USA > Illinois > St Clair County > Cahokia > Cahokia records, 1778-1790 > Part 9
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68
xcii
ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS
urges them to join the expedition against Detroit, "which will win the confidence of the honorable Congress and convince the king of France of the real interest which you take in a cause for which he has already made great sacrifices and which will procure for you in a little while all imaginable assistance from him."1 That De la Balme deceived the French by promising them the assistance and co-operation of the king of France, and that his words led them to believe that the royal troops would soon be seen again on the banks of the Mississippi cannot be denied; but if he came in accordance with the plan of Washington and Lafayette, he was following his orders as far as it was possible under the very perplexing conditions which he found in the Illinois.
Although the French received him enthusiastically, their power of aiding the expedition was not great and it was only with a handful of men, about eighty French inhabitants and Indians,2 that De la Balme started for Detroit. The standard which waved over this little company was that of France.3 He successfully attacked the post at the Miami, but was in turn defeated and killed by the Indians.4 At the time of his departure for Detroit he had sent a detachment from Cahokia under Hamelin against St. Joseph, which succeeded in sacking that place but was overtaken by a body of merchants and Indians and defeated.5 Thus ended the attempt at arousing the Canadians. Before the arrival of De la Balme in the West, the policy of Washington and Luzerne had changed and they left their agent to effect what he could alone.
The death of De la Balme did not bring this interesting episode in the history of the Illinois to an end. The villagers of Cahokia had suffered a severe loss at St. Joseph, for all the members of their expedition were either killed or captured except three. The Cahokians, wishing for revenge, hurriedly raised a troop of twenty men and asked aid of the Spanish government, which throughout
1 Can. Archives, B., 184, vol. 2, p. 434. Translation by the editor.
2 LeGras to Clark, December 1, 1780, Dr. MSS., 50J75.
3 Papers of Old Cong., xlviii., 1; Menard Col., Tard. Papers, Memorial of Kaskaskians, to Governor of Virginia.
4 Can. Archives, B., 100, P. 486; Va. State Papers, i., 465.
5 Mich. Pio. and Hist. Col., xix., 591; Va. State Papers, i., 432.
xciii
INTRODUCTION
the year had made common cause with them in repelling and at- tacking the enemy, and which now sent thirty men to their assist- ance. With the addition of two hundred Indians' they marched in midwinter, within a month of their previous defeat, across Illinois, and in the first days of 1781 took and sacked St. Joseph, returning home immediately.2
The failure of De la Balme is not of much importance in our narrative, but the effect of his presence on the people of the Illinois was tremendous. His appeal to them as Frenchmen, their awakened pride in the name, the expectation of French inter- vention in their behalf, were all factors in the events which fol- lowed. From this time there is no mistaking their animosity towards the Virginians. Their eyes had been opened by the harsh treatment of the frontiersmen, but they had submissively accepted their fate without daring to do more than petition their oppressors. On account of the false hope aroused by De la Balme they now dared to adopt open measures, for was not their former king
1 McCarty to Slaughter, January 17, 1781, Va. State Papers, i., 465.
2 Mich. Pio. and Hist. Col., xix., 600. When the expedition returned the Spanish com- mandant at St. Louis sent a greatly exaggerated account of the campaign to the home govern- ment. In this he said that sixty-five militia men from St. Louis had marched, under the greatest difficulties, across the country and taken possession of an important British post and all the country north of the Illinois River in the name of the king. (The account was printed in the Madrid Gazette of March 12, 1782, and may be found in Sparks, Diplomatic Correspondence, iv., 425.) This immediately aroused anxiety in the minds of the American ministers in Europe. (See ref. to Diplom. Cor. above and Works of Franklin, Bigelow, ed., vii., 444.) That Spain desired to win the east bank of the Mississippi is unquestioned (See Doniol, Hist. de la Paticipation de la France, iii., 393 et seq.), and that she intended to make the utmost of this unimportant success at a minor British post is plain, but the motive for the expedition came from Cahokia and in assisting his neighbors in expeditions on the eastern bank, as in this case, the Spanish commandant was doing no more than he had done at least twice before within the past year. In taking possession of the territory north of the Illinois River, he was not encroaching upon the region occupied by the Virginians any more than did Galvez when he captured Mobile and Pensacola, for the limits of the county of Illinois extended only to the Illinois River.
The best account, because unbiased and given in an incidental way, is that of McCarty, who in writing the news of Cahokia, where he was, states the facts as I have given them above. Historians have, however, followed exclusively the Spanish account and have made more of the episode than it was worth, for its only importance was the use Spain may have made of it in her diplomacy, provided there is any basis for that suspicion. The most extended account based on the Spanish report will be found in Mason, Chapters from Illinois History, vi., 743; see also Winsor, Westward Movement, 189; Hart, Amer. Nation, ix., 286.
It is worth noticing that the story of the defeat of the Cahokians at the time of the De la Balme expedition and the subsequent victory with the assistance of the Spaniards was heard by John Reynolds from the village people, but the date of the two had been transferred to an earlier time, namely 1777 and 1778. The honor of the victory of the second attack, which, also, according to tradition was for revenge, was popularly ascribed to J. Bte. Mailhet of Peo- ria (Reynolds wrongly says Paulette) who must have been at Cahokia at the time, since the Peorians had been driven out of their village by the numerous British and Indian attacks in the previous summer. The facts of this tradition support McCarty's testimony. (Rey- nolds, Pioneer History.) Strangely enough Mason (Chapters from Illinois History, 275) accepted the date given by Reynolds and wrote an account of French attacks on British posts before the arrival of Clark.
xciv
ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS
interested in the fate of his distant and faithful followers? The citizens of all the villages united in a memorial to the governor of Virginia, in which they wrote that they had decided not to re- ceive any more troops in their villages, except those which should be sent by the king of France; the presence of the Virginians had brought them into war with the Indians who before had been friendly and they had suffered therefrom; they promised, however, to guard the frontiers of Virginia from attacks by the Indians.1 In each of the villages memorials were also drawn up to be sent to the French minister, Luzerne, in which were set forth with great detail the grievances which the inhabitants had suffered at the hands of the Virginians. These petitions, however, never reached their destination, since they fell into the hands of the British with the other papers of De la Balme.2
The best account of the changed attitude of the French is found in McCarty's journal. In the summer of 1780, he had been summoned with his troops to Fort Jefferson to give aid against a party of British and Indians attacking it. On his return to Kas- kaskia early in August he found that De la Balme had been in the village and that, "the people in General seem to be Changed towards us and Many things Said unfitting," and again, "as things are now the people in General are allienated and Changed from us."3 The short lived hope of the French did them little good. For a moment they were able to raise their heads like men, but with the defeat and death of their leader their hope was dashed to the ground and the weary wait for other means of relief began again; for, oppressed by the military and hearing nothing from Todd, they could only conclude that Virginia had withdrawn her support and that they were left to do for them- selves until some other power should take them under its pro- tection.4
1 Can. Archives, B., 184, vol. 2, p. 506.
2 The memorial from Cahokia is printed in this vol., p. 535; for that from Vincennes see Can. Archives, B., 184, vol. 12, p. 421. The petition from Kaskaskia, which would have been particularly valuable for the history of Clark's occupation of the village is not calendared in the Hald. Col. and bas probably been lost. A very brief memorial to Luzerne was sent by the Kaskaskians after the death of De la Balme and a copy of it is in the Menard Col., Tard. Papers.
3 See post, p. 620.
4 Va. State Papers, i., 382.
-
XCV
INTRODUCTION
During the fall the Americans carried out the plan which they had determined upon before the attack of the British and which subsequent events had postponed, namely, the partial evacuation of Illinois. At the time of the attack on Fort Jefferson the troops had been recalled from Vincennes. Montgomery after his return from the relief of the fort remained some time in Kaskaskia and on October 18th1 went down the river to New Orleans, leaving a bad name behind him, even among the Ameri- cans, on account of his extravagance and dishonesty. He did not add to his reputation by deserting his wife for "an infamous girl" whom he took with him.2
Captain Rogers, who was left by Montgomery in command of the few remaining troops at Kaskaskia,3 was to prove himself a worse tyrant to the French than his predecessor had been. Two other men had appeared in the Illinois in the spring or summer of this year whose names were also to become execrated, John Dodge and Thomas Bentley. John Dodge was born in Connec- ticut, had become a trader at Sandusky before the outbreak of the Revolution, and, since he showed his attachment to the cause of the colonists, was arrested by the British, who carried him to Detroit and later to Quebec, whence he escaped in 1779.4 In that year Washington recommended him to Congress as a man who would be useful in the West. He went to Virginia, won the friendship of Jefferson, and was appointed Indian agent.5
1 General Orders of Montgomery, Dr. MSS., 50J70.
2 Mason, John Todd Papers, 335. Montgomery's defence of his actions may be found in Mason, John Todd Papers, Chi. Hist. Soc.'s Collections, iv., 351 et seq. On April 23, 1782, he wrote a letter of justification to George Webb, in which he said: "Had I made a forton in the time people mout had Reason to Suspected me But to the Contreary I have spent one or at least my all But am in hopes to Be Eable to Live a poor and privet Life after wards it is now almost fore years That I have not Receive a shilling from Government Not Withstanding I advanced Every Shilling I had & straned my Credit till it Became Shred Bear Rather than draw Bills on the State." Copy from Va. State Lib.
Montgomery was born in Botetourt county, Va., about 1742. His use of English shows that his education was limited. He was one of the celebrated party of "long hunters" in 1771. His experience in Indian warfare had fitted him for such an undertaking as that by Clark against the Illinois. He was killed by the Indians in Kentucky in 1794. (English, Conquest of the Northwest, i., 137.)
3 Letter of Winston, Dr. MSS., 50J71.
4 Woodward, Dodge Genealogy; Dr. Notes, Trip 1860, 11J153; Dodge's memorial to Cong., January 25, 1779, Papers of Old Cong., xli., 2, 441.
5 Dr. MSS., 46J52 and 29J36. Dodge was one of the refugees from Canada and Nova Scotia who received compensation in land for their losses during the Revolutionary War. He must have died before 1800, since his heirs were granted 1280 acres of land in that year.
xcvi
ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS
The second, Thomas Bentley, had been well known in the village at an earlier period. On an accusation made by Roche- blave of intriguing with the Americans he had been arrested and sent to Quebec, where he remained until the spring of 1780, when he made his escape.1 He had asserted his innocence in several persuasive memorials and had convinced even Governor Haldimand of his good faith. As a further evidence of his allegiance to England he went to Virginia and by his intercession for British prisoners with the government gained for Governor Hamilton some mitigation to the harshness of his captivity and for Judge Dejean of Detroit, release on parole.2 Bentley's double dealing at this time is evident from his letters to the Americans and to the British. While he was writing to Clark concerning the activities of De la Balme and wishing the Americans success in their attack on the Indians, he was writing to the British officers that Illinois could be easily captured by a few hundred soldiers.3 In his deceit he was eminently successful, for Clark later wrote him a certificate of good character, in which he asserted that the latter had given great assistance to the cause;4 and the Governor of Canada was so persuaded of his honest motives that he thought it would be wise to allow Bentley to remain quietly in the Illinois, as he would be of great use there. On his return to Illinois, Bentley was firmly resolved to make the French pay for his cap- tivity, for he believed that they had all been in a plot with Rocheblave against him.
The operations of Bentley and Dodge, who formed a partner- ship for making the most out of the situation, began while Mont- gomery, who gave them countenance, commanded in the Illinois. They bought up the claims of the inhabitants against Virginia for trifling sums, in doing which it was suspected that they made
Amer. State Papers, Pub. Lands, i., 106. There are in existence two memorials to Congress narrating his earlier misfortunes. Washington Papers, xciii., 35; Papers of Old Congress, xli., 2, 441.
1 See supra, p. xxxV., n., 2.
2 Bentley to De Peyster July 28, 1780, Mich. Pio. and Hist. Col, xix., 598.
3 His most important letters are printed in Mich. Pio. and Hist. Col., xix. 548, 560. For his letter to Clark see Dr. MSS., 50151; Can. Archives, B., 185, vol. i, 58, 62.
4 Va. State Papers, ii., 153.
xcvii
INTRODUCTION
use of public funds, and their financial operations in purchasing supplies for the troops also aroused suspicion. Such conduct called forth a characteristic letter from McCarty to Todd. As McCarty was feeling at the time particularly angry with the officers of the Virginia line, because he had been arrested by Montgomery for bringing an accusation against Dodge,1 his testimony cannot be taken without reserve; but that there was some truth in what he wrote is abundantly proved by letters from Clark and others. The letter shows not only the situation brought about by the dealings of the two financiers but also the continued exactions of the troops and the effects of the visit of De la Balme. It is addressed to Todd. "When shall I begin to appolagize for the Different light and Oppinion, I saw and had of You when hear last Year, and now. the Spirit of a free subject that you inculcated thro' your better knowledge of things was hid to me. In short, Honour requires me to render You the Justice you de- sarve, and at the same time to inform you the reason of my altering my notions of things. I then thought the Troops hear would be duly supported by the State, and the legal expense for them paid to the people Justly. I had thought the Duty of an Officer who had any Command was to see Justice done his Soldiers, and that they had their Rights without wronging his Country. I then thought that it was also his Duty to fore see and use all manner of occonomie in Laying up provisions for these Soldiers, to carry on any Opperation that his supperiours should judge expedient to order him on, without any regard to private interests whatever, but for the Good of the State he served. I then never Imagined that an Agent would be sent hear to Trade in connec- tion with a Private Person to Purchase the Certificates from the people at such a rate which must appear scandalous & Dis- honorable to the State.
"To the contrary of all which I am now convinced by occular Demonstration: in short we are become the Hated Beasts of a whole people by Pressing horses, Boats &c &c, Killing cattle, &c &c, for which no valuable consideration is given : even many
1 See post, p. 621. For the charge that public funds were illegally used, see post, p. 481.
xcviii
ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS
not a certificate which is hear looked on as next to nothing."1
McCarty by this letter gave warning of his change of party alle- giance. He had up to this time sided with the military against the civil authority and the French. From now on he attempted to win the confidence of the latter, in the oppression of whom he had formerly taken active part. Both he and Winston advised the people to refuse all supplies to the troops and starve them out of the country. For this reason Winston also found his relations with the military even more strained than under the rule of Montgomery. He wrote to Todd that: "They Stretch greatly to bring the Country under the military rod and throw of the Civil Authority. So fond they are to be medling with what is not within their Power. . . . Since the arrival of this Captain Bentley, there has been nothing Butt discord and disunion in this place. . . he has left no stone unturned to Extinguish the laws of the State, and to revive the Heathen Law, being well accustomed to Bribes and Entertainments. Government ought to regulate the trade as there are many abuses Committed under Military sanction."2
It is unnecessary to give the details of the trying winter of 1780-1781, for it was but a repetition of the previous one. The inhabitants wrote that the government was like that of a town taken by assault. Captain Rogers, who was young and inex- perienced, was blinded by the advice of the crafty Dodge and Bentley.3 That the means they used to obtain provisions were cruel is proved by the piteous appeals of the inhabitants to the governor. That their methods were not always honest was firmly believed by many officers and by Clark himself. Captain Robert George in writing to Clark on October 24th after mentioning the almost starving condition of the troops, says that Montgomery told him that, "Capt. Dodge has purchased one Thousand bushells of corn and Ten Thousand lbs of Flour, which is all that is to show from a cargoe of Eleven Thousand hard dollars worth of Goods sent by Mr Pollock to You, together with
1 Va. State Papers, i., 379.
2 Winston to Todd, October 24, 1780, Va. State Papers, i., 380.
3 The court showed more spirit in opposing the soldiers. There are several interesting letters in regard to their exactions in the Menard Col., Tard. Papers.
xcix
INTRODUCTION
about five or six thousand Dollars worth from this place. . . . I have sent for all the State Horses at Kaskaskia, but it appears there is but few - what's gone with them God knows, but I be- lieve there will be a Very disagreeable accompt rendered to you of them as well as many other things when called for."' In March, 1781, Clark was thoroughly aroused by the complaints of the administration of the finances in his department, and in writing to Jefferson says: "I Received your dispatches by Capt. Sullivan. That part concerning the Bills countersd by Maj. Slaughter, and letters of advice, is something curious. It's surprising to me that Maj. Slaughter, as an Officer of the State, would suffer these persons to persevear in their villany, was he as he hints truly sensible of the principal that actuated them. You know my Sentiments Respecting sevrl persons in our Imploy. Those he accuses, are genly men of fair Character. I have long since determined to conduct myself with a particular Rigour towards every person under me. They shall feel the stings of Remorse, if capable, or the sweets of public applause, either as they demean themselves. . Those gentlemen Major Slaughter points at, with himself, may expect to undergo the strictest scrutiny in a short time, as Orders are prepared for that Purpose. Mr. Jno. Dodge & others, of the Illinois, also."2
While the officers were using their positions for private gain and reducing to abject poverty the French by their levies, the troops of Virginia were suffering the severest hardships. In August, 1781, Colonel Slaughter wrote from the Falls of the Ohio: "The situation of my little Corps at this place at present is truly deplorable. destitute of clothing, vituals & money, the Com- missaries have furnished them with little or no provisions these three months past nor dont give themselves the least concern about it." Montgomery wrote that at Fort Jefferson there was not a mouthful for the troops to eat, nor money to purchase any, and that the credit of the government was threadbare. On
1 Va. State Papers, i., 382. For other evidence of dishonesty see Slaughter's letter, January 17, 1781, Va. State Papers, i., 440. Jefferson was convinced of Dodge's dishonesty, Dr. MSS., 51J17. In the petitions of the Cahokians to Virginia it is stated that public supplies were used to buy in the drafts and other forms of credit, see this vol., p. 481.
2 Va. State Papers, i., 597.
C
ILLINOIS HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS
August 6, 1781, Captain Bailey wrote from Vincennes: "My men have been 15 days upon half allowance; there is plenty of provisions here but no credit. I cannot press, being the weakest party."1
The contest of Rogers, Dodge, and Bentley with the court was brought to a crisis at the end of January by the acts of the last. Bentley was inspired by his desire for revenge, and his malice is shown by a long letter which he addressed to, "The inhabitants particularly those who are not my friends," wherein he sets forth his grievances at length. There was little that he could say by way of accusation, so he had recourse to abusive language. The letter is too long to quote, but a few extracts will give an idea of its character. "I know that most of you are mortified at see- ing me succeed in surmounting the difficulties with which you together with that rascal Rocheblave, Cerré, and others have burdened me. I am persuaded that there is not one among you in this village who did not wish to crush me under the weight of my misfortunes. I know that it is a crime for a damned English- man to remain among you. The Irish suit you better. They are your equals in perfidy, lying, flattering, and drinking tafia. Some infamous vagabonds have had the audacity to demand an inspection of my books. Nothing but ignorance without parallel, joined with the most complete Irish imperti- nence could have thought of that. A man of the least honor would not have conceived such an idea.
"I am informed that the cause for which you came was con- cerning some tafia given to the negroes. On this subject I satisfy you on the honor of a man of integrity that it was not from me that they had it.
"I am informed that Lachance and Brazeau are getting together all the corn for M. Cerré. Why should not I have the same liberty, since perhaps I should give better merchandize and at a better bargain. The reason is that M. Cerré, concerning whom I will prove some day that he is a man without moral feeling, is a Frenchman and I am a damned Englishman."
1 These letters are printed in Va. State Papers, ii., 306, 313, 338.
ci
INTRODUCTION
A suit brought by Bentley against Richard McCarty and Michel Perrault was begun in the court of November, 1780; but the court refused Bentley any recognition until he had taken the oath of fidelity to the United States and Virginia. In the January court Bentley appeared with two Americans and said he was ready to take the oath. This the justices tendered him in the French language, which both he and his companions understood ; but Bentley refused to take it, claiming that it was the oath of office that they were offering him. He immediately left the court and soon after returned saying that he had made oath before Captain Rogers. The court, however, stood firm in re- gard to its rights.
Rogers took up the matter and wrote to the court that he was surprised at their audacity in not recognizing his certificate given to Bentley. "It seems to me that Mr. Bentley has the same right to justice as you yourselves and you can be assured that I can give reasons and proofs to impartial justices of his conduct which will make him appear perhaps a better friend of the state than you, since your court appears to be one for injustice and not for justice. And should you dare to refuse my certificate in the case of the oath of fidelity, I will take it on myself to set your court aside and become responsible for the consequences. You have only to consider and render justice or I will do what is mentioned above."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.