In 1752 fowls were selling in New Orleans at from 30 to 35 sols each, spring chickens at 25 sols, and turkeys at from 7 livres, ten sols to ten livres. In season much game was to be had at very low prices. Throughout the year it was possible to procure fish which sold at the same rate per pound as beef.^

i/i. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxxiii, fols. 153-156, 167-168; vol. xxxiv, fol. 294. * Ibid., vol. XXXV fols. 26, 330-331. ' Ihid., vol. xxxvi, fol. 334.

By 1762 the prices of meat in New Orleans had advanced considerably. Turkeys, weighing from 40 to 50 pounds, were selling for 45 livres; capons, for 17 livres, ten sols; fowls, weighing ten pounds, 12 livres, ten sols; spring chickens, 7 livres, ten sols, each; ducks the same as fowls; a pair of pigeons, five livres; a quarter of venison, 50 livres; mutton, weighing 80 to 100 pounds, 90 livres; and beef two livres, ten sols a pound.^ After 1762 there are no further reports made concerning the meat trade of Louisiana while under French control.

Lard, tallow, olive oil, bear's oil, butter, eggs, cheese and milk at an early date were bought and sold in Louisiana. The first named article was brought from France as well as made in the province itself. In spite of these two sources there was often a great shortage.^ In 1708 the settlers on the Gulf coast agreed to supply the garrison with this commodity at nine sols a pound, half payable in cash, the remainder in merchandise.' Up to 1710 the amount thus supplied was 180 quintals, 99 pounds.* In 1714 it was selling for 15 livres a quintal," with the domestic product bringing at the same time, six sols a pound." In 1725 the retail \ price for fresh lard was fixed by the superior council at 12 sols a pound.' The same body, in 1728, adjusted the weights for this product at 360 pounds for a hogshead, 240 \ pounds for a barrel, 180 pounds for a quintal and 90 pounds for an " ancre." * By 1735 the price of both French and

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xliii, fol. 122.

« Ihid., vol. iii, fols. 245-248; vol. xix, fol. 19.

» Ibid., vol. ii, fols. 237-248.

• Supra, p. 250.

» A. N., C. Sir. Ci», vol. iii, fols. 287-309-

• Ibid., vol. XX, fols. 250, 251.

' Ibid., Sir. A, vol. xxiii, July 24, 1725.

• Ibid., Sir. F», vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M., May 7, 1728.

domestic lard had fallen to six sols a pound/ but in 1747 I it advanced to ten sols.^ The stress of war by 1762 made r it retail at New Orleans at seven livres, ten sols a pound.^ j

Tallow had been put upon the market as early as 1720 ^ by the hunters from the Arkansas district.* It was widely used by both the French and Indians for illuminating purposes and by the former was sometimes mixed with myrtle-wax in making candles/ In some measure the myrtle-wax supplanted tallow because its harvest came at a time when there was little to be done on the plantations. It was firmer also in a warm climate like that of Louisiana. Moreover it gave a clearer light. In 1747, the wax sold at the capital at fifteen sols a pound and it was believed that the best grade would soon bring from eighteen to twenty sols. The amount put upon the market increased each year and in 1752 one , planter alone produced 6,000 pounds. A number of other | persons was producing it also but in smaller amounts.* In / 1754 the entire output of this commodity and that of bear's ' oil was valued at 25,000 livres annually.^

Before 1719 olive oil had had some sale in the province. On April 25, 1719, the Company fixed the price at which it should be sold at twelve reaux, one livre, ten sols a pot, payable in silver.* Notwithstanding the adjustment of the rate, olive oil advanced and in 1726 was reduced from

1 A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. xx, fol. 250; vol. xxi, fol. 273; Ser. B, voL Ixiv, fol. 518. ' Ibid., Ser. O^, vol. xxxi, fol. 127. ' Ibid., vol. xliii, fol. 122.

* Le Page du Pratz, vol. i, p. 150.

^ A. N., C, Sir. CIS, y^i xv, fol. 35.

* Ibid., vol. xxxiii, fol. 169.

' Ibid., vol. xxxviii, fols. 265.

* Ibid., vol. V, fol. 332. 1 ;

forty to twenty-five sols a pot.^ When weights and measures were standardized in 1728 a hogshead of oHve oil was henceforth to contain 100 pots; a " quart ", forty-five pots; and an " ancre ", twenty-two pots.' Information about the sales of olive oil during the royal regime in Louisiana is very scanty. In 1735 it was ag^in selling for forty sols a pot/ and in 1762 advanced to thirty-three and a third livres a pint*

The French of Louisiana learned from the natives to use bear's oil and soon beg^ to substitute it for olive oil.* It was claimed by some to be quite as good for salads as the best grades of the latter.' By 1719 the settlers of Natchitoches were carrying it to New Orleans.^ This supply was augmented by hunters who left the capital each winter to go to the St. Frangais river to hunt bear. In 1721 it was plentiful and sold at twenty sols a pint.* There was a shortage the next year due to the fact that the Arkansas Indians who usually furnished New Orleans with something like 2,500 or 3,000 pots of oil annually this year had none to sell." The amount thus reduced, the prices rose to ten and twelve livres a p>ot; ^" by 1735 it was down to forty sols." From this time onward the hunters and In-

1 A. AT., C, Sir. C", vol. ix. fol. 254.

2 Ibid., Sir. F«, vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M.. May 7, 1728. ' Ibid., Sir. C^*, vol. xx, fols. 250, 251.

* Ibid., vol. xliii, fol. 122.

* Ibid., vol. vi, fol. SI; Le Page du Pratz, vol. ii, pp. 88-^.

• Margry, vol. vi, p. 230.

'' Le Page du Pratz, vol. i, p. 150. ' Ibid., p. 207.

• Margry, vol. vi, p. 382.

«> A. N., C, Sir. Ci», vol. vii, fols. 23, 24. " Ibid., vol. XX, fols. 250, 251.

dians continued to bring bear's oil in constantly increasing quantities to the markets of both Mobile and New Orleans, and by 1754 the sales of it and tallow together were 25,000 livres each year/ Six years later the oil was selling in New Orleans at twenty livres a pot.^

As early as 1731, New Orleans became the butter and cheese market for the German settlements and continued as such to the end of the French control.^ From the large herds in the Mobile valley a supply of butter and cheese was carried both to Mobile and New Orleans. Ten farmers at Bayagoulas, midway between those two villages, likewise provided both markets with these commodities.* The price of butter like all foods was advanced by the war, and in 1762 was selling at ten livres a pound.^

Eggs were market products in 1717 and sold at fifty sols a dozen,® which price was maintained at both Mobile and New Orleans until 172^ when it dropped to sixteen and eighteen a dozen.^ .By"i727, however, the price of eggs at New Orleans was at forty-five and fifty sols a dozen.® A decline followed and in 1752 they were eighteen, twenty, thirty-two sols, six deniers, and thirty-five sols a dozen.^" In 1762 eggs had advanced to three livres, fifteen sols a dozen,"

1 Supra, p. 261.

« A. N., C, Ser. Ci3, vol. xliii, fol. 122.

^ Ibid., vol. xiv, fol. 138; vol. xxxiii, fol. 167,

* Ibid., vol. XXX, fol. 253.

* Ibid., vol. xliii, fol. 122. 8 Ibid., vol. V, fol. 48.

■' Ibid., vol. vi, fols. 417-418, 422,

* Ibid., vol. vii, fols. 23, 24.

* Gravier, p. 30.

^ A. N., C, Sir. Ci3, vol. xxxvi, fol. 334-" Ibid., vol. xliii, fol. 122.

Although the greater part of the people of the province no doubt owned a cow or two and provided themselves with milk, there was a market for it as early as 1713.^ In 1716 the inhabitants at Biloxi were selling it to the newcomers and to the crews of vessels that at times touched there at forty sols a pot.^ At New Orleans, in 1723, there was a dairy carrying on a trade.* In order to protect the sick from the extortionate prices of the dealers, the superior council issued an ordinance, July 24, 1725, fixing the maximum price of milk at fifteen sols a pot and making the pun- . ishment for violations a fine of fifty livres, one-half of ' which was to go to the informer, the remainder to the hospital.* For a time the law seems to have been enforced, for in 1727 milk was selling in New Orleans at fourteen sols a / pot, half of the ordinary measure used in France by milk dealers.* In 1751, there was a new dairy established at Bayagoulas, the cows for which being procured at Natchitoches. At the time it was the opinion of the officials that the development of this industry would be an advantage to the province." The next year milk sold at New Orleans at two sols, six deniers a pot.^ Trade in this commodity was carried on at the different posts of the province. In 1762, the bill from one of these alone cost the royal govemment 20,000 francs for the amount consumed in a single year. The chronicler remarked that " the garrison of that post must have been suckled all that year ".*

1 A. N., C, Sir. O', vol. iii, fols. 209-310; vol. vii, fol. 72.

* Dumont, vol. ii, p. 53.

» A. X., C. Sir. 08, vol. vii, fol. 72-

* Ibid., Sir. A, vol. xxiii, July 24, 1725.

* Gravier, p. 30.

* A. N., C, Sir. 03, vol. xxxv, fols. 97-98.

* Ibid., vol. xxxvi, fol, 334.

* Hist. Colls, of La., pt. v, p. 136.

The supply of flour for lower Louisiana came both from France and from the Illinois country, the climate of the Gulf region being unsuited to the growing of wheat. The amount secured from these two sources, however, was never constant, therefore the prices were most variable. From 1713 to 1719, flour from France sold at Mobile at twenty piasters (eighty livres)a barrel of 180 pounds.^ When rates were fixed by the Company of the Indies, in 1719,^ flour was placed at fifteen livres a hundredweight.^ In 1725, the Company again adjusted prices; this time the commodity was to sell at sixty livres a " quart/, 160 pounds, an amount double what it brought in 1719.^ The legal measure for flour, in 1728, was made 180 pounds for ^ a " quart ".* At this time rice flour was selling at three sols, six deniers a pound;, 118 to 120 pounds of unhulled rice sold at seven to eight livres and made about fifty-nine pounds of flour.^ In 1734, the price of flour from France reached at New Orleans thirty livres a barrel." Three years later it advanced to forty livres a quintal or eight sols a pound,^ but dropped the following year to twenty-two livres a quintal for both the domestic and French articles. *

In 1740, a " quart" of flour brought seventy livres and at the time both com and rice were mixed with it in making bread. In 1741, it became so scarce that it could be given no price.® As the war approached, one source of supply

' A. N., C, Sir. Ci3, vol. iii, fols. 216-223 ', vol. iv, fols. 391-392.

' La Harpe, p. 176.

» A. N., C, Sir. C13, vol. viii, fol. 181.

* Ihid., Sir. F^, vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M., May 7, 1728,

* Ibid., Sir. O^, vol. xi, fol. 119.

^ Ibid., vol. xviii, fols. 8-12; vol. xix, fols. 151-157. ^ Ibid., vol. xxii, fols. 140-147.

* Ibid., vol. xxiv, fol. 127. ' Ibid., vol. xxvi, fol. 185.

was cut off; therefore, an increase in the price followed, and in 1747 it was selling in New Orleans at seven livres, ten sols a pound. ^ The war over, the price again became normal; in 1752, it was twenty livres a hundredweight.-The second war with England coming so soon after the close of the first threw trade into more disorder than ever; in 1757, flour was selling at 280 livres' and in 1762 at 600 livres a " quart " of 160 pounds.*

To the cost of flour must be added the profit of the baker and the shop-keeper in order to get at the price of bread. In 1723, the officials found it necessary to put it at forty sols a pound. This year some very poor black bread was sold by a woman at three livres a pound, whereupon she was ar-yrested and brought before a magistrate who demanded ~^ that she tell from whom she had received it. She at first refused to answer, but upon being lodged in jail, she reconsidered and named a woman as the person from whom she had purchased it. This second woman was forthwith arrested and likewise questioned. She declined, at first, to state from whom she had received the bread, saying she could not remember the name, but that it was a soldier, whereupon she was sent to jail to spend the night and refreshen her memory on a diet of water and some of the bread she had sold. The next morning she still asserted that she could not recall the name of the soldier. On hearing the order that the incarceration and diet be continued she burst into tears, giving the name of the baker who was responsible for the making of such a quality of bread. She further informed the magistrate that she had been carrying on the trade secretly for some months but declared that

1 A. N., C. Sir. C", vol. xxxi, fol. 127.

* Ibid., vol. xxxvi, fol. 334. ' Villiers du Terrage, p. 80.

* A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xUii, fol. 122.

/,

during that time she had never sold it at more than twenty-sols a pound. Here the examination ended. The woman was fined 500 livres and commanded at once to return to her last customer the thirteen livres she had received from her for the bread.^ A similar complaint was made in 1725 against a baker in New Orleans who sold it to a Spanish captain at three reaux a pound, which price it was claimed was detrimental to the building-up of a trade with Spain's colonies." Still, much of the bread used by the colonists was made in whole or part of corn meal or rice flour. In 1727 it sold at the capital for ten sols a pound.^ For some time before the crown took over the province in 1731 the bread for the troops had been made half rice; it was proposed to continue the practice since it made it about a fourth cheaper, even if it did fall short of making the same amount as wheat flour by about twenty pounds a hundredweight.^

The storm that visited the province in 1732 completely destroyed the bakery at New Orleans that had been engaged to provide bread for the troops.^ The royal government's bakers at New Orleans and Mobile were receiving 400 livres a month for their services, while a negro at the Balise was doing the same work quite as well for his clothes and a soldier's rations. It was the belief that the cost of bread for the troops could be reduced at the first two places named.*' In 1744 bread sold in New Orleans at twelve sols a pound, if paid for in silver, but at sixteen sols, eight deniers, if colonial money were given in exchange.^

1 A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. vii, fols. 49-50.

* Ihid., vol. ix, fol. 137.

* Ihid., vol. X, fol. 198; vol. xii, fol. 135; Gravier, p. 30.

* A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. xiv, fol. 16; vol. xviii, fols. 24-27.

^ Ihid., vol. xvii, fols. 192-195. « Ihid., vol. xvi, fol. 58.

'' The Present State of the Country, etc., pp. 14, 27.

By 1720 rice was grown all along the Mississippi and could be procured in great abundance. Its price the next year was fixed by the Company at twelve livres a quintal.* Soon, however, it began to fluctuate, and in 1726 was twenty livres a barrel, of 200 pounds./' Only two years later unhulled rice was as low as seven or eight livres a barrel, of 118 and 120 pounds.^* The last year of the Company's control of the province it paid three livres a "quart", and in some instances not above forty-five sols for that quantity J of rice. When the transfer was made, the crown took over 8,000 barrels of it that was then in the storehouse at the Company's rate of three livres a barrel.* Almost the entire crop of the commodity was lost in the storm of 1732. Rice became scarce and the price advanced. Some of the planters, in order to keep their slaves from starving, were obliged to pay for it as much as fifty-two livres a " quart ". For the purpose of protecting these men from such extortion an ordinance was issued making the further practice of it illegal." Before the end of the year rice had dropped to twenty livres for a barrel of 200 pounds.* In 1735 the price was three livres a " quart ", but a bad harvest in 1736 advanced it to seven livres, and in a few instances it was seven livres, ten sols.' In 1737 it sold at six and seven livres a quintal.* In 1738 the shortage of the crops was

' A. N., C, Sir. OS, vol. vi, fol. 20; vol. vii, fols. 16&-169; Sir. B, vol. xliii, fol. 88. » Ibid., Sir. C", vol. x, fol. 152.

* Ibid., vol. xi, fols. 112-113.

* Ibid., vol. xvj, fol. 97; vol. xvii, fols. 78-84.

* Ibid., vol. xvi, fol. 97; vol. xvii, fols. 78-84.

* Le Page du Pratz, vol. iii, p. 387.

' A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xx, fols. 105-109, 123-125; vol. xxi, fols. 256-260.

* Ibid., vol. xxii, fols. 121-123, 140-147.

somewhat offset by an abundant harvest in the Illinois country. The products from that part of the province not only held prices at normal level but were able to reduce rice to seven and eight livres a quintal.^ Floods in 1741 swept away the greater part of the rice produced that year and caused the price to advance from six to twelve livres a barrel,^ the next year hulled rice sold at twenty-five livres a quintal.^

Corn for lower Louisiana was secured both from the natives and Europeans, therefore should have been plentiful and cheap. As early as 1710 the settlers provided the government with 116 barrels of 150 pounds each, at fourteen livres, eight sols a barrel, to be used as food for the troops.* In 1716 it sold at three piastres a barrel of 200 pounds.^ La Harpe on his journey up the Mississippi in 1719 met at the mouth of the Red river some Natchitoches farmers who were carrying their products to New Orleans. He bought from them five barrels of corn, for which he paid five piastres each.® The next yiear com at the same post was selling at sixteen livres a barrel.'^ In 1735 it brought two livres a "minot." The bad harvest the following year caused the price to advance to seven livres in 1736 ^ and to nine in 1738.® The floods mentioned above destroyed large quantities of corn, which became so scant that it sold

1 A. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxiv, fol. 153; vol. xxiii, 134-137. ^ Ibid., vol. xxvi, fols. 67, 130. ' Ibid., vol. xxvii, fols. 5-8.

* Supra, p. 250.

^ A. N., C, Ser. C^s, vol. iv, fol. 624.

* Margry, vol. vi, p. 251. ' Ibid., p. 231.

* A. N., C, Ser. O^, vol. xxi, fol. 256; vol. xxii, fols. 121-123.

* Ibid., vol. xxiii, fol. 120.

at fifteen and sixteen livres a barrel.* In 1750 the price was still high, due to a great scarcity.* In 1754 there was a large yield in this commodity.^ It sold in 1760 at ten livres a " quart". At this time it was necessary to buy a supply for the royal storehouse. Rochemore received an offer of the entire amount needed, delivered at the storehouse at ten livres. The " ordonnateur ", being unfriendly to the grain dealer, refused to take it. Instead he bought what was wanted, 2,312 *' quarts ", at Pointe Coupee, paying also ten livres. An additional expense was incurred in transporting it to New Orleans and placing it in the storehouse; a cost to the government of 18,099 livres, nine sols and three deniers.* In 1763 com sold at four livres, five sols, three livres, ten sols and three livres, five sols a " quart '\^ Of the trade in other kinds of grain grown in Louisiana there are few records. On April 25, 1719, however, the Company fixed the price of rye at seven, wheat at ten and oats and barley at four livres a hundredweight, which perhaps would indicate some trade in these commodities.*

The first products put upon the market by the French settlers on the Gulf coast were vegetables which were offered to the soldiers of the garrison.^ The amount of such foodstuffs increased as the province developed, and in 1719 one planter alone sent to market 200 livres worth of com, beans, potatoes, other vegetables and fruit; while a second

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xxvi, fols. 67, 130. ^Ibid., vol. xxxiv, fol. 298.

• Ibid., vol. xxxviii, fol. 176.

• Ibid., vol. xlii, fol. 78.

^ Ibid., vol. xliii, fols. 3I5-35I.

• La Harpe, p. 176.

» A. N., C, Sir. OS, vol. iii, fols. 213-214.

sent a similar assortment which brought 100 livres/ This year La Harpe bought five barrels of so-called "Apalaches" beans from the Toniac Indians at the mouth of the Red river, which was all that tribe had to sell.^ In 1720 these beans brought from Nachitoches sold in New Orleans at sixteen livres a barrel.^ At the same time the colonists on the Mississippi were supplying that market with beans, potatoes and vegetables.* The farmers in the vicinity of the village in 1722 were selling beans to the soldiers at twenty-five sols a pound, a price so exorbitant that the " or-donnateur " requested Bienville to fix the maximum for the retail price at four sols a pound, thirty livres a barrel. It was claimed the petition was just, since eighteen livres a barrel made the producer a good profit.^ By 1723 there was an abundance of all kinds of vegetables, most of which brought good prices at New Orleans where, for example, watermelons in season sold for three livres each; and a "handful" of peas at fifty and sixty sols.^ The next year the harvest of corn, rice and beans for the New Orleans district alone was 5,093 barrels, and the potato crop 2,900 barrels.^ On June 27, 1725, a list of legal prices for the different domestic products to be found in the markets was published. Like many similar laws during the French regime it was not well enforced. The next year the great abundance of vegetables of all kinds forced the farmers to take what they could get for them.^ In 1728 the legal weight of a

^ A., B. de VA., vol. 4497, fol. 55.

^ Margry, vol. vi, p. 249.

' Ibid., p. 231.

* A., M. des C, Sir. C-, vol. 464.

» A. N., C. Ser. Cis, vol. vi, fol. 330.

« Ibid., vol. vii, f ols. 23-24.

''A., M. des C., Ser. G^, vol. 464.

« A. N., C, Ser. Os, vol. ix, fol. 246.

barrel of French beans was fixed at 360 pounds and for the smaller weights the same as those for flour/ while for domestic beans 150 pounds were to be considered a barrel. The price of "Apalaches " beans at this time was ten livres a barrel.-

Nothing more is to be learned of the market-gardening trade of Louisiana until 1744, when it is asserted that both Mobile and New Orleans had markets containing quantities of fruit, almonds, oranges and lemons, also many kinds of vegetables, such as pumpkins, water melons, melons of other sorts, cabbages, herbs, beans, peas, rice and potatoes. On ordinary market days and on fete days a great many German farmers came to the capital bringing with them fine apples, peaches, pears, figs, sweet potatoes, melons of all kinds, artichokes, large cabbages, salad plants, herbs, all of which were finer than those grown in France.^ For the most part the prices received are not given. For a salad plant they often got as much as thirty sols; * for a quintal of red beans twelve to thirteen livres.' At this time all, especially fine, domestic products were labeled in the shops with the word " Creole "." In 1754 the output of pitch, tar and vegetables amounted to 30,000 livres annually. There seems to be no way of ascertaining how much of the sum was gotten from the sale of vegetables alone.'

The liquor business of Louisiana, as is the case in most

1 Supra, p. 265.

« A. N., C, Ser. F«, vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M., May 7, 1728; Le Page du Pratz, vol. iii, p. 387.

• A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xxx, fols. 254-255; vol. xxxiii, fols. 167-168.

• The Present State of the Country, etc., p. 14. ' Le Page du Pratz, vol. iii, p. 387.

• German-American Annals, vol. vii, p. 186. "> A.N., C, Sir. C", vol. xxxviii, fol. 265.

frontier communities, had many representatives, most of whom were doing well. As early as 1706 there was a liquor shop in the province, said to have been owned by Bienville but administered under the name of another person. At this place wine was sold at 200 piastres a cask, the price remaining constant until 1712.^ Governor Cadillac assured the crown such profits would not be made under the new regime.^ Before the end of 1713 the Crozat agents themselves, however, were selling wine in the province at 320 livres a cask; in small quantities four reaux for red, and three for white wine; brandy four livres, and vinegar four reaux a pot.^ The next year the retail price for brandy, red and white wine was three livres, thirty sols and twenty sols a pot, respectively.*

On May 24, 1717, because of the disorder in the province caused by the selling of brandy to the Indians and slaves, an ordinance was issued making it an offense punishable by a fine of fifty livres to make such sales; half of the money thus derived to go to the church, the remainder to the hospital.® In 1719 the Company made the rates just quoted the legal prices for the province.* The act, however, did little to bring stability to the trade in such commodities. The Company, itself, made a change in 1721, when it made the selling price of wine and brandy at Mobile 120 livres a cask.'^ At New Orleans, the next year, brandy was retailed at fifty sols a pot and in 1724 at one piastre, and

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. i, fols. 500-501.

2 Ibid., Ser. F^, vol. ccxU, May 13, 1713.

* Ihid., Ser. C^^, vol. iii, fols. 216-223; vol. v, fols. 332, 336.

* Ibid., vol. vi, fol. 421.

» Ibid., Sir. F^, vol. ccxli, May 24, 1717. « Ibid., Sir. C^^, vol. v, fols. 332, 336. ' Ibid., vol. viii, fols. 88, 90.

wine at the same price. ^ By the end of £726 wine was down to twenty sols a pot and brandy to three Hvres, five sols." On October 5th, the superior council enacted the first of a series of laws aimed at the regulation of the liquor traffic. This act provided for the closing of all dram-shops '^ on Sunday while church was in progress.' On March 29, 1727, another was passed making the selling of intoxicants z' to slaves illegal. Moreover they were not to be given it to carry to their masters unless they presented to the innkeeper a written order from their masters so to do. The law was not well enforced.* The council on May 7, 1728, fixed the legal measures as follows: no pots for a hogshead of red wine, " guildive " and vinegar; 100 pots of white wine for a hogshead; 150 pots for a hogshead of brandy; and fifty pots for a " quart" of brandy, and red and white wine; twenty-three pots for an " ancre" of brandy."

The transfer of the province to the crown had no beneficial effects upon the liquor traffic. In May, 1732, wine sold in New Orleans at 120 livres a cask, and by July had advanced to 150 and even 200 livres. At the same time it was retailed at thirty sols a pot and brandy at from forty to fifty sols.' At the beginning of the next year wine sold at ten livres, brandy at twenty-seven livres and " guildive " at four and five livres a pot. These excellent prices brought about a considerable increase in the number of dram-shops and taverns in New Orleans, where the consumption of liquor of all kinds was large. On December

1 A. N., C, Sir. O', vol. viii, pp. 90-91.. 290-291, 336-337-

* Ihid., vol. ix, fol. 253.

» Ihid., Sir. A, vol. xxiii, Oct. S, 1726.

* Ibid., March 29, 1727.

* Ihid., Sir. F', vol. ccxli, May 7, 1728.

* Ihid., Sir. 0», vol. xv, fols. 115, 173.

19, 1733, the " ordonnateur " put forth an ordinance aiming at the suppression of the disorder arising from drunkenness, by making it illegal for any one, under penalty of a fine of fifty livres and confiscation of the liquor in his possession, to sell either wine, brandy or other liquors by the pint, pot or cup without first having secured from his office a license permitting such sales. The ordinance was to go into effect three days after its publication/ Moreover, the governor and " ordonnateur " were both of the opinion that the prices for liquors should be reduced one-half, thereby bringing them about to the same as they were at the time of the retrocession. Whether the decrease was made officially is not evident. At any rate wine, in 1734, sold at 120 and 200 livres a cask and brandy at thirty-five, forty and fifty sols a pot. By October good white wine at the capital had advanced to 320 livres a cask, red to 480 livres and brandy at the same time had dropped to thirty sols.^ In December a further shifting of prices took place. Wine now sold at 150 and 200 livres a cask and brandy at thirty, thirty-five and forty livres an " ancre" (sixteen pots).' This year the " ordonnateur" took another step toward placing the liquor business imder some restraint. His ordinance made it an offense for any one to sell liquor to the Indians. The law was so poorly enforced that it was practically of no value.* In 1735 wine at New Orleans brought 6<X) livres a cask and brandy thirty-five livres a pot.^ The " ordonnateur ", December 7, 1736, made a further attempt to prevent liquor from being sold to the slaves. To this

^ A. N., C, Sir. A, vol. xxiii, Dec. 19, 1733.

^ Ibid., Sir. C^^, vol. xviii, fols. 95-97; vol. xix, fols. 104-105, 151.

' Ibid., vol. xix, fols. 106-107,

* Ibid., Sir. A, vol. xxiii, Oct. 14, 1734.

* Ibid., Sir. O^, vol. xx, fols. 106-107.

end he issued an ordinance making it illegal to sell it to them without direct permission from their masters.^ Again the lack of its enforcement defeated the purpose of the law.

Wine, in 1740, was selling at 200 ' livres, but the next year the price advanced to 500 if paid in Spanish silver, and 8cx> livres if in colonial paper.' In September it was down to 350 and 400 livres a cask. Notwithstanding the law of 1733,* prices so attractive caused much secret selling by unlicensed shops. In such places, in 1744, whiskey was sold at a pistole, brandy at three livres, ten sols, and rum and wine at fifty sols a bottle. Public disorder in New Orleans increased in direct proportion to the amount of liquor used.**

Governor Vaudreuil and the " ordonnateur ", August 19, 1746, made another attempt to do away with some of the drunkenness at the capital by suppressing all unlicensed drinking places. In the hope of accomplishing this work they demanded all keepers of dram-shops to have from the " ordonnateur " a permit to sell liquor.' The police of the village, however, found g^eat difficulty in enforcing the law. In 1751 only six shops in New Orleans were licensed by the government. These proprietors were permitted to sell drinks only in moderation to " voyageurs ", sick persons, settlers and sailors. They were forbidden absolutely to sell it to the soldiers and negjoes. For the privilege they were each to pay 2CK> livres yearly to the government and an additional 100 livres to be used in taking care of the

1 A. N., C, Sir. A, vol. xxiii, Dec 7, 1736. « Ihid., Sir. O', vol. xxv, fol. 264. » Ihid., vol. xxvi, fols. 165-166, 185.

* Supra, pp. 274-275.

» The Present State of the Country, etc., p. 14.

• A. N., C, Sir. A, vol. xxiii, Aug. 19, 1746.

poor of the village. These drinking places were to close daily at nine in the evening, after which hour no one was to be allowed to enter. Moreover, on penalty of a fine and annulment of the license for any violation of this part of the law, they were to close the shops on fete days and on Sundays during divine services.^

The soldiers were to receive liquor at two canteens, provided especially for them by the officials. At these places no civilians were to be allowed to buy. Violations were to be punished by a fine of ten ecus and confiscation of all liquor and a stay in the pillory, the length of time being fixed by the officials; the second by a life sentence to the galleys.^ Had the law been rigorously enforced it seems that the punishment was severe enough to do away with the illicit trade entirely. Such, however, was not the case. At this time some farmers of the province left their farms in order to engage in an illicit business in and about New Orleans. Here they dispensed liquor secretly, selling it even to slaves. The officials called upon the better class of settlers to help them in the suppression of the evil. The offenders were given eight days, counting from the date of the publication of the ordinance, in which to return to their farms, after which time if they were still in New Orleans they were to be treated as vagabonds and driven from the village.^

In 1752 the quantity of " guildive " that was disposed of at the canteens had become so excessive that it was ruining many of the soldiers by making them dangerous maniacs.* Wine at this time was selling at 400 livres a cask.' During

1 A. N., C, Sir. C^8, vol. xxxv, fols. 41-43.

» Ibid. ' Ibid.

* Ibid., vol. xxxvi, fols. 228, 267.

' Ibid., vol. xxxvi, fol. 334.

/

278 THE COMMERCE OF LOUISIANA [078

the war it seems to have advanced in price gradually until in 1762 it was 3,500 livres a cask.^

As early as 1722 both New Orleans and Mobile had / large wooden shops that would not " ornament a village of France ".^ In 1726 Governor Perier established in the former a general merchandise store and placed d'Anville in charge. The latter's commission was fixed at six deniers a livre on all sales. He was to keep in this shop all sorts of goods, excepting, however, flour, wine, brandy, coffee, shirts, shoes, soap, limbourg and other articles that usually were scarce. The project had the approval of the people who believed it would be a decided advantage to the community.' By 1729 the capital had shops not under government control, in which was carried merchandise similar to that just mentioned. The proprietors of these stores proposed to the director of the Company to give them annually a larger supply of merchandise and to agree to allow them to return the part they could not dispose of. They further requested the Company to advance them at once merchandise to the amount of 20,000 livres. The proposition was accepted because, it was declared, it involved small risk and the possibility of bringing to the Company very large profits.* Little is to be learned of the manner in which the private shops carried on business, except that they charged excessive prices for everything. The next year they were pronounced by the " ordonnateur " as detrimental to the province because of the high rate they demanded for their goods.'

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xliii, fol. 122.

* Charlevoix, A Voyage to North America, voL ii, p. 207.

• A. N.. C, Sir. Ci», vol. ix, fol. 252.

♦ Ihid., vol. ix, fol. 361. ' Ihid., vol. vii, fol. 49.

On April 25, 1719, the Company fixed the price of powder at fifteen sols a horn, copper candlesticks at four livres a pound and bullets at eight sols a pound. ^ At quite an early date there were some shoemakers in the province who made "galoshes ", but nothing is given as to the price they brought when sold.^ In 1723 imported shoes cost in New Orleans forty livres/ in 1733, thirty and thirty-five,* and 1762, forty-five livres a pair.^ Gold trimmings and velvet, by 1727, were commonly used at the capital where, it was asserted, they cost three times as much as at Rouen.® All kinds of wearing apparel were always expensive in Louisiana.^ In 1762 they sold at New Orleans as follows: an ell of cloth for a man's coat, 250 livres; with a lining of silk, 150 livres additional; a beaver hat 400 livres, with a band of gold 250 livres extra; a hat half beaver, 250 livres; a pair of silk stockings, 150 livres; a purse, twenty-five livres; an ell of cloth for a shirt, sixty livres; the same amount of batiste, 120 livres; and of muslin, 200 livres; powder for the face and hair, fifteen livres a pound.* Imported soap, in 1762, sold at twenty-five livres a pound, while at the same time the domestic article brought from two to six livres a brick.®

Lower Louisiana received salt from France and also from the Illinois country. It was sold at the private shops and by the government officials; for example, Crozat's

1 Ordonnance de la Cotnpagnie d'Occident, 1719, N. Y. Pub. Lib. ^ A., M, des C, Sir. C^, vol. 464. » A. N., C, Ser. O^, vol. vii, fol. 16.

* Ibid., vol. xvi, fols. 166-177. ^ 1 bid., vol. xliii, fol. 122,

* Gravier, p. 30.

'' A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. xxxvi, fols. 229, 269-270.

* Ibid., vol. xliii, fol. 121. » Ibid.

agents demanded two sols a pound for it from civilians and eighteen deniers from the soldiers.^ There was often a shortage in the supply for this part of the province, due to some extent to the fact that much of it deliquesced before it could be consumed because of the excessive amount of moisture in the air. In 1719 the Cadodaquian Indians provided the French with 200 pounds.* The commodity, in 1723, sold at New Orleans at sixty sols a pound.^ When the superior council in 1728 standardized the weights and measures of the province, it fixed that of salt at 500 pounds to the hogshead.* In 1731 the settlers on the Gulf coast were entirely without salf;' in 1759 a cargo of 250 hogsheads arrived at the capital where it brought twenty deniers a pound.' Rochemore, seeing in this transaction a chance for big profits for himself, demanded the whole amount of the supply for the government. Later, however, all but fifty hogsheads of it was retailed at six sols, three deniers a pound to the civilian population.' Of the trade in other groceries very little is saidy/ In 1728 the weight for sugar was made 500 pounds to a hogshead, 200 to a " quart ", and for molasses at 110 pots to a case.* In 1762 sugar was selling for five livres, and coffee at seven livres, ten sols a pound.®

A banquet given in honor of Governor Kerlerec on his arrival in 1752 affords some idea of what the shops and

^A. N., C, Sir. Cia, vol. v, fol. 33.

* Ibid., vol. ii, fol. 248; vol. xxv, fol. 4; Margry, vol. vi, p. 272.

* A. N., C, Sir. Ci«, vol. vii, fol. 20.

* Ibid., Sir. F», vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M., May 7, 1728.

* Ibid., Ser. C", vol. xiii, fol. 145.

* Ibid., Sir. F^, vol. xxv, fols. 101-105. ' Ibid.

* Ibid., vol. ccxli, M. S. S. M., May 7, 1728. » Ibid., Sir. 0«, vol. xliii, fol. 122.

markets of the capital had to sell. The governor asserts there were 200 persons present, of whom half were most richly dressed women. The hall and tables were elaborately decorated; and from the latter he partook of delicious meats, vegetables and fruits. The whole affair, it was claimed, would have done honor to such an entertainment in the wealthiest cities of Europe.^

The drug supply for the province came from France and at first was given out from the government storehouse. In July, 1732, the " ordonnateur " made a bargain with the apothecary at the hospital in New Orleans to supply medicine to the sick at two sols, six deniers a person. The hospital physician was authorized to send to the home government a report of the drugs given out, with the price according to the list it had furnished.^ Up to 1734 the amount thus furnished cost the crown annually 2,400 livres.^ In 1738 drugs were very scarce at New Orleans and therefore expensive, due in part to the fact that in some instances the supply asked for had been reduced more than half; for example, quinine was cut from sixty-five to thirty pounds, while from the same list sal ammoniac, antimony and diaphragmatic was omitted entirely. Quinine, rhubarb and spirits of wine sold at nine livres, ten sols a pound, fifty livres a pound, and three livres a pint, respectively. These prices were declared to be a third higher than they should be. Sarsaparilla was thirteen to fifteen sols a pound.* Governor Vaudreuil, during his term of ofiice, had a third interest in all the trade that was carried on between New Orleans and other posts of

^ Villiers du Terrage, p. 46.

2 A. N., C, Sir. C13, vol. xv, fols. 164-165.

' Ibid., vol. xix, fols. 25-29.

* Ihid., vol, xxiii, fols. 119-120; Le Page du Pratz, vol. iii, p. 391.

the province. At the capital he converted one room of his dwelHng into a store where every sort of drug^was sold. The house steward usually attended to the trade but in his absence Madame Vaudreuil, herself, did the selling. She, it was declared, was a very clever business woman, being able to force other merchants to buy goods from her husband at prices fixed by herself. The governor made no objection to the trade since it brought handsome profits into his coflfers.^

Trade in live stock in lower Louisiana was sporadic. Horses were bought either from the Spaniards or from the Indians and were paid for in merchandise.^ In 1733 the crown gave 800 livres for fourteen horses that belonged to the Company.^ Fine geldings sold at New Orleans in i y^t? for thirty livres each, 250 being brought hither from Natchitoches.* Horses owned by the Jesuits sold in 1763 at from ninety livres for a single animal to 455 for a mare and gray colt.'*

The cattle that Iberville brought with him to the Gulf coast in 1699 cost him in the French islands eighty livres a

^ Gayarre, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. ii, p. 54.

* Margry, vol. vi, p. 280,

* A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xvi, fol. 100.

* Dumont, vol. i, p. 81.

* A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xliii, fols. 3IS-35I. Value of horses in livres:

1395 820 2400

Totals, 21 head brought 4.615 livres.

head.^ Such animals, in 1713, sold at Mobile at thirty and forty piastres each.^ By 1725 the price of cattle had advanced to 500 and 6cx) livres a head.^ A pair of oxen with their harness sold in lower Louisiana in 1749 at 300 livres, while at the same time cows brought only sixty livres each."* No further sales seem to have been recorded until 1763, when the Jesuits' herd was sold at public auction."

1 A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. i, fols. 185-195-' Ihid., vol. iii, fols. 245-248.

* Ibid., vol. vii, fol. 19.

* Ibid., vol. xxxiii, fols. 196-200.

* Ibid., vol. xliii, fols. 31S-351. Value of cattle in livres are as follows:

Cow and Heifers Cows Young Oxen in Heifer and Pair oxen Pair oxeo

8105 3070 2545 1585 5270 760 3245 570

Bunch of 27 oxen, 1200 livres; 51 cows, 12500 livres; 24 calves, 2400 livres. Totals: 217 head of cattle brought 52,050 livres.

Iberville also brought to Louisiana, in 1699, some hogs for which he paid forty livres each/ In 1713 they were selling in the province at twelve reaux each, and sheep at four reaux a head.^ At the Jesuit sale, in 1763, the former sold as follows: barrows, fifty-six livres each; a sow 130 livres; a sow and barrow, 150 livres.' Sheep sold at the same sale in lots of six at from 150 to 245 livres and a flock of seventy for 3,000 livres.*

/^Trade in lumber was considerable. In lower Louisiana, /in 1716, there were two saw mills. Cedar boards, 20 ft. by I ft. by 2 in., sold at six livres each; those 10 ft. by 10 in. by I in., at 100 livres a hundred feet; and other varieties at sixty livres; oak boards, 15 to 20 feet long by 3 ft. by I in., at two sols, six deniers a foot; large pieces of building lumber at three livres a cubic foot; and that suited to boat building at two sols, six deniers a foot' 1,010 feet of cypress building material sold in 1723 at five sols a foot; 408 planks at twenty sols each; 1,150 feet of bark for covering houses at thirteen livres, thirteen sols, eleven deniers a hundred feet; shingles at 100 sols a thousand; and laths, hand turned, at the same price.' Siding was selling at New Orleans, in 1726, at twenty livres a thousand; planks at fifty livres; and oars, five sols each. The Company considered these prices very exorbitant.^ The next year the manager of a mill located on Bienville's land

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. i, fols. iSs-iQS-' Ibid., vol. iii, fols. 245-248. ' Ihid., vol. xliii, fols. 315-351. « Ihid.

Value in livres of nine different bunches of six each: 150, 160, 200, 205, 210, 210, 220, 230, 245. Totals: 124 head brought 4,830 livres. * Ihid., vol. iv, fols. 389-398. « Ihid., vol. vii, fols. 178-181. ' Ihid., vol. ix, fol. 242.

contracted to saw 2,500 pieces of lumber, 10 ft. by 8 or 10 in. by i^ in., for a church at fifty livres a hundred.^ The producing of lumber went on much the same after as before Louisiana became a royal province. In 1736 joists were selling at the capital at three livres a foot; planks at one sol, six deniers.^ By 1739 lumber for building purposes had trebled in price since 1731. What had sold at forty livres a hundred at the earlier date at the latter brought 120 livres.^ The higher prices did not continue, however, for in 1747 lumber was down to six sols a foot.* Above New Orleans, in 1752, large quantities of it were sawed and floated down stream to that market. ° The output for 1754 was worth 180,000 livres.^ In a community where wood for fuel was so plentiful as in Louisiana one would not expect to find a large trade in cord wood, yet there was some sale for it. In 1757 it sold on the wharf at New Orleans at fifteen livres a cord.^ In 1763 twenty cords brought at a public sale 200 livres and ten more, seventy-five livres; that is, ten livres and seven livres, ten sols a cord, respectively.*

Very soon the people of lower Louisiana began making/ brick, because, for certain purposes, due to the dampness of the climate, lumber was not serviceable. Brick 12 by 8 by 2 sold at New Orleans, in 1729, at thirty and thirty-five livres a thousand for the export trade and to the settlers at twenty livres. At the brick yards, pottery, floor and roof

1 A. N., C, Sir. C13, vol. xi, fol. Zl-

* Ihid., vol. xxi, fol. 115.

' Ibid., vol. xxiv, fol. 178.

* Ihid., vol. xxxi, fol. 189. ' Bossu, vol. i, p. 35.

* A. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxxviii, fol. 265. ' VilHers du Terrage, p. 80.

' A. N., C, Sir. Ci3, vol. xliii, fols. 315-351.

tiles also were made, the latter selling at sixty livres a thousand.^ In 1732 the price for brick was fifteen livres a thousand, but the cost of delivery brought it down to about nine livres, ten sols for the producer.* 20,720 brick for two chimneys and the foundation of a house in New Orleans cost the purchaser, in 1733, ten livres a thousand.' In 1746 the price was from seven livres, ten sols to ten livres a thousand. At such prices large quantities were put upon the market.* In 1763 the Jesuits sold at auction 97,000 brick. The price ranged from twenty-six livres, thirteen sols, four deniers to fifty-two livres, ten sols a thousand.'

1 A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xt, fols. 362-363.

97000 4375

'-' Lime in this part of the province was scarce. In 1733 it retailed at the capital at ten sols and twelve sols, eight deniers a pound/ For use in building fortifications, the officials the next year bought 2,139 barrels, paying for it thirty sols a barrel, two deniers a pound.^ Prices for building materials, such as nails, tacks, hinges and shutter hooks were, in 1733, ten sols a pound, one livre a pound, five livres, ten sols a pair, and four livres a pound, respectively.^

The sparseness of settlement and the great areas of idle land in all parts of the province made the traffic in real estate small. Nevertheless there were some such transfers. As early as 1717 a house at Natchez was valued at fifty livres, and in 1719 at 1,000 livres.* At this same settlement, in 1721, a large, well-equipped plantation sold at 50,000 livres.® Then, too, many Germans bought from former owners part or all of the land they owned above New Orleans. In the instances where prices are quoted, the land sold at 105 livres and sixty-two livres, ten sols an arpent.* There were still other such exchanges. The Jesuits, in 1726, for example, purchased from Bienville land adjoining their property and in 1751 the Ursuline order bought a plot of ground that lay next to its establishment. The amount given in these exchanges is not stated.^

1 A. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xvii, fols. 192-195. ^ Ihid., vol. xviii, fols. 89-go.

• Ihid., vol. xvii, fols. 192-195.

* A., B. de VArsenal, vol. 4497, fol. 55. ' A., M. des C, Ser. G^, vol. 464. •Ibid.

''A. N., C, Ser, C^^, vol. xxxv, fols. 5-6.

CHAPTER XVII The Trade of the Illinois Country

The French colony on the Gulf coast had scarcely been planted when "voyageurs" from the Illinois country arrived with their boats loaded with peltry.^ At first the trade consisted only of skins. The traffic soon was extended to other things and in a short time all sorts of products were being carried down the Mississippi to the Gulf coast market. The Jesuits at an early date introduced the growing of wheat into the Illinois country. By 1721 that part of the province was producing a fine grade of it, which commodity had put the French in that region " pretty much at their ease ".' As yet, however, there was not enough homegrown wheat to furnish Louisiana with all that was needed.'

Convoys of boats in 1721 went from the Illinois country to New Orleans loaded with all sorts of products. The wheat of the cargo, it was asserted, was of a very fine quality. Bienville, in fact, ordered the posts along the Mississippi to give all possible protection to the freight convoys from the Illinois and to furnish them with needful supplies.* Up to this time the Company of the Indies had sent to the Illinois French merchandise to the amount of 25,000 pounds annually. While there was some tendency on the part of the traders, there, to make the journey

1 Margry, voL iv, p. 364.

* Charlevoix, A Voyage to North America, vol. ii, p. 166. » A. N., C„ Sir. C", vol. vi, fol. 332.

* Hist. Coll. of La., pt. 3. PP. 105-106.

to New Orleans themselves for the goods they desired, the officials believed it was not wise to encourage them in the practice since their time could be employed more profitably otherwise.^ In August, 1725, however, two convoys, one from the Illinois and the other from Natchitoches arrived at New Orleans. Henceforward it became a regular occurrence for men at those posts to send to the capital their annual shipments of products.^ In 1729 the Illinois country had a fine harvest. It began to be asserted that as soon as -^ that part of Louisiana had become well established and free from Indian turmoil, it would be able to furnish flour and salt meat sufficient in quantity to supply the whole colony. This belief was strengthened by the large quantities of both of these products then being brought to New Orleans from the Illinois country.*

By 1732 there was a well-established trade between the Illinois country and Louisiana proper. The convoy that was expected at the capital about March did not arrive until May, thereby causing a shortage of provisions. This year it was composed of from twenty-five to thirty boats on which the farmers had shipped, at their own risk, products amounting in all to about 2,000 quintals of flour, 120 of lard, 200 quintals of beef and 160 of tallow, 600 or 700 hams, and 6,000 pots of bear's oil. In order to avoid a double shipment, when provisioning the posts between the Illinois country and New Orleans, the " ordonnateur " directed the several commandants to take from the convoy as it passed what flour and salt meat they needed for the year's subsistence.*

^ A.N., C, Sir. C13, vol. ix, fol. 240.

* Hist. Coll. of La., pt. 3, p. no.

* A. N., C, Sir. Ci3, vol. xii, fols. 15-16, 19.

* Ihid., vol. XV, fols. 133-136.

In compliance with the order just mentioned the commandant at Natchez secured 548 quintals of flour, fifty-five of lard, 200 of beef and 255 pots of bear's oil. The commandant at the posts at the Arkansas, the Tonicas and Pointe Coupee secured enough food for six or seven months, viz., at the Arkansas, sixteen quintals of flour; at the Tonicas and Point Coupee, each, thirty quintals, making a total for the four posts of 624 quintals. The remainder of the produce was sold at New Orleans, the officials buying 125 quintals of flour for the royal storehouse, making in all 749 quintals purchased by the government. Of this amount 340 quintals were of the better grade, " mieur blutee {^ic)", and sold at twelve livres, ten sols a quintal; 409 of a poorer quality cost but eleven livres. These prices did not suit the shippers, who the year before had received twenty-five livres for such flour.

In explanation the officials stated that the difference was apparent rather than real and was due entirely to a change in the paper money of the province. The remainder of the shipment was sold to the merchants of New Orleans, where flour from the Illinois never sold as well as the French commodity, since even the best grades of the former flour would produce only an equal weight of bread, hence could not be mixed advantageously with rice in making it. The supply of provisions sent to New Orleans from the Illinois country in 1732 indeed was so considerable that the officials informed the crown that, if it were kept up every year flour shipments from France might well be discontinued. It was further asserted that it was not wise to make any reduction even, because that part of the province was still disturbed by Indian wars.*

Notwithstanding Indian hostilities, the output of the

1 A. N., C, Sir. C^», vol. xv, fols. 133-136-

products of the Illinois country increased annually. In 1733 the convoy reached New Orleans on May 10, six weeks later than usual. On the way down the river it left 6,000 quintals of flour at the Arkansas and 32,120 pounds at Natchez for the respective garrisons. The past season had been hard on the Illinois crops; half the grain that matured was swept away by storm before it could be harvested. Therefore after the posts had received an allowance there was not a large supply left for New Orleans.^

Lower Louisiana secured quantities of foodstuffs from the Illinois country in 1734. The " voyageurs ", too, were making yearly trips to New Orleans for a supply of merchandise.^ By July of the following year two convoys had reached the capital. One of these consisted of twelve boats and carried 1,500 quintals of flour, some peltry and 200 hams.^ Prices in the Illinois country at the time were as follows: flour, two sols a pound; hams, four livres, each; bear's oil, forty sols a pot; frogs, two livres each; tobacco, two livres a pound; brandy, five livres a pot; and salt, fourteen livres a minot (70 pounds).*

In 1736 the harvest in the upper part of the Mississippi valley was light.' That of 1737 brought forth an abundance of every thing, therefore the consignments the next winter were correspondingly large. The first shipment, containing 100,000 pounds of flour alone, reached New Orleans in April, 1738. It was carried thither by a convoy, part of the boats composing it belonging to the government, the remainder to private persons. The second, comprising

^A. N., C, Ser. Cis, fols. 166-168; vol. xvii, fol. 147.

* Ihid., vol. xix, fols. 18-20, 25-29, 69-70.

' Ihid., vol. XX, fols. 238-239; Sir. B, Ixiii, fol. 608.

* Ihid., Sir. C^^, vol. xx, fols. 250-251.

' Ibid., vol. xxi, fol. 260; vol. xxii, fol. 121.

between 50,000 and 60,000 pounds of flour and many other commodities arrived in May. The men in charge of the convoy brought the news that a third shipment was en route. Its consignment of flour brought the amount suppHed to New Orleans that year up to 300,000 pounds.^

In 1738 the crops of the Illinois country were poor. Yet before the end of the year 1739, 300,000 pounds of flour, of which 12,000 pounds came from the Illinois and 17,000 from the Wabash, were used in provisioning the troops eng^aged in a war against the Chickasaw.' Some " voyageurs " who carried flour to New Orleans in 1739 received for it twenty-two livres a quintal.' In 1740 lower Louisiana received from the Illinois country 6,000 quintals of flour; * in the following year 125,000 pounds more flour and large quantities of peltry.'^ In 1742 the " ordonnateur " instructed the government convoy to bring to New Orleans oak lumber from the Illinois. In June it had not reached the capital and it is not stated whether the order ever was carried out. At any rate no such trade developed.'

The harvest in 1745 in the upper district of the province was not good. The convoys were dispatched as usual 5ut no statement is made concerning the shipments.'^ In April, 1746, a convoy of "voyageurs" arrived at New Orleans with cargoes of flour amounting to 100,000 poimds which put the colony beyond immediate want.* In Septem-

1 A. N., C, Sir. Ci», vol. xxiii, fols. 48-51, 77-8 r.

• Ibid., vol. xxiv, fols. 2-7, i28;Iournal of the Chickasaw War, etc., p. 80.

» A. N., C, Sir. Ci», vol, xxiv, fol. 128.

• Ibid., vol. XXV, fol. 22; vol. xxiv, fols. 3-7.

• Ibid., vol. XXvi, fol. 97.

• Ibid., vol. xxvii, fols. Z7, 113-' Ibid., vol. xxix, fol. 89.

• Ibid., vol. XXX, fol. 57; Pownall, App., p. 25.

ber the government convoy reached the capital with another consignment of flour, and the news that the growing crops were very promising when it left the Illinois.^ Although the prospects for large consignments of produce from the upper part of the Mississippi valley in the ensuing year were flattering, the outlook for the whole province was not happy. The output of colonial flour as yet, was not equal to the amount consumed and the English war, practically, had shut off the annual supply from France.^

The convoys from the Illinois country carried to the Gulf settlements, in 1748, 8oo,ckx) potmds of flour alone.* Besides the flour the cargoes were made up of corn, bacon, hams from the bear as well as the hog, salt pork, buffalo meat, tallow, hides, tobacco, lead, copper, small quantities of buffalo wool, venison, bear's oil, tongues, poultry and peltry, chiefly, however, the loads were made up of pork and flour.* The government convoys carried up the Mississippi consignments of brandy, cloth, made clothing and other European goods. They left New Orleans usually some time in August. In 1748 the first convoy set out up stream early in July. Notwithstanding the gain in time in starting there was a great shortage in all kinds of foodstuffs before it returned with supplies from the Illinois country.^

During the continuance of the war, to bring down the Mississippi at flood time the entire output of bear's oil, tallow, salt beef, tongues, hams, peltry, lead and other produce of the region required only twenty-five or thirty

* A, N., C, Sir. C"i3^ vol. xxx, fols. 71, 110-112, 144.

* Ihid., vol. xxxi, fol. 72.

^ Le Page du Pratz, vol. i, p. 331.

* A. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxxii, fols. 6z, 113-121, 196-197.

* Ihid., fols. 24-25; vol. xxxiii, fol. 168.

men. To return, including the escort carried along to g^ve protection from Indian attacks, 150 to 200 men were needed.^ In 1749 New Orleans received from the Illinois country a large consigpnment of flour and of peltry. The governor was of the opinion that the former commodity could be augmented considerably. To this end it was proposed to increase the number engaged in agriculture by men drawn from the Gulf coast settlements and from New France; to improve, also, the methods of production employed by the farmers and millers, and the manner in which the latter prepared the flour for shipment. Heretofore it had been sent to New Orleans in skin or cloth bags, much of it being damaged by water en route.' No plans were ever formulated by the colonial officials to carry out systematically any part of the above proposal. In 1750 the last of the annual convoys reached New Orleans in July. How many there were or what were their size and composition is not stated.' The crops this year were very short, therefore the consignments to New Orleans the next year were smaller than they had been for some time.* Flour at the time sold there at eighty and one hundred livres a quintal." By this time the abuses in the trade carried on between New Orleans and the Illinois country, it was declared by the " ordonnateur ", had become intolerable. A man who had received his appointment as a g^tuity from the governor, the usual practice, was in command of the government convoy. In making up the cargoes for the voyage his own merchandise took first place, that of private persons

^A. N., C, Sir. Ci», vol. xxxii, fol. 116; vol. xxxiii, foL 168; Jes. Ret., vol. Ixix, pp. 147, 213. « A. N., C, Sir. C" vol. xxxiii, fols. 57, 152, 153. 'Ibid., vol. xxxiv, fd. 321. * Ibid., vol. XXXV, fols. 24, 195. » A., B. N., Joly ColL, vol. I7a6, fol. 119.

second, and lastly that of the crown, if there still remained space for it. Frequently it happened that the " ordonna-teur " was obliged to add a boat and more men in order to have the royal freight carried along, the commander being interested, naturally, in the merchandise from which he would derive extra profits. The arrival of the convoy was announced at each post in advance in order to give time to get ready for a trade with the captain when he reached the particular post. The government consignment was put on sale, and part of the profits found their way into the pockets of the commander. In 1748 the captain had been well supplied with provisions for the entire trip before he left New Orleans. At Pointe Coupee, on the way up the river, he purchased further supplies amounting to 1,150 livres; during the voyage he incurred a bill of 1,200 livres for his daily supply of game ^ and an additional bill of 2,000 livres for other foodstuffs.^

In 1749 the convoy under the same commander left New Orleans in August; in January, 1750, it had not reached the Illinois country and it was feared it would not do so before the river was blocked by ice. Because of the length of time taken to make the voyage the " ordonnateur " prophesied that the receipts would show a great leakage in the liquor he had placed on board. His belief was based on the fact that the previous year the government liquor consignment on delivery in the Illinois country was considerably less than the amount shown in the bill of lading. The " ordonnateur" learned, from what he considered good authority, that the commander and crew were drunk during the entire journey. At each of the posts en route the commander drank and caroused indiscriminately with soldiers

1 Supra, p. 259.

* /i. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxxiv, fols. 291-296.

and civilians. It was further asserted that there was not a day that he did not lose his reason from the effects of the " guildive " he had consumed. From the beginning to the end of the voyage the government was " pillaged and robbed ". Each year the expense for the convoy had increased. Michel, however, was unable to find any one better with whom to replace this commander, or to find a way to punish him for his business irregularities, due to the fact that almost every one in New Orleans was interested in him, some member of his crew, or in one of the private consignments, hence would not tolerate his prosecution.^

The next year the governor informed the crown that ever since the coming of Michel he had heard complaints about irregularities in the shipments of supplies to the Illinois country. He further asserted that he had heard them at no time except from the " ordonnateur " himself, a statement that was perhaps true. Notwithstanding his one source of information, the governor endeavored to find ways and means to decrease the expense of the convoys. For the coming year he proposed to offer the contract to the general public and to let it to the lowest bidder. He had small hope that anyone would be found to do the work for less than it had been done. In the first place there were very few men in the province in a position to undertake the risk. In the second place such service in Louisiana had always been expensive. The governor was of the opinion the price demanded was not excessive, since laborers were scarce and wages high. Moreover, it was difficult, at any price, to secure crews for the government boats which were large, requiring at least twenty-four men each. The efforts of the governor resulted as he had predicted; apparently, therefore, the matter seems to have been dropped.*

^ A. N., C, Sir. 03, vol. xxiv, fols. 291-296. ' Ihid., vol. XXXV, fols. 8-12.

In 1752 the annual shipment from the Illinois country to New Orleans were unusually large. The posts en route, even including that of Natchitoches, were provisioned. Notwithstanding the amount given out the convoys on reaching the capital still had between eighteen and twenty cargoes of flour, pork and peltry.^ Moreover, the commandant of the Illinois, in March, sent a consignment of lard, flour, com, tallow and tobacco to Ft. Ouiatanon and Detroit. The entire order for the troops of New France had not been filled, due to the fact that there was a shortage of boats and men to transport it. The past harvest had been large but the growing crop indicated that there would be a greater output the coming year.^

Up to 1752 the English intrusions into the Mississippi valley had been troublesome enough to the French. Nevertheless they became more and more unbearable until the rupture came in 1754. Before the latter date the enemy seemed to be determined to take possession of the Ohio valley. Therefore, in order to prevent it, the French built Fort Du Quesne on the upper Ohio river. In 1753 it began to be provisioned with supplies drawn from the Illinois country. As the convoy was unable to pass the Falls of the Ohio, it was delayed through being forced to make a portage. After this experience it was despatched in time to pass the falls while the water was high enough to allow of it. The Ohio convoys were made up of from fifteen to sixteen boats, loaded with wheat, biscuit, com, bear's oil, lard, tallow, salt meat, tobacco, bullets and some other commodi-ties."

"^A. N., C, Ser. C^^, vol. xxxv, fol. 126; vol. xxxvi, fol. 271; Rec. Am. Cath. Hist. Soc. of Phila., vol. x, p. 206, * A. N., C, Ser. O^, vol. xxxvi, fol. 309; vol. xxxvii, fol. i88.

^ Ibid., vol. xxxviii, fol. 99; Kerlerec, Report, 1758, p. 70; Bossu, vol, i, p. 179.

For three years the harvests in the Illinois country had been adequate to the demands put upon them. In July, 1754, the last of the annual convoys reached New Orleans, bringing with it the news of a fine growing crop in that district of the province.^ Therefore the next year the settlements on the Gulf coast received from the Illinois country the usual shipments. From the same region other consignments were sent up the Ohio to the garrison stationed at Ft. Du Quesne.^ During the progress of the war, due to the transportation of troops and munitions, the number of official convoys plying between New Orleans and the Illinois country had to be increased. Formerly one was sent out annually; now there were two regular ones and frequent special convoys, each being composed of double the number of boats.'

After 1755 it became increasingly difficult for the frontier posts to procure supplies from New France, therefore the bulk of the provisions for the troops in such places was drawn from the Illinois country. In response to a call for food, Captain Villiers with a company of men left Fort Chartres, in 1755, for Fort Du Quesne with 18,000 pounds of provisions.* The next year a similar consignment was carried to that post.'* Governor Kerlerec, in his report of 1758, states that the Illinois country, from the beginning of hostilities, sent annually a convoy of about sixteen boats loaded with wheat, biscuit, com, oil, lard, tallow, tobacco, salt, powder and bullets to the French posts that were surrounded by hostile Indians.® The next year Captain Audry, with 300 soldiers, some militia and 600 Indians,

* A. N., C, SSr. C^', vol. xxxviii, fol. 26. » Ibid., fol. 170; Bossu, i, 159.

» A. N., C, Sir. C", vol. xxxvi, fol. 285.

* Trans. III. St. Hist. Soc, 1907, No. 11, p. 222.

* Bossu, vol. i, p. 179. • Kerlerec, Report of 1758, p. 70.

set out from the Illinois over the Maumee-Wabash route to reinforce the outlying posts of New France. For the support of themselves and the garrisons they carried along 200,000 pounds of flour and a considerable quantity of other provisions/

The Illinois trade, to be sure, suffered from the war; perhaps even more from the irregularities in the traffic itself that it seems the officials were powerless to eliminate.^ These obstacles were offset to some extent by men migrating from the Gulf region and from New France to the Illinois country where they established themselves either in trade or agriculture. In 1755, for example, a young merchant, Gabriel Carre, from Montreal, began business at Kas-kaskia, continuing there until 1781 when he removed to St. Louis.* At the end of the French control a trading company, " Boy ton, Wharton and Morgan ", had one store at Kaskaskia and another at Fort Chartres, where it carried on trade in cattle and all kinds of produce.* Beauvain, who, in 1763, bought the property of the Jesuits at Kaskaskia, also, was an energetic and capable business man. He supplied the royal storehouse at Fort Chartres in one year alone with 86,000 pounds of flour. He also had more flour and other products ready for the market.^ Valet, at St. Genevieve, on the west side of the Mississippi, annually put large quantities of produce upon the market, together with shipments of lard and salt. For some time after St. Louis was founded its entire supply of food was drawn from St. Genevieve.* On November 3, 1763, Captain Villiers reached Fort Chartres from the Gulf with a boat heavily laden

1 Coll. III. St. Hist. Lib., Va. Ser., vol. i, p. 165.

^ Supra, pp. 259, 294.

' Billon, Annals of St. Louis, etc., p. 452.

* Chicago Hist. Soc. Coll., vol. iv, p. 421.

* Pittman, p. 85. • Ibid., p. 95.

with merchandise sent by the firm " Maxent, Laclede and Company ", of New Orleans; Pierre Laclede, a member of the company, being in charge of the goods. The next year he began operating a branch trading-house in St. Louis.^ Because of the scarcity of records on the subject no account can be given of the business methods employed by these companies.

The legal prices for European goods in the Illinois country were higher than on the lower Mississippi.* The law evidently had little effect; for example, brandy, in 1723, sold there at 5,000 livres a " quart ", when paid for in bills of exchange;* in 1735, at five livres a pot.* Whatever the cost of brandy, much of it was consumed by the French themselves, and a far larger quantity used in the Indian traffic.' Information about the sort of European goods and their cost in the Illinois country is impossible to obtain. In 1738, however, a glimpse of the kinds of merchandise that changed hands in the upper district of the province and the prices they brought is available from the record of a sale that took place at Kaskaskia."

1 Trans. III. St. Hist. Soc, No. 8, p. in. » Supra, p. 252.

^ A. N., C, Sir. Ci«, vol. vii, fol. 15; supra, p. 120.

* Ihid., vol. XX, fols. 250-251.

* Ibid., vol. xxxi, fols. 47-48; vol. xxxvi, fol. 228. *Kaskaskia Papers, 1737-1784, MS. Chicago Hist. Soc. Lib. The names and prices of the articles sold follow:

Wearing apparel. Liv. Sol, Wearing apparel. Liv. Sel,

Breeches (sheepskin) 15 ..Jacket (sheepskin) 16 ..

" " 7 10 " " 15 5

•« •« 7 .. " " (4) each 15 ..

" (2 pairs) (sheep " " (3) each 13 00

skin) each 6 10 " " (2) each 11 15

Breeches (2 pairs) (sheep- Coat (sheepskin) 21

skin) each 6 . .Coat and )acket (sheepskin) 30 ..

Breeches (3 pairs) (cloth) " " " " 21 10

each 7 ..Soldier's uniform 18 ••

" " II ..

THE TRADE OF THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY

301

Records of the trade in live stock in the lUinois country are also scant. The French drew their supply of horses, in part at least, from the Indians to the west of the Mississippi who in turn secured them from the Spaniards of New Mexico. In 1719 a trader exchanged three muskets, some powder, knives and a few trinkets with the Osage Indians on the upper Missouri for two horses and a mule, all bearing the mark of a Spanish branding iron. He also procured fourteen other horses, and on his failure to secure an Indian to guide him back to the Illinois country made his

Wearing apparel, Liv. Sol.

Hat 5 ..

Dress 50 ..

Skirt (blue) 29 ..

" (gray (2) each ...... 22 5

Dry-goods. Ells Liv. Sol.

Limbourg 2 34 05

" 2^ 19 10

" I 16 10

i>i 16 ..

iM IS ••

Cloth (white) 2}^ 16 ..

" " 4 21 ..

" (red) 4 21 ..

" (linen) 2% 34 ..

" 5 27 ••

" (cotton) 21 ..

« « 2

" (wool) 3 10 05

Cloth cover 29 ..

" " (white) 20 5

" « 16 ..

Cover (red limb.) i6 5

Napkins (half doz.) 29 10

(doz.) 49 ..

Yarn 8 10

" (lib.) 3 ..

Hardware. Liv. Sol,

Sieves (two) 20 jo

" " 7 10

Kettles ( 7 or 8 pots) 25 ..

" 22 ..

" 17 ..

" (copper) 16 ..

" " (6 pots) 12 ..

" " (4 pots) 10 ..

" (iron) 10 ..

" (with cover) (4 pots).. 10

Stove (iron) 30 10

Candlestick 10 ..

Axes with handles (two) 10

Adzes (two) 12 •.

Miscellaneous. Liv. Sol.

Table 25 ..

" (two small round) 20

Chairs (8), (2 rockers) 25 ..

Cart (iron tires) 40 ..

Harness (2 sets) 60 ..

Dishes (12 plates) 8 ..

" (2 large, 10 medium), 2

small plates, a 2 qt. pot.. 50 00

way alone by the aid of a compass. En route, however, he lost six horses and a colt in attempting to cross a stream, a loss estimated at more than 900 livres.^ By 1738 the Illinois country had horses to sell; forty-six, at 200 livres a head, being provided the government for use in the Chickasaw war.' At the sale mentioned above,' horses sold somewhat cheaper.* 135 yoke of oxen supplied the officials for the Indian war in 1738 cost 450 livres a pair.** Other exchanges of live stock at the sale just referred to brought quite good prices.'

Records of transfers of real estate, furthermore, are as rare as those of personal property. In 1738, however, a house and grounds, including a garden, near Fort Chartres, sold at 650 livres. At the same settlement a horse-mill and two arpents of land brought 9CX) livres.' In 1755 a house

' Margry, vol. vi, pp. 314-315.

» A. N., C, Sir. Ci«, vol. xxiv, fol. 135.

» Supra, p. 300.

* Sec note 6 below.

^ A.N.. C. Sir. 0», vol. xxiv, fol. 135-

• Kaskaskia Papers, 1737-1784, MS. Chicago Hist. Soc. Lib. Price of live stock :

Kinds Age livres sols

Bull 3 years 75

Bull 2 years 52

Bull I year 62

Bull (one large, one small) 185

Cow (black) .. 8 years 99

Cow (black) 5 years 96

Cow (black) 5 years 86

Heifer (red) 2 years 50

Hogs (10) 5 or 6 months 77

Horses (3) mare and colt 400

Horse 300

Dogs (bull, mother and 4 pups) 15

' Kaskaskia Papers, 1737-1784, MS. Chicago Hist. Soc. Lib.

and its adjoining fields located near Kaskaskia sold at 6,500 livres, 3,000 livres being paid at the time of the transfer.^

Building materials were plentiful in the Illinois country, therefore few sales are recorded for lumber and stone. In 1737, for the construction of the fortifications at Fort Qiartres, the crown paid from 130 to 135 livres a cubic " toise " for the masonry, 185 livres for the brick and ten sols a foot for the carpenter work, which prices the officials considered too high/

Up to 1724, the lead mines of the Illinois country had supplied only local needs. That year 20,000 pounds, at fifty-five livres a quintal, payable in paper currency, were sold to the government for the use of the garrison at Fort Chartres.* In 1744, 30,000 pounds of lead from the Illinois mines was sent to New Orleans.* After 1750 enough lead was procured from these mines to supply both the French and Indians there, also to send annual shipments to the frontier posts of New France. The output was incapable of further expansion at this time, because there were in the colony no men with capital willing to invest in such an enterprise.*

' A. N., C, Sir. C^^, vol. xxii, fols. 51-54. 2 MS. 1755, Courthouse, Belleville, 111. ' A. N., C, Sir. Ci3, vol. viii, fol. 103.

* Ibid., Sir. P, vol, Ixxviii, fol. 16.

* Jes. Rel., vol. Ixix, pp. 221-223. vfivjicr

CHAPTER XVIII

New France in the Fur Trade of the Mississippi Valley

Ever since the establishment in New France of " The Company of the Hundred Associates ", in 1626, the traders sent out under its direction pushed westward into new and unknown lands. On July 4, 1634, Jean Nicolet left Three Rivers to go among the Indians on the upper Great Lakes and before returning went on as far as the present state of Wisconsin.^

The coming in 1654 of a convoy of fur-laden canoes from a point 400 leagues to the westward stimulated interest in the trade, and in September of that year, Father Mer-cier wrote that, if thirty Frenchmen could be sent to the upper Lakes, " not only would many souls be won to Grod but also a profit would be derived in excess of the outlay required for the maintenance of the Frenchmen sent out, since the best furs come in greater abundance from those regions "} The French government did not respond to this call, but in the winter of 1658-1659, Radisson and Groseilliers, two traders who desired " to travel and see countreys " and "to be knowne with remotest people ",* went westward as far as Lakes Michigan and Superior, on the latter of which they built a fort.*

* Coll. St. Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. viii, pp. 188, 191-192; vol. xi, pp. 1-24. » Jes. Rel, vol. xli, pp. 77, 185.

* Thwaites, The Colonies, p. 247.

* Pub. Prince Soc, vol. xvi, p. 31; Coll. Minn. Hist. Soc, vol. x, pt. 2, pp. 457-553.

In time the traders became better acquainted with the region between Lakes Michigan and Superior. From twelve to fifteen Indian tribes made regular trips to the upper waters of the former for the purpose of securing food and of engaging in trade with one another. There the French established in 1670 a post named Michilimacki-nac that became the center of the western fur trade. From this post, in 1673, Joliet and Marquette set out on their journey in search of the Mississippi.^ The traders, however, had reached the valley of that river ahead of them, for while on the Illinois Joliet met La Taupine whom he had known at Sault Ste. Marie in 1671.^

The work delegated to the Company, and its successors after 1663, and that assigned to the Church in New France sometimes was carried on by the traders in conjunction with the churchmen, while in other cases the former pushed on a little in advance. Nor did the task of establishing commerce with the Indians and the duty of converting them to the Christian faith always harmonize, as is shown in a letter in 1672 to Colbert by Governor Frontenac, stating that the Jesuits " think as much about the conversion of beaver as of souls; for the majority of their missions are pure mockery".' Other complaints evidently reached the royal government. In 1676, Governor Frontenac received the following instructions : " you must not suffer any person, invested with Ecclesiastical or Secular dignity or any Religious Community, to follow it (the fur trade) in any wise, under any pretext whatsoever, or even to trade in any peltries; and I consider it necessary to tell you that, for the sake of the example,

' Jes. Rel., vol. lix, p. 91.

' Winsor, Nar. and Crit. Hist, of America, vol. iv, p. 179; Mag. West. Hist., vol. ix, p. 432, » Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 93.

you ought not to allow any of your domestics, or any other person, in your name or by your authority, to do so; and I even forbid you to issue any license or permit for the (Indian) trade." ^ Had the crown been able to enforce this command it would have protected the fur trade of the Company organized for the purpose from inroads by the officials and independent traders as well as by the missionaries.

At the request of Governor La Barre the home government granted to La Salle, in 1678, a trading privilege that caused the existing Company much uneasiness. The patent from the standpoint of the officials of New France was given for a most worthy purpose, that of protecting the province and its fur trade from the hostile attacks of the Iroquois. The crown issuing the patent had attempted to preserve the rights of the Montreal fur traders by permitting La Salle to buy buffalo skins and peltry only from the territory not belonging to the Company.* La Salle gave the home government assurance that any bad effects that his grant might have upon the trade of those men would be more than balanced in the first place by the added security that it would give to his majesty's American possessions. In the second place it would increase the output of peltry, since his post on the upper Illinois river would intercept the skins that the Iroquois heretofore had carried to the English market.'

After receiving this grant La Salle ill-treated the Iroquois, avowing he would convey arms and ammunition to the Illinois and would, himself, if need be, die in assisting those tribes in carrying on war against them. The Iroquois, however, were not intimidated by his threats, and

» Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 126.

• Margry, vol. i, pp. 337-338.

» Hxst. Coll. of La., pt. i, ? 42; Coll. III. St. Hist. Lib., vol. i, p. 122.

in 1680 they returned from the IlHnois carrying with them large quantities of skins/ These successes led them to plan larger campaigns. In 1683, they were engaged in a war against the Miami, Ottawa, Huron and Illinois, in the hope of taking possession of Michilimackinac, thereby cutting off French communication with the Indian tribes to the South and rendering themselves masters of the fur trade in the west.^

In order to combat this movement, La Salle established a sort of confederacy at Fort St. Louis on the upper Illinois river. Before the French and their Indian allies were able to check them, the Iroquois had pushed their incursions almost to the Mississippi.' The ferocity and extent of such attacks no doubt were due in part at least to the fact that the English fur fields were already practically exhausted.* La Salle at this time also pointed out to the home government the necessity of protecting its American fur trade from encroachments from the Hudson's Bay Company.^ The crown, however, did not heed the warning; therefore very soon that Company had perceptibly decreased the amount of furs carried to Quebec. The French accordingly began to understand that in their struggle for control the Hudson's Bay Company would have to be reckoned with.'

The fight for full possession of the fur trade fell primarily upon the agents of the Company at Montreal and the traders with special permits from the crown. Tonty had been left in charge of the affairs at La Salle's post on the

* Penn Arch., 2nd Ser., vol. vi, p. 9. ' Margry, vol. v, pp. 7, 48-49.

' Ind, Hist. Soc. Pub., vol. ii, p. 327.

* Coll. of III. Hist. Lib., vol. i, p. 122.

* Ibid., p. 121.

* Penn. Arch., 2nd Sen, vol. vi, p. 13.

upper Illinois and here aided the Illinois Indians in defending themselves against the attacks from the Iroquois. In 1687, after paying his trading dues to the government, amounting to 4,cxx) livres worth of beaver skins, he still had left in the storehouse between 1,000 and 1,200 livres worth of peltry/ Tonty and La Forest became the sole proprietors of the trade at Fort St. Louis; but the Iroquois and Fox hostilities greatly interrupted it*

Apart from the trouble caused by the savages the condition of the fur trade in the Illinois country was not entirely satisfactory. Many of the skins sent to Montreal and Quebec were not properly cured; others were of poor quality. The officials thought it was wise to take all the peltry the Indians offered. They desired to improve the situation, and to this end requested Tonty and La Forest " to excite the savages to dress their skins well". At the same time it was proposed to make the conditions in the Illinois country such that there would be no need to buy skins in such abundance. It was decided to limit the number of permits to traders to twenty-five; to pay the soldiers of the garrison at Fort St. Louis in order to keep them out of the traffic, and to send presents to the Indians for the purpose of appeasing them for any shortage in a market for their peltry. Tonty, however, was permitted to go 500 leagues west of Michilimackinac in order to build up trade among the Indians of the region in question.' Still other Frenchmen from the Illinois country were exploring the territory on the upper Missouri, where they formed alliances with the Indians, the aim being to build up an advantageous fur trade.*

* Margry, vol. iii, p. 499.

* Early Voyages up and down the Miss., p. 49.

* Margry, vol. v, pp. 65-66.

* Jes. Rel., vol. Ixiv, p. 161; supra, p. 30.

By this time the French were feeling the pinch of competition from the Hudson's Bay Company. In order to relieve the situation, Le Sueur began his voyages to the upper Mississippi valley among the Sioux. Before the end of the century he had made a number of such trips and had learned their language.^ This accomplishment greatly increased the value of Le Sueur's services among the Sioux. In 1690 he was sent among them to restore peace. In five years the work was accomplished and a French post established there. In accomplishing the task Le Sueur received considerable aid from the presents that Perrot carried to Michilimackinac for distribution among the Indians of the northwest.^

Le Sueur, meanwhile, had become interested in the possibilities of the fur trade in this region. He told the officials that the bear, lynx, wild cat, martin and badger skins found there were incomparably more beautiful than those elsewhere, and requested that he be given the exclusive trade with the Sioux for a period of ten years, together with men and supplies for carrying on the traffic with Montreal. He further requested that he be allowed to supply those tribes with guns and ammunition. His proposition was rejected. Le Sueur, nevertheless, did not lose his interest in the commerce. In order to impress the officials with the abundance and wealth of the furs in the Sioux country, he stated that these savages dressed themselves entirely in beaver skins which were soon discarded and replaced by fresh ones, simply because of the lack of a market.'

' Margry, vol. vi, pp. 57-65.

^Ibid., vol. vi, pp. 55-56; Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 478; Coll. Minn. Hist. Soc, vol. ii, pp. 94-95. ' Margry, vol. vi, pp. 60-64.

Le Sueur's appeal failed to move the officials of New France to undertake the establishment of such a trade. In some measure the rejection of the scheme was due to the opposition to it from the friendly Illinois, who looked with disfavor on a strong alliance with the Sioux, their enemies. Then too the opinion and action of the officials of New France at the time were influenced by men who hated Le Sueur because of his success and were doing what they could to thwart his plans and bring about his political and financial ruin. In part, as has been shown, they succeeded in the task assigned themselves. Misfortune completed the work. In 1698 Le Sueur was captured by the English, lost 10,000 livres, and finally made his way to France. On his return to New France he found his enemies bitterly hostile, he therefore soon decided to go back to France. He secured from the crown a mining and trading grant for the Sioux country, to be operated from. Iberville's settlement on the Gulf of Mexico.^ Although many of Le Sueur's personal schemes failed, the work that he and others did among the Indians of the Northwest succeeded in reviving the fur trade of New France. In August, 1690, five hundred Indians from Michilimackinac were at Montreal. The merchants of the village were very happy. It had been a long time since they had seen there so large a number of these savages. In order to induce them to repeat their visit. Governor Frontenac, August 25, gave them a great feast consisting of " two oxen, six large dogs, two barrels of wine, some prunes and tobacco to smoke ".*

The frequent conflict with the Iroquois finally led the officials of New France to conclude that the only way to put an end to the trouble was to remove the cause. To this

* Margrry, vol. vi, pp. 90-92.

« Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, pp. 478-479.

end, in 1685, they informed the home government " the English both to the north and south of us as well as the Iroquois be to us as a constant threat, and it is our belief that something should be done to remove this enemy". They informed the royal government, also, that a great deal of uncertainty would be cleared up if only it could purchase the region dependent upon Albany/ This proposal, however, was not the first of its kind. In 1666, a colonial official had suggested to the crown the buying of the colony of New York, whereby his majesty " would have two entrances into Canada, and by which he would give to France all the peltry of the north, of which the English share the profits through communication they have with the Iroquois by Manhattan and Orange ".^ The argument was sound. Not only would it have given New France a second waterway to the sea and considerable influence over the Iroquois, but it would have closed one of the easiest English routes into the Mississippi valley. Moreover, during the reign of Charles II it is probable that such a purchase could have been made had the French government been persevering enough. Through lack of alertness their competitors, the English, again were left in a position to continue their formidable rivalry for the possession of the western trade.

At the beginning of 1687, New York, in order to aid the Iroquois in their wars with the French, and incidentally to increase its output of fur, made them a present of a barrel of powder.^ The next year, through the artifice of the French, as the English claimed, a treaty of commerce between the subjects of the two crowns was signed, giving the French trader a decided advantage over his English

1 Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, p. 329.

* Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, pp. 56-57.

* Colden, vol. i, p. T2>.

rival. Moreover, Governor Andros saw to it that the treaty was obeyed, but the English asserted that the French did not.^ Whatever the disadvantage from this source, the EngHsh were able to push forward to the great discomfort of the French. In 1692, the latter claimed the former were among the Miami and predicted the loss of the whole of New France if the English became masters of the Mississippi fur trade. In fact English influence among the western Indians already had caused the Fox, who wished to trade with them, to become hostile to the French. Moreover, it had caused outbreaks among the Miami. The French, therefore, were obliged, in 1692, to send out Nicholas Perrot for the purpose of pacifying the latter tribes.* Then too French legislation enacted for the purpose of regulating the fur trade had been decidedly useful to the English. The restrictions on the quantity of skins bought annually and on the number of permits issued, together with the actual extent of the fur territory, had caused the Company's agents to carry peltry to the English market.* In 1695, the fur output of New York, the only province at the time drawing furs from the Mississippi valley, amounted to about £10,000 sterling a year.*

The close of the seventeenth century, therefore, presented an interesting situation in the struggle for control of the western fur trade. The work of the French was beset with difficulties both internal and external. The English had as allies the Iroquois and Fox and were making headway among some of the other tribes of that area. They seemed, however, to have dreaded the Jesuits more

1 Pub. of Prince So£., vol. vii, p. 229. ' Parkman Club Papers, 1896, p. 12.

• Margry, vol. v, p. 65.

* Halsey, Old New York Frontier, p. 8.

than they did the French traders. In 1700, Robert Livingston declared the " Jesuits at Canada are so cunning to have their share of whatever an Indian hunts, which is brought and laid before the image of the Virgin Mary in the Church, and this being done they have not only remission of their sins, but her prayers to the bargain for good luck when they go out a hunting next time ".^

To these external problems of the fur trade of New France must be added the troubles that arose within. The officials complained of the men to whom special trading permits had been granted by the crown and they in turn complained that other persons with similar privileges were infringing upon their rights. For example, as early as 1682, La Salle asserted that Du Lhut and others working among the Sioux were ruining the trade belonging to him.^ Legislation, added to extortion on the part of the officials themselves, brought bankruptcy to many of the Indian traders, who thereupon entered into direct commerce with the English. By the time Biloxi was founded they had become independent and at once opened up a traffic with the new French settlement. *

Before Louisiana was a year old New France asked the home government for protection against encroachments from the colony on the Gulf.* The governor of the former sent Tonty to Michilimackinac to induce the agents of Montreal merchants to return. Tonty succeeded with only 20 out of 104. The others to the number of eighty-four made their way to the Gulf, whither thirty more had gone some time before with ten canoes laden with beaver skins

^ Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. iv, p. 649.

" Margry, vol. ii, pp. 253-254.

3 Supra, p. 288.

* A. N., C, Sir. OS, vol. i, fol. 29.

belonging to the Montreal dealers. The officials of New France at once informed the home government that it was very necessary to have this barefaced robbery stopped. To this end they desired the crown to limit the Louisiana trade to buffalo skins or other peltry found in that province itself.'

Instead of checking these traders, the home government sent out additional ones with special permits. Le Sueur was among the Sioux in I7cx) where the officials of New France complained he was buying beaver skins contrary to the terms of his grant.^ The crown was thereupon informed that it would be better to allow a few skins to go to the English than to ruin New France entirely by putting the whole trade in furs into the hands of persons who would carry it to Louisiana.' Le Sueur bought 3,600 beaver skins in eight days and sent them in three canoes down the Mississippi to Biloxi,* a fact that perhaps gives the above statement, in some measure at least, the appearance of being true.

The French government not only did nothing to restrain Le Sueur's traffic but actually increased the trouble of the Montreal merchants by issuing to Juchereau a permit to establish on the lower Wabash a tannery and there allowed him to buy buffalo hides and other peltry, except beaver skins. Thereupon the officials of New France began to make complaints against him similar to those previously directed against Le Sueur. They claimed that the three canoes of merchandise that Juchereau's grant allowed practically gave him control of the western trade. They as-

* Rep. and Coll. Sf. Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. xvi, pp. 201-202. 2 Infra, p. 336.

* Margry, vol. vi, pp. 68-69.

* Ihid., vol. V, p. 417.

serted further that this traffic would make it impossible for the Company at Montreal to fulfill the terms of its contract with the crown, such as paying in its name the 6,000 livres it had agreed to distribute among the poor families of the province and its obligation to build a post at Detroit. In spite of a denial from Juchereau, they declared that it was utterly impossible for a trader to go among the Indians as he did without being obliged to buy all the peltry the savages offered/ The home government took no action in the matter, therefore it continued to receive complaints against Juchereau until his death in 1703.^

Although encroachments came chiefly from the English side yet the French did not abstain from retaliation. In

1700, Martin Chartiere went into Pennsylvania without a permit and opened up trade with the Shawnee and Delaware. He built a post on the Susquehanna, married an Indian woman and reared a family. He and his sons became owners as well as fur traders. They always remained friendly to the French and regarded themselves as French subjects.*

Since the abolition of the " Company of the Hundred Associates ", in 1664, a number of different companies had tried in vain to build up in New France a profitable fur trade. At the beginning of the eighteenth century it was in the hands of the "Company of Canada", having an exclusive traffic in beaver skins, and being permitted to send to France 150,000 a year.* The traffic at the Detroit post, in

1701, fell to the Company of Canada's privilege, for which it paid 70,000 francs annually. The permit included also

1 Margry, vol. v, pp. 357-358, 360-365. » Ibid., vol. vi, p. 180.

* Lancaster County Hist. Soc. Papers, vol. ix, pp. 305-306.

* Kingsford, The Hist, of Canada, vol. ii, pp. 504-506; Margry, vol. v, pp. 360-361.

Fort Frontenac which was so close to the English that soon there was an illicit trade established with the merchants at Albany/ In order to protect the rights of the Company, the officials of New France, as has been seen, made violent protests to the home government against such men as Le Sueur and Juchereau,^ hoping no doubt, to force them out of the business, thereby shutting off competition and forcing down the prices of skins demanded by the Indians. In order to prevent the traders of New France from carrying their peltry to the Louisiana market, also, the director of the " Company of Canada " proposed that all beaver skins shipped to France on vessels from Louisiana should be seized at Rochefort and sold at the same price as the Company was paying for them at Quebec.'

About the same time the officials of New France suggested to the crown that the boundary between the two French colonies on the continent of North America be made the Ohio river, it being claimed that definite limits would enable them better to control the fur trade. In order to make the dividing line effective, it was further recommended that the following posts should be built, namely, one among the Miami; another on the Wabash (Ohio) where it empties info the Mississippi; a third on the Wisconsin; and a fourth in the country of the Sioux. It was further suggested to the home government that Detroit be made the center for the trade of the west. With headquarters at the latter post it was believed to be possible to unify the whole fur traffic of New France, since the colonial officials would then be able to force the Indians in that area to carry their peltry directly to Detroit, enabling them,

* Margry, vol. iv, pp. 58^592; Winsor, Tlie Miss. Basin, p. 73. 'Supra, p. 314.

• Margry, vel. iv, pp. 61 1-612.

therefore, to keep the savages under more effective control/

The affairs of the Company passed from bad to worse. On October 5, 1701, it was asserted that the disorder among their Indian agents had reached such a state that those in the interior did not come back. In the previous September twelve men, with four canoes, made their escape and since almost their entire stock of merchandise consisted of brandy, they presumably were well received by the savages. The peltry they procured in exchange, it was believed, passed to the colony of Louisiana. The Company had not increased the number of its traders because the quantity of the beaver skins permitted to send annually to France was limited. It was claimed, nevertheless, that there were more of these persons than ever before engaged in the interior traffic, from whom, naturally, the Company derived no profit. The peltry they collected passed to the English market or was carried to the French at Biloxi."

The next year, 1702, the royal government was informed that so many men had left their homes in New France, for the purpose of entering the Louisiana fur trade, that many of the merchants of Montreal and Quebec were financially ruined and asked that the practice be stopped.^ The Louisiana officials, however, stated in reply that the difficulty rested entirely with these merchants themselves, because they provided the men with merchandise and sent them into the woods to buy peltry which would have gone over to the English if the French of Louisiana had not received it.*

In 1706, the "Company of Canada" became bankrupt.

1 Margry, vol, iv, pp. 588-590; vol. v, pp. 359-362.

* Ibid., vol. v, p. 358.

' Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 6io-6ii.

* Ibid., pp. 628-629.

The fur trade of New France passed to ** Aubert, Neyret and Gayot ", who were often forced to pay more for peltry than they were able to secure for it in France. The firm spent lavishly, always having more traders in its employ than the traffic would warrant. Each year therefore the profits fell more or less below the expenses. Its credit collapsing brought on the ruin of its business, which in 1718 was given to a new company for a term of twenty-four years.^ The prospects for the new organization, however, were not flattering, since the failure of the earlier company had occurred at a time when the traffic in peltry was said to be worth annually 2,000,000 livres. To increase that output was not an easy task.' The company also was given the exclusive beaver trade of the province. As a means of protection, the discovery of one beaver pelt on board a vessel not belonging to it was to be considered sufficient proof to warrant confiscation of both ship and cargo.'

Nothing the officials of New France did to regulate the fur trade of that province seems to have succeeded. The independent traders became yearly more numerous, their ranks being swelled by soldiers sent to the frontier posts who soon became traders there. When their commerce was interfered with officially, they deserted and began trafficking with Louisiana or the English. Other recruits came from among the settlers of New France who believed it less profitable to till the soil.*

Such difficulties were trifling in comparison with the in-

* Kingsford, vol. ii, pp. 505-507.

' Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 757 ; Charlevoix, A Voyage to No. Am., vol. i, p. 52; Le Page du Pratz, vol. i, p. 48.

* Kingsford, vol. ii, p. 507.

* Coll. Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc, vol. xxxiii, p. 243.

termittent wars that for years the Fox and Iroquois had waged against the French and their savage allies, at times with such fierceness as to threaten to destroy the entire traffic.^ In 1716, the government of New France offered amnesty to the illicit traders on condition that they would agree to defend the province against these hostile savages.^ Moreover these attacks of the natives brought the officials of New France to understand that in order to keep intact the fur trade of that province it was necessary to drop the quarrel with Louisiana concerning it and unite with that colony in combating English aggression. To that end the governor of New France proposed to give more attention to the garrisons at the frontier posts where the English of Pennsylvania, Virginia and Carolina were anxious to pass into French territory by means of rivers that furnished easy communication with the Mississippi, the very center of the French fur traffic.^ In 1717, therefore, when New France lost control of the Illinois country the circumstance did not affect the fur trade to any extent.

In 1700, it was asserted that "the English do not discriminate in the quality of the beaver; they take all at the same rate, which is more than 50 per cent higher than the French, there being, besides, more than 100 per cent difference in the price of their trade and ours." * To a considerable extent the variance in rate paid was due to the fact that English goods were preferred by the savages and could be procured in Europe cheaper than could the similar French merchandise. As a result many of the French

1 Rep. and Coll. of Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. xvi, pp. 289-300; Neill, Hist, of Minn., pp. 177-179.

* Coll. Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc, vol. xxxiii, p; 573. ' Rep. and Coll. Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. xvi, pp. 345-346.

* Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 409.

traders sold to the natives goods of English make/ The advantage in price increased English influence among the Indians year by year. By 1705, many of the Miami tribes had been won over, Juchereau's post on the Wabash was destroyed, and Governor Vaudreuil found it necessary to send Vincennes to arrange a treaty with the natives in question. Under existing conditions such a mission was not easy. In 1708, the Miami came to trade at Albany to the joy of the English who for five years had been working to that end.'

Encouraged by this accomplishment, the people of New York now began to make plans to drive the French from Canada as the only way to establish peace with the Indian tribes of the Mississippi valley. Moreover they were of the opinion that the expulsion would be neither a difficult nor an expensive undertaking, since whatever debt was incurred in the conflict could be paid for in a short time by the Indian trade thus acquired.*

By 1715, the English traders had penetrated as far as the Wabash.* The nejxt year an " Ohio Company " was formed in Virginia for the purpose of promoting the west-em traffic. The Board of Trade, however, withheld its approval by laying the proposal aside. The English government at the time was indolent and much " afraid of giving umbrage to the French"; therefore until 1748 it made no attempt to help the American colonies extend their trade and settlement into the Mississippi valley. Interest in such a movement, however, seems to have kept alive, for in 1729 Joshua Gee published an ingenious discourse

1 Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. ix, p. 409. ^Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, pp. lo-ii. » Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. iv, pp. 1054-1055. * Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, p. 12.

on trade, in which he urged the planting of colonies as far west as the Mississippi river.^ The English traders meanwhile had not waited for encouragement from the home government. In 1716, they sent to the mother country 72,000 deer skins ;^ and from 1717 to 1720 the total exports from New lYork alone were worth £8,443 sterling, most of it coming from the territory belonging to New France.*

Up to this time the struggle with the French had been carried on chiefly by fur traders from New York; after 1716, however, Virginians and Pennsylvanians became increasingly active in the Mississippi valley. In the year 1716, Governor Spotswood, of Virginia, sought to extend the boundary of that province westward far enough to break the communication along the Mississippi between New France and Louisiana.* He wrote to the Board of Trade that the British dominions were surrounded by French territory in such a way as to enable the French to secure the whole Indian trade on both sides of the Great Lakes. This position, moreover, made it possible to send out bodies of Indians for the purpose of attacking the English frontier settlements. Fortunately for the latter, he declared, the mountains in the rear had passes unknown to the French; hence he proposed that these passes be seized by the English before they should become known.^ New York also urged upon the home government the necessity of strengthening the American colonies against the French, who were said to be fortifying themselves by making

» Dillon, Hist, of Ind., p. 47.

2 A. N., C, Sir. CIS, vol. iv, fol. 914.

' Roberts, New York, vol. i, p. 233.

* Trans. III. St. Hist. Soc. Lib., No. 8, p. 40.

* Board of Trade Papers, 1718-1720, Pa. Hist. Soc. Trans.

stronger and better connections between New France and Louisiana.^

New York was becoming more and more convinced that the only way for the English to win control of the fur trade of the northwest was to secure the Indians as allies, through a recognition of the fact that it was useless to attempt " to persuade an Indian otherwise than that they are his best friends who can help him to the best bargains ".' By such a policy New York for years had usually kept the friendship of the Iroquois, yet at times some of the tribes, through the influence of the Jesuits, had shifted over to the French for short periods of time. These exceptions, however, simply strengthened the English in their belief that the confidence of an Indian could be acquired and held only by affording him advantageous commercial opportunities.^ The English traders, therefore, were encouraged to deal fairly with all the savage tribes, and each of the provinces was to bear its proportional share of the expense of building posts to the westward in order to advance the traffic*

In spite of the active interests the merchants of New York had had in the western fur trade up to 1720, they were still unable to compete with the Indians and French. Since the beginning of the century, however, the New York merchants had derived handsome profits by selling to the French almost all the merchandise, except a small amount of brandy, that they used in their transactions with the natives. Such goods could be bought at Albany easier and cheaper" than they could be imported from Europe, a circumstance due in part to the impossibility of navigating the

» Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. v, p. 502.

» B. of T. Papers, pt. 2, vol. x, 1718-1720, Pa. Hist. Soc. Trans.

• Ibid. * Ibid.

* Supra, p. 319.

St. Lawrence during a number of months in the winter season,^

At this time some of the inhabitants of New York felt that direct trade with the Indians would be much more advantageous to the province as a whole. To this end laws were passed in 1720, 1722 and 1724 prohibiting the sale of Indian goods to persons from New France. This action, it was claimed, would ruin Montreal to the corresponding benefit of New York, Strouds that cost £10 sterling at the latter sold at the former at £25. The difference, it was claimed at the time the bills were pending, would enable the English to sell the goods directly to the natives 50 per cent cheaper, and give their traders the same profits that the French were getting.^ As late as 1739 the New York officials asserted the prohibition laid on the trade with New France was working well, and informed the home government that presents should be sent to the Iroquois for the service they rendered in making it effective.^

There was, however, a considerable number of persons who did not view the arrangement with favor. They were satisfied with the trade as it had been and had no desire to incur the risk that would be necessary in order to carry it on directly in the Indian country. An illicit traffic sprang up with New France which was most exasperating to those who had promoted the enactment of the laws in question. On the other hand, October 28, 1748, they were encouraged in this regard by the news that the Indians had killed two Frenchmen who had tried to prevent them from carrying peltry to the English. Governor Clinton at once began to

^ Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. v, p. 577; Colden, vol. i, pp. 103-105.

^ Do£. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. v, p. 757; Colden, vol. i, pp. 103-105.

» Doc, Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. vi, p. 157.

use all his influence to shut off the clandestine trade. The assembly, however, was controlled at the time by men who favored it, hence nothing effective could be done in restraint/ At the opening of the second war with England, therefore, this traffic between Albany and New France was still being carried on. In 1756, Governor Shirley renewed Governor Clinton's proposal to establish direct trade with the Indians at Oswego, but the war made it impossible to adopt and carry out vigorously any trading policy whatever.*

New France, on the other hand, succeeded in persuading the Indians to allow a fort to be built on the Great Lakes that, it was hoped, might cut off to some extent the English trade at Oswego.' On May 14, 1726, the French entered into a treaty of commerce and friendship with the Sioux. To that end an exclusive right of trade with these tribes for three years, also, was given to a company protected by an order to commanding officers at the French posts in that territory to confiscate the merchandise of all persons guilty of interference with it, one-half of the goods thus forfeited to go to the company, the other to the crown. It was permitted to build storehouses at places where there was such an officer, but nowhere else. It was to be allowed 1,350 livres worth of merchandise annually and as many boats to carry on the traffic with Montreal as the trade would warrant. Its agents, however, were not to engage in commerce with the natives on the way to or from Montreal. At the end of the three years the government of New France reserved the right to assign the privilege to the highest bidder or to whomsoever it saw'fit; meanwhile no

1 Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., voL vi, pp. 371-374, 455-

2 Bancroft Papers, 1755-1757, Jan. 5, 1756, N. Y. Pub. Lib. • Parkman, A Half-Century of ConAict, vol. ii, p. 52.

member of the company should sell or transfer his stock to an ecclesiastic or any one whose activities might lead to competition with that organization.^ A right so restricted seems not to have appealed strongly to other merchants in Montreal, for when the grant expired it was renewed in favor of practically the same persons as before.^

From 1730 to the outbreak of the war with England in 1744 there was no change by either the French or English in the methods employed in the western fur trade. Each side worked to strengthen its alliance with its own Indians and to increase the number won over from the allies of its opponents.* The English at the time, however, were not well organized to meet aggression, and on September 20, 1731, the governor of Pennsylvania recommended to the Board of Trade that it instruct the governor in the several provinces to take especial care of the commerce with the western Indians, but in the endeavor to promote the welfare of a particular province the governor there should see to it that nothing was done that would weaken the trade of an English neighbor.*

The activities of the French traders up to 1720 had had little effect upon the provinces of Pennsylvania and Virginia, except perhaps to draw away a few of their allies.'* By this time they had carried the work of alienating the savages so far that they had been able to prevail upon the Iroquois to make groundless complaints against the people of Pennsylvania, who, the Indians were led to believe, were a mild and defenseless folk. It was asserted, further,

' Margry, vol. vi, pp. 547-552.

» Ibid., pp. 563-567.

' A. N., C, Ser. C^\ vol. xvi, fols. 184-185.

* B. of T. Papers, vol. xiii, Sept. 28, 1731, Pa. Hist. Soc. Trans.

* Ihid., 1720-1727, vol. xi, Nov. 30, 1720.

that the French had instigated inter-tribal wars for the purpose of drawing all of the English colonies into a war with the western tribes/ In 1721, accordingly, Governor Keith asked the home government " to fortify the passes back to Virginia ", " to build forts on the Mississippi ".* During the year Spotswood wrote to Keith asking him to make an agreement with Virginia to unite in an effort to hold the loyalty of the Indians east of the mountains.' At this time the English, in order to offset French influence among the tribes of the Ohio valley, decided to push more vigorously the old principle of furnishing them with goods at fair prices. In spite of this decision and active endeavors to carry it out, the avarice of the traders led them to impose upon the Indians, thus arousing their hostility rather than winning their friendship.*

About 1740, the Pennsylvania and Virginia traders began to be much more keenly interested in the western traffic' In order to safeguard Pennsylvania at least, a treaty with the Indians at Lancaster was made in 1744.' After that agreement the Pennsylvanians became bolder. From 1745 tf> 1753 sixty of them were busy in the west where they bought thousands of skins from the Indians. Some of the traders sent out regular trains of fifteen and twenty pack-horses that made several trips each year.^ Some of them also passed up the Alleghany river and westward to Lake Erie, whence they drove their pack-horses across country

• Penn. Col. Rec, vol. iii, p. 98.

• Thwaites, Wisconsin, pp. 88-89.

» Tht American Weekly Mercury, No. 75. P- 5i. May 25. 1721.

• Coll. and Res. Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc, vol. xix, pp. 12-13.

• Gordon. Hist. Penn., pp. 249, 259-260.

• Penn. Col. Rec, vol. iv, pp. 698-699; vol. v, p. 24. ^ Journal of Captain Wm, Trent, pp. 42-43.

to the Scioto river. Others, even more venturesome, went on to the Wabash where they traded with the Miami, thereby-tapping the rich fur-producing region between Lake Michigan and Lake Erie; a territory up to this time entirely controlled by New France.^

The French found it most difficult to make headway against these English traders who paid the Indians twice as much and gave them more presents.'^ Thereupon the French called to their assistance Peter Chartiere, son of Martin,^ and a band of Shawnee Indians who at once began to rob the Pennsylvanians. By 1747, almost the entire Miami trade again came under the control of the French who, however, did not use their influence wisely. They lowered the price of skins and vainly tried to induce the Indians to believe that the decline was caused by the war. Finally, when the offer for peltry in one case fell so low that a single charge of powder and a bullet was all the Frenchman would give for a beaver skin, the Indian promptly buried his hatchet in the head of that individual and scalped him. Five others of that nationality also lost their lives while engaged in trade with the natives to the south of Lake Erie, and it is more than likely that the savages had been encouraged in such hostilities through the influence of the Pennsylvanians.* The latter continued warring on the French competitors.

In May, 1747, a letter was sent to the governor of Pennsylvania from the Indians around Detroit, the spelling and construction of which seemed to show the earmarks of a jealous Pennsylvania trader. George Croghan, " prince of

^Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, p. 12; Penn, Col. Rec, vol. v, pp. 24, 87.

* Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. x, pp. 115, 119, 144. 3 Supra, p. 315.

♦ Penn. Arch., vol. i, pp. 741-742.

the Pennsylvania traders ", told the governor that the Indian allies of the French had been won over and that it was now feasible to reinforce the English influence over them by sending them presents. The policy of Pennsylvania, however, was opposed to using the western tribes for warlike purposes, but not averse to widening the area of the fur trade/ Croghan and his fellow traders nevertheless began to urge that arms be furnished to the natives around Lake Erie. The colonial council and assembly hesitated to take the step, whereupon, in September, 1747, Croghan wrote to the Governor: " The Inguns att this side of Lake Eary is Making warr very Briskly Against the French, Butt it is very impatiant To hear from there Brothers, ye English, Expecting a Present of powder and Lead, which if they Don't gett, I am of Opinion, By the Best Accounts I can gett, That they will Turn to the French, which will be very willing to make up with them again. Sr, if there be no provision Made for to Send them a present by some of the Traders Directly, Send Me an account by first opportunity, for if there be Nothing Sent I will not Send any Goods or Men this year for fear of Danger." * Croghan, it seems, struck the one vulnerable spot. Presents for the western Indians were immediately provided, the tribes around Lake Erie receiving powder and lead worth £30 or £40 sterling.'

Croghan thus had won his point with the Pennsylvania officials, and on August 10, 1748, nine licensed and forty-nine unlicensed traders left for the interior.* The augmentation of the number of men in the western traffic of the Quaker province was due to the fact that the Twight-

1 Penn. Arch., vol. i, pp. 741-742.

* Ibid., p. 770. • Ihid., pp. 77i-'/y2.

* Ibid., vol. ii, p. 14.

wee were aware that the French paid poor prices for peltry in places where there were no English competitors, hence were encouraging the latter to come among them. The growth of friendship between the Pennsylvanians and the savages resulted in a treaty at Logstown, in 1748, which virtually gave the former control of the Indian traffic as far west as the Mississippi. Moreover is was now possible for the English to interrupt French communication between Louisiana and New France.^ On July 23, 1748, Pennsylvania strengthened its position still further by making a treaty of commerce and friendship at Lancaster with representatives of the Miami tribes. The agreement was particularly advantageous to Pennsylvania and Virginia and of some value to the other English colonies."

The safety that these arrangements with the Indians afforded to the traders stimulated them to advance farther and farther into French territory. The next year, Celeron, August 6, 1749, on meeting some of these Pennsylvanians in the Ohio valley, sent word by them to the officials of their province that their traders were to be kept out of the Mississippi valley.^ Little heed was paid to this demand. On the contrary, the governors of Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia caused the trail that ran from the Miami country to the forks of the Ohio and from there to Will's Creek on the Potomac to be cleared in order to make the journey thither for the traders and Indians easier.* The improvement of this highway into the Indian country was a hard blow to the French in the Ohio valley, and was perhaps the most important move made by the English up to

^ Penn. Col. Rec, vol. v, pp. 315, 322. " Ihid., vol. V, pp. 316-319. ' Walton, Conrad Weiser, pp. 229- 231. * Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, p. 24.

this time in their endeavor to get control of the western fur trade.

With the development of the Pennsylvania and Virginia traffic with the Indians, the settlements gradually advanced westward and by the end of the war in 1748 had reached the foothills of the last range of mountains separating those colonies from the Mississippi valley. In 1748, Thomas Lee, of Virginia, in conjunction with twelve other men from that province and Maryland, and Handbury, a London merchant, formed " The Ohio Company " for the purpose of stimulating progress in that direction and promoting trade.^ Dr. Thomas Walker, Christopher Gist and others were sent out in the following year to explore the western country which they traversed as far as the Falls of the Ohio.' The Company also despatched Barney Cur-ran, a trader, with goods to exchange for peltry with the natives there.'

Between the Pennsylvania traders and those of Virginia and Maryland so much jealousy and rivalry in the fur trade developed as to threaten to destroy the effectiveness of the Logstown treaty.* Because of the greater distance to be covered those from the two latter provinces were put to much more expense and hence were readily undersold by the Pennsylvanians. The Virginians and Marylanders complained bitterly of this disadvantage, and differences often arose between them and the traders from Pennsylvania while actually at work among the Indians. This lack of unity greatly weakened the English encroachment upon the French territory.' During the recent war the French

* Penn. Col. Rec, vol. v, pp. 422-424; Dillon, p. 50.

* Filson Club Papers, No, 13, pp. 1-83; Dillon, pp. 50-51. ' Mag. West. Hist., vol. vi, p. 105.

* Penn. Arch., vol. ii, pp. 31, 46-49.

* Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, p. 25.

had lost many of their Indian allies. Until its close there was little opposition to English aggression further than protests sent to the governor of Pennsylvania, who was asked to recall the traders/

In 1749, Governor Vaudreuil was instructed to do what he could to stop the English advance into the Ohio valley. To this end a union of the Indian tribes was proposed, and also the building of one or two posts on the upper Ohio for the purpose of preventing the English from doing so, in which case they could easily carry on the trade in all parts of the French fur fields.^ The next year New France warned the English of Pennsylvania that their people were trespassing on French soil where, if they persisted, their goods would be seized and confiscated.^ Moreover, the French had bettered their organization and were energetically at work winning back the friendship of the Indians whom they had lost for a while.

By December 17, 1750, the Pennsylvania traders began to feel the results of the renewal of French activity in the Ohio valley. Croghan's men, for example, reported that two of their number and seven horses loaded with skins had been seized and carried to a new post being built on an arm of Lake Erie (probably Sandusky).* The English on their part were striving to counteract the growing French influence with all the force they could muster. In May, 1751, they were still holding the trade of many of the . savages.^ The next year Pennsylvania and Virginia traders met the Ohio Indians at Logstown where the tribes con-

* Penn. Col. Rec, vol. v, p. 425; Mag. West. Hist., vol. ii, pp. 369-373. " Margry, vol. vi, p. 727.

» Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. vi, p. 565.

* Journal of George Croghan, Dec. 17, 1750; in Taylor's Ohio, p. 61.

* Early Western Travels, vol. i, p. 59.

firmed the Lancaster treaty and agreed to further the operations of the " Ohio Company ".^

The treaty, however, did not assure full protection. On December 10, 1753, some of the English found on French territory were robbed of their merchandise, others were killed and still others carried away as prisoners. At the time the English claimed that the officials of New France and Louisiana were paying 100 crowns for each English scalp brought in. This information no doubt was derived from their spies whom they kept among the western Indians, for the purpose of inciting the tribes to war against the French.*

The English traders among the natives there nevertheless did not work as effectively as they might have done. As early as 1753 the savages complained these traders brought them " scarcely anything but Rum and Flour; They bring little Powder and Lead or other valuable goods. The rum ruins Us. . . . When these whiskey traders come they bring thirty or forty Caggs and put it down before Us and make Us drink and get all the Skins that should go to pay the Debts We have contracted for Goods bought of the Fair Traders. . . . The wicked Whiskey Sellers when they have once got the Indians in Liquor make them sell their very Clothes from their Backs. . . .'" Such behavior was not conducive to the building-up of a strong influence over the western tribes, hence by 1755 the English had lost much of their power over the Ohio Indians, and the Delaware were already at war with them.* The next year they lost both the Twightwee and the Jachquai (sic)."

' Mag. West. Hist., vol. vi, p. 335.

* Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, pp. 73-74.

* Penn. Col Rec, vol. v, p. 676.

* Walton, p. 227.

' Board of Trade Papers, I754-I757, Pa. Hist. Soc. Trans.

At the renewal of war with Great Britain, therefore, the French had much support from the natives. In 1758, the savages of the upper Ohio were carrying most of their peltry to Detroit where they always found plenty of French traders ready to buy it. French brandy, however, was not so plentiful as English rum. At times the Indians found it necessary to call a council in order to decide who should be the ones to get drunk. ^ ^

Regarding the amount of peltry that passed from the Mississippi valley to New France and to the English colonies during the period in question, few statistics are available. On August 20, 1749, there were at Oswego 193 canoes manned by 1,557 men who had carried thither 1,185 packs of skins of which 1,049 came from the western country. Out of this number of canoes three were manned by thirty-six Frenchmen who brought thirty-five packs. The value of the peltry thus carried to this post was £21,406 sterling.- The Miami alone brought seventy-seven packs in eleven canoes manned by eighty-eight men.^ By 1761, the value of the goods necessary to carry on the Indian trade in the upper Mississippi valley amounted to 1,500,000 livres, when sold at an advance of 30 per cent to cover freight charges. It was asserted at this time by the English that the French " computed the value of all kinds of skins imported from Canada to amount to £135,000 sterling per annum ".* At the same time all the northern English colonies did not export to the mother country more than £90,000 sterling. The next year the peltry that

^ Ohio Valley Hist. Series, No. 5, pp. 75-76.

2 Doc. Rel. to Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. vi, p. 538.

' Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, p. 25.

* Coll. and Res. Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc, vol. xix, p. 14; The Present State of the British and French Trade, etc., 1745, p. 9.

reached Montreal from the upper Mississippi valley was worth 146,000 livres/

Notwithstanding the fact that the output of furs from New France was greater than that from its English rival, and the further fact that in 1763 Fort Ouiatanon alone sent to Detroit 80,000 pounds of peltry, the French had lost to the English in the struggle for the control of this traffic. The latter were at this time trading in Wisconsin. For example, Denis Croghan, in the spring of 1763, arrived at Green Bay with seventy packs each weighing thirty pounds."

In short, then, the account of the peltry that passed from the Mississippi valley to New France and to the English colonies during the period under consideration shows that up to 1720 the greater part of the skins from that region were despatched to Europe by way of Montreal and Quebec. From the beginning of the century at least many pelts passed from these two markets to Albany and from there were shipped to Europe. From this time to the opening of the first war with England the French continued in the ascendancy, but all the while were gradually letting that power pass into the hands of their rival. Between 1744 and 1750 the English merchants received a larger quantity of the peltry from the region in question than did the French. Before the opening of the Seven Year War, however, the latter had regained much they had lost. For the remainder of the time the trade was in such great confusion that not much definite knowledge can be ascertained concerning it. The few facts available, at all events, show that the French obtained peltry in considerable quantities up to the time the province was ceded to the English.

* The Present State of the British and French Trade, etc., 1745. P- 9-» Coll. and Rep. St. Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. viii, p. 235.

CHAPTER XIX The Fur Trade of Louisiana, 1699-1763

Among Iberville's schemes for the development of the province was one for the promotion of a trade in skins with the natives. As early as 1700, he had received some buffalo hides from the Illinois country and had engaged the " voy-ageurs " returning thither to procure more of them in order to ascertain their possible value in the markets of France. For each skin the hunters were to receive seven livres; in order to secure the skins more rapidly they were instructed to do what they could to induce the Illinois Indians to abandon the beaver for the buffalo hunt. In Iberville's opinion the savages would prefer the latter if the hides would bring as large returns as the skins of the former did. In order to carry on this traffic on a large scale it was further proposed to have a number of large flatboats constructed, on which considerable quantities could be sent down the Mississippi,^ there to be placed on ocean vessels and shipped to France.'

Iberville's previous knowledge of the fur trade about the Hudson Bay ^ led him to beheve in the possibility of persuading the natives of that region to sell the peltry to traders from Louisiana whom he proposed to station on the upper waters of the Mississippi river. With prices the same and French merchandise as attractive as that offered

1 Supra, p. 59.

* Margry, vol. iv, p. 376.

• Ibid., vol. vi, pp. 497-500.

by the English, the Indians undoubtedly would prefer to dispose of the pelts in this fashion rather than to carry them miles over a difficult and dangerous country in order to exchange them for the latter's goods. If workable the scheme would completely destroy the traffic of the English in that region since none of their traders could be induced to follow the savages into the interior. Iberville asserted that if such a traffic were established, within four or five years it would draw away from Fort Nelson annually between 60,000 and 80,000 buffalo skins, worth four or five livres each; 150,000 deer skins, worth 2,500,000 livres; and other peltry, such as that of the bear, wolf, otter, lynx, wild cat, fox and martin, worth at least 200,000 livres.^ The proposal seems to have had no effect on his own government, whereas the agents of the Hudson's Bay Company, in order to strengthen their influence over the Indians with whom they traded, speedily began to supply them with guns.^ For some time the energetic way in which the English carried on their work made it impossible for the French to make any advance in the field.

In 1700, Le Sueur ^ left Biloxi with two boats, manned by nineteen men;"' on reaching the territory in the Sioux country assigned him by his patent, he began operations by establishing a post on the Blue river which he named Fort I'Huillier." During his stay he bought 3,600 beaver skins ' and many other pelts, for which he gave in exchange merchandise, including some Brazilian tobacco that was much appreciated by the savages." Trade in beaver was

1 Margry, vol. iv, pp. 600-601. * Ih'td., vol. vj, p. 82.

« Supra, p. 314.

* Margry, vol. vi, p. 70.

» Ibid., p. 80.

^ Supra, p. 314.

^ Margry, vol. v, pp. 417-419.

contrary to Le Sueur's grant; but he justified the purchase on the ground that the Indians had pillaged his canoes and that he had taRen the pelts in compensation for his losses. The officials of New France, however, asserted that the robbery was preconceived by Le Sueur in order to have an excuse to seize the skins/ On returning to Biloxi he soon sailed for France, Nothing more was done with his grant in the Sioux country, due perhaps to the fact that the Illinois opposed the French going there to trade, fearing they might supply the Sioux with firearms; the very thing Le Sueur, himself, would have done had the officials permitted it.^ The Illinois, in fact, robbed eleven Frenchmen who were returning from that region of beaver skins to the value of 33,000 livres/

During the very first year of the existence of the little French settlement on the Gulf of Mexico quite a traffic in skins was established with the traders coming from the upper part of the Mississippi valley.* On February 16, 1700, Tonty and others from the Illinois country sold at Biloxi six canoe loads of beaver pelts."^ As has been shown," this commerce, of an illicit sort, was stimulated by the attitude in New France toward it. But neither length nor the hardships of a voyage to the Gulf were great enough to stop the traffic in question. Therefore both buffalo hides and peltry found their way to that market in prodigious quantity.'' For some of the beaver skins Iberville gave in return 1,200 to 1,500 pounds of powder,

1 Margry, vol. v, p. 357. ' Ibid., vol. vi, p. 89. ' Ibid., vol. iv, p. 366.

* Supra, pp. 313, 314.

* Margry, vol. iv, p, 364. ^ Supra, pp. 313, 314.

■' Margry, vol. iv, pp. 521, 606-607.

and " some of his people have also given them other goods in trade "/

On February 22, 1702, Iberville conferred with certain traders from the Illinois country who wished to sell him the beaver skins they had in storage there. They had received flattering offers from the English, but the risk to be incurred in the transaction made them prefer to sell to the French at Biloxi.* Encouraged by this opportunity, Iberville began to consider the feasibility of increasing the fur trade at Biloxi to at least 45,000 pounds of skins annually.' This he proposed to bring about by a readjustment of the position of the Indian tribes in the upper valley. The scheme aroused no interest on the part of the home government, yet a royal grant at this time was made to Juche-reau * who soon collected 15,000 skins which contributed in some measure to an enlargement of the quantity of skins sent down the Mississippi from the Illinois country."

In 1704, Bienville tried to increase the trade still more by attempting to induce about no Frenchmen who were at work in bands of seven or eight in the Missouri region to come down with their peltry.* About this time a quarrel broke out among the savages of the Illinois that destroyed Juchereau's post on the Wabash, involving a loss 6f 13,000 buffalo hides that would have gone to the same market.' The peltry trade of the French was further disturbed by hostilities between the Alibamon and Mobile Indians.*

> Rep. and Coll. St. Hist. Soc. Wis., vol. xvi, pp. 201-202.

• Margry, vol. iv, pp. 509-510. * Ibid., p. 598.

• Supra, p. 314.

• A. N., C, Sir. 0», fol. 458; U Harpe, p. 367.

• Margry, vol. v, p. 368.

» A. N.. C, Sir. 08, vol. i, fol. 22S;Trans. III. St. Hist. Soc. pt. i, p. 43; Journal of Captain Wm. Trent, pp. lo-ii.

• A. N., C, Sir. CIS, vol. ii, fol. 398; Margry, vol. v, pp. 435-43^.

Louisiana, like New France, had English rivals to reckon with. In 1699, traders of that nationality had given the Indians near the mouth of the Arkansas guns and other presents in order to alienate them from the French and especially from the Jesuits/ A year later Penicaut, on passing up the Mississippi found an English trader also among the Arkansas Indians. He was kindly disposed toward the French and rendered them much assistance in securing food of which the latter were much in need.^

These Englishmen, however, were evidently not the first visitors of their kind to the valley. Delisle's map of 1701 shows Carolina trade routes as far west as the Chickasaw, and on a map of 1703 the Tennessee river is marked as the chief thoroughfare.^ Carolinians in fact were much ahead' of their northern neighbors in crossing the mountains. It is claimed that they were trading with the Indians on the Cumberland and Tennessee when La Salle made the discovery of the mouth of the Mississippi, and that by 1700 were passing down these rivers to the Ohio, Wabash and Mississippi.*

In 1701, the French government was informed that English traders were among the Chickasaw, and was advised to establish a post at the mouth of the Wabash in order to prevent trade from being developed over that route between the English and the French. ° The post was not built. Before the end of the year one Frenchman was killed on this route, though five others made successful trips to Carolina and brought back quantities of English merchandise.

1 Jes. Rel., vol. Ixv, p. 117.

* Hist. Coll. of La. and Fla., vol. i, p. 63.

' Winsor, The Miss. Basin, p. 20.

*Coxe, Description, etc., pp. 109-122; King, Ohio, pp. 48-49.

» Margry, vol. v, pp. 354-355.

This traffic explains why Iberville wished to shift the relative position of the native tribes in the Illinois country to block it and at the same time to protect the French against attacks from Indian allies of the English/

On May 7, 1707, it was stated that the Carolinians were receiving from the western Indians, including the Chickasaw, about 50,000 skins annually, in exchange for broad cloth, red and white beads, knives, guns, powder and bullets worth between £2,500 and £3,000 sterling.* About this time the Board of Trade was informed that English merchandise was attractive to the Indians and held the savages to alliance and obedience provided its price were low enough; on the principle that " they afifect them most who sell the best cheap ". It was indispensable to the success of the traffic, also, that Indian traders should be enabled to buy their merchandise at as low a rate as possible, because they were often forced to take small skins at double their real value in order to maintain friendly relations with the savages.'

The influence exercised by the Carolinians over a number of tribes in the lower Mississippi valley led them to believe it possible to control all, hence, July 10, 1708, the Board of Trade was informed that all the Indians of the " back country " could be made English subjects by placing the Yassas and other friendly tribes on the Cussate river, and by building a few small forts on the frontier where English merchandise could be stored. The home government was further informed that the Cherokee were an adequate protection for Carolina against the Illinois and

1 Margrry, vol. iv, pp. 599-600.

« Bancroft Papers, MSS., 1662-1679, N. Y, Pub. Lib.

* Public Records of South Carolina, MSS., vol. v, p. 196; Trans. B of T., Gjlumbia, S. C.