colonies no individual or company could -legally purchase land from the Indians unless at a general meeting of -the tribe presided over by the superintendent. - -The plan thus outlined by the ministry was never legally carried into -effect, although the superintendents used the outline as a guide in -their dealings with the Indians. The original intention had been to -levy a tax on the Indian trade to defray the expense of putting the -scheme into operation, but it was found that the budget was already too -greatly burdened; and the Stamp Act disturbance which soon followed -illustrated the possible inexpediency of imposing such a duty.[114] - -The foregoing considerations serve to indicate the importance the -ministry attached to the Indian trade in general. But what of the -trade in the Illinois country? This region had been one of the great -centers of the Indian trade under the French regime; and, in addition, -the French inhabitants had been one of the main supports of New -Orleans since its foundation early in the century. The commercial -connection between the Illinois villages and New Orleans had never been -broken, and at the time of the occupation of Illinois in 1765 French -fur traders and merchants still plied their traffic up and down the -Mississippi River. Now that the title to this trade center passed to -England it was expected that the volume of trade would be turned -eastward from its southerly route. The necessity for this was patent if -any solid benefits were to accrue to the empire from the cession.[115] - -The home and colonial authorities early saw the importance of the -redirection of the trade. They hoped and expected that a trade would be -opened with the Indians in and about the Illinois country immediately -after the active occupation by the English troops.[116] A large number -of individual traders were early aware of this and representatives of -some of the large trading corporations of the East were also preparing -to take advantage of the early opening of the trade. In 1765 Fort Pitt -became the great rendezvous for this element, and when the army reached -Fort Chartres in October, 1765, it was followed as soon as the season -of the year would permit, by the traders with their cargoes to exchange -for the Indians' furs. Among the more important figures was George -Morgan,[117] a member of the firm of Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan -of Philadelphia,[118] and the firm's personal representative at the -Illinois, where he first appeared early in 1766,[119] remaining there -the greater part of the next five years.[120] Other representatives -of this company left Fort Pitt in March of the same year with a large -cargo of goods, which reached Fort Chartres during the summer.[121] -Firms such as Franks and Company of Philadelphia and London and Bently -and Company of Manchac also traded extensively in the Illinois during -the following years: all the larger British companies becoming rivals -for that portion of the Indian trade which the English were able to -command. - -Other and perhaps greater sources of profit to the English merchants -lay in the privilege of furnishing the garrison with provisions[122] -and the Indian department with goods for Indian presents.[123] -Although the houses of Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan, and Franks and -Company were usually competitors for the former privileges, the latter -company generally had the monopoly.[124] On the other hand, Baynton, -Wharton, and Morgan derived their greatest profits from the sale of -enormous quantities of goods to the government through the Indian -department for distribution among the Indians accustomed to assemble -at the Illinois.[125] But whether all these houses received profits -commensurate with the risks undertaken is problematical.[126] In the -Indian trade, in which all the merchants were interested, they not -only had to compete with each other and with independent English -traders, but with the French and Spanish who had not ceased to ply -their trade among their old friends the Indians. This continuance of -foreign traders in British territory was probably the most serious -problem in the trade situation. Not only did it affect English traders -but the interests of the empire itself were seriously threatened by the -presence within its limits of unlicensed foreign traders. - -It is therefore evident that the close of hostilities between France -and England in 1763 and the formal transfer of Canada and the West to -Great Britain by no means closed the intense rivalry between the fur -trading elements of the two nations for predominance in the western -trade: it rather accentuated it. As has already been suggested, France, -until cession of the West, had naturally possessed the sphere of -influence among the savages of the Mississippi Valley and Canada, and -consequently the monopoly of the fur trade accrued to her subjects. In -the upper Ohio river region and among the tribes bordering on or living -within the limits of the English colonies, the British, during the -first half of the eighteenth century, were either strong rivals of the -French or were completely dominant. And it was generally expected that -after the cession of the West the British would inherit the influence -of the French among the Indians and succeed to the monopoly of the fur -trade just as Great Britain had succeeded to the sovereignty of the -territory itself. But the Conspiracy of Pontiac, due in large part to -the machinations of the French traders, postponed for a considerable -period the entry of the British traders, during which time the French -became more strongly entrenched than ever in the affections of the -savages. - -The character of the French fur traders has already been noted. Their -methods had from the beginning been different from those pursued by -their neighbors and rivals: they lived among the Indians, affected -their manners, treated them kindly and respectfully, and supplied all -their wants, while the missionary, the connecting link between the -two races, was ever present. This association of religion was one of -the causes of the success of the French in gaining such a permanent -foothold in the affections of the Indians, but was entirely absent -in the British relation with that race. The English traders were in -general unscrupulous[127] in their dealings with the savages and -deficient of that tact which enabled Frenchmen to overcome the natural -prejudice of the Indian and acquire an interest with him which would -be difficult to sever. In that section of the Indian country where -the influence of Great Britain was such that her traders could go -among the Indians, there was always considerable dissatisfaction on -account of the methods employed by the large number of independent -and irresponsible traders. Many carried large quantities of rum, some -dealing in nothing else.[128] English traders frequently attended -public meetings of Indians, gave them liquor during the time for -business and defrauded them of their furs.[129] This abuse was one -of the great causes of complaint against British traders.[130] -Indeed, wherever they participated in the trade, its condition was -deplorable. Many of the independent traders had little or no credit so -that the legitimate merchants suffered as well as the Indians.[131] -They adopted various expedients to draw trade from each other, one -of which was to sell articles below first cost, thus ruining a large -number of traders.[132] Fabrications dangerous to the public were -frequently created to explain the price and condition of goods.[133] -But probably more injurious still to imperial interests, was the fact -that whole cargoes of goods were sometimes sold by English firms to -French traders thus enabling the latter to engross a great part of the -trade,[134] depriving the empire of the benefit of the revenue accruing -from the importation of furs into England. This practice was probably -followed to a greater degree in the farther West, where the French -continued to have a monopoly in the trade. - -It had been expected that the Illinois villages would be the center of -trade for the English side of the upper Mississippi Valley just as it -had been one of the centers during the French regime.[135] But, except -for the few tribes of Illinois Indians in the immediate vicinity, -very few savages found their way to these posts for trading purposes. -English traders, on the other hand, did not trust themselves far -beyond this narrow circle.[136] But their French and Spanish rivals -from Louisiana, many of whom formally lived in the Illinois, carried -on a trade in all directions, both by land and by water.[137] They -ascended the Ohio, Wabash, and Illinois rivers[138] and crossed the -Mississippi River above the Illinois River, plying their traffic among -the tribes in the region of the Wisconsin and Fox rivers.[139] This -was probably the most productive area in the Mississippi Valley in the -supply of fur bearing animals. The Mississippi River from its junction -with the Illinois northward was also considered especially good for the -peltry business: the otter, beaver, wolf, cervine, and marten were to -be found in abundance.[140] But the British traders dared not venture -into that quarter. The loss of this trade, however, can scarcely be -attributed to their misconduct, for the French had never allowed it -to pass from their own hands. The latter continued to intrigue with -the Indians throughout the greater part of this period just as they -had prior to 1765. As we have seen they pointed out to the savages how -they would suffer from the policy of economy practiced by the British -government.[141] Thus by giving presents and circulating stories and -misrepresentations the French subjects of Spain attempted to checkmate -every move of the English.[142] The Indians were constantly reminded -of the bad designs on the part of the English, and were encouraged -with unauthorized promises of aid in case they took up the hatchet in -defense of their hunting grounds.[143] - -This state of affairs continued throughout the greater part of the -period, although it was probably modified to some extent after 1770, -for in that year O'Reilly, the Spanish governor of Louisiana, issued an -order to all the commandants in that colony to prohibit the inhabitants -crossing the river in the pursuit of trade and whenever any excesses -were committed satisfaction was to be given the English commandant -according to the laws of nations.[144] - -During the first years of the British occupation there was considerable -friction in the contact between the two alien peoples in the Illinois -villages. In spite of the fact that the French who remained became -subjects of Great Britain there was for several years sharp competition -between the English and French residents in the vicinity of the -villages.[145] The latter were on terms of friendship with the savages -and could go into any part of the country without difficulty and those -Indians who came to Fort Chartres to trade generally preferred to deal -with their trusted friends. The French often carried the packs of -furs thus obtained across the river to St. Louis or transported them -directly to the New Orleans market. Although the British merchants -were occasionally to pool their interests with French residents, such -cases were exceptional prior to 1770. In that year, however, General -Gage informed the home government that "the competition between his -Majestys' old and new Subjects is greatly abated & must by degrees -subside, for if carried to extremes it would be very prejudicial to -both."[146] - -We have seen in the foregoing study how the British traders were -handicapped in the prosecution of the trade by their French rivals. -Naturally the large quantities of furs and skins obtained by such -contraband traders as well as by the French residents of Illinois were -taken directly to New Orleans and there embarked for the ports of -France and Spain. These foreign interlopers, however, only followed -the course they had long been accustomed to take. On the other hand it -was expected by the government that the traders who carried English -manufactured goods down the Ohio River would return by the same route -with their cargoes of peltry for the purpose of transporting them to -England. In this the aim of the ministry miscarried. English traders -and merchants followed the line of least resistance: the route down -the Mississippi to New Orleans was easier and quicker than up the -Ohio and across the country to the sea-coast.[147] Moreover, the New -Orleans market was attractive, for peltries sold at a higher price -there than in the British market.[148] The tendency of the English -traders and merchants to follow this course was discovered soon after -the occupation.[149] In a communication to Secretary Shelburne in 1766 -Gage informed the government that "it is reported that the Traders in -West Florida carry most of their Skins to New Orleans, where they sell -them at as good a price as is given in London. As I had before some -Intelligence of this, the Officer commanding at Fort Pitt had Orders -to watch the Traders from Pensilvania (sic) who went down the Ohio in -the Spring to Fort Chartres; & to report the quantity of Peltry they -should bring up the Ohio in the Autumn. He has just acquainted me -that the traders do not return to his Post, that they are gone down -the Mississippi with all their Furrs and Skinns under the pretense of -embarking them at New Orleans for England."[150] A few weeks later -he wrote again in a similar strain: "That Trade will go with the -stream is a maxim found to be true from all Accounts that have been -received of the Indian Trade carried on in that vast Tract of Country -which lies in the Back of the British Colonies; and that the peltry -acquired there is carried to the Sea either by the River St. Lawrence -or River Mississippi."[151] Gage seemed to believe that the part -which went down the St. Lawrence would be transported to England; but -that the peltry passing through New Orleans would never enter a British -port.[152] "Nothing but prospect of a superior profit or force will -turn the Channel of Trade contrary to the above maxim."[153] - -It seems impossible to figure exactly what the loss to imperial -interests was under these conditions.[154] Furs and skins, however -being among the enumerated commodities[155] some loss certainly accrued -to British shipping and to the government through loss of the duty, as -well as to English manufacturers. While practically no peltries reached -the Atlantic ports from the Illinois region, enormous quantities were -carried to New Orleans. The few who have left any estimate of the -amount of peltries exported to New Orleans agree in general that from -500 to 1000 packs were shipped annually from Illinois. According to -the usual estimate 500 packs were worth in New Orleans about 3500 -pounds sterling.[156] At New Orleans, where the western trade finally -centered, it was estimated that peltries worth between 75,000 and -100,000 pounds sterling were sent annually to foreign ports.[157] - -It became apparent to those in a position to understand the situation -that those solid advantages which the Government had expected would -accrue in return for the expense of maintaining establishments in the -West would not be forthcoming, unless some effective though expensive -measures be taken. The rivalry of the French who monopolized the larger -part of the trade and who naturally followed their old road to New -Orleans, and the action of the English traders in turning the channel -of their trade down the stream effectually deprived the empire of any -benefits. Conditions grew no better as the years went by. In 1767 we -find General Gage complaining that "as for the Trade of the Ilinois, -and in general of the Mississippi, we may dispose of some manufactures -there, but whilst Skins and Furrs bear a high price at New Orleans, no -Peltry gained by our manufactures, will ever reach Great Britain, and -if our Traders do not return with the Produce of their Trade to the -Northern Provinces, by way of the Ohio or Lakes, it will not answer to -England to be at much expence about the Mississippi."[158] Not only -were the officials in America, who were in close touch with western -affairs, convinced of the impossibility of obtaining any immediate -commercial benefits from the country, but one of the leading members -of the ministry, Lord Hillsborough, Secretary for the colonies, took a -similar view, in an argument against the planting of western colonies. -"This Commerce cannot (I apprehend) be useful to Great Britain -otherwise than as it furnishes a material for her Manufactures, but -it will on the contrary be prejudicial to her in proportion as other -Countries obtain that material from us without its coming here first; & -whilst New Orleans is the only Post for Exportation of what goes down -the Mississippi, no one will believe that that town will not be the -market for Peltry or that those restrictions, which are intended to -secure the exportation of that Commodity directly to G. Britain, can -have any effect under such circumstances."[159] Though there seems to -have been a unanimity of opinion respecting the commercial inutility of -the Illinois and surrounding country under existing conditions, there -were those, however, who believed that with the adoption of certain -measures the western country could be made of intrinsic commercial -value. Whether any adequate steps could have been taken to turn the -channel of trade eastward and to exclude foreign traders is uncertain. - -The original intention of the British government had been to use -Fort Chartres to guard the rivers in order to prevent contraband -trading;[160] but its inefficiency was soon apparent.[161] Although -well constructed, its location was not strategic; it commanded nothing -but an island in the river.[162] An indication to the Indians of -British dominion[163] and a place of deposit for English merchants -was about the sum total of its efficiency.[164] In order to make the -Illinois country effective as a bulwark against foreign aggression and -to keep the trade in English hands, thus insuring material advantages -to the empire, it seemed imperative to many who were familiar with -the situation to adopt measures looking toward the closure of those -natural entrances into the country, the mouths of the Illinois and -Ohio rivers.[165] Almost all the correspondence of the time relating -to Illinois, contains references to the practicability of erecting -forts at the junctions of the Illinois and Ohio rivers with the -Mississippi; in most cases this was insisted upon as the only measure -to be adopted to make the country of value.[166] All were further in -agreement that until such plan was carried out no benefits would arise -from the possession of that territory. Suggestion were also offered -relative to the erection of a fort on the Mississippi River above its -junction with the Illinois for the protection of that section of the -country.[167] Perhaps the most novel suggestion emanated from General -Gage, who declared that in order to gain all the advantages expected it -would be necessary to amalgamate all the little French villages lying -between the Illinois and Ohio rivers into one settlement, which would -also be the centre of the military establishment; detachments could -then be sent out to guard the rivers and prevent British merchants -from descending the stream to New Orleans and also watch for foreign -interlopers.[168] - -But these suggestions one and all failed to receive recognition from -the government. One of the main reasons for this non-action may well be -summed up in a statement of Hillsborough's, who appears by 1770 to have -become somewhat pessimistic regarding the prospect of any immediate -advantages from the western trade. He declared in that year that "Forts -& Military Establishments at the Mouths of the Ohio & Illinois Rivers, -admitting that they would be effectual to the attainment of the objects -in view, would yet, I fear, be attended with an expence to this Kingdom -greatly disproportionate to the advantage proposed to be gained.——"[169] - -The failure of the government to manage successfully the western trade -previous to 1770 was not the only reason the ministry hesitated to -do any thing further. Any measure would have meant the expenditure -of large sums of money with no absolute certainty of an adequate -return. The problem of the western trade confronted the ministry at -a most unfortunate time. Questions of graver import were arising and -demanding immediate attention. Instead of seeking new schemes upon -which to lavish money, every opportunity was seized upon to curtail -expenses. The government failed to put into full operation the plan -of 1764 because of the added financial burden it would entail and in -1768 the management of the Indian Trade was transferred from the crown -to the colonies to further reduce the budget. The western question -had become subordinated to that of the empire. Furs were important -to the manufacturing monopoly of Great Britain, but at this time of -rising discontent and dissatisfaction in the colonies any new projects -entailing further expense were out of the question. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -COLONIZING SCHEMES IN THE ILLINOIS. - - -Although prior to the Seven Years War France was in nominal possession -of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, the English colonies on the -sea-board viewed that territory in a different light. The old sea to -sea charters still possessed a potential value in the eyes of British -colonists and little or no respect was accorded the claims of France. -Gradually toward the middle of the century the more enterprising and -farsighted of the colonists, who appreciated the future value of the -region, began to lay plans for its systematic exploitation. As early -as 1748, shortly after the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, the Ohio Company, -composed of London merchants and Virginia land speculators obtained -from the crown a grant of land south of the Ohio river. This was the -precursor of several companies formed for similar purposes. In 1754 the -question of western expansion had become of sufficient importance to -engage the attention of the Albany Congress, the plans for the creation -of western colonies were discussed by that body.[170] The following -year Samuel Hazard of Philadelphia outlined a proposition looking -toward the formation of a western colony,[171]—probably the first which -comprehended the Illinois country. - -The treaty of cession of 1763 gave a new impulse to the colonizing -spirit which had lain dormant during the early years of the war. The -English now believed that they were free to occupy at will the -unsettled lands as far westward as the Mississippi River. Early in the -summer of 1763, before the British ministry had had time to consider -and determine its policy toward the new acquisitions, there was formed -an organization known as the Mississippi Land Company,[172] for the -purpose of planting a colony in the Illinois and Wabash regions. In -this scheme some of the most prominent inhabitants of Virginia and -Maryland were interested,[173]—indeed membership in the organization -was drawn almost entirely from those two colonies and from London. The -Company was eventually to be composed of fifty members who were to -contribute equally towards the maintenance of an agent in England, to -whom was intrusted the duty of soliciting from the crown a grant of two -million five hundred thousand acres of land[174] on the Mississippi and -its tributaries, the Wabash and Ohio rivers. The proposed grant was -to be "laid off within the following bounds beginning upon the East -side of the Rivers Mississippi one hundred and twenty miles above or -to the northward of the confluence of the River Ohio therewith. Thence -by a line to strike the river Wabash or St. Ireon eighty miles above -the union of Ohio and Wabash, and abutting on the main branch of the -River Cherokee or Tennessee one hundred fifty mile above the junction -of Cherokee River with Ohio and proceeding thence Westerly in a line -to strike the River Mississippi seventy miles below the union of Ohio -with that River; thence upon the said River to the beginning."[175] -The subscribers were to be free to retain their lands twelve years -or more at the pleasure of the crown without the payment of taxes on -quit rents. Within the same period also the company was to be obliged -to settle two hundred families in the colony, unless prevented by -Indians or a foreign enemy.[176] In order to insure against any such -interruption, it was hinted that the government might establish and -garrison two forts,—one at the confluence of the Cherokee[177] and Ohio -rivers, and the other at the mouth of the Ohio.[178] - -In their petition the memorialists enumerate the advantages they expect -the empire to receive in case the land be granted, special emphasis -being laid on two points of view,—commerce and defence. "The Increase -of the people, the extension of trade and the enlargement of the -revenue are with certainty to be expected, where the fertility of the -soil, and mildness of the climate invite emigrants (provided they can -obtain Lands on easy terms) to settle and cultivate commodities most -wanted by Great Britain and which will bear the charges of a tedious -navigation, by the high prices usually given for them,—such as Hemp, -Flax, Silk, Wine, Potash, Cochineal, Indigo, Iron, &c., by which means -the Mother Country will be supplied with many necessary materials, -that are now purchased by foreigners at a very great expense."[179] - -From the point of view of both trade and defense, the company proposed -"that by conducting a trade useful to the Indians on the borders of the -Mississippi they will effectually prevent the success of that cruel -policy, which has ever directed the French in time of peace, to prevail -with the Indians their neighbors to lay waste the frontiers of your -Majestie's Colonies thereby to prevent their increase."[180] - -Lastly, the establishment of a buffer colony would effectually prevent -the probable encroachments of the French from the West side of the -Mississippi, and cut off their political and commercial connection with -the Indians. They would "thereby be prevented from instigating them to -War, and the harrassing the frontier Counties as they have constantly -done of all the Colonies."[181] - -The plan received its first official check in the year of its -inception, when in October, 1763, the British ministry announced its -western policy in a proclamation according to which all the territory -lying north of the Floridas and west of the Alleghanies was reserved -for the use of the Indians.[182] Thereafter the colonial governors were -forbidden to issue patents for land within this reservation without the -consent of the crown.[183] However, the enounciation of this policy -did not deter this and similar companies from pressing their claims -upon the Board of Trade. The more far-sighted of the Americans -had probably correctly interpreted the proclamation as temporary in -character and as promulgated to allay the alarm of the savages.[184] -The Mississippi company therefore continued to solicit the grant until -1769, when it was decided that on account of the temper of the ministry -towards America, it would be advisable to allow the matter to rest -for a time in the hope that a change in the government would bring a -corresponding change in policy.[185] But at no time does it appear that -the promoters of the colony received the slightest encouragement from -those in authority.[186] - -About the time of the Mississippi company in 1763, General Charles -Lee[187] outlined a scheme for the establishment of two colonies, one -on the Ohio River below its junction with the Wabash, and the other -on the Illinois River.[188] It was his plan to organize a company -and petition the crown for the necessary grants of land.[189] A -portion of the settlers were to be procured in new England, and the -remainder from among Protestants of Germany and Switzerland.[190] In -narrating the probable advantages which he thinks would be derived -from such settlements, Lee takes practically the same point of view -as the Mississippi company, adding the suggestion that a new channel -of commerce would be opened up through the Mississippi River and -the Gulf of Mexico.[191] This proposal suffered the same fate as -its contemporary in being objected by the ministry, whose policy of -allowing no settlements in the country beyond the mountains had been -too recently adopted.[192] - -Thus far there seems to be no indication that the above mentioned -colonizing schemes received encouragement from any one in close touch -with the government. Apparently the authors of those projects did not -have the ear of those members of the ministry, whose general attitude -gave some ground for the belief that in the end plans for western -settlements would be adopted. The most prominent among these was Lord -Shelbourne, whose personal attitude favored carving the West into -colonies. Possibly his friendship with Dr. Franklin influenced him in -part to throw the weight of his prestige in favor of a new plan for a -colony, promoted this time by prominent merchants and land speculators -of New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. It was in 1766 that the -next definite scheme appeared, although it is probable that there -were many others, for during those years half of England was said to -have been "New Land mad as every body there had their eyes fixt on -this Country."[193] Pamphlet literature was printed and disseminated -throughout England and America from 1763 on advocating the feasibility -of settling the new lands,[194] which doubtless had considerable -influence. It is hardly probable that the few definite propositions -of which we have recorded were the only schemes projected during this -period.[195] - -The plan of 1764 had its origin we may safely say as 1764. In January -of that year the Board of Trade received a communication from one of -the promoters of the plan, George Croghan, who was then in England, -asking their Lordships "whether it would not be good policy at this -time while we certainly have it in our power to secure all the -advantages we have got there by making a purchase of the Indians -inhabiting the Country along the Mississippi from the mouth of the Ohio -up to the sources of the River Illinois, and there plant a respectable -colony, in order to secure our frontiers, and prevent the French from -any attempt to rival us in the Fur trade with the Natives, by drawing -the Ohio and Lake Indians over the Mississippi which they have already -attempted by the last accounts we have from Detroit."[196] - -The tentative proposition thus suggested by Croghan to the Board -was in essence the same plan that he and his associates developed -two years later. In its general outline there is no intimation that -Croghan intended at this time to include the cultivated lands of the -French inhabitants of Illinois who might leave that country.[197] But -Sir William Johnson, his superior in the Indian department in America -and his constant associate in colonizing enterprizes, writing to the -two years subsequently, gave as his opinion that "some of the present -Inhabitants may possibly incline to go home, and our Traders will I -dare say chuse to purchase their rights, this may be the foundation -for a Valuable Colony in that Country, —-—, this may be effected in -time, & large cessions obtained of the Natives."[198] This idea of -basing the colony in part upon the lands vacated by the French was a -few weeks later taken up and emphasized by General Gage. He declared -that there was only one way to obviate the difficulties in Illinois -on account of lack of provisions for the army as well as to form at -the least expense a barrier against probable incursions of foreigners -from Louisiana. That method must be to "grant the lands deserted by the -French, which I presume forfeited, as well as other Lands unsettled, -using necessary Precautions to avoid Disputes with the Indians, to -the British Settlers."[199] While Croghan, Johnson, and Gage were -thus advocating the purchase of the French claims and some additional -Indian lands with the view of forming a buffer colony, Governor William -Franklin of New Jersey and some Philadelphia merchants, all friends of -the Indian agent Croghan, were promoting the same scheme, and on March -29th, 1766, Governor Franklin drew up[200] a formal sketch.[201] "A -few of us, from his (Croghan's) encouragement, have formed a Company, -to purchase of the French, settled at the Illinois, such lands as -they have a good title to, and are inclined to dispose of. But as I -thought it would be of little avail to buy lands in the Country, -unless a Company were established there, I have drawn some proposals -for that purpose, which are much approved of by Col. Croghan and the -other gentlemen concerned in Philadelphia, and are sent by them to Sir -William Johnson for his sentiments, and when we receive them, the whole -will be forwarded to you. It is proposed that the Company shall consist -of twelve, now in America, and if you like the proposals, you will -be at liberty to add Yourself, & such other gentlemen of character & -fortune in England, as you may think will be most likely to promote the -undertaking."[202] - -Franklin's letter to his father explains very clearly the steps in the -development of the plan up to that time. It is necessary, however, to -examine other sources in order to ascertain details concerning the -proposition. The Articles of Agreement as outlined by Governor Franklin -contains the tentative proposal that application be made to the crown -for a grant in the Illinois country of 1,200,000 acres or "more if to -be procured."[203] Provision was also made in the original draft for -ten equal shareholders, the stipulation to be subject to change in case -others desired to enter the company.[204] The original draft was sent -to Sir William Johnson who was requested to consider the proposals and -make any alterations he saw fit.[205] The articles were then to be -returned to Governor Franklin, with Johnson's recommendations to the -ministry.[206] Through Franklin the papers were to be forwarded to Dr. -Franklin in London, to whom was intrusted the task of negotiating with -the ministry.[207] - -In his recommendations Johnson urged upon the ministry the adoption -of the proposals and in addition offered a number of suggestions -among which the following are of interest.[208] 1. The crown should -purchase from the Indians all their right to the territory in the -Illinois country. 2. A civil government should be established. 3. The -proposed land grants should be laid out in townships according to the -practice in New England. 4. Provincial officers and soldiers who served -in the French war should receive grants. 5. The mines and minerals -should belong to the owners of the land in which they may be found, -except royal mines, from which the crown might receive a fifth. 6. In -every township 500 acres should be reserved for the maintenance of a -clergyman of the Established Church of England. 7. Finally the lands of -the colony were suggested as follows:—From the mouth of the Ouisconsin -(or Wisconsin) River down the Mississippi agreeable to Treaty, to the -Forks, or Mouth of the Ohio. Then up the same River Ohio to the River -Wabash, thence up the same River Wabash to the Portage at the Head -thereof. Then by the said Portage to the River Miamis and down the said -River Miamis to Lake Erie. Thence along the several Courses of the said -Lake to Riviere al Ours (or Bear River) and up the said River to the -Head thereof, and from thence in a straight Line, or by the Portage of -St. Josephs River & down the same River to Lake Michigan then along the -several Courses of the said Lake on the South and West Side thereof -to the point of Bay Puans, and along the several Courses on the East -Side of the said Bay to the Mouth of Foxes River, thence up to the Head -thereof and from thence by a Portage to the Head of Ouisconsin River, -and down the same to the Place of Beginning. - -Benjamin Franklin exerted every effort to advance the project in -England, but with little success. Lord Shelburne, who was at this -time Secretary of State for the southern department, was also ready -and anxious to see the new colony established, and he was able to -influence the ministry to take a favorable view. Others in authority, -however, and particularly members of the Board of Trade, were opposed -to the proposition.[209] In 1768, the Board, under the presidency -of Hillsborough, reported adversely and the question of the Illinois -colony was dropped. Attention of land speculators was now called to the -new Vandalia colony in the upper Ohio region. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -EVENTS IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY, 1765-1768. - - -In the foregoing chapters an attempt has been made to point out -certain general aspects relating to the West and to the Illinois -country, with special reference to the governmental status of the old -French settlements after the conquest, the extension of the English -law to the conquered territory, some of the problems of the Indian -and trade relations, and finally attention has been called to some -of the projects for the colonization of the Illinois country after -1763. What were the actual events taking place in the Illinois after -the occupation has always been problematical. Previous writers have -almost without exception dismissed with a sentence the first two -or three years of the period. Indeed the whole thirteen years of -British administration have generally been crowded into two or three -paragraphs. Although the available historical material relating to -the material to the period in general has recently been considerably -augmented, there yet remain gaps which must be bridged before a -complete history of the colony under the British can be written. - -Among the first duties of the British commandant after taking formal -possession of Fort de Chartres in October, 1765, was to announce to -the inhabitants the contents of Gage's proclamation. It is only from -this document that we know anything of the status of the individual -inhabitants of Illinois. One of its leading features was a clause -granting to the French the right of the free exercise of the Roman -Catholic religion "in the same manner as in Canada,"[210] which was -the fulfillment on the part of the British government of the pledge -stipulated in the IVth article of the treaty of Paris, containing the -following clause: "Brittanick Majesty agrees to grant the liberty -of the Catholic religion to the inhabitants of Canada; he will -consequently give the most precise and effectual orders, that his new -Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion, -according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church, as far as the -laws of Great Britain permit."[211] This provision appertained to the -whole western territory as well as to Canada proper. Prior to the -treaty of cession the Illinois and Wabash settlements were subject to -the jurisdiction of Louisiana, while approximately the country north -of the Fortieth parallel had been within the limits of Canada. But -in the treaty all the territory lying between the Alleghanies and -the Mississippi river was described as a dependency of Canada. The -government was thus commited to religious toleration within the whole -extent of the ceded territory. This meant, however, that only the -religious privileges of the church had been secured, for the clause in -the treaty, "as far as the laws of Great Britain permit," meant that -papal authority would not be tolerated within the British empire. - -Other clauses provided that all the inhabitants of Illinois who -had been subjects of the king of France, might if they so desired, -sell their estates and retire with their effects to Louisiana. No -restraint would be placed on their emigration, except for debt or -on account of criminal processes.[212] This was also a fulfillment of -the pledges made in the treaty of Paris.[213] All the inhabitants who -desired to retain their estates and become subjects of Great Britain -were guaranteed security for their persons and effects and liberty of -trade.[214] Finally they were commanded to take the oath of allegiance -and fidelity to the crown in case they remained on British soil.[215] - -When Captain Sterling proceeded to Kaskaskia to post the proclamation -and to administer the oaths of allegiance for which he was empowered -by the commanding general, he was confronted by an unexpected movement -on the part of the inhabitants. A petition was presented signed by the -representative French of the village, asking for a respite of nine -months in order that they might settle their affairs and decide whether -they wished to remain under the British government or withdraw from -the country.[216] At first Sterling refused to grant the request.[217] -According to the terms of the Paris treaty the inhabitants of the ceded -territory had been given eighteen months in which to withdraw, the time -to be computed from the date of the exchange of ratifications.[218] The -limit had long since expired, and it was therefore beyond the power of -Sterling or his superior General Gage to grant legally an extension of -time.[219] When, however, the commandant perceived that unless some -concessions were granted, the village would be immediately depopulated, -he extended the time to the first of March, 1766, with the provisions -that a temporary oath of allegence be given,[220] and that all desiring -to leave the country should give in their names in advance.[221] To -this tentative proposition the French in Kaskaskia agreed on condition -that Sterling forward to the commanding general a petition, in which -they ask for the longer time.[222] An officer was dispatched to the -villages of Prairie du Rocher, St. Phillipe, and Cahokia where similar -arrangements were made.[223] - -The machinery of civil government in operation under the French regime -had become badly deranged during the French and Indian war and when the -representatives of the English government entered the country affairs -were in a chaotic state. The commandant of the English troops had of -course no authority to govern the inhabitants. But he found himself -face to face with conditions which made immediate action imperative. -Practically the only civil officers Sterling found on the English side -of the river were Joseph La Febevre, who acted as Judge, Attorney -General and Guardian of the Royal Warehouse, and Joseph Labuxiere, -was Clerk and Notary Public.[224] But those men retired with St. Ange -and the French soldiers to St. Louis shortly after the arrival of -the English.[225] This brought the whole governmental machinery to a -standstill, and the English commander was forced to act. He determined -to appoint a judge and after consulting the principal inhabitants of -the villages, selected M. La Grange, who was intrusted "to decide -all disputes according to the Laws and Customs of the Country," -with liberty to appeal to the commandant in case the litigants were -dissatisfied with his decision.[226] The captains of militia seem to -have retained their positions under the British, their duties being -practically the same as in the French regime. Each village or parish -had its captain who saw to the enforcement of decrees and other civil -matters as well as looking after the local militia.[227] The office -of royal commissary continued and James Rumsey, a former officer -in the English army was appointed to this position.[228] But who -was to continue the duties of the old French commandants with both -his civil and military functions? Obviously the most logical person -was the commanding officer of the English troops stationed at the -fort, with the difference that the former held a special commission -for the performance of these duties, while the latter had no such -authorisation. A further and more fundamental difference lay in -the fact that formerly the French had the right to appeal to the -Superior Council at New Orleans, while apparently no such corresponding -safeguard was given them by the new arrangement. - -Sterling did not long retain command of the post[229] for in December -he was superseded by Major Robert Farmer,[230] his superior in rank, -who arrived from Mobile with a detachment of the 34th regiment, after -an eight months voyage. Their arrival was exceedingly welcome to -Sterling and his men since they were becoming greatly embarrassed for -lack of provisions, ammunition, and presents for the Indians.[231] -When they left Fort Pitt in August, it had not been thought necessary -to transport more than sixty pounds of ammunition inasmuch as Fort -de Chartres was expected to yield a sufficient supply, and both Gage -and Sterling believed that Croghan, with his cargo of supplies, would -be awaiting the arrival of the troops at the Illinois.[232] Neither -expectation was realized. Croghan was back in the colonies prior to -Sterling's arrival at the post, and when the fort was transferred, it -yielded neither ammunition nor other supplies in sufficient quantity to -meet the needs of the troops.[233] - -An assembly of three or four thousand Indians had been accustomed to -gather at the fort each spring to receive annual gifts from the French. -But the English had made no provisions for such a contingency, which, -coupled with the weakness of the garrison and the recent hostility of -the Indians, would probably lead to serious complications. A possible -defection of the Indians, therefore, necessitated a large supply of -military stores[234] which it was possible to obtain from the French -merchants in the villages. The latter agreed to furnish the soldiers -with ammunition, on the condition that other provisions would also -be purchased,[235] for which the English alleged they charged an -exorbitant price.[236] Sterling was compelled to acquiesce, for the -merchants had sent their goods across the river where he could not get -at them.[237] - -The large supply of provisions which the colony had produced in former -years seems to have decreased, at any rate it fell far short of the -expectations of the English officers. One officer writes at this time -that "they have indeed but little here, and are doing us a vast favor -when they let us have a Gallon of French brandy at twenty Shillings -Sterling, and as the price is not as yet regulated the Eatables is in -the same proportion."[238] The wealth of colony had been considerably -impaired since the occupation on account of the exodus of a large -number of French who disobeyed the order of Sterling that all who -desired to withdraw should give in their names in advance. Taking -their cattle, grain and effects across the ferries at Cahokia and -Kaskaskia, they found homes at St. Louis and St. Genevieve on the -Spanish side.[239] Probably a large part of the emigrants left in -the hope that in Louisiana they might still enjoy their ancient laws -and privileges,[240] and others from fear lest the Indians, who were -now assuming a threatening attitude, might destroy their crops and -homes.[241] - -The acute situation of the garrison brought on by the dearth of -supplies continued through the winter and spring of 1765 and 1766.[242] -Farmer estimated that all the provisions available amounted to no more -than fifty thousand pounds of flour and 1250 pounds of corn meal,[243] -upon which the garrison could barely subsist till the following July; -and a portion of this stock would have to be given to the Indians, -since representatives of the Indian department had not yet appeared. -These circumstances obliged Major Farmer to send Sterling and his -troops to New York by way of the Mississippi river and New Orleans -instead of up the Ohio river in accordance with Gage's orders.[244] In -response to a series of urgent requests for assistance, Gage employed -a force of Indians to transport a cargo to the Illinois,[245] which -reached Fort Chartres during the early summer of 1766, by which time -also representatives of the English merchants at Philadelphia had -arrived with large stores of supplies.[246] Henceforth we hear nothing -further of a shortage of provisions in the Illinois, for not only did -the English merchants import large supplies from the East, but cargoes -were brought up the Mississippi from New Orleans by the French;[247] -and for a time the English government itself transported the necessary -provisions from Fort Pitt.[248] - -Late in the summer of 1766 Farmer was relieved by Lieutenant Colonel -Reid, who arrived during the summer from Mobile with another detachment -of the thirty-fourth regiment.[249] Reid soon became obnoxious to -the people on account of his tyrannical acts, many of which have been -recorded in Colonel George Morgan's letter book. His administration -of affairs, however, continued over a period of two years. In 1768 he -was relieved by Colonel John Wilkins who ruled the French for the next -three years. - - - - -BIBLIOGRAPHY. - - -Alden, George Henry, New Governments West of the Alleghany Mountains -before 1780. University of Wisconsin Bulletin, II. Madison, 1889. - -Alvord, C. W., Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763. Mich. Pion. & Hist. -Colls. - -Bancroft, George, MSS Collection of, N. Y. Pub. Lib. - -Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, New York, 1907. - -Brown, Henry, Hist. of Ill., New York, 1844. - -Butler, Mann, Hist. of Ky., Louisville, 1834. - -Canadian Archives, Report concerning for the year 1906. Ottawa. - -Chatham Papers, Pub. Rec. Office, London. - -Coffin, V., The Province of Quebec and the American Revolution. -University of Wisconsin Bulletin, I. Madison, 1896. - -Franklin, Benjamin, Works of, Ed. by John Bigelow. 10 Vols. New York, -1888. - -Gayarre, C., Hist. of La. 3 Vols., New Orleans, 1903. - -Harding, Julia Morgan, Geo. Morgan: His Family and Times. Washington -(Pa.) Observer, May 21, 1904. - -Hinsdale, B. A., The Old Northwest. New York, 1888. - -Historical MSS Commission's Reports. London. - -Johnson, Sir William, MSS Collections of, 26 Vols. New York State -Library, Albany. - -Kaskaskia Records: British Period. MS Collection, University of -Illinois. - -Kingsford, W., Hist. of Canada. 10 Vols. Toronto, 1887-1890. - -Morgan, George, MS Letter Book. Nov. 1766 to July 1768. - -Monette, J. W., Hist. of the Miss. Valley. 2 Vols. New York, 1848. - -New York, Documents relating to the Colonial History of. Edited by E. -B. O'Callaghan, 11 Vols. Albany, 1856-1857. - -Parkman, F., MS Collection, Mass. Hist. Soc. Lib. - -Parkman, F., Conspiracy of Pontiac, 2 Vols. Boston, 1903. Wolfe and -Montcalm. Boston, 1903. - -Public Record Office, London: Mil. Corr., Series America & West Indies; -Home Office Papers; Chatham Papers. - -Sioussat, St. George L., The English Statutes in Maryland. J. H. U. -Studies, XXI, Baltimore, 1903. - -Stone, H. R., Life and Times of Sir William Johnson. 2 Vols. Albany, -1865. - -Thwaites, R. G., Early Western Travels, 1784-1846. Cleveland, 1904. - -Terrage, Mare de Villiers, Les Dernièrs Années de la Louisiane -Française. Paris, 1903. - -Winsor, J., Narrative and Critical History of America. 8 Vols. Boston -and New York, 1889. - -The Westward Movement, 1763-1798. Boston & New York, 1897. - -The Mississippi Basin, Boston & New York, 1898. - - - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] Perkins, _France under Louis XV_, II, pp. 1-83. - -[2] Parkman, _Montcalm and Wolfe_, I, pp. 1-39. - -[3] Parkman, _Montcalm and Wolfe_, I, pp. 39-67. - -[4] Hunt, _Pol. Hist. of England_, X, pp. 23-40. - -[5] Text of treaty in Chalmers, _Collections of Treaties_, I, 467-483. -Canadian Archives, 1907 _Report_, 73-84. Hildreth, _Hist. of U. S._, -501-503. - -[6] Parkman, _La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West_, 312. - -[7] Ibid., 312. - -[8] Cahokia was founded in 1699 by the priests of the Seminary of -Foreign Missions. - -[9] Winsor, _Narr. and Crit. Hist._ V, 43. - -[10] Ibid., 49. - -[11] Ibid., 53. - -[12] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 272-273. - -[13] For the Indian rebellion the best secondary accounts are: Parkman, -_Conspiracy of Pontiac_, 2 vols., passim. Kingsford, _Hist. of Can._, -1-112. Poole, The West, in Winsor, _Narr. & Crit. Hist. of Amer._, VI., -684-700. Winsor, _Miss. Basin_, 432-446. Bancroft, _Hist. of U. S._, -IV., 110-133. (Ed. of 1852, containing references.) - -[14] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, I, 182. - -[15] Johnson to Lords of Trade, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, pp 929, 955, -960, 964, 987. - -[16] Johnson to Amherst, July 11th, 1763, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 532. - -[17] Johnson to Amherst, July 11th, 1763. _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 532. - -[18] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, I, 181, quoting from a letter -of Sir William Johnson to Gov. Colden, Dec. 24, 1763. Winsor, _Miss. -Basin_, 433. - -[19] Johnson to Lords of Trade, July 1, 1763, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, -525. Johnson to Amherst, July 8, 1763, Ibid., 531. Johnson to Lords of -Trade, Dec. 26, 1764, Ibid., 688-689. Gage to Bouquet, June 5, 1764, -Can. Arch., Series A, Vol. 8, p 409. Gage to Bouquet, Oct. 21, 1764, -Ibid., p 481. Johnson to Gov. Colden, Jan. 22, 1765, Johnson MSS, X, -No. 99. - -[20] _Can. Arch. Report_, 1905, I, 470. Neyon to Kerlerc, Dec. 1, 1763, -Bancroft Coll., Lenox Lib. Extract from letters of M. D'Abaddie, Jan., -1764, _Can. Arch. Report_ I, 471. D'Abaddie to the French minister, -1764, Ibid., 472. - -[21] This is the view taken by Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, -279, and by Bancroft, _Hist. of U. S._, V, 133, 136. But Kingsford, -in his _Hist. of Can._, V, 25, takes an opposite view. He says that -the "high character claimed for Pontiac cannot be established." "He -can be looked upon in higher light, than the instrument of the French -officials and traders." On page 6 he declares that "there is no -evidence to establish him as the central figure organizing this hostile -feeling." - -[22] Gage to Halifax, July 15, 1764, Bancroft Coll., Eng. & Am., -1764-1765. Winsor, _Miss. Basin_, 444, 456. Winsor, _Narr. & Crit. -Hist. of Am._ VI, 702. - -[23] Beer, _British Col. Policy_, 263. Kingsford, _Hist. of Can._, V, -68. - -[24] Winsor, _Miss. Basin_, 633. Ogg, _Opening of Miss._, 301. - -[25] Bouquet to Amherst, Dec. 1, 1763, Can. Arch., Ser. A, Vol. IV, p -413. Gage to Bouquet, Dec. 22, 1763, Ibid., Vol. 8, p. 341. - -[26] Lt. Col. Robertson to Gage, March 8, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., -1764-1765, De Villers, _Les dernièrs Années de la Louisiana_, 180. - -[27] Robertson to Gage, Mar. 8, 1764. - -[28] Ibid. - -[29] Loftus to Gage, April 9, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -Gage to Halifax, May 21, 1764, Ibid. Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, -88, 283, 285. Kingsford, _Hist. of Can._, V, 69-74. Winsor, _Narr. and -Crit. Hist. of Am._, VI, 701, 702, Gayarre, _Louisiana_, II, 102-103. - -[30] Loftus to Gage, April 9, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -De Villers, _Les dernières Années de la Louisiana_, 182-184. - -[31] Ibid. - -[32] Robertson to Gage, Mar. 8, 1764, Ibid. "Account of what happened -when the English attempted to take possession of Illinois by way of -the Mississippi," from Paris documents, Can. Arch. Report, 1905, I, -407-411. Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 284, note 1, containing -a letter from Gage thanking D' Abadie for his efforts in behalf of the -English. - -[33] Extract from the correspondence of D' Abadie with the French -commandants, Jan., 1764. _Can. Arch. Report_, 1905, I, 471. Parkman, -who made a careful study of the correspondence in the French archives, -came to the conclusion that the French officials may be exonerated. -Winsor holds a similar view in his _Mississippi Basin_, 452. See also -Cayarre, _Louisiana_, II, 101. Kingford, in his _Hist, of Can._, V, -69-74, places no dependence in D' Abadie's statements. On the other -hand he bases most of his argument upon a letter of Loftus which he -quotes at length, but gives no hint as to its location, date, &c. It is -evidently not the letter written to Gage, which is quoted above. - -[34] Loftus to Gage, April 9th, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[35] Gage to Halifax, April 14th, 1764, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 619. - -[36] This has reference to those tribes along the Mississippi River who -were in direct communication with Pontiac and the French. The great -Cherokee and Chicksaw nations were favorable to the English. - -[37] Gage to Bouquet, May 21, 1764, Can. Arch., Ser. A, Vol. 8, p 393. -Gage to Halifax, May 2d, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. Gage -to Haldimand, May 27, 1764, Brit. Mus., Add. MSS, 21, 662. Gage to -Halifax, July 13, 1764, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[38] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, Winsor, _Miss. Basin_, 454. - -[39] St. Ange to D' Abadie, Aug. 16, 1764, _Can. Arch. Report_, 1905, -I, 471. Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 279-280. - -[40] The original journal kept by Morris during his journey is -reprinted in Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 198-208. There is -also a biographical sketch in the same volume. Correspondence relating -to the Morris mission is to be found in the Bouquet Collection, Can. -Arch., Ser. A, Vol. 8, pp 475-491. For a good account of the incident, -see Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 198-208, and Kingsford, -_Hist. of Canada_, V, 8. - -[41] This incident illustrates the practical failure of Bradstreet's -campaign against the Indians in the Lake region. While he retook the -posts, his terms were so easy that the Indians were not in the least -awed by the proximity of his army. - -[42] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 305. - -[43] Ross to Farmer, Feb. 21, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -Gage to Halifax, Aug. 10, 1765, Ibid. - -[44] Ross to Farmer, May 25, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -H. Gordon to Johnson, Aug. 10, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 73. - -[45] Ross to Farmer, May 25, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[46] Ibid. - -[47] Ibid. - -[48] Ibid. Copy of Council held at the Illinois in April, 1765, Home -Office Papers, Dom., Geo. III, Vol. 3, No. 4(1). Public Rec. Office. -Copy of minutes of Council, April 4, 1765, in _Can. Arch. Report_, -1905, I, 473. See also De Villiers, _Les dernières Années de la -Louisiana_, p. 220. - -[49] Ross to Farmer, May 25, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[50] Johnson to Gage, June 9, 1764, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIX, No. 111. -Johnson to Lords of Trade, Dec 26, 1764, N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 689. -Bouquet to Gage, Jan. 5, 1765, Can. Arch., Ser. A, Vol. VII, p 111. -Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 291-292. Winsor, _Narr. & Crit. -Hist, of Am._, VI, 702. Croghan is one of the most interesting figures -of the period. He had entire charge, as Sir William Johnson's deputy, -of the Indians in the Ohio river region and was thoroughly conversant -with western affairs. For biographical sketch see Thwaites, _Early -Western Travels_, I, 47-52, or _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII. - -[51] Gage to Bouquet, Dec. 24, 1764, Can. Arch., Ser. A, Vol. VIII, -p 499. Ibid., Dec. 30, 1764, Ibid. This distinction is not generally -made. Writers have usually inferred that Fraser simply accompanied -Croghan in an unofficial capacity. See, however, Winsor, _Miss. Basin_, -456. Ogg, in _Opening of the Mississippi_, 310, places Fraser's journey -a year previous to Croghan's, which is obviously an error. - -[52] Gage to Johnson, Feb. 2, 1765, Parkman Coll., Pontiac:—Miscell., -1765-1778. - -[53] Jos. Calloway to B. Franklin, Jan. 23, 1765, Sparks MSS, XVI, 54, -55. - -[54] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 292. - -[55] The frontiersmen could not understand the significance of giving -valuable presents to the Indians. - -[56] Johnson to Lords of Trade, May 24, 1765, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, -716. Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 292-297. - -[57] Johnson to Lords of Trade, May 24, 1765, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII. -716. - -[58] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 297. - -[59] Johnson to Lords of Trade, Jan. 16, 1765, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, -694. - -[60] Croghan's Journal of his transactions, from Feb. 28 to May 12, -1765, MS in Parkman Collection. Johnson to Burton, June 6, 1765, -Johnson MSS, X, No. 263. - -[61] Croghan's Journal of his transactions, from Feb. 28 to May 12, -1765, MS in Parkman Collection. - -[62] Maisonville, a Frenchman, and one Andrew, an interpreter were -among the whites. Shawnee and Seneca Indians also accompanied the -party. Note the error in Kingsford, _Hist. of Can._, V, 116, wherein -Sinnot is said to have accompanied Fraser. Sinnot had been sent about -the same time from the south by Indian agent Stuart. On arriving at -the Illinois his goods were plundered and he was finally forced to -flee to New Orleans. Johnson to Lords of Trade, Sept. 28, 1765, _N. Y. -Col. Docs._, VII, 765. Ibid., Nov. 16, 1765, Ibid., p 776. Apparently -Sinnott must have arrived at Illinois after Fraser's departure for -New Orleans, since Croghan implies that the former was still at Fort -Chartres while he was a captive at Vincennes. See Croghan's Journal as -printed in the _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 780. - -[63] Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 300. - -[64] Fraser to Gage, May 15, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -Fraser to Crawford, May 20, 1765, _Mich. Pion. Colls._, X, 216-218. -Fraser to Gage, May 26, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. Gage -to Johnson, Aug. 12, 1765, Parkman Coll., Pontiac, Miscell., 1765-1778. - -[65] Fraser to Gage, June 16, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 302. De Villiers, _Les dernières -Années de la Louisiana Française_, 220-221. Reports were current in -the East that Fraser and his party had been killed by the Indians. See -Gage to Johnson, June 17, 1765, Myers Coll., N. Y. Pub. Lib. Johnson to -Lords of Trade, July, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 43. One of the -party, Maisonville, remained in the Illinois. Thwaites, _Early Western -Travels_, I, 146. - -[66] Fraser to Campbell, May 20, 1765, _Mich. Pioneer Colls._, X, -216-218. - -[67] St Ange to D' Abadie, _Can. Arch. Report_, 1905, I, 471. - -[68] A party of traders under the leadership of one Crawford preceeded -Croghan. They were, however, cut off before reaching the Illinois. -Shuchburgh to Johnson, July 25, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 56. - -[69] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 131. Parkman, _Conspiracy of -Pontiac_, II, 304. The chief sources of information for this journey -are Croghan's Journals, most of which have been printed in Thwaites, -_Early Western Travels_, I, 126-166. For secondary accounts see, -Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 304-315. Kingsfords, _Hist. of -Can._, V, 116-120. Winsor, _Narr. & Crit. Hist. of Am._, VI, 704. -Ibid., _Miss. Basin_, 456-457. - -[70] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 131. Gage to Conway, Sept. -23, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. Parkman, _Conspiracy of -Pontiac_, II, 304. - -[71] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 139. - -[72] Croghan to Murray, July 12, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., -1764-1765. Gage to Conway, Sept. 23, 1765, Ibid. - -[73] Croghan to Murray, July 12, 1765, Ibid. Thwaites, _Early Western -Travels_, I, 146. - -[74] Croghan to Murray, July 12, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., -1764-1765. Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 144-145. Johnson to -Lords of Trade, July, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 43. - -[75] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 145-146. - -[76] Ibid. Jas. Macdonald to Johnson, July 24, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. -XI, No. 50. Thos. Hutchins to Johnson, Aug. 13, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. -XI, No. 97. Gage to Conway, Sept. 23, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., -1764-1765. - -[77] Thwaites, _Early Western Travels_, I, 154-166. Johnson to Wallace, -Sept. 18, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 56. Gage to Conway, Sept. 25, -1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am,, 1764-1765. Johnson to Lords of Trade, -Sept. 28, 1765, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 766. Gage to Conway, Nov. 9, -1765. Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[78] Gage to Conway, Sept. 23, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. -Johnson to Wallace, Sept. 18, 1765, Johnson MSS, Vol. XI, No. 56. -Johnson to Lords of Trade, Sept. 28, 1765, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, 766. - -[79] Gage to Conway, Sept. 23, 1765, Ban. Coll., Eng. & Am., 1764-1765. - -[80] Ibid. - -[81] Stirling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. Ind. -Vol. 122. - -[82] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. Ind. -Vol. 122. - -[83] Ibid. - -[84] Ibid. - -[85] Ibid. Sterling asserts that although Croghan claimed to have made -a peace with all the Illinois chiefs, he is assured that not one was -present at the peace conference in Ouiatanon, and that his own sudden -appearance at the village was the real cause of his success. Sir -William Johnson, in a letter to Croghan, Feb. 21, 1766, (Johnson MSS, -Vol. XII, No. 60.) casts doubt upon the representation of Sterling. -He says that it is easy to account for his motives, and that he has -written Gen. Gage fully upon the subject. The letter referred to has -probably been destroyed; at any rate it is not in any of the large -collections. - -[86] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. Ind., -Vol. 122. Eidington to ——, Oct. 17, 1765, Catham Papers, Vol. 97, -Pub. Rec. Office. Gage to Johnson, Dec. 30, 1765, MS letter in Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. Gage to Barrington, Jan. 8, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, -A. & W. Ind., Vol. 122. Gage to Conway, Jan. 16, 1766, Ibid. Johnson -to Lords of Trade, Jan. 31, 1766, _N. Y. Col. Docs._., X, 1161 ff. -Capt. Sterling relates in his letter to Gage that he had considerable -difficulty in persuading St. Ange to surrender his ammunition and -artillery stores. The latter claimed he had positive orders to -surrender only the fort and a few pieces of artillery. - -As to the time of Sterling's arrival, Parkman, II, 314, says he arrived -in the early part of winter, while Nicollet, in his sketch of St. -Louis, states that the fort was reached in mid-summer. From the above -references, there can be no doubt as to the exact date. - -[87] Text of the Proclamation in _Can. Arch. Report_, 1906, pp 119-123. -For discussion as to the origin of the various clauses, see Alvord, -_Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763_, in _Mich. Pion. & Hist. Coll._ - -[88] Egremont to Lords of Trade, July 14, 1763. _Can. Arch. Report_, -1906, p 108. - -[89] Egremont to Lords of Trade, Aug. 5, 1763, C. A. Rep., 1906, pp -110-111. - -[90] "We would humbly propose, that a Commission under the Great -Seal, for the Government of this Country, should be given to the -Commander-in-chief of Your Majesty's Troops for the time being adapted -to the Protection of the Indians and the Fur Trade of Your Majesty's -subjects." Ibid., p 111. - -[91] They could not have been ignorant of the existence of such -colonies in the ceded territory, for Sir William Johnson, who was -familiar with western conditions, was in constant correspondence with -the ministry, and such works as the _Histoire de Louisiana_ by Du -Pratz, published in 1758, were doubtless familiar to English statesmen. - -[92] See post Ch. V. - -[93] Dartmouth to Cramahé, Can. Arch. Ser. Q., Vol. IX, p 157. - -[94] See post Ch. V. - -[95] It is very curious that no reference occurs in Art. XV of the -Plan, which dealt with civil matters. "That for the maintaining peace -and good Order in the Indian Country, and bringing Offenders in -criminal Cases to due Punishment, the said Agents or Superintendents, -as also the Commissaries at each Post, and in the Country belonging -to each Tribe, be empowered to act as Justices of the Peace in their -respective Districts and Departments, with all powers and privileges -vested in such Officers in any of the Colonies; and also full power of -Committing Offenders in Capital Cases, in order that such Offenders may -be prosecuted for the same; And that, for deciding all civil actions, -the Commissaries be empowered to try and determine in a Summary way -all such Actions, as well between the Indians and Traders, as between -one Trader and another, to the amount of Ten Pound Sterling, with the -Liberty of Appeal to the Chief Agent or Superintendant, or his Deputy, -who shall be empowered upon such appeal to give Judgement thereon; -which Judgement shall be final, and process issued upon it, in like -manner as on the Judgement of any Court of Common Pleas established in -any of the Colonies." - -[96] Brown, _Hist. of Ill._, 212-213. See post Ch. VII. - -[97] Gage to Sec. Conway, March 28, 1766. B. T. Papers, Vol. XX, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[98] Gage to Johnson, Jan. 24, 1767, Johnson MSS, XIV, No. 28. - -[99] See post Ch. IV. - -[100] Review of the Trade and Affairs of the Indians in the Northern -District of America, _ N. Y. Col. Docs._, Vol. VII, 964. - -[101] Gage to Hillsborough, Aug. 6, 1771, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 128. Two years before he had written: "Two persons are confined -in Fort Chartres for murther, and the Colonel (Wilkins) proposes to -send them to Philadelphia, about fifteen hundred miles, to take their -Tryall." Gage to Hillsborough, Oct. 7, 1769, Pub. Rec. Office, A. W. -I., Vol. 125. - -[102] Hillsborough to Gage, Dec. 9, 1769, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 124. - -[103] "The situation and particular circumstances of the Ilinois (sic) -Country, and the use, if that Country is maintained, if guarding the -Ohio and Ilinois Rivers at or near their junctions with the Mississippi -has been set forth to your Lordship in my letter of the 22d of Feb. -last. It is upon that plan the Regiment is posted in the Disposition -in the Ilinois Country." Gage to Shelburne, April 3, 1767, Pub. Rec. -Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 123. - -[104] Blackstone, _Commentaries_, (3d ed., Cooley) _Introduction_, sec. -4, 107. - -[105] Text of the decision in _Can. Arch. Report_, 1906, pp 366-370. - -[106] Other important leading cases, such as Calvin's case in 1607 -and the case of Blanckard vs Galdy in the 18th century, involving -the status of Jamaica, have the same bearing. See Sioussat, English -Statutes in Maryland, J. H. U. Studies, XXI, 481-487. - -[107] _Can. Arch. Report_, 1906, 120-121. - -[108] _Franklin's Works_, (Sparks Ed.) IV, 303-323. "I conceive that -to procure all the commerce it will afford and at as little expense to -ourselves as we can is the only object we should have in view in the -interior Country for a century to come." Gage to Hillsborough, Nov. 10, -1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 126. It may be noted, however, -that some members of the government had serious doubts as to this -policy. Such men as Shelburne favored an early opening of the country -to colonization. - -[109] Alvord, _Gen. of the Proc. of 1763_, _Mich. Pion. & Hist. Coll._, -Vol. - -[110] Alvord, _Gen. of Proc. of 1763_, _Mich. Pion. & Hist. Coll._ - -[111] _Can. Arch. Report_, 1906, p 122. - -[112] See supra ch. III. - -[113] _Can. Arch. Report_ 1904, pp 242-246. The plan is here presented -in full. - -[114] _Franklin's Works_, V, 38. Coffin, _Quebec Act and the American -Revolution_, p 415, quoting from Knox, _Justice and Policy of the -Quebec Act_, London, 1774. - -[115] The failure to successfully carry out this plan would of course -leave the country a dead weight on the empire. - -[116] Johnson MSS, Vol. X, No. 190. - -[117] Morgan notes something more than mere mention, since he plays an -important role in the affairs of the Illinois country from 1765-1771. -He was born in Philadelphia in 1741 and was educated at Princeton -college. Through the influence of his father-in-law, James Baynton, he -was admitted to the firm of Baynton and Wharton and in 1765 became the -western representative of the firm. After his experiences in Illinois, -Morgan served the Revolutionary cause in the capacity of Indian agent. -He died in 1810. See _Biography of Col. George Morgan_, by Julia Morgan -Harding, in the _Washington (Pa.) Observer_, May 21, 1904. - -[118] This company had traded extensively among the Indians on the -Penn. border prior to 1765. During the Indian wars the firm lost -heavily and it was in an attempt to retrieve its fortune that a branch -house was established in the Illinois Country. - -[119] Morgan's MS Letter Book. - -[120] Morgan's MS Letter Book. - -[121] Five batteaus loaded with goods under the command of John -Jennings, sailed from Fort Pitt, March 9, 1765. Joseph Dobson to -Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan, March 9, 1765, MS letter, Pa. Hist. Soc. -Lib. - -[122] Morgan's MS Letter Book. - -[123] Ibid. - -[124] Ibid. - -[125] Ibid. - -[126] Gage wrote in 1770 that the "Company from Philadelphia -(Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan) failed in the Ilinois trade." Gage to -Hillsborough, Dec. 7, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 128. - -[127] See Ch. II for references. - -[128] Johnson to Hillsborough, Aug. 14, 1770, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VIII, -224. See extract from "Ponteach or the Savages of North America: A -Tragedy," in Parkman, _Conspiracy of Pontiac_, II, 344 ff. - -[129] Johnson to Hillsborough, Aug. 14, 1770, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VIII, -224. - -[130] Johnson to Hillsborough, Aug. 14, 1770, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VIII, -292. - -[131] Johnson to Lords of Trade, Sept. 1767, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VII, -964-965. - -[132] Ibid. - -[133] Ibid. - -[134] Ibid. - -[135] The British were not so well situated to command the trade as the -French had been. The Illinois post had always been the center for the -trade of the Missouri river region, but after the cession of Illinois -to England and the Foundation of St. Louis by La Clede in 1764, the -latter place became the centre for the trade of that region. - -[136] Information of the State of Commerce given by Capt. Forbes, 1768, -Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 125. - -[137] Gordon's Journal down the Ohio, 1766, MS in Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. -Phym to Johnson, April 15, 1768, Johnson MSS, Vol. 25, No. 109. - -[138] Gage to Hillsborough, April 24, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 124 Gage to Shelburne, April 24, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & -W. I., Vol. 124. - -[139] Gage to Hillsborough, Nov. 10, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 126 Huchin's Remarks upon the Illinois country, 1771, MS in -Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. It may be noted also that during the French regime -the French-Canadians traded extensively in this region. See Gage's -Report on the State of the Government of Montreal. - -[140] Wilkins to Barrington, Dec. 5, 1769, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 124. - -[141] Johnson to Carleton, Jan. 27, 1767, C.A., Ser. Q, Vol. IV, p 115. - -[142] Johnson to Hillsborough, Feb. 18, 1771, _N. Y. Col. Docs._, VIII, -263. - -[143] Gage to Hillsborough, Apr. 24, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 124. - -[144] Order for O'Reilly, Jan. 27, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 126. - -[145] Information of the State of Commerce, in the Illinois Country, -given by Captain Forbes, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, Vol. 125. Morgan's MS -Letter Book. - -[146] Gage to Hillsborough, Nov. 10, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 126. - -[147] Gage to Shelburne, Jan. 17, 1767, B. T. Papers, Vol. 27, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[148] Gage to Shelburne, Dec. 23, 1766, B. T. Papers, Vol. 27, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. Johnson to Gage, Jan. 29, 1767, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIV, -No. 35. Gage to Shelburne, Feb. 22, 1767, B. T. Papers, Vol. XXII, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. Gage to Johnson, Jan. 25, 1767, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIV, -No. 28. George Phym to Johnson, Apr. 15, 1768, Johnson MSS, Vol. XXV, -No. 109. Gage to Dartmouth, May 5, 1773, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 128. Gage wrote in 1766 that skins and furs bore a price of ten -pence per pound higher at New Orleans than at any British market. Gage -to Conway, July 15, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 122. - -[149] Gage to Conway, July 15, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. &W. I., Vol. -122. - -[150] Gage to Shelburne, Dec. 23, 1766, B. T. Papers, Vol. XXVII, Pa. -Hist. Lib. - -[151] Ibid., Feb. 22, 1767, B. T. Papers, Vol. XXII, Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[152] Gage to Shelburne, Feb. 22, 1767, B. T. Papers, Vol. XXII, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[153] Ibid., "As long as Skinns and Furrs bear a high price at New -Orleans they will never be brought to a British Market. The Indian -Trade in general from the observations I have made, will always go -with the stream, and the whole will either go down the St. Lawrence -or Mississippi Rivers." Gage to Johnson, Jan. 25, 1767, Johnson MSS, -XIV, No. 28. "I am entirely of your opinion concerning the Trade, &c -by way of the Mississippi whilst the Traders find better markets at -New Orleans." Johnson to Gage, Jan. 29, 1767, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIV, -No. 35. Also Johnson to Gage, Feb. 24, 1767, Johnson MSS, XIV, No. 67. -"So long as New Orleans is in the hands of another power, the whole -produce of the western country must center there. For our merchants -will always dispose of their peltry or whatever the country produces, -at New Orleans where they get as good a price as if they were to ship -them off." Phym to Johnson, Mobile, April 15, 1768, Johnson MSS, Vol. -XXV, No. 109. "The Traders from these Colonies say it will answer to -carry Goods down the Ohio, but that it will not answer to return with -their Peltry by the same route, as they can get to Sea at so much less -expense, & greater expedition by means of Rapidity of the Mississippi, -and pretend that they have Ships at New Orleans to transport their -Peltry to England." Gage to Shelburne, Jan. 17, 1767, B. T. Papers, -Vol. XXVII, Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. "The Peltry gained by the Traders -from Canada, whether on the Mississippi or on the Ouabache we may be -satisfied generally goes down the St. Lawrence River to Quebec: it has -been the usual track of those Traders from the beginning, & there is -no reason to suspect the contrary now. But the British Traders at the -Ilinois who carry their Goods above three hundred miles by land before -they have the convenience of Water or Carriage cannot afford to return -the same way, with the produce of their Trade." Gage to Hillsborough, -Nov. 10, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 126. That this state -of affairs continued through most of the period is evident from the -following: "The Trade of the Mississippi, except that of the upper -parts from whence a portion may go to Quebec, goes down that River; and -has, as well as everything we have done on the Mississippi, as far as -I have been able to discover tended more to the Benefit of New Orleans -than of ourselves. And I conceive it must be the case, as long as the -Commodities of the Mississippi bear a better price at New Orleans -than at a British Market." Gage to Dartmouth, May, 5, 1773, Pub. Rec. -Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 128. - -[154] It is necessary to ascertain the cost of maintaining the military -establishments and the Indian department in the West, and the amount of -peltries imported into England. I already have some figures on this but -not enough upon which to base any statement. - -[155] Beer, _British Colonial Policy_, 222. - -[156] Hutchins, Remarks on the Country of the Illinois, MS in Pa. Hist. -Soc. Lib. Hutchins gives an account of the exports from Illinois from -Sept. 1769 to Sept. 1770. In that year 550 packs of peltries were sent -from Illinois, while from the Spanish side 835 packs were exported. -Wilkins, the commandant at Fort Chartres at this time, makes a somewhat -higher estimate, but the two agree in essentials. - -[157] Gage estimated it at 80,000 pounds sterling. Gage to Shelburne, -Jan. 17, 1767. B. T. Papers, Vol. XXVII. Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. "New -Orleans remits one hundred thousand pounds Sterling worth of Peltry -annually for France." Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan to McLeane, Oct. 9, -1767, B. T. Papers, Vol. XXVI, Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[158] Gage to Johnson, Jan. 19, 1767, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIV, No. 23, -Captain Forbes, commandant at Fort Chartres during part of 1768, wrote -to Gage: "As I am very sensible of the immense expence this Country is -to the Crown & the little advantage the Public has hitherto reaped by -the trade with the savages, & the reason is that the inhabitants have -continued to send their Peltry to New Orleans which is shipped from -thence to Old France & all the money that is laid out for the Troops -and Savages is immediately sent to New Orleans, for which our Subjects -get French Manufactures. I hope, Sir, you will excuse me when I observe -to Your Excellency, that the Crown of Great Britain is at all the -expence & that France reaps the advantages." Forbes to Gage, April 15, -1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 124. Commandant Wilkins wrote -the same year, "the French of New Orleans are the sole gainers in this -Trade and the public suffer greatly thereby." Wilkins to Gage, Sept. -13, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office. - -[159] Hillsborough to Gage, July 31, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 126. - -[160] Gage to Shelburne, April 3, 1767, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 123. - -[161] Gage to Johnson, Feb, 8, 1767, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIV, No. 44. - -[162] "It has not the least command of the River, owing to an Island -which lies exactly opposite to it, & the Channel is entirely on the -other side for a great part of the year. This is impassable from a -sand bar which runs across even for small boats, & the French & their -contraband goods, forcing an illicit Trade, to our great disadvantage & -a certain and very considerable loss to his Majesty's Revenue." Wilkins -to Barrington, Dec. 5, 1767, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 123. - -[163] Gordon's Journal, 1766, MS in Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. Gage to -Johnson, Feb. 8, 1767, Johnson MSS, XIV, No. 44. Hillsborough to Gage, -July 31, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 126. - -[164] Gage to Hillsborough, Jan. 16, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol 124. - -[165] Gage to Shelburne, April 3, 1767, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 123. Johnson to Lords of Trade, Sept. 1767, N. Y. Col. Docs. Vol. -VII, 974. - -[166] Gage to Conway, July 15, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I. Vol. -122. Gordon's Journal down the Ohio, 1766, MS in Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. -Gage to Johnson, Jan. 25, 1767, Johnson MSS, XIV, No. 28. Ibid., Feb. -8, 1767, Johnson MSS, XIV, No. 44. Gage to Shelburne, Jan. 17, 1767, -B. T. Papers, Vol. XXVII, Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. Gage to Shelburne, April -3, 1767, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 123. Johnson to Lords of -Trade, Sept. 1767, N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 974. Phym to Johnson, April -15, 1768, Johnson MSS, XXV, No. 109. Wilkins to Gage, Sept. 13, 1768, -Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 125. Wilkins to Harrington, Dec. 5, -1769, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 123. Gage to Hillsborough, -Nov. 10, 1772, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 126. - -[167] Gordon's Journal down the Ohio, 1766, MS in Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[168] Gage to Hillsborough, June 16, 1768, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 124. - -[169] Hillsborough to Gage, July 31, 1770, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 126. - -[170] Alden, _Governments West of the Alleghanies before 1789_, pp No -attempt is made in my study to add any new contribution to the period -preceding 1763. - -[171] Ibid., 7-11. - -[172] Original Articles of Agreement of the Mississippi Co. Chatham -Papers, Vol. 97, Pub. Rec. Office. Another copy, in the handwriting -of Washington, is in the Lib. of Congress. No mention is made in the -original articles relative to the exact location of the proposed -colony. Most of the information concerning the project comes from a -collection of papers relating to the company, in the handwriting of -William Lee, which I found in a miscellaneous collection of the Earl of -Chatham's papers, in the Pub. Rec. Office. - -[173] Some of the original members of the company were George, Samuel -and John Washington, and several of the Lees and Fitzhughs. There were -38 charter members, but provision was made for 50. - -[174] Articles of Agreement, Chatham Papers, Vol. 97. Each member was -to have fifty thousand acres. Ibid. - -[175] Memorial to the crown, prepared at a meeting of the company at -Belleview, Va., Sept. 9, 1763. - -[176] Ibid. Articles of Agreement. - -[177] Tennessee River. - -[178] Memorial to the crown, Sept. 9, 1763. Four years later this -suggestion was withdrawn at the suggestion of their London agent, -Thomas Cumming. Letter to Cumming, March 1, 1767. Catham Papers, Vol. -97. Some of the members declared their determination to become early -settlers in the new colony. Memorial to the crown, Sept. 9, 1763. -Petition to the crown, Dec. 16th, 1768, Butler, _Hist. of Ky._, 381-383. - -[179] Memorial to the crown, Sept. 9th, 1763, Chatham Papers, Vol. 97. - -[180] Ibid. - -[181] Letter of the company to Thomas Cumming, Sept. 26th, 1763. - -[182] Can. Arch., _Report for 1906_, p 122. See ch. III. - -[183] Ibid. - -[184] "I can never look upon that proclamation in any other light (but -this I say between ourselves), than as a temporary expedient to quiet -the minde of the Indians, and must fall, of course, in a few years, -especially when those Indians are consenting to our occupying the -lands." Washington to Crawford, Sept. 21, 1767. Writings of Washington, -II, 220-221. (Ford ed.) - -[185] Letter of William Lee, London, May 30, 1769, Chatham Papers, Vol. -97. - -[186] I have found no account of any further activity on the part of -the company. In 1774 a copy of the correspondence was sent to the Earl -of Chatham, which may have been done in the hope that his interest -might be aroused in the undertaking. The bundle of papers contains the -following indorsement: "Mississippi Cos. papers, sent to the Right -Honble William Earl of Chatham, on Saturday the 20th of April 1774." -Charles Lee, in speaking of this undertaking, said: "Another society -solicited for lands on the lower part of the Illinois, Ohio or on the -Mississippi: this was likewise rejected; but from what motives it is -impossible to define, unless they suppose that soldiers invested with a -little landed property, would not be so readily induced to act as the -instruments of the oppression of their fellow subjects, as those whose -views are solely turned, if not reduced, to farther promotion; and if -reduced, to full pay." The Lee Papers, N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls., VII, 98. - -[187] The Charles Lee of Revolutionary fame. - -[188] Lee Papers, _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, VII, 214. Sparks, Life of -Lee, Sparks Bio. Ser., IV, 19. - -[189] Lee Papers, VII, 214. - -[190] Ibid. - -[191] Ibid. - -[192] Ibid. - -[193] Croghan to Johnson, Mar. 30, 1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No. 127 - -[194] Alden, New Government West of the Alleghanies before 1780, p 12. -Mr. Alden notes a pamphlet published in London entitled "Advantages -of a Settlement upon the Ohio in North America," and another pamphlet -issued at Edinburgh in 1763 entitled "Expediency of Securing our -American Colonies." In the same connection the following is of -interest: "As the happy possession of the Illinois Country is the -Subject of much conversation, both in England & America, we beg leave -to inclose,—a small pamphlet, wrote lately on a very interesting -point—towit, The Establishment of a Civil Government there: The Author, -has borrowed some of his Sentiments from Monsr. De Prats." Baynton, -Wharton, & Morgan to Johnson, Mar. 30, 1766, Johnson MSS, Vol. XII, No. -128. - -[195] George Croghan who was in London in 1764 wrote: "There is a talk -of setleing a Colony from the mouth of the Ohio to the Ilinois, which -I am tould Lord Halifax will Desier my opinion of in a few Days. Mr. -pownal tould me yesterday that I would be soon sent for attend the -board of Trade. what Meshures they will Take Lord knows but nothing is -talkt of but Oconomy," Crogan to Johnson. Mar. 10, 1764, Johnson MSS, -VIII. - -[196] N.Y. Col. Docs., VII, 605. As appears from the above note Croghan -was to have been summoned before the Board of Trade to answer questions -relative to a new colony. Whether he was finally called upon for his -testimony is not known. - -[197] Later, however, he adopted this idea. Croghan to Johnson, March -30, 1766, Vol. XII, No. 127. - -[198] Johnson to Lords of Trade, Jan. 31, 1766, N.Y. Col. Docs., VII, -809. When Croghan was preparing to go to the Illinois in 1766 in order -to pacify the Indians, Johnson wrote him as follows: "As soon as I hear -farther from the General I shall write you and send the Instructions -in which I shall insert an Article directing you to enquire into the -French bounds & Property at the Illinois. I have no objection to what -you propose on that subject there, and as the French are now said to be -retiring fast, you will have the better opportunity of making a good -Choice on which the value will chiefly depend." Johnson to Croghan, -Mar. 28, 1786, Johnson MSS, XII, 126. - -[199] Gage to Conway, Mar. 28, 1766, B. T. Papers, Vol. XX. Pa. His. -Soc. Lib. He explained further "that Lands should be granted without -delay, by any Person authorized properly to do it; but no Fees are to -be taken by the Person who grants, or by Secretarys, Clerks, Surveyors, -or other Persons whatever; that no large tracts should be given, but -the Lands granted in Farms, consisting of an Hundred & Fifty or Two -Hundred Acres of good Land, unless to Half Pay Officers, who might have -Four or Five Hundred Acres. People may be tempted on these Advantages -to transport themselves with a Year's Provisions, Seed, Corn and Tools -for Husbandry, down the Ohio. The Lands shall be held of the King on -condition of Military Service, & such other obligations as shall be -convenient." To anticipate somewhat, the details thus outlined by Gage -are in striking contrast to those proposed by the active promoters of -the colony. - -[200] Croghan to Johnson, Mar. 30, 1766. Johnson MSS, XII, No. 127. - -[201] Articles of Agreement, MS copy in Pa. His. Soc. Lib. The signers -of the original draught were: William Franklin, Sir William Johnson per -George Croghan, George Croghan, John Baynton, Samuel Wharton, George -Morgan, Joseph Wharton, Sr., Joseph Wharton, Joseph Hughes and Joseph -Galloway. Gage declined being concerned in the project, although his -attitude doubtless contributed something towards it. Johnson to Gov. -Franklin, June 20, 1766, MS letter in AM. Antiq. Soc. Lib. - -[202] William Franklin to B. Franklin, Apr. 30, 1766, Printed in -Bigelow's Life of Franklin, 538, "Inclosed is the proposals Drawn up -by governor franklin for yr honours perusal and such Amendments or -Alterations as you may judge necessary," Croghan to Johnson, March 30, -1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No, 127. - -[203] Articles of Agreement, Penn. Hist. Soc. Lib. This was a new -contribution to the original plans of Croghan, Johnson, and Gage. It -was probably Franklin's own suggestion, as we have seen that he himself -drew up the sketch. - -[204] Articles of Agreement. Croghan writing to Johnson said: "itt is -likewise preposed to aply for a Grant of 1200,000 Acres to the crown -in that Country and to take into this Grant two or three Gentlemen -of fortune and Influence in England and Governor franklin and those -other Gentlemen desire to know whome your honour would chouse to be -concerned, & that you wold write to them if you should nott name ye -whole you wold chouse they Designe to Save y. Nomination of such as you -dont to Dr. franklin who they prepose to send the proposals to he is -much attended to by ye Ministry and certainly can be of Service in this -affair." March 30, 1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No. 127. - -[205] Croghan to Johnson, March 30, 1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No. 127. -Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan to Johnson, June 6, 1766, Johnson MSS, -Vol. XII, 197. - -[206] Croghan to Johnson, Mar. 30, 1766. Johnson to Baynton, Wharton, -and Morgan, June 20, 1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No. 214. Johnson to -William Franklin, July 8, 1766, Johnson Papers, Am. Antiq. Soc. Lib. - -[207] Croghan to Johnson, Mar. 30, 1766. Johnson to William Franklin, -June 20, 1766, Johnson Papers, Am. Antiq. Soc. Lib. Johnson to B. W. & -M. June 20, 1766, Johnson MSS, XII, No. 204. - -[208] Johnson to Conway, July 10, 1766, B. T. Papers, Pa. Hist. Soc. -Lib. - -[209] See letters of Franklin to his son, in Franklin's Works, IV, -136-145. - -[210] _Brown, Hist. of Ill._, 212-213. - -[211] Can. Arch., _Report, 1907_, p 75. - -[212] Brown, _Hist. of Ill._, 213. - -[213] Can. Arch., _Report for 1907_, p 75. - -[214] Brown, _Hist. of Ill._, 213. - -[215] Ibid. - -[216] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18th, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I. -122. - -[217] Ibid. - -[218] Can. Arch., _Report for 1907_, p 86. - -[219] Butler, _Treaty Making Power_, I. - -[220] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 122. - -[221] Ibid. Farmer to Gage, Dec. 19, 1765, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20, Penn. -Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[222] Petition of inhabitants to Gage, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 122. The petition is signed by such prominent men as La Grange, -who acted for a time as civil judge under the British; Rocheblane, -who became the last British commandant in Illinois; Blouin, a wealthy -merchant and later a prominent advocate of a civil government, J. B. -Beanvais, Charleville and others. Gage granted their request without -waiting for an answer from London, thus indorsing the action of his -subordinate. Gage to Conway, Jan. 16, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 122. - -[223] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 122. - -[224] Sterling to Gage, Dec. 15, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 122. - -[225] Ibid. - -[226] Ibid. - -[227] Ibid. Cahokia Records, British Period. - -[228] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -Vol. 122, N. Y. Col. Docs. X, 1161. - -[229] Monette, in Hist. of the Valley of the Mississippi, I, 411, -says that "Capt. Stirling died in December, St. Ange returned to Fort -Chartres, and not long afterward Major Frazer, from Fort Pitt arrived -as commandant." Billou, in Annals of St. Louis, I, p 26, makes the -same assertion. The statement is an error, since Sterling served in -the Revolutionary war, and lived until 1808. Frazer never commanded at -Fort Chartres. See Winsor, Narr. & Crit. Hist. VI, 706. For a sketch -of Sterling's career see N. Y. Col. Docs. N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 706, -and Dic. of Nat. Biog. Vol. - -[230] For sketch of Farmer's life see N. Y. Col. Docs. N. Y. Col. -Docs., VII, 786. - -[231] Farmer to Gage, Dec. 15 & 19, 1765, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. Johnson to Lords of Trade, Mar. 22, 1766, N. Y. Col. -Docs. VII, 816. Gage to Conway, Mar. 28, 1766, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20, -Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. Campbell to Johnson, Mar. 29, 1766, Park. Coll., -Pontiac, Miscell. 1765-1778. Farmer to Gage, Mar. 11, 1766, Home -Office Papers, Vol. 20, No. 41, Pub. Rec. Office. In the letter just -cited Farmer blames Gov. Johnstone of West Florida for his long delay -in starting for the Illinois and for the scant supply of provisions -he carried. It appears that Farmer had planned to start early in the -spring of 1765, but he alleges that Johnstone questioned his right to -take provisions from the store, and in many other ways delayed his -departure for several weeks. - -[232] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, P.R. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. -122. - -[233] Letter of Eidington, Oct. 12, 1765, Catham Papers, Pub. Rec. -Office. - -[234] Ibid. - -[235] Ibid. - -[236] Ibid., Stirling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. -I., Vol. 122. - -[237] Sterling to Gage, Oct. 18, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., -122. - -[238] Letter of Eidington, Oct. 12, 1765, Catham Papers, Pub. Rec. -Office, Vol. 122. - -[239] Sterling to Gage, Dec. 15, 1765, Chatham Papers, Pub. Rec. -Office, Am. & W. I., Vol. 122. - -[240] Fraser to Gage, Dec. 16, 1765, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20, Pa. Hist. -Soc. Lib. Farmer alleged that St. Ange, who acted as commandant at St. -Louis after his retirement from Fort Chartres, instigated many of the -French to cross over, and that other residents of the Spanish side -endeavoured to frighten the inhabitants of Illinois by representing -Major Farmer as a rascal who would deprive them of their former -privileges. - -[241] Memorial of the inhabitants to Gage, Oct. 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, -Am. & W. I., Vol. 122. Fraser to Gage, Dec. 16, 1765, B. T. Papers, -Vol. XX, Pa. Hist. Soc. Lib. The movement of the inhabitants across the -river was considerable during the early years of the occupation. In the -summer of 1765, there were approximately 2000 whites on the English -side. Fraser to Gage, May 15, 1765, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. -122. Three years later, in 1768, the approximate number was 1000. See -for this, State of the Settlements in the Illinois Country, Pub. Rec. -Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 125. - -[242] Farmer to Gage, Dec. 16, 1765, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20, Pa. Hist. -Soc. Lib. Ibid., March 19, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. 122. - -[243] Ibid., Dec. 16 & 19, B. T. Papers, Vol. 20. Farmer had just -received word that Col. Reid was on his way to the Illinois from -Mobile, with about fifty men and just enough provisions for the -journey, he was depending upon receiving further supplies at Fort -Chartres. Ibid. - -[244] Farmer to Gage, Dec. 16 & 19, 1765, B. T. Papers Vol. XX, Pa. -Hist. Soc. Lib. - -[245] Gage to Conway, June 24, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, A. & W. I., Vol. -122. - -[246] Ibid., July 15, 1766. Baynton, Wharton, & Morgan to Gage, Aug. -10, 1766, Johnson MSS, Vol. XIII, No.30. - -[247] See supra ch. IV. - -[248] George Morgan's Letter Book. MS copy. - -[249] The exact date of the change is not known. The first document -that appears with Reid's signature as commandant is dated Sept. 8th. -Johnson MSS, Vol. XIII, No. 104. Major Farmer was expecting his -successor's arrival some time in July or August. Farmer to Gage, Mar. -9th, 1766, Pub. Rec. Office, Am. & W. I., Vol. 122. - - - - ┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ - │ Transcriber's Note: │ - │ │ - │ The original spelling, hyphenation, and punctuation has been │ - │ retained, with the exception of apparent typographical errors │ - │ which have been corrected without note. │ - │ │ - │ Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant │ - │ form was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed. │ - │ │ - │ Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained. │ - │ │ - │ Italicized words are surrounded by underline characters, │ - │ _like this_. │ - │ │ - │ Footnotes were moved to the end of the text and numbered in one │ - │ continuous sequence. │ - │ │ - │ Other notes and corrections: │ - │ p. 3: sparceness changed to sparseness. (The sparseness of its │ - │ population.) │ - │ p. 10: Boquet changed to Bouquet. (Previous to Bouquet’s second │ - │ campaign.) │ - │ p. 19: Missing footnote 56 tag added by the transcriber. │ - │ p. 20: Sinnot and Sinnot: Variants unchanged. │ - │ p. 21: sefuse changed to refuse. (St. Ange continued to refuse.) │ - │ p. 33: delinquenents unchanged. (A determination to delinquenents │ - │ to punishment.) │ - │ p. 42: Missing footnote 118 tag added by the transcriber. │ - │ p. 44: effect changed to affect. (Not only did it affect English │ - │ traders.) │ - │ p. 46: Missing footnote 133 tag added by the transcriber. │ - │ p. 55: Missing footnote 164 tag added by the transcriber. │ - │ p. 77: The wealth of colony changed to The wealth of the colony. │ - │ Variants unchanged: Ilinois and Illinois. │ - │ p. 38, footnote 109, page 58, footnote 170, and p. 76, footnote │ - │ 229: Incomplete references, page numbers missing. │ - └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ - - - - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BRITISH POLICY IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - |