USA > Wisconsin > Richland County > History of Crawford and Richland counties, Wisconsin > Part 40
USA > Wisconsin > Crawford County > History of Crawford and Richland counties, Wisconsin > Part 40
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 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161 | Part 162 | Part 163 | Part 164 | Part 165 | Part 166 | Part 167 | Part 168 | Part 169 | Part 170 | Part 171 | Part 172 | Part 173 | Part 174 | Part 175 | Part 176 | Part 177 | Part 178 | Part 179 | Part 180 | Part 181 | Part 182 | Part 183 | Part 184 | Part 185
It became manifest, therefore, immediately after the commissioners were possessed of the report of the agent, that whatever claim the people of Prairie des Chiens might have for a confirmation of their land titles, must be founded upon proof of continued possession since 1796- a basis sufficiently broad to have comprehended perhaps all their claims, but for the changes which have occurred within a few years among them, and the interrruptions and occasional evictions from their possessions consequent upon the establishment there, since the late war, of bodies of American troops.
Such interruptions and evictions, though fre- quent since the period last referred to, seem never, among the French population, to have excited a spirit of resistance, but to have been submitted to in silence. Since their ancestors were cut off by the treaty which gave the Canadas to the English, from all intercourse with their parent country, the people, both at Green Bay and Prairie des Chiens, have been left, nntil within a few years, quite isolated- almost without any government but their own.
And although the present population of these settlements are natives of the countries which they inhabit, and consequently are by birth citizens of the United States, yet, until within a few years, they had apparently, as little connec- tion with its government as their ancestors had with that of the British. Ignorance of their civil rights, carelessness of their land titles, do- cility, habitual hospitality, cheerful submission to the requirements of any government which may be set over them, are their universal char- acteristics. With those who know them, their quiet surrender of their fields and houses upon the demand of those who come ostensibly clothed with authority, would constitute no evidence of the illegality of their titles, or of the weakness of their claims.
A few additional remarks, in conclusion, mihgt seem sufficient to satisfy the requisition of the law, and to explain adequately the grounds of the decisions the commissioners have made. A circumstance has occurred, however, which seems to call for a more detailed exposition of their views. After [the] agent [Isaac Lee] had returned from Green Bay and Prairie des Chiens, and when it seemed too late to obtain rebutting or further testimony, a caveat was filed with the commissioners, at the instance of the superintendent of Indian trade, by John W. Johnson, Esq., Indian factor, against the claim to village lot No. 14, preferred by the American Fur Company. The principles upon which that caveat is founded, and by which it is endeavored to be supported, apply with equal force to all the other land claims at Prairie des Chiens. The objections against the claim, and the doc- uments adduced in its support, consist in this : that the settlement at Prairie des Chiens is of recent origin ; that its residents have intruded upon the public land in violation of the laws of the United States, and that, in truth, the Indian title to the country in question has not been ex- tingnished ; objections which, if sustained in one case, must conclude all cases there. Upon a critical examination of this matter, so unex-
275
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
pectedly and so recently presented to them, the commissioners have not been able to discover anything in the protest of the United States' Indian factor, in the documents he has adduced, nor in his own fair and candid statement, which could sanction a doubt as to the propriety of confirming the claim set up by the American Fur Company.
It appears to have been in the spring of 1673, that Pierre [Pere] Marquette and Mons. [Louis] Joliet took their departure from the French establishment at Green bay, on a voyage of discovery up the Fox river and down the Onis- consin [Wisconsin), to the Mississippi. This channel of communication between the great lakes and the Mississippi, from about that period, had attracted a considerable portion of public attention. The French voyagers con- tinued afterwards generally to take that route ; their Indian traders most usually did, and it is the same channel through which [Jonathan] Carver also penetrated into the Mississippi country, in 1766.
Although the commissioners have not, on this head, been able in so short a time to procure that ample and certain information which is desirable, yet it is believed that not very many years after its first discovery, in 1673, by the French, a permanent establishment was made by them at Prairie des Chiens. Vestiges of an old and strong French fort are still discernable there, although it is stated to have been de- stroyed so early as in the first years of the Revolutionary War.
When, in 1805, the late Gen. Pike was on his voyage up the Mississippi, he computed the fixed white population of the place, in the ab- sence of the traders and those connected with them, at 370, and the total number of them at from 500 to 600. Mr. Schoolcraft, in 1820, es- timates the population at 500. No evidence can be obtained from the traditionary history of the country, that, at any one period, that settle- ment has received, by emigration, any sudden and large augmentation in the number of its in-
habitants. It has never been characteristic of the French Canadian settlements to increase rapidly; and it is considered a fair inference, from all that can be learned on the subject, that, for a long and an indefinite time, its num- bers have been considerable, and increasing only at a tardy pace. This consideration is sup- posed to be eminently corroborative of the po- sition the commissioners have assumed of the antiquity of this settlement.
With what propriety the inhabitants of Prai- rie des Chiens, who were born there, and whose ancestors have for more than a century resided there, may be said to have "taken possession of the public lands in violation of the laws ;" - how they may be said to be "intruders" who, and whose ancestors, through so many political changes, have, with the assent, expressed or im- plied, of each successive sovereignty, continued to inhabit the country which gave them birth, it is hard to imagine.
It has been urged against them that their only right in the soil which they occupy consists in the permission accorded them by the Indians to remain there. Surrounded, as that settlement always has been, by numerous hordes of fero- cious savages, quite well disposed at all times to cause their power to be felt, it may perhaps be emphatically said (especially since the power of the French government here was over- thrown) that its inhabitants have occupied their lands "by permission of the Indians." Left with none to defend them, they must have accomodated themselves to their humors: it has from necessity resulted that they have been compelled to submit to their commands and however reluctantly to subserve perhaps often their vindictive views. But it is not considered that anything in their history, in such respects, detracts from the force of their present claims.
The commissioners have not had access to any public archives by which to ascertain with positive certainty, whether either the French or English government ever effected a formal ex- tingnishment of Indian title at the mouth of
276
IHISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
-
the Onisconsin [Wisconsin]; yet the same obser- vation, with the same truth may be made in re- lation to the land now covered by the city of Detroit. It is believed that the French govern- ment particularly, was not accustomed to hold formal treaties for such purposes with the In- dians, And when lands have been anciently procured from them, either in virtue of the as- sumed right of conquest or by purchase, evi- dence of such acquisition is rather to be sought for in the traditionary history of the country, or in the casual and seanty relations of travel- ers, than among collections of State papers. Tradition does recognize the faet of the ex- tinguishment of the Indian title at Prairie des Chiens by the old French government before its surrender to the English. And by the same species of testimony, more positive because more recent, it is established also that in the year 1781, Patrick Sinclair, Lient. Gov., in the province of Upper Canada, while the English government obtained over this country, made a formal purchase from the Indians of the lands comprehending the settlement of Prairie des Chiens. In Pike's Journal, allusion is made to the last mentioned purchase. [Pike's Journal, Appendix to Part I, Page 47]. The agent [Isaac Lee] also took down some testimony con- cerning the same facts, which may be found in the subjoined abstracts.
Whatever purchases may thus have been made by the French or British anthorities, [they] have since been sanctioned by the treaty of St. Louis, holden on the 3d of June, 1816 [ be- tween the United States and that portion of the Winnebagoes residing on the Wisconsin river]; and by another treaty (see aets of the 2d session of the 14th Congress pp.307-309),concluded also at St. Louis, on the 24th of August of the same year. It is provided (Art. 2) that the United States relinquish to the tribes with whom that treaty was holden a certain tract of country lying north of a west line from the south bend of Lake Michigan, "excepting out of said relin- qnishment a tract three leagues square at
the mouth of the Oniscon-in [Wisconsin], in- cluding both banks," etc .; thus giving additional sanction to the allegation of a previous acqusi- tion of the country comprehending the Prairie des Chiens settlement. For it will not escape observation, upon a reference to the treaty of the 3d of November, 1804 (U. S. Laws, Vol. 1 pp.428), that the last mentioned treaty does not contain a cession of the tract thus excepted by the United States from their relinquishment. The real object of the clanse alluded to in the treaty of the 3d of November, it is apprehended, was to enable the United States, in its election, to erect a fort on the west bank of the Mis- sissippi, where the Indian title had not yet been extinguished, and where a more eligible site, it was supposed, could be selected.
If further evidence were necessary on this head, it might be found perhaps in the provis- ions of the 4th article of the treaty of Green- ville. The settlement of Prairie des Chiens lies "east of the Mississippi: it is "west" from Detroit. It was certainly "in the possession of the French people," who, or whose children still inhabit it. It is believed to be comprehended within both the words and the spirit of the pro- visions of the 3d and 4th articles of that treaty.
After all, it is not deemed important (except so far as it may seem to strengthen the equity of the claimants), to establish the proposition of an early extinguishment of the Indian title. There can be no doubt but that the Indian title is now extinguished. It would be hardly ad- missable to suppose that the American govern- ment have been themselves guilty of an act of oppressive usurpation and violence; and yet, it cannot otherwise be if the Indian title be not extinguished-for they have erected forts and established garrisons there [at Prairie des Chiens]. It would equally violate every prin- ciple of decorum for the commissioners to sup- pose that they had no power, and that the peo- ple of Prairie des Chiens had no right in re- lation to this matter, when the law of May 11, 1820, under which they act, expressly extends
1
277
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
to that people all the benefits and all the rights which, in virtue of former acts of Con- gress, the people residing within the Detroit land district heretofore possessed in relation to their land titles; and also imperatively re- quires of the commissioners that they give effect to that act.
The act of the 3d of March, 1807, vested in those for whose benefit it was passed, a right to be confirmed in their claims upon the exhi- bition of proof of continued possession from July 1, 1496, to March 3, 1807, inclusive. The extension to the people of Green Bay and Prairie des Chiens of the provisions of that act, it is presumed, conferred upon them upon the exhibition of like proof, a like right. Proof of this tenor has been adduced by John Jacob Astor, Ramsey Crooks and Robert Stewart, co- partners under the firm [name] of "The Ameri- can Fur Company," formerly styled "The Southwest Company," as well as by others whose claims they have confirmed; and the commis- sioners have not felt themselves ju-tified in adopting any course of reasoning which would frustrate the object of the law from which they derive all the power they have possessed.
A majority of the commissioners have felt obliged, nevertheless, to withhold from many of the claims the sanction of their confirmation; not because those claims were less equitable, but because the proof addneed of occupancy. possession and improvement did not reach far enough back; they considered that the posses- sion, etc., contemplated by the law, was an in- dividual and exclusive possession from July, 1796, to March, 1807. The fact in relation to the claims not confirmed seems to have been that the lands so claimed had been immemori- ally occupied by the villagers in common, or as a common; and that they had not been individu- ally and exclusively appropriated until after July, 1796.
As no dissent on the part of the villagers was at any time expressed or rather as none was proved, or attempted to be proved, one of the
commissioners was willing to deduce from cir- cumstances appearing, a presumption of assent, equivalent to a formal conveyance. Upon such hypothesis, the present claimants combining their own exclusive possession with the ante- cedent occupancy of the villagers in common, under whom they might be considered to claim, would be respectively entitled, under the law, to confirmations; but a majority of the com- missioners believing that such construction was at least obnoxious to much doubt felt obliged reluctantly to reject it. and, without further dif- ference of opinion, they all resolved to present with these cases to the revising power, their re- speetful and most earnest petition in behalf of the unsuccessful claimants, that their claims may be confirmed. Although some of these claimants have been in the exclusive occupancy of their possessions but for a very short space of time, yet their claims are considered not the less meritorious; for those who have thus re- mained in possession for the shortest period would seem to have been removed from their former and older possessions because those possessions were dermed necessary for the con- venience of the troops by whose permission they have located themselves on the tracts now claimed. *
All of which is respectfully submitted, WILLIAM WOODBRIDGE,
Secretary of Michigan.
HENRY B. BREVOORT, Register Land Office, Detroit.
I. KEARSLEY, Receiver Land Office, Detroit.
SURVEY OF LUCIUS LYON, UNITED STATES DEPUTY SURVEYOR, 1825.
In the "Field Notes, etc., of the survey of private land claims at Prairie du Chien ; the whole male in July and Angu-t, 1824, by Lu- cius Lyon, deputy surveyor," there is a record of the survey of the following claims:
Heirs of James Aird.
1
Charles Menard do 2
Joseph Rolette. do
278
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
Joseph Rolette.
do
4
*Not confirmed by the commissioners in 1820 .- ED.
*Not confirmed, in 1820 .- ED.
E
Jean M. Querie. do
do
17
Augustin Hebert [ Augustus Hebert, as written by Isaac Lee]
do
16
Charles Lapointe. do
19
John Baptiste Ouilmette [Jean Bt. Al- bert, as written by Isaac Lee]. do
17
Heirs of James Aird*
do
18
Joseph Rolette *.
do
19
Nicholas Boilvin. Lot No. 13
American Fur Company do
14
Michael Brisbois. do
15
Francois Bouthellier do
16
Joseph Rolette
do
17
Heirs of James Aird
do
18
IIebert, ]*
do
23
Marshal Mann. do
19
James McFarlane* do
24
Charles Lapointe do
20
Antoine Lachapelle
do
25
Joseph Rolettle
do
21
Julian Lariviere
do
26
Charles Lapointe. do
20
John Simpson* do
27
Joseph Rolette*
do
28
Andree Bazin [Andrew Basiu, as writ- ten by Isaac Lee]. đo
29
Pierre Lariviere. do
30
Julian Lariviere.
do
31
Jean M. Querie [Jean Marie Quere, as written by Lee]
do
32
Charles Lapointe*
do
33
Pierre Lessard *.
do
34
Strange Powers [Poze]*
do
35
Francois Lapointe, Sr .*
do
36
Francois Lapointe, Jr .*
do
37
Michael Lapointe* du
38
Pierre Lessard* do
39
Therese Lapointe*
do
40
Charles Lapointe*
do
41
Joicham Lamierre [ Joseph Lemrie as
written by Lee]t
do
42
Thomas McNair* do
43
Phelix Mercer [or Mercier]
do
5
Heirs of Claude Gagnier* do 70
Jean Fisher [Rolette].
do
6
SURVEY OF UPPER VILLAGE LOTS.
Michael Brisbois. Lot No. 1
Dennis Courtois
do
8
Francois Vertefeuille do
4
John Simpson.
do
9
Augustin Hebert do
6
Benjamin Cadotte.
do
11
Michael Brisbois.
do
12
Heirs of Claude Gagnier.
do
13
Andrew Bazin. Lot No. 13
Strange Powers
do
14
viene, or Chenneviere, as written by Isaac Lee] do
14
Heirs of James Aird.
do
15
Pierre Lessard.
Francois Lapointe
do
18
Heirs of John Campbell.
do
20
Francois Vertefeuille*
do
21
Augustin lebert *.
do
Heirs of Pierre Jandron [or Jaudron,
claimed in 1820, by Augustus
Barth. Monplasir. do
20
E
[Concerning the main village lots numbered by the agent, in 1820, from I to 12 inclusive, Mr. Lyon, the deputy United States surveyor, in 1828, says:]
"The ground where all the Main Village lots up to No. 13 were situated, is now, and has been for several. years, occupied for military pur- poses. Other lots situated in the lower part of the village, were designated by the command- ing officer, and taken possession of by the in- habitants, in lieu of the lots thus occupied, but these lots have not been confirmed." [The sufferers by this were Michael Brisbois, Nich-
*In 1820, not confirmed .- ED.
+Surveyed in 1828, but not marked "confirmed."-ED.
5
Joseph Rolette
do
10
Joseph Rivard
do
-7
:
VILLAGE LOTS IN ST. FRIOL [FERIOLE].
Francis Chainvent [Francois Cheune-
Francois Provost. do
MAIN VILLAGE LOTS.
Joseph Rolette do
21
ITEMS FROM LYON'S "FIELD NOTES," 1828.
[1]
Magdaline Gouthrie [Madeline Gouth- ier or Magdaline Gauthier] do
Alexander Dumont do
15
16
279
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
olas Boilvin, La Frombois, John Babtiste Coron, Jean Fisher Rolette and Wilfred Owens].
"The whole island formed by the slough or Marias de St Friol [Feriole] is subject to inun- dation. About two months ago the water was of sufficient depth for steamboats to pass in any direction over the island. The fences were swept away; the fort, was, for a time, abandoned by the troops; and the inhabitants were com- pelled to retreat across the slough, on to the prairie near the bluffs: retire to the lofts of the houses, or live in boats and on rafts."
[HI.]
"The surveyed village lots are level and ele- vated about ten feet above low water. There are houses and other buildings on all of them except No. 16. Several mounds of a character already described are also scattered over the island."-Field notes of Lucius Lyon, United States deputy surveyor, July, 1828.
[IV.]
"Marais is the appellation which the French apply to designate a marsh, fen, bog or swamp. The word is adopted and used in the same sense by the English on the lakes and Mississippi."
[V.]
"From the mean of a series of ten days' ob- servation of the meridian altitude of the sun, Mars, and one of the fixed stars, the latitude of Fort Crawford appears to be 43 deg. 5 min. This, I believe, is somewhat less than the obser- vation of Prof. Douglas and Maj. Long."
[VI.]
"This farm [Farm lot No. 7, confirmed to the heirs of James Aird], by the description appears
to be bounded on the Mississppi; but on account of the high water, it now, and has been for sev- eral months quite impossible to determine precisely where the bank of the river is and the line is run direct to the place of beginning. The land can be of no value should there be any cut off."
[VII.]
" There appears to have been a mistake in en- tering this claim [ Farm lot No. 37, confirmed to Francois Lapointe, Jr.] The farm occupied is nearly twice the width mentioned in the claim."
[VIII.]
"This claim [Farm lot No. 42] by the record of the commissioners does not appear to have been confirmed; but, as there was reason to think it had been omitted ia the list through mistake, the description was inserted and I have made a survey accordingly, but have since learned that it was not occupied in 1802 [1820] nor any time previous, consequently could not have been recommended for confirmation by the commissioners."
[IX.]
"I have surveyed this elaim [Farm lot No. 43] agreeably to the confirmation by the commis- sioners, extending from the bluffs toward the Mississippi, but have no doubt from the coneur- rent testimony of the owner and every other person on the prairie, that it ought to have been in a contrary direction, up the coulee. The house and improvements on which the claim is founded are there, and it was expected the claim would cover them; but by some mistake, or design of the person who was entrusted with making out the description, it does not."
280
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
CHAPTER X.
FIRST SETTLEMENT OF THE COUNTY.
To three Canadians of French descent be- longs the honor of being the first settlers in what is now Crawford county. Their names were Basil Giard, Pierre Antaya and Augustin Ange. The year of their arrival on the "Prai- rie des Chiens," was 1781. Soon after them eame Michael Brisbois Pierre La Pointe took up his residence on the Prairie the next year- 1782. These five men may fairly be considered the pioneers par excellence of Crawford county. That posterity should desire to know more of them than merely their names, who can wonder?
OF THE FIRST FIVE SETTLERS.
Of Basil Giard there is but little to record He did not figure in public affairs. lle had a Spanish claim of three miles square allowed him by the United States, where McGregor, lowa, is situated. He was a Canadian trader. HIe died in Prairie du Chien in 1819, at about seventy years of age. He left quite a family by a Sac woman. Some of his grand-children are yet living in the county.
Pierre Antaya was, as already mentioned, a native of Canada. He was a farmer. His wife had some Fox Indian blood in her veins. They raised a large family, mostly girls. Antaya died soon after the peace of 1815, between the United States and Great Britain.
Augustin Ange first came west as a voyageur but in time became a trader. He finally went among the Sioux of the Prairie. on the Missouri, to trade. Ile attended the Indian treaty at Prairie du Chien, in 1825, but returned after the treaty to his home on the upper Missouri,
where he subsequently died, and where he left a family.
Michael Brisbois was born at Maska, below Montreal, in 1760. His grandfather emigrated from Normandy. His parents were Joseph and Marguerite Brisbois. In 1775, Michael was a student in a college at Quebec. In 1779 he was in Mackinaw. Ile reached the "Prairie des Chiens" in 1781, probably very soon after the arrival of Giard, Antaya and Ange.
About the year 1785, Brisbois married a fair and handsome Winnebago woman. By this marriage he had three children-one was a danghter, Angellic ; the others were boys, Michael and Antoine. On the 8th of August 1796, he was again married, this time at Maek- inaw, to Domitelle Gautier de Verville, gener- ally called Madelaine, daughter of Charles Gau- tier de Verville. Her mother, wife of De Ver- ville, was, before her marriage, Madelaine Chevalier. The result of the marriage of Michael Brisbois to Domitelle Gautier de Verville, was a family of ten children; one of whom-B. W. Brisbois-is still a resident of Crawford county. The father died, in 1837 and is buried on the bluff overlooking the prairie.
Pierre LaPointe, as we have seen, came to the "Prairie des Chiens" in 1782. Ile, too, was a native of Canada. Ile was well educated and well informed. Ile was one of the best of Indian interpreters, and his services were much in quest by the traders. In 1817 he was in the employ of Joseph Brisbois, at Bad Ax. He died three or four years later, a little past sev- enty years of age. His wife was a sister of
281
HISTORY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY.
the Sioux chief, Wabashaw. They raised a family. La Pointe was a sensible, good man, and servicable to the pioneer settlement in Crawford county and to the Indians.
NAMES OF EARLY SETTLERS.
Of those who followed the five Canadians just mentioned, within a few years, and settled at the Prairie, there were : Jean Marie Cardinal, Claude Gagnier, Antoine Brisbois, Marie Sou- ligne, Dennis Courtois, Pierre Lariviere, Jean Marie Courville, Joseph Rolette, Patage La- pierre, Nicholas Colas, Pierre Lafleur, Francois LaRoche, Francois Bellard, John Campbell, Jean Marie Guere, Nicholas Boilvin, Antoine Sicoer, Francois Bonthellier, Augustus Mason, Joseph Laplante, Francois Lavigne, Peter An- tega, Angustin Hebert, Benjamin Cadotte, Francois Vertefeuille, James Frazier, Pierre Jandron, John Simpson, M. St. Condone, Henry Monroe Fisher, Francois Provost, Robert Dixon, Joseph Senie, Joseph Crele, John Stork, Andre Todd, Michael La Bothe, Jean Baptiste Fari- bault, Francois Rocker, Jean Baptiste Barthe- lette, James Vernier, Charles Lapointe, Fran- cois Lapointe, and a brother of the two last named ; also, one Michael Lapointe.
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.