Part 2

This letter, however, does not appear in Sparks’ work, who states in a foot-note that very few of the letters to Lund Washington existed. If this statement is true, it is possible that Washington did not preserve a copy of this particular letter; but the circumstance is a very remarkable one and not at all in keeping with his custom in regard to all his other business letters. If Washington did indeed fail to preserve copies of these letters it was also a very unfortunate circumstance, for he always wrote to Lund Washington, without reserve, upon the people and events of his day. That his habit in this regard was well known needs no stronger confirmation than the fact that the “Spurious Letters of Washington,” as they are called—which were first published as original drafts of letters said to have been found in part of Washington’s baggage and claimed to have been captured by the British—were all addressed to Lund Washington. The letter here presented shows that Washington did not always write in so guarded a manner as the Sparks version of his correspondence would lead us to believe. With this and other evidence we cannot escape the conclusion, either that Mr. Sparks was, notwithstanding his unique opportunities, very unfairly dealt with by Fate, in the scope and completeness of the correspondence entrusted to his care, or that he himself suppressed those letters which were not to his own individual taste.

Washington wrote as follows:

Camp at Cambridge,

_Aug 20 1775_

_Dear Lund_,

Your letter by Capt. Prince came to my hands last Night—I was glad to learn by it that all are well.—the account given of the behaviour of the Scotchmen at Port Tobacco & Piscataway surpriz’d & vexed me—Why did they Imbark in the cause?—what do they say for themselves?—what does others say of them?—are they admitted into Company?—or kicked out of it?—what does their Countrymen urge in justification of them?—They are fertile in invention, and will offer excuses where excuses can be made.—I cannot say but I am curious to learn the reasons why men who had subscribed & bound themselves to each other & their Country, to stand forth in defence of it, should lay down their arms the first moment they were called upon.

Although I never hear of the mill under the direction of Simpson without a degree of warmth & vexation at his extreme stupidity, yet, if you can spare money from other Purposes, I could wish to have it sent to him, that it may, if possible, be set a-going before the works get mixed and spoilt & my whole money perhaps totally lost—If I am really to loose Barron’s debt to me, it will be a pretty severe stroke upon the back of Adams, & the expence I am led into by that confounded fellow Simpson, and necessarily so in putting my Lands under the management of Cleveland.—

Spinning should go forward with all possible despatch, as we shall have nothing else to depend upon if these disputes continue another year—I can hardly think that Lord Dunmore can act so low, & unmanly a part, as to think of siezing Mrs. Washington by way of revenge upon me; however, as I suppose she is, before this time gone over to Mr. Calvert’s, & will soon after returning go down to New Kent, she will be out of his reach for 2 or 3 Months to come, in which time matters may, & probably will take such a turn as to render her removal either absolutely necessary, or quite useless—I am nevertheless exceedingly thankful to the Gentlemen of Alexandria for their friendly attention to this point & desire you will if there is any sort of reason to suspect a thing of this kind, provide a kitchen for her in Alexandria, or some other place of safety for her and my Papers.—

The People of this Government have obtained a character which they by no means deserved—their officers generally speaking are the most indifferent kind of People I ever saw.—I have already broke one Col^o and five Captains for cowardice, and for drawing more Pay & Provisions than they had Men in their companies.—there is two more Colonels now under arrest, & to be tried for the same offences—in short they are by no means such Troops, in any respect, as you are lead to believe of them from the acts which are published, but I need not make myself Enemies among them, by this declaration, although it is consistent with truth.—I dare say the Men would fight very well (if properly officered) although they are an exceedingly dirty & nasty people.[2]—had they been properly conducted at Bunker’s Hill (on the 17th of June) or those that were there properly supported, the regulars would have met with a shameful defeat; & a much more considerable loss than they did, which is now known to be exactly 1057 killed & wounded—it was for their behaviour on that occasion that the above officers were broke, for I never spared one that was accused of Cowardice but bro’t ’em to immediate Tryal.

Our Lines of Defence are now compleated as near so at least as can be—we now wish them to come out, as soon as they please, but they (that is the enemy) discover no Inclination to quit their own works of Defence; & as it is almost impossible for us to get to them, we do nothing but watch each other’s motions all day at the distance of about a mile; every now and then picking of a stragler when we can catch them without their Intrenchments; in return, they often attempt to cannonade our Lines to no other purpose than the waste of a considerable quantity of Powder to themselves which we should be very glad to get.—

What does Dr. Craik say to the behaviour of his countrymen, & Townspeople?—remember me kindly to him, & tell him that I should be very glad to see him here if there was anything worth his acceptance; but the Massachusetts people suffer nothing to go by them that they can lay hands upon.—

I wish the money could be had from Hill, or the Bills of Exchange (except Col. Fairfax’s, which ought to be sent to him immediately) turn’d into cash; you might then, I should think, be able to furnish Simpson with about £300; but you are to recollect that I have got Cleveland & the hired People with him to pay also.—I would not have you buy a single bushel of wheat till you can see with some kind of certainty what market the Flour is to go to—and if you cannot find sufficient Imployment in repairing the Mill works, and other things of this kind for Mr. Robers and Thomas Alferd, they must be closely Imployed in making cask or working at the Carpenter’s or other business—otherwise they must be discharged, for it is not reasonable, as all Mill business will probably be at an end for a while, that I am to pay them £100 a year to be Idle.—I should think Roberts himself must see, and be sensible of the reasonableness of this request, as I believe few Millers will find Imployment of our Ports are shut up, & the wheat kept in the straw, or otherwise for greater security.—

[Illustration:

Delaware Pilot’s “Broadside” ]

I will write to Mr. Milnor to forward you a good Country Boalting Cloth for Simpson—which endeavour to have contrived to him by the first conveyance.—I wish you would quicken Lanphire & Sears about the Dining Room Chimney Piece (to be executed as mentioned in one of my last Letters) as I could wish to have that end of the House compleatly finished before I return.—I wish you had done the end of the New Kitchen with rusticated Boards, however, as it is not, I would have the corners done so in the manner of our new Church, those two especially which Fronts the Quarter—What have you done with the Well?—is that walled up?—have you any acc^{ts} of the Painter?—how does he behave at Fredericksburg?—

I much approve of your Sowing Wheat in clear ground, although you should be late in doing it, & if for no other purpose than a Tryal—It is a growing I find, as well as a new practice, that of overseers keeping Horses, & for what purpose, unless it be to make fat Horses at my expence, I know not, as it is no saving of my own Horses—I do not like the custom, & wish you would break it—but do as you wish, as I cannot pretend to interfere at this distance;—

Remember me kindly to all the Neighbours who enquire after

Y^r affection^t—friend & Serv^t G^o Washington

WEEMS’ “LIFE OF WASHINGTON.”

Weems, the book peddler, who was not a New England man, wrote for his own ends, one of the most popular books in his so-called “Life of Washington.” It is said to have gone through some forty editions, Washington declined, and very naturally, to give him access to his papers; hence Weems was thrown entirely upon the resources of his imagination for the material which he needed. It was natural, therefore, and not difficult with so free a hand, to make up a good story. Hence the origin of the incident of the Cherry Tree and little hatchet, and other like truthful and popular anecdotes, which have become almost _historical_ in our day.

Excuse may be found for Weems on the score of his commercial instinct, the inaccessibility of facts and of his irresponsibility; but what can be said in mitigation of the offence of those New England historians, who have distorted facts, although they had access to all the material necessary to have enabled them to do full justice to others as well as to their own people? These men assumed, and upon them rested, the solemn responsibility of teachers and defenders of historical Truth!

The author here disclaims all prejudice and has no other motive than an earnest desire to establish the truth. This issue is made with the writers of the past and not with the country nor with the people of the present day.

The _true_ history of New England is sufficiently great to enable her to look fearlessly into the mirror of Truth, and she can well afford to cast off the meretricious glamour which has been thrown about her by those sons who “loved her not not wisely, but too well.”

NEW YORK CITY THOMAS ADDIS EMMET, M. D.

❧

EARLY MENTION OF EVENTS AND PLACES IN THE CHAMPLAIN VALLEY.

I

The origin of place-names, and the reason for them, are always matters of interest. Sometimes we may know both, often only one, and sometimes neither. Frequently a dead and forgotten old resident survives in the name of the hill he built his house on, or of the pond or brook by the side of which he lived, or in the property he once owned, or even in some event in which he was a prominent actor. Thus, the Brighams of Essex, in Brigham Hill; the Burlings, in Burlington; Count Fredenburgh, in Fredenburgh Falls and M. Chasy, nephew of Tracy, in Chazy, have a kind of immortality. The name of Samuel Champlain is preserved not only in the Lake which is called after him, but in the River Champlain, the Town Champlain, the Village Champlain; and who can give the number of Champlain hotels and streets, in the cities and towns and villages of the United States and of the British Provinces north of us? Also it is interesting that many localities in our very midst have had names in common use for a time, which, later, are lost in oblivion.

For years I have noted place-names and their reputed origin, both curious and suggestive, in our locality; and am constantly adding to them. Quite recently a man in our city spoke of Happy Hill, and another, in a neighboring town, of Pirate’s Hollow. Thus I added two to my list, and inquiry revealed their origin. I can give, approximately, the beginning of, and reason for, Providence Island, Gougeville, Molasses Corner, North and South Hero, Johnnycake Street and North Africa. Even The Devil’s Half Acre has quite a known history. But I greatly desire information concerning Whig Hollow, Cumberland Head, Beartown, Valcour, Suckertown, The Lost Nation, and many others.

On the western border of Lake Champlain, scarce five miles from its outlet into the Richelieu river, in the town of Champlain, opposite the lower end of Isle La Motte, is a famous headland called Point au Fer, freely rendered into English Point of Iron—Iron Point. But its common and only name now is the French Point au Fer. No iron is found there, and there is nothing suggestive of the hardness of iron in its shape, or in the ruggedness of its shores. Hadden, Riedesel, Phillips and many others called it Point au Fer only, and I think it proper to consider this to be its real name, in spite of the fact that on a map issued about 1748, from surveys made in 1732, it is called Point au Feu, or, in English, Point of Fire—Fire Point. It may be that the transcribers mistook the final r for u, an easy mistake when we consider the similarity between r and u as often found in old manuscripts.

I think I have chanced on the origin of and reason for this place-name. I will present my evidence to you and hope you will agree with me, or disagree, if you have reason to the contrary.

This evidence is found in and based upon, an account in volume 48, pages 99–107, of “The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents,” edited by Reuben G. Thwaites, secretary of the Wisconsin Historical Society. This volume, 48, came out in July, 1899. The original was the Relation of 1662–63, written by Father Jerome Lalemant, and contains a graphic account of a fierce fight between some Algonquins and a band of Iroquois returning from a raid on Montreal.

Father Lalemant says:

“The Algonquins living at Sillery, after passing the winter in innocence and piety, resolved, towards spring, to go and wage a petty warfare. They were only forty, but their courage exceeded their number. Arriving at the Richelieu Islands without discovering any foe, they entered the river of the same name and directed their course to Lake Champlain, where they lay in ambush. Scarcely had they arrived there when those victors who had dealt their blow at Montreal, and were conducting their poor Frenchmen in triumph, were discovered by our Algonquins, who followed them with their eyes and noted their camping spot. Our Christian soldiers, under cover of the night, stealthily advanced and surrounded the place where the enemy were sleeping, in readiness to attack them at the first dawn of day. But as it is very difficult to walk in the night time without making a noise, or by hitting some branch, one of the Iroquois chiefs was awakened in some way or other. He was a brave man named Garistatsia (“the Iron”), vigilant and greatly renowned for his exploits performed against us and against our savages. The chief of the Algonquins, perceiving that the leader of the Iroquois was this Garistatsia—or in French Le Fer, so famous and renowned by the many disasters that have so often made us mingle our tears with our blood, made straight at him and by a hatchet stroke on the head, forced Garistatsia to fall to the ground, where his courage forbade him to acknowledge himself vanquished, and he yielded the victory after losing his life. Ten of the enemy remained dead on the spot, while three were taken alive, and the rest escaped, completely covered with wounds.”

This was a terrific engagement, though short. It evidently occurred on the west shore of Lake Champlain, between a band of Iroquois raiders returning over land from Montreal and a band of Algonquins, who, coming up the Richelieu, had “scarcely arrived” at Lake Champlain. These latter proceeded to surround the Iroquois. How much more easily surrounded on a point than on a continuous shore! The leader of the Iroquois “was famous and renowned.” He had “so often made us” _i. e._ both French and Algonquins, “mingle our tears with our blood!” So well known was he that the leader of the Algonquins, even in the dark, “made straight at him”—in order to rid the country of this distinguished enemy.

Therefore, I think it not unreasonable to claim that this battle, in the year 1663, was fought on the cape on the west border of Lake Champlain opposite the lower portion of Isle La Motte, known now and for so many years as Point au Fer, and that the cape received its appellation from that of the mighty Iroquois chief killed there—“Garistatsia, or in French Le Fer.”

II

The matter of prehistoric occupation of the Valley of Lake Champlain has received considerable attention during the last twenty-five years. Before that time, historians would refer to Champlain’s vague statements concerning the enemies of his Algonquin allies residing around the mountains in the east and south, and then state that but few vestiges remained of ancient occupation. But later researches have revealed the fact that this valley was once quite thickly populated. I know of at least forty-five dwelling sites, the greater portion of which I have located and visited. The larger part of these are on, or near, the Lake itself; but there are, also, many on the rivers and smaller streams and lakes; and some at a distance from any even moderately large body of water. The evidence of former dwelling sites consists of stone implements and weapons, and chippings scattered over small areas—say of half an acre or more. One such site exists on the River Richelieu, in the Parish of St. Valentine, near Isle aux Noix, twelve miles below Rouses Point. From this place alone I have obtained several hundred stone implements and weapons, some of them very fine.

Another is at the mouth of the Big Chazy River, near Point au Fer. It was October 5, 1881, that I first discovered this dwelling site, and in two hours I picked up about thirty stone axes and many chipped flints; and had not the night come on, I should have obtained at least twice as many at that visit. To an ardent collector, so many things almost beseeching to be gathered furnished an experience not readily forgotten. I presume that any of you would have done as I did. You would have taken off your shoes and stockings, and found with your feet, stone axes in the clay mud of the bottom, and picked them out with your hands; and would have wished the sun to stand still at least an hour, in order that you might obtain more.

Another place is on a high sand plain in the town of Ausable, New York. Here the ground is white with quartzite chippings over many acres, though this locality has furnished but few perfect implements.

From Colchester Point upon the Ouinooski river, certainly as far as Williston, the soil abounds in celts, chippings and wrought flints. But to locate and describe all the known sites would require far too much time, and I presume the half of them have not been discovered.

However, in many particulars, the most important prehistoric dwelling place in our Valley is that on the shore of Cumberland Bay, partly within the present limits of the city of Plattsburgh. Here was a sand ridge a mile long, from twenty to forty rods wide, fifteen to twenty-five feet high, having a sluggish stream abounding in fish on its landward side, and the wide bay opening out into the broad lake, on the other. The greyish white sand between the pines on the ridge and the waters of the bay, was a conspicuous object for miles out on the lake. About thirty-five years ago some of the pines were cut off, and the wind made openings through and through the ridge at right angles to the axis of its length. Then it was seen that here was once a great village, covering the whole ridge. Below the old surfaces were vast quantities of flint chippings, arrow and spear points, axes, pottery, fire-places, kitchen middens, and other evidences of ancient occupation. From this site alone, I have secured fragments of hundreds of edge pieces of different jars of pottery, and thousands of wrought implements of stone.

In our early researches, where the sand had not been blown out down to the level of the lake, there were seen heaps of cobble stones, arranged in some order, each perhaps consisting of a bushel or more of sand stones that had been heated by fire. These heaps rested in sand and ashes blackened by charcoal, but never, in a single instance did they contain flints, wrought stones or pottery. In other words, these were not kitchen middens.

For years, I supposed this place to have been prehistoric, as it mostly was. But in 1885, the Prince Society of Boston, in its invaluable series of historical publications, printed “Radisson’s Voyages.” Now, Peter Esprit Radisson was a Frenchman of roving disposition, who came from France to Canada in 1651. He made several “voyages,” as he calls them, going through Lake Champlain to the Iroquois country; and again to Lake Huron and Lake Superior; and, I believe, overland to Hudson’s Bay, in his various journeyings. But he did what we wish more of those early adventurers had done. He left a written account of his experiences. This record was made partly in French and partly in English and is very full of interest. In the year 1652, he was out hunting on the St. Lawrence River, one day, was made prisoner and taken up the Richelieu, through Lake Champlain and thence to the country of the Iroquois. I quote from his “Relation of My Voyage being in Bondage in the hands of the Irokoits.” After being captured (and his captivity seems to have been a pleasant one from beginning to end), he says: “Midday wee came to the River of Richelieu, where we weare not farr gone, but met a new gang of their people in cottages” (village No. 1). After a day and a night, he continues: “Our journey was indifferent good without any delay, w’ch caused us to arrive in a good and pleasant harbour. It was on the side of the sand where our people had any paine scarce to errect their cottages, being that it was a place they had sejourned at before.” (Village No. 2). The next day, he says: “At 3 of the clock in the afternoon we came to a rappid streame, where we were forced to land and carry our Equipages and boats through a dangerous place. Wee had not any encounter that day. Att night where we found cottages ready made (village No. 3), there I cutt wood with all dilligence. The morning early following, we marched wth making great noise, or singing as accustomed. Sejourning awhile, we came to a lake 6 leagues wide, about it a very pleasant country, imbellished with great forests. * * * * We arrived to a fine sandy bancke, where not long before Cabbanes weare errected and places made where Prisoners weare tyed.” (Village No. 4.)