Читать книгу St. Louis - The Fourth City, Volume 1 - Walter Barlow Stevens - Страница 8

The source and origin of all empires has been the refuge and kind usage which men And In the gentleness of the laws. The evil administration of them Is the greatest impediment to the building of a government; for not only are those who are present and who are exposed to them exasperated, but others are prevented from coming. Hence, as our laws are extremely mild, they ought not to be obscured by ambition and self-interest as has been the case with some settlements formed by the king. — Royal decree sent to the Spanish Governor. St. Louis, 1778.

With six officers and twenty soldiers, Don Pedro Piernas arrived in St. Louis in 1770. He was the first Spanish lieutenant governor. Making no demonstration of authority, he took his residence, as a guest, at Laclede's house. The government went on as before, except that no land titles were issued. The wife of Piernas was French. Laclede, it is said, spoke Spanish. Piernas made himself agreeable. He did not formally begin the discharge of the duties of his office for some weeks. The first official act of the governor found in the archives bears date of May 20, 1770. Laclede and St. Ange laid before Piernas the details of the de facto administration. Piernas accepted the forms and methods with only slight changes to conform to Spanish laws. He went even farther in his policy of conciliation. He retained in minor positions the appointees of the St. Ange government. He gave St. Ange a Spanish commission, said to have been that of captain of infantry. The old Canadian, however, declined further active service, and retired.

Piernas did one thing which, more than all of the rest, made easy the transition of government. When St. Ange and Labusciere brought to the attention of the governor the eighty-one titles to ground in St. Louis which they had issued to settlers, Piernas accepted them and announced publicly his recognition of them so far as his authority went. In short, the Spanish official took St. Louis as he found it, ratified all that the community had done during the six years previous and proceeded along the lines familiar and acceptable to the seven hundred inhabitants.

With all of his circumspection and mildness of method, Governor Piernas encountered at least one unpleasant proof of the spirit of liberty which the settlers of St. Louis had acquired in their experiment of governing themselves.

Before he had been in office six months Don Pedro posted a notice declaring "Amable Latourneau duly attained and convicted of seditious language and a disturber of the public peace." The governor sentenced Latourneau to "ten years' banishment from His Majesty's settlements, with still heavier punishment should he disregard this sentence and reappear."

Latourneau was a Canadian. He had come to St. Louis in 1764. Piernas, to obtain some revenue to pay the expenses of Spanish government, imposed a tax on provisions. The ordinance was posted in a public place. Latourneau saw it and spoke rebelliously. He claimed that all he said was that if the other young men in the community were like him they "would not work for forty sous a day in peltries." The governor took evidence and concluded that the time was opportune to make an example. Latourneau moved across the river. Before the term of Piernas expired the merchants of St. Louis were getting even with Spain for what they deemed excessive duty on imports. They were receiving goods through the British country across the river instead of by way of New Orleans and the Mississippi. Perhaps it was smuggling but it was peaceful evasion of what prompted the throwing overboard of the tea in Boston harbor sometime later. The offense of Latourneau was officially described in the records as "derisively commenting on an ordinance laying an excise tax on provisions." Others than Latourneau had the instinct of self-government but they were politic. They made no protest against the tax in theory but found ways to defeat it in practice.

In strong contrast with his measures at New Orleans to suppress the movement for independence, was O'Reilly's policy toward St. Louis. In New Orleans the representative of Spain was "Cruel" O'Reilly. When he sent Piernas to set up Spanish authority at St. Louis he told him to cultivate friendly relations with St. Ange, the head of the de facto government. He spoke in his instructions of St. Ange as one whose practical relations with the Indians will be very useful. The lieutenant-governor was told to do whatever he could to gain the good will of St. Ange, to listen to the opinions of St. Ange, and to accept his views as far as possible without prejudice to the service.

The lieutenant governor shall preserve the best of relations with Monsieur de Santo Ange. whose practical knowledge of the Indians will be very useful to him. He shall do whatever he can to gain his friendship and confidence, and shall listen to his opinion attentively in all matters, and shall condescend to him so far as possible without prejudice to the service.

These instructions were given in February, 1770. not quite six months after Piernas returned to New Orleans from his first mission to St. Louis, and expressed himself rather savagely upon the kind of government he found there, reflecting especially upon what he considered the lack of authority exercised by St. Ange.

Laclede's house was built originally with one chimney. The first St. Louis winter showed that more heat was needed. A second chimney was added. This was constructed on the outside of the north wall. An opening for the fireplace was made from the inside. At a later date more patching was applied to meet the needs of the seat of government of the growing settlement. An addition was built on the south side. This was intended for a prison when needed. At least one prisoner was confined in the jail. He was a soldier charged with homicide. What became of the case does not appear. That the prisoner regularly left the jail without escort to go to his meals and as regularly returned to confinement is recorded. In the yard of Laclede's house, after it became the property of Auguste Chouteau, was dug the first well. Until that time the river and the springs had been the sources of water supply. The river was within easy reach of all the houses of the period.

With the coming of this first Spanish governor in 1770, Laclede's house lost none of its official significance. It was still government house. There the Spanish governor was quartered. In the high basement the Spanish soldiers on duty were stationed. The Spanish flag took the place of the French flag on the same flag staff. Successive Spanish governors occupied this house until the years of use and weather began to tell upon it. The time came when the governor decided that the house was no longer habitable. He moved his headquarters across the street on the south. When the estate of Laclede was settled and when the affairs of the firm of Maxent, Laclede and Company were adjusted, this house became the property of Auguste Chouteau. After the Spanish government moved out, Auguste Chouteau put the building in thorough repair adding another story. There he lived until his death in 1829. Even after the historic Laclede's house became the mansion of Auguste Chouteau, it was still the nursery of St. Louis. The mantle of the founder fell upon the shoulders of Auguste Chouteau. Although the officers of the government were moved formally over the way, questions of local policy were still settled in the old house. At Auguste Chouteau's the conferences were held. There the conclusions were reached, to be officially published from headquarters. Where the infant Fourth City was born, the cradle was rocked through forty years.

When the first Spanish governor retired from St. Louis he carried this remarkable testimonial signed by fifty French residents, heads of families:

We, the undersigned inhabitants, merchants, tradesmen, hunters and traders of the post of St. Louis, assembled in the government chamber by direction of Governor Don Francisco Cruzat, of the Illinois, certify to all whom it may concern, that we have no subject of complaint to allege against the manner in which we were governed by his excellency, the late Governor Don Pedro Piernas; that he rendered us all the justice to which we were entitled; that neither he nor the company of soldiers he commanded in this post ever committed any excess or extortion, or were guilty of any wrong on any of the inhabitants; that said company occasioned no trouble, nor gave any scandal or bad example; that no one received any violence or bad treatment without cause; that we are not aware that he had any pecuniary agreement or understanding with any one whomsoever, on this or the other side in regard to business. It was never perceived by any one that he had injured the public by restricting trade. He never exacted anything from merchants and traders for licenses or passports necessary for their affairs, either in setting out or on their return. He never excluded any one from this trade, which he distributed alternately each year to the beat of his judgment for the public interest and the number of traders. No one received any ill treatment from the Indian tribes for having been badly received by him at this post. They never heard from said Indians any complaint of him, his behavior, or of the Spanish government, and they are peaceable and contented, as well as we ourselves. In short we can only speak well of him and with respect and gratitude.

As the result of considerable research, Pierre Chouteau, the third of that name, has fixed the terms of the Spanish governors at St. Louis. It will be observed that the length of service was from two to seven years:

Piernas, from May 20, 1770 to May 19, 1775.

Cruzat, from May 20, 1775 to June 17, 1778.

De Leyba, from June 18, 1778 to June 28, 1780.

Cruzat, from September 24, 1780 to November 25, 1787.

Perez, from November 25, 1787 to July 24, 1792.

Trudeau, from July 21, 1792 to August 28, 1799.

De Lassus, from August 29, 1799, to March 9, 1804.

De Leyba died and the gap between the end of his administration and the beginning of Cruzat's second term was filled by the lieutenant, Don Silvio de Cartabona. The record shows a loss of three days between the terms of Perez and Trudeau. The St. Louisans had long before shown a capacity for taking care of themselves; the discrepancy in the dates is considered by Mr. Chouteau "not important."

The government which Spain applied to St. Louis was mild. That is the descriptive term the historians apply. The more definite truth is the governors imposed very limited government. Spanish laws were presumably operative. In fact, few of them were in force. Those relating to land and to government organization were invoked by the governors. In business affairs, in court contracts, in the practical essentials, the people of St. Louis went on governing themselves, much as they had done under Laclede and St. Ange. The legal customs of the French colonies continued to prevail. Arbitration was common in business differences. The governor sometimes appointed the arbitrators. He conducted the arbitration. He might enforce the finding of the arbitrators. It was seldom this extremity was needed. The principle of arbitration was recognized by the community. When the decree was given, it was accepted. The governor had a few soldiers. He seldom called on them to enforce Spanish authority over the community. The military presence was looked upon rather as protection against Indian trouble. On a very few occasions in the period of Spanish government, undesirables were escorted by soldiers to the bank of the river, put in boats and sent over to Illinois. In these cases the action was taken on the complaint of the habitants of St. Louis. The governors did not initiate radical reforms or impose oppressive measures. The only shadow of despotism in the Spanish government of St. Louis was that cast by the flag floating in front of Laclede's house.

About the only regulations which the Spanish governors enforced rigidly were those which public sentiment sustained as for the common good. In the case of the banishment of Amable Latourneau, it is said that Don Pedro acted only when the officers of the St. Ange administration furnished the evidence and urged the show of authority as desirable for the good order of the community.

Habitants looked well to their reputations in early St. Louis. A strict code of respectability was enforced by public sentiment. Joseph Robidou came with his father, who was a shoemaker, from Montreal when St. Louis was about half through the first decade. Even then antecedents were scrutinized. Joseph Robidou courted Mademoiselle Becquet, the daughter of the blacksmith. The young lady was responsive. The young man went to the blacksmith and asked for the daughter. The blacksmith, young Robidou said in his complaint to the Spanish governor, "appeared pleased with the proposal and asked for three days to consider it. Your petitioner was very much surprised at the expiration of the time that Mr. Becquet should say to him he would not give his consent to the marriage because he had learned there were some in your petitioner's family who had surrendered their souls to the devil. As there were no wicked ones in the Becquet family, he would not introduce any."

The blacksmith did not go into the particulars when pressed, but Miss Becquet did. An uncle of the young lady had told her sister that he had learned Joseph Robidou had an uncle who had killed his wife. This uncle, according to the report, had also killed the man for whom he had worked.

Robidou became busy with the old habitants and with some recent comers from Canada. They gave him certificates that there was no blemish on the character of his family. One of those who testified was old Mr. Tabeau, a Canadian before he became a St. Louisan.

"Of what are you accused?" asked Mr. Tabeau, according to the statement which Robidou filed with the governor, "There is nothing to repeat about your family. I know them and it is only through mischief that these things are said." Robidou told Mr. Tabeau that the story was "one Demer, an uncle, had killed his wife and his employer." Tabeau replied he "knew of no stain on the family of Robidou."

Robidou demanded of Becquet the authority for the statements reflecting upon him. Becquet refused to tell but Madame Becquet gave the young man two names. To Governor De Leyba went Robidou for satisfaction. Both of the men whose names had been given to Madame Becquet denied that they had said anything to the detriment of Robidou. The governor's decision was that there had been too much talk and that the case was not one which called for a penalty on anybody. He advised Robidou to obtain from Montreal certificates as to the respectability of his family. Robidou went into the business of fur trading and became wealthy. He ceased to mourn for the blacksmith's daughter. Three years after his first affair he wooed and won Catharine Rollet. When he died in 1809, he left a considerable estate and six sons who were men of affairs. Auguste Chouteau administered upon the estate, which was evidence of the excellent position Robidou had obtained in the community.

The wisdom of Solomon was in some of the decisions of the Spanish governors of St. Louis. Before De Leyba, in 1780, was brought a suit for slander. Estimable ladies living in one of the best neighborhoods of the settlement, Main and Elm streets, only a square away from the government house, within sight of Father Valentin's church, talked about one another. The talk was carried. One of the ladies complained to the governor. De Leyba called all of them before him and took their affidavits. Then he settled the case in this way:

"All attentively considered and examined, it appears that there are no grounds for a suit in this case, it being at most but the idle scandal of babbling women, which took place long since and is now revived by dissensions and broils among themselves. I throw the matter out of court as too trivial, and impose silence in the future on the subject on all implicated therein, strictly forbidding any reflection on each other that might tend to the injury of their reputations, under the utmost vigor of the law to be imposed upon the first transgressor. I condemn the two parties in the case each to one-half the costs and expenses of the suit."

De Leyba came in state to enter upon the duties of governor at St. Louis. He traveled up the river from New Orleans in a batteau with two swivel guns. He was received, as he described the arrival, "by all the habitants with extraordinary signs of rejoicing." When he had been here a short time he wrote to the governor-general at New Orleans:

"Since this district is commanded by a person chosen by your lordship, they have whatever is necessary for their progress and happiness."

De Leyba made a good record as a judge in such ordinary disputes as were brought to his attention, but in a great emergency he failed utterly. The memorial of protest and repudiation by the people of St. Louis was carried to New Orleans by the first citizen, Auguste Chouteau. Of the six Spanish governors of St. Louis, De Leyba was the only one not well remembered.

O'Hanlon, the Irish historian came to St. Louis while some who were here in 1780, "the year of the blow" — L'Anne du Coup, — were still living. He obtained from eye witnesses and from the family traditions, then fresh, the details for the most definite and graphic recital of that affair which has been written. Father O'Hanlon was for some time stationed at the cathedral about 1848. He saw the records. He sought the recollections from those best qualified to speak. And this is what he wrote:

A few days before the attack was made an old man named Quenelle, who was a resident of St. Louis, had gone over to the mouth of Cahokia creek, on a fishing excursion. While watching his lines on the south side of the creek, he heard a slight noise at the opposite side. On looking up ho beheld an acquaintance, who had formerly resided in St. Louis. The man had absconded on account of some crime he had committed. His name was Ducharme. Afterwards it was ascertained that he was one of the chief leaders in the attack. The sudden and strange appearance of Ducharme, the circumstances under which he had left and the rumor of a meditated attack, induced Quenelle to refuse Ducharme 's invitation to cross the creek. The wary fisherman was confirmed the more in his refusal by observing the bright eyes of several Indians glaring upon him from out of the bushes.

" Come over, " Ducharme said, " I have something very particular to tell you. "

"No," said Quenelle, "your request is not intended for my benefit, nor for the gratification of your friendly feelings. Though I am an old man and bald, yet I value my scalp too highly to trust myself with you and your friends."

So saying, the fisherman promptly re-embarked in his canoe. He crossed over to St. Louis, and without delay he informed the commandant of what he had seen and heard. The people became alarmed when such tidings reached them. Instead of commending, De Leyba called his informant an old dotard and ordered him to be put in prison. This strange proceeding had the effect of calming people's minds and banishing apprehension.

The 25th of May that year brought the festival of Corpus Christi. This was a day highly venerated by the inhabitants. Had the assault occurred then, in all probability it must have proved fatal to them; for after Divine worship and procession, all of the townspeople, as they had been accustomed, went to gather strawberries which grew wild on the prairies near. The town could have been taken with ease, while the unsuspecting inhabitants, who were roaming about in search of fruit, could have been massacred. Fortunately few only of the enemy had crossed the river and ambushed themselves on the prairie. The villagers frequently came so near them that, from their places of concealment, the Indians could have reached these strollers with their hands. But they knew not how many whites were still remaining in the town. On the 26th the main body crossed and marched directly toward the fields, expecting to find the greater part of the village there. They were disappointed, few only among the tillers baring gone out to view their crops. These perceived the approach of their savage foes and immediately commenced to retreat toward the town.

One man, named Chancellor, had gone out that day before the attack to get strawberries. His wife, two daughters and an American, — the first that had ever lived in St. Louis, — accompanied him in a cart which was drawn by two horses. When they perceived the Indians, these excursionists fled towards the town. Chancellor was seated in front and driving, while the American was posted behind in order to protect the women. During the flight the American was mortally wounded and as he was falling out of the cart, Chancellor seized him and threw him in the midst of the women, exclaiming:

"Those Indians shall not get the scalp of my American."

At the same time, Chancellor was struck by two balls which broke his arm in as many places, above the elbow. His wife received a bullet through the middle of her hand. The elder daughter was shot through the shoulder. The younger was struck on the forehead, the ball glancing and only stunning her. The family had a most providential escape, for the moment Chancellor arrived at the town gate, his horses dropped dead, having been pierced with wounds while galloping homewards, impelled by the owner's shouts and whip.

Had those who discovered their foes in the prairie fled to the lower gate, they could have escaped. The greater part of them took that road which led to the upper gate through the very midst of their enemies. About twenty persons, it was computed, met death while endeavoring to get within the entrenchments. A Mr. Belhomme had his thigh broken by a ball fired from an Indian 's gun. He managed to crawl toward the great bend of a pond opposite to a mill. In the evening when the Indians had disappeared, he began to call aloud for help. Finding this unavailing, Belhomme fired his gun. He continued this until all of his ammunition was expended. The people in the town heard the report but fearing the Indians were still lurking about, they dared not obey the signal of distress. The unfortunate man was found dead a few days after, having perished through loss of blood and through hunger.

Julian Boy was pursued by an Indian who wished to take him prisoner. Finding that his enemy gained on him at every step, the Creole determined to give him battle. He turned, and, taking aim, fired at the Indian's head and shattered his jawbone. The Indian fell. Boy ran up to him and tearing his shirt, bound up the wound. The Indian was grateful and guarded Boy through the ranks into St. Louis.

This rencontre greatly alarmed those who remained in the town and immediately the cry was raised, "To arms! To arms!" From every direction the townsmen rushed towards the works, and threw open the gates to save their brethren. The Indians advanced slowly but steadily towards the ramparts. Taken by surprise, and almost deprived of hope, owing to the superiority of numbers of their assailants, the courageous inhabitants determined to defend themselves to the last extremity. About fifteen men were posted at each gate. The rest were scattered along the line of defense. The Indians began an irregular fire. This was answered with grape shot from the cannon. For a while the contest was very warm. On account of the intrenchments and deterred by the cannon, the Indians deliberately retired.

The inhabitants proceeded to gather the slain and bury their bodies that lay scattered in all parts of the prairie. Seven were at first found and buried in one grave. Ten or twelve others were discovered in the course of a fortnight in the long grass. The acts of the Indians were accompanied by their characteristic ferocity. Some of the victims were horribly mangled. In the cathedral register of St. Louis Father Bernard, the Capuchin missionary, records as a fact that on the 26th day of May, 1780, he interred in the cemetery of the parish the bodies of Charles Bizet, Amable Guion, Calve and a negro. These men were massacred by the Indians. Their corpses seem to have been the first recovered.

The conduct of the Spanish governor, De Leyba in connection with the British-Indian attack on St. Louis has been one of the subjects of controversy among historians of St. Louis. Father O'Hanlon's researches prompted him to conclusions very discreditable to the Spanish governor. He said that De Leyba did not make his appearance until the Indians had begun to retire from the attack:

Being an invalid he was rolled in a barrow to the scene of action. It is traditionally stated that immediately be ordered several pieces of cannon, which were posted in front of the government house to be spiked, and to be filled with sand. In a very peremptory tone De Leyba commanded the inhabitants to cease firing and to regain their homes. Those posted at the lower gate did not hear the order and consequently kept their stations. The commandant perceived this and ordered a cannon to be fired at them. They had barely time to throw themselves on the ground when the volley passed over them. The shot struck against the wall and tore down a portion of it. The tenor of De Leyba 's conduct gave rise to suspicions of treachery on the part of the governor. Under the pretext of proving that there was no danger of an attack, only a few days before it actually occurred, De Leyba sold the government ammunition to the traders. The townspeople would have been left defenseless had they not found in a private house eight barrels of powder belonging to a trader. This they seized upon the first alarm. These very singular circumstances gave rise to the strongest possible aversion for their commandant, which showed itself in execration of his base character for a long time afterwards.

The action of St. Louis upon the conduct of the Spanish governor, De Leyba, in relation to the attack of 1780, was an illustration of the independent spirit of the community. These bold settlers, after their narrow escape from destruction, did not condone the course of the governor. They sent to New Orleans, by a special representative, a full statement of the actions of De Leyba, with a detailed account of the attack and repulse. Father O'Hanlon says:

There can hardly be a doubt that De Leyba had been seduced into defection from his duty, and that it was only the unflinching heroism of the St. Louis people that saved their infant outpost from utter destruction. Their defense against this attack and that bold spirit manifested on the occasion were in keeping with the deeds of their brethren, the French, who took part in the American Revolution; while their course of action has given them the right to Bay. that, on the occidental shores of the Mississippi river, they were the first to battle against English oppression and English ambition.

De Leyba made his will on the 10th of June, 1780, two weeks after the battle. Father Bernard entered in the cathedral register that Don Ferdinand De Leyba, having received the sacraments of our Holy Mother the church, had been inhumed immediately in front of the right hand balustrade of the St. Louis Old Church on the 28th of June, 1780. But it appears from the inventory of the governor's property, made with evident care, that he died on the 28th. That he was buried on the day of his death was so unusual as to suggest suspicion. In the families which preserved the traditions, there was transmitted a rumor that De Leyba died of poison administered by himself, as the result of shame and remorse.

The feeling in St. Louis toward the governor did not end with the indignant protest sent to the governor-general at New Orleans. It was not quieted by the death of De Leyba a month after his inexplicable conduct in the battle against the British and the Indians. John B. Trudeau, the village schoolmaster, Canadian by education, wrote a song, abounding in satire directed against the Spanish commandant. The composition was called the "Chanson de l'Anne du Coup." It was set to music and was sung by the St. Louisans of two or three generations. Aside from the historical interest, this song is significant as showing the boldness with which the independent spirit of the community was manifested under Spanish authority. There was a good deal of the instinct of Americanism in St. Louis as early as 1780. The chanson of Trudeau was the Yankee Doodle of the St. Louisans. It is tradition that a copy of the song was transmitted to the governor-general at New Orleans to inform him as to the sentiment of the community. On the 17th of February, 1845, the St. Louis Reveille printed the song in the original French and with it an English translation in verse by J. M. Field, the editor of the Reveille and the literary authority of St. Louis in that day. Trudeau gave the song the character of a musical dialogue between the governor-general at New Orleans and the messenger who had arrived from St. Louis with news of the battle and the settlers' charges against De Leyba. The chanson was sung as late as the time of Field's translation which began as follows:

Governor

Courier, say, what Is the news

That seems thy fancies to confuse?

What! Have we lost the Illinois?

Then English— do they the land enjoy? Downhearted thus!

Speak, courier, say.

What great misfortune has happened, pray?

Courier

Oh, General. General, all Is lost.

If not redeemed with speed and cost.

We've been by savages attacked —

They threaten us. still, by others backed

Ever so many, alas '. were killed ,

Unable to aid them, with grief we're filled.

When the enemy first appeared,

To arms we ran. no one afeared:

Townsmen, traders, grave and gay.

Bravely to battle and win the day;

But by command we were forbid

To quit the trench where our ranks were hid.

The defenses of St. Louis in 1780 were temporary. They were constructed hurriedly when the rumor came of an attack being planned by the British. Trunks of small trees were planted in the ground in a double row a few inches apart. The space between was filled in with earth. This protection was five or six feet high. It began at the river bank, where the electric plant is, near the foot of Biddle street. It extended up the hill to about Third street and curved southward with the present court house site as the highest point, reaching the river again some distance north of Chouteau avenue. In this rampart were three gates, one well to the south, the others on the high ground so located as to give exit to and entrance from the tilled fields on the northwest and the great pasture on the southwest. At the gates were posted cannon. These were, according to tradition, some of the pieces St. Ange had brought from Fort Chartres. They were kept loaded and in good condition. It is further tradition that the men of St. Louis built this fortification in the fall of 1779 without encouragement from De Leyba and in the face of repeated assurances from him that the rumors of an attack were false.

The fortifications of St. Louis did not amount to much until long after 1780. Church records at the old cathedral show that on the 17th of April, 1780, Father Bernard blessed the first stone of the fort on the hill. That was Fort St. Charles, named in honor of the king. It stood as late as 1820 very near what is now the southwest corner of Walnut and Fourth streets, where the Southern hotel corners. "The high-fenced house of thunder" was the name the Indians bestowed upon the fort.

Plans were drawn for elaborate defenses. Auguste Chouteau, at the request of the Spanish governor, made a study of the situation with a view to the construction of substantial fortifications. But more was done on paper than with stone and timber and earth. The fort on the hill was, after many months, completed. At what is now Olive street, was built a circular tower and about Fourth and Poplar was another, with a third stone tower between that and the river. A square stone structure not far from what is the entrance to the Eads bridge was the bastion. Another piece of work in that vicinity was the half-moon. Governor Cruzat built a palisade of posts connecting the stone towers and other structures. Cannon were placed in the towers. The wall of posts was pierced with loopholes for firing. Soldiers went on guard at the fortifications.

When General George Victor Collot visited St. Louis during the Spanish regime, he obtained a plan, showing the streets and principal houses, the existing fort and the proposed additional defenses, some of which were never constructed. The map was drawn by Adjutant Warin.

While on a visit to Paris, George E. Leighton found in a second-hand bookstore what is, probably, the most elaborate map of St. Louis, made during the period of the Spanish governors. This plan was made in 1796 by a former French officer, George de Bois St. Lys. It gave the existing topography of St. Louis quite in detail and showed the plans proposed for the more complete fortification.

Relations between the Spanish soldiers and the habitants of St. Louis were pleasant. They bore out the theory that the military force was for protection, not for enforcement of sovereignty over the people. These soldiers occupied barracks just north of where the Southern hotel stands. A long one-story stone house was built westward from Fourth street. This was divided into rooms. The soldiers cultivated gardens near the barracks. They not only mingled freely with the people of the village but went out into the fields and helped with the planting and harvesting. The relations were so agreeable that some of these soldiers married French girls and became permanent and good residents of St. Louis.

Militia service under the Spanish governors was not a perfunctory performance. Scattered in little garrisons, "the regiment of Louisiana" did not appear formidable. But the regulars from Spain were reinforced by an enrolment of "all persons able to bear arms, from the age of fourteen years to fifty." One of the orders issued by a Spanish governor at St. Louis read:

"Innovation or not, the militia will assemble every fourteen days, on Sundays. Each commandant will exercise his company in marching by file, or in sections of four or eight, according to the number of men, teach them the manual of loading and firing to enable them to execute it promptly and with regularity."

There were penalties for those who shirked military duty. The Spanish governor put into his warning the reproach as well as the threat:

All enrolled militia men who exhibit an indisposition to comply with the order, by not appearing at the place of assembling when required, thus giving an unequivocal proof of little love of country, will, for the first offense, be reprimanded by eight days' imprisonment and eight dollars fine; for the second time, by double the length of imprisonment and fine; the third time it will be signified to him that he must settle up his affairs and leave the country. Understand that in the oath of allegiance administered to every new comer to the country, before a concession of land is granted to him, he must obligate himself to take arms against the enemies of the state and all malefactors whenever it may be required. As there may be found some of the inhabitants who have not yet taken the oath, the commandant will administer the same to all those he may find on each Sunday of assembling.

A stringent liquor law was promulgated from St. Louis by the Spanish authorities:

At each post there shall be but a certain number of tavern and dramshop keepers that wo will appoint, who shall be persons of good conduct and devoted to the government. These, under no pretext, can sell or give liquor to Indians or slaves. They will give immediate notice of the least disturbance at their houses which may lead to disorder, to the commandant or nearest syndic that he may apply the most prompt remedy. All persons other than those who shall be authorized to keep tavern, or dramshop, who shall be found to have sold liquor, shall undergo for the first offense three days' imprisonment and two dollars fine; for the second offense fifty dollars fine and fifteen days' imprisonment; for the third relapse they shall be sent to New Orleans under safe conduct at their own cost and expense.

Every person, cither keeper of tavern or dramshop, or any other who shall be found to have given or sold liquor to Indians shall be at once arrested, put in irons and sent under escort of a detachment of militia at his cost and expense to New Orleans, and his effects shall be seized and sequestered until the decision of his lordship, the governor general.

Perhaps in all other Spanish colonial history there was not administered government so far dependent on consent of the governed as that which prevailed at St. Louis. Probably if the authority had been less tolerant, if the rod had been felt, the revolt would have come. The spirit of revolution could not flame out of such go-as-you-please political conditions. The militia and liquor laws were so manifestly in the public interest that they inspired no antagonism toward the government.

The habitants of St. Louis held town meetings to consider public improvements. As business conditions changed they adopted new methods. They carried their conclusions to government house. The governor often accepted the will of the people.

The collection of debts occasionally called for an application of authority. The creditor went to the governor and reported the debtor. A notice was sent from the government house. If this did not bring a settlement, the second notice directed the debtor to appear before the governor. Should this be ignored, a squad of soldiers brought in the prisoner as a debtor. This was not often necessary; it was one of the few occasions for the show of the military.

Before the end of the Spanish regime, the business men of St. Louis were asserting a degree of commercial independence which caused the political authority no little concern but even that did not lead to harsh measures. In January, 1802, Governor-General Morales, at New Orleans, wrote to Governor Delassus:

After comparing the shipments of goods from this market and the arrivals of furs with those of 1781 and 1782 and other years, we find the difference is against this capital and therefore also against royal interests, because the duties are not paid as before when goods were shipped. I am well aware that the Indian works do not produce as much as they did earlier. I also know this is not the only reason of the decline in mercantile relations between your region and this capital. The secret importation and exportation that I am informed the Englishmen and the Americans are doing contribute largely to the present condition of affairs. Therefore it is my duty to ask you to exert all your efforts to prevent such acts. Advise me what you think it would be necessary to do. If any expenditure is indispensable, I will consider the matter and try to do what will be in my power.

The consideration shown in the enforcement of authority at St. Louis was illustrated when Delassus reported to Salcedo in March, 1803, that he had been compelled to place Manuel Lisa, the fur trader, under arrest The governor-general referred the matter to Counselor De Guerra. The latter sustained the action of the governor at St. Louis after this manner:

"It seems to me that you can approve the action he took against Manuel Lisa and his arrest for the insulting and disrespectful expressions he used in his writings, which are the more surprising because they come out as false and without any foundation according to the declarations made by his associates, as seen in the different documents. Therefore it is necessary that the said commander advise Lisa that in future he must behave himself with respect and moderation, as he ought to. Otherwise a different course will be taken for correction and punishment."

Salcedo wrote on the counselor's findings: "As I think this is satisfactory, I transmit it to you for compliance and in answer to your communication." The papers were returned to Delassus, addressed to him as "commander of the Illinois."

Monette, in his History of the Valley of the Mississippi, tells of the habit of dress which prevailed in St. Louis in colonial days. The leggins were of coarse linen in summer and of deerskin in winter. The principal garment in cold weather for the men was:

Generally a coarse blanket capote drawn over the shirt and long vest. The capote served the double purpose of cloak and hat; for the hood, attached to the collar behind, bung upon the back and shoulders as a cape, and, when desired, it served to cover the whole bead from intense cold. Host commonly in summer and especially among the boatmen, voyageurs and coureurs des bois, the head was enveloped in a blue handkerchief, turban-like, as a protection from solar heat and noxious insects. The same material of lighter quality and fancy colors, wreathed with bright-colored ribbons, and sometimes flowers, formed the fancy headdress of the females on festive occasions; at other times they also used the handkerchief in the more patriarchal style. The dress of the matrons was simple and plain; the old-fashioned short jacket and petticoat, varied to suit the diversities of taste, was the most common over dress of the women. The feet in winter were protected by Indian moccasins, or the more unwieldy clog-shoe; but in summer, and in dry weather the foot was left uncovered and free, except on festive occasions and holidays, when it was adorned with the light moccasin, gorgeously ornamented with brilliants of porcupine quills, shells, beads or lace, ingeniously wrought over the front instead of buckles, and on the side flaps.

Immigration was a living issue at St. Louis in the days of the Spanish governors. Piernas reported to the governor-general at New Orleans the continued movement of settlers "from the English Illinois" to the St. Louis side of the river. Cruzat, the second governor, was given authority to encourage immigration to St. Louis, especially from Canada. The Spanish government set apart 40,000 pesos to be used as an immigration fund. In 1780 Shadrach Bond led from Maryland and Virginia a colony of people who settled on the east side of the river between what is now East St. Louis and Kaskaskia. This colony gave to the long, fertile tract the name of the American Bottom. Much correspondence passed between St. Louis and New Orleans upon the policy toward immigration.

When Governor Delassus was appointed to the important position at St. Louis, Gayoso, the governor-general, at New Orleans in March, 1799, gave him these instructions:

"I recommend to you Messrs. Chouteau, Cerre and Soulard. Please do whatever you can for them without showing any injustice to the rest. You must consider it a policy that, this being a time of general peace, it is not advisable to form or encourage new settlements unless with Canadian people. These are really the people we want. You can try to get information as to how it will be best to bring people from Canada at the smallest expense. You must not let the public notice you have adopted this policy. You understand that in things which cause interest and excitement you have to act with a great deal of tact."

Americans, who came to settle in St. Louis and the vicinity while the Spanish flag still floated, seldom complained of the government. They looked forward to the day when St. Louis would be an American city. But they found nothing oppressive in the Spanish authority. Many gave the governor credit for showing them unexpected consideration.

Spanish authority at St. Louis, or San Luis as it was called in the official correspondence, looked forward to American occupation by force years before the secret treaty retransferred Louisiana to France and paved the way to the cession by Napoleon in 1803. As early as 1797, Governor Delassus was having correspondence marked "confidential" with Carlos Howard at New Madrid as to what should be done if the Americans undertook to seize St. Louis. On the 9th of April, 1797, Don Carlos wrote to Governor Delassus advising him as to the proper course if the attack was made:

You have shown your prudence and care in your letter of this date, in which you mention the situation on account of the weak state of defense. We have now only one fortification in the post of St. Louis, to wit: one simple stockade, with four cannons, thirty-five soldiers, including two artillery-men. In case anything should come up between our court and the United States, we could not do very much. I must inform you that, although there are some rumors that such a thing will happen, it is improbable. I think, however, it would be advisable to be prepared. In case you feel certain that you will be attacked by the Americans, I am of the opinion that after you throw into the river the cannons, ammunition and powder, you should try to come to me by land. You may advise me in advance so that I may be able to help your march all I can. It is probable that upon the attack of the Americans they will try to call my attention to this side so that they can catch San Luis unprotected.

The aggressiveness of Americans at St. Louis and in that vicinity was giving Spanish authority occasional shocks before the transfer of the Louisiana provinces. In January, 1801, Ramon dc Lopez y Angulo, the governor-general at New Orleans, felt constrained to warn Delassus in this manner:

Notwithstanding the advantages which may result from the working of an iron mine in your country, according to the plans presented to you by an American, David Wilcox, which you enclose to me in your communication of the 28th of November last, it will not be advisable to permit any American or foreigner to establish works in our possessions. Therefore you must decline his proposition, not giving him to understand the reason why. Ton will do the same with all foreigners that may come, especially when they want concessions of land and establishments in this province.

Jefferson, Livingston and Monroe are accorded the credit of the Louisiana Purchase. History tells how the one as President, the second as Minister to France, and the third as Special Envoy or Commissioner conducted the negotiations with Bonaparte and Marbois. Still another eminent American, destined to become President, bore no insignificant relationship to this greatest of peaceful transfers of territory. Yet his name is seldom mentioned in this historical connection.

When Colonel Charles De Hault Delassus, the Spanish governor, had witnessed the transfer of sovereignty to the United States at St. Louis in 1804, he carried away with him the cannon, munitions and archives. This was under the terms of the treaty of purchase. The instructions to the governor of Upper Louisiana Territory were to leave behind only such papers as related to the private affairs of individuals. These papers included deeds and concessions and the ordinary records, personal in character, of communities. It is tradition in Missouri that, when full of years, Colonel Delassus was gathered to his fathers, he left in a mahogany box a collection of papers with instructions that all be burned after his death. If the tradition is well founded, the injunction was not kept. The contents of the mahogany box were not destroyed. Some of them are of rare historic interest and value, but until recently have not been available for public information.

The first information that Louisiana Territory had passed to the possession of the United States reached St. Louis through American channels. It was communicated to Delassus by William Henry Harrison, then governor of Northwest Territory, with headquarters at "Old Vincennes."

The order which bade him remove and return to Spanish dominion the archives of Upper Louisiana Territory was not construed by Governor Delassus to include correspondence with Governor Harrison, covering several years. These Harrison letters were preserved by the Spanish governor of French name and descent. They were transmitted to his heirs. They shed light of no little importance upon the period of the Louisiana Purchase.

William Henry Harrison's place in American History is that of a soldier, rather than that of a statesman. He was elected to the Presidency on his war record and died before he had opportunity to impress upon the country his qualities as chief magistrate. There was, however, a diplomatic and statesmanlike side to the character of "Old Tippecanoe." The letters reveal it. They show that at one of the crises in the life of the American nation this man was performing a diplomatic part with no ordinary shrewdness. President Jefferson was confronted with a condition, along the Mississippi, of the gravest concern. The action of the Spanish Intendant at New Orleans in placing burdensome restrictions upon the river commerce had brought almost open rupture between the American population east and the Spanish authority west of the Mississippi. Jefferson had Livingston at Paris conducting negotiations with the First Consul through Talleyrand and Marbois. He sent Monroe as a special commissioner to assist Livingston. Spain had secretly transferred Louisiana Territory by the treaty of Ildefonso back to France. France was about to take possession. As between Spain and France the government at Washington hardly knew where American interests lay. While these negotiations were in progress, Jefferson, through William Henry Harrison at Vincennes, was keeping in close touch with affairs in Upper Louisiana Territory; General Harrison was in frequent correspondence with Governor Delassus. The letters he wrote speak for themselves. They show that by way of Vincennes and St. Louis the American government was establishing that relationship with Upper Louisiana which would have been of the greatest significance and importance had the diplomatic negotiations at Paris failed. The histories of that period dwell upon the events at Washington and Paris. They tell nothing of what was transpiring at Vincennes and St. Louis.

A few years ago President Benjamin Harrison learned of the existence of these letters, written by his grandfather in 1803 and 1804. Recognizing their important bearing upon American history, he endeavored to find some trace of the correspondence which passed, as these letters show, between Governor Delassus and William Henry Harrison. He had investigation made among the archives at Washington, but could not find the correspondence. It is a fair supposition that William Henry Harrison regarded this correspondence of such personal and confidential character as not to warrant the incorporation of it in the public official files.

Yellowed by the century which has passed, worn and ragged with handling, but bold and distinct in unfading ink, the original letters from Harrison to Delassus are preserved. They passed into the possession of the late A. J. Tullock of Leavenworth, Kansas, who made a collection of books and manuscripts relating to the history of Louisiana and its acquisition by the United States. From Mr. Tullock, copies were obtained for publication.

My Dear Sir:— Vincennes, March 6, 1803.

I had the pleasure to receive a few days ago from the hands of Colo. Dumoulin your favor of the 22nd ultimo. I should have written to you before the receipt of that letter but I waited to hear of your return from New Madrid.

The cession of Louisiana to France is confirmed beyond all doubt and nothing but the great misfortunes which have befallen the armament of that power which was sent to St. Domingo and the reduced state of Beunaparte's finances have prevented its being taken possession of before this. More of the circumstances attending the cession are still secret but it is believed, and I think truly, that the Ministry of Spain were much deceived and imposed upon by Beunaparte. It is very evident that the Prince of Peace knew nothing of the transaction. After the treaty was actually signed he was heard to tell Lucien Beunaparte that Spain would never give up Louisiana and that France had nothing to offer which would prove an equivalent for that province.

You have no doubt heard of the port of New Orleans having been shut by the intendant of that place to American vessels — this circumstance has occasioned much agitation amongst the citizens of the United States — but I have great satisfaction in apprising you that it is believed to have been wholly unauthorized by the court of Spain. The measure appears to have proceeded from the Cabinet of St. Clouds.

The Cabinet of St. Clouds, you will say. Yes my friend, it is from this chateau of the former royal family of France that the Corsican Beunaparte gives law to an empire. Happy will it be for the world if his ambition is at length satisfied. But there is reason to believe that this native of a small island will not be contented until he has reduced a continent at least, perhaps the whole civilized world, to his dominion. Our government has sent to Madrid Mr. Monroe (formerly oar minister in Paris) as envoy extraordinary to represent the conduct of the intendant of New Orleans. He sailed about the first of the last month. Having accomplished his business in Spain he is then to proceed to France. And I think it is not improbable that the strong remonstrances of the United States backed by those of Great Britain, may prevail upon Beunaparte to give up his designs upon Louisiana and suffer it to be retained by Spain.

If your most respectable father should determine to move to this Government be perfectly assured my dear sir that every exertion on my part shall be made to sooth the evening of his life and make it as comfortable as possible.

I have just received information of my having been continued in the government of this territory for the three years succeeding the 13th of May next.

The bear chose to take up her winter quarters at Kaskaskias, but I expect her soon to arrive together with the other curiosities which you so profusely heaped upon me.

I go to Detroit in about ten days. When I return I will have the pleasure again to write to you.

Present me in the most respectful manner to Madam and Mr. Delassus and believe me to be, truly your friend.

(Signed) William Henry Harrison.

PS : I shall certainly attend to your request relative to the Creek Indians.

The Honbl.

Colo. Delassus, etc., etc

Delassus was a Frenchman in the service of the King of Spain. The government of his adoption had just transferred by secret treaty to the government of his nativity the great province of the upper part of which he was the official head.

In the light of such conditions the freedom with which General Harrison wrote is the more remarkable. It reveals how close and confidential must have been the relationship between these neighboring representatives of the governments at Washington and Madrid. General Harrison condemned Bonaparte, or Beunaparte, as he wrote it, unsparingly. Undoubtedly he had learned from previous intercourse the real sentiments of Delassus. It is probably also true that he reflected the feeling of the Jefferson administration toward the First Consul. Accepting as "confirmed beyond all doubt" the cession of Louisiana to France, General Harrison forecasted what he believed to be the policy of this government to make common cause with Great Britain upon France to undo the secret treaty of San Ildefonso, and to prevail upon Bonaparte to permit Louisiana to be retained by Spain.

The action of the Spanish Intendant at New Orleans in shutting the port to American vessels was the chief cause of irritation on the American side, and the immediate provocation for President Jefferson sending James Monroe abroad as a special envoy. Yet General Harrison, in this letter to Delassus acquitted the Spanish government of responsibility for this hostile act, and charged it upon the "Corsican Beunaparte."

The letter is a revelation of official sentiment and policy at Washington just preceding the Louisiana Purchase. It gives light from a new source upon diplomatic negotiations which have been the subject of controversy.

The treaty transferring the Louisiana Territory to the United States was signed at Paris, April 30th, 1803. By reference to the letter it will be seen that General Harrison wrote in the month preceding.

The personal suggestion of American residence for "your most respectable father" is not the least interesting feature of the correspondence, made as it was when international relations respecting the Louisiana Territory were approaching a crisis. It is impossible to believe that the American governor of Northwest Territory did not have the full concurrence of his government in the approaches he was making to the Spanish governor of Upper Louisiana.

The last months of the Spanish regime at St. Louis were made uncomfortable by some Americans from Connecticut, the Austins. Moses Austin had obtained from the Spanish a grant to mine at what is now Potosi. He was showing the pioneers how to make sheet lead by crude smelting of ore on flat rocks. About the end of January, 1804, Don Antonio Soulard commissioned Thomas Madden to measure a tract of land in the locality where Austin had located. The tract to be measured, Governor Delassus said in an official communication to Marquis de Casa Calvo had been granted to an inhabitant named Pascual Deschamandy. When the surveyor began his measurements "the inhabitants of the mine presented themselves well-armed on a vacant lot of the royal dominion and opposed the functions of Madden. After they had mistreated Deschamandy and Madden they used very harmful phrases against the Spanish government, hallooing 'Viva Gifferson!' As soon as I was informed I began getting ready to act against the guilty parties, but I have just received your orders to surrender Upper Louisiana and of course this order has compelled me to abandon the punishment of these people."

A few months later, as he floated down the river, taking the flag of Spain with him and gathering the munitions at various posts, the sorely tried, old Governor Delassus encountered more of this spirit of American aggression. When he reached Ste. Genevieve, Governor Delassus was told that two small pieces of artillery were in the possession of Austin at the lead mine, having been loaned to him when he was in favor with Spanish authority on the plea that he needed them for protection against the Indians. All that Francisco Valle at Ste. Genevieve could show for the artillery was the receipt of Austin, and with this Governor Delassus was compelled to be content, but he embalmed in his diary of the trip an expression of his sentiments about the American, Austin.

"It must be understood that the said Austin is generally busy; he was the principal one in the riot of the inhabitants of that mine when they opposed the work of the surveyor, as I informed Marquis de Casa Calvo. And yet he has been favored by the Spanish government, having been given a large portion of land. It seems that his ungratefulness toward Spain has not deprived him of any merits with the republican government of the United States as he has been appointed the first judge by Mr. William Henry Harrison."

Moses Austin was to be heard from later in the winning of the southwest. He was one of the first Americans to obtain a grant in what is now Texas, on which to settle a colony. He died before he could carry out his plans, but his son, Stephen Fuller Austin, took up the duty of destiny and headed the colony. His activity in promoting united action among the American pioneers in Texas got him into prison on a charge of treason against Mexico. But he persisted with the same aggressiveness that made his father a thorn to Spanish authority at St. Louis. When Texas became a state of the American Union Stephen Fuller Austin, who was a boy of twelve when his father at Mine-a-Breton led the hallooing "Viva Gifferson!" was enrolled among the patriots and honored with the name of the capital of the Lone Star state.