^v.^ ."^%,^a: 
 
 t^ - 
 
 
 r :W&- 
 
 
 '•'*<. 
 
 ■^ 
 
 0^ cO-. ^h 
 
 
 '/ <.^ 
 
 >tr«- 
 
 ^0 
 
 r V^. . ; 
 
 
 '•' ^^ 
 
 ^4 o^, .^-^ 
 
 <^^&\ .^ 
 
 :4^ 
 

 
 O.V 
 
 
 
THE FRONTIER POLICY 
 OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 BY 
 
 GEORGE ARTHUR CRIBBS 
 
 ^ 
 
 PITTSBURGH, PA. 
 19 19 
 

 Gtltt 
 
':> The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 1^ The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 '^ 
 
 BY GEORGE ARTHUR CRIBBS 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 INDIAN POLICY. 
 
 1682-1800. 
 
 William Penn's ideas of justice and humanity permitted 
 but one Indian policy. His natural benevolence and the prin- 
 ciples of his sect demanded a just and friendly treatment. 
 Before leaving England he forwarded to those Indians dwell- 
 ing in his province a letter expressing his friendly attitude 
 toward them and his hope that he and they would always 
 live together as neighbors and friends. He instructed his 
 commissioners to be careful not to offend them, to court 
 their good will, and let them know that the Christians had 
 come to settle among them on terms of friendship. (1) 
 
 The Quaker's treatment of the Indians was always char- 
 acterized by fairness and honor. In Pennsylvania alone 
 could an Indian get satisfaction from a white man, fojr here 
 only was the testimony of an Indian accepted against a 
 white. In matters of trade the provincial government tried 
 faithfully to guard the Indian against exploitation by the 
 white man. In treaties, for the first fifty years at least, 
 only open and honorable means were used to gain a point. 
 And not only abstract justice, but friendly and kindly in- 
 tercourse were encouraged. Penn learned their language 
 in order that he might be able to converse with them more 
 freely, and later sent his son to dwell among them that he 
 might understand their language and customs. (2) The rela- 
 tionship between the Indians and the Quakers was, there- 
 fore, most cordial and friendly. Penn himself was a fre- 
 quent visitor among them, partaking of their venison, homi- 
 ny, and roasted acorns; and to their great delight, partici- 
 pating in their athletic exercises. The Indians responded 
 at once to this treatment ; and the early settlers found them 
 
 (1) Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, II, Part I, 
 
 218, Penn's Instructions to his Commissioners to settle the 
 Province: "Be tender of offending the Indians, and hearken by 
 honest Spyes, if you can hear yt any body inveigles ye Indians 
 not to sell, or to stand off, and raise the value upon you. You 
 cannot want those yt will inform you, but to soften them to 
 mee and the people, lett them know yt you are come to sit 
 down Lovingly among them." 
 
 (2) Franklin, Benjamin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 97. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 ever ready to provide food, assistance, or protection if it lay- 
 within their power. Former intercourse had taught them 
 somewhat of the white man's injustice and insatiable desire 
 for land, but they were still in a frame of mind to appreciate 
 fair treatment and to return it in kind. 
 
 Penn attempted to carry his ideas of equality into the 
 court room. The white man and the Indian were given the 
 same legal standing and by written agreement between them 
 were to be punished by the same laws.(l) If an Indian wrong- 
 ed a white man, the plaintiff was not allowed to take the law 
 into his own hands. He must appeal to the nearest magi- 
 strate, who would then take up the affair with the chief of 
 the Indian who had committed the wrong. If satisfaction 
 was not obtained, proceedings were instituted against the 
 Indian in the same manner as in the case of a white offender. 
 If a white man wronged an Indian, he incurred the same 
 penalty that was inflicted upon those who wronged a Chris- 
 tian. In such cases the Indian chief would complain to the 
 governor. If investigation seemed to warrant it, the cul- 
 prit was tried ; and if found guilty, punished. 
 
 An attempt was made to have cases which involved both 
 races tried by juries of six whites and six Indians, (2) but 
 this was found impracticable and soon abandoned. A case 
 was tried in the county in which the crime was committed, 
 but in 1744 it was provided that all Indians accused of capi- 
 tal crimes committed within the province in places distant 
 from the inhabitants should thereafter be tried in the Coun- 
 ty of Philadelphia before the justices of the supreme court 
 or of the courts of Oyer and Terminer, and the expenses to 
 be paid by the province as a whole and not by any particular 
 county. These plans on the whole worked very satisfactori- 
 ly, but neither whites nor Indians were always scrupulous 
 about observing them. They were often inclined to take 
 the law into their own hands, thus causing complications 
 during which border warfare sometimes seemed certain. 
 
 The Quakers also aimed, as far as possible, to preserve 
 peace between the various tribes. About 1719 a disagree- 
 ment occurred between the northern and southern Indians. 
 
 (1) Myers, A. C, Narratives of early Pennsylvania, 276, reprint- 
 
 ing Penn's Further Account: "If any of them break our laws 
 they submit to be punished by them, and to this they have 
 tyed themselves by an obligation under their hands." 
 
 (2) Ibid, 236, reprinting Penn's Letter to the Free Society of 
 
 Traders "We have agreed in all differences between us six of 
 each side shall end the matter: Don't abuse them but let them 
 have justice and you win them." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 The governor, in order to prevent evil consequences, went 
 to Virginia where he arranged terms of settlement with the 
 governor of that colony. After he returned, he held a treaty 
 with several Indian tribes and prevailed upon them to ac- 
 cept the compromise. The Pennsylvania Indians were not 
 to hunt in the mountains south of the Potomac and the 
 southern Indians were not to come north of that river. (1) 
 
 Many treaties were made with the Indians during the 
 early period of Pennsylvania's history. Any one who glanc- 
 es through the Colonial Records will see what a great per- 
 centage of time must have been given up to Indian affairs. 
 Penn himself is said to have made treaties personally with 
 nineteen different tribes. The most of these were confirma- 
 tions of friendship or treaties for the purchase of land. At 
 times, however, they involved the regulation of trade and 
 intercourse or even the question of frontier defense. 
 
 A treaty of this latter type was that made with the Sus- 
 quehanna Indians in 1701. (2) According to its terms neith- 
 er side was to do the other any wrong or injury. Indians 
 who came into the neighborhood of the white settlements 
 were to behave themselves regularly according to the laws 
 of the Christians. The Indians were not to aid or abet the 
 enemies of the whites or believe any evil rumors concerning 
 them, but report the same to the governor. They were not 
 to allow any strange Indians to settle on the west side of 
 the Susquehanna or about the Potomac without the gover- 
 nor's permission. All traders were to be approved and li- 
 censed by the government. The Indians were to deal with 
 Pennsylvania traders only. 
 
 Until 1722 Indian expenses were inconsiderable, being 
 limited to fifty pounds a year. (3) Great caution was al- 
 ways exercised in allowing more. In this year, however, a 
 bill for 230 pounds was allowed to defray the expenses of 
 Governor Keith's journey to Albany and the cost of the 
 presents made to the Indians at that time. (4) From 1722 
 to 1727 no Indian expenses were paid from the provincial 
 treasury. But in this latter year the assembly contested a 
 bill for seventy pounds, one half of which was finally paid 
 by the public and the remainder by the proprietors. (5) In 
 1728 the assembly requested Governor Gordon to hold a 
 treaty with the Indians, the costs of which they promised 
 
 (1) Proud. Robert, History of Pennsylvania, II, 198, 131. 
 
 (2) Pennsylvania Archives, 1st series, I, 344. 
 
 (3) Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, II, 230. 
 
 (4) Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the 
 
 Province of Pennsylvania, IV, 194. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 198. 
 
The F7'ontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 to pay. After this, expenses mounted rapidly higher and 
 higher until in 1750 over one thousand pounds per year were 
 being expended in this manner. (1) 
 
 As soon as Indian expenses became appreciable, a quar- 
 rel began between the assembly and the proprietors con- 
 cerning their payment. The assembly argued that all form- 
 er grants for this purpose had been considered as free gifts 
 of the people and that they did not commit the government 
 to a continuation of the policy. As long as treaties had been 
 made primarily for the maintenance of friendly intercourse, 
 no objections had been raised; but now it was becoming ap- 
 parent that they were only the forerunners of land pur- 
 chases, and for this reason the assembly maintained that 
 the proprietors should bear a share of the expense. (2) The 
 Penns objected on the grounds that they were already bear- 
 ing their fair share of Indian expenses in other ways, such 
 as paying interpreters and making purchases of land from 
 which the inhabitants derived great benefit. They consid- 
 ered that they were no more obliged to contribute to the 
 public treasury than the governors of other colonies. (3) 
 The assembly, however, still argued that as the Penns were 
 absolute proprietors of the soil, they should at least bear 
 the expenses of treaties for the purchase of lands. Those 
 for the maintenance of friendship might still be held at the 
 expense of the public. But treaties of friendship and those 
 of purchase were so inextricably bound together that it was 
 found impossible to dravi^ a dividing line between them. The 
 assembly then resolved that the surest way out of the dif- 
 ficulty would be to request the proprietors to agree upon a 
 certain proportion of all treaty expenses which would be 
 assumed by them. (4) The contest had not yet been decided 
 
 (1) Votes of Assembly, IV, 195. 
 
 (2) Franklin, Review, 82. "But when it appeared, as in Course of 
 
 Time was unavoidable, that a Treaty and a Purchase went on 
 together; that the former was a Shoeing Horn for the latter, 
 that the Governor only made the compliments, and the Assem- 
 bly the Presents, & it could not but appear also, that there must 
 be somewhat unfair in a Procedure where one paid all the 
 cost, and the other engrossed all the Profit: and that it was 
 high Time to put some Stop to a Practice so injurious to their 
 Understandings." 
 
 (3) Ihid, 97. 
 
 (4) Votes of Assembly, IV, 104. Resolve of Assembly: "That the 
 
 Proprietaries Interests are so constantly intermixt with those 
 of the Province in all Treaties with our Indian Allies, that 
 we apprehend the surest Way to prevent Dissatisfactions on 
 all Sides, will be to request the Proprietaries — (to agree upon 
 a proportionate part to be paid by them) — as in justice they 
 ought to do." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 when the outbreak of the French and Indian War brought it 
 to a close. 
 
 The chief objective of the Quaker's Indian policy was 
 the maintenance of friendship. To this end his energy and 
 his money were freely expended; for as long as the good 
 will of the Indians could be retained, the frontier difficulties 
 which vexed the other colonies would be greatly lessened, 
 if not entirely avoided. It was, in his estimation, much bet- 
 ter to prevent than to cure. The attitude of the assembly 
 is briefly stated in one of their arguments against the ac- 
 ceptance of the proprietary proposal to build a fort at the 
 forks of the Ohio River. "We have," they say, "seriously 
 considered the offer made by our proprietaries toward build- 
 ing such a House ; but as we have always found that sincere, 
 upright Dealing with the Indians, a friendly Treatment of 
 them on all occasions and particularly in relieving their ne- 
 cessities at proper Times by suitable Presents, have been 
 the best means of securing their Friendship, we could wish 
 our Proprietaries had rather though fit to join with us in the 
 Expense of those presents, the Effects of which have at all 
 Times so manifestly advanced their Interest witlj the se- 
 curity of our frontier Settlements." (1) 
 
 As is shown by this extract, the making of presents was 
 the method in which the greatest faith was placed. It was 
 this that caused the great increase in Indian expenses during 
 the restless years from 1730 to 1750. As the Indians were 
 found to be slipping away from the English interest, the 
 number and value of the presents were gradually increased 
 in a vain attempt to hold them true. It was for the purpose 
 of carrying such a present that Conrad Weiser made his 
 journey to the Ohio in 1748. In the following year George 
 Croghan was sent with a small gift to the Twightwees, in 
 company with Alexander Montour, the interpreter. On 
 their way they met Christopher Gist who had been sent by 
 the governor of Virginia to summon the Indians to meet at 
 Logstown the next spring, to receive a present from the 
 king. (2) This, then, was the customary method of bidding 
 for the Indian's favor. 
 
 While Croghan was at the Twightwee town delivering 
 the present and the governor's message, several chiefs of 
 the tribes living on the Wabash River appeared and asked 
 to be admitted into the chain of friendship with the English 
 and the Iroquois. Croghan, considering that such an alli- 
 ance would be of great advantage to the colony and extend 
 
 (1) Colonial Records, V, 547. 
 
 (2) O'CALLAGHAN, E. B., New York Colonial Documents, VII, 628. 
 
10 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 the English interest among the Indians, granted the re- 
 quest ; concluded treaties of friendship with them ; and made 
 each a small present. But on his return the assembly, with 
 their usual jealousy of any attempt to anticipate in any way 
 their action in money matters, repudiated his action and 
 condemned him for bringing an additional expense upon the 
 government. They seemed to lack entirely any appreciation 
 of the situation into which the province was rapidly plung- 
 ing, for at this most critical point they refused to extend 
 their interest by the very policy which they considered most 
 effective in gaining and holding the Indian's friendship. 
 
 Presents were also made at times to console them for 
 losses which they had suffered in the English interest, such 
 as the death of several Twightwee warriors in defending 
 some English traders against the French. Money was also 
 raised sometimes to placate them when they had become in- 
 censed on account of injuries. This was done in 1768 after 
 the murder of ten Indians by a frontier settler named Fred- 
 erick Stump. (1) 
 
 Private satisfaction was made to them in the same way. 
 In 1794 a young man named Robertson killed an Indian in 
 Western Pennsylvania by striking him with a club. The fath- 
 er of the murderer sent an agent to deal with the Indians. 
 When the latter appeared, all the Indians of the neighbor- 
 hood collected about him. His offer of about one hundred 
 dollars to pay for the man who had been killed was consid- 
 ered highly satisfactory, and some of the Indians even seem- 
 ed disappointed that is was not their relative who had been 
 killed, as they were missing a share of so large an indemni- 
 ty. (2) 
 
 Considerable sums, too, were paid at various times to 
 provide for the wants of friendly Indians, particularly when 
 these wants had arisen on account of their attitude toward 
 the English. In 1755, for example, five thousand pounds 
 were voted by the assembly to be expended by seven commis- 
 sioners for the relief and supplying of settlers and friendly 
 Indians who had been driven from their homes by attacks 
 upon the frontier. (3) 
 
 Assistance against their enemies was never held out as 
 an enticement for the Indians to ally themselves with the 
 provincial government. Such would have been inconsistent 
 with the Quaker's principles. But during the French and 
 Indian War it was found necessary to erect houses at Wy- 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser.. Ill, 380. ^ 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., VI, 738. 
 
 (3) Statutes at Large, V, 211. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania H 
 
 oming for the reception and protection of the Indian allies 
 of the province. (1) 
 
 Fair, open, and honest dealing was also considered an 
 excellent means of holding the affection and adherence of 
 the Indians; but the working of this policy was greatly 
 hindered, or we may say almost entirely prevented, by the 
 action of the white traders who refused to be bound by gov- 
 ernmental regulations. (2) When once they had gone into 
 the woods where supervision was practicably impossible, 
 their dealing with the Indians was often far from fair and 
 honest. 
 
 Agents who understood the Indians' character and whose 
 personal influence was strong were sent to deal with them. 
 The most prominent among these was Conrad Weiser, a 
 German, who had migrated vv^ith his father to New York 
 when he was fourteen years of age. Here they lived for 
 four years on the Livingston Manor, then removed to Schol- 
 arie where Conrad became acquainted with the Mohawks, 
 was adopted into their tribe, and lived among them for a 
 number of years. In 1729 he joined a group of Germans 
 who were migrating from New York to Pennsylvania by way 
 of the Susquehanna River. (3) With his wife and five chil- 
 dren he settled in what was then Lancaster County about a 
 mile east of the present site of Womelsdorf, and soon be- 
 came an important personage among his countrymen who 
 had settled in this vicinity. He was first employed as an 
 interpreter about two years after his arrival and allotted 
 forty shillings for his services. He acted thereafter as offi- 
 cial interpreter and the government's most trusted agent in 
 Indian affairs. 
 
 Second to Weiser only, and not second even to him among 
 the western Indians, was George Croghan. He was born in 
 Ireland and educated at Dublin, but at an early age migrated 
 to Pennsylvania and settled on the west bank of the Sus- 
 quehanna, (4) nearly opposite Harris's Ferry, in the township 
 of Pennsboro which was at that time upon the frontier of 
 the province. His love of travel and adventure soon attract- 
 ed him to the Indian trade in which he appeared as far west 
 as Sandusky, Ohio, in 1746. (5) He gained great influence 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 929. Governor Denny to Assembly: 
 
 "Teedyuscung has renewed his Request to have the Houses 
 finished at Wyoming, for whicii this Government stands 
 engaged." 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 748. 
 
 (3) Thwaites, Ruben Gold, Early Western Travels, I, 17. 
 
 (4) Col. Rec, II, 34. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 742; Col. Rec, V, 72, 139. 
 
12 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 with the western Indians and won to an English alliance 
 many of the wavering French adherents. He soon attracted 
 the attention of Conrad Weiser by whom he was recom- 
 mended to the government. Thus he v'as introduced into 
 the public service in which he continued for the remaining 
 active years of his life. 
 
 Such was the Quaker plan for securing peace upon the 
 frontier. For fifty years it was successful but not much 
 longer. The question now arises as to why it failed. The 
 various answers which have been given will be discussed 
 later. But it may be well to observe at this point that had 
 all these plans been followed ever so closely, the general 
 policy was still doomed to ultimate failure. It was only 
 while whites were few and land was plenty that it could suc- 
 ceed. When the Indian once saw that he was being gradu- 
 ally driven out of the province, no presents however exten- 
 sive, no treatment however kind, no agent however adept 
 could make him content. When once he saw how affairs 
 were tending, he was bound to resist. 
 
 About 1735 a definite change took place in the Indian 
 policy of the provincial government. More and more atten- 
 tion was thereafter given to the Six Nations because they 
 were becoming a very important ally against the growing 
 power of the French. The Delawares and Shawanese, who 
 were now living upon the Ohio, were ignored. They were 
 no longer welcome at Philadelphia and attempts were even 
 made to stop their coming. (1) Their masters, the Six Na- 
 tions, were called in to drive them from the lands claimed 
 by virtue of the notorious Walking Purchase. Such treat- 
 ment, so very different from that which they had formerly 
 received, was a great blow to their pride, and they treasured 
 it up in their memories as one more score to be avenged. 
 The English and the Indians were thus drifting rapidly 
 apart; friendship was being superceded by hatred. 
 
 The English were unlucky in the fact that at the point 
 where contact was most frequent the worst characters 
 among them appeared. (2) The trader who went among the 
 Indians was not a fair representative of the white settlers. 
 
 (1) Hazard, Samuel, Register of Pennsylvania, IV, 205. 
 
 (2) Thompson, Charles, An Enq^dry into the Causes of the Alien- 
 
 ation of the Delaivare and Shaivanese Indians from the 
 British Interest, 56. "It would be too shocking: to describe the 
 Conduct and Behavior of the Traders, when among: the 
 Indians, a ad endless to enumerate the Abuses the Indians had 
 received and born from them, for a Series of Years. Suffice it 
 to say, that several of the Tribes were at last weary of 
 bearing." 
 
The F^'ontier Policy of Pennsylvania 13 
 
 He was inclined to be restless, shiftless, and dissolute. He 
 cheated consistently, he sometimes murdered th2 warriors 
 and often debauched their wives. Yet it was from him that 
 the Indian formed his estimate of the white man's character. 
 
 The conduct of the frontiersman, too, was often not above 
 reproach. He was inclined to look upon the Indian as little 
 more than an animal to be shot down with as little impunity 
 as any other denizen of the forest. Many an innocent red 
 man fell a victim of these white savacas. One of the most 
 notorious cases was the murder by Frederick Stump of ten 
 Indians in January, 1768. Six of these, four men and two 
 women, came to his house drunk and disorderly on the tenth 
 of the month. Fearing that they world do hiri some harm 
 he killed them all and concealed their bodies beneath the ice 
 of the creek near the house. Then afraid that news might 
 be carried to the other Indians, he went the next day to 
 some cabins about fourteen miles from his home; killed the 
 woman, two girls, and a child whom he found there; put their 
 bodies into the cabins; and set tliem afire. (1) The murder- 
 er with his servant, John Ironcutter, was detected, arrested, 
 and confined in the jail at Carlisle. But on January 29, about 
 two o'clock in the morning, a mob of seventy or eighty armed 
 men broke into the jail and carried them away in 
 triumph. (2) 
 
 Such was the frontiersman's viewpoint. (3) He painted 
 Indian character in the blackest and most baleful shades in 
 order the more easily to justify the wrongs that were com- 
 monly done them. It was always difficult to bring a defend- 
 ant to justice on account of the difficulty of proving the 
 crime as well as on account of the assistance that was in- 
 variably given him, whenever it was possible, by his friends 
 and neighbors. 
 
 But while there was this negative power repelling the 
 Indians from the English, there was also a positive power 
 drawing them to the French. When the latter first appeared 
 upon the American continent, they had gained the enmity 
 of the Iroquois by espousing the cause of their enemies. The 
 French tried in vain to subdue them. When the English 
 appeared, the Five Nations were, therefore, their natural al- 
 lies. The Indians invited them to aid in destroying the in- 
 fant colony of Canada while it was a comparatively easy 
 task, but the English turned to them a deaf ear. The French, 
 finding at last that the Iroquois could not be subdued, chang- 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, IX, 414. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 448. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 770, 773; VI, 822. 
 
14 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 ed their tactics and attempted to gain by kindness and favors 
 what they had failed to win by force. In this they were 
 more successful. (1) Able agents were employed whose zeal 
 was so much superior to that of the English agents and 
 commissioners that the latter were held in almost universal 
 contempt. The Indians gradually withdrew from the Eng- 
 lish interest on account of the unfavorable view which they 
 The French, too, seemed to be more able to attract and hold 
 were beginning to form of English integrity and ability, 
 their good will. They entered more easily into their manner 
 of living, married squaws, and became veritable savages. 
 The Indians looked upon them as more nearly akin to them- 
 selves, and put more trust in them than in any other Euro- 
 peans. (2) 
 
 "The English," says a contemporary pamphleteer, "in 
 order to get their lands, drive them as far from them as 
 possible, nor seem to care what becomes of them, provided 
 they can get them removed out of the way of their perma- 
 nent Settlements ; whereas the French, considering that they 
 can never want land in America, who enjoy the P'riendship 
 of the Indians, use all the Means in their Power to draw as 
 many into their alliance as possible ; and, to secure their af- 
 fection, invite as many as can to come and live near them, 
 and to make their Towns as near the French settlements as 
 they can." (3) 
 
 About 1728, or possibly earlier, they began their at- 
 tempts to dissuade the Delawares and Shawanese from their 
 friendship for the English. The latter tried to frustrate 
 the tempters by persuading the Shawanese to move east- 
 ward from the Ohio and by excluding French agents from 
 western Pennsylvania. But all efforts were fruitless. A 
 Frenchman came every spring to trade with the Allegheny 
 Indians, and particularly with the Shawanese. The Gover- 
 nor of Canada sent a blacksmith to work for them free of 
 charge, (4) which pleased them so highly that on his de- 
 
 (1) Parkman, Francis, Cons-piracy of Pontiac, III, Appendix A2, 
 
 Cadwallader Golden to the Earl of Halifax: "After the peace 
 of Utrecht, the French changed their measures. They took 
 every method in their power to gain the Friendship of the Five 
 Nations, and succeeded so well with the Senecas, who are by 
 far the most numerous, and at the greatest distance from us, 
 that they were entirely brought over to the French interest. 
 The French obtained the consent of the Senecas to the build- 
 ing of the Fort at Niagara, situated in their country." 
 
 (2) Zeisberger, David, History of the North American Indians, 122. 
 
 (3) Thompson, Causes of Alienation, 48. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 301. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 15 
 
 parture they made him a present of skins to the value of 
 ten pounds. 
 
 Before the French and Indian War many Indians were 
 inclined to look upon the English as a counterpoise to the 
 power of the French and therefore remained their steady 
 friends. But after the reduction of Canada they began to 
 look upon them in an entirely different light. (1) The Eng- 
 lish now held the forts which controlled the Great Lakes 
 and the rivers communicating with them. The Indians look- 
 ed with jealousy upon these for they imagined that they 
 could see in every little garrison the germ of a future colony 
 which foretold only too clearly the day of their own expul- 
 sion. 
 
 The most fundamental cause — the cause that would in- 
 evitably have brought on a struggle had all others been ab- 
 sent — was, therefore, the usurpation by the whites of the 
 Indians' land. The assembly laid the whole blame at the 
 door of the proprietors. "The Causes of the Present Indian 
 Incursions on the Province," they say in 1757, "have arisen, 
 in a great Measure, from the exorbitant purchases made, 
 or supposed to be made, of the Indians." (2) Xhey were 
 especially dissatisfied with the Albany Purchase of 1754. 
 In fact it was considered fraudulent throughout, and was 
 practically recognized as such by the proprietors in redeed- 
 ing the tract to the Indians. The Walking Purchase, al- 
 though of a date somewhat remote, doubtless still lingered 
 in the Indian's mind and helped to swell the general impres- 
 sion of English rapacity. The vast grant of land by the 
 king to the Ohio Company also fostered discontent as did 
 the frequent settlement of squatters upon lands which had 
 not yet been released. The real cause, however, cannot be 
 found in any individual purchase or specific event, but only 
 in the steady, irresistable progress of the whites. After all 
 the lesser causes of irritation have been brushed aside, we 
 must look upon the Indian wars as an inevitable struggle 
 between an inferior race in possession of the soil and a su- 
 perior race which was gradually usurping it. 
 
 Turning from the political and military aspects of the 
 Indian policy, I shall now review the various attempts to 
 
 (1) N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 603. George Croghan to the Board of 
 
 Trade: "The Indians before the late war, or the conquest of 
 Quebeck considered us in the light of a Counterpoise to the 
 power of the French, their ancient Enemies, and were steady 
 Friends to the English on that account; but since the reduc- 
 tion of Canada, they consider us in a very different and less 
 favorable light — ." 
 
 (2) Votes of Assembly, IV, 728. 
 
16 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 convert them to the principles of civilization and Christiani- 
 ty. To do this was usually set forth as one of the chief 
 objects of colonization; but in most cases it was acted upon, 
 if at all, in a very dilatory manner. In Pennsylvania, how- 
 ever, considerable effort was made, particularly by the Quak- 
 ers and Moravians, to convert and civilize them. 
 
 The missionary was compelled to work under great dif- 
 ficulties. The Indians, as any other race, were closely at- 
 tached to their own traditions and not inclined to embrace 
 a new belief which they were unable to comprehend. (1) 
 The white man, too, it was observed, did not live according 
 to the teachings of his own doctrine. He was very willing 
 to take advantage of the Indian in trade, and sometimes 
 committed crimes of a more heinous nature. The mission- 
 ary was also at times obliged to work through the unsatis- 
 factory means of an interpreter. It was only he who spent 
 a considerable time with the Indians who was able to gain 
 a working knowledge of their language. 
 
 The Indian believed in a Supreme Being or Great Spirit 
 who had created Earth, man, and all things about him. This 
 belief had been handed down from generation to generation. 
 Penn liked to assume that it could be traced back to the 
 Lost Tribes of Israel from whom he conceived that they had 
 descended. They did not presume to know the dwelling 
 place of their god or attempt to solve his mysteries. But 
 somewhere in the indefinite future, they held, lay the happy 
 hunting ground where the warrior who had lived a virtuous 
 life and refrained from theft, murder, and immorality would 
 ultimately take up his abode; where game was plenty and 
 the hunter never knew fatigue; where he would live a life 
 of superfluity, joy, and dancing. 
 
 They had no conception of a hell. It was punishment 
 enough for him who had lived an evil life to be denied an 
 entrance into the abode of happiness. Throughout eternity 
 be was obliged to wander about, sad, discontented. (2) The 
 Indians, they said, within whose hearts was written the 
 word of God had no necessity for a bible, but one had been 
 given to the whites on account of their wickedness. 
 
 They had their own traditional manners and customs, 
 which they were by no means inclined to change. They 
 believed that the white and the red man had been created 
 by the same Great Spirit but that each had been given a 
 different employment. The whites were charged with the 
 cultivation of the soil while the Indians were given the more 
 
 (1) Holm, T. C, Description of the Province of New Sweden, 140. 
 
 (2) Zeisberger, Indians, 128. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 17 
 
 noble employment of hunting the wild beasts of the forest. 
 They considered it contrary to the will of the deity that 
 they should adopt the white man's manner of life and pointed 
 to nature for their proof. (1) Each animal, they said, deer, 
 bear, or rabbit, had its own characteristic habits; and no 
 one ever observed one of them giving up its own habits to 
 adopt those of another. They held that the same principle 
 applied to whites and Indians. 
 
 Falckner, who visited Pennsylvania about the close of the 
 seventeenth century, recognized the difficulty of coming 
 into influential relationship with them on account of the 
 ditterences of race, custom, and language. He believed that, 
 in order to obtain any important results, it would be neces- 
 sary to plant colonies of whites near their centers of popu- 
 lation._ (2) Strange to say, he suggests bringing up some 
 of their children in the knowledge of the German or English 
 tongue rather than that the missionary should acquaint 
 himself with theirs. (3) 
 
 _ But the greatest obstruction to Christianization, except- 
 ing possibly the religious inertia which is inherent in any 
 people, was the bad example set by the English. While 
 the missionary was teaching the doctrines of Christ, the 
 traders and other frontier inhabitants were absolutely con- 
 troverting them ; and it was from these, as has been pointed 
 out m dealing with the causes of alienation, that the Indian 
 formed his opinion of the white man's character. They 
 soon became so convinced that most white men were evil at 
 heart that they were inclined to turn their backs in disdain 
 upon the missionary. (4) 
 
 (1) Heckewelder, John, History, Manners, and Cvstomn of the 
 indmn Nations who once inhabited Pennsylvania and the 
 Neighboring States, 121. 
 
 JIf f£^^^oo^\J^^^''^^' 9^T^«^ Nachricht von Pennsylvania, 127. 
 
 (6) Ibid, 123. If some of them could only have been brought up on 
 the already mentioned lines, so that they understood the En- 
 glish or German tongue, then we could lead them to a knowl- 
 edge of God through the story of the first creation, and then 
 by daily intercourse with them strengthen them, until God 
 deSce " "^ ^^^^^^^ opportunity to show them greater confi- 
 
 (4) Thompson, Causes of Alienation, 56. "And as these Traders were 
 the persons who were in some Sort the Representatives of the 
 iuighsh among the Indians, and by whom they were to iuds'e 
 of our Manners and Religion, they conceived" such invincible 
 i;rejudices against both, particularly against our holy Relio-ion 
 that when Mr Sergeant, a Gentlemen in New England, took a 
 journey m 1741 to the Shawanese, and some other Tribes living 
 on Susquehannah, and offered to instruct them in the Christian 
 Religion, they rejected his offer in Disdain. They reproached 
 Christianity. They told him the Traders would lie, c?eat! and 
 were Sot afho"^^"' ^""^^ *^^''" W^^^«' ^^ their Husbands 
 
18 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 "And yet," Heckewelder reports them as saying, "these 
 white men would always be telling us of their great Book 
 which God had given to them, they would persuade us that 
 every man was good who believed in what the Book said, 
 and every man was bad who did not believe in it. They told 
 us a great many things, which they said were written in 
 the Book and wanted us to believe it all. We would prob- 
 ably have done so, if we had seen them practice what they 
 pretended to believe, and act according to the good words 
 which they told us. But no ! while they held their big Book 
 in one hand, in the other they had murderous weapons, guns 
 and swords, wherewith to kill us, poor Indians! Ah! and 
 they did so too, they killed those who believed in their Book, 
 as well as those who did not. They made no distinction." (1) 
 
 This criticism naturally does not apply to the Quakers. 
 They labored faithfully to promote justice as well as to im- 
 prove the Indian's physical, intellectual, and religious con- 
 dition. Penn himself was much concerned in their spiritual 
 welfare and while he was in the province labored zealously 
 to improve it. Before the founding of the colony George 
 Fox and other Quaker missionaries had preached to them, 
 and very soon after that event joint religious meetings of 
 Quakers and Indians were held. Attempts were also made 
 to teach them some of the principles of civilized life. They 
 were instructed in the barbarity of torture and in the evil 
 effects of war. (2) They were furnished with agricultural 
 implements and taught how to till the soil in a more skillful 
 manner. (3) 
 
 The Moravians, however, were the most energetic and 
 successful missionaries. They began their activities in 
 Pennsylvania about 1740, from which time until the end of 
 the century they were constantly active. At the outbreak 
 of the French and Indian War a number of converts were 
 already living with them at Bethlehem. (4) Under the 
 name of the Society of the United Brethren for propagating 
 the gospel among the heathen they were incorporated by a 
 law of the commonwealth. (5) 
 
 The Moravians, however, were not alone in their labors. 
 The Scottish Society for Propagating Christian Knowledge 
 was also active. Its most important missionary in Penn- 
 sylvania was David Brainerd. He had studied three years 
 
 (1) Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 188. 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, III, 79. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 47. 
 
 (4) Ibid, II, 761. 
 
 (5) Statutes at Large, XIV, 71. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 19 
 
 at Yale and worked for some time at an Indian settlement 
 near Stockbridge, Massachusetts, before taking up his labors 
 at the forks of the Delaware in 1744. In the autumn of the 
 year he visited the Susquehanna Indians and the next sum- 
 mer transferred to New Jersey where he met with the 
 greatest success, baptising seventy-eight Indians. On the 
 twentieth of March, 1747, after only three years of labor, 
 he died at the home of Johnathan Edwards from pulmonary 
 consumption brought on'by exposure and hardship. (1) 
 
 The Presbyterians occasionally sent out itinerant mis- 
 sionaries, but seem to have established no permanent mis- 
 sions. Mr. Beatty, one of these missionaries, visited the 
 frontier of Pennsylvania in 1776. The Indians were very 
 attentive and seemed to desire instruction in religion, many 
 coming to seek it individually; but the practical results of 
 the trip were negligible. His journal shows that Mr. Beat- 
 ty's hope was based upon the interest which the Indians 
 showed and not upon actual conversions, (2) 
 
 He has left us the following description of one of his 
 missionary services near Muskingum. "At eleven o'clock, 
 or a little after, one of the council came to our hut, in order 
 to conduct us to the Council House, where his majesty lives. 
 A considerable number of men and women attended. 
 
 "I began divine worship by singing part of a psalm, hav- 
 ing previously explained the general drift and meaning of 
 it to them. (Psalmody, by the way, is exceedingly pleasing 
 to the Indians.) I then prayed, and the interpreter repeated 
 my prayer to them in their own language. 
 
 "I then preached to them from the parable of the prodi- 
 gal son, Luke, XV, 11. By way of introduction, I gave some 
 short account of man's primative happy state — then of the 
 fall — how all mankind were concerned therein, and effected 
 by it — and that, this the bible taught us, and sad experience 
 and observation abundantly confirmed. I then illustrated 
 our sad condition, particularly by the prodigal son, and 
 showed what hopes of mercy and encouragement there were 
 for us to return to God, the father, through Christ." (3) 
 
 (1) Edwards, Johnathan, Memoirs of David Brainerd, 5. 
 
 (2) Beatty, Charles, Journal, "Upon the whole, there really ap- 
 
 pears a strange, nay, a strong desire prevailing in many of 
 these poor heathens, after the Knowledge of the gospel, and 
 the things of God, and a Door, as we before observed, to be 
 effectually opening, or, rather, already opened for carrying to 
 them the glad tidings of salvation, so that, if now proper 
 measures were vigorously pursued, there is much reason to 
 hope that the blessing of God might attend and crown 
 attempts of this kind with success." 
 
 (3) Beatty, Journal, 54-55. 
 
20 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 This as given a little at a time through an interpreter 
 "making things as plain as possible, using such similies as 
 they were well acquainted with, in order to convey a more 
 clear idea of the truth to their minds." 
 
 Some efforts were also made to instruct them in the fun- 
 damentals of reading, writing, and husbandry. At times 
 they requested such instruction. In 1758, for example, 
 Teedyuscung made a second request for ministers and school 
 masters. (1) Although the goverhment had promised to 
 supply them, the promise had not been kept. (2) 
 
 After the Revolution we find provisions made at various 
 times for the education of some of those Indians who still 
 remained in or near the province. In 1791 the Quakers re- 
 ceived and agreed to teach at their own expense two Seneca 
 boys. They were to instruct them in reading, writing, and 
 husbandry, "and especially to teach them to love peace." (3) 
 
 The government also at times assumed such expense. 
 In 1795 an act was passed to provide for the education of 
 John Metaxen, one of the Stockbridge tribe of Oneida In- 
 dians. It empowered the governor to furnish the said In- 
 dian at public expense with suitable lodging, clothing, and 
 entertainment for a term not exceeding two years, and to 
 place him in such school or schools during this period as he, 
 the governor, might think proper. Three hundred dollars 
 were appropriated for the purpose. (4) Again in 1797 pro- 
 vision was made for the education of John Konapat, another 
 youth of the same tribe, and two hundred dollars appro- 
 priated for the purpose. (5) 
 
 The results of these efforts were by no means as great 
 as could be wished, but they were still attended by some 
 good results. Teedyuscung states that Indians lived better 
 lives after their conversion than they had done before. (6) 
 A number of Christian Indians who visited Philadelphia 
 during the French and Indian War abstained entirely from 
 the use of liquor and behaved themselves in an orderly and 
 commendable manner. They expressed a great abhorrence 
 of war and wondered much that the Christians were such 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VIII, 47. 
 
 (2) Ibid, IX, 8. 
 
 (3) Some Transactions betiveen the Indians and Friends in Pennsyl- 
 
 vania in 1791 & 1792. 
 
 (4) Statutes at Large, XV, 295. 
 
 (5) Ibid, XV, 514. 
 
 (6) Col. Rec., VIII, 48. "You are wise men, You tell us the Chris- 
 
 tian Relij^ion is Good, and we believe it to be so. partly from 
 the Credit of your Words and partly because we see that some 
 of our brothel Indians who were wicked before they became 
 Christians, Live better Lives now than they formerly did." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 21 
 
 great warriors rather than lovers and cultivators of 
 peace. (1) 
 
 The efforts of the Moravians were attended by the great- 
 est success but they had probably baptised considerable less 
 than a thousand Indians when their labors were disturbed 
 by the Revolution. Several tribes, however, had received 
 some instruction in the arts of civilization. Their Ohio 
 colonies were flourishing. Here they dwelt peaceably and 
 quietly together under the supervision of their teachers and 
 ministers. (2) Their cabins and wigwams were neat and 
 comfortable ; their cornfields were well tilled. Nearby stood 
 the church and the schoolhouse where they were taught the 
 arts of peace and industry. 
 
 But under the very thin veneer of civilization was still 
 an Indian. The inheritance of centuries could not be neutra- 
 lized in a single lifetime. The Indian child brought up in 
 all the white man's traditions and habituated to all his cus- 
 toms relapsed inevitably to the life of his ancestors if he 
 but once visited his relatives and felt the irresistable charm 
 of the camp fire by a mountain stream and experienced for 
 a time the unrestrained freedom of a forest life. 
 
 (1) Proud. History of Pennsylvania, II, 320. 
 
 (2) Darlington, Mrs. Mary C, Fort Pitt and Letters from the 
 
 Frontier, 241. 
 
22 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 INDIAN TRADE. 
 
 1680-1770. 
 
 It is with considerable trepidation that I take up the sub- 
 ject of the Indian trader, because any account that can be 
 given of him and his work must be unsatisfactory. He was 
 a man of the woods and the pack horse trail, not a man of 
 the pen. The sources of our information are, therefore, un- 
 trustworthy. They are for the most part laws made for the 
 regulation of trade and the opinions of outsiders who were 
 not acquainted with the actual conditions. 
 
 When the province came under his control, Penn decided 
 that the Indians should be treated with fairness and hones- 
 ty, that there should be no monopoly of trade by any person 
 or company, and that they should be furnished only with 
 those things which were beneficial. Before he came to the 
 colony he wrote them a letter in order to open negotiations 
 for a commercial treaty which would work to the advantage 
 of both nations. (1) He was offered in June, 1681, six 
 thousand pounds, together with a handsome annuity, for a 
 monopoly of the trade between the Delaware and Susque- 
 hanna rivers. But although he was much in need of funds, 
 he refused the offer because such a monopoly would take 
 the control of trade out of his hands and subject the Indians 
 to the machinations and corruption of a selfseeking com- 
 mercial company. (2) 
 
 The fur trade of Pennsylvania grew so rapidly that by 
 1686 the authorities of New York began to fear that New 
 York City and Albany would be depopulated. (3) A year 
 later, on account of the continued encroachments upon their 
 trade, they recommended to the king that all of Pennsyl- 
 vania north of the falls of the Susquehanna should be joined 
 to that province. (4) Nearly all the white inhabitants along 
 the frontier bartered more or less with their Indian neigh- 
 bors. Then of course there were those who made this their 
 
 (1) Janney, S. M., Life of William Penn, 196. 
 
 (2) Mem. Pa. Hist. Soc., 1, 212. 
 
 (3) N. Y. Col. Docs., Ill, 416. Governor Dongon's Report: "I am 
 
 now informed that the people of Pennsylvania have had last year 
 from the Indians, upwards of 200 packs of beaver down to the 
 Skonshill and will have more this as I have reason to believe, 
 which if not prevented, his Mty must not expect this Govern- 
 ment can maintain itself, besides that it will wholly depopu- 
 late this Town & Albany. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 424. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 23 
 
 chief occupation. James Logan reported to Governor Keith 
 in 1719 that the Indian trade probably amounted to 40,000 
 pounds sterhng per year. (1) In 1748 there were about 
 twenty English traders at Logstown on the Ohio River. (2) 
 The chief trading house here was that of George Croghan 
 whose activities will be described later in this chapter. 
 
 As the Indians became gradually more hostile, they be- 
 gan to place obstructions in the way of the traders. They 
 complained that roads were cut through their country and 
 houses built without first having obtained their consent. (3) 
 Then backed by the French they began to arrest and carry 
 to Canada those who passed into the contested territory 
 about the Ohio. In 1752 John Pattin was captured and car- 
 ried finally to France. (4) After three months imprison- 
 ment he at last obtained his liberty through the interven- 
 tion of friends, but was unable to gain the restitution of his 
 confiscated goods. During the next year four men trading 
 west of the Ohio were arrested and subjected to practically 
 the same treatment. (5) The traders had by this time es- 
 tablished posts on Lake Erie, on the Ohio River, and as far 
 west as the Muskingum, Scioto, and Miami. 
 
 During the Indian wars, as has just been intimated, the 
 losses of the traders were sometimes very high. George 
 Croghan lost in 1756 150 pounds at his Muskingum post 
 alone. (6) Two men in his employ were among those ar- 
 rested and carried to France. The firm of Moynton, Whar- 
 ton, and Morgan, which was extensively engaged in the 
 western trade, was a heavy loser in 1763. The combined 
 loss of all traders in this year was 85,000 pounds. (7) In 
 1774 William Wilson, a fur trader of Pittsburgh, with a 
 great deal of difficulty escaped from the western woods leav- 
 ing behind him nearly fifty horse loads of peltry. (8) 
 
 Soon after the conclusion of the French and Indian wars 
 trade resumed its former prominence. A considerable pro- 
 portion of it was carried on from Pennsylvania westward by 
 the channel of the Ohio, and northward by the Allegheny 
 River to Le Boeuf and Lake Erie. (9) Until the outbreak 
 of Dunmore's War free intercourse was kept up between the 
 
 (1) Hazard, Register, III, 212. 
 
 (2) Thwaites, Early Western Travels, I, 28. 
 
 (3) iV. Y. Col. Docs., VI, 870. 
 
 (4) Votes of Assembly, IV, 235. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 233. 
 
 (6) Gist, Christopher, Journals, 108. 
 
 (7) Ibid, 241. 
 
 (8) Byars, W. v., The First American Movement West, 27. 
 
 (9) N. Y. Col. Docs., VIII, 26. 
 
24 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 red men and the white, the Indians often visiting the settle- 
 ments and the whites going far into the forest with their 
 goods to exchange for pelts. Before the Revolutionary War 
 Carlisle was the chief center of Indian trade ; after that war 
 Pittsburg, which had since 1763 been encroaching rapidly 
 upon the older city, became the more prominent of the two. 
 (1) This transfer of importance was inevitable on account 
 of the Indians being driven gradually westward. 
 
 In the more northern colonies beaver skins occupy the 
 most important place in Indian trade ; but these, on account 
 of their scarcity, were superceded in Pennsylvania by other 
 products of the forest. Bear, moose, and deer skins ; martin, 
 otter, fox, and other furs; turkeys, game, and fish were in 
 the early days brought down to Philadelphia and exchanged 
 for powder, lead, blankets, cooking utensils, and brandy, or 
 sold for wampum. (2) The Indians preferred wampum to 
 silver money because they were acquainted with its value 
 and could not easily be cheated in its use. 
 
 Zeisberger tells us that in his time the Indians for their 
 pelteries received from the traders "powder, lead, rifle-bar- 
 raled guns — for other weapons they do not value — blankets, 
 strouds, linen, shirts, cotton, callemanco (calico), knives, 
 needles, thread, woolen and silken ribbon, wire and kettles 
 of brass, silver buckles, — these are considered as valuable 
 as gold and with them they can purchase almost anything 
 — bracelets, rings, combs, mirrors, axes, hatchets and other 
 tools." (3) The goods for the Indian trade came chiefly 
 from England and the skins and furs for which they were 
 traded in turn found their way to that country. (4) 
 
 The traders were mostly frontier inhabitants who, hav- 
 ing gained some knowledge of the Indian language and 
 standing in need of money, were easily induced to engage in 
 such undertakings. (5) The following description of them 
 has been left by a contemporary: 'The river (Ohio) flows 
 quietly and evenly. Boats are going back and forth; even 
 now one is coming, laden with hides from Illinois. The peo- 
 ple on board are wearing clothes made of woolen bed blank- 
 ets. They are laughing and singing after the manner of 
 the French, yet as red as Indians, and almost the antipodes 
 of their fatherland." (6) 
 
 (1) Olden Time, edited by N. B. Craig, II, 339. 
 
 (2) Myers, Narratives, 382, 426. 
 
 (3) Zeisberger, Indians, 118. 
 
 (4) Franklin, Works, III, 481. 
 
 (5) Hanna, C. a.. The Wilderness Trail, I, 3. 
 
 (6) HULBERT, A. B., Historic Highways of America, XII, 87. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 25 
 
 The most enterprising among the Pennsylvania traders, 
 who as a class were noted for their enterprise, was George 
 Croghan, the "king of the traders." He came to America 
 from Ireland in 1741 and within a few years took out a 
 license to trade. In 1753, compelled by approaching bank- 
 ruptcy, he deserted the settled parts of the province and 
 established a trading post near the Juniata River. His let- 
 ters and journals furnish us almost the only reliable infor- 
 mation upon the trader's life. 
 
 The ordinary trader, however, was far below Croghan in 
 character. The traffic, on account of the great opportunity 
 for unlicensed action and dishonest gain, attracted a disrep- 
 utable class of men whom Penn and his successors tried in 
 vain to eliminate. The escape from civilization and any sort 
 of efficient governmental control gave free scope to all their 
 basest passions and desires. Drunkenness, dishonesty, bloody 
 quarrels, and debauchery of the Indian women were com- 
 mon, while cases of murder were occasionally reported. There 
 was constant danger that these abuses would involve the 
 province in war with the Indians. "I cannot but be appre- 
 hensive," wrote Governor George Thomas to the assembly 
 in 1744, "that the Indian trade as it is now carried' on will 
 involve us in some fatal quarrel with the Indians. Our 
 Traders in defiance of the Law carry Spirituous Liquors 
 amongst them, and take the Advantage of their inordinate 
 Appetite for it to cheat them out of their skins and their 
 wampum, which is their Money, and often to debauch their 
 wives into the Bargain. Is it to be wondered at then, if 
 when they Recover from the Drunken fit, they should take 
 severe revenges ?" (1) 
 
 The assembly in 1754 expressed their opinion of the 
 traders in clear and comprehensible terms. "We are now 
 to join with the Governor, in bewailing the miserable Situa- 
 tion of the Indian Trade, carried on (some few excepted) by 
 the vilest of our Inhabitants, and Convicts imported from 
 Great Britain and Ireland, by which means the English Na- 
 tion is unhappily represented among our Indian allies in the 
 most disagreeable manner. These trade without Control, 
 either beyond the Limits, or at least beyond the Power of 
 our Laws, supplied as we are informed, by some of the 
 magistrates who hold a Commission under this Government, 
 and the other Inhabitants of our back Counties." (2) 
 
 Charles Williams, an early settler in Ohio, has left us an 
 account of his methods of trade. "After some time I moved 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 854. 
 
 (2) Votes of Assembly, IV, 287. 
 
26 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 up the River where I came from — Carpenter's Station, Short 
 Creek. Then had money, two horses. Then peace with the 
 Ingens. I thought I would pay them up for what damage 
 they had done me, steahng horses. And following them 
 many miles, went out to New Cumer's Town. There I and 
 three more persons fell in with thirty or forty Ingens. Give 
 them a small cag of whiskey and keep one to trade on. They 
 got pretty high soon, and came to take my bread, and got 
 hold of the bag and run; but I soon over hauled him and 
 took it away from him. Soon after they come to get more 
 whiskey, and I sold them for one dollar a quart, one third 
 water. Then I was paying them up. In two or three days 
 I got done trading, and went home in fine heart, thinking 
 what I would do next trip. Soon started out, with several 
 horses loaded with articles for trade; one horse load with 
 whiskey, as it would make two horse loads (after being 
 watered). Come to the camp. Plenty of Ingens there, 
 hungry for trade. I made a good trade for myself." (1) 
 The Indian was naturally unable to trade advantage- 
 ously with the more experienced white. He was usually 
 worsted in the bargain and often complained of it to the 
 provincial government. But on account of the difficulties 
 of supervision the evils could not be entirely prevented. 
 Each continued to make the best bargain that he could and 
 each was left to guard his own interests. (2) The Indian 
 was obliged to look out for himself. "If they can deceive 
 the whites," says Zeisberger, "they do so with pleasure, for 
 it is not easily done. They are delighted, also, if they suc- 
 ceed in purloining something. They are fond of buying on 
 credit, promising to pay when they return from the chase. 
 The traders may be willing to take the risk, hoping to con- 
 trol all the catch. But if the Indians, on their return, find 
 other traders in the country, they barter with them and 
 trouble themselves no longer over their creditors. If the 
 latter remind them of their debts, they are offended, for to 
 pay old debts seems to them to be giving goods away for 
 nothing. Usually traders learn from their losses to give 
 nothing or but little on credit. This is the safest course 
 and there is no danger of arousing the enmity of the Indians. 
 When war breaks out the traders are the first in danger, 
 
 (1) Hanna, Wilderness Trail, II, 310. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 433. Patrick to the Chiefs of the Five 
 
 Nations: "As to Trade, they know 'tis the Method of all that 
 follow it to buy as cheap and sell as dear as they can, and 
 every man must make the best Bargain he can: the Indians 
 cheat the Indians & the English cheat the English, & every 
 man must be on his Guard." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 27 
 
 not only of losing their property but also their lives. When 
 the Indians suspect a war approaching, they keep it secret 
 and take as many goods on credit as they can get; as soon 
 as the war breaks out all debts are cancelled." (1) 
 
 After Pontiac's War the ministry drew up a plan to com- 
 pel Indians to pay debts of fifty shillings or over upon pain 
 of imprisonment. Franklin opposed it. (2) The Indians, 
 he said, knew no such thing as imprisonment for debt; in 
 fact they never imprisoned one another. If then the Eng- 
 lish attempted to imprison them, it would be generally dis- 
 liked and occasion breaches. The valuation which they put 
 upon personal liberty was so high and that upon personal 
 property so low that imprisonment for a debt of a few shil- 
 lings would appear extremely disproportionate. Debts of 
 honor were generally as well paid as other debts. Where no 
 compulsion could be used, it was considered the more dis- 
 graceful to be dishonest. 
 
 That contact with the traders had an evil effect upon the 
 Indians is generally conceded by all who had any acquaint- 
 ance with the situation. They had vices of their own, it is 
 true, but from association with the outcasts of ivhite so- 
 ciety they could only add to them. "In treating of this sub- 
 ject," says Heckewelder, "I cannot resist the impression of 
 a melancholy feeling, arising from the comparison which 
 forces itself upon my mind of what the Indians were before 
 the Europeans came into this country, and what they have 
 become since, by a participation in our vices. By their in- 
 tercourse with us, they have lost much of that original 
 character by which they were once distinguished, — and the 
 change which has taken place is by no means for the bet- 
 ter." (3) 
 
 It was impossible to regulate Indian trade with any de- 
 gree of thoroughness. The frontier was too extensive and 
 the inhabitants too widely scattered. The Indians too did 
 not always live in towns sufficiently large to encourage 
 traders to live among them, but scattered about in families 
 which shifted their situation as often as better hunting 
 grounds seemed to entice them. (4) The government could 
 not regulate the social and commercial intercourse of these 
 scattered shifting peoples. It was also found impracticable 
 
 (1) Zeisberger, Indians, 117. 
 
 (2) Franklin, Works, III, 480. 
 
 (3) Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 261. 
 
 (4) Franklin, Works, III, 476. 
 
28 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 to force the Indians to bring their furs to a central post 
 when they could more easily and to better advantage dis- 
 pose of them to their neighbors. Even if the province could 
 have controlled the actions of her own traders, many non- 
 residents came in from Maryland, Virginia, and New York, 
 who refused to abide by the trade laws of Pennsylvania. 
 A law was enacted in 1693 forbidding nonresidents to trade 
 within the province under penalty of fine and confiscation 
 of goods. (1) It was re-enacted several times but could not 
 be enforced as is attested by the many Indian complaints. 
 (2) The very nearness of other colonies made it difficult 
 to control the kind and amount of goods which the Indians 
 should be allowed to purchase. If they were refused any 
 kind of goods within the colony, it was generally quite easy 
 to purchase them just over the border. In 1682 some In- 
 dians asked that the prohibition on the sale of rum be raised 
 because it was sold in Newcastle and their young men went 
 down there, bought it, and were more debauched than if 
 they had been allowed to purchase it at home. (3) 
 
 Trade, therefore, was left practically free and unre- 
 stricted. Any one could engage in it by obtaining a license 
 from the governor; many traded unmolested without li- 
 censes. This threw its conduct into the hands of a great 
 number of individuals, more or less irresponsible, who, when 
 once they were hidden by the forest, seemed to forget all 
 laws of God and man. The conduct of the French trade 
 stood out in direct contradistinction to this. In Canada the 
 right to trade was farmed out to the highest bidder for the 
 benefit of the government. The operations of the traders 
 were generally restricted to certain posts at each of which 
 was stationed a military commander with a number of sol- 
 diers. (4) 
 
 Penn's Conditions and Concessions provided that all 
 trade with the Indian should be carried on in the market 
 places, and that all goods should be carefully tested. If they 
 were found good, they were to pass; but if not good, they 
 were not to be sold for such. (5) In 1701 a scheme was 
 suggested by the proprietor of forming a company into 
 which all would be free to enter under obligation of observ- 
 ing and submitting to all rules and regulations which the 
 government might make. This, however, never went into 
 
 (1) Charter and Laws of Pennsylvania, 240. 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, V, 229; Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 425. 
 
 (3) Hazard, Samuel, Annals of Pennsylvania, 531. 
 
 (4) Hanna, Wilderness Trail, II, 322. 
 
 (5) Hazard, AnnaU, 518. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 29 
 
 effect. (1) Instructions were sometimes issued to the trad- 
 ers to govern them in their dealings with the Indians. (2) 
 While these were faithfully observed by some, most traders 
 altogether ignored them when once they had gone beyond 
 governmental control. 
 
 The most efficient method developed for the regulation 
 of trade was the licensing of traders. (3) After 1710 no one 
 was allowed to trade without a license issued by the gov- 
 ernor under penalty of imprisonment and forfeiture of 
 goods; after 1715 each was put under bond to observe the 
 trade laws. (4) Landholders, however, were allowed to buy 
 for their own use and to sell their own produce at will. This 
 law, like all others, was evaded. (5) But it was much easier 
 to enforce than any other because the trader could be re- 
 quired to show his license at any point ; and in case his char- 
 acter proved undesirable or his dealings dishonest, his li- 
 cense for the following year could be refused. 
 
 The Indian agent was the most important factor in the 
 enforcement of all trade laws. In case unscrupulous traders 
 imposed upon the Indians, it was he who informed the gov- 
 ernor and attempted to bring the offender to justice. At 
 times he staved the casks of liquor which had been illegally 
 imported. In general he did his best to see that satisfaction 
 was furnished to the offended. (6) 
 
 During the French and Indian War we should naturally 
 expect all converse with the Indians to be stopped; but the 
 assembly during this period kept pressing upon the govern- 
 or a trade bill which he, on account of his instructions, per- 
 sisted in amending. (7) The governor considered that it 
 would be of no service, but the assembly believed that the 
 Indians could be won back to the English interest by a con- 
 tinuation of friendly intercourse. They rejected several 
 times the governor's amendments and returned the bill to 
 him as it originally stood. They argued that it was merely 
 
 (1) Hazard, Register, VI, 11. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 243. In 1789 the following instructions 
 
 were issued: Furnish no rum ; do not trade with drunk Indians ; 
 Incense no Indian against any trader; all sell at a common 
 price; give Indians a good example of sobriety of life; send all 
 messages to governor immediately. 
 
 (3) Statutes at Large, II, 367; III, 60. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 866. 
 
 (5) Egle, Notes and Queries, I, 403. 
 
 (6) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 762. Conrad Weiser to the Provincial 
 
 Government: "The Indians must have satisfaction for all 
 possible injuries. — If all comes to all, rather than the poor 
 Indian should be wronged, the public ought to make satisfac- 
 tion if no remedy can be found to prevent it." 
 
 (7) Franklin, Review, 291, 317, 325, 336. 
 
30 The Frontier' Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 an imitation of the law which long practice had shown to be 
 beneficial, and that the governor should reconsider his 
 amendments and let it pass. (1) After it had been sent 
 back and forth a number of times and the assembly had 
 been convinced that the governor would never sign it with- 
 out the suggested amendments, they approved them to- 
 gether with a new amendment to determine the salary of 
 the agents. (2) As the assembly had now accepted the 
 amendments to the former bills, the council advised the 
 governor to pass it if he was satisfied that the one thousand 
 pounds said to be expended for Indian goods were actually 
 so expended. The bill was, therefore, returned to the house 
 with a message to that effect. (3) It became a law April 8, 
 1758. 
 
 The purpose of this law was to win the friendship of the 
 Indians, lead to their civilization by providing preachers 
 and teachers, and keep peace along the frontier. (4) It pro- 
 vided for the appointment of nine commissioners of Indian 
 affairs whose duty it was to appoint Indian agents, to supply 
 them with goods for trade, and to oversee intercourse in 
 general. They were not allowed to engage in trade for them- 
 selves or for others. They supplied the traders with goods 
 from a general stock appropriated by the assembly; and in 
 case the trade should prove lucrative, they might borrow 
 further sums to carry it on. In case of deficit taxes were 
 to be levied to pay it. Goods were to be sold at prices suf- 
 ficient merely to pay the expenses of the transaction and 
 support the missionaries and teachers among the Indians. (5) 
 
 Trade, however, as carried on under the act proved un- 
 profitable. The returns were not sufficient to pay the inter- 
 est on the sums borrowed. (6) Teachers and preachers could 
 not be provided as had been contemplated. The situation 
 was explained to the Indians by Governor Hamilton in 
 August, 1762. "You know that for some Years past the 
 Government hath kept a great Store at Pittsburgh in order 
 to supply you with goods, in exchange for your Skins & 
 Furs, near your own Homes. Good men have been appoint- 
 ed to regulate the Prices of our Goods and your Skins, & 
 great care has been taken that you should not be cheated or 
 imposed upon by those who have from Time to Time kept 
 the Provincial Stores ; but I am sorry to inform you that the 
 
 (1) Col Rec, VII, 63. 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, VII, 63. 
 
 (3) Ihid, VIII, 71. 
 
 (4) Ibid, VII, 450. 
 
 (5) Statutes at Large, V, 320-330. 
 
 (6) Statutes at Large, VI, 291. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 31 
 
 charges of carrying our Goods & bringing back your Skins 
 so many hundred miles on Horse back are so high that it is 
 a great disappointment to that Trade, and we lose a great 
 deal of money by it every year, insomuch that I fear that it 
 will drop, unless your Uncles, the Six Nations, will consent 
 to let us go with our canoes up the West Branch of the Sus- 
 quehanna as far as we can, & build a few Store Houses on 
 the Banks of that river to secure our Goods in as we pass 
 and repass. This will cut off a long Land Carriage, and may 
 be a means of encouraging the continuance of the Trade with 
 you, & enabling our people to sell their goods to you at a 
 reasonable rate. We intend to speak to your Uncles on this 
 Subject." (1) 
 
 A new trade law was passed in April, 1763, but beyond 
 reducing the number of commissioners to six and a few 
 minor changes, it was merely a re-enactment of the law of 
 1758 (2) A few months later, on account of Indian hostili- 
 ties and depredations making trade with them impractic- 
 able, the commissioners were required to sell all goods in 
 their hands within eighteen months and turn over the pro- 
 ceeds to the provincial treasurer. (3) But on account of 
 some goods at Pittsburgh being hard to sell to advantage, 
 the time was extended until September 1, 1765, and the 
 commissioners granted discretion in disposing of them. (4) 
 In 1766, and possibly a year earlier, the British min- 
 isters were discussing a plan for the control of Indian trade. 
 (5) The colonies were to be divided into two districts, over 
 each of which was a superintendent. In the northern dis- 
 trict the trade was to be carried on at fixed posts, in the 
 southern district within the Indian towns. The superintend- 
 ents were not to be subject to the miliary power except in 
 time of great danger. They or their deputies were to visit 
 among the Indians annually. Credit was to be limited to 
 fifty shillings by making debts for higher amounts irrecov- 
 erable. This general plan, however, remained in force only 
 until 1769 when the king who considered that the legisla- 
 tures of the respective colonies must be the best judges of 
 what their situations and circumstances might require, turn- 
 ed over once more the control of trade to them. (6) 
 
 In February, 1770, an act was passed providing for the 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., Ill, 156. 
 
 (2) Statutes at Large, VI, 283-293. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 315. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 380. 
 
 (5) Franklin, Works, III, 476. 
 
 (6) Col. Rec, IX, 555: Pa. Arch., 4th ser.. Ill, 404. 
 
32 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 appointment of six commissioners to confer with commis- 
 sioners who might be appointed by the legislatures of the 
 neighboring colonies to agree upon a general plan for the 
 regulation of the Indian trade. They were charged to report 
 with all convenient speed any action which might be taken 
 in order that a proper law might be passed. (1) This is the 
 last law in respect to Indian trade which appears upon the 
 statute books. The legislature was soon involved in the 
 more pressing questions leading up to the revolution, and 
 when the war was over, so few Indians remained in the state 
 that trade with them was no longer important. 
 
 The question of the rum traffic and its regulation is so 
 important that I have reserved it for special consideration. 
 In the first place it should be stated that the white man 
 must be held responsible for the introduction of drunkeness 
 among the Indians. The processes of distillation and fer- 
 mentation were entirely unknown to them. (2) They had 
 among them no intoxicating liquors except those which they 
 received from the whites. The great prevalence of drunk- 
 eness was due to unprincipled traders who persuaded them 
 to become intoxicated in order that they might the more 
 easily cheat them of their goods. "When I come to your 
 place with my peltrie," an Indian is represented as saying, 
 "All call to me, 'Come, Thomas! here's rum, drink heartily, 
 drink! it will not hurt you.' All this is done for the purpose 
 of cheating me. When you have obtained from me all you 
 want, you call me a drunken dog, and kick me out of the 
 room." (3) 
 
 The Indian, however, was generally quite willing to pur- 
 chase any spirituous liquors which were offered for sale. 
 Many of the Indians themselves, especially the women, en- 
 gaged in the rum traffic. (4) They imported it from the 
 settled districts and sold it at a considerable profit, often 
 taking from their customers everything they had, even to 
 the rifles upon which their sustenance depended. 
 
 Intoxication, too, affected an Indian quite differently 
 from a white man. The latter when very drunk usually falls 
 asleep. The Indian on the other hand was thrown into the 
 greatest agitation, dancing, running, and shouting. (5) 
 Drunk Indians, says Beatty, "generally appear terrible, and 
 behave like madmen ; it is therefore very dangerous for 
 
 (1) Statutes at Large, VII, 339. ~ 
 
 (2) Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 262. 
 
 (3) Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 267. 
 
 (4) Zeisberger, Indians, 90. 
 
 (5) Bartram, John, Observations, 15. - ■ " 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 33 
 
 white people to be with or near them at that time." (1) This 
 observation is confirmed by Zeisberger, Heckewelder, and 
 others best acquainted with Indian life and customs. (2) 
 Disease was often caused by exposure ; and as murders com- 
 niitted while drunk were not severely punished, this was 
 often used as an excuse by those who sought revenge. 
 
 If trade in general was hard to control, the rum trade 
 was particularly hard because this was the good upon which 
 the trader depended for his profit. The Dutch attempted 
 with little success to regulate the traffic, (3) but it was 
 with the coming of the Quakers that the question was first 
 taken up with earnestness. In 1682 a stringent law was en- 
 acted forbidding any person to furnish any Indian within 
 the province with rum, brandy or other strong liauor under 
 penalty of five pounds fine for each such oflfence. (4) From 
 1684 to 1701 the prohibition was raised. (5) In the year 
 last named, after consultation with a number of chiefs, it 
 was decided to renew it and a second act was passed much 
 like that of 1682. (6) 
 
 But none of these laws was strictly obeyed. "The Euro- 
 peans," says Falckner, "certainly did bring in beer and 
 brandy, but who can help it that the savages take too much 
 thereof? All kinds of laws and regulations have been made 
 as to the quantity that might be given to them. However, 
 they know how to obtain it by their cunning, although there 
 are some mercenary people who for gain furnish them with 
 drmk m the forest." (7) The Indians complained of this 
 liquor being brought among them and were thereupon 
 authorized by the governor to stave the casks and destroy 
 the hquor, in which action they would be protected by the 
 government against all persons whatsoever. 
 
 In 1722 a more stringent measure was passed. (8) No 
 one was to sell rum to the Indians or carry more than one 
 gallon of liquor beyond the Christian settlements under 
 penalty of twenty pounds fine or imprisonment. The gov- 
 ernor and council, however, were allowed to give a reason- 
 able amount at treaties, and any inhabitant of the province 
 could give any Indian small amounts at his own dwelling. 
 
 (1) Beatty, Journal, 41. 
 
 (2) Zeisberger, Indians, 90: Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 263. 
 
 (3) Hazard, Annals, 314, 333, 372. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 623. 
 
 (5) Col. Rec, II, 26. 
 
 (6) Statutes at Large, II, 169. 
 
 (7) Falckner, Curieuse Nachricht, 173. 
 
 (8) Statutes at Large, III, 311. 
 
34 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Although sincere efforts were made by the government 
 and by the Quaker yearly meetings to put these laws into 
 effect, they were compelled in the end to recognize the utter 
 futility of approaching anything like a strict enforcement, 
 and to be content with limiting as far as they could the 
 amount of liquor imported. It was also found impracticable 
 to carry on trade with the Indians, and thus maintain the 
 chief bond of friendship with them without furnishing at 
 least some moderate quantities of liquor. (1) When prohi- 
 bition had been found impracticable, the government took 
 up the question of regulation. The first agreement to this 
 end was made in 1684. The governor and council held a 
 conference with the Indians at which they agreed to submit 
 to the English laws for drunkeness in case the prohibition 
 was suspended. (2) This arrangement, however, was soon 
 found unsatisfactory. Another plan was that of limiting 
 the sale of liquor to licensed traders whose actions were 
 more easily controlled, but selling by unlicensed traders 
 could not be prevented. 
 
 The Indians saw that the prohibition of the liquor trade 
 was really for their benefit, yet they continually opposed it. 
 When strong drink was denied them, the desire for it gained 
 the mastery and they petitioned to have the prohibition 
 raised ; when it was allowed them, they saw its evil effects 
 and many complaints were registered against it. We there- 
 fore find them making vain sporadic attemps to exclude it 
 from their villages. The chiefs at times prohibited the sale of 
 strong liquors, but it was always obtained in some manner 
 against which the chiefs were unable to protest. For ex- 
 ample a sacrifice of rum would be used. The chiefs accord- 
 ing to custom could not prevent importation for such a pur- 
 pose. After the Indians had once gained a taste of the 
 liquor at the sacrifice, they would go to the old women who 
 dealt in it and obtain sufficient to satisfy their cravings. (3) 
 
 As has formerly been stated, the Indians during the 
 periods of prohibition were authorized to stave all casks of 
 rum brought among them. But few were staved. They 
 were too fond of it to destroy it. (4) On the other hand it 
 was carried in by their own men. Conrad Weiser, speaking 
 
 (1) Votes of Assembly, III, 158. 
 
 (2) Charter and Laws, 169. 
 
 (3) Zeisberger, Indians, 117. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 433. Governor Gordon to the Chiefs of the 
 
 Five Nations: "As to rum, we have made divers law^s to pro- 
 hibit it, & made it lawful for an Indian to stave all the Rum 
 that is brought to them. — But the Indians are too fond of it 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pefinsylvania 35 
 
 to the Ohio Indians at Logstown in 1748, said, "You go 
 yourselves and fetch horse loads of strong liquors ; only the 
 other day an Indian came to this town out of Maryland with 
 three horse loads of Liquor, so that it appears you love it 
 so well that you cannot be without it." (1) 
 
 The Indians at Allegheny in March, 1737, resolved in 
 council that all strong drink in their towns should be de- 
 stroyed and that whatever was imported after that date by 
 either white or Indian should meet the same fate. Four 
 men were appointed in each town to oversee the execution 
 of the law. The resolution was signed by about one hun- 
 dred Indians ; all the rum in the towns, amounting to about 
 forty gallons, was destroyed; (2) but as in former cases 
 they soon began to backslide. 
 
 In conclusion it may be well to state that the rivalry 
 between the French and the English for the control of the 
 Indian trade of the Ohio Valley was one of the chief causes 
 of the French and Indian War. The Indians at first were 
 inclmed to favor the English because they paid better prices. 
 But as soon as the French saw that the English were out- 
 bidding them, they employed Indians to rob those who ven- 
 tured farthest into their territory. By 1745 some tribes, 
 incensed by the treatment which they had received at the 
 hands of the English, were inclining strongly toward the 
 French. In 1749 the English traders were warned out of 
 the Ohio Valley, and soon after Joncaire was seen searching 
 the upper Allegheny for a suitable site upon which to build 
 a fort. After that the quarrel became rapidly more acute. 
 
 (1) Chapman, The French in the Allegheny Valley, 155 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., I, 551. ^' ■ 
 SCHOEPF, J. D., Travels in the Confederation, I, 146. A tribe of 
 
 Indians living on the Susquehanna remove to the Ohio coun- 
 try " to escape the danger of intoxicating drinks, which had 
 been brought among them, by their new neighbors and v.'ere 
 making idle all their efforts at keeping the peace and livino- 
 orderly." "^ 
 
36 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 THE DEFENCE OF THE FRONTIER. 
 
 1682-1800 
 
 The Quaker's Attitude Toward War. 
 
 Pacifism was one of the fundamental tenets of the So- 
 ciety of Friends. War, according to their view, could not 
 be justified in any form. They followed the teaching of 
 Christianity that the nations should beat their swords into 
 plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. "Nor," 
 argues Penn, "ought they for this to be obnoxious to Civil 
 Government: since if they cannot fight for it, they cannot 
 fight against it, which is no mean security to any state." (1) 
 They were firm believers in the state and bowed obediently 
 to its authority except when the law's demands clashed with 
 those of their consciences. (2) Then they were adamant. 
 Whenever, in spite of their political opposition, provisions 
 were made for raising a militia in Pennsylvania, they as a 
 society remained sullenly inactive, even when not expressly 
 excused from the action of the law. (3) He who lived ac- 
 cording to the true principals of religion, they contended, 
 needed no other protection than that of the God "Who for 
 the Sake of ten righteous Persons would have spared even 
 the Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah." (4) 
 
 It was, however, impossible to hold all their members, 
 particularly the younger and more progressive, to this or- 
 thodox but unnatural doctrine. There soon appeared a con- 
 siderable minority who, although they held the orthodox 
 belief as to offensive war, maintained that in case of attack 
 a defensive war was clearly justifiable. (5) These at times 
 
 (1) Penn, William, Ri'^e and Progress of the People called Quak- 
 
 ers, 37 
 
 (2) Votes of Assembly, II, 99. "That the Majority of the Inhabi- 
 
 tants of this Province being of the People called Quakers, 
 religiously persuaded against war, and therefore cannot be 
 active therein; yet are as fully persuaded, and believe it to 
 he their bounden Duty to pay Tribute, and yield due Obedi- 
 ence to the Powers God has set over them in all things, as far 
 as their religious persuasions can permit." 
 
 (3) Col. Rec., XV, 418. 
 
 (4) Votes of Assembly, III, 367. 
 
 (5) Franklin, Autobiography, 151. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 37 
 
 even took part in military operations, (1) but their action 
 was always promptly repudiated by the society. 
 
 A distinction was also made between warfare and the 
 preservation of internal peace. Their state existed primari- 
 ly for the maintenance of public order; and if its existence 
 was to continue, it must have the power to protect itself 
 against internal insurrections and rebellions. (2) It must 
 maintain order if necessary at the point of the magistrate's 
 sword. The execution of a criminal, whose existence 
 threatened the life and property of every individual within 
 the state, was considered quite different from the killing 
 on the battlefield of a soldier whose only crime was obedi- 
 ence to the command of his sovereign. The Quakers sym- 
 pathized with and aided in raising money for the construc- 
 tion of a fort below the city of Philadelphia as a protection 
 against pirates. (3) Some even aided in the work of con- 
 struction. 
 
 While the Quakers were principled against participating 
 personally in any military undertaking, they did not con- 
 demn the use of arms by others. Franklin states that the 
 defence of the province was not disagreeable to them as 
 long as they were not required to assist in it. (4) ' When 
 in times of public danger the governor stated to the as- 
 sembly his purpose to put the province in a condition for 
 •defence, they offered usually no objection as long as mili- 
 tary service remained purely a voluntary matter. (5) 
 
 Penn himself was opposed to the use of force as has been 
 shown by the quotation from his Brief Account of the Rise 
 and Progress of the People Called Quakers. He also drew 
 up a plan for the pacification of Europe. (6) When con- 
 fronted with the actual necessities of government, his ac- 
 
 (1) Mem. Pa. Hist. Soc, X, 130-136. 
 
 (2) BUDD, Thomas, Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and 
 
 New Jersey, 73. "I do believe it to be both lawful and expedi- 
 ent to bring offenders to justice by the power of the magis- 
 trate's sword, which is not to be used in vain, but may be 
 used against such as raise Rebellions and Insurrections 
 against the Government of the Country, be they Indians or 
 others, otherwise it is vain for us to pretend to Magistracy 
 or Goverment." 
 
 (3) True and Impartial State of the Province of Pennsylvania, 49 i 
 ROUSSELOT DE SuRGY, Historie naturelle et Politique de la PenyisyU 
 
 vanie, 201. "La crainte de tomber en un instant an pouvoir 
 des corsaires ennemis, leur fit supprimer toutes representa- 
 tions. Quelquesuns meme y travaillerent de leurs mains 
 d'autre s foumirent de I'argent, & toutes les provisions neces- 
 saires." 
 
 (4) Franklin, Autobiography, 151. 
 
 (5) Votes of Assembly, II, 274. 
 
 (6) See Old South Leaflets, III, No. 75. 
 
38 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 tions did not conform exactly to his theory. He accepted 
 from the king a charter which empowered him to levy, must- 
 er, and train troops, to make war, and to pursue enemies 
 or robbers even beyond the limits of the province. (1) 
 These are rather extensive military powers for a peaceful 
 minded Quaker, (2) yet there is no record that Penn pro- 
 tested against them. James Logan testifies that in the 
 few years during which the proprietor administered the 
 government in person he found himself so embarrassed 
 between his evident duties as a governor and his expressed 
 convictions as a Quaker that he was determined, if he had 
 remained, to perform those duties through a deputy. (3) 
 During his absences he almost invariably appointed non- 
 Quaker deputy governors. That this was not a premedi- 
 tated policy can hardly be assumed. James Logan is the 
 most important example of those who refused to be bound 
 by the principle of non-resistance. In 1741 he wrote a letter 
 to the yearly meeting in which he upheld defensive war- 
 fare. (4) While condemning offensive war, he maintained 
 that the bearing of arms for self defence is lawful. The 
 Quakers, he says, "although they allege they cannot for 
 Conscience-sake bear Arms, as being contrary to the peace- 
 
 (1) Hazard, Amials, 496. 
 
 (2) Votes of Assembly, III, 365. Governor Thomas to Assembly. 
 
 "A mind employed as mine has been, about the Defence of the 
 Province, has long since made itself acquainted with the 
 Powers granted in the Royal Charter for that End; and I 
 
 think that it may be reasonably concluded that the first 
 
 Proprietor, tho' one of the People called Quakers, must have 
 
 entertained an Opinion (however different from yours) of the 
 Lawfulness and Necessity of bearing Arms in the Defence of 
 
 his Government against the Invasion of Enemies, othei'wise 
 
 he would not have accepted of the Powers of a Captain General 
 
 in that Charter." 
 
 (3) Pennsylvcmia Magazine of History and Biography, VI, 407 .i 
 
 James Logan to the Yearly Meeting, 1741: "And I am a wit- 
 ness that in those two years, or somewhat less, that the Pro- 
 piietor took the Administration on himself, when last here. 
 He found himself so embarrassed between the indespensible 
 Duties of Government on the one Hand, and his profession on 
 the other, that he was determined, if he had staid, to act by a 
 Deputy." 
 
 (4) Ibid, VI, 402-411. This letter was refused a reading in the 
 
 meeting. Besides the quotation given in the text, the following 
 extract is interesting: "But as I have always endeavored to 
 think and act consistently myself, observing Friends had laid 
 it down for their Principle, That Bearing of Arms, even for 
 Self-Defence, is unlawful; being of a different Opinion in this 
 Respect, though I ever condemned offensive War, I, therefore, in 
 a great Measure, declined that due attendance on their Meet- 
 ings of Business, which I might otherwise have given." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 39 
 
 able Doctrine of Jesus (whose Disciples nevertheless are 
 know^ji to have carried Weapons) yet, without regard to 
 others of Christ's Precepts, full as express, against laying 
 up Treasure in this World, and not caring for the morrow, 
 they are as intente as any others in amassing Riches." 
 
 The Quaker principles were put to their first serious test 
 at the outbreak of the French and Indian War. The fron- 
 tier inhabitants, incensed by the depredations of the In- 
 dians, demanded protection by a military organization. The 
 Quakers stoutly opposed it In opposition to the petitions 
 for defence came their addresses protesting against the use 
 of force and the payment of a tax for such purposes. (1) 
 Committees were sent to interview all those with whom 
 they had any connections; their sermons were adapted to 
 show the sin of taking up arms and to presuade the people 
 to remain true to their principlies. (2) Some even declared 
 that Braddock's Defeat had come as a just judgment for 
 attempting to disturb the French in their settlements. (3) 
 In 1757 the bodies of a number of inhabitants who had been 
 killed and scalped at Swatara Gap were paraded through 
 Lancaster as a spectacle for some Quakers who were then 
 in that town. (4) 
 
 When, as the war forced upon the government the adop- 
 tion of a military policy, the pacifists felt their grip upon 
 the government relaxing, they formed themselves into an 
 extralegal society pledged to maintain, as far as possible, 
 the old doctrines. This was known as The Friendly Asso- 
 ciation for regaining and preserving Peace with the In- 
 dians by pacific Measures. During the next few years 
 they, with the aid of the Germans, voluntarily contributed 
 several thousand pounds toward regaining the good will of 
 the Indians. (5) They began in 1756 by opposing a decla- 
 ration of war against the Indians until pacific measures 
 had first been tried. Finding that the governor and council 
 did not agree with their plans, they addressed a letter to 
 the general assembly. Their efi'orts to gain this point, how- 
 ever, were in vain. They continued nevertheless to write 
 letters to off:"icers, intrude at treaties, and make presents 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 487. Quaker protest against raising 
 
 money for defence: "We apprehend many of Us will be under 
 necessity of suffering- rather than Consenting Thereto by the 
 payment of a Tax for such Purposes." 
 
 (2) Ibid, 4th ser., II, 478. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 489. 
 
 (4) Blach, Thomas, Letters and Papers relating chiefly to the 
 
 Provincial History of Pennsylvania, 78. 
 
 (5) Proud, History of Pennsylvania, II, 335. 
 
40 The Frontier Policy of Pemisylvania 
 
 to the Indians in spite of the protests of the governor and 
 proprietors that such actions tended to prevent the suc- 
 cessful issue of the government's plans. (1) In 1757 they 
 advanced money to aid in sending messengers to the Ohio 
 Indians in order, if possible, to regain their friendship. (2) 
 During Pontiac's War they were still active. (3) 
 
 The Quaker's doctrine was severely criticised by many 
 of his contemporaries, but he seems to have acted accord- 
 ing to what he considered the wisest policy. His mistakes 
 were made, to a great extent, because he did not understand 
 the facts. During the early years his principles had been 
 successful in maintaining the peace, and now when diffi- 
 culties were arising, he thought that peace could be re- 
 gained by a rigid prosecution of the old policy. Living in 
 the southeastern corner of the province, he knew little of 
 the frontier. He interpreted all news in terms of the olden 
 days when Quakers and Indians smoked together in the 
 shade of the elms. He did not understand that the restless 
 progress of the western pioneers had now aroused in the 
 heart of the Indian the apprehension that he would soon be 
 driven from his hunting grounds. His policy had kept the 
 peace for the first half century when whites were few and 
 land was plenty; and now without considering the great 
 change in conditions, he felt that upon him developed the 
 task of making the policy succeed still. 
 
 The Quakers, however, were not the only pacifists. Many 
 of the Germans, belonging to various sects, were also op- 
 posed to war. (4) Then, too, having come so recently from 
 the fatherland, they had not yet developed a sense of pro- 
 vincial patriotism. The struggle between the French and 
 the English did not concern them. "They say it is all one 
 to them which king gets the country, since, if they remain 
 quiet, they will be permitted to enjoy their Estates, under 
 the Conqueror, whoever he is; and as they have, many of 
 them, lived under Popish rulers on their own Country, they 
 give out that they know the worst that can happen." (5) But 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 836-837. 
 Col. Rec, VII, 647-648. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 391. A receipt from Georg-e Crop:han to the Friendly As- 
 
 sociation for one hundred pounds which they had contributed 
 "for regaining and preserving Peace with the Indians by Pa- 
 cific Measures, to be employed in sending messengers to the 
 Ohio Indians, and obtaining a Conference with them, in order 
 to endeavor to settle the Differences between them and the Sub- 
 jects of His Majesty in this and the adjacent Pi'ovinces." 
 
 (3) Ibid, IX, 141. 
 
 (4) RousELLOT DE SuRGY, Historie, 223. "lis sont encore plus en- 
 
 nemis do la violence que les Quakers: car ils ne se pennettent 
 pas meme de I'employer pour leur propre defense." 
 
 (5) Smith, Brief State. 29. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 41 
 
 in the heat of the war, when their lands were being de- 
 vastated, their homes destroyed and their families murder- 
 ed, they unlike the Quakers, often abandoned their pacific 
 principles and joined in the defence of the province. This 
 was probably due primarily to their position on the frontier 
 where the necessity of defence was manifiest. The Ger- 
 mans knew at first hand the conditions of which the Quak- 
 ers, situated about Philadelphia, heard only reports. 
 
 Some historians of early Pennsylvania like to dwell upon 
 the pacific principles of the Quakers and the readiness with 
 which the Indians were captivated by their just and friend- 
 ly measures. According to one of them the Quakers lived 
 unharmed while others were being m.urdered all about them. 
 (1) Only two Quakers, he writes, were killed by Indians 
 during the period of the wars, and these only when evi- 
 dence appeared to show that they had given up their pa- 
 cific principles. It is probably true that but few Quakers 
 lost their lives in the Indian wars. This, however, was not 
 due so much to the Indian's making a distinction between 
 Quaker and non-Quaker as it was to the fact that the ter- 
 ritory occupied by the Quakers was comparatively secure. 
 Between them and the danger line was a broad. belt of 
 Scotch, Irish, and Germans in whose blood the thirst of the 
 tomahawk was quenched before it could threaten these 
 friends of peace. 
 
 Frontier Conditions. 
 
 The Quaker method of preserving peace was eminently 
 successful during the first half of the eighteenth century. 
 The Indians lived usually on terms of friendship with his 
 white neighbor. He was ready to furnish food, assistance, 
 or protection whenever they were needed. (2) His love 
 for Penn was almost unbounded. (3) There were naturally 
 occasional differences on questions of land or trade. But 
 before 1750 the great majority of these diflferences were 
 easily adjusted; the question of an Indian war was seldom 
 seriously involved. During the earlier years attacks were 
 feared from the sea rather than from the forest. (4) In 
 
 (1) Applegarth, a. C, Quakers in Pennsylvania, 54-56. One case 
 
 was that of a young man who carried a gun with him on his 
 way to work in order to shoot some squirrels. The other case 
 was that of a young Quaker woman who had not been molested 
 while others were being killed in great numbers. At last her 
 fear became so great that she fled to a fort for safety. The 
 Indians, thinking that she had deserted her pacific principles, 
 killed her. 
 
 (2) BuDD, Good Order, 65. 
 
 (3) Col. Rec, II, 628; III, 288. 
 
 (4) N. Y. Col. Docs., IV, 965. 
 
42 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 1709, for example, Governor Charles Gookin communicated 
 to the assembly as follows: "The boldness of our Enemies 
 this summer, in Plundering Lewis, Watering in our Bay, 
 and sounding it as they passed along, is so remarkable, that 
 it may justly give us occasion to apprehend a nearer visit; 
 
 But at present we are so unprovided, that there is no 
 
 monej^ to pay an Express on any occasion." (1) Many de- 
 mands were made by the crown for military aid against the 
 French and Spanish, but until the second quarter of the 
 eighteenth century there was no question of an attack upon 
 the Pennsylvania frontier. 
 
 In April, 1728, however, Indian alarms frightened the 
 frontier inhabitants of the County of Philadelphia and 
 caused them to petition the government to take such mea- 
 sures as might be deemed necessary for their protection. 
 Less than two weeks later, May 10, 1728, the inhabitants 
 of Colebrookdale informed the governor that the Indians 
 had already fallen upon the frontier settlers and that aid 
 was imminently necessary. (2) In 1743, when the situa- 
 tion v/as becoming much more serious. Governor George 
 Thomas who had formerly, on account of the defenceless 
 condition of the province, petitioned the crown to order for 
 their safety, was directed and required to lay before the 
 king v/hatever plans he apprehended it would be necessary 
 to adopt for the security of the province. (3) In 1745 the 
 back inhabitants of Lancaster County petitioned the Gov- 
 ernment to provide them with arms and ammunition, but in 
 spite of the governor's recommendation that the petition 
 be granted, it was laid unanswered on the table. (4) Thus 
 Quaker opposition to war left the frontier unprotected. 
 
 The event that finally awakened the Quakers to the seri- 
 ousness of the situation and forced them to turn over the 
 control of the government to those who were not principled 
 against the use of arms was the attempt by the French to 
 appropriate the western part of the province. Pennsyl- 
 vania was expanding gradually westward; Canada was 
 throwing out feelers to the south On the Ohio their inter- 
 ests clashed. As early as 1719 Governor Keith became ap- 
 prehensive of the growing power of the French. He urged 
 upon the Lords of Trade the erection of a fort on Lake Erie 
 to check their southern advance. (5) He feared, too, that 
 the Six Nations would be enticed away from the English 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4lh aev., I, 305. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 1st ser., I, 209, 213. 
 
 (3) Ibid, I, 636. 
 
 (4) Votes of Assembly, IV. 24. 
 
 (5) Olden Time, I, 7. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 43 
 
 interest. (1) After the migration of 'che Delawares and 
 Shawanese to the west James Logan became very earnest 
 in his portrayal to the proprietors of ^he French danger. 
 In 1731 he prepared a memorial on the state as the British 
 Plantations which was presented to Walpole, (2) but that 
 minister was too busy with his own concerns to notice in- 
 terests so distant. Even the assembly seems to have ap- 
 preciated the danger. (3) The frier; dly Indians of the west 
 advised the building of a fort and the taking of aggressive 
 measures, but their advice was not followed. (4) The only 
 English west of the Alleghanies were the traders, who were 
 sometimes seized and carried away as prisoners to Canada 
 without the least struggle or opposition . Upon the very 
 eve of the conflict, when the rumor of var was the chief 
 subject of conversation in Philadelphia, t was generally 
 ridiculed by the people as false. (5) 
 
 The frontier of Pennsylvania was, therei .re, practically 
 defenceless when the struggle started in 1754, It was not, 
 however, until after Pr^.ddock's defeat chat the province 
 began to reap the fruits of its listless ijolicy. Th^ remainder 
 of the shattered army was withdrawn from tho frontier. 
 The Delawares, Shawanese, and many other Indi.* fi nations 
 went over to the French who promised to return to them 
 their hunting grounds. (6) General Shirley refused to fur- 
 nish protection by the regular troops, saying that Pennsyl- 
 vania, Virginia, and Maryland were populous enough to 
 protect themselves. (7) The Indians fell first upon the 
 inhabitants west of the Susquehanna. The settlement at 
 the Great Cove was attacked, the houses burned, six per- 
 sons killed, and seventeen carried away. The settlers of 
 the frontier counties v/ere driven into the interior, (8) and 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 361. William Keith to the Governor of 
 
 New York: "The prudent apprehensions which we ought to 
 have of the extravagant Growth of the French Settlements upon 
 the Back of these Colonies, and the Inconveniences which must 
 follow upon the Success of their Jesuits in debauching many 
 out of the five Nation Indians from the English to a French 
 Interest, are very fully and clearly set forth in your letter to 
 me of the 20th of December last " 
 
 (2) Olden Time, I, 8. 
 
 (3) Votes of Assembly, III, 169. Assembly to Governor; "We can- 
 
 not be without just Apprehensions of the daily Encroachments 
 of the French, as well upon our frontiers, and our Indians, as 
 those of our neighboring Colonies. This danger now seems 
 very imminent; " 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch. Ui ser., II, 238. 
 
 (5) Balch, Letters and Papers, 31. 
 
 (6) Col. Rec, VI, 768. 
 
 (7) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 474. 
 
 (8) Col. Rec, VI, 767. 
 
44 The TT rontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 in November and December the incursions were extended 
 east of the Susquehanna River. (1) In November, Gana- 
 denhutten, a Mara\ ian settlement on the west branch of 
 the Delaware, was barned and six persons killed. 
 
 During 1756 and 1757 the frontiers were still in danger. 
 Cumberland and York counties were almost depopulated. (2) 
 Fort Granville was burned by the enemy ; Fort Shirley was 
 evacuated by the governor's order. (3) The people every- 
 where were dispirited and clamoring for protection. The 
 Indians pressed forwa d scalping and murdering as far as 
 Swatara and Faxtan?,. It appeared that Lancaster was to 
 become once more a frontier town, (4) but now upon a re- 
 ceding instead of upon an advancing front. The year 1758, 
 however, brought relief. 
 
 During the remainder of the war the frontier of Penn- 
 sylvania was practically secure, but hardly had peace been 
 declared when the storm broke forth again. The Indians, 
 not the Frer.ch, were now the instigators. Under their 
 leader, Pontiac, they strove to hi* : back the tide of whites 
 which was driving them gradualiV westvraid- Almost with- 
 out warniiig they fell upon the frontier settlers. Forts 
 Pitt and igonier alone held out. Houses and mills were 
 burned. The inhabitants of the West huddled together 
 within the protecting walls of '»^"ort Pitt; those east of the 
 Alleghanies fled toward Lancaster and Philadelphia. (5) 
 The ripe crops in the deserted fields stood waiting in vain 
 for the reaper. The despondent settlers had so little faith 
 in the expedition which was sent for their relief that none 
 of them would join it, (6) although their service, on ac- 
 count of their acquaintance with the country, would have 
 been of great value. Bouquet, nevertheless, succeeded in 
 relieving Forts Ligonier and Pitt and in once more bringing 
 peace to the distressed frontier. 
 
 In 1774 hostilities again commenced on account of the 
 murder of some Indians by Virginians. The usual panic 
 ensued. (7) The back settlers fled from their homes. There 
 
 (1) Ibid, VI, 767. 
 
 (2) Ibid, VII, 120, 233. 
 
 (3) Ibid, VII, 278. 
 
 (4) Balch. Letters and Papers. 79. Edwards Shippen to James 
 
 Burd: "You will see by the inclosed papers, that the savages 
 have been committing some murders near Swatara, and it ap- 
 pears to me that unless the Militia Act be passed, with the 
 Governor's amendments, we of this borough (Lancaster) shall, 
 in less than a month, become the frontiers." 
 
 (5) Smith William, An Historical Account of ^he Expedition 
 
 Against the Ohio Indians in the year 1764. 
 
 (6) Ibid, 12. 
 
 (7) Col. Rec, X, 192. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsijlvania 45 
 
 was fear of a general war, but the conilict was happily con- 
 fined within rather narrow limits. 
 
 During the Revolution the red allies of the English com- 
 mitted their customary depredjiiions. The Ohio Country 
 and the upper Susquehanna Valley were the greatest suf- 
 ferers. The western inhabitants were again driven into the 
 forts where they could get no food from their plantations. 
 (1) Stockades with store houses were erected at Ligonier 
 and Hannastown at public expense to protect the people 
 and their goods. The massacres in Cherry and Wyoming 
 valleys in the upper Susquehanna district are too well known 
 to require more than a passing mention. After the Revo- 
 lution isolated clashes still took place. (2) There were oc- 
 casional alarms, (3) but the days of widespread destruc- 
 tion were over. The Ohio settlements like a wedge were 
 forcing the danger farther west. It was only when the 
 Indians were elated by their victories over Harmar and St. 
 Clair that there were serious apprehensions that they would 
 again fall upon Pennsylvania in numbers. "The late dis- 
 aster of the army," wrote the inhabitants of Pittsburgh to 
 the governor in 1791, "must greatly effect the safety of this 
 place. There can be no doubt but the enemy will 'now come 
 foreward, and with more spirit, and greater numbers than 
 they ever did before, for success will give confidence, and 
 secure allies The Indians at present hostile are well ac- 
 quainted with the defenceless situation of the town. Dur- 
 ing the late war there was a garrison at this place, though, 
 even then, there was not such a combination of the savage 
 nations, nor so much to be dreaded from them. At present 
 we have neither garrison, arms, nor ammunition to defend 
 the place." (4) 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., V, 471. "The Distressed situation of our 
 
 Cuntery is such, that we have no Prospect But Disolation and 
 Distruction, the whole country on the north side of the Rode 
 from the Alegany Mountains to the Eiver is all kept close in 
 
 forts; In short there is very few Days there is not some 
 
 murder committed on some part of our frontiers." 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, XVI, 306. 
 
 Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XI, 377. James Marshall to Benjamin 
 Franklin: "From numerous applications by the frontier In- 
 habitants, in the County of Washington, especially in that part 
 of the county, where the families were killed last fall: I found 
 it necessary early in the spring to order on duty, about twenty 
 men, and to continue from time to time, nearly that number." 
 
 (3) Pittsburg Gazette, October 27, 1787. A report was received 
 
 that some warriors having with them four scalps were en- 
 camped about sixty miles west of the town. A band of forty 
 inhabitants marched out in quest of them, but their search was 
 in vain. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 675. 
 
46 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Throughout these wars defence became gradually more 
 difficult on account of ibe increasing extent of the frontier. 
 In 1756 the frontier east of the Susquehanna River followed 
 the line of the Blue Hills; west of that river it might be 
 roughly drawn as a semicircle with a one hundred mile 
 radius from Harris' Ferry. During the Revolution it ex- 
 tended from Wyoming to Pittsburgh. It was impossible 
 to defend this line efficiently. The Indian method of fight- 
 ing complicated the question. Their attacks were not made 
 in large bodies; but parties of from five to twenty would 
 creep noiselessly upon their unsuspecting victims, kill, scalp, 
 and be gone before an alarm could be spread. Forts were 
 of little avail against such a method of warfare unless the 
 whole population could be gathered within their walls. The 
 vast uncharted wilderness in which a campaign against the 
 Indians must be carried on made it a thing of dread to the 
 soldiers. "There is no refreshment for the healthy nor re- 
 lief for the sick. A vast inhospitable desert, unsafe and 
 treacherous, surrounds them, v/here victories are not de- 
 cisive, but defeats are ruinous; and simple death is the 
 least misfortune which can happen to them," (1) 
 
 The settlers on account of the lack of arms were often 
 unable to defehd themselves. During the earlier years this 
 was due primarily to the poverty of the immigrants; all 
 their surplus capital was expended in clearing and improv- 
 ing their lands. (2) But in later years it was often a case 
 of negligence or carelessness. When Indian hostilities 
 threatened in 1791, not more than one sixth of the western 
 militia had guns. The considerable period of peace which 
 preceded this outbreak had givea them confidence that they 
 would never be called upon to defend themselves again ; and 
 as game was becoming scarce, arms were of no great use 
 to them. Most of these, therefore, had been sold to emi- 
 grants who were going to Ohio, Kentucky, or some other 
 section of the new frontier. (3) 
 
 The Assembly and ?*lilitary A Hairs. 
 
 Such was the situation which confronted the provincial 
 
 government of Pennsylvania a frontier at first peaceful 
 
 but later hostile, a problem of defence becoming more dif- 
 ficult as the settlements became more extensi^-e. The gov- 
 ernment itself was divided on the issue. The deputy gov- 
 ernors stood always for defence ; the assembly before 1756 
 was invariably anti-military\;_^ The milTtary powers of the 
 governor, according to tHe charter, were sufficiently great; 
 
 (1) Smith, Bouquet Expedition, 19. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 883. 
 
 (3) Ihid, 2nd ser., IV, 652, 786. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pen csylvania 47 
 
 but could be of no avail without the enactment by the legis- 
 lature of laws to compel service and an appropriation of 
 money for the purpose. Governor George Thomas in an 
 address to the assembly in 1743 concerning putting the prov- 
 inces in a state of defence in case of a rupture with France 
 argued in part as follows: ''All that it is now possible for 
 me to do is to issue a Proclamation requiring the Inhabi- 
 tants to prepare themselves in the best manner they can to 
 repel any attack that may be made upon Us, And to com- 
 mission the best qualified to Levy, Muster, and Train them. 
 Upon you it lies to prepare a Bill for obliging then to ap- 
 pear well Armed and Accountred at convenient Stated Times 
 for their Instruction in Military Discipline, and whenever 
 else it shall be necessary for the Defence of the Province; 
 And as the Disposition of the Public Money is in You, it 
 should be your Care likewise to provide a Stock of Arms and 
 Ammunition, as well as to make some Provision for the 
 security of our back Inhabitants against Inroads from the 
 French Indians, And of this City; upon which the Trade of 
 the whole Province chiefly depends, against any Attempt 
 that may be upon it from the Sea." (1) The political his- 
 tory of military affairs before the French and Indian War 
 is, therefore, that of a struggle between the governor and 
 the assembly, the former favoring military defence and the 
 latter opposing it. 
 
 This struggle began before the close of the seventeenth 
 century on account of the wars between France and Eng- 
 land spreading to their colonies. There was fear that the 
 Five Nations would go over to the French interest; and 
 Benjamin Fletcher, v/ho for a short time was governor of 
 Pennsylvania as well as of New York, recognizing the hope- 
 lessness of enticing the Quaker assembly into warlike mea- 
 sures, appealed to them for aid in the following message: 
 *'Gentl., I consider your principles that you will not Carie 
 arms nor Levie money to make warr, though for your own 
 defence, Yet I hope that you will not refuse to feed the 
 Hungrie and Cloath the Naked. My meaning is to supply 
 those Indian nations with such necessaries as may influence 
 them to a Continuance of their friendship to these prov- 
 inces. And now, Gentl., if you will consider, wherein I may 
 be useful to you, according to the Tenor of my Commis- 
 sion, in redressing your grievances, (if anie you have,) you 
 shall find me readie to act by the rules of Loyaltie, with a 
 true regard to Libertie & propertie." (2) The assembly, 
 
 (1) Ibid, 4th ser., I, 881. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 171. 
 
48 The frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 however, spent mo.ve time in reporting their grievances than 
 in considering means of complying with his request. He, 
 therefore, called them before his council and insisted that 
 they should give a positive answer. (1) They reported fin- 
 ally, June 7, 1694, a bill to raise a fund, part of which should 
 be expended in purchasing presents for the Indians, but the 
 disposal of it remained in their own hands. (2) As this 
 was considered unsatisfactory, the governor again called 
 the assembly before him and insisted upon more definite 
 action. They contended that their former bill met all re- 
 quirements and were dissolved. (3) Again in 1795 a demand 
 came from the queen through Fletcher to raise a quota of 
 men. The council considered that they had no power to 
 act in a matter so important. A meeting of the assembly 
 was therefore called. (4) They, however, refused to pro- 
 vide for the raising of the men unless they were granted 
 a charter of liberties, and were thereupon dissolved. (5) In 
 the early years of the next century came further appeals for 
 men, but the assembly consistently declined to furnish 
 them. (6) 
 
 As the French peril began to cast its shadow over the 
 province, the contest became more acute. Governor Thomas 
 hurled volumes of argument against the assembly's de- 
 fensive principles. "I must lament," he said, "the unhappy 
 Circumstances of a Country, populous indeed, extensive in 
 its Trade, bless'd with many natural advantages, and cap- 
 able of defending itself, but from a religious Principle of 
 its Representatives against bearing Arms, subject to be- 
 come the Prey of the first Invader, and more particularly 
 of its powerful Neighbors, who are known to be well armed, 
 regular in Discipline, inured to Fatigue, and from thence 
 capable of making long Marches, in Alliance with many 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, I, 460, 462. 
 
 (2) Ihid, 468. "His Excellie ordered the readin.^ of a bill giving one 
 
 pennie in the pound The Council are of opinion that the sd 
 
 bill Cannot pass, and that it is no answer to the Queen's Letter, 
 nor does anie thing towards the support of the government." 
 
 (3) Ibid, 460, 472. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 75. 
 
 (5) Ibid, 82. Markham to Assembly: "Gentl., As oft as I press you 
 
 to ansr the Late Quenn's Letter for the Supplie of New York, 
 your ansr to m? is that your privileges ought to be confirmed 
 to you. I never did, nor ever shall endeavor to diminish them. 
 But Gentl., Since there's no Likehood of obtaining from you 
 anie ansr to the Late Quenn's Letter, nor to his Excellie Govr. 
 Fletcher's Demands thereupon, Unless He enter upon and grant 
 you a Charter of privileges, I dissolve you, and you are hereby 
 dissolved." 
 
 (6) N. Y. Col Docs., V, 71, 78. 
 Votes of Assembly, II, 34, 36. 
 
The Frontier Policy of I'cnnsylvania 49 
 
 Nations of Indians, and of a boundless ambition." (1) He 
 accused them of inconsistency in making a distinction be- 
 tween the execution of a criminal and the killing of a sol- 
 dier in the defence of a state. "If a Burglar acts contrary 
 to the Laws of Christianity and of the land in breaking open 
 your Houses, and by those Laws you are justified in put- 
 ting him to Death ; and if a soldier acts contrary to the 
 Laws of Christianity (as he does according to your own 
 principles) and the Laws of Nations, in plundering your 
 Houses and murdering your Families, it will be difficult to 
 show why you may not as justly put the latter to Death as 
 the former." (2) He considered, too, that assemblymen 
 should be the watchmen of the whole people, not of a par- 
 ticular religious sect. (3) 
 
 The assembly in justification of their conduct urged that 
 they were exempt from military service by a charter of 
 privileges granted to them by the first proprietor and by 
 their own laws; that the colony had existed and prospered 
 without forts or militia ; that being a peaceful people, there 
 was no danger of their neighbors molesting them ; and that 
 in case of emergency the proprietor was obliged to defend 
 his province. It was found, however, upon examination that 
 they were nowhere exempted by law from military service ; 
 and that the proprietor, although his personal interests 
 might be greater, was no more obliged to defend the prov- 
 ince at his own expense than the governor of any other 
 colony. (4) The argument that there was no danger from 
 their neighbors reflects once more their misunderstanding 
 of the real situation. 
 
 A circular signed by Conrad Weiser was published by 
 order of the proprietors in order to draw the Germans 
 over to their viewpoint. (5) It refuted the idea, instilled 
 by the Quakers, that the proprietors were endeavoring to 
 enslave the inhabitants of their province, and called upon 
 them out of gratitude for the privileges they were enjoying 
 to elect assemblymen who would show their loyalty to the 
 government by a vote of supplies. This was answered by 
 an anonymous writer who disparaged Weiser's statements 
 and accused him of either being deceived or attempting to 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 693. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 699. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 712. "But as every account from Europe gives us more 
 
 and more reason to apprehend a general War, you must excuse 
 me if I still consider you as the Representatives and the Watch- 
 men of the whole People of the Province, and not of a particu- 
 lar religious Society, " 
 
 (4) Col. Rec, VII, 273. 
 
 (5) Egle, Notes and Queries, 4th ser., I, 33. 
 
50 The Front i/' Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 deceive his countrymen. Weiser had recently been made 
 justice of the peace. He was now, says, this author, seek- 
 ing to make his position secure by ingratiating himself with 
 the governor. The chief positive argument was that the 
 encroachments of the proprietors tended to bring upon them 
 the samie slavery which they had left their own country to 
 escape. (1) But in spite of all representations the Ger- 
 mans, as well as most of the other citizens, gave their sup- 
 port to the policy of the Quaker representatives by re-elect- 
 ing them to the ^issembly until the outbreak of war in 1755 
 brought with it the necessity of more strenuous measures. 
 
 When the requisitions upon them to raise men or money 
 became too urgent to be refused, the assembly managed 
 generally to comply with the spirit of the demand without 
 disturbing their consciences. As long as they were requir- 
 ed to perform no military service and to grant no money 
 for definite military ends they were satisfied. Since they 
 did not condemn the use of arms in others, they raised no 
 objections to their grants being turned to military ends. 
 Their plan was to throw the responsibility from their own 
 shoulders and let it fall where it would. They granted ab 
 various times thousands of pounds "for the king's use" or 
 "for the queen's use" without stating definitely how it 
 should be expended. (2) This, they said, did not concern 
 them. At other times they stated particularly not only 
 how the money should be raised but also how it should be 
 used. (3) In 1745, for example, a grant of four thousand 
 pounds was made for "bread, beef, pork, flower, wheat, or 
 other grain," although it was well known that provisions 
 were plentiful. The words "other grain" were interpreted 
 to mean powder. The assembly made no objection and the 
 money was so expended. (4) 
 
 There was sometimes difficulty in raising the money 
 after it had been granted by the assembly. As proof of this 
 we have a message of Governor Charles Gookin to the as- 
 sembly. "But I must first recommend to you," he wrote, 
 "as I did to the last assembly, that the 2000 Granted for 
 the Queen's use, may be made ready paymt. when Demand- 
 ed: for notwithstanding the Powers Given for the Rais- 
 ing that money, 'tis not yet paid in." (5) 
 
 The outbreak of the French and Indian War brought to 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., II, 675-679. 
 
 (2) Votes of Assembly, II, 98. 
 
 (3) Col. Rec, I, 361; IV, 366; VI, 133. 
 
 (4) Franklin, Autobiography, 154. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., I, 320. 
 
The Frontier- Policy of Pennsylvania 51 
 
 a crisis the struggle between the governor and the assembly. 
 The governor's chief ally was necessity ; the assembly's most 
 serviceable weapon was the power of the purse, The latter, 
 to use the words of a contemporary writer, "seem quite in- 
 toxicated; are factious, contentious and disregard the Pro- 
 prietors and their Governors. Nay, they seem even to claim 
 a kind of Independency of their Mother-Country, despising 
 the Orders of the Crown, and refusing to contribute their 
 quota, either to the general Defence of America, or that of 
 their own particular province." (1) Early in the year 1754 
 Governor Hamilton, having received orders from the king 
 to arm the province, solicited a grant from the assembly 
 to enable him to obey ; but after considering the matter for 
 several weeks, they adjourned on the ninth of March with- 
 out coming to any decision." (2) 
 
 After the Virginians had been driven from the Ohio, the 
 governor again called the assembly, pointed out the extreme 
 dangers of the situation, and implored them to enable him 
 to put the province in a condition for defence, promising 
 even to disregard the proprietary instructions against an 
 issue of paper money, providing they would make ^ gener- 
 ous grant and sink the issue within five years as had been 
 prescribed by Parliament in the case of New England." (3) 
 They then passed a bill granting ten thousand pounds re- 
 deemable in twelve years. As he considered five the legal 
 limit, the governor vetoed it. Upon the news of Washing- 
 ton's defeat he again convened the assembly and entreated 
 them to find ways and means consistent with his instruc- 
 tions to repel the enemy. They voted fifteen thousand 
 pounds to be raised as in the former bill. Upon the gov- 
 ernor's refusal to sign it they adjourned without voting 
 him any salary. (4) 
 
 Governor Hamilton gave up in disgust and was succeed- 
 ed by Robert Hunter Morris. He informed the assembly 
 that he was subject to the same instructions as his pre- 
 decessor, but they sent up to him a bill to raise twenty 
 thousand pounds by an issue of paper money to extend for 
 the same length of time. (5) The grants seemed to become 
 more generous as the governor's veto became more sure. 
 
 In August a petition from a great number of frontier 
 
 (1) Smith, Brief State, 10. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 261. 
 
 (3) Smith, Brief State, 18. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 20. 
 
 (5) Ibid, 22. 
 
52 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 inhabitants was presented to the assembly, praying that 
 they might be furnished with arms and ammunition. It 
 was not granted. The friendly Indians sent a request to 
 the governor begging that he should direct the building of 
 a stockade in which they might defend themselves from 
 the incursions of the enemy; but the assembly refused to 
 grant any money for the purpose, and advised the Indians 
 that if they were afraid, they might move down into the 
 settled part of the province. (1) 
 
 The same procrastinating policy was pursued during the 
 early months of 1755. In January the assembly proposed 
 to adjourn until May without m.aking any provisions for the 
 defence of the province or granting the supplies which had 
 been requested by the governor. The governor objected to 
 the adjournment and insisted that they should continue in 
 session until they had provided some effective plan for 
 defence, (2) but it was nevertheless made. But in the 
 spring of this year a new influence was brought to bear 
 upon them. The governor convened the assembly on March 
 17 and laid before them a letter from General Braddock. 
 The following account of its reception was written by Ed- 
 ward Shippen to his father two days later: "The Governor 
 has laid before the Assembly a most alarming letter from 
 General Braddock, which charges them in strong terms with 
 faction and disaffection, and assures them, that, as the 
 assigning quarters for the army is his province, he shall 
 take due care to burden those colonies the most, that show 
 the least loyalty to his Majesty; and lets them know that 
 he is determined to obtain, by unpleasant methods, what 
 it is their duty to contribute with the utmost cheerfulness. 
 The Assembly know not how to stomach this military ad- 
 dress, but 'tis thought it will frighten them into some rea- 
 sonable measures." (3) Provision was immediately made, 
 as he demanded, for the establishment of a post to Win- 
 chester and the opening of a road westward from Carlisle 
 to the Youghiogheny. It was also voted to raise Pennsyl- 
 vania's portion of the general fund. No troops, however, 
 v/ere raised by the province. 
 
 During the alarm after the defeat of General Braddock 
 the Assembly talked of contributing largely but delayed 
 as long as possible. A bill was finally passed to raise fifty 
 thousand pounds but a clause was attached to tax the un- 
 profitable proprietary lands, which made it necessary for 
 
 (1) Smith, Brief State, 23. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 335. 
 
 (3) Balch, Letters and Papers, 35. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 53 
 
 the governor to veto it. (1) On the question of raising a 
 militia they would take no action. (2) A later bill was sent 
 up granting sixty thousand pounds to the king's use, and 
 including all the amendments formerly made by the gov- 
 ernor, except that the taxation of the proprietary estates 
 was to be submitted to royal determination. (3) This, too, 
 was vetoed by the governor as he considered that he had 
 no power to pass any bill which did not definitely exclude 
 such taxation. At this point certain gentlemen of Phila- 
 delphia, evidently despairing of a settlement, offered to sub- 
 scribe five thousand pounds in lieu of the proprietary share 
 of the tax in question, upon the presumption that the pro- 
 prietors would honorably reimburse them. (4) There was 
 no need, however, to take the risk. The proprietors offered 
 five thousand pounds to be used in the defence of the prov- 
 ince. (5) In consideration of this gift the proprietary 
 estates were exempted in a new bill, which became a law, 
 granting fifty-five thousand pounds for the king's use. (6) 
 
 According to this law the money raised was to be placed 
 in the hands of a committee of the Assembly to be used by 
 them "for supplying Friendly Indians, holding Treaties, 
 relieving distressed settlers who have been driven frohi their 
 Lands, and other purposes for the King's use." Nothing 
 was said about military service, although the words otJier 
 purposes could be given such an interpretation. Some, con- 
 sidering the principles of the committee, had little antici- 
 pation that they would be given such a meaning; (7) but 
 Benjamin Franklin, who was one of the members and who 
 probably knew better than any other the real inclination of 
 his colleagues, was more hopeful. Eight days after the 
 passage of the law he wrote to William Parsons, saying 
 that the money was to be used chiefly for the defence of 
 the province, and stating that orders had already been is- 
 sued to raise three hundred rangers and erect block houses 
 along the frontier. (8) 
 
 The Quaker's opposition to the use of arms and the taxa- 
 tion of the proprietary estates were, however, not the only 
 points of contention between the governor and the Assem- 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VI, 599. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 493. 
 
 (3) True and Impartial State, 139. 
 
 (4) Franklin, Review, 254. 
 
 (5) Votes of Assembly, IV, 582. 
 
 (6) Statutes at Large, V, 201-212. 
 
 (7) Col. Rec, VII, 274. 
 
 (8) Franklin, Works, II, 427. 
 
54 The F^'ontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 bly. The latter feared that the proprietors were attempt- 
 ing to introduce a system of despotism and slavery, and to 
 augment their own powers at the expense of the peoples 
 liberties. (1) A general militia law would, they thought, 
 materially strengthen this power by creating a host of of- 
 ficers dependent upon the proprietors alone. (2) It could 
 have in Pennsylvania only the same centralizing effect which 
 such laws had shown in Europe. The assemblymen conscien- 
 tiously felt that if they sumbitted to the amendments of the 
 governor, they would be guilty of a breach of trust in sur- 
 rendering up the rights of the people whom they had been 
 chosen to represent. 
 
 The governor on the other hand considered that the as- 
 semblymen were striving to promote their schemes of in- 
 dependence by grasping at the disposition of all public 
 money. (3) He was charged by the partisans of the As- 
 sembly with inciting the people to come down to the city 
 in multitudes to coerce them into compliance with his plans. 
 (4) Whether the governor was guilty of instigation or not, 
 popular influence was brought to bear upon the Assembly. 
 In November, 1755, a remonstrance was presented to them 
 by the mayor, aldermen, and common council of Philadel- 
 phia calling their attention to the importance and urgency 
 of the problem which they were facing, and insisting that 
 all disputes should be laid aside until the defence of the 
 province had been provided for. "You were," ran the re- 
 monstrance in part, ''lately called together upon more urg- 
 ent Business than ever came before an Assembly of this 
 province, and while you have been sitting, scarce a day has 
 passed wherein you have not heard of the inhuman Slaught- 
 er of our Fellow Subjects, & been loudly called upon for 
 that protection, which by the most sacred Ties you owe to 
 the People. On such an Emergency we imagined you had 
 an easy and expeditious mode of procedure before you, 
 
 (1) True and Impartial State, 37. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 56. A general Militia Law would naturally produce this 
 
 long train of ruinous Effects; an infinite Number of new Rela- 
 tions, Dependences, &c. would be created, all under the Con- 
 trol, and subject to the Dominion of our Proprietaries, and their 
 Governors; on them would the Officers of the Militia alone be 
 dependent, being commissioned by them, and liable to be turned 
 out at their pleasure; the common Men would be influenced 
 by their Officers, and directed by them in their Choice of Rep- 
 resentatives; so that, not only the Quakers, but every man 
 who had the Virtue and Spirit to oppose such arbitrary and 
 unjust Proceedings, would be utterly excluded from that im- 
 portant Trust." 
 
 (3) Ibid, 114. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 142. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania' 55 
 
 namely, to postpone all Disputes to a more seasonable time, 
 to grant the necessary Supplies on such lerms as those on 
 which the rest of his Majesty's Colonies have granted large 
 sums for the like purposes; and lastly to pass a reasonable 
 Law in order to collect and regulate the Force of the Prov- 
 ince for repelling the cruel Invasion. Nevertheless, while 
 you have been deliberating, much innocent Blood has been 
 spilt, a great deal of our country laid waste, the miserable 
 Inhabitants scatter'd abroad before the savage Spoiler." (1) 
 
 There were for a time constant reports that mobs of 
 frontier inhabitants were preparing to come to Philadelphia 
 to force the government to provide efficient means for de- 
 fence. (2) The mobs, however, failed to come in any great 
 numbers, and the few who did come proved harmless. (3) 
 The governor, evidently desiring to bring the Assembly 
 into closer touch with actual frontier conditions or prob- 
 ably under the influence of mob domination, advised with 
 his council in 1756 whether he should call them to meet at 
 Lancaster. (4) The council advised that the meetmg should 
 be called for Philadelphia. The writ was, therefore, issued 
 to meet in this city. 
 
 The argument had been occasionly advanced thai those 
 who had scruples against the use of arms should in times 
 of public danger decline to act as assemblymen. (5) This 
 was consistent with the Quaker's policy of shiftmg the bur- 
 den of defence from his own shoulders and letting it fall 
 where it would. Acting therefore, in accorelance with the 
 request of the ministry the Quakers in 1756 did not offer 
 themselves as candidates, and the four who A'ere neverthe- 
 less elected asked to be relieved from the responsibility of 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VI, 734. 
 
 (2) Ibid, VI, 729. Minutes of Council. "A Letter ; rom Colonel Wil- 
 
 liam Moore, dated yesterday, to the Governoi advising him of 
 2000 Inhabitants preparing to come to Philail<'lphia from Ches- 
 ter County, to compel the Governor and Assembly to agree to 
 pass Laws to defend the Country and oppose the Enemy, was 
 read." 
 See also a letter from the assembly to the gove -nor and contain- 
 the same facts in vol. VII, page 91. 
 
 (3) True and Impartial State, 142. 
 
 (4) Col. Rec, VII, 90. 
 
 (5) Pa. Mag. of Hist. and. Biog., VI, 410, James Logan to the Yf^ar- 
 
 ly Meeting: "It is therefore proposed to the serious and most 
 weighty Consideration of this Meeting, Whether it may no., at 
 this Time, be advisable, that all such who for Conscience sake 
 cannot join in any Law for Self-Defence, should not oiil> de- 
 cline standing Candidates at the ensuing Election for Repre- 
 sentatives themselves, but also advise all others who are equally 
 scrupulous, to do the same. 
 
56 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 service. (1) Their request was granted, their seats de- 
 clared vacant, and they themselves disabled from sitting 
 or serving in the Assembly for the ensuing year. 
 
 Even before the resignation of the Quakers a makeshift 
 militia bill had been passed. During the Indian incursion 
 of the summer and autumn of 1755 petitions came from all 
 parts of the province, interior as well as frontier, stating 
 that the people would concur in taking measures for the 
 defence of the province. (2) The Assembly's bill, which 
 will be treated more fully in the section devoted to the 
 militia, seemed to be calculated rather to exempt persons 
 from military service than to encourage them in it. The 
 whole was purely voluntary. There was no method of com- 
 pelling those principled against fighting to find substitutes. 
 (3) The governor, contrary to expectation, signed the bill 
 in order to show that he was willing to do anything that 
 had the slightest chance to contribute to the defence of the 
 province, (4) and also to show by experience that such laws 
 would do more harm than good. (5) 
 
 (1) Votes of Assembly, IV, 626. October 16, 1756: "Understanding 
 
 that the Ministry have requested the Quakers, who from the 
 first Settlement of this Colony have been the majority of the 
 Assemblies of this Province, to suffer their Seats, during the 
 difficult Situation of the Affairs of the Colonies, to be filled by 
 Members of other Demoninations, in such Manner as to pre- 
 pare, without any Scruples, all such Laws as may be necessary 
 to be enacted for the Defence of the Province in whatever 
 Manner they may judge best suited to the Circumstances of 
 it; and notwithstanding we think this has been pretty fully 
 complied with at the last Election, yet, at the Request of our 
 Friends, being willing to take off all possible Obligation, we 
 who have (without any Solicitation on our Part) been returned 
 as Representatives in this Assembly, request we may be ex- 
 cused, and suffered to withdi'aw ourselves, and vacate our 
 Seats in such Manner as may be attended with the least Trouble, 
 and most satisfactory to this honorable House. 
 Mahlon Kirkbride, Peter Dicks, 
 William Hoge, Nathaniel Pennock," 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, VI, 680. 
 
 (3) Ibid, VII, 2';4. 
 
 (4) Ibid, VI, 741. 
 
 (5) Fa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 531. Governor Morris to Governor Din- 
 
 widdle: "If with this Grant they had made a good Militia Act, 
 I might have done something toward putting the Country into 
 a posture of Defence; but as they offered me a senseless, par- 
 tial and impracticable Bill, rather than have any more dis- 
 putes with them, and as it was only to continue in Force till 
 next October, I passed it, that Experience may convince them 
 such Bills will do infinitely more harm than good." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 57 
 
 This law having proved satisfactorily its inefficiency, 
 the governor in May, 175(;, recommended to the Assembly 
 to form a bill that could be carried into immediate execu- 
 tion and that would enable him to throw the strength of the 
 province into those sections where the danger was most im- 
 minent. (1) The law of 1755 was disallowed by the king 
 in council, (2) the chief objection to it being the election 
 of officers by a vote of the soldiers. Pennsylvania was 
 thus left without even \he shadow of a legal military estab- 
 lishment. During the next eighteen months the governor 
 appealed constantly loi- an efficient military bill, (3) but of 
 all those returned to him not one was free from the objec- 
 tions which had causei^ he disallowance of the former law. A 
 good example of these bills is that w^;' li passed the House, 
 March 20, 1757. (4) It provided thai tie constables should 
 make out a list of the inhaWitants oi each township, indi- 
 cating the religion of each. Those religiously opposed to 
 bearing arms were not to be f -reed; the others were to be 
 formed into companies of six \ each. Each company was 
 then to choose by ballot its own captam, lieutenant, and 
 ensign. 
 
 The governor objected to these bills because they did 
 not subject the militia to the proper discipline; because 
 trials by courts martial were nc r r.rovided; and because the 
 appointment of officers was ta^ r out of the hands of the 
 government. (5) The Assem.),v on the other hand con- 
 sidered that their bills were reasonable; that subjecting 
 the people to a court martial would be inconsistent with 
 their liberties; and that the appointment of olficers was 
 not taken out of the hands of the government, as the gov- 
 ernor, according to the later bills, was empowered to ap- 
 point one from severivl whose names had been recommended 
 by the soldiers. (6) They could see in such a law as the 
 governor desired only an attempt to undermine their liber- 
 ties. (7) 
 
 The tension was fi, ali,/ somewhat relieved by the ap- 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VII, 121. 
 
 (2) statutes at Large, V, 201. 
 <3) Col. Rec., VII, 444, 720, 758. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser.. Ill, 120-136. 
 
 (5) Col. Rec, VII, 533, 720. 
 
 (6) Ibid, 733. 
 
 (7) Ibid, 618. Resolution of Assembly: "That it appears to Us, that 
 
 the Governor is determined to withhold that Protection from 
 the People of this Province, virhich a pioper Militia might af- 
 ford them, Unless w^e will present him such a Bill as will enable 
 certain designing men to subvert the Constitution, and deprive 
 the Inhabitants of every Liberty they think worth enjoying." 
 
58 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 pointment of Pitt to the English premiership. His liberal 
 and energetic policy soothed the fears of the Pennsyl- 
 vanians, and to a great extent obviated the necessity of a 
 military law. To encourage enlistment the Assembly now 
 voted a bounty of five pounds to each able bodied soldier 
 and twenty shillings to the enlistinu' officer; (1) and recom- 
 mended to the governor to do evei v thing in his power to 
 have the forces ready at the time (iesignated by the min- 
 istry. Pennsylvania was not provided with a militia law, 
 but hence forth she furnished to the general army with 
 little opposition her quota of men and supplies. (2) 
 
 After the French and Indian Wai the Assembly did not 
 show themselves so strongly opposf.i to providing for mili- 
 tary defence, although they cannot always be complimented 
 for their prompt and efficient action. During Pontiac's War 
 and Dunmore's War they provided for the defence of the 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VIII, 53. The .^sembly to the Governor: "It is also 
 
 the Opinion of this Hou.s^ that Five Pounds be given as a Boun- 
 ty to every able Bodied Man that shall voluntarily enter into 
 the Service of the Province, and Twenty Shillings to the Of- 
 ficer for every Man he sUall enlist." 
 
 (2) During the period of contention between the governor and the 
 
 assembly a veritable pamphlet war was carried on between the 
 champions of the opposing viewpoints. William Smith in his 
 Brief View of the Cond":i of Pennsylvania, 1755, and his 
 Brief State of the Provinst of Pennsylvania \rpheld the policy 
 of the governor and proprietors, holding the Quakers and their 
 assembly responsible for the misfortunes which had fallen upon 
 the province; while Cross's A\iswer to au inviduous pamphlet, 
 intitled "A brief state of the province of Pennsylvania" and the 
 anonyrnous True and Impartial state of the province of Penn- 
 sylvania take the side of the assembly. The first of these lat- 
 ter two is an inadequate unreasonab^ie, vindictive and alto- 
 gether amusing attack upon Smith's position. It is rather a 
 raillery than an argument, leaving the points made by Smith 
 unanswered. The lYue and impartial state of the province of 
 Pennsylvania is on the other hand more reasonable anu pre- 
 sents arguments of some weight in favor of the assembly's 
 position. Benjamin Franklin's An Historical Review of ^he 
 Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania is another excel- 
 lent statement of the assembly's viewpoint. Charles Thomp- 
 son's Enquiry into the Causes of the Alienation of the Dela- 
 ware and Shawanese Indians from the British Interest is a 
 careful study of Indian affairs from 1722 to 1758, in which 
 the author shows how the whites imposed continually upon 
 the Indians, expecially in matter of land and ti'ade. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 59 
 
 frontier either by arming the settlers themselves (1) or 
 by raising bands of rangers. (2) During the Revolutionary 
 War the contrvjl of frontier defence was voluntarily given 
 over to the president and council. (3) Action was often 
 crippled by the lack of funds, but for this the Assembly 
 can no longer be held responsible. After the capture of the 
 goverment by the revolutionists, they stood necessarily for 
 military defence. 
 
 The Indian and Frontier Defence. 
 
 Having thus sketched in outline the necessity for de- 
 fence, the conflicting views of the assembly and the pro- 
 prietors, and their prolonged quarrel over military grants 
 and laws, I shall now take up in the following sections what 
 is an even more pleasant task, a description of the methods 
 of defence which were put into actual operation. 
 
 As has been stated formerly, the Indians during the 
 early years of the province lived on terms of friendship with 
 their English neighbors. When, therefore, the traders be- 
 gan to bring in rumors of danger and the Indians to grow 
 gradually more restless on account of the encro'achments 
 of the whites, the great problem was that of maintaining 
 their friendship. If the Indians who lived along the fron- 
 tier could only be retained as friends, the necessity for de- 
 fence would, if it did not entirely disappear, at least be 
 greatly minimized. 
 
 The methods employed to maintain and, after many 
 tribes had been alienated, to regain their friendship have 
 been treated quite fully in the chapter on Indian Policy. It 
 it, therefore, only necessary to review here some of the 
 most important points. Many thousand pounds were ex- 
 
 (1) N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 530. Sir Jeffrey Amherst to the Earl of 
 
 Egremont: "The Province of Pennsylvania has, on this Occa- 
 sion Empowered the Governor to raise Seven Hundred Men, 
 but it is only with a view of getting in their Harvest, which 
 entirely frustrates the Public good that might be expected from 
 such a number actually raised; whereas, these in effect are only 
 farmers and reapers, which the Assembly mean by their vote 
 to arm to defend their own fields." 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., IV, 548. Resolution of Assembly: They authorize 
 
 the payment of a sum not exceeding two thousand pounds for 
 paying "a number of Rangers lately raised by the Magistrates 
 of Westmoreland County, for the removing the Panic into which 
 the Inhabitants of the sd County have been thrown by the late 
 Indian Disturbances." 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 4th ser. Ill, 800; 832. 
 Col. Rec, XIII, 248. 
 
60 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 pended for Indian presents as a voluntary return for ser- 
 vices which they had rendered or merely to retain their 
 good will. Agents whose personal influence vas strong were 
 sent to treat with them. (1) They were flattered into mak- 
 ing treaties of friendship. The name of their "good broth- 
 er Onas" (2) was conjured for this purpose. Goods were 
 furnished them cheaper than they could be procurred from 
 the French. Lands, the purchase of which they considered 
 fraudulent were returned. 
 
 If a buff'er state of Friendly Indians could be maintained 
 on the frontier, the danger of attacks by the French or 
 hostile Indians would be greatly lessened. But the policy 
 of erecting such a state was not consis jntly followed. The 
 rapid westward expansion of population and the consequent 
 purchases of land would have prevented its operation ex- 
 cept for brief periods of time. In his agreement with the 
 Susquehanna Indians in 1701 Penn insisted that they should 
 allow no tribes of strange Indians to settle upon the western 
 bank of the Susquehanna or along the Potomac and that 
 they should bring no other Indians into any part of the 
 province without his express consent. (3) But there seems 
 to be no indication that such a policy was pursued from 
 that date until the outbreak of the French and Indian War. 
 The Indians were, on the contrary, gradually receding be- 
 fore advancing settlements. 
 
 In 1757, however, the policy was again acted upon. The 
 friendly Indians requested lands about Wyoming upon 
 which they might settle and live permanently. The as- 
 sembly, recognizing the advantage of such a settlement, 
 recommended that the request be granted and that a com- 
 fortable place of security be erected for their reception. (4) 
 
 (1) Votes of Assembly, IV, 137. Governor Hamilton to Assembly; 
 
 "The Indians of those Pai-ts are not of the most prudent Be- 
 havior, and therefore it seems necessary there should be al- 
 ways among them some discreet Person, who by his Influence 
 may be able to regulate their Conduct, and keep them firmly 
 attached to the British Interest; " 
 
 (2) The Indian word for "pen" by which William Penn was commonly 
 
 known among them. 
 
 (3) Col. Rec„ II, 16. 
 
 (4) Col. Rcc., VII, 730. Assembly to Governor: "The securing an 
 
 Indian Barrier to the Frontiers of this Province is of so much 
 importance to the Safety and Welfare of the People, that we 
 are of Opinion, a Compliance with this Request should not be 
 postponed a Moment longer than is necessary; therefore, we 
 earnestly entreat your Honor, with all Expedition, to proceed 
 to build such a place of Security as shall be agreeable to the 
 Indians; and as many houses as they shall stand in need of at 
 the Place nominated by Teedyuscung, for their comfortable 
 Living and Safety." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 61 
 
 The governor, acting in accordance with the assembly's 
 recommendation and the promise made to the Indians at 
 Easton, appointed commissioners for the immediate con- 
 struction of a stockade and such houses as were necessary 
 for their accommodation. (1) 
 
 The Indian was not extensively used in actual warfare. 
 As his acquaintance with the country and his skill in wood- 
 craft made him an excellent scout, he was at times em- 
 ployed in this capacity. (2) The Quakers were, however, 
 naturally opposed to his use, and when wars had finally 
 become serious, most of the Indians were allies of the 
 French. The problem of the English was one of regaining 
 or retaining their friendship (3) rather than of using them 
 against their enemies. 
 
 Here duty demands that I deal with a subject which, 
 out of respect for our ancestors, I should prefer to pass in 
 silence. The Indian at times paid dearly for his neutrality. 
 The frontiersmen, frantic with the losses which they had 
 suffered and unable to satisfy their vengeance upon an elu- 
 sive foe, fell upon and destroyed the neutral Christian 
 tribes which were situated within their lines. • The first 
 massacre occured at Paxton (or Paxtang as it was then 
 spelled) during Pontiac's War and the second at Gnaden- 
 hutten, Ohio, in 1782. The latter took place in Ohio, but 
 the prepetrators were chiefly Pennsylvanians. An account 
 of these massacres or an account of the Indian's suffering 
 does not lie within the scope of our present task. But we 
 are somewhat concerned with the attitude of the frontiers- 
 man to the subject and to the policy of permitting bodies 
 of neutral Indians to dwell behind the frontier in time of 
 war. The frontiersman looked upon the situation quite dif- 
 ferently from the inhabitants of the interior. (4) He 
 could not understand the attitude of a government that 
 would grant neither men nor funds for the protection of 
 its own citizens, yet fostered and protected a band of dan- 
 gerous Indians. (5) All Indians, whether Christian or 
 
 (1) Balch, Letters and Papers, 99. 
 
 (2) Col. Ree., VII, 46. Minutes of Council, February 24, 1756; 
 
 "Two of tlie Six Nation Indians were sent at the Instance of 
 the Governor up the River Sasquehannah to gain Intelligence 
 of the Motions and Number of the Enemy Indians.'' 
 
 (3) Ibid, 435. 
 
 (4) Darlington, Fort Pitt, 239. 
 
 (5) Col. Rec, IX, 143. Declaration of frontier inhabitants, 1764: 
 
 "Both money and protection is granted to Indians who were 
 enemies of Bouquet, while at the same tim.e 100s of distressed 
 families were compelled to flee from their homes to starve ne- 
 glected." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 pagan, were, according to their conception, equally treach- 
 erous ; and to allow bands of them to remain in times of war 
 was simply nursing an adder in the bosom of the province. 
 (1) The massacres were carried out in cold blood after 
 days of careful consideration. 
 
 To inspire the friendly Indians to activity rewards were 
 sometimes offered for enemy prisoners and scalps. This 
 plan was first adopted on the recommendation of the Indian 
 commissioners (2) in 1756 at the same time that war was 
 declared against the Delawares. The rewards were gradu- 
 ated as follows : (3) for male prisoners above ten years of age, 
 $150; for females and males under ten, $130; for scalps of 
 males over ten, $130 ; for scalps of Indian women, $50 ; for 
 the recapture of English prisoners, $150. Soldiers in the 
 pay of the province could lay claim to one half of the above 
 amounts. The same plan was followed during Pontiac's 
 War. (4) The system was attended by some favorable re- 
 sults, but appealed for the most part to the baser motives. 
 The effect upon the Indians was particularly bad, leading 
 to the murder and scalping of innocent Indians in order to 
 get the reward. (5) 
 
 Militia. 
 
 Before 1755 the pressure of danger was never suffici- 
 ently great to overcome the religious prejudices of the 
 Quakers against the establishment of a militia. But the 
 governors at times were able, acting under their charter 
 authority, to raise a body of men. (6) The majority of 
 the Quakers, as long as service was purely voluntary, re- 
 mained passive. There was some opposition on the part 
 of the extremists but never enough to interfere seriously 
 with the governor's plans. 
 
 {1) Col. Rec, IX, 141. Petition of Inhabitants of Frontiers, Febru- 
 ary 13, 1764: "We humbly conceive that it is contrary to the 
 maxims of good Policy, and extremely dangerous to our Fron- 
 tiers, to suffer any Indians, of what tribe so ever, to live with- 
 in the Inhabited parts of this Province, while we are engaged 
 in an Indian war, as Experience has taught us that they are 
 all perfidious, & their Claim to Freedom & Independency puts 
 it in their power to act as Spies, to entertain and to give in- 
 telligence to our Enemies, and to furnish them with Provisions 
 and Warlike Stores." 
 
 (2) Ibid, VII, 74. 
 
 (3) 
 
 Ibid 
 Pa. 
 
 ', 88. 
 Arch. 
 
 , 1st 
 
 ser., 
 
 , 11, 
 
 607, 
 
 618, 
 
 625. 
 
 (4) 
 (5) 
 (6) 
 
 Col. 
 Pa. 
 Col. 
 
 Rec, 
 Arch. 
 Rec, 
 
 IX, 
 
 , 1st 
 IV, 
 
 188. 
 ; ser. 
 696; 
 
 , III, 199 
 V, 251. 
 
 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 63 
 
 These companies were raised by voluntary associations 
 of citizens. In fact when a militia law was finally passed 
 in 1755, it was professedly nothing more than the legaliza- 
 tion of the method which had formerly been followed with- 
 out the sanction of law. Franklin's Association of 1747 
 was probably the most successful attempt to raise troops 
 in this manner. (1) By the spring of 1748 almost twenty 
 thousand men had joined the Association and become some- 
 what adept in the use of arms. (2) The governor, there- 
 fore, at the beginning of the French and Indian War natur- 
 ally followed the same plan. He informed the several 
 counties that if they would enter into associations, form 
 themselves into companies, and recommend proper persons 
 for officers, he would grant them commissions and give 
 them all the encouragement in his power. (3) Many fol- 
 lowed his suggestion and thus the foundation for a military 
 establishment was laid. 
 
 The act of November 25, 1755, as has just been stated, 
 merely put the stamp of legal approval upon the method 
 of raising troops which was already in common use. The 
 preamble shows its spirit. The Quakers state themselves 
 principled against the use of arms but not oppo^d to their 
 use by others as the world was then circumstanced. To 
 compel them to enlist would be a breach of privilege, for 
 them to compel others would be inconsistent. But owing 
 to the great number of petitions showing a popular desire 
 for defensive organization they pass an act providing for 
 the better organization of those who are willing and desir- 
 ous to be united for military purposes. (4) 
 
 This act made it lawful for freemen to form themselves 
 into companies "as hitherto they have used in time of war 
 without law;" to choose their own captain, lieutenant, and 
 ensign, and present their names to the governor or to the 
 commander in chief for his approval. The officers of the 
 various companies were empowered to choose and present 
 in the same way the name of a colonel. The officers should 
 
 U) Franklin, Autobiography, 141-149. 
 
 (2) Balch, Letters and Papers, 15. John Swift to John White, 
 
 April 12, 1748: "The association for the militia goes on very- 
 well here, there are upwards of 8000 rren in this city (Phila- 
 delphia) that bear arms, and are already become pretty expert 
 in their exercise; and in the province there are near 20,000 
 associators, and more daily coming in. The platform for a 
 battery is begun by the swamp below the Swedes' church, and 
 we have cannons coming to us from New York. With these 
 we shall be able to make some resistance in case of an attack." 
 
 (3) Col. Rec, V. 680. 
 
 (4) Statutes at Large, V, 197. 
 
64 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 then draw up articles of war for the government of the 
 forces. (1) These articles must be read before the com- 
 panies, and each man, after at least three days considera- 
 tion, must sign them in the presence of a justice of the 
 peace. No regiment or company could be compelled to go 
 more than three days march beyond the inhabited parts 
 of the province or be detained longer than three weeks in 
 any garrison without a previous engagement signed by each 
 man for that particular service. 
 
 The law was wholly inadequate to provide for the de- 
 fence of the province. It provided that freemen might form 
 themselves into companies and choose their own officers. 
 But neither time nor place was designated; no person was 
 empowered to call them together; there was no method to 
 compel those not principled against the use of arms to enlist 
 or to force others to find a substitute. (2) Beyond the 
 moral obligation which it placed upon the assmebly to pro- 
 vide funds for the payment of the troops there was little 
 gained. A number of companies were formed under its 
 sanction, but the process of mobilization was necessarily 
 so slow and the restrictions upon the action of the governor 
 so great that little could be accomplished. (3) 
 
 In 1756 there were three batallions engaged in the de- 
 fence of the frontier. Each consisted of seven companies 
 of infantry and one of cavalry. (4) In 1757 thirteen thou- 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 547. Soldiers' Ai^Teement: "We, the 
 
 Subscribers do hei-eby engage ourselves to serve as Soldiers in 
 his Majesty's Service, under the command of Captain John 
 Vanetta, for the space of one Month, and whoever of us shall 
 get drunk, desexi;, or prove cowardly in Time of Action, or dis- 
 obedient to our Officers, shall forfeit his Pay. This Agreement 
 we make in Consideration of being allowed at the rate of Six 
 Dollars per Month, Wages, one Dollar for the use of a Gun 
 and Blanket, to each Man who shall furnish himself with them, 
 and the Provisions and Rum mentioned in a Paper hereunto 
 annexed." 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, VII, 274. 
 
 (3) Votes of Assembly, IV, 557. 
 
 Col. Rec., VII, 121. Governor to Assembly, May 11, 1756: "The 
 Law for the Better Ordering and Regulating such as are will- 
 ing and desirous to be united for military puiposes, within this 
 Province, has contributed very little toward the Defence of the 
 Frontiers, and as I observed to you when I Passed it, is so 
 Defective in itself, and requires so much Time to carry it into 
 Execution, that Nothing Good is to be expected from it, though 
 many Companies have formed themselves under that Law, yet 
 it is not in my Power to Order any of them to the frontiers, 
 they are, as to that most Martial Service, entirely useless." 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., Ill, 62. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 65 
 
 sand men were in the pay of the province; (1) in 1758 
 twelve thousand seventy-four are reported. (2) These were 
 engaged in garrisoning the forts and ranging the frontiers. 
 
 After the first panic and confusion of 1763 had passed 
 away the frontier settlers formed themselves voluntarily 
 into companies (3) and the assembly ordered seven hun- 
 dred men to be raised for the protection of the frontier 
 during harvest. Most of these v/ere newly raised and un- 
 disciplined troops, but working in conjuction with the volun- 
 tary companies they were able to gather in the greater part 
 of the harvest. (4) 
 
 When the news came from New England in 1775 that 
 the struggle with Great Britian had begun, the inhabitants 
 of western Pennsylvania were involved in difficulties with 
 the Indians and almost on the verge of civil war among 
 themselves over the question of the boundry between Penn- 
 sylvania and Virginia. But within four weeks after the 
 Battle of Lexington, meetings were held in Pittsburgh and 
 Hannastown and resolutions unanimously passed indorsing 
 entirely the action of Massachusetts. (5) It was determin- 
 ed to form military associations to oppose by force if neces- 
 sary the encroachments of a "wicked ministry a^id a cor- 
 rupted parliament." (6) A tax of 2s. 6d. per tithable man 
 was also recommended for the purpose of providing the 
 associations with arms and ammunition. A standing com- 
 mittee was appointed to collect, repair, and deliver such 
 arms as could be obtained to the captains of the various 
 companies. (7) The boundry question in the presence of 
 the common danger became a minor issue. Other counties 
 followed the same plan. (8) Thus the problem of organi- 
 zation was met until the state and the confederation were 
 able to take up its solution. 
 
 A militia law providing for the enrollment of all males 
 
 (1) Ihid, 99. 
 
 (2) Ihid, 341. 
 
 (3) Ibid, IV, 120, 124. 
 
 (4) Col. Rec, IX, 42. Governor Hamilton to Assembly, September 
 
 12, 1763: "I have taken into the Pay of the Province Seven 
 
 hundred Men for the defence and protection of our Frontiers 
 
 : And I have the satisfaction to acquaint you, that under 
 
 the aforesaid protection, great part of the Harvest, which is 
 of so much Importance to the back Inhabitants, hath been 
 gathered in, and as well secured as the Season of the Year 
 would admit." 
 
 (5) Olden Time, I, 571-573. 
 
 (6) Ibid, 575. 
 
 (7) Ibid, 573. 
 
 (8) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., IV, 657. 
 
TJie Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 between the ages of eighteen and fifty-three years passed 
 the state legislature on March 17, 1777. (1) The country 
 was divided into districts, the inhabitants of which should 
 meet and elect their field officers, a colonel, a lieutenant- 
 colonel, and a major; subdistricts were erected, each of 
 which should elect captains, lieutenants, and ensigns. The 
 Executive Council, in case of invasion or upon the request 
 of Congress, could call the militia into service. Each en- 
 rolled man must serve in his turn or provide a substitute. 
 Service as a substitute did not excuse a m.an from his own 
 turn. 
 
 During the Indian wars of 1791 and 1795 the lieutenants 
 of the frontier counties were authorized in case of actual 
 invasion or imminent danger of invasion to order into ser- 
 vice such parts of the militia as the situation seemed to 
 require. (2) In 1793 and again in 1794 three temporary 
 companies of riflemen were also provided to protect the 
 frontiers of Westmoreland, Washington, and Allegheny 
 counties. (3) Each company, according to the law of 1793, 
 consisted of fifty privates, and officers, to continue in ser- 
 vice for six months, unless the state of the war made it 
 necessary for the governor to extend their time until the 
 next meeting of the legislature. Captains received twenty- 
 five dollars per month, lieutenants twenty, sergeants eigth, 
 and privates six dollars and sixty cents. The law of 1794 
 was almost a replica of that of 1793. Each company, how- 
 ever, consisted of sixty-five instead of fifty privates ; service 
 was to continue for eight months instead of six; and the 
 wages were slightly higher. 
 
 After 1754 a plan of patrolling the frontier was followed 
 whenever danger threatened. Bodies of soldiers were sta- 
 tioned at intervals along the frontier. The main body was 
 kept in garrison at a post near the center of their district. 
 From here bands ranged each morning to the end of the 
 district and back in the afternoon. (4) Signals by which 
 a warning of danger could be spread were agreed upon with 
 the inhabitants. (5) The bands consisted usually of from 
 
 (1) StaUites at Large, IX, 75-94. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., IV, 271. Governor Mifflin to Assembly: 
 
 The military officers of the frontier counties were authorized 
 to call out the militia and instructed "by virtue of the discre- 
 tionary power which the law creates, to continue the three rifle 
 companies in service, till the opening of the present session." 
 
 (3) Statutes at Large, XIV, 381; XV, 13. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 239. 
 
 (5) Ibid, 546. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 67 
 
 ten to fifteen men ; the posts were situated twelve or fifteen 
 miles apart. (1) At times larger bands were sent to scout 
 beyond the frontier as far as supplies could be provided for 
 them. (2) In 1763 the people about the Great Cove raised 
 money by subscription and employed a scouting party for 
 two months to defend the north and western frontiers of 
 Cumberland County. (3) During Dunmore's War parties 
 were raised to range between Turtle Creek, Bullock Penns, 
 Hannastown, Proctors, and Ligonier. (4) During the Revo- 
 lution (5) and the later Indian wars (6) the same plan was 
 followed. 
 
 The skill in marksmanship which tradition attributes 
 to the frontiersman will not bear the light of careful inves- 
 tigation. Some, particularly among the hunters and trad- 
 ers, were doubtless very expert in the use of the rifle; but 
 as a whole the settlers along the frontier would not appear 
 to much greater advantage than our rural citizens of today. 
 James Young, when on an inspection tour of the western 
 forts in 1756, tested the marksmanship of the soldiers at 
 the various garrisons. (7) At Fort Lebanon only fifteen 
 out of twenty-eight were able to hit within two feet of the 
 center of a target at eighty yards; at the fort above Al- 
 leminga not over four in twenty-five could hit a tree at 
 eighty-five yards. James Burd, who inspected the forts in 
 1758, reports the same conditions as still existing. (8) 
 
 The task of recruiting, on account of the attitude taken 
 by the Quakers and many of the Germans, was often tedious 
 and difficult. This fact, as well as the methods sometimes 
 used, is shown by the following extract from a letter writ- 
 ten by Joseph Shippen to James Burd, May 31, 1757. "I 
 have found little success, having enlisted as yet but five 
 men. Captain Jameson writes me he has got but six. Cap- 
 tain Hambright has had better success; the day when all 
 the Captains came to town to wait on the governor he en- 
 listed twelve or thirteen of our discharged Dutchmen, by 
 assuring them that they were not to go to Shamokin, nor 
 do any kind of work, but to range and scour the woods con- 
 tinually. This pleased them so much that they have begun 
 
 (1) Ibid, 865. 
 
 (2) Ihid, 4th ser., II, 626. 
 
 (3) Votes of Assembly, VI, 296. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., IV, 514. 
 
 (5) Col. Rec, XI, 750, 
 
 (6) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 693. 
 
 (7) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 677. 
 
 (8) Ihid, III, 352-357. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 endeavoring to persuade all their countrymen they meet 
 with to enlist with Captain Hambright, by which means I 
 belive he has now thirty recruits." (1) Captain Ham- 
 bright's brother, who was at the same time recruiting at 
 Lancaster, gave each man a dollar and provided him with 
 a pistol. 
 
 When General Forbes was raising forces for the expedi- 
 tion against Fort Duquesne in 1752, Provost William Smith 
 at his request wrote and published an address to the colonies 
 calling upon them to raise in defence of their liberties. (2) 
 "Rise then, my countrymen ! as you value the blessings you 
 enjoy, and dread the evils that hang over you, rise and show 
 yourselves worthy of the name of Britons! rise to secure 
 to your posterity, peace, freedom, and a pure religion ! rise 
 to chastise a perfidious nation for their breach of treaties, 
 their detestible cruelties, and their horrid murders." 
 
 The soldiers, as might be expected under such laws as 
 the assembly provided for their regulation, sometimes show- 
 ed an inclination to disobedience and insubordination. The 
 officer was rather an advisor than a commander. There 
 was no court martial to punish offenders. Public odium was 
 the only penalty. Even this had little weight as the soldier 
 always received the sympathy of the Quakers and German 
 pacifists. To the honor of the soldier it may nevertheless 
 be said that glaring cases of disobedience were very rare. (3) 
 
 Neglect of duty was often more serious. The scouting 
 parties sometimes did not go to their destination ; (4) some 
 officers failed to send out any scouts at all; others were 
 drunken and totally unfit. Relief was at times refused to 
 
 (1) Balch, Letters and Papers, 82. 
 
 (2) Smith, William, Discourses, App. 21-31. 
 
 (3) Doddridge, Notes, 110. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 727. William Findley to Secretary Dal- 
 
 las, June 18, 1792: "The Neglect and disobedience of the of- 
 ficers and scouting parties has obliged him (Major McCully) 
 to keep two Companies embodied at one station, where he can 
 enforce the execution of his own Orders. It appears that small 
 scouting parties sent out by Guthrie, never went the length of 
 their destination; this is proved beyond dispute by their trail in 
 the weeds. Cooper sent out no scouts nor did any duty, he has 
 turned out worse than my fears." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 69 
 
 those in danger. (1) Desertion, too, was common. (2) 
 
 Mutiny sometimes broke out among the men. An in- 
 stance of this took place at Fort Bedford in 1760. (3) The 
 garrison, on account of a report that they were to receive 
 no pay after January 15, refused to do their duty. They 
 rescued one of their leaders who had been imprisoned. The 
 commandant, drawing his sword and threatening to kill any 
 one who resisted, was able to retake the prisoner. By set- 
 ting before the men their disgraceful behavior, by threats 
 of court martial and forfeiture of pay he finally succeeded 
 in quelling the disturbance and bringing the men back to 
 a sense of their duty. In 1794 the garrison at Fort Le 
 Boeuf almost broke into mutiny upon the imprisonment of 
 some men who had stolen brandy from the warehouse. The 
 ringleader was, however, secured and sent to Fort Pitt for 
 detention. (4) The troops were becoming dissatisfied be- 
 cause the time, set by law for obtaining bounty lands had 
 almost elapsed (5) without their being able to locate any 
 on account of Indian opposition. 
 
 But in spite of desertion, neglect of duty, and an oc- 
 casional mutiny we may say that in general the soljdier per- 
 
 (1) Ihid, VI, 797. Report of Andrew Ellicott, December 30, 1794; 
 
 "From some experience of the disutility of our frontier Block 
 House establishments, owing to a general neglect of duty, I 
 would, upon the principles of economy, recommend that they 
 be discontinued. Among the many instances of the inutility of 
 those establishments, I shall take the liberty of relating the 
 following fact: Last June, a party of five Indians attacked three 
 men in a canoe, on the Allegheny River, wounded two, and kill- 
 ed the third. The survivors immediately informed the detach- 
 ment stationed at a neighboring Block-House of their mis- 
 fortune; but the commanding officer, instead of sending out a 
 party to oppose the enemy, shut himself up in the building, and 
 stationed a centinal on the top of the house, to give the alarm, 
 should they appear in the neighborhood of the work." 
 
 (2) Pittsburg Gazette, June 23, 1788. 
 Col. Rec, VIII, 225. 
 
 (3) Balch, Letters and Papers, 171. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., VI, 771. A letter dated September 3, 1794, 
 
 from Captain Denny to General Harmar giving a full Descrip- 
 tion of the mutiny at Fort Le Boeuf. 
 ^5) Ihid, 775. Andrew Ellicott to Governor Mifflin, September 4, 
 1794: (The season is now so far advanced that the act of as- 
 sembly as far as regards bounties may be considered as al- 
 ready expended.) "But this I have carefully concealed from 
 the state troops, two thirds of whom at least came out for the 
 express purpose of making improvements. They are already 
 much discontented, and fear they have been imposed upon; and 
 but few men would have been able to manage them until this 
 period as well as Capt. Denny has done." 
 
70 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 formed his duties willingly, arduous though they might be. 
 I can do no better than to quote here the tribute of Captain 
 Walker to his troops. "One third of our men ware Con- 
 stantly Imployed as Guards to the Inhabitants, and, I may 
 Aferm, in Harvest the one half ware Imployed the same 
 way, nor can any man in the County say he ever Asked a 
 guard (when he had a Just Occasion) and was denied. 
 Dureing this time the Troops ware not supplied even with 
 Ration Whiskey, allmoste Neaked, for want of Blankets and 
 Cloathes, and yet I have the satisfaction to inform you they 
 done their Duty Cheerfully." (1) 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., VII, 383. Captain Walker was stationed at 
 Fort Muncy during the Revolution. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 71 
 
 THE DEFENCE OF THE FRONTIER. 
 
 Frontier Forts. 
 
 Before the French and Indian War only one fort had 
 been erected in Pennsylvania which has the slightest claim 
 to be considered of a public character. This is the fort, 
 already mentioned, which was erected below the city of 
 Philadelphia as a protection against pirates. The cost of 
 its erection was defrayed by a public lottery. 
 
 In 1750, before the trouble with the French had be- 
 come acute, the proprietors in a letter to the governor recom- 
 mended that a small stone fort should be erected on the 
 Ohio, and expressed themselves as willing to donate four 
 hundred pounds toward its erection and one hundred pounds 
 a year for its maintenance. (1) The governor had several 
 private conferences with the speaker and some of the prin- 
 ciple members of the house, but found them adverse to the 
 acceptance of the proprietory proposal. And despite the 
 fact that the fort was recommended by the traders and those 
 best versed in frontier aifairs, the assembly, relying upon 
 their old method of maintaining peace with the western 
 Indians by means of extensive presents and friendly treat- 
 ment, refused to sanction its erection. (2) The governor, 
 recognizing its utility, still hoped to gain his end, (3) but 
 the procrastination of the assembly put it off until the oc- 
 cupation of the territory by the French made the project 
 impossible. 
 
 But while the Quakers and the Quaker government at 
 Philadelphia, secure in their distance from the frontier, 
 rested upon the defence of justice, it was different with the 
 backwoodsman. He knew the forest and its natives. It 
 was he who suffered from the scalping party. It was his 
 property which was destroyed, his wife who was murdered, 
 and his children who were carried away while the assembly 
 hesitated to act for fear of alienating the affection of the 
 
 1. Col. Rec, V, 575. 
 
 2. Ihid, 547. 
 
 3. Ihid, 522. 
 
72 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Indians. No wonder then that before the procrastinating 
 assembly took up the question the enterprising westerner 
 had often worked out for himself a system of defence. 
 
 These defences might be nothing more than a log house, 
 strongly built, with small windows and loopholes flaring on 
 the inside to permit a rifle being pointed in any direction. 
 They might consist of a block house with projecting upper 
 story, or of a group of buildings surrounded by a stockade. 
 These larger works formed the community's center of de- 
 fence. (1) They were the dwelling places of the inhabi- 
 tants during times of danger, from which armed parties 
 were sent out to till the fields, (2) each workman with his 
 entire fighting equipment. The weapons were deposited in 
 some central place and a sentinel stationed (3) to give the 
 alarm in case of attack. The whole company could thus be 
 ready for combat on brief notice. 
 
 Such forts were seldom attacked by Indians alone and 
 almost never taken. In case of attack each inmate had his 
 assigned post and task. Each man with his rifle and as good 
 a supply of ammunition as could be provided was stationed 
 at a specified loophole. All axes, mattocks, and other such 
 implements were collected within for use in case of a hand 
 to hand encounter. The women saw that all utensils were 
 full of water to quench any fire that might be kindled. (4) 
 
 Captain James Patterson, a trader of the Juniata Valley, 
 adopted a very novel means of defence. He constructed a 
 cannon from an oak log and discharged it frequently in the 
 hearing of the Indians, (5) much to their awe and amaze- 
 ment. Once during the absence of her husband Mrs. Patter- 
 son frightened off" a band of Indians by threatening them 
 with this miniature cannon. He also erected a target, the 
 center of which was shot full of holes, at some distance from 
 his house. Whenever Indians came in sight, he would fire at 
 it. The appearance of the target gave them so high an 
 opinion of his skill that they did not care to trifle with him. 
 
 The earliest private fort of which we have any account 
 was that erected upon the present site of Harrisburg. About 
 1705 John Harris moved westward and established a ferry 
 over the Susquehanna at this point. (6) The place soon 
 became important as a connecting link between Philadelphia 
 
 (1) No distinction can be made between the use of the private and 
 
 the use of the public fort. The one merges into the other. 
 
 (2) Doddridge, Notes, 95. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 100. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 222-223. 
 
 (5) Collections of Historical Society of Pennsylvania, I, 64. 
 
 (6) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XII, 372. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 73 
 
 and the Susquehanna settlements. The original settler died 
 in 1748 but his son, John Harris, Jr., continued in the same 
 place, living generally on good terms with the Indians. When 
 hostilities began in 1755, he cut loopholes in his house, pro- 
 vided it with a garrison of six or seven men, and determined 
 to hold out until the last. (1) This for a time was the only- 
 place of security in the Susquehanna Valley, (2) but after 
 1756 it merges in with the system of forts erected by the 
 province. 
 
 Another private fort was that erected by Benjamin 
 Chambers on the present site of Chambersburg, Franklin 
 County. (3) . The stockade inclosed the flour and saw mills 
 as well as the dwelling house of the proprietor. The house 
 was of stone and two stories in height, the water from the 
 spring running under part of it. The windows were small 
 and particularly adapted to defence; the roof was covered 
 with sheet lead as a protection against fire. Besides small 
 arms, Colonel Chambers had provided himself with two four 
 pound cannon. In this fort the Chambers family dwelt safe- 
 ly throughout the whole period of the Indian wars. It was 
 also a place of refuge for many of their neighbors. 
 
 A third important private fort was that erecfed in 1753 
 at Aughwick, (4) in what is now Huntington County, by the 
 trader, George Croghan. It was enlarged and stockaded by 
 the government in 1756 and renamed Fort Shirley. 
 
 It may seem to be almost a digression, but the con- 
 struction of the French forts was such an important event 
 in the history of Pennsylvania, in fact of America, that I 
 shall turn to the French viewpoint long enough to describe 
 them briefly. The French in 1750 claimed the entire Missis- 
 sippi Valley by the right of discovery. From the mouth of 
 the river to the Great Lakes they had stretched a line of 
 forts in witness to their claim. Now, in order to secure also 
 the Valley of the Ohio, they projected a secondary line to 
 the mouth of that river. As far as Fort Duquesne the line 
 was extended: then circumstance interfered, but of that 
 more later. 
 
 (1) Egle, History of Pennsylvania, 90. John Harris to the governor, 
 
 October 29, 1755 : "I have this day cut holes in my house, and 
 am determined to hold out to the last extremity if I can get 
 some men to stand by me, few of which I can at present, every 
 one being in fear of their own families being cut off every 
 hour (such is our situation.)" 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 635. 
 
 (3) Ihid, XII, 350. 
 
 (4) Darlington, Gist, 180. 
 
*74 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Fort Presqu'Isle, (1) erected in 1753, was the northern- 
 most of the series. It was a square fort built of one thick- 
 ness of logs. There was neither bank within nor ditch with- 
 out. Of the two gates, one faced toward Lake Erie, the 
 other toward Fort Le Boeuf. Four cannon were mounted 
 in one of the bastions. The magazine was a store house 
 covered with shingles and not sunk in the ground as was 
 customary. There were barracks within the fort for 150 
 men. 
 
 The next fort to the south was Le Boeuf, situated on 
 French Creek at the head of navigation, distant about thirty- 
 miles from Presqu'Isle. George Washington, who visited it 
 in 1753, describes it in journal as follows: "It is situated on 
 the South or West fork of French Creek, near the water, 
 and is almost surrounded by the creek and a small branch of 
 it which forms a kind of island. Four houses compose the 
 sides. The bastions are poles driven into the ground, stand- 
 ing more than twelve feet above it and sharp at top, with 
 port holes cut for cannon, and loop holes for the smaller 
 arms to fire through. There are eight six pound pieces 
 mounted in each bastion, and one piece of four pounds be- 
 fore the gate. In the bastions are a guard house, chapel, 
 doctor's lodging, and the commander's private store: round 
 which are laid platforms for the cannon and men to stand on. 
 There are several barracks within the fort for the soldiers' 
 dwelling, covered with bark and some with boards, made 
 chiefly of logs. There are also several other houses, such 
 as stables, smith's shops, &. Number of men supposed 200, 
 exclusive of officers, of which (2) there are many." 
 
 Fort Venango was the third in the series. This was a 
 small stockade fort built on the Allegheny River at the 
 Mouth of French Creek, and accommodating a captain's 
 command of fifty men. (3) The French intended to build a 
 new and better fort at this place, but it is doubtful whether 
 it was ever done. Samuel Hazard concludes that it was not : 
 yet there are today remains of a second fort below the city 
 of Franklin which seem to be of French origin. (4) 
 
 The most important of the series, both on account of 
 the struggles which centered about it, was Fort Duquesne. 
 It was erected by the French in 1754 after they had driven 
 away the Virginians who were attempting to forestall them, 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., Ill, 13; XII, 444. " 
 Col. Rec, VIII, 312. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XII, 387. 
 
 (3) Ihid, XII, 463. 
 
 (4) Day, Hist. Coll, 641. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 75 
 
 at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, 
 the most strategic point in western Pennsylvania. This was 
 a rectangular fort about fifty yards long and forty yards 
 wide, with bastions at each corner. About one-half was con- 
 structed of squared logs and the other half, which was 
 toward the water, of stockades. This part was built of 
 round logs somewhat over a foot in diameter and eleven 
 or twelve feet high, with loop holes made for firing toward 
 the ground. Split logs covered the spaces between each two 
 round ones. Entrenchments about seven feet high were 
 cast up all around the fort at a distance of four rods. These 
 were constructed of wattlework filled in with earth. There 
 were two gates, the one opening inland and the other toward 
 the river. The first was provided with a drawbridge which 
 at night was drawn up by iron chains. The magazine, con- 
 structed of large logs and covered four feet thick with clay, 
 was almost entirely underground. There were no cannon 
 except at the bastions, each of which had four. The barracks 
 were outside of the fort ; the land about it was solid and dry, 
 but cleared of all trees and stumps for a considerable dis- 
 tance, so that an attacking party would have to expose him- 
 self to a direct fire. (1) About two hundred yard^ from this 
 was a second fort in the shape of a square and much more 
 strongly constructed. (2) 
 
 When the news came that the French were bnildmg 
 these forts, the East broke into one of its periodic furies of 
 excitement. Then came the defeat of Braddock and the re- 
 treat of Dunbar. The frontier, unprepared in spite of many 
 representations of its condition by traders and Indian 
 agents, lay at the mercy of the savages. The inhabitants, 
 undisciplined and many of them unarmed, were compelled 
 to improvise some scanty means of defence or flee from their 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., Ill, 13. 
 
 Ibid, XII, 357. A description by John McKinney who was held 
 as a prisoner in the fort. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 427. Extract from a letter from Pittsburg- November 26, 
 
 1758; "On the 24th, at night, we were informed by one of our 
 Indian scouts that he had discovered a cloud of smoke above the 
 place, and soon after another came with certain intelligence 
 
 that is was burned and abandoned by the enemy There 
 
 are two forts about 200 yards distant, the one built with im- 
 mense labor, small, but a great deal of strong works collected 
 into little room, and stands on the point of a narrow neck of 
 land at the confluence of the two rivers. It is square, and has 
 two ravelins, gabions at each comer, &c. The other fort stands 
 nothing so strong as the other — several of the outworks were 
 on the bank of the Allegheny, in form of a parellogram, but 
 lately begun, and still unfinished. There are, I think, 30 
 stacks of chimneys standing, the houses all destroyed." 
 
76 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 homes. The assembly hesitated to act, pleading as an ex- 
 cuse that they feared to alienate the affections of the 
 Indians. Very affectionate the red denizens of the forests 
 were proving themselves. 
 
 Commissioners were finally appointed to inspect the 
 frontier and recommend means of defence. At first they 
 considered that the best plan would be to carry the war into 
 the enemy's country ; but on the representations of Croghan 
 and others better acquainted with Indian affairs, they 
 adopted a plan of defensive operations and recom.mended a 
 line of forts along the frontier. (1) Construction was be- 
 gun immediately. 
 
 The forts east of the Susquehanna were erected along 
 the line of the Blue Hills: west of that river they formed a 
 semicircle stretching from Sunbury to the Great Cove. They 
 were built at the principle passes through the mountains 
 and each was garrisoned by from twenty to one hundred 
 troops according to the importance of the place and the 
 number of troops at the disposal of the government. (2) 
 
 East of the Susquehanna the forts were from ten to 
 twelve miles apart. (3) The three most important were 
 Forts Allen, Lebanon, and Henry. The easternmost. Fort 
 Allen, was situated on the west branch of the Delaware, 
 near the Moravian town of Gnadenhutten. Fort Lebanon 
 was at the forks of the Schuylkill and Fort Henry, which 
 was the most important of them all, was situated at a pass 
 called Talihiao further to the west. The spaces between 
 these three were filled up by block houses and smaller stock- 
 ades. The garrisons consisted of from twenty to fifty men 
 who employed themselves in ranging the woods between the 
 posts. The chain of forts ran at times on the south side of 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VII, 153. Commissioners to Governor, read in Council 
 
 June 14, 1756: "When the Indians first began to Infest our 
 Frontiers, the Commissioners were of opinion that the best 
 means of Securing our Inhabitants was to carry the war into 
 the Enemy's Country and hunt them in all their Fishing, Hunt- 
 ing, Planting, & dwelling places : But having sent for Croghan 
 & others in order to obtain their opinion and they advising that 
 by a chain of forts the Fi'ontier should first he in some de- 
 gree secured before we acted offensively, the same was agreed 
 
 to the Building of Forts immediately set about, which took 
 
 up more time than was expected. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser.. Ill, 340, 
 
 (3) Ibid, II, 565. 
 
 (4) Report of Commission on Frontier Forts, I, 70. "It was the 
 
 most important fort between the Susquehanna and Lehigh 
 Rivers, owing to the fact that it was about equally distant 
 from each, and also because it was on the main road to Shamo- 
 kin and protected the most populous portion of the entire 
 region." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 77 
 
 the mountains, at times on the north. Both sides were 
 occupied if it seemed to be necessary. They were sometimes 
 merely the reconstructed defences of the settlers. This is 
 particularly true of the smaller posts. (1) A stockade 
 thrown about a convenient farmhouse and garrisoned by a 
 few soldiers was sufficient. 
 
 The Moravians seated within the forks of the Delaware 
 were obliged for the safety of themselves and their neigh- 
 bors, many of whom had fled to them, to fortify their settle- 
 ment with stockades and set military watches. Wishing to 
 continue the same until the danger was over, they applied 
 to the governor for a commission. This was duly granted 
 them giving full power and authority to take and use arms 
 against any Indians or other enemies of the province. (2) 
 
 The chief forts west of the Susquehanna were Lyttle- 
 ton, Shirley, Granville, and Pomfret Castle, (3) erected 
 about twenty miles apart. The first mentioned was situated 
 on the new road which was being laid out to the Ohio at a 
 distance of about twenty miles from the settlements. 
 Twenty miles north of Lyttleton was Fort Shirley on Augh- 
 wick Creek, somewhat larger than the former and situated 
 on the old traders' path to the Ohio. Next in order was Fort 
 Granville, fifteen miles northeast of Fort Shirley at a nar- 
 row pass where the Juniata breaks through the mountains. 
 The northernmost of the four was Pomfret Castle, situated 
 fifteen miles from Fort Granville and twelve west of the 
 Susquehanna River. The spaces between these were filled 
 in with smaller forts in the same manner as east of the 
 Susquehanna. 
 
 The building of these forts soon used up the sixty 
 thousand pounds which had been appropriated, and more 
 was required for the adequate defence of the province. (4) 
 Yet the assembly carefully guarded each succeeding outlay. 
 They, however, supplied from time to time enough money 
 to guard the frontier in a semi-efficient way (5) and lend 
 some assistance in driving the French from the western part 
 of the province. 
 
 Fort Augusta, another important post, was built at the 
 
 (1) Ibid, I, 4. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., II, 704. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 1st ser., II, 569. 
 
 (4) Ibid, 557, 565. 
 
 (5) Ibid, III, 101. 
 
78 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 forks of the Susquehanna in the summer of 1756. (1) It 
 was erected primarily to protect the inhabitants about Sun- 
 bury and serve as a connecting link between the eastern 
 and western lines. It was here that the friendly Indians 
 had requested the building of a fort, about which they 
 promised to gather and assist in the protection of the 
 frontier or in any other operations that might be made 
 against the French. 
 
 When the Revolutionary War began and the Indians, 
 incensed by the encroachment on their lands, embraced the 
 English cause, one of the first districts to suffer from their 
 depredations was that inhabited by the Scotch Irish on the 
 west branch of the Susquehanna. These energetic frontiers- 
 men, with the love of liberty instilled into their systems by 
 life on the frontier, had eagerly taken up arms in the cause of 
 independence ; and although their families were often poor- 
 ly provided with the necessaries of life and exposed to the 
 mercy of the savages, they had departed for Boston in order 
 to take part in active service. In order to protect their 
 families, a stockade was erected at each important settle- 
 ment along the river. Some were provided with troops, 
 others were defended by the settlers of the neighbor- 
 hood. (2) Fort Muncy, erected at the bend of the west 
 branch, was the most important; while Fort Augusta act- 
 ed as a rear post and distributing point for troops and sup- 
 plies. It was to this fort that the settlers retreated when 
 they had been driven out of the others. 
 
 Of the early western forts Ligonier and Pitt were the 
 most important. The first of these was erected by General 
 Forbes during his expedition against Fort Duquesne in 
 1758. (3) During Pontiac's War, in spite of its dilapidated 
 condition, it was one of the few spots which did not fall into 
 
 (1) Darlington, Fo7't Pitt, 146. Bouquet to Major Gladwin, August 
 
 1756: "I also propose to Build a fort at Shamokin, at the forks 
 of Susquehanna, as soon as the season will admit a passage up 
 the river, for the mountains north of the Kitectiny are quite 
 impassible for carriages. This is what our friendly Indians 
 request'd of me at the late interview, and say they will collect 
 themselves together under the protection of such a fort, and 
 readily assist us in the defence of our frontier, or in any 
 attempt that we shall make upon the French encroachments." 
 
 (2) Day, Hist. Coll., 451. 
 
 (3) Olden Time, reprinting Arthur Lee's Jou^mal, II, 335. 
 
The Frontiei- Policy of Pennsylvania 79 
 
 the hands of the Indians. (1) In the Revolution it figured 
 as a place of refuge for the settlers. (2) The Indians, how- 
 ever, passed it and murdered many of the inhabitants 
 further eastward. 
 
 On account of the important place which Fort Pitt oc- 
 cupies in the history of Western Pennsylvania I shall relate 
 its history with somewhat greater detail. As has already 
 been pointed out, the proprietors in 1750 recommended that 
 a small stone fort should be erected on the Ohio, and ex- 
 pressed themselves as willing to aid in its maintenance. (3) 
 In April, 1751, George Croghan was sent with a present to 
 the Ohio Indians. One of his speeches, prepared by Weiser, 
 recommended the building of a fort on the Ohio. (4) This 
 was, however, considered too strongly expressed and he was 
 given private instructions by the governor not to make it 
 but to sound the Indians on the point. (5) He obeyed 
 orders and such Indians as he approached on the subject 
 informed him that the building of a fort had been agreed 
 upon between themselves and the Onondaga Council. They 
 requested publicly the building of such a fort at the forks 
 
 (1) Darlington, Fort Pitt, 146. Bouquet to Major Gladwin, August 
 
 28, 1763 : "Ligonier, a post of great consequence to us, was de- 
 fended with a handful of men by Lieut. Blane, and Capt. 
 Ecuyer baffled all their efforts here (Fort Pitt), though the 
 fort was open on three sides; the floods having undermined the 
 sodwork, the rampart had tumbled in the ditch. He palisaded 
 and fraised the whole, raised the parapet all around, and in a 
 short time with a small garrison he has made it impregnible 
 for savages." 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., VII, 345. 
 
 (3) Col. Rec, V, 515. Extract from letter of proprietors: "I think 
 
 an House with thick walls of Stone with small Bastions might 
 be built at no very great Expense, as it is little matter how 
 rough it is within side; or a wall of that sort perhaps fifty feet 
 square, with a small house in the middle of it, might perhaps 
 do better. The command of this might be given to the principle 
 Indian trader, and he be obliged to keep Four or Six men at 
 it who might serve him in it and the House to be his Magazine 
 for Goods. If something of this sort can be done we shall be 
 willing to be at the expense of four hundred Pounds Currency 
 for the building of it, and one hundred Pounds a Year for 
 keeping some men with a few Arms and some Powder." 
 
 (4) N. Y. Col Docs., Vlly 268 
 
 (5) Col. Rec, V, 522. 
 
80 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 of the Ohio to protect them and the English traders. (1) 
 Croghan reported these facts but the government refused 
 to accept the Indians' proposal and condemned Croghan for 
 making such a report. (2) They argued that it was not the 
 intention of the Indians but that they had been imposed 
 upon. How far private interests could influence Croghan 
 to draw the Indians in an underhanded manner to his view- 
 point can not be determined. The erection of such a fort 
 would certainly have been a great advantage to him. as a 
 trader. Both the government and Weiscr denied that he had 
 any authority to treat with the Indians on the sub- 
 ject. (3) Croghan maintained that he had such instruc- 
 tions. The Colonial Records support him. (4) The fact 
 that the Indians constantly repeated their request for the 
 building of the fort is another strong argument against the 
 charge that he had seduced them. (5) 
 
 The proprietors, convinced that the assembly would 
 never do anything in the matter, instructed Governor Hamil- 
 ton to assist the Governor of Virginia to erect a fort there, 
 but under protest that such a settlement would not preju- 
 dice Pennsylvania's right to the territory. (6) On July 1, 
 1754, Governor Dinwiddie of Virginia wrote to Governor 
 Hamilton strongly urging the erection of a fort beyond the 
 Alleghenies, stating that he had a force ready to cross the 
 
 (1) Thwaites, Early Western Travels, I, 54. George Croghan to the 
 
 governor, December 16, 1750: "We have seen but very few of 
 the chiefs of the Indians they being all out a hunting, but 
 those we have seen are of opinion that their Brothers the 
 English ought to have a Fort on this River to secure the Trade, 
 for they think it will be dangerous for the Traders to travel 
 the Roads for fear of being surprised by some of the French 
 and French Indians, as they expect nothing else but a war with 
 the French next Spring." 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, V, 547. Assembly to Governor, August 21, 1751: "The 
 
 Information of Conrad Weiser and Alexander Montour on their 
 arrival in Town since the Governor's Message of the thirteenth 
 Instant, we suppose have given the Governor as well as the 
 House Reason to believe that the Request inserted in George 
 Crogan's Journal which the Governor was pleased to lay be- 
 fore the House, as made by the Indians at Ohio to this Govern- 
 ment, to erect a strong Trading House in their Country as 
 well as the danger 'tis there said they apprehend from the 
 Attempts of the French, have been misunderstood, or mis- 
 represented by the Person in whom the Government confided 
 for the Management of the Treaty," 
 
 (3) N Y. Col. Docs., VII, 268. 
 
 (4) Col. Rec, V, 522, 529, 537, 547. 
 
 (5) N. Y. Col. Docs., VII, 269, 
 
 (6) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 265. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 81 
 
 mountains, and inviting the cooperation of Pennsylvania. (1) 
 Governor Hamilton urged that Governor Dinwiddle should 
 be supported, but the assembly evaded the subject and ad- 
 journed leaving the Virginians to fight their battles alone. 
 
 The force from Virginia proceeded to the forks of the 
 Ohio and were engaged in the erection of a stockade when 
 they were driven off by the appearance of a French force 
 under Contracoeur, who then erected Fort Duquesne at this 
 point. The Virginians retreated to a place between Chestnut 
 and Laurel Ridges, called the Great Meadows, and there erec- 
 ted Fort Necessity, a log breast work one hundred feet each 
 way and partly surrounded by a shallow ditch. (2) From 
 this they marched out to dislodge the French, but were 
 driven back, themselves besieged, and forced to capitulate. 
 The French, allowing the Virginians to retire and having de- 
 molished the fort, then returned to Fort Duquesne. (3) 
 
 Braddock's expedition in 1755 and its results are too 
 well known to require any comment. General Shirley sug- 
 gested that a second attempt to take the fort should be 
 made this same year, but it was necessary to postpone it. 
 among other reasons, on account of the backwardness of the 
 Pennsylvania Assembly. (4) By February, 1756', however, 
 the assembly had assumed such an attitude that Governor 
 Morris thought that they would willingly take part in an 
 expedition against Fort Duquesne if the northern colonies 
 would provide entirely for the Crown Point project. (5) Gen- 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, VI, 137. Governor Dinwiddie to Governor Hamilton, 
 
 July 31, 1754: "I think the sooner we endeavor to make a 
 Settlement and build a Fort the other side of the Allegheny 
 Mountains the better, for if we allow them a quiet Settlement 
 their numbers will greatly increase in the Spring. We have 
 now three months fit for marching and action. I would fain 
 hope our Force will be at Mills Creek before the twentieth 
 of the month, and shall be glad if reinforced from your Colony: 
 if you send some Companies they may safely march after our 
 Forces over the Mountains." 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XII, 420. 
 
 (3) Col. Rec, VI, 50. 
 
 (4) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 300. Governor Morris to Governor Din- 
 
 widdie, August 10, 1755: "I rec'd letters last night by Express 
 from General Shirley, acquainting me that he had been in- 
 formed that this Province, Virginia & Maryland, had given 
 considerably towards another expedition, he thought proper to 
 send orders to be forwarded to Col. Dunbar, to make a second 
 attempt upon Fort Duquesne, but I am of Opinion this cannot 
 be put in practice before next Year, from the backwardness of 
 my assemblies in particular to do what is so Strongly in their 
 Interest to Comply with." 
 
 (5) Ibid, 570. 
 
82 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 eral Shirley, however, had now come to the conclusion that 
 the reduction of Niagara and the other northern forts was 
 more important than that of Duquesne: for if the English 
 should get control of the Great Lakes, the southern forts 
 would be cut off and forced to capitulate. (1) The emphasis 
 was for some time put on the northern war, and it was not 
 until 1758 that a second expedition set out against Fort 
 Duquesne. The French, upon the approach of the English, 
 destroyed their works and fled. 
 
 Near the ruins of Fort Duquesne an English Fort was 
 then erected and named Fort Pitt in honor of the great 
 English premier. It was surrounded by a rampart of earth, 
 which on the two inland sides was supported by a wall near- 
 ly perpendicular, so that it presented an almost impregnible 
 obstacle to any enemy that was likely to be encountered in 
 those parts. On the other sides the rampart was only an 
 incline of earth with a row of pickets about its base. Around 
 the whole was a wide ditch which could be filled with water 
 from the river. (2) It was garrisoned by some three hun- 
 dred provincials, one half of whom were Pennsylvanians and 
 the other half Virginians. (3) 
 
 All was quiet on the Ohio until 1763. Then, after faint 
 mutterings of danger, the storm of Pontiac's War swept 
 down upon the fort. It was suddenly besieged by over four 
 hundred Indians. Captain Ecuyer, taking warning from the 
 vague rumors, was not entirely unprepared. (5) His gar- 
 rison consisted of 250 men, half regulars and half militia, 
 in good spirits and determined to succeed. The fort was 
 provided with sixteen cannon. Rations were low; so as 
 many cattle as possible were collected about the fort to 
 serve as food and prevent their falling into the enemy's 
 
 (1) Ibid, 572. 
 
 (2) Olden Time, I, 196. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., Ill, 693. General Stanwix to Governor Ham- 
 
 ilton: "The works are carried on to that degree of defence 
 which was at first prepared for this year, so that I am now by 
 degrees forming a winter garrison, which is to consist of 300 
 provincials." 
 
 (4) Darlington, Fort Pitt, 145. 
 
 (5) Ihid, 186. Captain Ecuyer to Colonel Bouquet, May 3, 1763, "I 
 
 fear that the affair is general. I tremble for our posts. I 
 fear according to the reports that I am surrounded by Indians. 
 I neglect nothing to receive them well, and I expect to be 
 attacked tomorrow morning. God wills it, I am passably 
 ready." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 83 
 
 hands. (1) We are apt to be amused as we read of Captain 
 Ecuyer's attempt to catch Indians in beaver traps, (2) but 
 his ingenuity and determination, together with the good will 
 and faithfulness of his command, held the fort until it 
 could be relieved by Colonel Bouquet. 
 
 Soon after this war the English ministry began to act 
 upon the assumption that the colonies should protect their 
 own frontiers. Lord Hillsborough recommended that Fort 
 Pitt, with some others, should be left to the colonies to gar- 
 rison if they considered it necessary. (3) In October, 1772, 
 the fort was abandoned by the English and the material in 
 it sold to Alexander Ross and William Thompson for fifty 
 pounds. (4) The inhabitants, alarmed at the abandonment, 
 requested the retention of a small garrison, but General 
 Gage refused to comply. They then petitioned the assembly 
 that, as evacuation would surely retard settlement, a gar- 
 rison should be provided (5) for this post, but the assembly 
 refused (6) to act. The fort, however, was not destroyed. 
 It was retained by the purchasers until in 1774 it was seized 
 by Doctor John Connelly who, (7) acting under instructions 
 from Governor Dunmore of Virginia, planned to control the 
 frontier. As he was soon arrested and imprisoned', (8) the 
 fort fell again into the hands of the Pennsylvanians. 
 Throughout the Revolution it was held by the Americans. 
 
 (1) Ibid, 128. Captain Ecuyer to Colonel Bouquet, June 2, 1763: "My 
 
 garrison consists in all of 250 men, as many regulars as mili- 
 tia all very determined to conquer or die, our men are high 
 spirited and I am glad to see their good will and with what 
 celerity they work. I have little flour, the inhabitants receive 
 half rations of bread and a little more meat, to the poorer 
 women and children a little Indian com and some meat. I 
 manage as well as I can. I have collected all the animals of 
 the inhabitants and placed them under our eye. We kill to 
 spare our provisions, for the last resource and in order that 
 the savages shall not profit by our animals I have dis- 
 tributed tomahawks to the inhabitants; I have also gathered 
 up all their beaver traps which are arranged along the rampart 
 that is not finished." 
 
 (2) Ibid, 131. Captain Ecuyer to Colonel Bouquet, June 16, 1763: 
 
 "I have collected all the beaver traps which could be found 
 with our merchants and they were placed in the evening out- 
 side the palisades. I would be pleased to send you one with 
 the leg of a savage, but they have not given me this satis- 
 faction." 
 ^3) Franklin, Works, IV, 128. 
 
 (4) Olden Time, II, 95. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., Ill, 573. 
 
 (6) Col. Rec, X, 71. 
 
 (7) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., IV, 477, 478, 484, etc. 
 
 (8) Col. Rec, XI, 196. 
 
84 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 A plot by some Tories to destroy it in 1778 was detected and 
 the leaders were punished. (1) Supplies were scarce. (2) 
 The problem of securing food and clothing appears to have 
 been much more difficult than that of defending the inhab- 
 itants. 
 
 After the Revolution, the fort, on account of decreasing 
 dangers, lost its importance until in 1791 another Indian 
 war began. A new fort, called Fort Fayette, was now erected. 
 It stood on the bank of the Allegheny about a quarter of a 
 mile further up than the old one, and consisted of a stock- 
 ade with barracks and a block house in one of the angles. (3) 
 Even after 1800 a small garrison was maintained (4) here. 
 
 Soon after evacuating Fort Duquesne in 1758 the 
 French also withdrew their forces from Venango, Le Boeuf, 
 and Presqu'Isle in order to strengthen Niagara which was 
 being vigorously attacked by Sir William Johnson. The 
 English were thus left in full possession of western Penn- 
 sylvania. The forts in the northwest were garrisoned and 
 held until their destruction by the Indians in 1763. Forts 
 Ligonier and Bedford were also for many years important 
 in keeping open the road to the west. During the Revolu- 
 tion a number of new forts were erected in the West, group- 
 ed about Pittsburgh as a base. The most important were 
 Fort Armstrong at Kittanning (5) and Fort Mcintosh at 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., VI, 507. 
 
 (2) Olden Time, II, 378. Daniel Broadhead to Richard Peters, 
 
 December 7, 1780: "Indeed, I am so well convinced that the 
 inhabitants on this side the mountains cannot furnish half 
 enough meat to supply the troops, that I have risked the 
 sending a pai'ty of hunters to kill buffalo at little Canhawa, 
 and to lay in the meat until I can detach a party to bring it 
 in, which cannot be done befoi'e spring." 
 Ibid, 382. A letter from Daniel Broadhead to Joseph Reed com- 
 plaining of the lack of clothing for the soldiers. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XII, 437. 
 
 Pittsburg Gazette, May 19, 1792: "The fort began last winter 
 at this place, stands on the Allegheny River within about 100 
 yards of the bank, on a beautiful rising ground, about one- 
 quarter of a mile higher up than the old garrison of Fort 
 Pitt. It is completely stockaded in, and one range of bar- 
 racks built, a block house in one of the angles finished, and 
 the remainder in forwardness." 
 
 (4) MiCHAUX, Travels, 72. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., VIII, 38. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 85 
 
 the mouth of the Beaver River. (1) 
 
 The construction of forts did not stop with the Revolu- 
 tion. A new one was erected at Venango in 1787, (2) about 
 one mile above the mouth of French Creek. (3) It was 
 a small fort armed with one cannon and garrisoned with one 
 company. A third fort (4) was erected here in 1795 during 
 the process of settling the northwestern part of the 
 state. (5) At the same time Fort Le Boeuf was rebuilt, (6) 
 and two companies raised to garrison it. (7) In 1794 an 
 attempt was made to settle Presqu' Isle but it was prevented 
 by the opposition of the Indians, instigated probably by the 
 British. (8) During the next year, however, two block 
 houses were erected to protect a small garrison established 
 to protect the surveyors who were engaged in laying out 
 the lands. 
 
 Doddridge gives us an excellent description of one of 
 these frontier forts. "The reader will understand by this 
 term, not only a place of defence, but the residence of a small 
 
 (1) Ibid, 32. General Mcintosh to E. V. P. Bryan, December 20, 
 
 1778: "I erected a good strong Fort for the Reception and 
 Security of Prisoners and stores, upon the Indian side of the 
 Ohio below Beaver Creek with Barracks for a Regiment; and 
 another on the Muskingum, which I expect will keep the sav- 
 ages in awe, and secure the peace of the frontiers effectually 
 in this quarter hereafter if they are well supported and also 
 facilitate any future enterprises that may be attempted that 
 way." 
 
 (2) Pittsburg Gazette, November 22, 1788: "Fort Franklin— off 
 
 French Creek, near to the post formerly called Venango, is a 
 small, strong fort, with one cannon, was erected in 1787, and 
 is garrisoned with one company. 
 
 This post was established for the purpose of defending the 
 frontiers of Pennsylvania, which are exposed by the facility by 
 which the Indians can cross from Lake Erie, either to French 
 Creek or the Judaggue lake and the Coneawango branch, and 
 thence descend the rapid river Allegheny." 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., VI, 795. 
 
 (4) Or fourth if there were two French forts at this place. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., XII, 463. 
 
 (6) Ibid, 2nd ser., VI, 739. Major Denny to Governor Mifflin; July 
 
 4, 1794: "Sir: I had the honor of addressing you last on the 
 20th ult., since which we have been busily employed in erect- 
 ing a stockade fort, the plan of which will be sent you by the 
 next conveyance. We are now beyond the power of any body 
 of hostile Indians that may attempt to strike us, and every 
 day we will be getting stronger,, provided we can keep our 
 men together." 
 
 (7) Ibid, VI, 783, 806. 
 
 (8) Pittsburg Gazette, August 16, 1794, quoting a letter from Le 
 
 Boeuf: " once a week we have people at Presq' Isle, 
 
 and the British watch the place as close as we do: and some 
 mornings when we discharge our cannon they return the fire 
 from their vessel, which we distinctly hear." 
 
86 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 number of families belonging to the same neighborhood. 
 As the Indian mode of warfare was an indiscriminate slaugh- 
 ter of all ages, and both sexes, it was as requisite to provide 
 for the safety of the women and children as for that of the 
 men. 
 
 "The fort consisted of cabins, block houses, and stock- 
 ades. A range of cabins commonly formed one side at least 
 of the fort. Divisions, or partitions of logs, separated the 
 cabins from each other. The walls on the outside were ten 
 or twelve feet high, the slopes of the roof being turned wholly 
 inward. A very few of these cabins had puncheon floors, the 
 greater part were earthen. The block houses were built at 
 the angles of the fort. They projected about two feet beyond 
 the outer walls of the cabins and stockades. Their upper 
 stores were about eighteen inches every way larger in 
 dimension than the under one, leaving an opening at the 
 commencem.ent of the second story to prevent the enemy 
 from making lodgment under their walls. In some forts, 
 instead of block houses, the angles of the fort were furnished 
 with bastions. A large folding gate made of thick slabs, 
 nearest the spring, closed the fort. The stockades, bastions, 
 cabins and block house walls, were furnished with port holes 
 at proper heights and distances. The whole of the outside 
 was made completely bullet proof. It may be truly said 
 that necessity is the mother of invention ; for the whole of 
 this work was made without the aid of a single nail or spike 
 of iron ; and for this reason, such things were not to be had. 
 In some cases, less exposed, a single block house, with a 
 cabin or two, constituted the whole fort. Such places of 
 refuge may appear very trifling to those who have been in 
 the habit of seeing the formidable military garrisons of 
 Europe and America ; but they answered the purpose, as the 
 Indians had no artillery. They seldom attacked, and scarce- 
 ly ever took one of them." (1) 
 
 In June, 1756, James Young inspected the eastern forts 
 and made a return of their condition to the government. (2) 
 He reports that the fort at Northkill was "intended for a 
 square abt. 32 ft. Each way, at Each Corner is a half Bas- 
 tion, of very little Service to Flank the Curtains, the Stock- 
 ades are very ill fixed in the Ground, and open in many 
 Places; within is a very bad Log house for the People, it 
 has no chimney, and can afford but little shelter in bad 
 weather." Only nine of the fourteen men were found on 
 
 (1) Day, Hist. Coll., 661. Reprinting Doddridge's Notes. 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., II, 675-681. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 87 
 
 duty; and the woods were not cleared away above forty 
 yards from the fort. Provisions consisted of flour and rum 
 for four weeks; military supplies amounted to eight mus- 
 kets, four rounds of powder and lead per man, fifteen blank- 
 ets, and three axes. 
 
 Fort Lebanon, at a more important point, was reported 
 in much better condition, well stockaded, with good bastions 
 and one wall piece. Within was a strong house and two 
 other houses built by the country people who had taken 
 refuge there. Munitions consisted of twenty-eight good 
 muskets, forty blankets, one axe, and one wall piece. There 
 was food sufficient for a month. 
 
 The fort above Alleminga, another of the less important 
 points, was found in bad condition, poorly stockaded and 
 totally unfit for defence. Munitions, however, were quite 
 plentiful ; there were twenty-eight good muskets and twelve 
 rounds of ammunition per man. Fort Allen on the other 
 hand was well stockaded, with four good bastions and one 
 swivel gun. The woods were cleared all around for a con- 
 siderable distance, and throughout it was in good condition 
 for defence. Within the fort there were good bari:acks and 
 a guard room. Munitions consisted of twenty-seven mus- 
 kets, twenty rounds of powder, and sixty rounds of lead, 
 besides twenty rounds of filled cartridges for each of the 
 twenty-five men. 
 
 These are only a few from the number of which he re- 
 ported but they may be taken as fairly typical. The more 
 important places like Forts Allen, Lebanon, and Henry were 
 well constructed and highly efficient ; but the smaller forts 
 were often carelessly built and poorly supplied with food 
 and ammunition. In fact it is almost unbelievable that these 
 hastily constructed posts with only a few rounds of ammu- 
 nition per man could have defended the frontier as well as 
 they did. Much must have depended upon the Indian's 
 natural fear of anything like an ambuscade or a fortification. 
 
 The same criticisms may be applied at a later date to 
 the western forts. Major Denny in 1794 reported the con- 
 dition of Fort Franklin as follows: "I am not surprised at 
 Polhemus' alarm. The fort is worse than any frontier sta- 
 tion you ever seen, & that for the Block House, which is far 
 from being the best, it would be infinitely worse than 
 nothing at all. The pickets might do to inclose a garden, 
 and do look more like a fence than anything else. They are 
 placed in the form of a square without anything to defend 
 the curtain's flanks, & in the bottom of a ditch, along which 
 
88 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 five hundred Indians might lay perfectly secure." (1) It 
 was put into somewhat better condition by the commission- 
 ers who had been appointed to lay out the town at Presqu' 
 Isle, (2) but its position at so great a distance from the 
 Allegheny River was still a disadvantage. (3) 
 
 But in spite of the dilapidated condition in which the 
 forts were often found, and in spite of the insufficient gar- 
 risons with which the commanders were often forced to be 
 contented, they were the most important element in frontier 
 defence. They were points of irritation which drove the 
 Indians farther and farther westward; they were places 
 of refuge where the inhabitants in times of danger could 
 find an almost certain security. 
 
 Ammunition and Supplies. 
 
 The equipment of a soldier was very simple. It was a 
 distinct advantage to be lightly clad, armed, and accoutred. 
 A watch coat, a waist coat, a pair of woolen overalls, a 
 shirt, a pair of shoes and a blanket sufficed for bed and 
 clothing. (4) The gun furnished him was often poor in 
 quality and condition. Benjamin Franklin said of the arms 
 furnished the frontiersmen in 1755 : "I wish they were bet- 
 ter ; but they are well fortified, will bear a good charge, and 
 I should imagine they would do good service with swan or 
 buck shot, if not so good for single ball." (5) The riflemen 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., VI, 705. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 728. Andrew Ellicott to Governor Mifflin, June 29, 1794: 
 
 "On my arrival there, the place appeared to be in such a de- 
 fenseless situation that, with the concurrence of Captain Denny 
 and the officer commanding at the fort, we remained there 
 some time, and employed the troops in making it more ten- 
 able. It may now be considered as defensible, provided the 
 number of men is increased. The Garrison at present consists 
 of twenty-five men, one half of whom are unfit for duty, and 
 it is my opinion that double that number would not be more 
 than sufficient." 
 
 (3) Ibid, 795. Report of Andrew Ellicott, December 30, 1794: "The 
 
 present Fort is erected on French Creek, about one mile from 
 the old one, which was built by the British. I have never yet 
 (tho' frequently made the inquiry) been able to discover the 
 reason why the old works were abandoned and a new position 
 taken, without one visible advantage to justify it, but, on the 
 contrary, attended with many obvious and important disad- 
 vantages. The old work commanded the Allegheny River just 
 below the mouth of French Creek, and the present can only 
 command that ci'eek, and when the waters are low, loaded 
 boats cannot be brought within three quarters of a mile of it." 
 
 (4) Col Rec, XIII, 143. 
 
 (5) Franklin, Works, II, 240. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 raised in 1792 refused to take the (1) muskets furnished 
 them, but a compromise was effected by which they were 
 furnished with rifles as their own property, the price of 
 them to be deducted from their pay. 
 
 During the years 1755 and 1756 twenty-nine cannon, 
 fourteen swivels, and 4789 small arms, with great quantities 
 of powder, lead, flints, and tomahawks were purchased with 
 the money granted for the king's use, and sent to the several 
 parts of Pennsylvania. (2) Most of these went to the fron- 
 tiers. At the close of the war 1742 muskets, with about the 
 same number of bayonets, cartridge boxes, and gun worms 
 were returned to the provincial government by persons to 
 whom they had been loaned. (3) 
 
 Supplies were almost chronically lacking. Even so im- 
 portant a place as Fort Augusta had no definite source but 
 the soldiers were compelled to scour the country and obtain 
 food where ever it could be found, much to the detriment of 
 the work on the fort and the ranging of the woods. (4) The 
 question of ammunition was still more serious; at times 
 there were only three pounds per man. (5) Clothing was 
 furnished in no more abundance. (6) 
 
 According to the testimony of Arthur Lee the supplies 
 which were provided were not always used to advantage. 
 The powder at Fort Pitt in 1784 was found to have spoiled. 
 "The commanding officer alleged that it was the business 
 of the garrison to guard the stores only, and not to keep 
 them from spoiling." (7) Soldiers, too, were obliged to go 
 
 (1) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 711. Major McCully to Colonel Biddle, 
 
 March 11, 1792: "The Soldiers, being enlisted as Riflemen, re- 
 fused to take the muskits, and it had liked to have caused 
 some difficulty; however, the officers and myself agreed to 
 purchase a number of rifles, the soldiers agreeing to receive 
 them as their property, and giving power of attorney to stop 
 as much of their pay as would answer for the sum." 
 
 (2) loid, 1st ser., Ill, 25. 
 
 (3) iHd, 2nd ser., II, 712. 
 
 (4) Rid, 1st ser., II, 780. 
 
 (5) lUd, III, 352. 
 
 (6) Ihid, 2nd ser., VI, 791. Captain Denny to Governor Mifflin, 
 
 November 1, 1794: "For want of clothing, particularly shoes, 
 ;here are numbers of men who are now almost useless. The 
 :erm of enlistment is too long to depend upon them providing 
 for themselves, especially when they can receive their eight 
 nonths' pay before they have served one. No restraint in 
 ihis case is a very great injury to the service." 
 
 (7) OUen Time, II, 340. 
 
90 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 without sufficient equipment while plenty was lying in the 
 public stores. (1) 
 
 The lack of supplies along the frontier was to a great 
 extent due to the difficulty of transportation. Roads were 
 bad or nonexistant. At the time when supplies were in 
 greatest demand, the convoys were most subject to attack 
 by the Indians. Expeditions, too, were greatly retarded by 
 their baggage trains for which a road must often be carved 
 through the forest. On account of these difficulties the cost 
 of transportation was extremely high. (2) After the con- 
 struction of roads had greatly lessened the difficulties, a 
 woeful inefficiency still at times retarded shipments. (3) 
 Military and Scouting Expeditions. 
 
 Pennsylvania did not stand wholly upon the defensive 
 but at various times sent out scouting or military expedi- 
 tions into the enemy's country. The earliest of these with 
 
 (1) Ibid, 341. Reprinting Arthur Lee's Journal: "Col Harmar, who 
 
 commanded the troops that were equipping for the treaty, 
 came in; and upon my asking him if the troops were provided 
 with what was necessary, he said no, not even with blankets. 
 The clothier general, upon being applied to, had informed him 
 that they must be purchased. We told him that there were 
 thousands rotting in the public store, and directed him to go 
 there immediately and furnish his corps, which he did. 
 "The reason for all this is, that there is a profit in purchasing, 
 and none in issuing out of the public stores." 
 
 (2) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., II, 139. Gevernor to Assembly, January, 
 
 1750: "The money voted at your last sessions as a present to 
 the Indians at Ohio has been laid to the best advantage in 
 goods proper to the occasion. But as all the money given 
 for this service was invested in the goods, and no provision 
 made that I know of to pay the charge of their conveyance to 
 Ohio, I must desii'e you to think of this and provide accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 "The sum demanded for their Transportation is Two HunJred 
 and Fifty Pounds, which appears to me to be very high; but 
 by all the Enquiry I have been able to make, I do not f:nd I 
 can get it done for less by any Persons in whom I can place 
 a confidence." 
 
 (3) Cal. of Va. State Papers, I, 476. Colonel George Muter tJ the 
 
 Governor, January 31, 1781: "The wagons are ready to start, 
 that are to carry out the necessarys for the forces h the 
 Western Department, and instructions with respect to tie de- 
 livery of the goods they carry are wanted. I am incepable 
 of even originating instructions, as I know no more cf the 
 matter, than that the goods are to be carried to Fort Pilt, but 
 am entirely ignorant of anything further. I am informed 
 that Major Quirk has said lie cannot give the necessary in- 
 structions. I beg leave to add, that Mr. Rose informs ne, the 
 waggoners refuse to move, unless some spirits are furnished 
 them and a satisfactory provision made for their being paid. 
 These are matters I do not know what to do in, therefore have 
 I been induced to mention them to your Excellency." 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 91 
 
 which we are concerned is that made by Conrad Weiser in 
 1738. In November, 1747, a delegation of Ohio Indians had 
 visited Philadelphia and requested that an agent should be 
 sent to them for the purpose of holding a council. They 
 were given a promise that Conrad Weiser would be sent 
 early the next spring. He accordingly made the journey 
 with a considerable present from the government, and ac- 
 companied by George Croghan who as a trader was well 
 acquainted with the country and its roads. (1) He was in- 
 structed to learn the number, situation, disposition, and 
 strength of the various Indian tribes, and whether they were 
 likely to be friends, neutrals, or enemies in the impending 
 struggle with the French. The Indians reported 780 war- 
 riors and expressed themselves as very friendly to the 
 English. 
 
 During the winter of 1753-1754 John Pattin was sent 
 to the Ohio Country on a somewhat similar mission. He 
 was instructed to learn what the French were doing, their 
 numbers and location, and what forts they had built or in- 
 tended to build. (2) He was to take account of the western 
 roads, learn the number of the Indians and whether they 
 inclined toward the French or toward the English, obtain 
 the names of those who carried whisky to the Indians, learn 
 what quantity of arms and ammunition had been sent to 
 the Ohio Indians by the Governor of Virginia, and find out 
 whether any measures had been decided upon for frontier 
 defence. The trip was made, the desired information set 
 down in a diary and delivered to the governor in February, 
 1754. (3) 
 
 In 1758, in order to facilitate Forbes' expedition, the 
 government began to lay plans to withdraw the Indians from 
 the French interest. After some search for a suitable mes- 
 senger to send to them. Christian Frederick Post was chosen. 
 He was a plain honest man who had (4) lived as a missionary 
 among the Indians for seventeen years, and therefore knew 
 their language perfectly. About the middle of July he re- 
 ceived orders from the governor to go to the Delaware, 
 
 (1) Col. Rec, V, 290-292. 
 
 (2) Col. Rec, V, 707. 
 
 (3) Ibid, 730. Minutes of Council: "The Governor ordered the Sec- 
 
 retary to inform the Council that Andrew Montour and John 
 Patten were come from the River Ohio; that the tran- 
 sactions with the Indians were contained in a Journal sent by- 
 Mr. Croghan and in a diary taken by Mr. Patten, which he de- 
 sired might be I'ead and sent to the House." 
 
 (4) Thompson, Causes^ of Alienation, 129. 
 
92 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Shawanese, and Mingo Indians on the Ohio to persuade 
 them, if possible, to withdraw from the French interest. He 
 proceeded west by way of Fort Augusta and the old Shamo- 
 kin Trail, was kindly received by the Indians and protected 
 against the French who planned to have him either killed 
 or delivered to them as a prisoner. He was, however, un- 
 successful in his mission. (1) In October he was directed 
 to make a second attempt, following Forbes' army to the 
 west. He arrived at Loyalhanna on the seventh of Novem- 
 ber and from there proceeded to the Allegheny where he 
 was now wholly successful. (2) 
 
 To give accounts of the various military expeditions 
 against the French and Indians does not fall within the com- 
 pass of our task. References have already been made to 
 Washington's and Braddock's expeditions of 1754 and 1755 
 respectively. In 1756 Colonel Armstrong, commander of 
 the forces west of the Susquehanna River, made a success- 
 ful expedition to destroy the Indians' base of supplies at 
 Kittanning. Forbes' capture of Fort Duquesne has already 
 been mentioned, as has Colonel Bouquet's relief of Fort 
 Pitt in 1763. 
 
 During the Revolution various offensive expeditions 
 were made against the Indians. General Mcintosh in the 
 fall of 1778 started from Fort Pitt to destroy the Indian 
 towns about Sandusky, but the season was so far advanced 
 that he was forced to give up the project. (3) Colonel 
 Broadhead, setting out from Fort Pitt on August 11, 1779, 
 with a force of about six hundred men destroyed the Indian 
 villages and corn fields in the Allegheny Valley. (4) At 
 the same time General John Sullivan was engaged in a simi- 
 lar expedition against the Six Nations, proceeding by way 
 of the Susquehanna Valley. He destroyed many Indian 
 towns and laid v/aste their cornfields, thus embarassing all 
 future operations against the northern frontier. (5) Fur- 
 ther expeditions v/ere contemplated but given up upon the 
 recommendation of General Washington. (6) 
 
 Later Years 
 
 After the Revolution three new elements entered into 
 the problem of defence. The first of these was the settle- 
 
 (1) Thwaites, Ea7-ly Westei-n Travels, I, 185-233. Reprinting the 
 
 journal of the first journey. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 234-291. Reprinting the journal of the second journey. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 1st ser., VI, 670. 
 
 (4) Olden Time, II, 309-310. 
 
 (5) Ibid, 308. 
 
 (6) Col. Rec., XIII, 380. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 ment of Ohio, the second the assumption by the general 
 government of responsibihty for frontier defence, and third 
 the settlement of the Pennsylvania lands northwest of the 
 Ohio and Allegheny rivers. 
 
 The Revolution had hardly closed before emigrants 
 began to pass down the Ohio River to settle upon ttie new 
 Congressional lands west of Pennsylvania. Marietta and Cin- 
 cinnati within a few years were flourishing frontier towns. 
 These settlements tended to push the Indians farther west- 
 ward and thus free Pennsylvania from the danger of incur- 
 sions, but at the same time they incensed the former pos- 
 sessors of the soil. Resistance was made during which mur- 
 ders were again committed in western Pennsylvania, it 
 was only by Wayne's victory in 1795 that the western pait 
 of the state was wrested from the Indians' hands and en- 
 tirely secured from Indian depredations. 
 
 During the Revolution but to a greater extent after its 
 close the central government began to play an important 
 role in frontier defence. This was inevitable on account of 
 the new frontier stretching across the federal lands as well 
 as on account of the constitutional duties of the federal 
 government. (1) The individual states were hencefortli 
 not so much concerned as the Confederation. Thus a second 
 element was interposed to relieve Pennsylvania of the bur- 
 den of defence. Each state was still required to furnish its 
 quota of men, but operations were directed by the Secretary 
 of War and expenses were met by the general government. 
 
 Pennsylvania, however, took the initiative when hos- 
 tilities began in 1791. The legislature appropriated four 
 thousand pounds to provide for the immediate defence of the 
 frontier, to continue until in the opinion of the governor the 
 measures projected by the United States should give suffi- 
 cient protection. (2) The governor was authorized to draw 
 orders on the state treasurer for the above mentioned sum 
 and apply the same in such manner as he should judge most 
 proper for carrying the law into effect. 
 
 The Secretary of War instructed the lieutenants of the 
 western counties to employ at the expense of the United 
 States as many of the militia by voluntary enlistment or 
 other legal method as in their judgement the protection of 
 their respective counties required. (3) This raised several 
 
 (1) Constitution of the United States, Art. I, Sec. 2. 
 
 (2) Statutes at Large, XIV, 95. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 646. 
 
94 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 legal questions. (1) Could the Secretary of War order out the 
 militia under a Pennsylvania law and direct them to be paid 
 less out of the treasury of the United States than the law 
 under which they served provided? Was not the governor 
 of the state, and not the Secretary of War, the proper person 
 to order out the militia? These questions tended to keep the 
 people from acting with spirit, but they were not pushed to 
 an issue. 
 
 The state still had, to some degree at least, the power 
 to accept or reject the federal proposals. In January, 1792, 
 the Secretary of War laid before the governor of Pennsyl- 
 vania his plan for defensive operations. (2) This was sub- 
 mitted to and approved by the state assembly. In order to 
 aid the measures of the United States the governor was then 
 authorized to engage for six months a number of experienced 
 riflemen from the militia, not exceeding 228, (3) and sta- 
 tion them as in his judgement would best protect and de- 
 fend the western frontier. (4) When the term of the 
 Pennsylvania companies had almost expired, the Secretary 
 of War considered it as politic at least to ask the permission 
 of the governor before allowing the federal officers to re- 
 cruit among them. (5) 
 
 The last problem of frontier defence which presented 
 itself to the state was that of protecting the commissioners 
 who were appointed to lay out the towns of Erie, Franklin, 
 and Waterford. The survey was authorized April 8, 
 1793. (6) The Indians, who still maintained their claim to 
 the northwestern corner of the state, opposed it. Governor 
 Mifflin, however, purposed to protect the commissioners by 
 means of a draft from the western militia and carry out the 
 establishment in spite of any resistance that might be offer- 
 ed. (7) But in compliance with a request coming from the 
 President of the United States through the Secretary of War 
 and stating that the establishment might complicate the 
 problem of pacifying the western Indians with whom the 
 nation was then at war, he suspended temporarily the ex- 
 ecution of the act. (8) All difficulties having at last been 
 removed, commissioners were appointed to make the survey 
 
 (1) Ibid, 655. 
 
 (2) Ibid, 4th ser., IV, 216. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 686. 
 
 (4) Statutes at Large, XIV, 19G-198. 
 
 (5) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., IV, 732. 
 
 (6) Statutes at Large, XIV, 395-396. 
 
 (7) Pa. Arch., 2nd ser., VI, 667. 
 
 (8) Ibid, 668. 
 
The F7'ontier Policy of Pennsylvania 95 
 
 in 1795. (1) The governor on April 18 was empowered to 
 enlist as many men, not exceeding 130, as he thought neces- 
 sary to protect and assist the commissioners. (2). If a 
 greater force should prove necessary, he was authorized to 
 raise at his discretion a complete company. On account of 
 the alarming reports of Indian hostilities he considered it 
 necessary to raise the additional men; (3) but the survey 
 was made and the land settled without any further Indian 
 opposition. 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 (1) statutes at Large, XV, 337-346. 
 
 (2) Ihid, 344. 
 
 (3) Pa. Arch., 4th ser., IV, 342. Governor Mifflin to Assembly: 
 
 "Before the Commissioners departed from Pittsburg. The 
 symptons of savage hostility were so alarming, that it be- 
 came expedient, as well for their protection, as for the gen- 
 eral security of the frontiers, to augment the number of state 
 ti'oops, by the additional company which, in a case of emer- 
 gency, I was empowered to raise. Orders were accordingly 
 issued for that purpose, but you will perceive, on a perusal 
 of the documents relating to the subject, that every step was 
 taken in concert with the general government, and that no 
 precaution was omitted to prevent an accumulation of useless 
 expense, or a continuance of the enlistments, beyond the 
 period of actual necessity." 
 
96 The Frontiey^ Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Albach, James R., Annals of the West, Pittsburg, 1856. 
 
 The American Annual Recrister or Historical Memoirs of the United 
 States for the year 1796, Philadelphia, 1797. 
 
 Applegarth, Albert C, Quakers) in Pennsylvania, Baltimore, 1892. 
 
 Bartram, John, Observations on the Inhabitants, Climate, Soil. Rivers, 
 Productions, Animals and other matters worthy of Notice. London. 
 1751. 
 
 Beatty, Charles, The Journal of a Two Months' Tour with a view of 
 promoting: Relis'ion Among the Frontier Inhabitants of Penn- 
 sylvania, and of introducino; Christianity anion!? the Indians to 
 the westward of the Allegheny Mountains, London, 1768. 
 
 Bliss, Eugene P., Diai-y of David Zeisberger, Cincinnati, 1885. 
 
 Bolles, Albert S., Pennsylvania, Province and State, A History from 
 1600 to 1790, Philadelphia and New York, 1899. 
 
 Brainerd, David, Mii-abilia Dei Inter Indicos, Philadelphia, 1746. 
 
 Brissot de Warville, J. P., New Travels in the United States of Ame- 
 rica performed in 1788 London, 1792. 
 
 Budd, Thomas, Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New 
 Jersey, Philadelphia, 1685; Reprinted in Cleveleand, 1902. 
 
 /XBurnaby, Andrew, Travels Through the Middle Settlements in North 
 America in the years 1759 and 1760, London, 1775. 
 
 /^.Byars, W. V., The First American Movement West, (typewritten 
 transcriptions from the Gratz Papers prepared in the Library of 
 the Pennsylvania Historical Society), Philadelphia, 1913-1914. 
 
 Calendar of Virginia State Papers and other Manuscripts Preserved 
 in the Capitol at Richmond, Richmond, 1875-1884. 
 
 ^.Chapman, Thomas J., Old Pittsburg Days, Pittsburg, 1900. 
 
 Chapman, Isaac A., A Sketch of the Histoxy of Wyoming. Wilkes- 
 barre. Pa., 1830. 
 
 Chapman, Thomas J., The French in the Allegheny Valley, Cleveland, 
 1887. 
 
 Charter to William Penn and the Laws of the Province of Penn- 
 sylvania, 1682-1700, Harristburg, 1879. 
 
 Clay, John Curtis, Annals of the Swedes on the Delaware 1636-1834. 
 
 Collections of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 
 1853. 
 
 Cooper, Thomas, Some Information Respecting America, London, 1794. 
 
 Coxe, Trench, A View of the United States of America, Philadelphia 
 1794. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 97 
 
 Craig, Neville B., History of Pittsfcurg, Pittsburg 1851. 
 
 Craig, Neville B., Olden Time, Pittsburg 1846-1847. 
 
 Cross, Answer to an individious pamphlet, intitled "A Brief State of 
 the Province of Pennsylvania," London, 1755. 
 
 Darlington, Mrs. Mary C, Fort Pitt and Letters from the Frontier, 
 Pittsburg, 1892. 
 
 Day, Sherman, Historical Collection of the State of Pennsylvania, 
 Philadelphia, 1843. 
 
 A Dialogue, Containing Some Reflections on the late Declaration and 
 Remonstrance of the Back-Inhabitants of the Province of Penn- 
 sylvania, (anon.) Philadelphia, 1764. 
 
 Difenderfer, Frank Reid, The German Immigration into Pennsyl- 
 vania, Lancaster. 1900. 
 
 Doddridge, Joseph, Notes on the Settlement and Indian Wars of the 
 vi^estern parts of Virginia and Pennsylvania, 1763-1783, Pitts- 
 burgh, 1912. 
 
 Edwards, Johnathan, Memoirs of the Rev. David Brainerd, Missionary 
 to the Indians on the Borders of New York, New Jersey, and 
 Pennsylvania, New Haven, 1822. 
 
 Egle, W. H., An Illustrated History of the Commonwealth of Penn- 
 sylvania, Harrisburg, 1876. 
 
 Egle, W. H., Notes and Queries, Historical and Genalogical, chiefly 
 relating to Interior Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, 1894-1900. 
 
 Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to 
 the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1896-'97, Washing- 
 ton, 1899. 
 
 Falckner, Daniel, Curieuse Nachricht von Pensylvania, Frankfort 
 and Leipzig, 1702; Reprinted Lebanon, 1905. 
 
 Faust, Albert B., The German Element in the United States, Boston 
 and New York. 1900. 
 
 Ferris, Benjamin, History of the Original Settlements on the 
 Delaware, 1846. 
 
 Fisher, S. G., Pennsylvania Colony and Commonwealth, Phila- 
 delphia, 1897. 
 
 Force, Peter, American Archives, 4th ser., Washington, 1837. 
 
 Freme, Richard, A short Description of Pennsylvania (1692), New 
 York. 1912. 
 
 Franklin, Benjamin, An Historical Review of the Constitution and 
 Government of Pennsylvania, London, 1759. 
 
 Franklin, Benjamin, Autobiography, Boston, 1844. 
 
 Franklin, Benjamin, Complete Works, edited by John Bigelow, 
 New York and London, 1887. 
 
98 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Gist, Christopher, Journals, edited by W. M. Darlinp^ton, Pittsbure, 
 1893. 
 
 Gordon, T. F. Gazetter of the State of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 
 1833. 
 
 Gordon, T. F., History of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1829. 
 
 Haines, E. M., The American Indian, Chicago, 1888. 
 
 Hanna, C. A., The Scotch Irish, New York and London, 1902 
 
 Hanna, C. A. The Wilderness Trail New York and London, 1911. 
 
 Hardy, A. L., Story of Pittsburg, Pittsburg, 1910. 
 
 Hassler, E. W., Old Westmoreland, A History of Western Penn- 
 sylvania During the Revolution, Pittsburg, 1900. 
 
 Hazard, Samuel, Pennsylvania Archives, Philadelphia, 1852. 
 
 Hazard, Samuel, Annals of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 18.50. 
 
 Hazard, Samuel, Register of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1828-36. 
 
 Heckwelder, John, History of the Manners, and Customs of the 
 Indian Nations who once inhabited Pennsylvania and the neigh- 
 boring States, Philadelphia, 1876. 
 
 Hildreth, S. P., Pioneer History Cincinnati, 1848. 
 
 Holm, T. C, Description of the Province of New Sweden, Phila- 
 delphia, 1834. 
 
 Hulbert, A. B., Washington and the West, Cleveland, 1911. 
 
 Hulbert, A. B., Historic Highways of America, Cleveland, 1902-1905. 
 
 Imlay, Gilbert, A Topographical Description of the Western Ter- 
 ritory of North America, London, 1797. 
 
 Information and Directions Formerly given to such Persons as went 
 over to settle in America, London, 1750. 
 
 Jacobs, H. E., The German Emigration to America, Lancaster, 1898. 
 
 Janney, S. M., The life of William Penn, Philadelphia, 1882. 
 
 Jardine, L. J. A letter from Pennsylvania to a Friend in England. 
 Bath. 1795. 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, Writings, edited by P. L. Ford, New York, 1893. 
 
 Jenkins, H. M., Pennsylvania, Colonial and Federal, A History 1608- 
 1903, Philadelphia, 1903. 
 
 Jones, U. P., History of the Early Settlement of the Juniata Valley, 
 Philadelphia, 1856. 
 
 Kercheval, Samuel, A History of the Valley of Virginia, Woodstock, 
 Va., 1850. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Kuhns, Oscar, The German and Swiss Settlements of Colonial Penn- 
 sylvania; A Study of the So-Called Pennsylvania Dutch, New 
 York. 1901. 
 
 Laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1700-1802, Philadelphia, 
 1803. 
 
 Lincoln, C. H., The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, Phila- 
 delphia, 1901. 
 
 Loskiel, G. H., History of the Mission of the United Brethren among 
 the Indians in North America, London, 1794. 
 
 Lukens and Wallace, Newspaper Clippings relating to the early his- 
 tory of Pittsburgh and vicinity. (From various newspapers 
 and magazines of the last twenty five years). 
 
 Maclay, Samuel, Journal while Surveying the West Branch of the 
 Susquehanna, the Sinnemahoning and the Allegheny Rivers, 1790. 
 Williamsport. 
 
 Manypenny, G. W., Our Indian Wards, Cincinnati, 1880. 
 
 Maps: In Pa. Arch., 3rd ser., XA; 
 Evans' Map, 1749. 
 Scull's Map, 1770. 
 Howell's Map, 1792. 
 Historical Map of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1875. 
 
 May, John, Journal and Letters relative to Two Journeys to the Ohio 
 Country in 1788 and '89, Cincinnati, 1873. 
 
 Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 
 
 Michaux, F. A., Travels to the Westward of the Allegheny Moun- 
 tains, London. 1805. 
 
 Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania (Colonial Records), 
 Philadelphia, 1852. 
 
 Mittelberger, Gottlieb, Journey to Pennsylvania in the year 1750 and 
 Return to Germany in the year 1754, Philadelphia, 1898. 
 
 Myers, A. C, Immigration of the Irish Quakers into Pennsylvania, 
 Swarthmore. Pa., 1902. 
 
 Myers, A. C, (editor), Narratives of Early Pennsylvania, West New 
 Jersey, and Delaware, 1630-1707, New York. 1912. 
 
 The Observator's Trip To America in a Dialogue between the Obser- 
 vator and his Country-man Roger (anon.) 1726. 
 
 O'Callaghan, E. B., Documents relative to the Colonial History of 
 the State of New York, Albany, 1856-1877. 
 
 Parkman, Francis, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, Boston 1898. 
 
 Peck, George, Wyoming; its History, Stirring Incidents, and Ro- 
 mantic Adventures, New York. 1858. 
 
 Penn, William, A Brief Account of the Rise and Progress of the 
 People Called Quakers, London, 1748. 
 
100 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Penn, William, A Further Account of the Province of Pennsylvania, 
 Reprinted New York, 1912. 
 
 Penn, William, Letter to the Free Society of Traders, Reprinted New- 
 York. 1912. 
 
 Penn, William, Some Account of the Province of Pennsylvania, Re- 
 printed New York, 1912. 
 
 Penn, William, Plan for the Pacification of Europe, in Old South 
 Leaflets, III, No 75. 
 
 The Pennsylvania German Society, Proceedings and Addresses, 
 Lancaster. 
 
 The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Philadelphia. 
 
 Pennypacker, S. W., Pennsylvania in American History, Phila- 
 delphia, 1910. 
 
 Pennypacker, S. W., The Settlement of Germantown Pennsylvania 
 and the Beginning of German Immigration to North America, 
 Lancaster. 1899. 
 
 Pittsburg as seen by early travelers, 1783-1818, Pittsburg, 1902-1903. 
 
 The Pittsburg Directory for 1815, Pittsburg, 1815. 
 
 Pittsburg Gazette. Pittsburg. 1786. 
 
 Pritts, J., Mirror of Olden Time Border Life, Abingdon, Va., 1849. 
 
 Proud, Robert, History of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1797. 
 
 Reichel, L. T., Early History of the Church of the United Brethren 
 in North America, Nazareth, Pa., 1888. 
 
 Report of the Commission to Locate the Site of the Frontier Forts 
 
 of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, 1896. 
 Return of the Whole Number of Persons within the Several Districts 
 of the United States, 
 
 (First Census, Philadelphia, 1793) 
 (Second Census, Washington, 1802) 
 
 Richards, M. H., German Emigration from New York province into 
 Pennsylvania, Lancaster, 1899. 
 
 Rousselot de Surgy, Histories naturelle et Politique de la Pensyl- 
 vanie, Paris. 1768. 
 
 Rupp, I. D., Early History of Western Pennsylvania and of the 
 West, Pittsburg, 1846. 
 
 Rupp, I D., History of Northampton, Lehigh, Monroe, Carbon, and 
 Schuylkill Counties. Harrisburg, 1845. 
 
 Scharf, J. T., and Wescott, Thompson, History of Philadelphia, 
 Philadelphia, 1884. 
 
 Schoepf, J. D. Travels in the Confederation (1783-1784), Phila- 
 delphia, 1911. 
 
The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 101 
 
 Schoolcraft, H. R., Archives of Aboriginal Knowledge, Philadelphia, 
 1860. 
 
 Schweinitz, Edmund, D., The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, 
 Philadelphia, 1902. 
 
 Sharpless, Isaac, A Quaker Experiment in Government, 1682-1783, 
 Philadelphia, 1902. 
 
 Sheperd, W. R., History of Propietary Government in Pennsylvania, 
 New York, 1896. 
 
 Sheperd, W. R., The Land System of Provincial Pennsylvania, in 
 Annual Report of American Historical Association, 1895. 
 
 Smith, William, Brief State of the Province of Pennsylvania, London, 
 1755. 
 
 Smith, William, Brief View of the Conduct of Pennsylvania, 1755, 
 London, 1756. 
 
 Smith, William, Discourses on Public Occasions in America, London, 
 1762. 
 
 Smith, William, An Examination of the Connecticut Claims to Lands 
 in Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1774. 
 
 Smith, William, An Historical Account of the Expedition Against 
 the Ohio Indians under the command of Heniy Bsuquet, Phila- 
 delphia, 1764; Reprinted in Cincinnati, 1868. 
 
 Smith, William Henry, The St. Clair Papers, Cincinnati, 1882. 
 
 Some Transactions between the Indians and Friends in Pennsyl- 
 vania in 1791 and 1792, London, 1792. 
 
 Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania from 1682 to 1801, Harrisburg, 
 1896-1911. 
 
 Thompson, Charles, An Enquiry into the Causes of the Alienation of 
 the Delaware and Shawnee Indians from the British Interest 
 and into the Measures taken for recovering their Friendship, 
 London, 1759; Reprinted in Philadelphia, 1867. 
 
 Thwaites, R. G., Early Western Travels, Cleveland 1904. 
 
 Thwaites, R. G. and Kellog, Louise Phelrs, Documentary History 
 of Dunmore's War, Madison, 1905. 
 
 Thwaites, R. G. and Kellog, Louise Phelps, The Revolution on the 
 Upper Ohio, Madison 1908. 
 
 Travels in the years 1791 and 1792 in Pennsylvania, New York, and 
 Vermont, Journals of John Lincklaen, agent of the Holland 
 Land Company, New York, 1897. 
 
 Tree of Liberty (a weekly paper) Pittsburg, 1800. 
 
 True and Impartial State of the Province of Pennsylvania (anon), 
 
 Philadelphia, 1759. 
 Veech, James, Monongahela of Old, 1858. 
 
102 The Frontier Policy of Pennsylvania 
 
 Votes and Proceedinj?s of the House of Representatives of the Pro- 
 vince of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1753. 
 
 Walton, J. S., Conrad Weiser and the Indian Policy of Colonial 
 Pennsylvania, 1721-1776, Philadelphia, 1900. 
 
 Watson, J. F. Annals of Philadelphia nad Pennsylvania in the Olden 
 Time, Philadelphia, 1884. 
 
 Welsh, Herbert, Early Moravian Indian Work, Philadelphia, 1897. 
 
 Wilson, Erasmus, Editor, Standard History of Pittsburg, Chicago, 
 1898. 
 
 Wyoming Historical and Geographical Society, Proceedings and 
 Collections, Wilkesbarre, Pa., 1858. 
 
 Zeisberger, David, Diary, Cincinnati, 1885. 
 
 Zeisberger, David, Histoi'y of the Northern American Indians, 
 Columbus, 1910. 
 
 RD 1 -♦ «i 
 
^•' 
 
 
 ° -^^K^ " MPi 
 
 ^^^c;'^' 
 
 -r'^' 
 
 
 ,^,^ .'.'^^,'Kr' 
 
 "=#»' 
 
 ^^^s 
 
 fm^ 
 
 ^^fQt^- 
 
 Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
 Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 Treatment Date: •nnO 
 

 o. * N ' Si-' 
 
 ,>.. 
 
 ■ >./' '^ 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 0^ . 1 •: 
 
 . ■'^^%^° 
 
 
 * .^ 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 ."i^ .' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s.°-n*.. 
 
 \ 
 
 -P (^ 
 
 
 
 
 ■s.^ .. ^ 
 
 
 
 *<^ 
 
 
 >w, 
 
 
 >^^.. 
 
 ^^ *o^. 
 
 '^o^ 
 
 ^^°^ 
 
 .^^ "o -. 
 
 
 
 r /'^^'^"i'' 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^l*^ ^ a"^ * 
 
 
 
 
 .' .^^-V 
 
 
 / ^^ ^^ -mm.* J^ ^^ ^: 
 
 ,s^"-. 
 
 
 
 <^^ *^.. 
 
 "-^r^^ 
 
 ^oV^ 
 
 ^-. 
 
 
 
 V"^'