origin of the word Erie. On the other hand, some traditions of the Catawbas of the South, render it not improbable that they are the survivors of the vanquished Eries.6

6) For further details of these traditionary tribes, see Appendix No. I.

CHAPTER II.

THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF IROQUOIS CONQUEST IN THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.

THE extent of Iroquois conquest in the seventeenth century was the subject of much controversy between the French and English, while Canada was under the dominion of the former. The French title, by discovery of the Lakes and the Mississippi, was sought to be overcome by a grant of sovereignty from the Five Nations. This sovereignty was claimed to result from a conquest of the entire country east of the Mississippi. Colden in 1727, and Clinton in 1811, are the prominent champions of the Iroquois pretension-the former advancing it as a matter of vital importance to the English colonies, and the latter reiterating it with the interest of an antiquarian and the pride of a New Yorker. It is interesting to observe how closely recent writers have pursued the authority, almost the text, of Gov. Clinton. The following extract discloses the partisan tenor of his discourse:

"The conquests of the Iroquois, previous to the discovery of America, are only known to us through the imperfect channels of tradition; but it is well authenticated, that since that memorable era, they exterminated the nation of the Eries or Erigas, on the south side of Lake Erie, which has given a name to that Lake. They nearly extirpated the Andastes and the Chouanons; they conquered the Hurons, and drove them and their allies, the Ottawas, among the Sioux, on the head waters of the Mississippi. They also

subdued the Illinois, the Miamis, the Algonkins, the Delawares, the Shawanese, and several tribes of the Abenagins. The Illinois fled to the westward, after being attacked by the Confederates, and did not return until a general peace; and were permitted in 1760, by the Confederates, to settle in the country between the Wabash and the Scioto rivers. The banks of Lake Superior were lined with Algonkins, who sought an asylum from the Five Nations. They also harassed all the Northern Indians, as far as Hudson's Bay, and they even attacked the nations on the Missouri. When La Salle was among the Natchez, in 1683, he saw a party of that people who had been on an expedition against the Iroquois. Smith, the founder of Virginia, in an expedition up the Bay of Chesapeake, in 1608, met a war party of the Confederates then going to attack their enemies. They were at peace with the Cowetas or Creeks, but they warred against the Catawbas, the Cherokees, and almost all the Southern Indians. The two former sent deputies to Albany, where they effected a peace through the mediation of the English. In a word, the Confederates were, with a few exceptions, the conquerors and masters of all the Indian nations east of the Mississippi.

"In consequence of their sovereignty over the other nations, the Confederates exercised a proprietary right in their lands. In 1742 they granted to the province of Pennsylvania certain lands on the west side of the Susquehannah, having formerly done so on the east side. In 1744 they released to Maryland and Virginia certain lands claimed by them in those colonies; and they declared at this treaty, that they had conquered the several nations living on the Susquehannah and Potomac rivers, and on the back of the Great Mountains in Virginia. In 1754, a number of the

inhabitants of Connecticut purchased of them a large tract of land west of the Delaware River, and from thence spreading over the east and west branches of the Susquehannah River. In 1768 they gave a deed to William Trent and others, for land between the Ohio and Monongahela. They claimed and sold the land on the north side of the Kentucky River.”

This is a skillful statement of the grounds for the Iroquois claim, and was doubtless compiled by the learned writer from the archives of the colonies, and whatever of the diplomatic correspondence between the English and French governments had then transpired. The provincial authorities took early measures to obtain a transfer of whatever rights the New York confederates had obtained. As early as 1684, Lord Howard, governor of Virginia, held a treaty with the Six Nations, at Albany, when, at the request of Colonel Dungan, the Governor of New York, they placed themselves under the protection of the mother country. This was again done in 1701; and, upon the 14th of September, 1726, a formal deed was drawn up, and signed by the chiefs, by which their lands were conveyed to England, in trust, "to be protected and defended by his majesty to and for the use of the grantors and their heirs." 1

Without repeating the French argument in the premises, it may be mentioned as an interesting coincidence, that Gen. William H. Harrison, as recently as 1837, responded with intelligent zeal to the exaggerated narrative of Clinton, and vindicated the warlike qualities of the Western Indians, by a denial that the Miami Confederacy of Illinois and Ohio could have been conquered by the Iroquois. He cites nu

1) Writings of James H. Perkins, Vol. II, p. 186. Pownall's Administra tion of the Colonies, 4th Ed., London, 1768, p. 269.

merous evidences that in 1700 the Miami nation was very numerous; and, even within the memory of those living in 1837, that the Illinois tribes could bring into the field four thousand warriors. "In the year 1734," he adds, "M. de Vincennes, a captain in the French army, found them in possession of the whole of the Wabash, and their principal town occupying the place of Fort Wayne, which was actually the key of the country below. This officer was the first Frenchman who followed the route of the Miami of the Lake and the Wabash, in passing from Canada to their western settlements. Long before this period, the French must have known of the shorter and easier route, and no reason can be assigned for their never having used it, but from its being formerly the seat of war on some portion of it between the Wyandots and Iroquois De Vincennes found the Miamis in the possession of the entire Wabash."

Briefly, Gen. Harrison admits the subjection of the Delawares, in Pennsylvania, the dispersion of the Hurons, Eries and Andastes, and that the Iroquois advanced as far west as Sandusky; but denies that there is any tradition among the Miamis of their ever having been conquered by the Iroquois. He remarks that, at the treaty of Greenville, there was no allusion to a claim, on the part of the Five Nations, to any right of property in the soil, or jurisdiction over the territory of the Miamis.2

Upon a careful review of all the evidence, we think the hypothesis of Gen. Harrison deserves to be adopted in preference to that of Colden and Clinton; and for the following reasons, in addition to those already adduced:

1. The distance from their homes to which war parties

2) Harrison's Discourse before the Ohio Historical Society. See Transactions, Vol. I, p. 257.