.-J^' . 
 
 
 \.^*' 
 
 'O, *-V.s^ .'V 
 
 .^ 0-.0 '*'_ •• .0> .,. ^<6 ""' .^" .-„ ^'?'„"-*'' 4>" 
 
 
 ^-j*^ /.^•y7^v: 
 
 

 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2010 with funding from 
 The Library of Congress 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/fortpittOOdahl 
 
FORT PITT 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES W. DAHLINGER 
 
 PRIVATELY PRINTED 
 
 PITTSBURGH, 
 
 1922 
 
FORT PITT 
 
 BY y 
 
 CHARLES Wr DAHLINGER 
 
 PRIVATELY PRINTED 
 
 PITTSBURGH, 
 
 1922 
 

 GIFT 
 
 NOV 
 
 23 '27 
 
INTRODUCTORY 
 
 The following account of Pittsburgh while it 
 was still generally known by the name of 
 Fort Pitt, was originally published in the 
 Western Pennsylvania Historical Magazine 
 for January and April, 1922. The story is 
 now reprinted separately in order that it may 
 be preserved in a more convenient form than 
 if scattered through the pages of a serial 
 publication. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 Chapter I 
 
 The Struggle For Supremacy Between France and England 1 
 
 Chapter II 
 
 The Collapse of French Rule in America, and the Rise of 
 English Power in the Ohio Valley 11 
 
 Chapter III 
 
 The Town Grows as the Fort Declines 21 
 
 Chapter IV 
 
 In Virginia 31 
 
 Chapter V 
 
 Under the Continental Congress 45 
 
 Chapter VI 
 
 Last Days of Fort Pitt 57 
 
 Chapter VII 
 
 The Old Redoubt, 
 
 I Location and Date qf Erection 66 
 
 II In Later Days 76 
 
William Pitt 
 
FORT PITT 
 
 By 
 
 CHARLES W. DAHLINGER. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Struggle For Supremacy Between France and England 
 
 In the olden time Pittsburgh was known indiscrim- 
 inately as Pittsburgh and Fort Pitt, the latter designation 
 being most generally used. The story of those far-away 
 days has been told before, but as Sir Charles Wakefield of 
 England is about to present to the city, a bust of William 
 Pitt, first Earl of Chatham, for whom the place was named, 
 it will not be inappropriate to repeat the tale, together 
 with such incidents as may have been overlooked, or which 
 did not come to the knowledge of the earlier historians. 
 The story of the struggle for supremacy in America be- 
 tween the French and the English is of romantic interest. 
 The French claimed the interior of the continent by right 
 of discovery by LaSalle, The English claims were more 
 comprehensive and just as inconclusive as those of the 
 French. They claimed the country from the Atlantic 
 Ocean to the Pacific on the ground of discovery, and the Ohio 
 Valley by purchase at Lancaster in 1744 from the Six 
 Nations, the ostensible owners. (1) The contest on the 
 part of the French was hopeless from the beginning. Their 
 settlements were widely scattered. Canada and Acadia, which 
 last, had been ceded to England in 1713, were in the far 
 north, while away to the south was Louisiana. The total 
 population was only about eighty thousand, while the Eng- 
 lish Colonies, which were all closely connected and located 
 on the Atlantic seaboard, numbered about one million one 
 hundred and sixty thousand souls. (2) The French de- 
 veloped a comprehensive plan of building a line of forts 
 from Canada southward, intended ultimately to connect 
 Canada with Louisiana, and restrict the English to the sea- 
 board. 
 
2 Fort Pitt 
 
 Like that of most frontier communities, the story of 
 Fort Pitt and of the village which sprang up within its 
 shadow, is so intermingled, that in order to arrive at an in- 
 telligent understanding, the incidents connected with each 
 must be treated as the history of the whole. The annals 
 of Fort Pitt begin many years prior to its actual erection. 
 
 It was the desire for the possession of the Indian trade 
 that first stirred the rival claimants to the Ohio Valley into 
 action. It was a great fur country and was capable of 
 drawing rich tributary currents from the region of the 
 Great Lakes. (3) English traders were doing business 
 there as early as 1730, French traders even earlier. At first 
 the French had a monopoly of the fur trade, but the prices 
 of furs declined and the Indians were dissatisfied and in 
 1747 they turned to the English traders who paid them 
 more money for their furs. Conrad Weiser, a German, who 
 had been a farmer and school teacher, (4) and in early life 
 had lived with the Indians, spoke their language 
 and had their confidence, was now the Pennsyl- 
 vania Indian interpreter and the confidential adviser to 
 the authorities in Indian affairs. He early learned of 
 the discontent of the Indians with the French traders and 
 saw an opportunity for enlarging the trade and influence 
 of Pennsylvania, which information he imparted to the 
 Provincial authorities. Accordingly in 1748 he was sent 
 with presents to the Indians at Logstown, situated on the 
 north side of the Ohio River, eighteen miles below the site 
 of Pittsburgh, where he made a treaty and secured their 
 friendship for Pennsylvania. At the same time he gained 
 for the Province the Indian trade from Logstown to the 
 Mississippi River, and from the OMo to thel Michigan 
 region. (5) 
 
 Virginia was also anxious for the Ohio Indian trade, 
 and in 1748 there was formed by London merchants and a 
 few leading men in Virginia, including Thomas Lee the Presi- 
 dent of the Council of the Colony, and two brothers of George 
 Washington, the Ohio Company, to trade with the Indians 
 and settle on their lands, Governor Dinwiddle becoming a 
 partner at a later date. They obtained a grant from Eng- 
 land of 500,000 acres of land on the south side of the Ohio 
 River and sent Christopher Gist, a surveyor, into the coun- 
 
Fort Pitt 3 
 
 try to explore and report on the same, his first journey being 
 undertaken in 1751, and the other in 1752. On the second 
 visit to the Indians Gist made a treaty with them at Logs- 
 town, where he secured their promise not to molest the 
 company in its settlement of the lands. (6) The next year 
 the Ohio Company made plans for building a fort and laying 
 out a town on the hill immediately below the mouth of 
 Chartiers Creek. (7) 
 
 The French were not asleep while Weiser was weaning 
 the Indians from their cause, and during the time that the 
 Ohio Company was negotiating with them for permission to 
 occupy their lands, but were preparing to assert their 
 claims to the Ohio Country by some positive act. Accord- 
 ingly, in 1749, they sent an expedition down the Allegheny 
 and Ohio rivers, under Captain de Celeron and took posses- 
 sion of the Ohio Valley in the name of the French king. 
 The French carried the sword of conquest in one hand and 
 the cross of salvation in the other; and the occupation of 
 the Ohio country was both spiritual and political. The 
 wooden crosses which DeCeleron erected along the Ohio 
 River were intended to indicate that the country was dedi- 
 cated to the Christian religion; the sovereignty of France 
 was proclaimed by the burial of leaden plates reciting the 
 story of the occupation. Priests and soldiers chanted the 
 Te Deum, the hills and valleys rang with the cries of Vive 
 Le Roi, and the country was part of New France. 
 
 The English soon learned of DeCeleron's expedition, 
 but took no decisive measure to gain possession of the Ohio 
 Valley until 1754. Two years (8) before the French 
 had begun building their series of forts southward 
 and were contemplating the erection of a fort at 
 the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela 
 rivers. Pennsylvania knew of this action of the French 
 but did nothing to thwart them, although three of 
 the forts already constructed were within the limits of 
 that Province. Governor Dinwiddle of Virginia was not so 
 quiescent, being perhaps also influenced by his connection 
 with the Ohio Company. First he sent George Washington, 
 then twenty-one years of age, to interview the command- 
 ants of the French forts and ascertain their reasons for 
 
4 Fort Pitt 
 
 building the forts, but their only reply was that, "France was 
 resolved on possessing the great territory which her mis- 
 sionaries and travellers had revealed to the world." (9) 
 In the spring Dinwiddle, with the consent of Governor 
 Hamilton of Pennsylvania, (10) sent a small force, hastily 
 collected, to the confluence of the Allegheny and Ohio rivers 
 where they began the erection of a fort in an effort to 
 forestall the French, the place having been recommended by 
 Washington as the most suitable for the purpose. This the 
 Virginians called Fort Prince George (11) after the grand- 
 son of George the Second, king of England, the heir ap- 
 parent to the throne and afterward King George the Third. 
 Virginia also decided to raise a regiment of six companies, 
 and in order to stimulate the military ardor of the people. 
 Governor Dinwiddle issued a proclamation offering a bounty 
 of two hundred thousand acres of land on the Ohio River, 
 to be divided among those who would enlist for the pro- 
 posed expedition. (12) 
 
 But the French were equally alert and by a movement 
 from Canada which was Napoleonic in its rapidity (13) 
 they appeared on April 17, 1754, in overwhelming force 
 before the Virginians and compelled Ensign Ward, the 
 officer in charge of the uncompleted works, to surrender, 
 and themselves built a fort, which they named Fort Du- 
 quesne after the Marquis, Duquesne deMenneville, Gov- 
 ernor-General of Canada. The next year the French an- 
 nihilated the army of English and Provincials under Brad- 
 dock, which had been sent to capture Fort Duquesne. 
 
 Then came a change in the English policy. The nation 
 was disheartened at the failure of its armies in Europe and 
 America, and in 1757 with one voice called William Pitt, 
 to form a ministry in which he became nominally Secretary 
 of State but in reality Prime Minister, the Premier, the 
 Duke of New Castle, being a figurehead. Pitt was a man of 
 unbounded energy and immediately upon assuming power 
 planned for the next year a vigorous prosecution of the war 
 against the French whom the English had been fighting in 
 Europe for several years. For America he designed three 
 campaigns — one against Ticonderoga and Crown Point, an- 
 other against Louisburg and the third against Fort Du- 
 
Marquis Duquesne de Menneville. 
 
Fort Pitt 5 
 
 quesne, the last to be commanded by General John Forbes. 
 
 The fame of William Pitt spread to America and the 
 Colonials were aroused as they had never been aroused be- 
 fore; and they became enthusiastic partisans of the war. 
 The Pennsylvania Assembly at once provided men, voted 
 money, supplied wagons and repaired roads. In Phila- 
 delphia the Rev. Dr. William Smith, Provost of the College 
 and Academy of Philadelphia, now the University of Penn- 
 sylvania, renowned in his day as an orator and writer, advo- 
 cated participation in the war from the pulpit, and with his 
 pen. (14) The prevalent opinion among the Americans 
 was that they were engaged in a religious war. The French 
 were Catholics and the English Protestants, and therefore 
 it was a struggle between the two religions. Dr. Smith 
 advocated this view. In an address written, and published 
 broadcast, at the desire of General Forbes while levying 
 forces for the contemplated expedition against Fort Du- 
 quesne, he declared: "Never was the Protestant cause in 
 a more desperate situation." Probably for the benefit of 
 the many German settlers in Pennsylvania he lauded Fred- 
 erick II, the Protestant king of Prussia, designated in his- 
 tory as Frederick the Great, who was dazzling Eng- 
 land and the rest of Europe by his audacious victories over 
 several Catholic powers, and proclaimed him "The great and 
 heroic King of Prussia." Dr. Smith's conclusion was an 
 appeal to the patriotism of the Americans. "Rise then, my 
 countrymen! as you value the blessings of the liberty you 
 enjoy, and dread the evils that hang over you, rise and show 
 yourselves worthy of the name of Britons !" 
 
 Pennsylvania responded nobly to the appeal, and sup- 
 plied nearly half the required force, not including wag- 
 goners and laborers. Colonel Henry Bouquet, a brilliant 
 Swiss officer, and lieutenant-colonel of the First Battalion 
 of the 60th or Royal American Regiment, was the second 
 in command to Forbes. The campaign was opened in the 
 spring by Colonel Bouquet setting out with the regulars on 
 his march to Raystown which he reached early in June. 
 The Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina troops were 
 assembled at Winchester under Washington. Forbes 
 marched from Philadelphia early in July. The cam- 
 paign proceeded without mishap until September 14th when 
 
6 Fort Pitt 
 
 the army met with a serious setback at the very gate of 
 Fort Duquesne, where Major James Grant was defeated 
 and taken prisoner. 
 
 Emboldened by this victory the French with a large 
 force of Indians determined to attack Bouquet at his camp 
 on Loyalhanna Creek on October 12th, before the arrival 
 of the force under General Forbes, but were defeated with 
 considerable loss. The march was resumed. The weather 
 turned cold and the mountains were white with snow; then 
 the snow melted and the cold rains fell and the new road 
 which had just been constructed became deep with mud. 
 But the march continued. On November 24th the army 
 was on the bank of Turtle Creek, within twelve miles of 
 Fort Duquesne. In the evening the Indians reported seeing 
 thick clouds of smoke rising over the fort; at midnight the 
 dull sound of a distant explosion was heard. In the morn- 
 ing the army moved forward again and in the evening 
 came in sight of the smoking ruins of the fort, and not a 
 Frenchman to be seen. The goal was reached and the cam- 
 paign ended. In thankfulness to the great minister who 
 had sent him there, Forbes named the ruins, "Pittsburgh". 
 
 The next day was Sunday and by direction of General 
 Forbes the Rev. Charles Beatty, the chaplain of Colonel 
 William Chapham's Pennsylvania Regiment, was ordered to 
 preach "a thanksgiving sermon for the remarkable superi- 
 ority of his Majesty's arms." (15) On the same day 
 Forbes wrote to Lieutenant-Governor Denny of Pennsyl- 
 vania, reporting the capture of Fort Duquesne, the letter 
 being dated "Fort Duquesne or now Pittsburgh," (16) this 
 being the first time of which there is any record that the 
 name "Pittsburgh" was used. On the 27th Forbes notified 
 William Pitt of the victory over the French, this letter being 
 dated simply "Pittsburgh." He also gave Pitt this addi- 
 tional information: "I have used the freedom of giving 
 your name to Fort DuQuesne, as I hope it was in some 
 measure the being actuated by your spirits that now makes 
 us masters of the place." (17) 
 
 A flood of other letters must have been sent by the 
 happy captors of the French stronghold describing the ex- 
 pedition, and telling of the taking of the fort and expressing 
 the exhuberance of their joy over the event. Only a few, 
 
Fort Pitt ? 
 
 however, have been preserved, and these are mainly from 
 officers of the expedition. Among those still in existence 
 are two letters from Colonel Bouquet. To his friend, William 
 Allen, the Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, he wrote on No- 
 vember 25, 1758, the letter being dated at "Fort Duquesne" 
 in which he told of the last days of the campaign, and (18) 
 generously gave Forbes the credit for its happy ending. 
 "After God," he said, "the success of the expedition is en- 
 tirely due to the General." 
 
 The other letter written by Bouquet is the one he sent 
 his friend, Miss Anne Willing of Philadelphia, whose cousin, 
 Joseph Shippen, was in his command and was his intimate 
 friend. This also was dated at Fort Duquesne on November 
 25th. He addressed his correspondent as "Dear Nancy." 
 She has been described as a charming young lady to whom 
 Bouquet was engaged to be married. "I have the satisfaction 
 to give you the agreeable news of the conquest of this terrible 
 Fort," he began. "The French seized with a panic at our 
 approach have destroyed themselves — the nest of pirates 
 which has so long harboured the murderers and destructors 
 of our poor people. 
 
 "They have burned and destroyed to the ground their 
 fortifications, houses and magazines, and left us no other 
 cover than heaven — a very cold one for an army without 
 tents or equipages. We bear all this hardship with alacrity 
 by the consideration of the immense advantage of this 
 important acquisition." He concluded by telling her that 
 he hoped soon to have the pleasure of seeing her when he 
 would give her "a more particular account — chiefly about 
 the beauty of this situation, which appears to me beyond 
 my description." (19) 
 
 Another letter of importance is that of George 
 Washington, who wrote to Governor Farqieur of Virginia 
 on November 28, 1758, from the "Camp at Fort Duquesne" : 
 
 "I have the pleasure to inform you that Fort Duquesne, 
 or rather the ground upon which it stood, was possessed by 
 his Majesty's troops on the 25th inst. The enemy, after 
 letting us get within a day's march of the place, burned 
 the fort, and ran away by the light of it, going down the 
 Ohio by water, to the number of about five hundred men, 
 according to our best information. The possession of the 
 
g Port Pitt 
 
 fort has been a matter of surprise to the whole army, and 
 we cannot attribute it to more probable causes than the 
 weakness of the enemy, want of provisions, and the defec- 
 tion of the Indians. Of these circumstances we were luckily 
 informed by those prisoners, who providentially fell into 
 our hands at Loyalhanna, when we despaired of proceeding 
 farther. A council of war had determined that it was not 
 advisable to advance this season beyond the place; but the 
 above information caused us to march on without tents or 
 baggage, and with only a light train of artillery." (20) 
 
 Forbes left the junction of the two rivers on December 
 3rd with the bulk of the army, (21) Bouquet remaining with 
 the residue. The next day as Forbes' representative he 
 met the Indians and gave them Forbes' assurance that the 
 intentions of the British toward them were peaceful. (22) 
 On December 5th Bouquet followed Forbes (23) with nearly 
 all the remaining troops leaving Colonel Hugh Mercer in 
 command with a force of two hundred and eighty men. (24) 
 
 In the meantime Forbes was marching eastward, 
 but at Ligonier he became ill, and was obliged to 
 remain there until December 27th, when he continued his 
 journey, reaching Philadelphia on January 17, 1759. Not- 
 withstanding his continued illness, one of his first acts 
 after his arrival in Philadelphia, was to cause to be struck 
 a gold medal in commemoration of the campaign which 
 had ended so gloriously. On one side was a repre- 
 sentation of a road cut through a forest and over 
 rocks and mountains, together with the motto. Per tot 
 Discrimina. On the reverse side was a picture of the con- 
 fluence of the Ohio and Monongahela rivers, with a fort 
 in flames, and Forbes approaching, carried on a litter, fol- 
 lowed by the army marching in column with cannon; the 
 motto here was Ohio Brittanick Concilio Manuque. 
 On February 20th Forbes distributed the medals, (25) 
 which were to be worn around the neck attached to a dark 
 blue ribbon, to the officers of Colonel Bouquet's battalion 
 of the 60th or Royal American Regiment. 
 
 On March 11th, the conqueror of Fort Duquesne died 
 in Philadelphia. The entire city mourned his death and two 
 days later he was given an imposing funeral. The remains 
 were taken to the State House, and from there, escorted 
 
be- 
 
 » 
 
Fort Pitt 9 
 
 by a large force of military and by the officers of the 
 Province and of the city, were taken to Christ Church, 
 thousands of spectators lining the streets as the funeral 
 cortege passed by. In the chancel of the church the Iron 
 Head, as his Indian allies admiringly called Forbes, was 
 laid to rest. (26) 
 
 Winter was coming on at the junction of the Monon- 
 gahela and Allegheny rivers, and in order to provide shelter 
 as well as to afford protection for the troops, it was neces- 
 sary to build a temporary works, and the construction of a 
 small stockade was begun before Forbes left. It was located 
 on the bank of the Monongahela River at the south end of 
 West Street, and between that street and what was for 
 many years known as Liberty Street, but is now Lib- 
 erty Avenue, and within four hundred yards of Fort Du- 
 quesne. It was four-sided with bastions at the four corners. 
 According to the plan in the Crown Collection of Maps and 
 Manuscripts in the British Museum it was of sufficient size 
 for the accommodation of two hundred and twenty men. (27) 
 
 The importance of the place as a barrier against the 
 encroachments of the French, in the eyes of the English 
 ministry, is apparent from the letter of William Pitt, dated 
 January 23, 1759, and written immediately upon receiving 
 news of the capture of Fort Duquesne. Already he 
 advocated the restoration, if possible of Fort Duquesne, or 
 the erection of a fortress adequate to maintaining the pos- 
 sessions of English. (28) 
 
 REFERENCES. ' 
 
 1. William L. Stone. The Life and Times of Sir William Johnson, 
 Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. I, pp. 436-437. 
 
 2. Walford Davis Green, M. P. William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, 
 New York, 1901, p. 66. 
 
 3. Joseph S. Walton. Conrad Weiser And The Indian Policy Of 
 Colonial Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, p. 178. 
 
 4. Lucy Forney Bittinger. The Germans In Colonial Times, Phil- 
 adelphia, 1901, p. 188. 
 
 5. Joseph S. Walton. Supra, p. 193. 
 
 6. Early History of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, app. 
 p. 4-5. 
 
 7. William M. Darlington. Christopher Gist's Journals, Pittsburgh, 
 1893, pp. 236-237. 
 
 8. William L. Stone. Supra, p. 440. 
 
 9. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
 Boston, 1879, Vol. Ill, p. 71. 
 
 10. Neville B. Craig. Lecture Upon The Controversy Between Penn- 
 sylvania And Virginia, Pittsburgh, 1845, pp. 6-7. 
 
10 Fort Pitt 
 
 11. The Official Records Of Robert Dinwiddie, Lieutenant-Governor 
 Of The Colony Of Virginia, 1751-1758, Richmond, Virginia. 
 MDCCCLXXXIII,Vol. I, p. 323. 
 
 12. William L. Stone, Supra, p. 446-447. 
 
 13. George Bancroft, Supra, p. 75. 
 
 14. William Smith, D.D. Discourses On Public Occasions in America 
 London, 1762, Appendix pp. 2-31. 
 
 15. William M. Darlington. In Centennial Memorial Of The Plant- 
 ing and Growth Of Presbyterianism In Western Pennsylvania 
 And Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 265. 
 
 The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, pp. 184-185. 
 
 16. Colonial Records. Vol. VIII, pp. 232-234. 
 
 17. Gertrude Selwyn Kimball. Correspondence Of William Pitt, 
 New York, 1906, p. 409. 
 
 18. The Olden rime.__Supra, pp. 182-184. 
 
 19. George Harrison Fisher. Brigadier General Henry Bouquet, 
 InThe Pennsylvania Magazine Of History and Biography, Phil- 
 adelphia, 1879, Vol. Ill, pp. 121-143. 
 
 20. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Supra, App. pp. 302-303 
 
 21. Ibid, p. 122. 
 
 22. Ibid, pp. 127-128. 
 
 23. Ibid, p. 123. 
 
 24. Colonial Records, Supra, p. 292. 
 
 25. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace. A Regimental Chronicle And List 
 Of Officers Of The 60th Or Kings Royal Rifle Corps, London, 
 1879, p. 44. 
 
 William M. Darlington. Supra, pp. 265-266. 
 
 26. J. Thomas Scharf and Thompson Westcott. History of Philad- 
 elphia, Philadelphia, 1884, Vol. I, p. 254. 
 
 27. Archer Butler Hulbert. The Crown Collection Of Photographs 
 Of American Maps, Cleveland, Ohio, 1905, Vol. II, No. 23. 
 
 28. Colonial Records, Supra, p. 315. 
 
Fort Pitt 11 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Collapse of French Rule in America, and the Rise of 
 
 English Power in the Ohio Valley. 
 
 Forbes had been succeeded in the command of the 
 English and Provincial troops in the Southern Department 
 to which Pennsylvania belonged, by General John Stan- 
 wix (1) and Captain Harry Gordon who ranked as lieuten- 
 ant in the First Battalion of the 60th or Royal American 
 Regiment, (2) was designated as chief engineer of the 
 proposed fort. On August 6, 1759, Colonel Mercer wrote 
 to Governor Denny that Captain Gordon had arrived with 
 most of the artificers, but would not select a site for the 
 new fort until the arrival of General Stanwix, and added, 
 "We are preparing the materials for building with what 
 expedition so few men are capable of." (3) Shortly 
 afterward Stanwix arrived bringing with him ma- 
 terials and more skilled men and laborers, and on September 
 3, 1759, the work of building the fortress, advocated by 
 Pitt, was commenced. 
 
 The plan of the fort, however, was not the work of Cap- 
 tain Gordon, but was made by Lieutenant Bernard Ratzer, an 
 assistant engineer, also belonging to the First Battalion 
 of the 60th or Royal American Regiment. (14) The orig- 
 inal of this plan, like the plan of the temporary fort built 
 along the Monongahela River, is preserved in the Crown 
 Collection of Maps and Manuscripts in the British Museum. 
 The 60th or Royal American Regiment, originally the 62nd 
 or Royal American Regiment of Foot, had been authorized 
 by an act of Parliament of November 5, 1755, which pro- 
 vided for raising a regiment among the German and Swiss 
 settlers in America, and for the granting of commissions in 
 this regiment to foreign Protestants who had served abroad 
 as officers or engineers. The number of officers was 
 never to exceed fifty and the engineers never to be more 
 than twenty, and none were to be allowed to rise above the 
 rank of lieutenant-colonel. (5) One of the requirements 
 of the officers was that they must be able to speak the 
 German language. Judging from Ratzer's name and because 
 it appears in the list of officers of the battalion with nearly 
 
12 Fort Pitt 
 
 a score of other lieutenants with German names, all of 
 whom were commissioned at about the same time as Rat- 
 zer, he was a German. That he was a man of 
 ability is apparent from the fact that in 1766 and 1767 he 
 made a survey of the city of New York and a plan of the 
 place, of which several editions were published. This plan, 
 according to an eminent authority, is "the most accurate 
 and reliable survey which we have of New York at this 
 period and even today is much used in searching titles." (6) 
 Ratzer remained in the English army for many years after 
 the close of the French War, advancing to the rank of 
 captain in 1773 and major in 1782. (7) 
 
 An interesting account of the happenings at the forks 
 of the two rivers at this period was printed in the American 
 Magazine of December, 1759, published at Woodbridge, 
 New Jersey. (8) It is in the form of a letter, and is dated 
 September 24, 1759. "It is now near a month since the 
 army has been employed in erecting a most formidable 
 fortification; such a one as will to latest posterity secure 
 the British empire on the Ohio. There is no need to enum- 
 erate the abilities of the chief engineer, nor the spirit shown 
 by the troops in executing this important task, the fort will 
 soon be a lasting monument to both. Upon the General's 
 arrival, about four hundred Indians of different nations 
 came to confirm the peace with the English, particularly the 
 Tawas and Wyandots, who inhabit about Fort D'Etroit. 
 These confessed the errors they had been led into by the 
 perfidy of the French ; showed the deepest contrition for their 
 past conduct, and promised not only to remain fast friends 
 to the English, but to assist us in distressing the common 
 enemy whenever we should call on them to do it. And all 
 the nations which have been at variance with the English, 
 said they would deliver up what prisoners they had in their 
 hands to the General, at the grand meeting that is to be 
 held in about three weeks. As soon as the Congress was 
 ended the head of each nation presented the calumet of 
 peace to the General, and showed every other token of sin- 
 cerity that could be expected which the surrender of the 
 prisoners will confirm. In this as in everything that can 
 secure the lasting peace and happiness of these Colonies, the 
 General is indefatigable." 
 
Fort Pitt 13 
 
 On October 25, 1759, General Stanwix held another 
 council with the Indians and told them that he insisted on 
 their restoring the prisoners who were still in their pos- 
 session. He also had Captain Montour, the interpreter, in- 
 form them that the city of Quebec had been captured by 
 the English, who soon expected to drive the French out of 
 America. The Indians then formally buried the hatchet 
 and declared themselves fast friends of the English for all 
 time. The chronicler of conference adds that "thereupon 
 General Stanwix drank to the health of the Indians and the 
 meeting dispersed." (9) 
 
 The work of building the fort went on throughout the 
 summer and autumn, but was necessarily slow. The 
 only material at hand was wood, which could be cut within 
 a few hundred feet of the fort. Bricks had to be made, 
 and to do this the proper clay must first be secured and 
 thereafter kilns constructed for burning the bricks. Every 
 other article needed in the construction of the fort was car- 
 ried overland on packhorses, a distance of more than three 
 hundred miles. It was therefore winter before the fort 
 was well under way, and on December 8th, General 
 Stanwix wrote to Governor Hamilton from the "Camp at 
 Pittsburgh." 
 
 "The works here are near 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 three hundred Provincials, one-half of whom 
 are Pennsylvanians, the others Virginians, and four hun- 
 dred of the First Battalion of the Eoyal American Regi- 
 ment, the whole to be under the command of Major Tulli- 
 kens when I leave it. These I hope I shall be able to cover 
 well under good barracks and feed likewise for six months 
 from the first of January, besides artillery, artificers and 
 batteau men; Indians, too, must be fed, and they are not 
 a few, who come and go and trade here." (10) 
 
 On December 24th, General Stanwix sent another 
 letter to Governor Hamilton, this time dated "Pittsburgh," 
 in which he wrote that he was making arrangements to 
 have more troops at Fort Pitt in the following spring to 
 assist in the construction of the fort; and that it could be 
 completed during the next summer. (11) 
 
14 Fort Pitt 
 
 After the fort was occupied, although far from fin- 
 ished, on March 21, 1760, General Stanwix left Fort Pitt 
 for Philadelphia. On June 29th, General Robert Monc- 
 ton, the chief officer of the department to which Fort Pitt 
 belonged, called by Bancroft "the brave, open-hearted and 
 liberal Moncton," who only the year before had been the 
 second in command under Wolfe at the surrender of Que- 
 bec, came to the fort. (12) Almost immediately he began 
 arranging to send a large force to Presqu' Isle (now Erie) 
 to take possession of the upper posts as well as those along 
 the frontiers as far as Detroit and Mackinaw ; and on July 
 7th, Colonel Bouquet marched with five companies for 
 Presqu' Isle, other troops following later. But the march 
 was uneventful. The French, in order to reinforce the army 
 which was being collected by them to oppose the English 
 who were moving against Montreal, had withdrawn their 
 forces, and when Bouquet reached Presqu' Isle on July 
 17th, he was enabled to take possession without resistance. 
 It was at about this time that the first census of Pitts- 
 burgh was taken, the work being done hy Colonel James 
 Burd who arrived with his regiment of Pennsylvanians on 
 July 6th. The enumeration was made on July 21st and it 
 was found that the population, exclusive of the soldiers, 
 was one hundred forty-nine. (13) 
 
 That the reputation with which Bancroft credits Monc- 
 ton, was well deserved is evidenced by the consideration 
 which he had for the Indians. Some of the Indian traders 
 were unscrupulous in their dealings, and the Indians were 
 often imposed upon, and cheated in trading their skins and 
 furs for such necessaries as they required. Moncton saw 
 the evil and provided a remedy, and established a 
 store at Fort Pitt where the Indians could trade without 
 fear of being wronged. (14) 
 
 On August 20th, Moncton made a treaty at Fort 
 Pitt with the Six Nations and delivered a speech from Sir 
 Jeffrey Amherst, the commander in chief of the British 
 forces in America. He declared that the King of England 
 had not sent him to deprive the Indians of their lands, that 
 he did not mean to do so, and that the posts which he was 
 establishing were being built to prevent the enemy from 
 taking them; nor were the English people there to settle 
 
Fold-out 
 Placeholder 
 
 This foid-out is being digitized, and will be ins 
 
 future date. 
 
Fort Pitt 15 
 
 on the Indian lands. (15) 
 
 Meanwhile the work on the fort was progressing. In 
 the diary of James Kenny, a Quaker, who was living in 
 Pittsburgh in 1761, and managing a store (16) for Phila- 
 delphia parties, there is an account of the uncompleted fort 
 as it appeared in civilian eyes, as well as interesting side- 
 lights on the life of the village. In one of the entries dated 
 "11th mo., 19th," there is a detailed description of the fort, 
 the "banks" of which the writer states are nearly raised. 
 He relates that the front facing the town is of brick and 
 the corners of the angles of hewn stone ; * * * the part 
 nearest the point where the two rivers meet is of earth 
 sodded over and covered with thick long grass planted the 
 year before, the bank having been mown several times 
 during the summer. The fort he said is "four square" 
 with a row of barracks along each square, three rows being 
 of wooden framework, and the row on the side nearest the 
 point, brick. Also that a large brick house had been 
 erected during the past summer in the southeast corner of 
 the fort on which the roof is being put on. He continues, 
 telling that there are steps at the door of hewn 
 free stone, and the building has a cellar under it. The doors 
 of the magazine, vaults and dungeons, are under huge banks 
 of earth thrown out when the trenches were dug, and open 
 in the rear of the barracks. In the magazines are kept the 
 stores of ammunition, etc., and in the dungeons the pris- 
 oners who are to be tried for their lives are confined. There 
 are no lights in the vaults and on the southeast bastion 
 stands a high pole like a mast, on which a flag is hoisted 
 every first day of the week from about eleven to one o'clock, 
 and on state days, etc. Then there are three wells of water 
 walled in the fort, and there is a square of clear ground 
 in the interior about two acres in extent. 
 
 Kenny's journal also gives the earliest information 
 obtainable in regard to the state of education and re- 
 ligion in Pittsburgh. He states that many of the inhabi- 
 tants had engaged a schoolmaster, and had subscribed 
 sixty pounds for him for the year, and that he had twenty 
 scholars; also that the soberer people seemed to long for 
 some public way of worship and that the schoolmaster, 
 although a Presbyterian, reads from the book of Common 
 
16 Fort Pitt 
 
 Prayer, on the first day of the week to a congregation of 
 different principals, "where they behave very grave." This 
 last remark is evidently not made from personal knowl- 
 edge, as the writer adds in parenthesis, "as I heard;" and 
 concludes his observations by saying that, "On occasion 
 the children also are brought to church as they call it." 
 
 General Moncton had left Fort Pitt on October 27, 
 1760, (17) and from that time Colonel Bouquet was in 
 charge, and at his direction a second enumeration of the 
 inhabitants, as well as of the houses in the town was made. 
 This was done on April 14, 1761, and the report showed that 
 the population consisted of two hundred and twenty-one 
 men, which included a number of soldiers dwelling outside 
 of the fort, seventy-three women and thirty-eight children, 
 and that there were standing in the village one hundred and 
 sixty-two houses, of which ten were unoccupied. (18) 
 
 By the time that winter arrived Colonel Bouquet had 
 completed Fort Pitt. It was a most formidable work and 
 the cost was enormous. Lewis Brantz, a well educated 
 young German, who stopped over in Pittsburgh in 1785, 
 while on his way from Baltimore, being employed in con- 
 ducting a party of Germans to the Western country, who 
 had engaged to settle on lands owned there by his employ- 
 ers, wrote in his journal, that Fort Pitt was "formerly the 
 strongest Western fortification of the Americans." (19) 
 The Rev. David Jones, a Baptist missionary who was in 
 Pittsburgh in 1772, related that the fort was said to have 
 cost the crown £100,000 sterling. (20) Hugh Henry 
 Brackenridge, who came to the place in 1781, writing of the 
 fort in 1786, said, the cost was £60,000. (21) 
 
 What is claimed to be an authentic description of the 
 fort was printed in the Centennial number of the Pitts- 
 burgh Commercial Gazette of July 29, 1886 
 
 "It covered eighteen acres of ground and was much 
 larger than Fort Duquesne. The fort proper was built in 
 the form of an irregular pentagon, with regular bastions 
 at the five angles surrounded by a broad moat, which at 
 times was nearly filled by the rising water of the rivers. 
 The moat extended from the Allegheny River northeast of 
 the fort, and entirely around it, but did not connect with 
 the Monongahela, though it approached very near it. The 
 
Fort Pitt 17 
 
 two shorter angles of the work upon the land side were 
 revetted with brick solidly embanked with earth. The 
 other three angles were stockaded with an earthen parapet. 
 A line of sharpened palisades was planted near the foot of 
 the rampart. The fort was supplied with casemates, or 
 bomb-proofs, and had barracks and officers quarters for a 
 thousand men. Running across a point outside of and 
 parallel to the ditch was the glacis, or earth work, 
 with salient and re-entrant angles having entrances covered 
 by traverses and extending from river to river, A light 
 parapet with three bastions, extended along the Allegheny 
 and thence along the Monongahela to the bastion. Eigh- 
 teen guns were mounted on the bastions." 
 
 The fort was located almost entirely west of Marbury 
 (now Barbeau) Street which was laid out partly along what 
 had been the glacis and partly in the moat of the fort. (22) 
 At about where Penn Street (now Penn Avenue) inter- 
 sects Marbury Street was the main entrance to the fort 
 and here there was a drawbridge crossing the moat. The 
 southerly line of the fort extended across Penn Street, 
 this portion of Penn Street being entirely covered by the 
 fort all the way to the Monongahela River. It also crossed 
 Liberty Street at West Street and extended thence to the 
 Monongahela. Facing this stream was another en- 
 trance with a drawbridge. The stronghold extended north- 
 wardly from Penn Street at the point nearest to Marbury 
 Street, about one hundred and fifty feet, and at the north 
 bastion about three hundred feet, the distance in both in- 
 stances being measured to the outer line of the moat. 
 
 Along the easterly front of the fort Lieutenant Ratzer 
 had laid out gardens covering all the ground between the 
 Allegheny River and Liberty Street, and extending east- 
 wardly approximately to about seventy-five or a hundred 
 feet from Fifth (now Stanwix) Street. This ground was 
 divided by three lanes into five blocks. The gardens com- 
 prised about forty acres and were divided into two parts. 
 Close to the fort and extending eastwardly from the bas- 
 tions and along the Allegheny River, under the direction 
 of the officers of the fort, an orchard of apple and pear 
 trees was planted, called the King's Orchard. Farther east 
 the ground was brightened with flowers and shrubs ancj 
 
18 Fort Pitt 
 
 ornamental plants, and made useful by the cultivation of 
 vegetables, necessary for the inmates of the fort. This was 
 christened the Artillery Gardens. (23) 
 
 But the great fortress erected for the maintenance of 
 English supremacy proved to be unnecessary. Long before 
 it was completed French arms everywhere in America had 
 met with defeat at the hands of the English. The year 
 1759 had been a glorious one in English history. The 
 French had abandoned Ticonderoga on the approach of 
 General Amherst. The battle of Niagara had been fought 
 and won on July 24th by Sir William Johnson, the Colonial 
 Superintendent of Indian Affairs, the victory being so de- 
 cisive that the troops sent by General Stanwix from Fort 
 Pitt took possession of the French posts as far as Presqu' 
 Isle without resistance. (24) Finally General Wolfe had 
 climbed to the plains of Abraham and captured the fortress 
 of Quebec, In 1760 these victories were crowned by the 
 surrender of Montreal; and Detroit, and all other places in 
 Canada were surrendered to General Amherst in Septem- 
 ber. The end had come to the French domination. 
 All their possessions in the North, as well as those east of 
 the Mississippi were in the hands of the victorious English. 
 A preliminary treaty of peace between France and Great 
 Britain, as well as with other powers, was signed on No- 
 vember 3, 1762. But a definitive treaty of peace yet remained 
 to be executed, and this was not finally accomplished until 
 February 10, 1763, when a treaty was signed at Paris form- 
 ally ceding the conquered territories to Great Britain. 
 
 Fort Pitt, however, was still necessary as a protection 
 against the Indians. The transfer from the French to the 
 English of the posts between the Great Lakes and the Ohio 
 led to a war with the Indian tribes of which the master 
 spirit was Pontiac, the great chief of the Ottawas. A 
 coalition of the Indian tribes from the Allegheny and Ohio 
 rivers to the Great Lakes was formed, led by Pontiac, and by 
 Kiyasuta at the head of the Senecas, Delawares and Shaw- 
 anese. It is generally known as Pontiac's War, but along the 
 Ohio border it was called the Kiyasuta and Pontiac 
 War. (25) 
 
 The design of the Indians was to drive the English 
 from all the Western country. So sudden were the move- 
 
/O^/^^^^^'^^^^— 
 
Fort Pitt 19 
 
 ments of the Indians and so vigorous their attacks, that in 
 a short time they had captured eight widely scattered forts 
 and massacred the garrisons. Only Detroit, Niagara, Fort 
 Pitt and Ligonier remained in the hands of the English, and 
 these were all besieged. During the latter part of May 
 the Indians began murdering settlers in the neighborhood 
 of Fort Pitt and even soldiers who tarried outside of the 
 fort. On the 30th the matter had become so threatening 
 that the inhabitants of the town were ordered into the fort, 
 and in the next few days all the houses in the town were 
 pulled down or burned. 
 
 Now the siege commenced in earnest. Colonel Bouquet 
 then in command at Philadelphia, was early in the spring 
 ordered by General Amherst to collect a force and march 
 to the relief of Fort Pitt. (26) After being engaged by 
 the Indians at Bushy Run, whom he defeated decisively, 
 he reached Fort Pitt on August 10th and raised the 
 siege. (27) The Indians were dismayed at the terrible 
 punishment received at Bushy Run, and not only gave up 
 their designs against Fort Pitt, but withdrew westward to 
 the Muskingum River. The next spring, hov/ever, having 
 recovered from their fright, they again ravaged the fron- 
 tier, and a new expedition was planned to be sent against 
 their towns on the Muskingum River. 
 
 The army began to assemble at Carlisle on August 5, 
 1764, and here Colonel Bouquet assumed the command. The 
 arrangements were completed on August 9th, when the new 
 army began its march, arriving at Fort Pitt on September 
 17th. (28) On October 3rd the army left Fort Pitt and 
 arrived at the Muskingum on the 17th, when a conference 
 was held with the Indians. The Indians were only too will- 
 ing to make peace, the prisoners in their hands were sur- 
 rendered, a treaty of peace was entered into, and this ended 
 the Kiyasuta and Pontiac War. The termination of this 
 war ended the usefulness of Fort Pitt, except as a watch 
 tower from which to observe the neighboring Indians, and 
 as a place to fit out expeditions against the Indians farther 
 away. 
 
 REFERENCES 
 
 1. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
 p. 80. 
 
20 Fort Pitt 
 
 2. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace. A Regimental Chronicle And LAst 
 Of Officers Of The 60th Or Kings Royal Rifle Corps, London, 
 1879, p. 74. 
 
 3. Colonial Records. Vol. VIII, p. 392. 
 
 4. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra, p. 74. 
 
 Calendar Of New York Colonial Manuscripts, New York, 1643- 
 1803, Albany, 1864, p. 501. 
 
 5. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra, p. 1-32. 
 
 6. I. N. Phelps Stokes. The Iconography Of Manhattan Island, 
 1498-1909, New York, MDCCCCXV, Vol. I, pp. 342-343. 
 
 7. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra> pp. 95-106. 
 
 8. Hazard's Register Of Pennsylvania,, Vol. VIII, pp. 136-137. 
 
 9. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, App. 
 pp. 139-142. 
 
 10. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. Ill, p. 693. 
 
 11. Ibid, p. 696. 
 
 12. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
 Boston, 1879, Vol. Ill, pp. 216-225. 
 
 13. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. VII, p. 422. 
 
 14. Colonial Records, Vol. VIII pp. 646-647, p. 739. 
 
 15. Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 331. 
 
 16. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography, Phil- 
 adelphia, 1880, Vol. Ill, pp. 350-351. 
 
 17. Pennsylvania Archives, Second Series, Vol. VII, p. 428. 
 
 18. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, 
 Vol. VI, p. 347. 
 
 19. Henry E. Schoolcraft. Information Respecting The History, Con- 
 dition And Prosperity Of The Indian Tribes Of The United 
 States, Philadelphia, 1853, Part, III, pp. 336-339. 
 
 20. Rev. David Jones. A Journal Of Two Visits Made To Some Na- 
 tions Of Indians On The West Side Of The River Ohio, In The 
 Years 1772 And 1773, New York, 1865_, p. 20. 
 
 21. H. H. Brackenridge. Gazette Publications, Carlisle, 1806, p. 11. 
 
 22. The Olden Time. Supra 1848, Vol. II, p. 48. 
 
 23. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine's Correspondence, Madi- 
 son, Wis., 1882, p. 171. 
 
 H. H. Brackenridge. Supra, p. 12. 
 
 24. George Bancroft. Supra, p. 12 
 
 25. Neville B. Craig. Supra, p. 90. 
 
 A. W. Patterson. History Of The Backwoods, Pittsburgh, 1843, 
 p. 128. 
 
 26. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography Supra, 
 p. 132. 
 
 27. Historical Account Of Bouquet's Expedition Against The Ohio 
 Indians, Cincinnati, 0, pp. 16-26. 
 
 28. Ibid, p. 35. 
 
Fort Pitt 21 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 The Town Grows as the Fort Declines. 
 
 The town, which was located east of the fort, was soon 
 rebuilt after the termination of the Kiyasuta and Pontiac 
 War and grew in importance. Formerly nearly all the 
 houses were located along the Monongahela River, only a 
 few near the fort, in what was known as the lower town 
 standing away from that river and in the direction of the 
 Allegheny. The upper town was farther up the Mononga- 
 hela River and extended to the location of Market Street. 
 (1) On the rebuilding of the town the houses were mainly 
 erected in what had been the upper town, which now began 
 near the location of Ferry Street. There were as yet no 
 streets, and the only road was the one which came from the 
 East, and led to the main entrance of the fort. From this 
 a few paths diverged to the Monongahela River and to the 
 houses standing there and at the other points. And now, 
 in 1765, Colonel John Campbell, by direction of the com- 
 mander at Fort Pitt, prepared a plan of that part of the 
 territory which lay between Water Street and Second 
 Street, now Second Avenue, and Ferry and Market streets, 
 comprising four blocks; and this was the town of Pitts- 
 burgh. (2) 
 
 More traders settled in the town; the population in- 
 creased, trade with the Indians grew in volume, but other- 
 wise the only events of moment were the conferences held 
 with the Indians who were always willing to attend, know- 
 ing that food and drink would be served in abundance, and 
 that they would be supplied with such necessaries as am- 
 munition and blankets. The most important of these was 
 the great conference which began on April 26, 1768, with 
 the Six Nations, the Delawares, Shawanese, Munseys, Mohi- 
 cans and other tribes (3) who had complained of the mur- 
 der of several of their people by the whites, and about their 
 encroachments on the Indian lands, particularly on those 
 along the Monongahela and Youghiogheny rivers. The In- 
 dians attending this conference are said to have numbered 
 eleven hundred. (4) 
 
 The title to all the lands in Western Pennsylvania, in- 
 
22 Fort Pitt 
 
 eluding those about Fort Pitt, was still in the Indians, the 
 possession of the numerous occupants being by sufference 
 of the proprietaries or by permission of the military author- 
 ities. That it was true that the whites were encroaching 
 on the Indian lands, and that the Indians had cause for 
 their complaints is evident from the fact that the Pennsyl- 
 vania Council on February 3, 1768, enacted a law providing 
 the death penalty for persons settling on lands owned by 
 the Indians. (5) But nothing was done under this law ex- 
 cept to issue a proclamation notifying the intruders to 
 remove, which they refused to do. The conference con- 
 tinued until May 9th, but little was accomplished. It was 
 agreed that four deputies from the Indians, accompanied 
 by two white men, should go to the illegally settled lands 
 and warn the settlers to leave. The Indians, however, re- 
 fused to go and the conference ended in failure (6) and the 
 irritation between the Indians and the whites continued. 
 
 The desire for the acquisition of the Indian lands in 
 the Colonies was not confined to the people of Pennsylvania, 
 but was equally strong in New York and Virginia. A set- 
 tlement was eventually brought about by leading trading 
 companies, assisted by self-interested public men, (7) 
 among the latter being William Franklin, the Royal gov- 
 ernor of New Jersey, Governor Sir Henry Moore of New 
 York, and General Thomas Gage, the commander in chief 
 of the British forces in North America, all of whom con- 
 nected themselves with a land company formed to acquire 
 some of these very lands after the Indians had surrendered 
 their title, and expected to profit largely thereby. Sir 
 William Johnson is also said to have become interested in 
 this company. The matter of the acquisition of the Indian 
 lands was brought before the British cabinet, and in Jan- 
 uary, 1768, the Earl of Shelburne, the Secretary of State, 
 authorized Sir William Johnson to adjust the boundary 
 with the Six Nations. Johnson soon arranged for a con- 
 gress with the Indians to convene at Fort Stanwix, now 
 Rome, New York. On October 24th thirty-two hundred In- 
 dians had gathered and with the commissioners of the 
 interested Provinces, including Lieutenant Governor Penn 
 of Pennsylvania, in attendance, the first session was held. 
 
 Sir William Johnson had the confidence of the Indians 
 
Fort Pitt 23 
 
 and easily persuaded them to concede the demands of the 
 whites, and the sessions ended on November 1st. And for 
 a sum of money equal to about ten thousand dollars, and 
 such goods as were necessary to the Indians, or for which 
 their untutored hearts yearned, they conveyed enormous 
 tracts of land to Pennsylvania, Virginia and New York. 
 The deed to Pennsylvania was for about one-third of the 
 land in the Province, the western portion of the grant, in- 
 cluding all the territory south of the Ohio River and east 
 of the Allegheny, and comprising the southern portion of 
 Allegheny County, all of Washington, Greene, Fayette, 
 Westmoreland, Somerset and Cambria counties, and por- 
 tions of at least a dozen other counties, extending all the 
 way to the northeastern boundary of the state. To Vir- 
 ginia the Indians granted a still larger tract, including most 
 of the present state of Kentucky, and that to New York 
 was also enormous in extent. (8) 
 
 Thomas Penn and Richard Penn, the proprietaries of 
 Pennsylvania, were now prepared to place portions of their 
 newly acquired lands in the market for sale. All of West- 
 ern Pennsylvania was in Cumberland County, and the first 
 step taken by the Penns was on March 27, 1769, when they 
 caused a survey to be made of a tract of land in that 
 county to be called the manor of Pittsburgh, containing 
 fifty-seven hundred sixty-six acres, which included Fort 
 Pitt and the town of Pittsburgh, and much of the present 
 city, as well as a still larger area south of the Monongahela 
 River. This was patented on May 19, 1769. 
 
 In June, 1769, panic seized the people of Pittsburgh. 
 It was feared that an Indian uprising was imminent. In 
 the neighborhood of the town the Senecas had stolen up- 
 wards of a hundred and fifty horses, shot about two hun- 
 dred head of cattle, and murdered several settlers. The 
 prevalent opinion was that the Indian tribes had broken the 
 treaty of peace made with them the year before, and the 
 farms about the town were soon deserted. The Moravians 
 were a sect of German enthusiasts who believed themselves 
 called upon to preach the Gospel to the heathen 
 nations of all the world, and had penetrated the Western 
 wilds and risked torture and death in their efforts to 
 Christianize the Indians. The assistance which they rend- 
 
24 Fort Pitt 
 
 ered the Colonists of the middle Provinces during the 
 French War and in the time of Indian troubles, forms an 
 illuminating page in Colonial history. Since 1768 they had 
 conducted a mission on the upper Allegheny which was in 
 charge of David Zeisberger and Gottlieb Senseman. When 
 the excitement was at its height at Fort Pitt, the two mis- 
 sionaries appeared there for the purpose of obtaining sup- 
 plies for their people, and learned of the Indian outrages. 
 They knew the sentiments of the Indians toward the whites 
 better than the people at the fort and assured them that 
 they had nothing to fear as no general uprising of the In- 
 dians was contemplated. (9) The help which the Moravi- 
 ans gave General Forbes in keeping the Indians from join- 
 ing the French in 1758 had been invaluable, and was well 
 known at Fort Pitt, where also a number of the Moravians 
 had visited and were highly respected, and the assurance 
 given by Zeisberger and Senseman stayed the panic and 
 calmed the fears of the frontiersman. 
 
 The next year the mission on the Allegheny River was 
 removed to Beaver Creek, the congregation leaving on April 
 17th in fifteen canoes, reaching Fort Pitt three days later. 
 Zeisberger's biographer refers thus to the Indian converts 
 and the impression made by them at Fort Pitt: "When this 
 post still bore the name of Fort Duquesne, and French 
 priests were as active as French soldiers, it had often been 
 visited by baptized Indians. But now, for the first time 
 appeared a company of Protestant converts. It was a novel 
 sight. Traders and the garrison thronged the camp, and 
 beheld with astonishment the problem solved, that savages 
 can be changed into consistent Christians." (10) 
 
 Ever since the first settlers came into the neighborhood 
 of Pittsburgh, there had been scarcely any semblance of 
 enforcement of law. Carlisle, the county seat of Cumber- 
 land County, was two hundred miles away and when Bed- 
 ford County was erected in 1771, there was no relief, 
 the county seat of that county being still too distant to 
 induce the settlers on the Western border to attempt to 
 secure their rights or redress their wrongs by lawful 
 methods. They now agitated for a new western county, 
 with a centrally located county seat, and on February 26, 
 1773, their desires were attained and Westmoreland County 
 
Fort Pitt 25 
 
 erected, which embraced all of the Province west of "Laurel 
 Hill." The county seat was fixed at Hannastown, located 
 on the Forbes road about three miles northeast of the pres- 
 ent borough of Greensburg, and thirty-five miles from 
 Pittsburgh. Three years before its erection as the county 
 seat, Robert Hanna had purchased from the Penns the land 
 of which Hannastown was part, had built a tavern, laid out 
 a village site and thereafter had the place established as 
 the county seat. (11) The houses were all built of logs and 
 never exceeded thirty in number. 
 
 Few travelers visiting or passing through Pittsburgh 
 have left written records of their impressions while there. 
 In addition to a few missionaries who were sent out by 
 religious organizations in the East to attempt the con- 
 version of the Indians, or to preach the Gospel to the set- 
 tlers, there was only one lay traveler who wrote out his ex- 
 periences while in the place, of which there is in existence 
 a published record. Most of the early travelers have left 
 only meager details of their visits to "Fort Pitt," for by 
 that name they all designated the place. The notes of these 
 sojourners in Pittsburgh have an historic interest as they 
 indicate the various steps in the progress of the place. But 
 the reader cannot help wondering at the unanimity with 
 which, where, they refer to the houses at all, they place the 
 number so much below the figure given in Colonel Bouquet's 
 census of 1761. They were surely not all mistaken in this 
 respect, and the only manner in which this can be explained, 
 is that when Bouquet gave the number of the houses as 162, 
 he meant rooms, the trading houses, which comprised prac- 
 tically all of the town, generally having quite a number of 
 rooms, and a room being considered sufficient for a family. 
 
 The earliest account is that written by John Heckeweld- 
 er, the Moravian missionary, and is the story of a visit made 
 by him in 1762. He was then nineteen years of age, and was 
 accompanying Christian Frederick Post as assistant, who 
 was on a mission to the Moravian Indian towns on the Tus- 
 carawas River. On the evening of April 1st, the two trav- 
 elers reached Fort Pitt, and Heckewelder relates that when 
 within seven or eight miles of the fort, they came upon 
 the field of Braddock's defeat. "A dreadful sight was pre- 
 sented to our eyes," he writes. "Skulls and bones of the 
 
26 Fort Pitt 
 
 unfortunate men slain here on the 9th of July, 1755, lay 
 scattered all around, and the sound of our horses' hoofs 
 continually striking against them, made dismal music, as, 
 with the Monongahela full in view, we rode over this memor- 
 able battleground." Continuing he said: "The only pri- 
 vate dwelling in the neighborhood of the fort was situated 
 at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela. It was 
 owned by two traders, Messrs. Davenport and McKinney, 
 who received us in a very friendly and hospitable manner. 
 Within the fort also we met with kind well-wishers, and the 
 treatment we received at the hands of the gallant com- 
 mander, Col. Bouquet, and all his officers, calls for my last- 
 ing gratitude." (12) 
 
 Mathew Clarkson of Philadelphia, who subsequently 
 became prominent in the public life of that city, being 
 mayor of the city from 1792 to 1795, was at Fort Pitt in 
 1766, At this time he was connected with one of the most 
 noted commercial houses in Philadelphia, which carried on 
 the fur trade with the Indian tribes of the Mississippi Val- 
 ley, having their headquarters at Fort Chartres. He made 
 the western tour for his employers, and while on his way 
 to Fort Chartres stopped at Fort Pitt, arriving on August 
 18th. (13) His diary is disjointed, but throws consider- 
 able light on many phases of the life of the place of which 
 little is known today. Immediately upon his arrival he de- 
 livered the letters which he had brought for Major William 
 Murray, the commander of the fort. The first entry after 
 he reached Pittsburgh reads: "Got to Fort Pitt just after 
 dark, was stowed away in a small crib, on blankets, in 
 company with fleas and bugs, and spent a night not the 
 most comfortable." On August 10th, he wrote: "Took a 
 walk to the ship-yards. Found four boats finished 
 and in the water, and three more on the stocks; 
 business going on briskly. Met with Major Murray, who 
 had been at the store (which must have been the store 
 established by General Moncton) to wait upon me with 
 an invitation to dine with him today. Was extremely 
 polite and obliging ; took me into the fort. — Dined with him 
 at the mess-room in company with the officers in the gar- 
 rison at this post. Major Murray offered me a room in the 
 barracks which I accepted of. Lodged this night in Mr. 
 
Fort Pitt 27 
 
 John Reid's room, the Commissary. 
 
 He tells of hearing "Mr. McCleggan preach to the sol- 
 diers in Erse — but little edified. He preaches alternately 
 one Sunday in that language, and the next in English." He 
 gives some information in regard to the manner in which 
 letters were received at and sent from the fort. "Sent let- 
 ters to forward by the Express, which sets off directly with 
 monthly returns. They are forwarded by soldiers to Ship- 
 pinsburg, where they are put in the Post Office, and for- 
 warded to Philadelphia. The returns are made up the 24th 
 of every month." He also notes the arrival at Fort Pitt of 
 the Rev. Charles Beatty and Rev. George Duffield, two 
 Presbyterian missionaries, "on a message among the In- 
 dians to preach the Gospel. Supped with them at the 
 mess." He then relates that he heard Mr. Duffield "preach 
 in the town a very judicious and alarming discourse." 
 
 The Rev. Charles Beatty, who had been at Fort Pitt 
 with General Forbes' army, has also written a journal of 
 the visit to Pittsburgh which he and Mr. Duffield made and 
 about which Mr. Clarkson wrote. They remained at the 
 place four days, and Mr. Beatty (14) tells of waiting on 
 the commander of the fort whom he calls "Captain" Mur- 
 ray, who received them politely and introduced them to the 
 Rev. Mr. McCleggan, the chaplain of the Forty-second Regi- 
 ment, part of which was in garrison there. Both mission- 
 aries slept in a room in the fort, and Mr. Beatty seems to 
 be very grateful because Mr. McCleggan, "with some other 
 gentlemen of the place," furnished them with "blankets to 
 sleep in, and some other necessaries, so that we fared as 
 well as we could expect." 
 
 On Sunday forenoon, at the invitation of Mr. McCleg- 
 gan, Mr. Beatty preached to the garrison, while Mr. Duffield 
 preached to the people "who live in some kind of a town 
 without the fort." 
 
 The journal most often quoted is that of George Wash- 
 ington who was in Pittsburgh in 1770, while on his way to 
 the Kanawha River district. On October 17th he arrived 
 at Fort Pitt. "We lodged in what is called a town," he 
 wrote, "distant about three hundred yards from the fort at 
 one Semple's, who keeps a very good house of public en- 
 tertainment. The houses are built of logs and ranged in 
 
28 Fort Pitt 
 
 streets, are on the Monongahela, and I suppose may be 
 about twenty in number, and inhabited by Indian traders. 
 The fort is built on the point between the rivers Allegheny 
 and Monongahela, but not so near the pitch of it as Fort 
 Duquesne stood. It is five sided and regular, two of which 
 near the land are of brick; the others stockade. A moat 
 encompasses it. The garrision consists of two companies 
 of Royal Irish, commanded by Captain Edmonstone." (15) 
 
 Another glimpse of the village and the fortification is 
 obtained from the diary of Rev. David Jones, already re- 
 ferred to, who was there on June 4, 1772. (16) "At this 
 time," he relates, "the fortification was remaining but some- 
 what impaired. Here are about eighty soldiers with one 
 commanding officer — East at about two hundred yards dis- 
 tant, by the Monongahela, there is a small town chiefly in- 
 habited by Indian traders, and some mechanics. The army 
 was without a chaplain, nor was the town supplied with a 
 minister. Part of the inhabitants are agreeable and worthy 
 of regard, while others are lamentably dissolute in their 
 morals." 
 
 Two months after the visit of Mr. Jones, two other 
 ministers of the Gospel came to Pittsburgh, the Rev. David 
 McClure, and the Rev. Levi Frisbee, both Presbyterians. 
 Mr. McClure kept a diary and from this an extended view 
 and a most vivid picture may be obtained of life in early 
 Pittsburgh. Mr. McClure made Pittsburgh his headquarters, 
 preaching to the settlers in many places in Western Penn- 
 sylvania, as well as to the Indians on the Muskingum, 
 remaining in the country for eight or nine months. 
 He arrived in Pittsburgh on August 19, 1772, and thus de- 
 scribes his entry into the village. (17) 
 
 "Arrived at this place about sunset. The first object 
 of our attention was a number of poor drunken Indians, 
 staggering and yelling through the village. It is the head- 
 quarters of Indian traders, and the resort of Indians of 
 different and distant tribes, who come to exchange their 
 peltry and furs for rum, blankets and ammunition, etc." 
 He describes the fort as "a handsome and strong fortifica- 
 tion. In it are barracks, and comfortable houses, one large, 
 brick house is called the Governor's house. It stands at the 
 point of land formed by the junction of the Allegheny and 
 Monongahela rivers, on an extensive plain. Adjoining are 
 
Fort Pitt 29 
 
 good orchards and gardens. The village is about one-fourth 
 of a mile from the fort and consists of about forty dwelling 
 houses built of hewed logs and stands on the bank of the 
 Monongahela." 
 
 His first Sunday morning he spent in preaching in the 
 fort to the garrison at the request of Major Hamilton. 
 The greater part of the soldiers had lately arrived from 
 Fort Chartres, and had not heard a sermon for four years. 
 The men, about two hundred in number, were paraded 
 under arms during the divine service. His companion, Mr. 
 Frisbee, preached in the village in the afternoon. He com- 
 ments on the character of the inhabitants, and says they 
 are very dissipated. "They seem to feel themselves beyond 
 the arm of the government, and freed from the 
 restraining influence of religion. It is the resort of Indian 
 traders ; and many here have escaped from justice and from 
 creditors, in the old settlements. The greater part of the 
 Indian traders keep a squaw, and some of them a white 
 woman as a temporary wife." 
 
 The reception of the missionaries by the officers of the 
 fort was most friendly. On the eve of his departure for 
 the Indian country, having passed the evening with Major 
 Edmonstone, the commander of Fort Pitt, and the other 
 officers of the garrison, Mr. McClure wrote: "The Major po- 
 litely waited on me at the gate and at parting said, 'you are 
 engaged in a benevolent work and you have m^y best wishes 
 for your success. I am a Christian and therefore please to 
 command me in anything in which I may serve you.' " 
 
 In the entry of Oct. 19th he tells of the contem- 
 plated abandonment of Fort Pitt. "In consequence of 
 orders from General Gage, the garrison are preparing to 
 depart. They have begun to destroy the fortress. This is 
 a matter of surprise and grief to the people around who 
 have requested that the fortress may stand as a place of 
 security to them in case of an Indian invasion. I asked one 
 of the officers, the reason of their destroying the fort, so 
 necessary to the safety of the frontier. He replied, 'The 
 Americans will not submit to the British Parliament and 
 they may now defend themselves.' " 
 
 Shortly before he left the place finally, on November 
 19th, he made this entry in his journal, "Waited on Major 
 
30 Fort Pitt 
 
 Edmonstone, who remained in the dismantled fort, expect- 
 ing to leave it in a few days. — The Major appears dis- 
 pleased with the manners of the people of this country. In 
 conversation on the parade, he told me he had traveled 
 through England, Ireland, France, Germany and Holland, 
 but never knew what mankind were, till he came to that 
 sta tion.'' 
 
 REFERENCES: 
 
 1. William M. Darlington. In Centennial Memorial Of The Plant- 
 ing And Growth Of Presbyterianism In Western Pennsylvania 
 And Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 267. 
 
 2. The Navigator, Pittsburgh, 1808, p. 35. 
 William M. Darlington, Supra, pp. 267-268. 
 
 3. Colonial Records, Vol. IX, pp. 514-543. 
 
 4. Edmund De Schweintiz. The Life And Times Of David Zeis- 
 berger, Philadelphia, 1870, p. 337. 
 
 5. Neville B. Craig, Supra, pp. 99-100. 
 
 6. Colonial Records, Supra, pp. 514-543. 
 
 7. William L. Stone. The Life And Times Of Sir William John- 
 son Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. II, pp. 303-309. 
 
 8. William L, Stone. Ibid. 
 
 George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
 Boston, 1879, Vol. IV, pp. 127-128. 
 
 9. George Henry Loskiel. History Of The Mission Of The United 
 Brethern A^nong The Indians In North America, London, 1794, 
 Part 3, pp. 48-49. 
 
 10. Edmund DeSchweinitz. Supra, pp. 359-360. 
 
 11. Charles A. Hanna. The Wilderness Trail, New York, 1911, Vol. 
 II, p. 287. 
 
 12. Rev. Edward Ronthaler. Life Of John Heckewelder, Philadel- 
 phia, 1847, pp. 43-45. 
 
 13. Henry A. Schoolcroft, LL. D. Information Respecting The 
 History, Condition And Prosperity Of The Indian Tribes Of The 
 United States, Philadelphia, 1856, Part, IV, pp. 268-274. 
 
 14. Charles Beatty, A. M. The Journal Of A Two Months Tour, 
 London, MDCCLXVIII, pp. 28-34. 
 
 15. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 418. 
 
 16. Rev. David Jones. A Journal Of Two Visits Made To Some 
 Nations Of Indians On The West Side Of The River Ohio, In The 
 Years 1772 And 1773, New York, 1865, p. 20. 
 
 17. Franklin B. Dexter, M. A. Diary Of David McClure, Doctor Of 
 Divinity, New York, 1899, pp. 45-105. 
 
Fort Pitt 31 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 In Virginia. 
 
 The English had now been at peace with the Indians 
 for eight years. But the Indians were suspicious of them 
 on account of the continued maintenance of Fort Pitt. They 
 feared that the troops kept there and at the fortified places 
 on the Wabash, the Illinois and the Mississippi were in- 
 tended at some future time to be used against them. The 
 forts were regarded as useless by the English and in order 
 to conciliate the Indians, in the autumn of 1772, so it is 
 alleged by several authorities. General Gage ordered their 
 abandonment. (1) 
 
 It is quite possible, however, that the remark made to 
 Mr. McClure by the English officer about the abandonment 
 of Fort Pitt, had more than a foundation in fact. A revolu- 
 tionary spirit was already abroad, not only in the East, but 
 on the border as well. Ever since the passage of the Stamp 
 Act by Parliament in 1765, in pursuance of which documents 
 of all kinds were to be taxed, the American Colonists had 
 been irritated against England. They refused absolutely to 
 obey the law and declined to buy English goods. Nor did the 
 repeal of the obnoxious measure two years later allay the 
 popular resentment, especially as under a new act duties 
 were levied on importations; and the Americans again re- 
 fused to buy from England. General Gage in 1770, had 
 sent troops to Boston and the "Boston Massacre" resulted; 
 and in Pittsburgh the New England spirit may have be- 
 come evident. That the population was not any too friendly 
 to the English is apparent from the remarks of Major 
 Edmonstone to Mr. McClure, already quoted. It may have 
 been quite true that Fort Pitt and the other forts were 
 ordered dismantled as a precautionary measure, so that in 
 case of an uprising the Colonists might not gain the ad- 
 vantage of the possession of the forts and the military sup- 
 plies kept there. Also the conciliation of the Indians may 
 have been part of the plan of the English to win them to 
 their side in case the Americans rose in arms against them. 
 
 On October 10, 1772, Major Edmonstone, the com- 
 mander of Fort Pitt, sold the buildings and materials of the 
 
32 Fort Pitt 
 
 fort consisting of picketts, bricks, stone, timber and iron in 
 the building and walls of the fort and in the redoubts to be 
 demolished, for the sum of fifty pounds, New York cur- 
 rency, to William Thompson and Alexander Ross. (2) 
 Thereupon the fort was abandoned, but a corporal and three 
 men were left to care for the boats and batteaux intended to 
 keep up communication with the Illinois country. 
 
 The people of Pittsburgh protested and petitioned the 
 Governor of the state to intervene and prevail on General 
 Gage to restore the fort. Governor Penn, however, by a 
 message of January 29, 1773, recommended to the Assembly 
 that a small garrison be maintained at Fort Pitt by the 
 Province, (3) and in a communication dated February 5, 
 1773, suggested to the Assembly that a garrison of twenty- 
 five or thirty men might be placed there by the Prov- 
 ince. (4) The Assembly, however, on February 19, 1773, 
 declined to comply with Governor Penn's request, giving 
 as a reason that it might offend the Indians with whom the 
 country was at peace. (5) 
 
 But while Fort Pitt was abandoned it was not fully 
 destroyed and continued to be occupied in some way for a 
 score of years afterward. Upon its evacuation by the Eng- 
 lish it was taken possession of by Major Edward Ward, a 
 half brother of George Croghan, the Indian trader, and 
 Deputy Superintendent of Indian Affairs to Sir William 
 Johnson. He was the same Ward who, while Ensign, had 
 been compelled to surrender to the French the uncompleted 
 fort at the forks of the Monongahela and Allegheny rivers. 
 
 It is not quite clear by what right Ward took possession 
 of Fort Pitt, but it was perhaps done as agent of or by per- 
 mission of Ross and Thompson, to whom Major Edmon- 
 stone had sold the materials and buildings of the fort. That 
 this is probably the explanation of Ward's possession, is in- 
 dicated from the fact that a petition was presented to the 
 Virginia Convention on December 18, 1775, by Ross and 
 Thompson, in which they asserted that they were in posses- 
 sion of Fort Pitt from the time of its abandonment by 
 Major Edmonstone until it was occupied by Dr. 
 Connolly on January 1, 1774, (6) Ward's occupation of the 
 fort ending at that time, and asking to be compensated for 
 the use of the fort by Connolly. Also Ross had been the 
 
Fort Pitt 33 
 
 agent in Pittsburgh for the contractor for victualling his 
 Majesty's forces in North America, and was besides the 
 possessor of the title to several tracts of land located about 
 the fort, the grant of which had been made to him directly 
 or indirectly by Major Edmonstone prior to the evacua- 
 tion of Fort Pitt by the British. (7) Hence he was strongly 
 suspected of being disloyal to the American cause, and was 
 in fact afterward attainted of treason by Act of the Penn- 
 sylvania Assembly. The possession of the property at the 
 fort may therefore have been turned over to Ward whose 
 loyalty was unquestioned, in order to avoid being confis- 
 cated. 
 
 In 1774 the long pending controversy between Virginia 
 and Pennsylvania in regard to the boundary between 
 the Colony of Virginia and the Province of Pennsylvania 
 reached its climax in Pittsburgh. Lord Dunmore had been 
 Royal governor of New York from October 18, 1770, to 
 July 8, 1771, when he was transferred as Royal governor to 
 Virginia. (B) Bancroft paints a disagreeable picture of 
 Dunmore. "No Royal governor showed more rapacity for 
 power. During his short career in New York he had ac- 
 quired fifty thousand acres of land. Scarcely had he set- 
 tled in Virginia when his greed for land caused him to be- 
 come a partner in two immense purchases of land from the 
 Indians in Southern Illinois." (9) From the beginning he 
 had cast longing eyes on the growing settlements in West- 
 ern Pennsylvania, and early in 1773 he appeared at Fort Pitt 
 (10) where he met Dr. John Connolly, a Pennsylvanian by 
 birth, well connected, a nephew of George Croghan, 
 and the husband of the daughter of Samuel Semple 
 who kept the tavern where Washington stopped in 
 1770. That Connolly made a most favorable impression on 
 Washington who met him on this visit, is evident from the 
 entry which he made in his journal on that occasion. 
 Washington had invited Connolly, together with Crog- 
 han, and the officers of the fort to dine with him 
 at Semple's tavern and he wrote of him that he was "a very 
 sensible, intelligent man, who had traveled a good deal over 
 this Western country." He quotes Connolly's views at 
 length on the lands, climate and prospects of the country 
 southwest of Pittsburgh. (11) To Connolly, Dunmore un- 
 
34 Fort Pitt 
 
 folded his plans for extending the Virginia dominion. The 
 wiley Earl claimed that Pittsburgh and the surrounding 
 country was part of Virginia, being embraced in West 
 Augusta, as that part of Augusta County lying west of the 
 Alleghany Mountains was called. (12) He worked on Con- 
 nolly's ambition and perhaps his cupidity, and easily per- 
 suaded him to become the instrument for carrying out his 
 plans. 
 
 Early in January, 1774, Connolly appeared in Pitts- 
 burgh bearing a commission as captain from Dunmore, and 
 claimed authority to establish a new Virginia county which 
 was to include Pittsburgh. His bombastic proclamation was 
 dated January 1, 1774, and was posted in the village on Jan- 
 uary 6th. The proclamation called upon all persons in 
 Pittsburgh to assemble as militia on January 25th. (13) 
 The day before they were to gather, however, Connolly was 
 arrested in Pittsburgh (14) by order of Arthur St. Clair, 
 later a general in the Eevolutionary War, who was then 
 a Justice of the County Court, Prothonotary, Register and 
 Recorder of Westmoreland County, and committed to jail 
 at Hannastown. But Connolly's arrest did not prevent the 
 assembling of some of the people as militia. On February 
 2nd St. Clair wrote to Governor Denny of Pennsylvania, (15) 
 'T was in hopes that the sending him (Connolly) out of the 
 way would put an end to it altogether, but I was mistaken. 
 About eighty persons in arms assembled themselves, 
 chiefly from Mr. Croghan's neighborhood and the country 
 west and below the Monongahela, and after parading through 
 the town and making a kind of feu de joy, proceeded to the 
 fort, where a cask of rum was produced on the parade, and 
 the head knocked out. This was a very effectual way of 
 recruiting." 
 
 Connolly, however, was soon released on his own recog- 
 nizance. (16) In a few days he returned to Pittsburgh 
 and from there went to Redstone where he collected a body 
 of armed men, and then proceeded to Staunton, Virginia, 
 where he was sworn in as a justice of the peace of Augusta 
 County. Armed with civil authority, as well as the military 
 power which he already possessed, he reappeared in Pitts- 
 burgh on March 28th, (17) with a body of militia and took 
 possession of Fort Pitt, changing the name of both the fort 
 
Lord Dunmcre 
 
 The Ducking Stool. 
 
Fort Pitt 35 
 
 and the village to Fort Dunmore. 
 
 He reconstructed and refurnished the fort, using it 
 principally as a jail or lockup for the imprisonment of those 
 who opposed him. (18) That many of the settlers sup- 
 ported Connolly's contentions is beyond question. Bancroft 
 says, (19) "The western people, especially the emigrants 
 from Maryland and Virginia, spurned the meek tenets of 
 the Quakers, and inclined to the usurpation," — and with 
 this powerful support Connolly carried through his meas- 
 ures with a high hand, appointing civil and military officers, 
 levying taxes on peltries (20), arresting and imprisoning 
 those who refused to obey his orders. Jurisdiction was now 
 opposed to jurisdiction, arrests were followed by counter 
 arrests; and the Western country became a scene of con- 
 fusion. 
 
 Since February, 1774, there had been a number of In- 
 dian outrages in the Western country, which were met with 
 terrible reprisals by the whites. The Indians were for war. 
 Dunmore called out the militia of Western Virginia and 
 proceeded to Pittsburgh where he collected his forces, and 
 in September, 1774, with about twelve hundred men, raised 
 in the Northwestern counties of Virginia and about Pitts- 
 burgh, he descended the Ohio River. When he reached the 
 Scioto River, however, the fighting was over, General Andrew 
 Lewis, the commander of the militia of Southwestern Vir- 
 ginia, having defeated the Indians at Point Pleasant. (21) 
 This ended the war, and Dunmore, foreseeing the approach- 
 ing Revolution, arranged such terms of peace with the In- 
 dians, that they subsequently became the allies of the 
 British. (22) Connolly, who had been more or less occu- 
 pied with this war, now returned to Pittsburgh. 
 
 At Hannastown the Pennsylvania adherents were still 
 attempting to enforce the laws of that state, and on Decem- 
 ber 12, 1774, Dunmore issued a writ in the name of his 
 Brittanic Majesty, adjourning the county court of Augusta 
 County from Staunton, the county seat of Augusta County, 
 to Fort Dunmore and the first term was held there on Feb- 
 ruary 21, 1775. (23) The Virginia laws provided for the 
 ducking stool as a punishment for evilly disposed women, 
 and one of the first acts of the court at Fort Dunmore was 
 at the session held on February 22nd^ at whiqli Connolly 
 
36 Fort Pitt 
 
 presided, to instruct the sheriff to employ a workman to 
 ' build a ducking stool at the confluence of the Ohio and Mo- 
 nongahela rivers. (24) 
 
 But'Dunmore's power was rapidly drawing to a close. 
 The Revolution was beginning, the battle of Lexington was 
 fought on April 19, 1775. The Second Continental Congress 
 met in Philadelphia on May 10th. The Virginia Convention 
 which convened at Richmond on March 20, 1775, to appoint 
 delegates to the new Continental Congress, had taken meas- 
 ures for enrolling companies of volunteers in each county, 
 and before daylight on June 8th, Lord Dunmore and his 
 family fled from Williamsburg, and took refuge on board 
 the Fowey, an English man of war, lying at Yorktown. (25) 
 On July 25th, Connolly left Fort Dunmore (26) to join Dun- 
 more. He never returned to Pittsburgh, his rule was at an 
 end, and like his employer, he espoused the British cause. 
 
 The leaders in the newly formed government viewed 
 with alarm the troubles existing between Virginia and Penn- 
 sylvania, and on the day that Connolly shook the dust of 
 Pittsburgh from his feet, the delegates in Congress from 
 both Virginia and Pennsylvania published an address to the 
 "Inhabitants of Pennsylvania and Virginia on the west side 
 of Laurel Hill," whom they designated "Friends and Country- 
 men." The address was signed by Patrick Henry, Richard 
 Henry Lee, Benjamin Harrison and Thomas Jefferson of 
 Virginia, and by John Dickenson, George Ross, Benjamin 
 Franklin, James Wilson and Charles Humphries of Pennsyl- 
 vania. It referred to the unhappy condition existing west 
 of Laurel Hill and begged the inhabitants to terminate their 
 differences, dismiss their armed men, release their prison- 
 ers, and suggested that until the dispute was decided, every 
 person should be permitted to retain his possessions unmo- 
 lested. (27) 
 
 But the danger of civil war in Western Pennsylvania 
 between the adherents of that Province and those of Vir- 
 ginia was not yet over. The claim of Virginia to the dis- 
 puted land was not surrendered at Dunmore's flight, and 
 although she had driven him from Williamsburg and was 
 intensely loyal to the Revolution and was standing shoulder 
 to shoulder with Pennsylvania in the movement, she did 
 not loosen her grip on the western end of that Province. The 
 
Fort Pitt 37 
 
 first Provincial Convention organized by the Revolutionary- 
 Virginians met at Williamsburg on August 1, 1774, and 
 again at Richmond on March 20, 1775, Williamsburg being 
 no longer a safe place for treason mongers. (28) At the 
 session held in July, 1775, it appointed a Committee of 
 Safety. This body was given authority to commission offi- 
 cers, direct military movements, issue warrants on the Treas- 
 ury, and all commanding officers were directed to pay strict 
 obedience to its orders. (29) The Committee of Safety com- 
 missioned John Neville of Frederick County, captain of 
 militia, and on August 7th ordered him to proceed with his 
 company of one hundred men to Fort Pitt and take posses- 
 sion. Captain Neville was probably selected for this service 
 because he had been a resident of Pittsburgh for some time, 
 having made large entries of land on Chariters Creek under 
 the Virginia laws, and having been elected to the Virginia 
 Provincial Convention from Augusta County in the previous 
 year, but being prevented from attending on account of 
 illness. 
 
 During all of this time of turmoil and controversy, the 
 adherents of both Virginia and Pennsylvania were loyal to 
 their oppressed brethren in Massachusetts. On May 16, 
 
 1775, only four weeks after the battle of Lexington, meet- 
 ings were held by the Virginians at Pittsburgh, (30) and by 
 the Pennsylvanians at Hannastown, (31) at which resolu- 
 tions were adopted unanimously approving the New England 
 movement; and steps were taken to organize, arm and 
 discipline the militia in order to meet whatever might betide. 
 The better to carry out their designs the Hannastown meet- 
 ing organizd themselves into the Association of Westmore- 
 land County. At the same time the meeting proclaimed their 
 loyalty to King George the Third. 
 
 On July 12th, Congress created three Indian depart- 
 ments of which one was to be west of the Alleghany Moun- 
 tains, called the Middle Department. (32) Richard Butler 
 was made agent of this department with headquarters at 
 Pittsburgh, and continued as such until April 10, 
 
 1776, when he resigned in order to assist in the 
 organization of a regiment, which became the Eighth 
 Regiment of the Pennsylvania Line, and of which he was 
 commissioned major by Congress on July 20, 1776. He was 
 
§8 Fort Pitt 
 
 succeeded as Indian agent by George Morgan. Shortly- 
 after Morgan assumed the duties of the office there were 
 indications of Indian troubles. Consequently a hundred men 
 were raised in Westmoreland County for this service if 
 needed, and in September, Congress issued an order as- 
 sembling all the militia that could be spared, for the defense 
 of Fort Pitt. (33) Powder, lead and ten thousand flints 
 were forwarded to Morgan, but the Indians remained quiet 
 and neither the militia, the powder, lead or flints were 
 needed. 
 
 The Virginia Provincial convention which convened at 
 Richmond on July 17, 1775, divided Virginia into sixteen 
 districts. West Augusta being created one of the districts, 
 (34) and a law enacted in October, 1776, defined the 
 boundary between Augusta County and the District of West 
 Augusta. On November 8, 1776, the legislature divided the 
 district of West Augusta into three counties, Ohio, Monon- 
 galia and Yohogania, nearly all of the last, which included 
 Pittsburgh, and much of the other two being composed of 
 Pennsylvania territory. (35) Delegates were elected to 
 the Virginia Provincial Council, and after the passage of 
 the Act of 1776, senators and delegates to the legislature, 
 and all the other officers in the district were elected or ap- 
 pointed under the Virginia laws. Troops were raised for 
 the Revolutionary armies, the Sixth Virginia Regiment 
 being attached to Muhlenberg's brigade. (36) The Thir- 
 teenth Regiment was known as the West Augusta Regi- 
 ment. (37) The Seventh Virginia Regiment was the first 
 considerable body of men raised in the Monongahela coun- 
 try, (38) Justice's courts were now held regularly, those of 
 Yohogania County being held in the upper story of a log 
 jail and court house 24x16 feet, on the farm of Andrew 
 Heath on the Monongahela River, nearly opposite and a lit- 
 tle above West Elizabeth, and at or near the location of 
 Elizabeth. (39) Virginia granted lands to settlers, taxes 
 were levied but frequently not paid, the disputed jurisdic- 
 tion between Pennsylvania and Virginia giving to many of 
 the disaffected a chance to shirk their payment as well as 
 avoid military service. (40) Roads, mills, taverns and 
 ferries were authorized, and the Pennsylvanians obeyed the 
 Virginia laws and applied to the courts of that Colony or 
 
Fort Pitt 3d 
 
 state, and brought and defended suits there when necessary. 
 
 On December 18, 1776, Virginia, through its legislature, 
 proposed a certain line as the boundary between the two 
 states and suggested that a joint commission be appointed 
 to agree upon a boundary line to which proposal Pennsyl- 
 vania refused to consent. On July 5, 1777, the Supreme 
 Executive Council of Pennsylvania made an effort to bring 
 about an agreement by sending a letter to the Virginia dele- 
 gates in Congress, proposing a settlement, but nothing came 
 of the matter. 
 
 On February 7, 1777, the Virginia Provincial Council 
 directed the raising in Yohogania County of a company of 
 militia to consist of a hundred men to garrison Fort Pitt 
 and relieve Captain Neville's company. Robert Campbell 
 was made captain of this company and commanded at the 
 fort (41) until the arrival of Brigadier General Edward 
 Hand on June 1st. 
 
 In the meantime Captain Neville had been ordered to 
 join the Eighth Virginia Regiment, known as the German 
 Regiment, so called because it was largely composed of 
 young men of German birth or extraction. It was organized 
 on December 1, 1775, by the Rev. Peter Muhlenberg, pastor 
 of the German Lutheran Church at Woodstock, and at least 
 one company, that of Captain Stinson, came from about 
 Pittsburgh. (42) Muhlenberg was made colonel, and the 
 regiment became historic, not only on account of its achieve- 
 ments in the Revolution, but also by reason of the glowing 
 verses of Thomas Buchannan Read. The poet's picture 
 is prescient of war. It was Sunday morning; the church 
 was crowded with worshippers from far and near. The 
 pastor was in his pulpit declaiming about the impending 
 conflict. 
 
 "When suddenly his mantle wide 
 His hands impatient flung aside, 
 And lo! he met their wondering eyes 
 Complete in all a warriors guise." 
 
 Outside before the open church door the trumpets were 
 calling to the men to enlist ; the drum and the fife were firing 
 them "with fiercer life," while overhead the church bell rang 
 out wildly, and the word that is spoke was, 
 
 "War! War! War! War!" 
 
4d Fort Pitt 
 
 Muhlenberg having been made brigadier general on 
 February 21, 1777, and the regiment afterwards also los- 
 ing the two colonels who had successively follov/ed him, 
 Neville became colonel on December 11, 1777. On Septem- 
 ber 14, 1778, the regiment was merged into the Fourth Vir- 
 ginia Regiment, of which Neville became colonel on June 1, 
 1778. (44) After the war Colonel Neville returned to 
 Pittsburgh and became one of its most prominent citizens. 
 
 It was only at Hannastown, the county seat of West- 
 moreland County, and in the contiguous country that the 
 Pennsylvania jurisdiction continued. After the April term 
 of 1776, however, no sessions of this court were held until 
 1778, (45) the Assembly of the state having on January 
 28, 1777, under the first constitution, provided for reorgan- 
 izing the courts, and the first term of the Westmoreland 
 County court began with the July, 1778, session. (46) 
 
 Westmoreland County was not behind the District 
 of West Augusta in raising troops, and as early as 
 May 24, 1775, in pursuance of the resolution adopted at 
 Hannastown on May 16th, the Associators of Westmore- 
 land County began organizing themselves into companies, 
 which were formed into a regiment of two battalions, the 
 First Battalion being commanded by John Proctor. Con- 
 gress having on May 26th resolved that the Colonies be put 
 into a state of defense, (47) the Pennsylvania Assembly on 
 June 30th (48) created the Council of Safety, delegated 
 with power to call the Associators into actual service. 
 Thereupon the Regiment of Westmoreland County Asso- 
 ciators was reorganized, and became part of the militia of 
 the state. The First Battalion was called to Philadelphia 
 in January, 1777, (49) and was later stationed in the West. A 
 flag had been adopted by this battalion which was one of 
 the first, if not the first. Rebel flag to appear in the Western 
 country, and was the first Colonial flag to be flaunted in 
 Pittsburgh in defiance of British authority. On its crimson 
 folds alongside of the cross of St. George, was a rattlesnake 
 with thirteen rattles, and the warning motto, "Don't tread 
 on me !" 
 
 The Eighth Regiment of the Pennsylvania Line was 
 another body of Western Pennsylvania troops, seven of the 
 eight companies being organized in Westmoreland County, 
 
Flag of the First Battalion of the Regiment of Westmoreland 
 County Associators 
 
 The letters J. P. I. B. W. C. P., are the initials of the words, "John 
 Proctor's First Battalion, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania." 
 
Fort Pitt 41 
 
 and seeing service in the East and at Fort Pitt. (50) Other 
 troops raised in Westmoreland County were two companies 
 of the Second Pennsylvania Battalion, of Colonel Arthur St. 
 Clair. Westmoreland County also furnished men to the 
 Third and other Pennsylvania regiments. 
 
 At last, on December 18, 1778, Virginia proposed a joint 
 commission to agree upon a boundary line. To this Penn- 
 sylvania acceded in March, 1779. (51) The Commission 
 met in Baltimore in August, and on the 31st agreed 
 that Mason and Dixon's line should be extended 
 westward, and that private property rights acquired under 
 the laws of either state were to be fully recognized. The 
 report was ratified by the Pennsylvania legislature on No- 
 vember 19, 1779. But Virginia was not yet ready to sur- 
 render her claims, and in December sent into the disputed 
 territory three commissioners to adjust land titles therein, 
 this action being authorized by an act of her legislature of 
 May 3, 1779, enacted after her proposal for the boundary 
 commissioners but prior to their report. The land-adjusting 
 commissioners met at various points and granted a hundred 
 certificates to claimants under Virginia settlement rights. 
 (52) 
 
 The differences between the two states were a disturb- 
 ing element in the new republic and late in 1779 Congress 
 adopted a resolution recommending to the two states "not 
 to grant any part of the disputed territory or disturb the 
 possession of any person living therein until the dispute 
 can be amicably adjusted between the two states." (53) 
 This resolution came up in the Pennsylvania Council on 
 December 28th and a proclamation was ordered to be issued 
 in accordance with the recommendation of Congress. (54) 
 Virginia still held back and Pennsylvania, no longer ruled 
 by the Quaker government, became impatient of further 
 delay, and on March 24, 1780, through its Council, adopted 
 threatening preambles and resolutions which breathed war. 
 "But if Pennsylvania must arm for internal defense," the 
 resolution recited, "instead of recruiting her Continental 
 line; if her attention and supplies must be diverted in like 
 manner; if the common enemy encouraged by our division 
 should prolong the war; interests of our sister states and 
 the common cause be injured or disturbed; we trust 
 
42 Fort Pitt 
 
 we shall stand justly acquitted before them and the whole 
 world." (55) 
 
 But on June 23rd, Virginia confirmed the commissioners 
 report on condition that rights acquired by persons to whom 
 lands had been granted by Virginia be saved ; and the Vir- 
 ginia Court of Yohogania County closed its records on 
 August 28, 1780, (56) and the power of Virginia was with- 
 drawn. 
 
 The conditional agreement by Virginia had yet to be 
 ratifie(d by Pennsylvania, and on September 23rd, that 
 state agreed to the condition attached to Virginia's ratifica- 
 tion and confirmed and ratified the agreement of August 
 31, 1779. A survey had yet to be made and as 
 Virginia was then being invaded by the British, and 
 her affairs were in some confusion, at the suggestion of 
 Governor Thomas Jefferson, contained in a letter of June 
 3, 1781, a temporary line was agreed upon between Pennsyl- 
 vania and Virginia to hold good during the continuance of 
 the war. While the temporary line was being fixed on the 
 ground, the surveyors were under the protection of two 
 hundred militia, for fear of trouble from the Virginia ad- 
 herents. They made their report on February 19, 1783. (57) 
 The ratification by Pennsylvania of September 23, 1780, was 
 finally confirmed by Act of the Legislature on April 1, 1784. 
 After the Revolution was over the permanent line was run, 
 the commissioners making their final report on August 23, 
 1785. (58) 
 
 The western boundary was still to be run and this was 
 completed on October 4, 1786. (59) 
 
 REFERENCES: 
 
 1. William L. Stone. The Life And Times Of Sir William Johnson 
 Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. II, 356. 
 
 Johann David Schoepf. Travels In The Confederation, 1783- 
 1784, Philadelphia, 1911, Vol. I, p. 247. 
 
 2. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, 463-464. 
 
 3. Colonial Records, Vol, X, pp. 68-69. 
 
 4. Ibid, p. 71. 
 
 5. Ibid, pp. 74-75. 
 
 6. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1848, Vol. II, pp. 94-95. 
 
 7. The Records Of Deeds For The District Of West Augusta, Vir- 
 ginia, &c.. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, Vol. Ill, No. 2, 1905, 
 pp. 285-290. 
 
 '8. William L. Stone. Supra pp. 338-346. 
 
Fort Pitt 43 
 
 9. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
 Vol. IV, pp. 418-419. 
 
 10. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
 Philadelphia, 1882, p. 168. 
 
 11. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 432. 
 
 12. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 172. 
 
 13. Colonial Records, Vol. X, pp. 140-142. 
 
 14. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 4, p. 484. 
 
 15. Ibid, pp. 476-477. 
 
 16. Neville B. Craig. The History Of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
 pp. 112-113. 
 
 17. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 484. 
 
 18. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, pp. 628-632. 
 
 19. George Bancroft. Supra, p. 419. 
 
 20. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 628. 
 
 21. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, pp. 
 181-185. 
 
 22. Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
 vania And Virginia, 1748-1785, Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 
 Vol. I, p. 517. 
 
 Alexander Scott Withers. Chronicles Of Border Warfare, Cin- 
 cinnati, 1895, p. 181. 
 
 23. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 518. 
 
 24. Ibid, p. 530. 
 
 25. John Esten Cooke. Virginia — A History Of The People, Boston 
 1885, p. 434. 
 
 26. William Henry Smith. The St. Clair Papers, Cincinnati, 1882, 
 Vol. I, p. 362. 
 
 27. John J. Jacob. A Biographical Sketch Of The Life Of The 
 Late Captain Michael Cresap, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1866, pp. 51-52, 
 
 28. John Esten Cooke. Supra, p. 427. 
 
 29. Ibid, p. 435. 
 
 30. The Olden Time, Supra, pp. 572-575. 
 
 31. Ibid, pp. 575-576. 
 
 32. Journal Of Congress, Vol. I, p. 151. 
 
 33. Ibid, Vol. II, p. 250. 
 
 34. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
 Philadelphia, 1882, p. 182. 
 
 35. James Veech. Mason And Dixon's Line, Pittsburgh, 1857, pp. 
 52-53. 
 
 Alfred Creigh, LL. D. History Of Washington County, p. 15. 
 
 36. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Richmond, 
 Virginia, 1912, Vol. XX, pp. 276-277. 
 
 37. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 77. 
 
 38. Ibid, pp. 76-77. 
 
 39. James Veech. Supra, p. 52. 
 
 40. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Retreat On The Upper Ohio 
 Madison, 1917, p. 22. 
 
 41. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madison» 
 Wisconsin, 1882, p. 8. 
 
 42. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, p. 268- 
 Henry A. Muhlenberg. The Life Of Major-General Peter Muhl- 
 enberg, Philadelphia, 1849, p. 73. 
 
 43. Thomas Buchannan Read. The Waggoner Of The Alleghanies, 
 Philadelphia, 1868, pp. 89-91. 
 
44 Fort Pitt 
 
 44. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, p. 269 
 
 45. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 183. 
 
 46. Ibid, p. 156. 
 
 47. Journal Of Congress. Vol. I, p. 99. 
 
 48. Lewis S. Shimmell. Border Warfare In Pennsylvania, Harris- 
 burg, 1901, pp. 46-47. 
 
 49. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 85. 
 Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. V, p. 202. 
 
 50. Colonial Records, Vol. II, p. 110. 
 Boyd Crumrine. Supra, pp. 77-78. 
 
 51. James Veech. In Centennial Memorial Of The Planting And 
 Growth Of Presbyterianism in Western Pennsylvania and 
 Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 333. 
 
 52. Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
 vania and Virginia, 1748-1785. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 
 Vol. I, p. 522. 
 
 53. Colonial Records, Vol, XII pp. 210-211. 
 
 54. Ibid, pp. 212-214. 
 
 55. Ibid, pp. 289-292. 
 
 56. Smith Xessee v. Brown. 1 Yeates, p. 514. 
 
 Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania 
 Philadelphia, 1882. p. 195. 
 
 Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
 vania And Virginia. Supra, p, 521, 
 
 57. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
 pp. 197-199. 
 
 58. Ibid, p. 203. 
 
 59. Ibid, p. 203. 
 

 N 
 
 13 
 
 
 -u 
 
 rr- 
 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 <: 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 
 t> 
 
 M 
 
 n 
 
 1— 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 03 
 
 fi 
 
 <U 
 
 TS 
 
 
 h-1 
 
 a 
 
 
 >5 
 
 1— ( 
 
 3 
 
 'T3 
 
 
 J-i 
 
 OJ 
 
 =H 
 
 
 
 c4 
 
 cu 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 < 
 
 p4 
 
Fort Pitt 45 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 Under the Continental Congress 
 
 General Hand had been appointed by the Continental 
 Congress to the command of the Western Department, com- 
 posed of the counties of Westmoreland and Washington 
 in Pennsylvania, and Monongalia and Ohio in \^irginia, 
 with headquarters at Fort Pitt (1) because the people v/est 
 of Pittsburgh had become fearful of an Indian uprising. 
 (2) On June 1, 1777, he arrived at Fort Pitt, escorted by 
 a troop of Westmoreland lighthorse militia. (3) The 
 force under his command consisted of a few regulars, the 
 balance being militia, and with these little could be accom- 
 plished against the Indians who were threatening. The boun- 
 dary controversy between Virginia and Pennsylvania was 
 still on, and Hand was early accused of taking sides with 
 Pennsylvania. Then on March 28, 1778, he allowed the Loy- 
 alists, Mathew Elliott, Alexander McKee and Simon Girty, 
 and two others whom he had under surveillance, through 
 too much leniency, to escape from Fort Pitt to the British 
 lines, and on May 2, 1778, he was recalled by resolution of 
 Congress. (4) 
 
 On May 19, 1778, Washington appointed Brigadier 
 General Lachlan Mcintosh as Hand's successor. (5) 
 On August 6th he assumed command at Fort Pitt. His 
 greatest achievement was the treaty which he concluded 
 with the Delawares at Fort Pitt on September 19, 1778, 
 whereby they bound themselves to the American cause and 
 agreed to join in the contemplated expedition against the 
 Western Indians. Late in October, Mcintosh left Fort Pitt 
 and proceeded to the mouth of Beaver Creek, where many 
 of the regular troops and militia had preceded him, and 
 had begun building a large stockade which was called Fort 
 Mcintosh after the General. The main body of the army 
 consisting of twelve hundred men, more than half of whom 
 were militia from northwestern Virginia, proceeded as far 
 
46 Fort Pitt 
 
 as the Tuscarawas, where the Delaware Indians met them. 
 Fort Laurens was built; winter came on; dissatisfaction 
 arose between the officers, the campaign proved a failure 
 and on February 20, 1779, at his own request, Mcintosh 
 was recalled by resolution of Congress. (6) 
 
 Colonel Daniel Brodhead, who had been Mc- 
 intosh's second in command, was appointed to succeed 
 him on March 5, 1779. (7) On April 5th, Mc- 
 intosh surrendered the command to Brodhead. (8) 
 Great plans were in contemplation, but they all 
 ended in a campaign against the Indians on the upper Al- 
 legheny River, which began on August 11th. Rroahead 
 proceeded as far as the present boundary of the state of 
 New York, but the Indians had burned their villages and 
 fled before the approaching army. (9) On April 7, 1781, 
 Brodhead left Fort Pitt on his expedition against the Dela- 
 ware Indians at Coshocton, who had gone over to the 
 Eritifc'h. Completely surprised, the Indians were easily 
 overcome, many being taken prisoners and the remainder 
 dispersed; and their town was destroyed. (10) 
 
 It was during this time that part of the ground 
 belonging to Fort Pitt began to be encroached upon 
 by settlers and Colonel Brodhead wrote about the 
 matter to the Secretary of War. On June 22, 
 1779, he also complained to Timothy Pickering, 
 President of Pennsylvania: "The inhabitants of this place 
 are continually encioaching on what I conceive to be the 
 rights of the garrison * * *. They have now the assur- 
 ance to erect their fences within a few yards of the bas- 
 tions * * *. The block houses likewise, which are part 
 of the strength of the place, are occupied by private i ar- 
 sons to the injury of the service.". (11) On November 22, 
 1779, he again wrote to Pickering, "I hope the Hon. Con- 
 gress has come to a determination what extent of clear 
 ground to allow this garrison. The inhabitants on this side 
 the Alleghany Hills profess a great law knowledge, and it 
 would be exceedingly disagreeable to me to be pestered 
 with their silly courts, and therefore the service will suffer 
 until the pleasure of Congress is known respecting it." (12) 
 
 At Fort Pitt provisions were obtained with difficulty. 
 The inhabitants of the neighboring country refused to ac- 
 
Fort Pitt 47. 
 
 cept the depreciated Continental currency. At Pittsburgh 
 the troops marched in a body to the commandant's house 
 and protested against their lack of rations. Force was re- 
 sorted to to obtain the needed provisions. Charges were 
 made against Brodhead that he was taking advantage of 
 his position to further his private interests. (13) On May 
 5, 1781, Washington summoned Brodhead to Philadelphia, 
 and on May 6th, Brodhead turned over the command to 
 Colonel John Gibson and the next day left for that city. 
 (14) On September 24th, Brigadier General William Ir- 
 vine was appointed by Congress to the command of the 
 Western Department. 
 
 Leaving Philadelphia on October 9th, (15) Irvine prob- 
 ably reached Fort Pitt in the middle or latter part of the 
 month. At Yorktown, Virginia, on October 19th, Com- 
 wallis had surrendered the flovv^er of the British forces in 
 America to the allied American and French armies, and 
 the war was practically over. The news of the great vic- 
 tory reached Fort Pitt shortly after Irvine's arrival and 
 his first important act was on November 6th to issue a 
 proclamation congratulating the troops on the surrender, 
 and ordering thirteen pieces of artillery be fired at one 
 o'clock in the fort, at which time the troops were to be 
 under arms, with their colors displayed. He further di- 
 rected the commissary to issue "a gill of liquor extraord- 
 inary to the non-commissioned officers and privates on this 
 joyful occasion." (16) 
 
 During the administration of both Mcintosh and 
 Brodhead at Fort Pitt, the works had been sadly 
 neglected and at the close of Brodhead's command 
 the fort was said to be almost in ruins. This policy was 
 immediately changed under Irvine. On December 3, 1781, 
 he wrote to the Board of War : "Any person to look at the 
 place and be told that a number of artificers were employed, 
 I believe they would rather imagine they were pulling down 
 than building up or repairing. Such a complete heap of 
 ruins to retain the name of a post, I believe cannot be found 
 in any other place." (17) And in the summer of 1782, 
 Irvine made extensive repairs. On October 29th he wrote 
 to Washington about them: "A new row of picketing is 
 planted on every part of the parapet where the brick re- 
 
48 Fort Pitt 
 
 vetment did not extend, and a row of palisading is nearly- 
 finished to the ditch — above all a complete new magazine, 
 the whole arched with stone — some parts of the ramparts 
 and parapets are much broken down, a new main gate and 
 drawbridge are wanted and some small earthworks are 
 necessary to be erected." (18) 
 
 It was during this time that the British planned an 
 attack on Fort Pitt, and a force of three hundred soldiers 
 and five hundred Indians with twelve pieces of artillery, 
 was sent from Canada for the purpose. They reached 
 Lake Chautauqua and had already embarked in canoes for 
 the further journey when word was received from spies, 
 that the fort had been repaired and much strengthened. 
 In consequence of this information the campaign was aban- 
 doned and the soldiers returned to Canada. Detachments 
 of Indians, together with numerous Tories, were, however, 
 sent out in different directions to harass the settlements 
 on the borders of Pennsylvania. One of these bands, con- 
 sisting of three hundred Indians and sixty Tories, under 
 command of Kiyasuta, the Seneca chief, who had been 
 so conspicuous in the Indian war of 1763, fell upon Hannas- 
 town on July 13, 1782. 
 
 The county court had just adjourned and those in at- 
 tendance had gone to their homes, and many had resumed 
 their labors in the fields when the foe appeared. The object 
 of the attacking party seemed to be to surprise the inhab- 
 itants and make them prisoners, rather than to attack 
 them, but at the first alarm the settlers had hastened into 
 the blockhouse. Thereupon the Indians and Tories began 
 a vigorous attack on the building. Being unable to reduce 
 the structure they commenced plundering the houses in 
 the village, finally setting them on fire. This accomplished, 
 the force withdrew, carrying with them their booty and the 
 few prisoners they had taken. 
 
 Large areas, both in New York and Pennsylvania and 
 to the westward of both states, were still owned by the In- 
 dians. The country across the Allegheny and Ohio rivers 
 from Fort Pitt was all Indian territory and was forbidden 
 to white men, and on February 25, 1783, Irvine issued an 
 order regarding the same- (19) "Persons ferrying, either 
 men or women, across the Allegheny River, or who shall 
 
Fort Pitt 49 
 
 be found crossing into what is generally called the Indian 
 Country, between Kittanning and Fort Mcintosh, without 
 a written permit from the commanding officer at Fort Pitt 
 or orders for that purpose — until further orders, shall be 
 treated and prosecuted for holding or aiding others to cor- 
 respond and give intelligence to the enemy." 
 
 The Revolution being over, Irvine, on October 1, 1783, 
 left Pittsburgh finally (20) , Captain Marbury assuming the 
 command in his place. 
 
 Peace was declared by a preliminary treaty between 
 Great Britain and the United States on November 30, 
 1782, the definitive treaty being signed at Versailles on Sep- 
 tember 3, 1783. Immigration to the West was now re- 
 sumed and soon reached dimensions hitherto unknown. 
 Also travelers came for purposes of pleasure, trade, or to 
 inspect the lands in the Western country, who either made 
 Pittsburgh the end of their journey, or tarried there in order 
 to prepare for a continuation farther west. Among the earli- 
 est of the foreigners to arrive was Dr. Johann David Schoepf , 
 who had been chief surgeon of the Anspach troops, a con- 
 tingent of the German auxiliaries who fought on the 
 British side in the Revolution, (21) accompanied by an 
 Englishman named Hairs. The two men arrived in Pitts- 
 burgh on September 6, 1783, and remained seven days. 
 Speaking of their reception. Dr. Schoepf relates: "Not we, 
 but our vehicle, had the honor of being the first object of 
 their curiosity, for we had come the whole way in a two- 
 wheeled chaise." The place, he said, "numbers at 
 this time perhaps sixty wooden houses and cabins, in which 
 live something more than a hundred families * * *. The 
 first stone house was built this summer. * * * Of public 
 houses of worship or justice, there are none as yet. The 
 state of Pennsylvania, as is customary in this country, 
 sends hither a judge once or twice a year to administer the 
 law * * *. However little to be regarded the place is 
 now, from its advantageous site, it must be that Pittsburgh 
 will in the future become an important depot for inland 
 trade." He expressed his gratitude for the reception ac- 
 corded him by the men to whom he had been opposed in 
 the war just closed. "I should not fail to mention the 
 
50 Fort Pitt 
 
 courtesies and assistance rendered us by the officers of 
 the garrison, and I must especially acknowledge our obliga- 
 tions to the commander of the fort, General Irvine, and to 
 Colonel Bayard." 
 
 Another distinguished stranger who came to 
 Pittsburgh shortly after the Revolution, was General 
 Peter Muhlenberg, the former pastor of the German 
 Lutheran Church at Woodstock, whose services in the Rev- 
 olution had enabled him to attain the rank of major gen- 
 eral. He remained for three weeks while on his way to 
 the Falls of Ohio, now Louisville, having been appointed 
 by Virginia one of the Superintendents to locate lands in- 
 tended for the officers and soldiers of the Virginia line in 
 the Continental service- (22) He was accompanied by his 
 friend. Captain Paske', and records that he reached "Fort 
 Pitt" in the afternoon of March 10, 1784. He must have 
 attracted attention even in this frontier settlement as he 
 rode into town, having, as he relates, a "perfect resemblance 
 to Robinson Crusoe." He states that he had "four belts 
 around him, carried two brace of pistols, wore a sword and 
 had a rifle slung over his shoulder, and carried a pouch 
 and a tobacco-pipe, which was not a small one." He con- 
 cludes his description: "Add to this the blackness of my 
 face, which occasioned the inhabitants to take me for a 
 traveling Spaniard." General Muhlenberg spent his time 
 while in Pittsburgh in preparing for the further journey, 
 his leisure being employed in "trying to catch some Ohio 
 fish, which, according to report, are very large ; but hitherto 
 I have been unsuccessful, as the river is too full of ice." 
 
 When the boat on which General Muhlenberg and the 
 party with which he was now traveling left Pittsburgh, was' 
 passing Logstown, where his grandfather, Conrad Weiser, 
 had held his conference with the Indians in 1748, it ran 
 aground on an island. It was near sunset, and as the boat 
 could not be floated, they were compelled to stay all night. 
 The occupants of the boat became uneasy. On the north 
 side of the river was the Indian Country, and they were 
 fearful of an attack. The Indians, although at peace with 
 the whites, could probably not "withstand the great temp- 
 tation of plundering a boat so richly laden as ours," Muhl- 
 enburg writes. The company was therefore divided into 
 
TWO RELICS OF FORT PITT. 
 
 From Sketches made by Russell Smith in 1832. 
 
 
 imm 
 
 
 
 ^■^x^ 
 
 
 t^>::-^^^^^^ 
 
 The Old Redoubt. 
 
 The Powder Magazine. 
 
Fort Pitt x" 51 
 
 four watches and placed under his orders. He admits that 
 he felt anxious. "For I must confess that I did not hear 
 the noise of the wild fowl, the screaming loons, the hooting 
 owls, and the howling wolves, which continued around us 
 all night, with total indifference." 
 
 Early in 1784, Congress appointed three commissioners 
 to meet the Six Nations on the northern and western 
 frontiers, and purchase their western lands. On February 
 3, 1784, Pennsylvania also appointed commissioners to 
 acquire the Indian lands in Pennsylvania, (23) who were 
 to meet with the United States commissioners. All the 
 commissioners met the Indians at Fort Schuyler (more 
 generally known by its former and subsequent name of 
 Fort Stanwix), beginning on October 3, 1784. The treaty 
 was signed with the United States commissioners on Oc- 
 tober 22nd and with the Pennsylvania commissioners the 
 next day, (24) and all the Indian lands in Pennsylvania, 
 north and west of the Allegheny River, except certain 
 lands at Erie, were ceded to Pennsylvania. One of the 
 United States commissioners was Arthur Lee, of Virginia, 
 who, together with Dr. Franklin and Silas Deane, had been 
 joint commissioners of the United States to the Court of 
 France during the Revolution. Lee kept a journal from 
 Philadelphia to Fort Schuyler, and after the conclusion of 
 the treaty with the Six Nations, continued the journal 
 through Western Pennsylvania while on the way to Cuya- 
 hoga, now Cleveland, where a conference was to be held 
 with the Western Indians- The party came by way of Sun- 
 bury and Carlisle and consisted of the United States com- 
 missioners, George Rogers Clark, Richard Butler and 
 Arthur Lee, and arrived at Fort Pitt on December 2, 1784. 
 (25) 
 
 On December 5th a conference was held with Colonel 
 Josiah Harmer, who commanded the Pennsylvania troops 
 on the frontier, in the Indian Country on the opposite side of 
 the Allegheny River from Fort Pitt, where he was en- 
 camped, with a force of soldiers intended as an escort for 
 the commissioners on the further journey. Here it was 
 decided that owing to the lateness of the season and the 
 difficulty in securing supplies, the conference should be 
 held at Fort Mcintosh, thirty miles distant, Aft^r a stay 
 
52 Fort Pitt 
 
 of several weeks at Fort Pitt, the commissioners proceeded 
 to Fort Mcintosh, where the Pennsylvania commissioners 
 met them, and where the conference was finally held and 
 the deeds granting the lands to the United States and to 
 Pennsylvania were signed on January 21, 1785. (26) 
 
 During his stay in Pittsburgh, Lee wrote down his im- 
 pressions of the place: ''Pittsburgh is inhabited almost 
 entirely by Scots and Irish, who live in paltry log-houses, 
 and are as dirty as in the north of Ireland and Scotland. 
 There is a great deal of small trade carried on, the goods 
 being brought at the vast expense of forty-five shillings 
 per hundred weight from Philadelphia and Baltimore. They 
 take in the shops, money, wheat, flour and skins. There 
 are in the town four attorneys and two doctors." He also 
 expressed the opinion that the place would "never be very 
 considerable." In this respect the subsequent history of 
 Pittsburgh has shown that his judgment was of far less 
 value than that of Dr. Schoepf. 
 
 Religion also had begun to reassert itself in Pittsburgh 
 in the bosoms of those who, owing to the vicissitudes of 
 their new life, had neglected its outward observance. 
 Wandering clerics came and preached in the fort or in some 
 public house in the town, but house of worship there was 
 none. The strain of the Revolution being over and the 
 stress of adverse material circumstances being lessened, 
 the people began yearning for the spiritual life which they 
 had led in their old homes in the East, and a desire for a 
 church home developed. The majority of the people in 
 Pittsburgh and its vicinity were either Scotch-Irish or 
 German. The former were Presbyterians, while the latter 
 were divided in their church affiliations between the Evan- 
 gelical and Reformed faiths. The Germans were the first to 
 organize a congregation, their church dating from 1782. 
 (27) The Presbyterians claim 1784 as the natal year of 
 their church. When Dr. Schoepf was in Pittsburgh, as he 
 relates, a German preacher was living there who ministered 
 to all the Germans. (28) Arthur Lee, on the other hand, 
 tells that there was not in Pittsburgh "a priest of any 
 persuasion, nor church nor chapel; so they are likely to be 
 damned without the benefit of clergy." (29) Mr. Lee 
 probably did not know that the Presbyterian church was 
 
Port Pitt 5S 
 
 in process of formation, and he may have closed his eyes 
 to the fact that the German church had been in existence 
 for two years, in order that he might elaborate his wit- 
 ticism about being "damned without the benefit of clergy." 
 
 John Wilkins, who removed from Carlisle to Pitts- 
 burgh in October, 1783, and who subsequently became one 
 of its leading citizens, being an associate justice of the com- 
 mon pleas court of Allegheny County upon its erection, a 
 chief burgess of the borough of Pittsburgh, and county 
 treasurer for many years, has left a graphic, but rather 
 dark account of the social and religious conditions prevail- 
 ing in Pittsburgh at the time he settled there. (30) 
 
 "When I first came here I found the place filled with 
 old officers and soldiers, followers of the army, mixed with 
 a few families of credit. All sorts of wickedness v/ere 
 carried on to excess, and there was no appearance of mor- 
 ality or regular order. * * * There appeared to be no 
 signs of religion among the people, and it seemed to me 
 that the Presbyterian ministers were afraid to come to the 
 place lest they should be mocked or mistreated," 
 
 He then relates that he had "often hinted to the cred- 
 itable part of the people that something ought to be done 
 toward establishing a Presbyterian church." The result of 
 his suggestions was the organization of the Presbyterian 
 church and a building was commenced at which he says he 
 worked "with his own hands." 
 
 The Episcopalians in Pittsburgh comprised only a 
 small proportion of the population, but included some of 
 the most prominent and influential citizens of the village. 
 They were mainly emigrants from Virginia and Maryland, 
 where the Episcopal, or Church of England as it was com- 
 monly called, had been the state church, being disestab- 
 lished during the Revolution. The church as a whole had 
 fallen into disrepute, notwithstanding the fact that more 
 than two-thirds of the signers of the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence were Episcopalians, the principal reason being 
 that the majority of the clergy had remained Loyalists 
 during the Revolution. But at this time the movement for 
 the reorganization of the church on American lines was 
 well under way. In September, 1785, a convention of dele- 
 gates from New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Dela- 
 
U Fort Pitt 
 
 ware, Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina had been 
 held in Philadelphia and the Protestant Episcopal Church 
 as a national body organized, and a provisional constitution 
 adopted. On September 14, 1786, the Rev. Dr. William 
 White, the rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's Church 
 in Philadelphia, the friend of Washington, who had been 
 chaplain of the Continental Congress, was elected Bishop 
 of Pennsylvania, and on February 4th of the following year, 
 he and the Rev. Dr. Samuel Provoost, Bishop-elect of New 
 York, were consecrated in London by the Archbishops of 
 Canterbury and York, and the Bishops of Both, Wells and 
 Peterborough. And now the Episcopalians of Pittsburgh 
 were looking forward to the formation of a church of their 
 own, which, however, was not to be accomplished until 
 many years afterward. 
 
 All the Penns were devout Christians and John 
 Penn, Jr., and John Penn, at this time the proprietarys of 
 the manor and town of Pittsburgh, were not exceptions to 
 their forebears. Regardless of how they were affected 
 by the Revolution in which they were staunch Loyalists, 
 they set aside land in Pittsburgh at the time their plan of 
 the town was laid out, for all the religious denominations 
 to which the residents of Pittsburgh belonged at least 
 nominally, upon which to erect houses of worship. This 
 land they donated to trustees for the use of the congrega- 
 tions which had either been formed or were in process of 
 formation. The first deed given for such purpose was to 
 the German congregation and was dated June 18, 1787. 
 Two other donations were made, both deeds for the same 
 being dated September 24, 1787, the one being to the Presby- 
 terian congregation, whose building had already been 
 erected on the ground so conveyed, and the other being for 
 the use of the Episcopalians; but for almost forty years 
 after this land was conveyed to the Episcopalians it remained 
 bare of a church building, being used solely as a burying 
 ground. 
 
 And the German church and the Presbyterian church 
 were the pioneers in the reawakening of the religious life 
 of Pittsburgh. The crudeness of the frontier was wearing 
 off and the people yearned for a broader life, one of their 
 desires being for a newspaper of their own. This new con- 
 
Fort Pitt 55 
 
 dition coming to the ears of two adventurous young printers 
 in Philadelphia, John Scull and Joseph Boyd, they deter- 
 mined to meet it and establish a newspaper. The two 
 men removed to Pittsburgh, bringing a printing outfit with 
 them, and the Pittsburgh Gazette was born on July 29, 
 1786, and was the first newspaper to be published in the 
 entire Western country, and has had a continuous exist- 
 ence to this day. The community was no longer isolated 
 from the rest of the world. The paper mirrored the hap- 
 penings in the Eastern parts of the United States and in 
 Europe; and the only regret of the modern readers of the 
 files of this old newspaper is the fact that the publishers 
 did not deem it necessary to give publicity to local events. 
 The people of Pittsburgh were now on the highroad to 
 culture. 
 
 REFERENCES. 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 1. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madison, 
 Wis., 1882, pp. 72-74. 
 
 2. Reuben Gold Thwaites, LL. D. Revolution of the Upper Ohio, 
 1775-1777, Madison, 1908, pp. 255-256. 
 
 3. Reuben Gold Thwaites, LL. D. Frontier Defense on the Upper 
 Ohio. Madison, 1912, p. 1. 
 
 4. Ibid, pp. 249-252, pp. 293-294. 
 
 5. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Advance on the Upper Ohio, 
 1778-1779, Madison, 1916, p. 54. 
 
 6. Ibid, p. 233. 
 
 7. Ibid, p. 238. 
 
 8. Ibid, p. 28. 
 
 9. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Retreat on the Upper Ohio, 
 Madison, 1917, p. 15. 
 
 10. Ibid, pp. 376-382. 
 
 11. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. XII, p. 133. 
 
 12. Ibid, p. 190. 
 
 13. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Supra, pp. 31-32. 
 
 14. Ibid, p. 395. 
 
 15. Ibid, p. 73. 
 
 16. Ibid, pp. 73-74. 
 
 17. Ibid, pp. 159-160. 
 
 18. Ibid, pp. 139-140. 
 
 19. Ibid, pp. 261-262. 
 
 20. Ibid, p. 68. 
 
56 Fort Pitt 
 
 21. Johann David Schoepf. Travels in the Confederation, (1783- 
 1784), Philadelphia, 1911, Vol. I, pp. 241-290. 
 
 22. Henry A. Muhlenberg. The Life of Major General Peter 
 Muhlenberg, Philadelphia, 1849, pp. 425-430. 
 
 23. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 40. 
 
 24. Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1848, Vol. II, p. 429. 
 
 25. Richard Henry Lee. Life of Arthur Lee, LL.D., Boston, 1829, 
 Vol. II, p. 380. 
 
 Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 10, p, 391. 
 
 26. Richard Henry Lee, Supra, p. 385. 
 
 27. Carl August Voss. Gedenkschrift Zur Ein Hundert Fuenfund- 
 zwanzig-Jaehrigen Jubel Feier, 1907, p. 13. 
 
 28. Johann David Schoepf, Supra, p. 244. 
 
 29. Richard Henry Lee, Supra, p. 385. 
 
 30. Centennial Volume of the First Presbyterian Church of Pitts- 
 burgh, Pa., 1784-1884, Pittsburgh, 1884, pp. 16-17. 
 
Fort Pitt 57 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 Last Days of Fort Pitt. 
 
 The days of Fort Pitt's usefulness were over, although 
 it remained a landmark for a number of years longer, and 
 the Penns began to sell lots in the town of Pittsburgh. On 
 November 27, 1779, by enactment of the Pennsylvania As- 
 sembly, all the lands of the Penns in the state, except cer- 
 tain manors, etc., which had been surveyed and returned to 
 the land office prior to July 4, 1776, were forfeited to the 
 Commonwealth, and they were granted as compensation, 
 the sum of 130,000 pounds sterling. The manor of Pittsburgh 
 in which Fort Pitt and the town of Pittsburgh were lo- 
 cated, having been surveyed and returned to the land office 
 in 1769, remained the property of the Penns. 
 
 Neville B. Craig, in his. Life and Services of 
 Isaac Craig, relates: (1) "The army being disbanded, it at 
 once became necessary for these officers who had no for- 
 tunes to retire upon, to embark in some business to sus- 
 tain themselves, and to prevent the waste of what means 
 they may have accumulated before the war." Accordingly 
 Major Craig and Colonel Stephen Bayard, both of whom 
 until recently, had been officers at Fort Pitt, formed a 
 partnership to carry on the mercantile business, with the 
 design to deal in lands and lots. Their first venture was 
 to purchase from the Penns by agreement dated January 
 22, 1784, "a certain tract of land lying and being in a point 
 formed by the junction of the rivers Monongahela and Al- 
 legheny, bounded on two sides by said rivers, and on the 
 other two sides by the Fort and the ditch running to the 
 Allegheny; supposed to contain about three acres." This 
 was the first land sold in Pittsburgh. 
 
 The Penns employed Colonel George Woods, an engi- 
 neer residing in Bedford, to make a survey of the town and 
 lay out a plan of the same, which was completed on May 
 31st, and which embodied Colonel Campbell's plan of 1765. 
 Thereafter by deed dated December 31, 1784, they con- 
 veyed to Craig and Bayard thirty-two lots in the new plan, 
 which included the land sold to them by agreement. These 
 
58 Fort Pitt 
 
 thirty-two lots comprised all the lots between the Alle- 
 gheny and Monongahela rivers, and Marbury and West 
 streets, and included all the land occupied by Fort Pitt. 
 While the deed was made to Major Isaac Craig and Colonel 
 Stephen Bayard, they by a deed dated January 4, 1785, 
 acknowledged that the purchase had been made on their 
 own account and for the account of John Holker, William 
 Turnbull and Peter Marmie of Philadelphia, they having 
 entered into partnership with those gentlemen in June, 
 1784. These five men comprised the firm of Turnbull, 
 Marmie and Company, formed to engage in various enter- 
 prises in Pittsburgh, including dealing in real estate and 
 operating a distillery; (2) and later they also applied for 
 a license to trade with the Indians. (3) At subsequent 
 dates they added to their enterprises a sawmill up the Al- 
 legheny River and a salt works on the Big Beaver. 
 
 Fort Pitt had been in possession of the Continental 
 Congress since General Hand was placed in charge on June 
 1, 1777, but for some years the garrison had been dwindling 
 in numbers. In 1784, it consisted of a lieutenant and 
 twenty-five men. (4) It was at this time that Major Craig 
 and Colonel Bayard made a claim to the land on which the 
 fort was located. In a letter of Major Craig dated July 25, 
 1784, Craig and Bayard made a request to use some of the 
 buildings, their request being refused, both by Captain 
 Marbury and by his successor. Lieutenant Lucket. That 
 Craig and Bayard fully expected to obtain possession of Fort 
 Pitt at this time, is evident from the fact that the materials 
 for the erection of the distillery which they expected to 
 establish, had already been ordered, Craig stating in this 
 letter that on the refusal of the officers at Fort Pitt to allow 
 him to occupy any of the buildings, he had provided a house 
 for their reception when they arrived. (5) 
 
 In 1785, there were at the fort, only the commander, 
 Lucket, now risen to the rank of captain, and six men, 
 whose duty seemed to be to guard military pris- 
 oners awaiting trial. (6) An incident occurred 
 at this time which created considerable excitement 
 
Fort Pitt 59 
 
 in Pittsburgh. On May 11, 1785, a Delaware Indian 
 named Mamachtaga, while intoxicated, killed a white man 
 and wounded three others on the north side of the Alle- 
 gheny River opposite Pittsburgh- (7) He was apprehended 
 and taken to Fort Pitt and confined in the dungeon. The 
 feeling of the whites against the Indian was strong. They 
 were particularly incensed against Hugh Henry Bracken- 
 ridge, the leading lawyer of Pittsburgh, who was to appear 
 for the Indian, and against Joseph Nicholas, the interpreter, 
 who had been with Brackenridge in his interview with 
 Mamachtaga. They proposed to hang the interpreter and 
 exact an oath from Brackenridge not to appear at the trial. 
 It was, however, finally decided to go to the garrison and 
 demand the surrender of the Indian. Two attempts were 
 then made by parties of Washington County militia, Wash- 
 ington County then extending to the south side of the 
 Monongahela River opposite Pittsburgh, to take the Indian 
 out of the custody of the military and tomahawk him. In 
 their first effort the militia took possession of the garrison, 
 but were persuaded by Captain Lucket, to retire, which 
 they did, firing their guns as they passed through the town. 
 The next attempt was made two days later when they made 
 a prisoner of Captain Lucket and were marching him off, 
 when, through a hastily organized party of Pittsburgh citi- 
 zens and five or six soldiers, they were overpowered, and the 
 prisoner released, and several of the militia taken into 
 custody. Thereupon Colonel Harmar sent Captain McCurdy 
 with a number of soldiers to reinforce the garrison. 
 
 Major Michael Huffnagle, a justice of the peace of 
 Westmoreland County, reported the occurrence to John 
 Armstrong, the Secretary of the Council, and closed his 
 communication as follows: "I wish for a special commis- 
 sion to be sent for the trial of the prisoner at this place, 
 and a "blank death warrant." To the honor of the Council, 
 however, it should be remembered that they were 
 not as complaisant as Major Huffnagle imagined they 
 would be, and did not send a blank death war- 
 rant, but waited until the Indian had been tried and found 
 guilty, the trial taking place at Hannastown, when on No- 
 vember 25, 1785, a warrant was directed to be issued, 
 whereupon Mamachtaga was duly hanged. (8) 
 
60 Fort Pitt 
 
 Now Craig and Bayard instituted legal proceedings by 
 bringing a suit in ejectment against Captain Lucket for 
 the possession of the fort. The commander, however, was 
 not to be intimidated by the service of a Pennsylvania writ, 
 and declared that he would remain at his post until he had 
 received orders from Congress to surrender the possession. 
 (9) 
 
 That the fort was to be given up by the United States 
 was generally understood in Pittsburgh. The state of 
 Pennsylvania claimed that the effects purchased by Wil- 
 liam Thompson and Alexander Ross from Captain Edmon- 
 stone now belonged to Alexander Ross who had been at- 
 tained of treason during the Revolution, and it made prep- 
 arations to sell them. Major Huffnagle, who in addition to 
 being a justice of the peace, was one of the agents for the 
 sale of confiscated estates in Westmoreland County, (10) 
 on May 6, 1785, wrote to Secretary John Armstrong in re- 
 gard to the proposed sale. He reported that the greater 
 part of the property purchased by Alexander Ross and 
 William Thompson from Captain Edmonstone, had re- 
 mained in the fort and had been made use of, and inquired 
 how to proceed * * *. He also stated that in his opinion 
 it would be necessary to have an order from Congress that 
 possession be given to such person or persons as Council 
 should direct. (11) 
 
 In accordance with the suggestion of Major Huffnagle, 
 John Dickenson, the President of Pennsylvania, wrote on 
 June 28th to the Pennsylvania delegates in Congress ask- 
 ing them to obtain from Congress directions to the com- 
 manding officer at Fort Pitt, upon its abandonment by Con- 
 gress, to deliver the possession to John Ormsby, Michael 
 Huffnagle, John Proctor, Thomas Galbraith and Robert 
 Galbraith, citizens of Pennsylvania. (12) 
 
 General Arthur St. Clair, learning of the matter, ad- 
 dressed a letter to President Dickenson, on July 16, 1785, 
 in which he complained of the contemplated sale, and 
 claimed that no part of the buildings left standing on the 
 evacuation of Fort Pitt by the British belonged to Ross- 
 Part of them, he said, belonged to him and part to other 
 persons. (3) In compliance with this request the Council 
 on July 11th, ordered the sale to be postponed until further 
 
Fort Pitt 61 
 
 order of Council. (14) 
 
 Turnbull, Marmie and Company, in addition to the 
 ejectment brought by Craig and Bayard for the land on 
 which Fort Pitt was erected, had also presented a 
 memorial to Congress setting forth their claims and asking 
 that they be given possession. (15) To the letter of Presi- 
 dent Dickenson, Charles Pettit, a Pennsylvania delegate to 
 Congress, (16) replied in a communication dated August 
 12, 1785. He stated that he believed the garrison would 
 shortly be removed, and said, "as it is understood that pos- 
 session of the fort was taken on behalf of the United States 
 without any treaty or contract, it seems to be the intention 
 of Congress to relinquish it in the same manner." He 
 added, "I have therefore advised Turnbull, Marmie and 
 Company to make their application to your Excellency and 
 the Council on the subject." On August 15, 1785, Presi- 
 dent Dickenson addressed a letter to the commissioners 
 appointed to take possession of Fort Pitt upon its relin- 
 quishment by Congress, in which he stated, that as it was 
 probable that the United States would soon relinquish the 
 possession of Fort Pitt, which he called "Pittsburgh," he 
 thought it proper to direct, that upon such relinquishment, 
 they should take possession in the name and behalf of this 
 Commonwealth, and that the possession taken should be 
 without prejudice to private property rights. (17) 
 
 It was some time after August 15th that Turnbull, 
 Marmie and Company received possession of a portion of 
 Fort Pitt, a small garrison being maintained there for some 
 years longer. In 1786, the garrison consisted of twelve 
 men. Doctor Hildreth, of Marietta, Ohio, who passed 
 through Pittsburgh as late as April, 1788, related that 
 there was still "a small garrison of troops at Fort Pitt." 
 Major Ebenezer Denny, writing on July 10, 1791, stated 
 that he found two battalions of levies at Fort Pitt. (18) 
 
 Colonel John May of Boston, a former Revolutionary 
 officer, was in Pittsburgh from May 7th to May 24th, 1788. 
 (19) He stopped at the tavern of Marcus Hulings on the 
 south side of the Monongahela River, in Washington 
 County, opposite the foot of Liberty Street, and directly 
 across the river from Fort Pitt, because, as he complains, 
 the same lodgings would have cost him in Pittsburgh seven 
 
62 Fort Pitt 
 
 times as much as Hulings charged, and added, "Such is the 
 odds between the counties of Westmoreland and Washing- 
 ton. 
 
 "Pittsburgh is in plain sight," he continued, "at half 
 a mile distance. It is an irregular, poorly built place. The 
 number of houses, mostly built of logs, about one hundred 
 and fifty. The inhabitants (perhaps because they lead too 
 easy a life) incline to be extravagant and lazy. They are 
 subject, however, to frequent alarms from the savages of 
 the wilderness. The situation is agreeable and the soil 
 good." 
 
 He tells that Hulings informed him that more than 
 two hundred and fifty boats of twenty to thirty tons filled 
 with people, live stock and furniture had passed the place 
 since early spring, going down the river, the destination 
 being to the settlements farther south and west- He records 
 that General Harmar called on him, crossing the river in a 
 barge called the Congress, rowed by twelve men in white 
 uniforms and caps, and took him to the north side of the 
 Allegheny River where they visited some Indian graves 
 at the head of which tall poles were fixed daubed with red. 
 Later General Harmar also took him up the Monongahela 
 River where they visited Braddock's field. Of this he said, 
 "The bones of the slain are plenty on the ground 
 at this day. I picked up many of them which did not seem 
 much decayed." 
 
 The constantly rising tide of immigration into Western 
 Pennsylvania required more subdivisions of territory. 
 Westmoreland County had been reduced on March 28, 1781, 
 by the creation of Washington County, and was further re- 
 duced by the erection of Fayette County on September 26, 
 1783, but was still inordinately large, and on September 
 24, 1788, Allegheny County was formed out of Westmore- 
 land and Washington counties, and the county seat located 
 at Pittsburgh; and the village assumed a new importance. 
 
 In 1790, John Pope undertook a journey from Rich- 
 mond to Kentucky and the region farther south, stopping 
 on the way at Pittsburgh. In October he had crossed the 
 Alleghany Mountains. He relates: "I passed through the 
 shadow of Death — saw George Washington's intrenchments 
 at the Meadows, and undismayed rode over Braddock's 
 
Q 
 
 O 
 
 :^ ^ 
 
 
 
 «2 
 
 5- 
 
 <S 
 
 s 
 
 b (w 
 
 a 
 
 sr 
 
 S 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 S 
 
 t^ 
 
 1— ' 
 
 ;^ 
 
 Oq 
 
Fort Pitt 63 
 
 grave." (20) While in Pittsburgh he made the acquaint- 
 ance of Hugh Henry Brackenridge and he has much to say- 
 about that gentleman's recent marriage to the daughter 
 of a German farmer. He even writes verses on the event. 
 He tells that the lady whom Brackenridge married was 
 named Wolfe, and that after the marriage Brackenridge 
 sent her to a school in Philadelphia, where "she now is 
 under the governance of a reputable female, whose business 
 will be to polish the manners, and wipe off the rusticities 
 which Mrs. Brackenridge had acquired whilst a Wolfe." 
 He tells lof viewing Fort Pitt and the neighboring eminences 
 in company with Brackenridge, and says the fort "will one 
 day or other employ the historic pen, as being replete with 
 strange and melancholy events." His characterization of 
 the people of Pittsburgh is the reverse of flattering. "The 
 town at present is inhabited, with only some few excep- 
 tions, by mortals who act as if possessed of a charter of 
 exclusive privilege to filch from, annoy and harrass their 
 fellow creatures, particularly the incautious; many of 
 whom have emigrated from various parts to Kentucky and 
 can verify this charge — Goods of every description are 
 dearer in Pittsburgh than in Kentucky," and he places the 
 blame on the former Revolutionary officers who conducted 
 the mercantile establishments, by adding, "which I at- 
 tribute to a combination of pensioned scoundrels who infest 
 the place." 
 
 Neville B. Craig relates in his life of his father, that 
 Colonel Bayard withdrew from the firm ot Turnbull, 
 Marmie and Company in the spring of 1788, and that his 
 father. Major Isaac Craig, left it in October, 1789. (2) 
 The deed by which Major Craig conveyed his interest in 
 the lots purchased from the Penns, which was made to 
 William Turnbull and John Holker, two of the partners in 
 the firm of Turnbull, Marmie and Company, is, however, 
 dated September 8, 1795. 
 
 In February, 1791, Major Craig was appointed Quar- 
 termaster and Military Storekeeper at Pittsburgh, (22) 
 and while holding this office wrote a number of letters to 
 his military superiors which throw some light on condi- 
 tions at Fort Pitt. His letter of March 25, 1791, is of more 
 than usual interest, "In consequence of a number of 
 
64 Fort Pitt 
 
 people killed and several taken prisoners by the Indians in 
 the vicinity of this place, within a few days past," he 
 writes, "and frequent reports of large parties of savages 
 being on our frontier, the people of this town have made 
 frequent applications for arms and ammunition to me, and 
 I have been forced to lend them one hundred muskets and 
 bayonets and cartouch boxes." 
 
 The two following letters show that Turnbull, Marmie 
 and Company were still excluded from a portion of Fort 
 Pitt, and indicate that while Major Craig retained an in- 
 terest in the land purchased from the Penns, he was no 
 longer on friendly terms with his old partners. The first 
 letter is dated May 12, 1791, and in it he says, "Turnbull 
 and Marmie are now in this country and have directed their 
 lawyers to prosecute their ejectments in the Supreme Court 
 — they are confident of being put in possession of the fort 
 by the sheriff." The other letter is dated October 6, 1791, 
 and in this Craig complains: "Turnbull and Marmie con- 
 tinue to pull down and sell the materials of the fort, and 
 have lately been so ill-natured as to institute a suit against 
 me for pointing out a piece of ground between the fort 
 and the Allegheny River to Captain Buel for encampment." 
 
 In the next letter the requiem of Fort Pitt is sung. 
 The new fort farther up the Allegheny River had been com- 
 pleted and the garrison was withdrawn from Fort Pitt and 
 on May 13, 1792, Major Craig wrote to General Henry 
 Knox, the Secretary of War: "Captain Hughes, with his 
 detachment has occupied the barracks of the new fort since 
 the 5th instant * * * the works, if you have no objection, 
 I shall name Fort LaFayette." (23) 
 
 REFERENCES. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 1. Neville B. Craig, Sketch of the lAfe and Services of Isaac Craig, 
 Pittsburgh, 1854, pp. 50-51. 
 
 2. Ibid, pp. 51-52. 
 
 3. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 521. 
 
 4. Richard Henry Lee. Life of Arthur Lee, LL. D., Boston, 1829, 
 Vol. II, p. 387. 
 
 5. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
 p. 182. 
 
 6. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 10, p. 464-467. 
 
 7. Ibid, pp. 464-467. 
 
 Archibald Loudon, Indian Narratives, Carlisle, 1808, pp. 38-50. 
 
Fort Pitt 65 
 
 8. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 585. 
 Archibald Loudon, Supra, p. 50. 
 
 9. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, p. 468. 
 
 10. Colonial Records, Vol. 13, p. 774. 
 
 11. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol X, p. 462. 
 
 12. Ibid, pp. 477-478. 
 
 13. Ibid, p. 483. 
 
 14. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 498. 
 
 15. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 497. 
 
 16. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 549. 
 Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, pp. 462-464. 
 
 17. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 498. 
 
 18. Military Journal of Major Ebenezer Demiy, Philadelphia, 1859. 
 p. 152. 
 
 19. Journal and Letters of Col. John May, of Boston, Cincinnati, 
 1873, pp. 33-49. 
 
 20. John Pope. A Tour Through the Southern and Western Terri- 
 tories of the United States, Richmond, MDCCXCII, pp. 14-17. 
 
 21. Neville B. Graig, Sketch of the Life and Services' of Isaac 
 Craig, Surpa. p. 54. 
 
 22. Historical Register. Harrisburg, 1883, Vol. I, pp. 292-304. 
 
 23. Ibid, 1884, Vol. II, p. 123. 
 
66 Fort Pitt 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 THE OLD REDOUBT. 
 
 I. 
 Location and Date of Erection. 
 
 The only relic of Fort Pitt remaining in Pittsburgh to- 
 day is the Old Redoubt, also known as the Block House, 
 situated at the Point. It is the oldest building in Pitts- 
 burgh, and next to Trinity Churchyard, the oldest land- 
 mark in the city. It is a place of great interest, not only 
 locally, but to students of history all over the country. That 
 it was connected with Fort Pitt is beyond question, yet the 
 claim has been made that it was part of Fort Duquesne. 
 Russell Smith, the artist, who studied his art in this city, 
 was guilty of this error. In 1832 he made a sketch of the 
 Redoubt, and of the Powder Magazine of Fort Pitt which, 
 until sometime prior to 1844, stood on the northerly side of 
 Liberty Street about midway between Marbury and Water 
 streets. In The Pittsburgh Dispatch of Sunday, January 
 11, 1885, cuts of these sketches were published, along with 
 others of local interest, together with the statement that 
 the artist had presented the originals to the Historical So- 
 ciety of Western Pennsylvania on the preceding Thursday. 
 In these cuts the Redoubt, as well as the Powder Magazine, 
 are represented as having been part of Fort Duquesne. The 
 date on the tablet on the Redoubt is given as 1755, which 
 would bring it within the period of the French occupation; 
 and Colonel Bouquet's name is omitted. Today unfortun- 
 ately the whereabouts lof these two sketches are not known. 
 However, subsequent to the date of the sketches, paintings 
 were made from them by the artist, that of the Redoubt 
 being now in the possession of the Historical Society of 
 Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, a copy being printed in John 
 Martin Hammond's, "Quaint and Historic Forts of North 
 America," and an engraving of the painting of the Powder 
 Magazine having been published in Gody's Magazine And La- 
 dy's Book, for September, 1844. 
 
 A writer in Watson's Annals who saw the Redoubt in 
 
Fort Pitt 67 
 
 1804, (1) and to whom it was known as the Guard House, 
 also credits it as belonging to Fort Duquesne. 
 
 Attached to the bill of sale by which Captain Edmon- 
 stone sold certain property, being part of Fort Pitt, to Wil- 
 liam Thompson and Alexander Ross, was a schedule of 
 items, one of which was for "two redoubts." Nothing is 
 said about any blockhouses, except "a square log house 
 fifty feet long." (2) General Irvine in 1782, complained of 
 trespassers on the fort. He tells of Major Edward Ward 
 having a house in the King's Orchard which was formerly 
 a redoubt and had been removed from its orginial location 
 and taken there and "built house fashion." (3) He com- 
 plains further, about "Irwin's house" and states that this 
 was also formerly a redoubt, "but is now environed by the 
 other houses of the town of Pittsburgh." This Irwin was un- 
 doubtedly, Captain John Irwin, who was at the time deputy 
 commissary-general of issues. (4) Here there are two re- 
 doubts accounted for. Ward's could hardly have been the 
 Old Redoubt, as it was located in the King's Orchard, and 
 the Redoubt still standing, must therefore have been the 
 one occupied by Captain Irwin. 
 
 The Old Redoubt is located one hundred and fifteen 
 feet north of Penn Street and six hundred and sixty-seven 
 feet west of Marbury Street. It is a five-sided structure, 
 the side facing the city being twenty-three feet in width; 
 the two sides at right angles with the front, as well as the 
 two rear angling sides being each about sixteen feet. It 
 has a stone foundation standing about five and a half feet 
 above the level of the ground; the upper part of the build- 
 ing which is about eight and a half feet in height, is 
 constructed of brick. It has two ranges of loop holes for 
 musketry cut into sticks of timber which are let into the 
 walls on every side of the building and are a foot thick, one 
 row being placed a short distance below the roof and the 
 other immediately above the foundation. In the easterly 
 front facing the city, immediately under the eaves, is a 
 stone tablet bearing the following inscription: 
 
 "A. D. 1764 
 COLL. BOUQUET." 
 
 The whole is surmounted by a high sloping roof covered 
 
68 Fort Pitt 
 
 by wooden shingles. 
 
 Since March 15, 1894, the old relic has been the prop- 
 erty of the Daughters of the American Revolution, having 
 been conveyed to that organization by Mrs. Mary E- 
 Schenley who had been the owner for many years, having 
 inherited it, together with the entire block bounded by 
 Penn Street, Duquesne Way, Marbury and Water streets, 
 from her grandfather. Colonel James O'Hara. Turnbull, Mar- 
 mie and Company having acquired the land on which Fort 
 Pitt stood, probably obtained possession of the Redoubt be- 
 fore securing control of the rest of the fort, as Neville B. 
 Craig says Turnbull, Marmie and Company built an addition 
 to it in 1785, with bricks taken from the walls of the fort, 
 thus constituting a dwelling house. He also tells that this 
 was occupied by Mr. Turnbull for a year, and by his father 
 for the three following years, and that he was born there 
 in 1787. (5) 
 
 There is no evidence that either Mr. Holker or Mr. 
 Marmie ever resided in Pittsburgh, but Mr. Turnbull for a 
 number of years after he removed from the Redoubt, lived 
 in a stone house on Second Street, now Second Avenue, 
 west of Market Street. He was a prominent citizen and 
 was noted for the lavish manner of his entertainments. 
 Major Samuel S. Forman of New Jersey was in Pitts- 
 burgh in the latter part of November, 1789, accompanying 
 his uncle. General David Forman and his family, who with 
 a large number of negro slaves were on their way to settle 
 in the Natchez country, then under Spanish authority. He 
 records in his diary about the party being entertained by 
 Mr. Turnbull, "late of Philadelphia," whom he calls Colonel 
 Turnbull. He tells of an "elegant" dinner given in their 
 honor by Mr. Turnbull which was attended by several Pitts- 
 burgh gentlemen, and that the Pittsburghers accompanied 
 them to the boat as they left Pittsburgh. (6) 
 
 For perhaps tv/o score years the Redoubt was the hab- 
 itation of refined and cultured people. In 1831, according 
 to The Pittsburgh Gazette of August 19th, of that year, it 
 was occupied by a French engineer, presumably Jean Bar- 
 beau, who with Lewis Keyon had made a plan of Pittsburgh 
 which was published the year before. After the engineer 
 left the Redoubt, it was allowed to become dilapidated, grow- 
 
Fort Pitt 69 
 
 ing more shabby with each passing year until it became 
 the property of the Daughters of the American Revolution. 
 This organization tore down the addition and restored the 
 Redoubt to its original state. 
 
 The histories of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, 
 where they refer to the Redoubt at all, state almost unan- 
 imously that it was located outside of the fort, and a short 
 distance west of it. In the light of the latest investigation, 
 however, it appears beyond question that it was really a 
 part of the old stronghold and most likely stood on the 
 north bastion. To William McConway of this city, belongs 
 the credit of calling attention to this fact and causing an 
 investigation to be made. 
 
 Mr. McConway has long been interested in the early 
 history of Pittsburgh, and particularly in that of the old 
 fort at the Point. He made himself thoroughly familiar 
 with the published accounts, and when doubt arose in his 
 mind of their correctness, he examined the matter for him- 
 self. He knew of the existence of Lieutenant Ratzer's plan 
 of the fort, and in the year 1909, he sent to London and 
 had a copy made of it, and from his knowledge of the sub- 
 ject and a study of this plan reached the conclusion that 
 the Redoubt was not located outside of the fort, but was 
 part of the structure itself, and that it stood on the north 
 bastion. 
 
 That Mr. McConway's copy of Ratzer's plan is an 
 exact reproduction of the plan of Fort Pitt as preserved in 
 the Crown Collection of Maps and Manuscripts in the British 
 Museum, is apparent from a careful comparison, with the 
 copy of Ratzer's plan as published in 1905 by The A. H. 
 Clark Company of Cleveland. The writer became im- 
 pressed by Mr. McConway's conclusion and made an inde- 
 pendent investigation, becoming so deeply interested that 
 he studied the entire history of Fort Pitt, the result being 
 this monograph. 
 
 The Redoubt is said to have been the headquarters of 
 Colonel Henry Bouquet while at Fort Pitt and to have 
 been erected by him in 1764. (7) In his day Bouquet was 
 the most prominent figure in the British army in the West. 
 He was at the junction of the Ohio and Monongahela rivers 
 many times, and was there several times during the period 
 
10 Fort Pitt 
 
 from 1763 to and including 1764. There is no record of 
 the date on which he left Fort Pitt at the conclusion of the 
 Kiyasuta and Pontiac War, but it was no doubt before the 
 end of 1763. When the Indians became troublesome again 
 the next year, he was in Philadelphia, (8) and from there 
 was summoned to lead an army against the Indians on the 
 Muskingum River, as has already appeared- On September 
 17, 1764, he arrived at Fort Pitt preparatory to entering 
 upon this campaign on which he started on October 3rd, 
 returning to Fort Pitt at its conclusion on November 28, 
 1764. The regular troops were immediately sent to garri- 
 son the different posts farther East, and the Provincials 
 to their homes, Bouquet proceeding to Philadelphia, where 
 he arrived early in January, 1765. (9) If the Redoubt was 
 erected in 1764 by Colonel Bouquet, it must have been 
 sometime between September 17th and the end of that 
 year. 
 
 History has demonstrated that Colonel Bouquet was 
 the best Indian fighter who up to his time had engaged in 
 Indian warfare. Is it likely that such a seasoned cam- 
 paigner so soon after having driven the besieging Indians 
 of Kiyasuta and Pontiac from Fort Pitt, and having met 
 the Muskingum Indians and forced them into making a 
 lasting peace, would erect a building outside of the fort as 
 his headquarters, or for any other purpose? Not even the 
 merest tyro in military affairs would be guilty of such a 
 violation of military science. Nor would an experienced 
 military officer erect a redoubt between two bas- 
 tions, the Redoubt being close to the north bastion 
 and between that and the south bastion. Also 
 would a Redoubt be erected in this location with loop holes 
 facing in the direction of the fort, from which the enemy, 
 if it captured the building, could fire on the fort? The fact 
 that the Redoubt was loop-holed on all sides would indicate 
 that it stood above the level of the rest of the fort, and 
 that the purpose of the loop-holes was to enable the occu- 
 pants to fire over the fort in all directions. 
 
 Zadok Cramer, Pittsburgh's first publisher, in his Navi- 
 gator for 1808, writing of the ruins of Fort Pitt as they 
 appeared at that time, says * * * "within the embankment 
 are still some of its barracks and a strong stone powder 
 
Fort Pitt 71 
 
 magazine, the only remains of the British buildings-" 
 Nothing is said of any remnant of the fort being located 
 outside of the fort. In the article on the Redoubt already 
 referred to, published in The Pittsburgh Gazette of August 
 19, 1831, of which paper Neville B. Craig was the proprietor 
 and editor, no claim is made that the Redoubt was located 
 outside of the fort. This statement was not made until 
 more than a decade later. In 1830, the Honorable Richard 
 Biddle of Pittsburgh procured a copy of Lieutenant Ratz- 
 er's plan of Fort Pitt. This came into the possession of 
 Neville B. Craig and his son, Isaac Craig, then twenty 
 years of age. The two men published articles on the sub- 
 ject of the fort and the Redoubt in the American Pioneer 
 of June, 1842, a monthly publication emanating from Cin- 
 cinnati. (10) The article written by Isaac Craig was illus- 
 trated with Biddle's copy of Ratzer's plan, and on this sev- 
 eral of the present streets were located. On this plan the 
 Redoubt appears outside of the fort and just west of the 
 north bastion and beyond the moat. In his description of 
 the Redoubt, Neville B. Craig also states that it was located 
 "on the outside of the ditch of the fort." 
 
 The descriptions of Fort Pitt and of the Redoubt as 
 they were printed in these two articles, including the map, 
 were followed in 1869 by A. G. Haumann, who drew and 
 published a plan of Pittsburgh as it was supposed to be in 
 1795. In this plan even the mistake made in Ratzer's 
 name was followed, being given as "R." Ratzer instead of 
 "B." Ratzer, and the gardens as laid out by Ratzer east 
 of the fort, were omitted. Haumann's plan with only 
 slight variations has been republished many times since 
 1869, and has always been given out as if it were an orig- 
 inal picture of Pittsburgh, instead of having been labori- 
 ously built up, mostly from data obtained from Neville B. 
 Craig's History of Pittsburgh. The Craig articles and the 
 Haumann plan have been religiously followed by all subse- 
 quent historians, except only by George H. Thurston, who 
 said the Redoubt was erected within the fort. (11) 
 
 Neville B. Craig will always remain Pittsburgh's most 
 eminent historian. To him the city is indebted for the 
 preservation of much of the material relating to the early 
 history of this community, and he is quoted oftener than 
 
72 Fort Pitt 
 
 any other writer on the subject, yet he must be charged 
 with error, unimportant though it may be, in approving 
 the placing of the Redoubt outside of Fort Pitt. As Rat- 
 zer's plan, made in 1761, could not have had on it the Re- 
 doubt which is supposed to have been built at a later date, 
 nor the Pittsburgh streets which came into existence in 
 still more recent times, the question is, were these land- 
 marks placed on the plan by Biddle or by Isaac Craig, with 
 whose article the plan was published. The inference is, 
 from a careful reading of the article, that the Redoubt, 
 as well as the streets, were placed there by Isaac Craig 
 with the approval by his father, Neville B. Craig. 
 
 No authority is given for placing the Redoubt outside 
 of the fort and it must have been done, either because of 
 a wrong construction of the plan, as for instance that the 
 sally port of the fort led in the direction of the spot where 
 the Redoubt was placed, or by reason of a mistaken recol- 
 lection of Neville B. Craig of something which he had heard 
 many years before. 
 
 The plan as published by Isaac Craig gives the scale 
 as three hundred feet to the inch- Measuring from Mar- 
 bury Street, the distance to the Redoubt is about nine hun- 
 dred feet, while the actual distance as appears by the sur- 
 vey in the Deed Registry Office of the City of Pittsburgh, 
 is six hundred and sixty-seven feet. The distance from 
 Marbury Street as placed by Mr. McConway on the copy 
 of the plan procured by him in London, to the center of 
 the north bastion of the fort, is six hundred and sixty feet, 
 which closely approximates the distance from Marbury 
 Street to the location of the Redoubt as appears by the 
 records in the Deed Registry Office of Pittsburgh. Any 
 variation in the distance can be easily accounted for by 
 the fact that the line of Marbury Street as placed by Mr. 
 McConway, in conjunction with the fort, may be slightly 
 different from Marbury Street as located on the ground. 
 From this it would appear that Mr. McConway is right in 
 assuming that the Redoubt stood on the north bastion of 
 the fort. 
 
 That the bastions of the fort were above the level of 
 the remainder of the fort is beyond doubt. The profile 
 attached to Ratzer's plan shows the highest part of the 
 

 00 ^ 
 
 >, p-t 
 
 M 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ►-S 
 
 ^ 
 
 % ^ 
 
 o 
 
Fort Pitt 73 
 
 fort to have been the parapet, which was about fifteen feet 
 above the ground. This fact will not change the contention 
 that the Redoubt was on the bastion, the bastion being 
 merely an extension of the parapet. The contour of the 
 ground at the Point has been much changed since Fort 
 Pitt was erected. At that time the ground was low, and 
 was subject to overflow from the Allegheny River. John 
 McKinney in his description of Fort Duquesne, where he 
 was a prisoner in February, 1756, said, "the waters some- 
 times rise so high that the whole fort is surrounded with 
 it, so that canoes can go around it." (12) In many places 
 the distance from Penn Street to the ground subject to 
 overflow did not exceed one hundred and fifty feet and 
 nowhere two hundred and fifty feet. (13) As late as 1807, 
 Zadok Cramer, writing about the former location of Fort 
 Pitt, stated that on part of the ground there stood a large 
 brewery and two dwellings, and added, "the situ- 
 ation is too low for general building." (14) The 
 brewery referred to was the Point Brewery, then 
 conducted by Colonel O'Hara. The writer in 
 Watson's Annals speaking of this brewery, (15) 
 said, "a part of the brew-house premises fills the 
 place which was a bastion. At a little distance from it 
 there is still a small brick five-sided edifice called the Guard- 
 House, erected by the British after the capture from the 
 French." This was the Redoubt. There is in existence an 
 old plan of Pittsburgh made in 1805, by William Masson 
 (15a) and owned by Mr. Joseph B. Shea of this city, on which 
 the names of the owners of the property are given, 
 (mainly those of the grantees of the Penns) and on 
 which pictures of a few of the more prominent buildings ap- 
 pear. Twenty or thirty feet north of Penn Street and about 
 seven hundred feet west of Marbury Street, there is shown 
 the brewery, a large, two'story structure surmounted by a 
 belfry. It was the north bastion that was located north of 
 this part of Penn Street, and it was the easterly end of the 
 brewery which stood on the site of the bastion, if the writer 
 in Watson's Annals was correct in his statement. Brewery 
 Alley was laid out easterly of the rear line of the brewery 
 and led to it. It was a narrow alley nine feet in width 
 running parallel with Penn Street and about ninety-eight 
 
74 Fort Pitt 
 
 feet north of it. Eight feet north of the location of this 
 alley is the Redoubt. 
 
 The depth of the lots in Wood's plan which ran to the 
 Allegheny River, is given as four hundred and ten feet. 
 Therefore from one hundred and sixty to two hundred and 
 sixty feet must have been the lowlands which overflowed. 
 Since that day there have been great changes in the contour 
 of the ground, it having been raised from eight to seventeen 
 feet. A number of excavations have been made and tim- 
 bers of the old fort uncovered, buried from twelve to fifteen 
 feet underground. The width of the ground between Penn 
 Street and the Allegheny River has not only been widened 
 to four hundred and ten feet, but the Penn Street lots have 
 been increased to a depth of four hundred and twenty feet. 
 In 1836, two acts of the Assembly were passed authorizing 
 the councils of the City of Pittsburgh to lay out Duquesne 
 Way at not less than four hundred and twenty feet north of 
 Penn Street and to establish a grade for the same and to fill 
 up the ground. In pursuance of this authority, in 1839, 
 councils laid out Duquesne Way and it was entirely outside 
 of Wood's plan and ten feet beyond Wood's line; and the 
 land at the Point now extends several hundred feet beyond 
 even Duquesne Way. The north bastion was no doubt 
 built on the ground subject to overflow and was fifteen feet 
 or more above the then level of the ground. If the level of 
 the ground at this place has been raised only ten or twelve 
 feet, what is more reasonable than that the Redoubt, the 
 foundation of which is something over five feet above the 
 present level of the ground, might have been part of the 
 north bastion of the fort ? 
 
 That the north bastion was the most important part 
 of the fort was apparent to military eyes, there can be no 
 doubt. It was the nearest point to the Allegheny River. 
 Across that stream all was Indian country, and from there 
 the attack would occur if at all. This was made plain by 
 General Irvine while commanding here. In December, 
 1781, when there was talk of abandoning Fort Pitt and 
 building a new fort at the mouth of Chartiers Creek, he 
 wrote that in such case all of the fort but the north bastion 
 should be destroyed, and on this there should be placed a 
 strong blockhouse. (16) The belief that there were Re- 
 
Fort Pitt 75 
 
 doubts on the bastions is strengthened, when it is borne 
 in mind that the word Redoubt and Block House, then as 
 now, were used interchangeably, and that Neville B. Craig 
 says there were two or three block houses on the bastions, 
 (17) which undoubtedly meant that they were what we 
 know as redoubts. Nor is it certain that the building was 
 erected in 1764. It is more likely that it was built with 
 the fort and that the tablet with the date was placed in 
 the structure to commemorate the fact that it was occupied 
 by Colonel Bouquet in 1764. 
 
 There are extant two views of early Pittsburgh, the 
 first being that made by Lewis Brantz, the young German, 
 who was in Pittsburgh in 1785, as has already been re- 
 lated, and who was there a second time in 1790, the pic- 
 ture bearing that date. This shows that the ground about 
 Fort Pitt was quite low. The fort is seen, and surmounting 
 the easterly side are two small stack-like projections, 
 which are undoubtedly redoubts, one being on what was 
 apparently intended to represent the north bastion and the 
 other standing on what seems to be the east bastion. 
 Brantz Mayer, the biographer of Lewis Brantz, tells of 
 the remarkable accuracy which the artist displayed in this 
 picture. "Every house at the fort is minutely delineated 
 * * * and forty-five years afterward I saw him point out 
 every place of historical interest in a landscape which art 
 and trade has so transformed." (18) 
 
 The other view of Pittsburgh is the one appearing in 
 the book of General Henri Victor Collot, a French army 
 officer, who was in Pittsburgh in 1796, having been sent 
 out by the French government at the request of M. Adet, 
 the French Minister to the United States, for the purpose 
 of obtaining minute details of the political, commercial 
 and military state of the western part of the continent. 
 (19) In this picture also a structure is seen which appears 
 to be the fort and here there are redoubt-like buildings 
 rising above the main structure. The fort of course, had 
 been abandond at this time, but Collot said "one still sees 
 the remains of it. It is a regular pentagon of which today 
 the parapets have fallen into the moat, and it is neither 
 surrounded nor covered, either by stone or by palisades, 
 and it is open on all sides." 
 
76 Fort Pitt 
 
 II. 
 In Later Days. 
 
 The Redoubt was acquired by new owners, going early 
 into the hands of Colonel O'Hara. It was rented to tenants, 
 became surrounded by manufacturing establishments, and 
 the character of the tenants changed from year to year 
 and the building deteriorated. W. G. Lyford has left an 
 extended account of the Redoubt as he saw it in 1837- (20) 
 "A part of this fort, however, so far as houses constitute 
 a part, must yet be remaining; or a block house and 
 officers' quarters must have been erected on or near the 
 same spot, soon after the period last mentioned; for such 
 buildings exist — they are of brick and two stories high ; the 
 former low pitched, adjoin each other, and carry in their 
 appearance everything of a military feature. The heavy 
 timbers, in which the loop-holes are mortised, are on the 
 side next the city, about half the height of the building, 
 and probably serve at this time to support the floor of the 
 second story. 
 
 "I asked permission of the occupant, a pleasant looking 
 German, whose name is John Martin, to enter his citadel, 
 which he readily granted, and found the lower room taste- 
 fully finished and furnished; but he could give me no 
 further information, than that he had a lease on it at $40 
 a year. I suggested to him the advantage he might derive, 
 by opening the room (which is about 20 feet square), dur- 
 ing the season of travel, for the accommodation of 
 strangers, and have in preparation some light cakes, lem- 
 onade, ices, fruits, etc., for that numbers would be pleased 
 to visit the military relic, if they could do so under circum- 
 stances other than intrusive, and while he obliged such, he 
 would profit liberally by the pleasant speculation. His wife 
 just at this moment entered the room, laughing, from an 
 adjoining shed, and wiping her arms (for she appeared to 
 have been washing) said, 'Dare Jon, didn't I tell de so, 
 of den? hear vat de man sa.' John laughed likewise, and. 
 replied, *ah, Fms doo old now; and pesides, yoo nose I cot 
 vork petter dan dat.' 
 
The Old Redoubt in 1843. 
 
 From Day's "Historical Collections of the State of Pennsylvania." 
 
 The Old Redoubt in 1893. 
 
Fort Pitt 77 
 
 "These buildings are located in the midst of lumber 
 yards and workshops, very near the point at which the 
 two rivers unite; but as it is difficult finding them, from 
 the nature of the materials with which they are sur- 
 rounded, some of which appear as ancient as the edifices 
 themselves, it is probable that few other of the inhabitants 
 are acquainted with their existence than those whose vo- 
 cations call them into that section. It is a subject which 
 at present does not interest business men." 
 
 William Ferguson, an English traveler, visited the Re- 
 doubt in 1856, and said it v^^as "a small brick house with 
 arched windows and doorways, now inhabited by the 
 'lowest class.' " (21) Only at rare intervals during these 
 later years while the Redoubt was used as a dwelling, was 
 it occupied by families of the character of those living 
 there in its early days. Among these were the parents of 
 Professor Michael J. McMahon, the Pittsburgh educator, 
 who was for many years Principal of the First Ward Public 
 School. The family resided in the Redoubt during the last 
 years of the decade beginning in 1850, and in the decade 
 beginning in 1860, and it was during this time that Pro- 
 fessor McMahon was born there. 
 
 What is now called the Old City Hall, situated on 
 Smithfield Street, was dedicated on May 23, 1872. During 
 the course of its construction, the stone tablet was removed 
 from the Redoubt and placed in the rear wall of the build- 
 ing, opposite the main entrance on Smithfield Street, at the 
 top of the first flight of stairs, and immediately beneath 
 the window containing a representation of the seal of the 
 city. After the Redoubt became the property of the 
 Daughters of the American Revolution, the stone was 
 taken from the City Hall and replaced in its old location 
 on the Redoubt. 
 
 The writer recalls visiting the building in his boyhood 
 when it was occupied by an Irish family, who besides living 
 there had adopted, very likely unconsciously, Mr. Lyford's 
 suggestion, and in addition to showing the place to visitors, 
 were selling candy, lemonade, cigars, etc. The Redoubt 
 was also occasionally used for less legitimate purposes, an 
 instance occurring after the passage by the Legislature of 
 the Brooks High License Law in 1887, when the building 
 
78 Fort Pitt 
 
 was used as a "speakeasy," as drinking houses were called 
 where liquor was sold illegally. 
 
 Brewery Alley had been abandoned for more than half 
 a century, and as the Redoubt was in an obscure location, 
 it was difficult of approach. It could be reached either 
 from First Street, vacated by the city when the Pennsyl- 
 vania Railroad took possession of the block in which the 
 Redoubt is located, or by way of Point Alley, also vacated 
 at the same time. It was surrounded by poorly constructed, 
 shabby brick and frame houses, with a frame stable or 
 two close by. Hemming it in on all sides were manufac- 
 turing establishments, forges, foundries, boiler works, 
 planing mills, lumber yards and machine shops. 
 
 The settlement about the Redoubt was unique in Pitts- 
 burgh. The owner of the land lived in England, and leased 
 it in small lots for long terms of years to persons who built 
 their own dwellings, or released the ground for manu- 
 facturing purposes. It was the most densely populated 
 district in the city, and according to Rev. Dr. A. A. Lambing, 
 who had an intimate knowledge of conditions in that lo- 
 cality, being pastor of the Roman Catholic "Church of Our 
 Lady of Consolation," (22) located on the east side of First 
 Street only a short distance from the Redoubt, who, writing 
 in 1880, said: "It would not be exaggeration to say that 
 it would not be difficult to find at least a hundred families 
 who each occupied a single room, and that perhaps not. 
 more than twelve by fourteen feet." The Redoubt was as 
 crowded with tenants as the other houses. The people 
 were with very few exceptions, Irish Catholics from County 
 Galway, who had settled there about twenty-five* years 
 earlier, and Gaelic was the language generally spoken, even 
 by children born there. The people were poor and earned 
 their daily bread and little more. From 1868 on, they had 
 a church and a school of their own, the "Church of Our 
 Lady of Consolation," located in a remodeled dwelling on 
 First Street. And in the church a priest preached sermons 
 in Gaelic, and the district had another attraction in addi- 
 tion to the Redoubt. (23) 
 
 All this had vanished; the shabby settlement has dis- 
 appeared. The Irish are there no longer. The oldest among 
 them are long since dead, and their children and grand- 
 
Fort Pitt 79 
 
 children have scattered over the city and to more distant 
 points. The houses, the stables, the manufacturing estab- 
 lishments have gone, the very contour of the ground has 
 changed and now along Duquesne Way one sees a huge 
 brick warehouse extending along the entire length of the 
 block; a long low freight house runs parallel with it, and 
 leading to the buildings are railroad tracks, some low on 
 the ground, others elevated high in the air. Nestling 
 among these marvels of modern industrial life, sole re- 
 minder of the life that was, there still remains the 
 OLD REDOUBT. 
 
 REFERENCES AND NOTE. 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 1. John F. Watson. Annals of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, 
 Philadelphia, 1857, Vol. II, p. 131. 
 
 2. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, pp. 463-464. 
 
 3. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madi- 
 son, Wis., pp. 170-172. 
 
 4. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Advance on the Zipper Ohio, 
 Madison, 1916, p. 175. 
 
 5. Neville B. Craig. In The American Pioneer, Cincinnati, 1844, 
 Vol. I, p. 239. 
 
 6. Major Samuel S. Forman. Narrative of a Journey Down the 
 Ohio and Mississippi in 1789-90, Cincinnati, 1888, pp. 19-25. 
 
 7. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
 p. 92. 
 
 Neville B. Craig. In The American Pioneer, Supra. 
 Harris's General Business Directory, Pittsburgh, 1841, p. 5. 
 
 8. Historical Account of Bouquet's Expedition, Cincinnati, 1868, 
 p. 33. 
 
 9. Ibid, p. 81. 
 
 10. Isaac Craig. In The American Pioneer, Supra, p. 237. 
 
 11. George H. Thurston. Allegheny County's Hu7idred Years, Pitts- 
 burgh, 1888, p. 15. 
 
 12. Olden Time. Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 40. 
 
 13. James Ross. Colonel George Wood's Plan of Pittsburgh, P. 
 B. Recorder's Office of Allegheny County. 
 
 14. The Navigator, Pittsburgh, 1808, p. 33. 
 
 15. John F. Watson, Supra. 
 
 15a. Note. — William Masson, who prepared this plan, was appar- 
 ently the sailmaker who in the early part of the Nineteenth 
 Century resided on Water Street, between Smithfield Street and 
 Cherry Alley. The Pittsburgh Directories for both 1815 and 
 1819 have him as residing at this place, and according to a 
 deed filed in the Recorder's Office of Allegheny County he had 
 purchased the property in 1813. The belief that he was the 
 author of the plan is strengthened by the fact that the plan 
 contains pictures of eleven sailing ships of various classes, all 
 of which are labeled as having been built at Pittsburgh or in 
 the vicinity, and about which hardly anyone could have had knowl- 
 edge, unless he was intimately connected with shipbuilding. 
 
80 Fort Pitt 
 
 16. C. W. Butterfield. Supra, p. 78. 
 
 17. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Supra, p. 187. 
 
 18. Henry R. Schoolcraft, LL. D. Information Respecting the 
 History, Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the 
 United States, Philadelphia, 1853, Part III, p. 336. 
 
 19. Georges Henri Victor Collot. Voyage Dans L'Amerique Sep- 
 tenroale ou Description, Etc., Paris, 1826, Vol. I, p. 61. 
 
 20. W. G. Lyford. InThe Western Address Directory for 1837, 
 Baltimore, 1837, pp. 45-47. 
 
 21. William Ferguson, LL.D. America, by River and Rail, London, 
 MDCCCLVI, pp. 246-247. 
 
 22. Rev. A. A. Lambing. A History of the Catholic Church in the 
 Dioceses of Pittsburgh and Allegheny, New York, 1880, pp. 137- 
 138. 
 
 23. Rev A. A. Lambing. Mary's First Shrine in the Wilderness, 
 Pittsburgh, 1888, pp. 13-14. 
 

 
 
 
 f^'C^W: ^0^ :i 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 Av ... V *-° 
 
 ,0 
 
 ?>■ <^, Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
 
 -^z Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 
 ^^ Treatment Date: 
 
 
 
 PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES, L.P. 
 111 Thomson Park Drive 
 Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
 
aV ,< 
 
 
 b V^ n'.-^^^-. -^^Q^ 
 
 •^, 
 
 .-^c 
 
 v^ 
 
 
 i9^^ 
 
 
 
 ■•^<.„ .^-^^ • 
 
 
 
 ^i-^c. \wmw: .v^^^ -.«ii^r .^"-^^ 
 
 
 o-^o.