THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 D3~7s 
 
 «UWS KTHKAl SURVEY 
 
SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2012 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/somelasallejournOOdela 
 
INSTITUTE OF JESUIT HISTORY PUBLICATION 
 
 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 By 
 
 JEAN DELANGLEZ, S. J., PH. D 
 
 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY 
 LOYOLA UNIVERSITY, CHICAGO 
 
 CHICAGO 
 INSTITUTE OF JESUIT HISTORY 
 
 1938 
 
Copyright, 1938, by Institute of Jesuit History 
 
PREFACE 
 
 The series of studies included within the pages of this book 
 are not intended to tell the entire story of La Salle's life as he 
 lived it along the waterways and the Great Lakes of North Amer- 
 ica between 1667 and 1685. Robert Cavelier, Sieur de la Salle, 
 has already found biographers who have recounted his deeds as 
 an explorer and trader and frontiersman of the advancing French 
 colonial empire in the Mississippi Valley. It is assumed, then, 
 that the elements upon which his fame rests are known. There 
 were other elements, other influences, other characters of history 
 behind the scenes, and these were in great part responsible for 
 what fame he attained and for his inglorious end. After all, La 
 Salle, apart from romanticised narratives of his life's work, dealt 
 with other men. These weighed him in view of their own interests 
 and projects, weighed his capabilities as a leader, his shortcom- 
 ings, his good qualities. There was very little of disinterested 
 friendliness to be found among those associated with La Salle, 
 as this detailed documentary analysis reveals. 
 
 In the following pages many of the men who had dealings 
 with La Salle appear as persons of import to the drama of his 
 life. Their personalities with varying motives, their characters, 
 literally walk out of the documents. Other historical personages, 
 who at a much later date concerned themselves with the fame of 
 La Salle as an explorer, come into the scope of the studies. La 
 Salle's claim to fame lies in his early explorations, in his trading 
 ventures and fort building, in his journey toward the mouth of 
 the Mississippi, and in his expedition to Matagorda Bay. The first 
 and last of these items are considered in this work. The first and 
 second studies narrow the extent of La Salle's explorations during 
 the first years of his life in America. Some apology may be due 
 to historians who have stated or who have suspected that Cave- 
 lier did not reach the Ohio River or the Mississippi during these 
 £ early years, but no apology need be offered for the presentation 
 of documentary proofs to this effect. Incidentally, the study of 
 "La Salle and the Ohio" is reproduced here, with some few 
 modifications, from Mid-America, where it was printed recently 
 \ in two parts under the heading "La Salle, 1669-1673." The third 
 study pertains to the last years of La Salle's activity and reveals 
 the European background of the ill-starred venture to Texas. 
 
 This volume comes as the first of the Studies of the Institute 
 
 v 
 
 
v i PREFACE 
 
 of Jesuit History of Loyola University. In considering the limits 
 of the field of research appropriate to the Institute, the members 
 have become aware of the necessity of preliminary ground clear- 
 ing as preparation for a new interpretation of Jesuit activities in 
 the Great Lakes region and in the Mississippi Valley. Such clear- 
 ance involves a study of the men who stand forth as the great 
 builders of colonial times. Obviously, the economic, the military, 
 and the civil penetration of the French cannot be conveniently 
 divorced from that of the missionary. This and the forthcoming 
 interpretations are in fine designed to be wider than the indi- 
 vidual interests of the times, and more comprehensive by reason 
 of an approach from various and complex angles. 
 
 Jerome V. Jacobsen, S. J. 
 Director, The Institute of Jesuit History 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 PREFACE V 
 
 LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 
 
 PART ONE: THE AUTHORITIES 3 
 
 PART TWO : THE CARTOGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE ... 23 
 
 DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 43 
 
 PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 65 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 101 
 
LA SALLE 
 
 and 
 THE OHIO 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 
 
 PART ONE: THE AUTHORITIES 
 
 Where was La Salle journeying from October, 1669, to the 
 beginning of 1673? This question has divided historians into 
 several camps. The answer of one group is that La Salle ex- 
 plored the Ohio; others contend that besides the exploration of 
 the Ohio River at this time as far as the rapids near Louisville, 
 he reached the great river on another journey by way of the 
 Great Lakes. In either opinion La Salle found the Mississippi 
 before the epochal expedition of Marquette and Jolliet in June, 
 1673. Students of the question in this country are almost at one 
 against an upper Mississippi finding by La Salle. 
 
 Pierre Margry and Francis Parkman 
 This dispute over priority of discovery arose solely through 
 the ingrained prejudice of one man, Pierre Margry, Curator of 
 the Archives of France. To convince the world that La Salle 
 was "the prince of explorers," as great if not greater than 
 Cortes, Pizarro, and other Spanish Conquistadores, had become 
 an idee fixe with Margry. This zeal for the cause of Robert 
 Cavelier sprang in part from an antipathy toward the Jesuits 
 that was little short of a phobia, and laboring under this com- 
 plex prejudice, the French archivist compiled his much-quoted 
 edition of documents on the discovery and exploration of the 
 Mississippi Valley. 1 La Salle in truth never laid claim to the 
 role of discoverer of the Mississippi as established for him by 
 Margry, 2 yet he did ambition a place among the great con- 
 querors. Hurt in pride because a mere Canadian of humble birth, 
 
 i P. Margry, Decouvertes et Etablissements des Frangais dans VOuest 
 et dans le Sud de VAmerique Septentrionale, 1611^-115^, Paris, 1876-1888. 
 
 2 It is very interesting to note the various views entertained with regard 
 to the Jolliet-Marquette expedition of 1673. La Salle disparaged the Jolliet 
 narratives; Margry claimed that La Salle preceded the Jesuit and the 
 Canadian; Chesnel is "willing to concede that Jolliett and Marquette de- 
 scended the Mississippi down to the 33°, but . . . denies that they were the 
 first"; two Franciscans denied that the expedition ever took place at all, 
 Father Douay, in Chrestien Leclercq, Premier etablissement de la Foy, 
 Paris, 1691, II, 364-366, and Father Hennepin, Nouvelle Decouverte, Utrecht, 
 1697, 293-294; the latter states as a conclusive proof that Jolliet told him 
 that he never went down the Mississippi, but remained among the Huron 
 and Ottawa Indians. Gabriel Gravier is of opinion that the expedition really 
 took place; he generously puts it on a par with the two explorations of the 
 Great River by La Salle in 1671 and 1672. Both Jesuits and Franciscans are 
 wrong, he says, the first for denying the priority of La Salle, the second for 
 saying that the Jolliet-Marquette expedition never took place at all. 
 
 3 
 
4 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Louis Jolliet, and Marquette, to whom he was formerly a Jesuit 
 confrere, 3 had preceded his arrival at the legendary river, La 
 Salle manipulated the names of rivers of the Valley to show that 
 he had found something different from what they found, and, 
 moreover, that the great river of the Valley was not the Mis- 
 sissippi but the Chuckagoa of De Soto. His re-discovery of this 
 latter would link him with a Conquistador. He disparaged Jol- 
 liet as an explorer and observer and decried the young Canadi- 
 an's narrative as teeming with "great mistakes"; 4 still he never 
 attributed to himself the journeys ascribed to him by Margry 
 and his followers, Gravier, Chesnel, and others. 
 
 Francis Parkman, whose opinion was of great weight in this 
 country, held that La Salle's priority in the Mississippi discovery 
 had not been proved, but, he wrote, that "he discovered the 
 Ohio may be regarded as established." 5 If Parkman had been 
 allowed to check the documents supplied to him by Margry, he 
 would have held differently. John Gilmary Shea, in an acknowl- 
 edgment to Parkman for his Jesuits in North America in the 
 Seventeenth Century, told Parkman he had allowed himself to 
 be influenced by Margry, who belongs, wrote Shea, to the mock- 
 ing section of the younger French generation of France. When 
 Parkman communicated this news to Margry, he did not deny 
 this influence, but rather remarked that he sent Shea what 
 appeared to be a flippant answer. 6 How Parkman should have 
 been influenced by a man like Margry is beyond our concern. 
 
 Another appraisal of Margry's well known work has to be 
 made unfortunately at this late date, and in this study the con- 
 viction grows firm that Margry by publishing documents to his 
 own purpose has obstructed and confused scholarship through 
 several generations. Such a realization comes when his printed 
 page is compared with the document, and the omissions, addi- 
 tions, changes, and other liberties taken with the originals stand 
 revealed. The first three of his six volumes of documents treat 
 almost exclusively of La Salle. To say nothing of the badly 
 edited texts of copies made by Margry, changes in the punctua- 
 tion of the original occur, distorting the author's meaning. Dates 
 
 3 Marc de Villiers du Terrage, La decouverte du Missouri et Vhistoire du 
 fort d'Orleans, 1673-1728, Paris, 1925, 11. 
 
 4 Margry, II, 81, 168, 178, 244, etc. 
 
 s La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West, Boston, 1907, 25. 
 
 s "Letters of Francis Parkman to Pierre Margry, with an Introductory 
 note by John Spencer Bassett," in Smith College Studies in History, Vm, 
 1923, 129; hereinafter quoted as Smith College Studies. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 5 
 
 of certain documents are omitted, and, considering the aim of 
 the compiler, not accidentally. Some documents are abridged, or 
 synopsized, or cut into several sections and printed at random 
 through the volumes. Italics are used where the editor thought 
 a passage proved his point, or even to no purpose, and are lack- 
 ing when the author of the document underscored a passage. 
 These items, together with the division of the compilation "into 
 chapters with bastard titles as those of a sensational news- 
 paper," 7 and the choice of documents, make it quite evident that 
 the prime intent of the compiler was to prove a cherished thesis. 8 
 Not a few of the materials selected were already known to 
 American scholars, 9 while some of the more important had been 
 published in translation in Documents Relative to the Colonial 
 History of New York, with this difference that where the Amer- 
 ican publication gave the document in full, Margry was satisfied 
 with printing an extract. To him the fundamental rule of the 
 context meant nothing. Nor is the provenience of the document 
 stated, except in a confused manner at the end of the third 
 volume for the contents of the first three volumes, and Margry 
 did not see fit to state whether the document he supposedly had 
 seen was the original or a copy, and if a copy, whether an early 
 or a late one. Until the Library of Congress had had photostats 
 or true copies made and checked by disinterested experts, it was 
 
 7 John G. Shea, The Bursting of Pierre Margry's La Salle Bubble, New 
 York, 1879; this tract first appeared in the New York Freeman's Journal. 
 
 s Margry's compilation does not even belong to that class spoken of 
 by Bernheim, "welche mit tendenzioser Auswahl aus umfangreichen Ma- 
 terial ausgehoben sind . . . ohne das die einzelnen Dokumente sebst ge- 
 falsche waren," Lehrbuch der historischen Methode, Leipzig, 1894, 249. 
 Henri Lorin, he Comte de Frontenac, Paris, 1895, xii, "Parmi les docu- 
 ments, tous reproduits avec grand soin et references aux collections origi- 
 nales, il en est qui paraissent de pure pol£mique et d'assez mediocre 
 valeur." When the document is compared with the printed page, very little 
 care is noticed. Pierre Heinrich, La Louisiane sous la Compagnie des Indes, 
 1717-1731, Paris, n. d., xiv, spoke thus of Margry's compilation: "auquel on 
 peut reprocher son arbitraire dans le choix des pieces publiees." Cf. Ernest 
 Gagnon, Louis Jolliet, Montreal, 1926, 16-17. De Villiers was led astray by 
 the arbitrariness of the selection. From a letter of Bernou to Renaudot, 
 Margry, III, 74, de Villiers in his "La Louisiane, Histoire de son nom et 
 de ses frontieres successives, 1684-1819," in Journal de la Societe des 
 Americanistes de Paris, XXI, n. s., 1929, 19, concluded that Bernou was not 
 on friendly terms with La Salle. It is evident when this letter of Bernou 
 is replaced where it belongs in the series, that Bernou was not unfriendly 
 toward La Salle at this time, nor was La Salle unfriendly toward Bernou. 
 
 9 In the first volume there were two documents which Parkman had 
 not seen, Parkman to Margry, 1876, August 8, Smith College Studies, VIII, 
 169. They were Tonty's relation and the "accusations piquantes de Fron- 
 tenac," the nature of the latter document will appear later. Cf. also Park- 
 man to Margry, 1882, October 17, ibid., 196. 
 
6 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 difficult to pass judgment on the compilation, and the student 
 was compelled to rely upon Margry's defective copies. 
 
 Margry published the first article in which La Salle's priority 
 in the discovery of the Mississippi was asserted, in 1862. 10 There- 
 after, he held over the heads of American scholars the threat 
 that they would have to revise their concepts about the begin- 
 nings of the history of the great Valley, asserting that he had 
 in his possession materials proving their former ideas erroneous. 
 Meanwhile, he used his official position as archivist to impede 
 American investigators and to prevent them from profiting from 
 the contents of the Archives of Paris. The story of how Mar- 
 gry's six volumes came to be published has been told. 11 Addi- 
 tional light was thrown upon the subject when Parkman's let- 
 ters to Margry were printed. 12 
 
 After the failure of Harrisse to raise the money for publi- 
 cation, Parkman made use of his influence with members of 
 Congress to have voted a subsidy of ten thousand dollars to 
 print the papers, which Margry had led them to understand 
 contained much more than he chose to disclose. "Whatever Mar- 
 gry was to other men, to Parkman he was a man honored and 
 esteemed for his character," wrote the author of the preface of 
 the letters of Parkman to Margry. After reading this corre- 
 spondence, one has a higher idea of the forbearing kindness of 
 Parkman and a lower estimate of Margry's character as an his- 
 torian. The present writer, not having seen the letters of Margry 
 to Parkman, judges the former solely by Parkman's answers, 
 and he sees Margry as suspicious, distrustful, and petty by na- 
 ture, apparently a hypochondriac and completely without appre- 
 ciation of his debt to Parkman. 13 That Parkman knew of Mar- 
 gry's prejudices is evident from his warning against including 
 propaganda papers among those about to be published under the 
 
 10 "Les Normands dans les Vallees de l'Ohio et du Mississippi," in 
 Journal General de VInstruction publique, July-September, 1862. 
 
 ii J. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America, Boston and 
 New York, 1884, V, 241-245; cf. Parkman, La Salle and the Discovery of 
 the Great West, Boston, 1907, Preface to the Eleventh Edition, vii-x; 
 Charles Hought Farnham, A Life of Francis Parkman, Boston, 1900, 155- 
 157. 
 
 12 Smith College Studies, VIII, 123-206. 
 
 is "Vous m'accusez d'avoir manque" de courage parceque je n'ai pas 
 trouve un libraire pour entreprendre la publication de votre collection. En 
 effet j'aurais pu en trouver un a condition de le garantir personnellement 
 de toute perte, ce que je n'ai pas voulu faire. Aussi j'ai travaille" tout l'hiver 
 pour porter congres a vous voter de l'argent." Parkman to Margry, 1876, 
 May 8, ibid., 166. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 7 
 
 auspices of Congress. 14 Parkman knew also that if Congress was 
 willing to finance publication of documents to make them more 
 accessible to students of the history of the Valley, Congress was 
 not willing to waste public funds by printing seventeenth-cen- 
 tury French lampoons, or idiosyncracies of a nineteenth-century 
 petit bourgeois. 15 
 
 At the time of publication, since nobody was able either to 
 view the original documents or the copies made by Margry, the 
 question of their authenticity was raised by suspicious scholars 
 in England and France. An unsavory incident was recalled. The 
 honesty of the compiler had been questioned before, for to prove 
 that French and not Portuguese navigators were first to reach 
 the Guinea Coast of Africa, 16 Margry had previously produced 
 a document of exceedingly amazing provenience. 17 Yet in spite 
 of the wariness of some scholars, a similar document was slipped 
 in and published, as shall be seen, by Margry among those for 
 North America in Decouvertes et Etablissements des Frangais. 
 Parkman was not aware of what had taken place in 1867-1868, 
 as is clear from his letter of February 12, 1877, acknowledging 
 the arrival of the proof-sheets for the first volume of the col- 
 lection. Parkman adds in the letter: 
 
 That gentleman whom you know (Henry Harrisse) is beginning to get 
 busy. A professor of Harvard University, of which I am one of the trus- 
 tees, wrote to him last December to ask for some information about a 
 point of French law. M(onsieur) H(arrisse) inserted in his answer a few 
 lines of postscript which the professor sent me. Here they are: "If you 
 should meet Mr. Francis Parkman, tell him to be very careful how he uses 
 the documents in Mr. Margry's new book. I have a letter from Mr. Meyer, 
 
 14 Parkman to Margry, 1873, May 1, ibid., 140. Cf. Margry, Introduc- 
 tion to volume IV, iii, where the compiler says that in this volume and 
 in those following, he would be "plus libre que je ne l'etais pour la publi- 
 cation des trois volumes qui precedent ou bien des passions sont en jeu 
 . . . ," that is, Margry resented the fact that he was not allowed to print 
 more propaganda papers. 
 
 is The Introductions are not found in the American edition. 
 
 is Les Navigations frangaises et la Revolution maritime du XIV e au 
 XVI* siecle, d'apres les documents inedits tires de France, d'Angleterre, 
 d'Espagne et d'ltalie, Paris, 1867. The first section entitled: "Les marins 
 de Normandie aux cotes de Guinee avant les Portugais," 11-70, is a fine 
 example of romantic mid-nineteenth century sentimentality in historical 
 research. 
 
 17 Cf. Richard Henry Major's preface to Select Letters of Christopher 
 Columbus, Second Edition, London, 1870, xlv-xlviii, where this author takes 
 Margry to task for having "put forth the empty pretension that the dis- 
 covery of America was due to the influence of French teaching." The point 
 at issue was the date of publication of the Imago Mundi of Pierre d'Ailly. 
 "M. Margry," says Major, "indeed asserts, but without giving his authority, 
 that in the Columbian Library at Seville are d'Ailly's treatises printed at 
 Nuremberg in 1^2. This is in contravention of all the bibliographers . . ." 
 
8 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Professor in the College of France (College de France), and one of the 
 commission appointed by the State for publishing historical documents, 
 stating that the reason why they always declined publishing Mr. Margry's 
 documents is that they are not convinced of their authenticity and ascribed 
 his always refusing to exhibit the originals or stating where they are to 
 the belief that some of them have been manufactured by Mr. de Rosny." 
 
 This same professor told me that Mr. Harrisse has a brother employed 
 in one of the departments at Washington. I wrote to Mr. Spofford (The 
 Librarian of the Library of Congress) to put him on guard against the 
 preventions that they might try to insinuate. It is unnecessary to remind 
 you of the importance of indicating at the end of the third volume at 
 the latest, the provenience of all the documents. It is true that they speak 
 for themselves, but there are few people intelligent enough or sufficiently 
 educated to fully appreciate the testimony of their internal evidence, and 
 anyway we must forestall all protests. 
 
 Who is this M. de Rosny? I think I correctly decifered this name, 
 although badly written in the letter of M. H.is 
 
 The answer to Parkman's last question is found in the Pref- 
 ace of Major's book on Prince Henry of Portugal. 19 Major ends 
 his discussion thus: "With respect to the documents now pro- 
 duced by Mr. Margry, the sum of the investigation yields a re- 
 sult which, unless further explanation can be given, is unavoid- 
 able, that, as all the surrounding evidence is not only not cor- 
 roborative, but contradictory and condemnatory, an unauthenti- 
 cated document, with internal indications of not being genuine, 
 and represented by a copy of a copy, which is itself not forth- 
 coming, is worth absolutely nothing." 20 
 
 Although the provenience of the notorious Recit d'wn ami de 
 Vabbe de Galinee is not quite as peculiar as that of the document 
 referred to by Major, it is almost so. The Recit is one of the two 
 documents on which the exploration of the Ohio by La Salle in 
 1669-1670 is partly based, and the priority of his exploration of 
 the Mississippi is wholly based; as for the other document on 
 which the exploration of the Ohio is based, there is a statement 
 of its author to the effect that for those years of La Salle's 
 career he had no data at all. 
 
 The other champion of this priority is Gabriel Gravier, 21 for 
 whom the vague, suspected documents are more definite, more 
 genuine than they appeared to Margry. And it speaks volumes 
 
 is Smith College Studies, VIII, 173. 
 
 19 Richard Henry Major, The Life of Prince Henry of Portugal, Lon- 
 don, 1868. 
 
 20 Major, ibid., Preface, li. 
 
 21 Gabriel Gravier, Decouvertes et Etablissements de Cavelier de la 
 Salle de Rouen, dans VAmerique du Nord, Rouen, 1870; Cavelier de la Salle 
 de Rouen, Paris, 1871. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 9 
 
 for Gravier's broad-mindedness, when it is remembered that he 
 accepted their contents as apodictic proofs before ever having 
 seen them. 22 Gravier's reasons are not far to seek. Besides being 
 anticlerical, Gravier was de Rouen, as was La Salle, and hence 
 civic pride played its part. Margry and Gravier became united 
 by strong bonds of mutual admiration, 23 and thirty years later 
 Paul Chesnel attached himself to their school, contributing lit- 
 tle more than volume to the chorus. 24 
 
 On the appearance of the first three volumes of the Decou- 
 vertes, Shea wrote his sharp criticism, The Bursting of Pierre 
 Margry's La Salle Bubble, in which he called attention to Mar- 
 gry's duplication of documents printed elsewhere, sometimes at 
 greater length, and notably in Broadhead. Winsor tabulated 
 names and arguments lined up for and against the priority of 
 La Salle in the discovery of the Mississippi. 25 The exploration of 
 the Ohio by La Salle was taken for granted. This came into ques- 
 tion when American scholars focused their attention on the ac- 
 counts of Virginia travelers, and when the Ohio legend, invented 
 by Bernou and Renaudot, was thrust upon Parkman by Margry, 
 the American could not defend himself, for his way was barred 
 in that he had access only to copies of materials which it pleased 
 the archivist to give him. Having accepted the legend, Parkman 
 lent his name unwittingly as proof for it to later historians. 26 
 
 Although many have suspected the accounts of La Salle's discovery of 
 the Ohio, the majority of historians have accepted it on very slender evi- 
 dence. Mr. Frank E. Melvin of the University of Illinois has finally proved 
 in our opinion, by the use of new evidence, its falsity. His essay on the 
 subject will soon be published.27 The latest writer concerning this region, 
 Mr. Hannahs is also prepared to reject the tale as a fabrication, and writes 
 that it is "only a question of time when the evidence will be declared wholly 
 false."29 
 
 A little more than a decade after Alvord and Bidgood wrote, 
 De Villiers pointed out that the two documents by means of 
 which the legend was imposed upon the world, were in reality 
 
 22 Cavelier de la Salle de Rouen, 22-23. 23 ibid., 5-6. 
 
 24 Paul Chesnel, Histoire de Cavelier de la Salle, Paris, 1901. 
 
 25 Winsor, Narrative, V, 245-246. 
 
 26 Clarence Walworth Alvord and Lee Bidgood, The First Explorations 
 of the Trans- Allegheny Region by the Virginians, 1650-1674, Cleveland, 
 1912, 20. 
 
 27 Dr. T. C. Pease of the University of Illinois informed the writer 
 that to his knowledge the essay of Melvin was not published. 
 
 28 Charles A. Hanna, The Wilderness Trail, New York, 1911, II, 87 ff. 
 
 29 Alvord and Bidgood, ibid., 24 note 8; cf. C. W. Alvord, The Illinois 
 Country, 1673-1818, Springfield, 1920, 78. 
 
10 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 mere modifications of the Galinee account and belonged wholly 
 to imaginative literature. 30 
 
 It is now the purpose of this paper to submit the evidence 
 contained in the two documents upon which the claims are 
 based, that is, the Memoire sur le projet du Sieur de la Salle 
 and the Recit d'un ami de Vdbbe de Galinee, to a critical examina- 
 tion with regard to their authorship and their contents. 
 
 Bernou 
 Regarding authorship of the documents, Parkman thought 
 that the first one was written by La Salle, modestly speaking 
 of himself in the third person. 31 De Villiers on the other hand 
 stated that the Memoire sur le projet du Sieur da la SaZZe 32 was 
 most certainly written by La Salle's "agent," Abbe Bernou. 33 
 The document printed by Margry is in the hand of Bernou, 34 
 who, as will appear, wrote many other relations of the journeys 
 of La Salle. Authorship of the second document 35 is attributed 
 to Abbe Renaudot. The reasons which would prompt the two 
 abbes to fabricate these documents are easily found. Renaudot 
 belonged to the Jansenistic faction; he was a friend of Arnauld, 
 the leader of the group of bitter enemies of the Jesuits, and he 
 felt that by imagining one or two La Salle journeys, the priority 
 of a discovery attributed to a Jesuit could be overthrown, and 
 their Relations found at fault. Renaudot was not the man to 
 hesitate in inventing such imaginary explorations. 36 It must be 
 stated, however, that neither Renaudot, nor Bernou, nor La 
 Salle, ever made public such a claim; it was necessary to wait 
 more than two centuries before Margry made this "discovery." 
 As for the Ohio, the French Government asserted that it had 
 been discovered by La Salle, 37 but not one shred of proof was 
 
 30 De Villiers, La decouverte du Missouri, 2-18. 
 
 3i La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West, 24, note 3. 
 
 32 Margry, I, 329-336. 
 
 33 La decouverte du Missouri, 11; cf. C. W. Alvord, The Illinois Coun- 
 try, 78. 
 
 34 Bibliotheque Nationale, hereinafter quoted as BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:49-50v. 
 
 as Recit d'un ami de Vabbe de Galinee, Margry, I, 345-402. The present 
 writer did not see the document in the Archives Nationales, K 1232: n. 1, 
 111 p. The entry in Surrey's Calendar, under the date [1678, June], states 
 that there are omissions in Margry. Cf. the note in Margry, III, 626, on 
 this document. 
 
 36 The Relations de la Nouvelle-France are ridiculed as so many fairy 
 tales in Chrestien Leclercq, Premier etablissement de la Foy, Paris, 1691, 
 Chapter XV and ff. 
 
 37 T. C. Pease, Anglo-French Boundary Disputes in the West, 1749- 
 1763, Springfield, Illinois, 1936, lix. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 11 
 
 ever produced during the bitter disputes between the courts of 
 France and Britain over the western boundary line of the English 
 provinces in America. 
 
 Bernou's aim in this question was to profiteer on La Salle's 
 explorations. 38 He wanted to be La Salle's "agent," if the ex- 
 plorer succeeded, but his paid agent. Bernou was willing to de- 
 vote himself to the aggrandizement of France. He was, he wrote 
 to Renaudot, 39 passionately zealous for the development of the 
 French colonies, provided there be some consideration, a certum 
 quid as he calls it, which in this case was a bishopric in the 
 French West Indies, or in the countries discovered by La Salle. 
 Biographical data on this abbe are very scanty. His name, says 
 De Villiers, is not found in the catalogue of the Bibliotheque Na- 
 tionale, 40 although he corresponded with many scholars of his 
 time, and collaborated in newspaper work. For a while, accord- 
 ing to Margry, 41 he edited the Gazette de France during the ab- 
 sence of his friend Renaudot. What is known and set down here 
 is gathered from passing remarks about himself found in his 
 writings. He was born in the "vicinity of the estates of the il- 
 lustrious House of Nemours." 42 He made the acquaintance of 
 Renaudot about 1671, 43 who thereafter molded Bernou to his 
 own image. 44 In 1683, Bernou went to Rome as unofficial agent, 45 
 as counsel of the special envoy of the Portuguese government, 
 then in trouble with Spain over Colonia do Sacramento in South 
 America. Bernou's talents for intrigue and politics were being 
 made use of by Portugal. 46 This task was to the liking of the 
 abbe who heartily detested the Spaniards. 47 But in this as in the 
 
 38 There are too many statements by Bernou in his letters to Renaudot 
 to admit any other conclusion. "I beg of you," he wrote February 22, 1684, 
 "if M. de la Salle's affairs are successful to have him confirm my com- 
 mission as his agent. . . . You know, or you ought to know, that all or the 
 majority of men like him have an agent. That of M. de Cussy is M. Apoil, 
 who was the agent of the former governor [of Santo Domingo]. . . . His 
 salary was 500 ecus. . . . M. de la Salle promised to give me 500 ecus also, 
 but he has met with many misfortunes. I did not, however, abandon him 
 when he found himself in adverse circumstances, he should not abandon 
 me in prosperity." BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:98 v. This volume contains the 
 letters of Bernou to Renaudot during the latter's sojourn in Rome. Cf. ibid., 
 54 v., 96-96 v., 108, 158, and Margry, III, 82. 
 
 39 Margry, III, 82. 
 
 40 "La Louisiane, Histoire de son nom . . .," in Journal de la Societe 
 des Am6ricanistes de Paris, XXI, n. s., 1929, 19. 
 
 4i Margry, III, 629. 
 
 42 BN, Clairambault, 1016:651. 
 
 43 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:220. 
 
 44 Ibid., 93. 
 
 45 ibid., 9. 
 
 46 Ibid., 32, 45. 
 
 47 ibid., 18, 44, etc., BN, Clairambault, 1016:199-205 v., 208-209 v., etc. 
 
12 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 case of being La Salle's agent, Bernou wanted his zeal financially 
 rewarded. 48 His enthusiasm for the "cause" of Portugal singu- 
 larly cooled off when the recompense for his services did not 
 come up to his expectations. 49 There is no doubt that Bernou 
 was a first class diplomatic agent, who was able to tell some very 
 unpalatable truths without antagonizing people; he had always 
 in mind that those with whom he disagreed at present might be 
 needed later on to secure his own ends. 50 He was far above the 
 bitter feelings of Renaudot or La Salle. He disapproved of the lat- 
 ter's attitude towards the Jesuits, for he thought that the ex- 
 plorer might be greatly helped in his plans by the missionaries 
 in North America, 51 and the abbe himself considered that 
 M(onsieu)r R(obe) N(oire), as he designates the Jesuits in his 
 letters, might be helpful for the success of his "great design," 52 
 despite his lack of any penchant for Mr. R. N. 53 
 
 During his sojourn in Rome, he wrote to Renaudot at least 
 once a week. These letters, says Leland, "are exceedingly inter- 
 esting for the light they throw on various aspects of La Salle's 
 enterprises, and other American matters." 54 As will appear later, 
 they also throw light on the composition of La Salle's relations, 
 on his character, on his last expedition, on Bernou's plans. 
 
 Renaudot 
 Bernou's friend, the Abbe Renaudot, the supposed author of 
 the second document, the Recit d'un ami de Vabbe de Galinee, on 
 which La Salle's exploration of the Ohio and his priority to the 
 discovery of the Mississippi is based, is better known. Eusebe 
 Renaudot was born in Paris in 1646. He was the grandson of 
 Theophraste Renaudot, the founder of the Gazette de France 
 (1631), the first French newspaper. His classical studies were 
 made at the Jesuit college in Paris, and he joined the Oratorians 
 in the year 1665, but only for a short time. Notwithstanding the 
 title of abbe, by which he is designated in this work and else- 
 where, he never received major orders. After the death of his 
 father, Eusebe, and of his uncle, Isaac, he was the editor of the 
 Gazette de France. Renaudot became one of the foremost Ori- 
 
 48 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:26 v., 38 v., 43, etc. 
 
 49 Ibid., 228 v., 230. 
 so Ibid., 143. 
 
 si Ibid., 86 v. 
 52 Ibid., 143 v., 224. 
 ss Margry, III, 80. 
 
 54 Waldo G. Leland, Guide to Materials for American History in the 
 Libraries and Archives of Paris, Washington, D. C, 1932, I, 98. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 13 
 
 entalists of his time, and was elected to the French Academy in 
 1689. He died in 1720. 55 
 
 The article in Michaud, written by an Orientalist, adds im- 
 portant details concerning Renaudot's literary activities. 56 These 
 details help to understand the composition of the Recit printed 
 in Margry. Renaudot is best known for his volumes supplement- 
 ing Arnauld's celebrated book, La Perpetuite de la Foi. To prove 
 certain statements, the abbe translated ambiguous expressions 
 to fit in with his own opinions. Later he published a translation 
 of the Anciennes Relations des Indes et de la Chine. They are 
 accounts of travel by Arab merchants to South China in the 
 ninth century, and while the narrative is interesting, they did 
 not deserve the confidence Renaudot gave to the information 
 supplied by the merchants with regard to the customs of China. 
 
 The author of the article in Michaud continues : 
 
 When he published his translation — from Arabic — the learned theo- 
 logian had neglected to make known where the manuscript which he pub- 
 lished and annotated was to be found. He was satisfied with saying in a 
 vague way that it was in the library of Count de Seignelay, Colbert's son. 
 As a result scholars long doubted the authenticity of these relations, if not 
 of the whole, at least of some of them. Scholars were all the more inclined 
 to doubt of their authenticity when they saw the translator, in the preface 
 and in long notes, made it too evident that he was not sorry to find in 
 these relations information which seemed to demonstrate that the Relations 
 sent by the Jesuit missionaries from and about China were either false or 
 full of gross exaggerations. 
 
 The Recit was also an occasion to disparage the Jesuit Re- 
 lations of North America. In 1797, a French scholar found the 
 mysterious manuscript, Anciennes Relations. It was faithfully 
 edited, but "assertions in the preface and long explanations at 
 the end, inserted with the evident intention to decry the Chinese 
 and to cast doubt on the veracity of the relations of the mission- 
 aries or on the scholarship of those who praised these relations, 
 caused the book of Renaudot to be much criticized." 
 
 The Recit remained buried in the Archives until found by 
 Margry who inserted it in his first volume. Since it was unpub- 
 lished, the missionaries of New France were not able to answer it, 
 as those in China were. The answer to Anciennes Relations came 
 from a Jesuit who had spent years in China, and who knew the 
 
 55 Louis Mor6ri, Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique, Paris, 1759. The 
 article on Renaudot in the Nouvelle Biographie Generate, Paris, 1862, is an 
 abridgment of that in MorSri. 
 
 56 Biographie Universelle, Paris, 1824. 
 
14 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 language and the customs of the people much better than Re- 
 naudot's Arab merchants, and definitely better than the specu- 
 lative abbe. Renaudot, a scholar in so far as the languages of 
 the Near East were concerned, was definitely not at home in Far 
 East lore. This answer, complete and thorough, is not only a 
 refutation; it is a devastating blow at Renaudot's authority. 57 
 
 These, then, are the given authors of the two documents, 
 both based on the account of Galinee for their details about the 
 Ohio River. The voyage of La Salle found in Renaudot's Recit, 
 is a pure invention. The pertinent passages of Galinee's narra- 
 tive are given below for the sake of comparison, and at the same 
 time to show that La Salle before leaving Montreal, in 1669, 
 knew all that he needed to supply Bernou and Renaudot with 
 details about the course of the Ohio. 
 
 Galinee's Basic Account 
 
 It was at this place (Quebec) that M. de Courcelles requested him 
 (Dollier) to unite with M. de la Salle, a brother of M. Cavelier, in order 
 that they might make the journey M. de la Salle had long been premedi- 
 tating towards a great river, which he understood (by what he thought 
 he had learned from the Indians) had its course towards the west, and at 
 the end of which, after seven or eight months' traveling, these Indians 
 said the land was "cut," that is to say according to their manner of speak- 
 ing, the river fell into the sea. This river is called in the language of the 
 Iroquois, "Ohio." On it are settled a multitude of tribes, from which as yet 
 no one has been seen here, but so numerous are they that, according to 
 the Indians' report, a single nation will include fifteen or twenty villages. 
 The hope of beaver, but especially of finding by this route the passage into 
 the Vermilion Sea, into which M. de la Salle believed the River Ohio 
 emptied, induced him to undertake this expedition, so as not to leave to 
 another the honor of discovering the passage to the South Sea, and thereby 
 the road to China. 
 
 M. de Courcelles, the governor of this country, was willing to support 
 this project in which M. de la Salle showed him some probability by a 
 great number of fine speeches, of which he has no lack. . . . 
 
 M. Barthelemy was intended to be a member of the party. . . . Ac- 
 cordingly, towards the end of the month of June, 1669, everybody was 
 preparing in good earnest to set out. M. de la Salle wished to take five 
 canoes and fourteen men, and Messieurs Dollier and Barthelemy three 
 canoes and seven men. 
 
 The talk was already of starting as soon as possible, and every one 
 had done his packing, when it occurred to the abb6 de Queylus that M. de la 
 Salle might possibly abandon our gentlemen, and that his temper, which was 
 known to be rather volatile, might lead him to quit them at the first whim, 
 
 57 Lettres Edifiantes et curieuses, Paris, 1781, 183-237. Bernou who had 
 seen the manuscript of Renaudot's book, had called his friend's attention 
 to some errors, cf. BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497: 230 v. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 15 
 
 perhaps when it was most necessary to have some one with a little skill in 
 finding his bearings for the return journey or acquainted with the situation 
 of known countries, in order not to get them into difficulties through 
 imprudence, and besides, it was desirable to have some trustworthy map 
 of the route that was contemplated. 
 
 It was from these considerations that the abb6 de Queylus permitted 
 me to accompany M. Dollier when I asked his leave. I had already some 
 smattering of mathematics, enough to construct a map in a sort of fashion, 
 but still sufficiently accurate to enable me to find my way back again from 
 any place I might go in the woods and streams of this country. . . . 
 
 Our fleet, consisting of seven canoes each with three men, left Mon- 
 treal on the 6th of July, 1669, under the guidance of Seneca Iroquois, who 
 had come to Montreal as early as the autumn of the year 1668 to do their 
 hunting and trading. These people while here had stayed a long time at 
 M. de la Salle's, and had told him so many marvels of the river Ohio, with 
 which they said they were thoroughly acquainted, that they inflamed in 
 him more than ever the desire to see it. They told him that this river 
 took its rise three days' journey from Seneca, that after a month's travel 
 one came upon the Honniasontkeronons and the Chiouanons, and that, after 
 passing the latter and a great cataract or waterfall that there is in this 
 river, one found the Outagame and the country of the Iskousogos, and 
 finally a country so abundant in roebucks and wild cattle that they were 
 as thick as the woods, and so great a number of tribes that there could 
 be no more. 
 
 M. de la Salle reported all these things to M. Dollier . . . (whose) 
 zeal prevented from remarking that M. de la Salle, who said that he under- 
 stood the Iroquois perfectly and had learned all these things from them 
 through his perfect acquaintance with their language, did not know it at 
 all, and was embarking upon this expedition almost blindly, scarcely 
 knowing where he was going. He had been led to expect that by making 
 some present to the village of the Senecas, he could readily procure slaves 
 of the tribes to which he intended to go, who might serve him as guides.ss 
 
 There is not the slightest reason to doubt any part of the 
 account of the young Sulpician, who although friendly was not 
 deceived by the belles paroles of La Salle. 59 Abbe de Queylus, the 
 Superior of the Sulpicians of Montreal, had also had time to 
 notice the unstable character of La Salle, who might change his 
 mind about the discovery he was so bent upon making and 
 
 ss James H. Coyne, translator and editor, "Explorations of the Great 
 Lakes, 1669-1670, by Dollier de Casson and de Brehant de Galinee, Galinee's 
 narrative and map," in Ontario Historical Society, Papers and Records, IV, 
 part I, 5-9. Galinee's account, English only, is found in L. P. Kellogg, 
 Early Narratives of the Northwest, 1631^1699, New York, 1917, 167-209; 
 Margry, I, 112-166. 
 
 59 Bernou, speaking of La Salle, wrote to Renaudot, November 4, 1684, 
 "Je voic que c'est un grand discoureur, peu sincere, et d'assez mauvaise 
 foy, et je vous avotie que si je ne savois que de luy ce qu'il nous a d6bite\ 
 j'aurois peine a en rien croire." BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:169. Two weeks 
 later: "Je le (La Salle) connois et je scais par experience que dans la 
 
16 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 abandon the missionaries when they least expected it. 60 It is 
 clear that this is the first voyage of La Salle, and that his knowl- 
 edge of Indian languages was not as comprehensive as his ad- 
 mirers supposed. 61 
 
 The expedition reached Sonnontouan, a Seneca village, and 
 during the sojourn there, continues Galinee, 
 
 we had made careful inquiry as to the road we must take to reach the 
 river Ohio, and everybody had told us that in order to get to it from 
 Seneca, it was six days' journey by land of about twelve leagues each. 
 This made us think it was not possible for us to get to it that way, as 
 we could hardly carry anything for so long a journey but the mere neces- 
 saries of life — carrying our baggage being out of the question. But at 
 the same time, we were told that in going to Lake Erie by canoe we 
 should have only three days portage to get to that river, much nearer to 
 the tribes we were seeking than we should find it going by Seneca.62 
 
 As they could not obtain a guide, they left this village, 
 crossed the Niagara below the Falls. They reached Tinawatawa, 
 an Iroquois village on the northern shore of Lake Ontario, Sep- 
 tember 24. Here they met Jolliet coming from Lake Superior. 
 He told them of the Potawatomi, a numerous Ottawa tribe, and 
 gave them a description of a shorter route to reach these In- 
 dians which M. Dollier wished to evangelize. 
 
 Meanwhile M. de la Salle's illness was beginning to take away from 
 him the inclination to push further on, and the desire to see Montreal was 
 beginning to press him. He had not spoken of it to us, but we had clearly 
 perceived it, 
 
 so that when the two Sulpicians were making themselves ready 
 to leave for the Potawatomi country by the route Jolliet had 
 indicated to them, 
 
 necessity il est homme a tout promettre aus gens dont il a besoin pour 
 gagner du tems, et a aller a ses fins sans se mettre beaucoup en peine des 
 suites que pourront avoir ses manquemens de parole." Ibid., 173. 
 
 so M. de Queylus had more than one reason to apprehend the con- 
 sequences of La Salle's fickleness, cf. Faillon, Histoire de la Colonie Fran- 
 gaise en Canada, Villemarie, 1866, III, 290. With this opinion of de Queylus, 
 cf. what La Salle's Jesuit superiors formerly thought in this respect, C. de 
 Rochemonteix, Les J6suites et la Nouvelle-France au XVII* siecle, Paris, 
 1895-1896, in, 44. 
 
 6i After La Salle's arrival in Canada, "he at once began to study the 
 Indian languages, and with such success that he is said, within two or 
 three years, to have mastered the Iroquois and seven or eight other lan- 
 guages and dialects," Parkman, La Salle, 24. Parkman refers here to the 
 Papiers de Famille; if the information found in other family papers is as 
 accurate as that found in these, for instance in the papers referred to in 
 the letter of Madeleine Cavelier, Margry, I, 379, there seems little reason 
 to regret their loss. 
 
 62 Coyne, 35-37. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 17 
 
 M. de la Salle, seeing us determined to depart in two or three days, in 
 order to proceed to the bank of the river that was to take us to Lake 
 Erie, explained himself to us, and told us that the state of his health no 
 longer permitted him to think of the journey he had undertaken along 
 with us. He begged us to excuse him if he abandoned us to return to Mon- 
 treal, and added that he could not make up his mind to winter in the 
 woods with his men, where their lack of skill and experience might make 
 them die of starvations 
 
 On September 30, 1669, after M. Dollier had said Mass, the 
 expedition broke into two groups. 
 
 We had no trouble in persuading our men to follow us. There was not 
 one at that time who desired to leave us; and it may be said with truth 
 that more joy was remarked in those who were going to expose themselves 
 to a thousand perils than in those who were turning back to a place of 
 safety, although the latter regarded us as people who were going to ex- 
 pose ourselves to death; as indeed they announced as soon as they arrived 
 here (Montreal) and caused a great deal of pain to those who took some 
 interest in our welfare.^* 
 
 Where did La Salle go after he left the Sulpicians on the 
 northern shore of Lake Ontario ? For Margry and others he went 
 down the Ohio as far as Louisville, 65 that is to say, La Salle, re- 
 fusing to go with the Sulpicians for want of experienced woods- 
 men and through fear of starvation, made a journey of incompar- 
 ably greater difficulty and hazard than anything he attempted 
 afterwards, and this with fewer men, — without the companions 
 of Dollier and Galinee and without those of his own men who had 
 returned to Montreal. 66 Naturally, if he had made the journey, if 
 there were proofs that he went down the Ohio, such reasoning 
 would be worth nothing, but there is no proof other than the 
 account of Bernou and that of Renaudot. The next time the 
 explorer was heard of was in the following summer, 1670, when 
 Perrot met "a little below (the rapids) of the Chats, M. de la 
 Salle, who was hunting with five or six Frenchmen and ten or 
 twelve Iroquois." 67 This portage, situated on the Ottawa River 
 
 63 Coyne, 47-49. Lorin, 13, tells his readers that Dollier and Galinee 
 "abandoned" La Salle, and, 14, that the two Sulpicians "laisserent leur 
 compagnon malade, vers rextrSmite" occidentale du Lac Ontario." 
 
 e* Coyne, 49. 
 
 65 Gravier, who never has any difficulty, asserts in Dicouvertes, 38, 
 that La Salle "marcha droit sur l'Ohio." 
 
 66 Charles Whittlesey, "Discovery of the Ohio River, by Robert Cavelier 
 de la Salle, 1669-1670," in Western Reserve and Northern Ohio Historical 
 Society, Tract 38, 12. 
 
 67 Jules Tailhan, ed., Memoire sur les Moeurs, Coustumes et Relligion 
 des Sauvages de VAmerique Septentrionale, par Nicolas Perrot, Leipzig and 
 Paris, 1864, 119-120. 
 
18 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 near Arnprior, is more than 700 miles in a straight line from 
 the Louisville rapids. La Salle himself never said he went down 
 the Ohio, or where he spent the winter of 1669 and the Spring of 
 1670. It was left to Bernou to concoct this voyage more than ten 
 years later. What the explorer did after he left Dollier and 
 Galinee, anybody may guess. He might have gone back to the 
 Iroquois village where the party had received a hearty welcome ; 
 he apparently did not go back to Montreal with some of his 
 men, for this cannot be deduced from the account of Galinee, who 
 was back in Montreal in June, 1670. 68 
 
 Bernou's Version 
 
 The vague, confused, misleading account of Bernou published 
 by Margry 69 reads as follows : 
 
 Memoir on the project of Sieur de la Salle to discover the West part 
 of North America between New France, Florida and Mexico. 
 Sieur de la Salle having always felt much inclination for making dis- 
 coveries and founding colonies which would be advantageous to Religion 
 and useful to France, went to Canada in 1666, and began that same year 
 the La Chine village, situated in the Island of Montreal, far from all 
 French habitations. In the year 1667 and in those following, he made 
 several journeys with much expense, in which he was the first to discover 
 much land south of the Great Lakes, among which the great Ohio River. 
 He followed it to a place where it falls from very high into vast marshes, 
 at the 37th degree of latitude, after having been increased by another 
 River, very large, which comes from the North, and all its waters7o dis- 
 charging themselves, according to all appearances into the Gulf of Mexico 
 making him hope?! to find a new way of communication with the sea, 
 from which New France might some day derive great advantages, as well 
 as from the Great Lakes which occupy a part of North America. 
 
 It is clear that this is a version of Galinee's account, with the 
 difference that it is no longer the Iroquois Indians who are 
 speaking of the Ohio, but La Salle, and he is made to explore 
 this river to the great fall. A few other incorrect data are added. 
 La Salle did not go to Canada in 1666, but in the Fall of 1667, 72 
 
 es Letter of Talon to Colbert, in Margry, I, 80, and ibid., I, 181, the 
 relation of de Courcelles' journey to Lake Ontario. 
 
 es Margry, I, 329. 
 
 70 The translation is that of Bernou's text which has et toutes ses eaux, 
 BN, Clairambault, 1016:49. 
 
 7i Margry's two words "fait-on" do not make sense, Bernou has et luy 
 font esp6rer. 
 
 72 Rochemonteix, III, 51, note 4, says that La Salle is mistaken in 
 saying that he went to Canada in 1666. The Jesuit historian evidently 
 thought that this memoir had been written by La Salle. For the date of 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 19 
 
 and consequently he got his tract of land no earlier than at the 
 end of 1667 or at the beginning of 1668. 73 The Iroquois came in 
 the Fall of 1668; La Salle did not travel that year, for he was 
 clearing his concession, and he did not travel in 1669, for he was 
 busy preparing to leave with Dollier from the Spring until 
 July. 74 We have the desire for explorations spoken of by Galinee, 
 and the great fall spoken of by the Iroquois. No longitude is 
 given. The latitude whereat the Ohio meets the Mississippi, is one 
 degree farther north than that observed by Jolliet, whose nar- 
 rative Bernou possessed. Bernou thought it would be prudent 
 to stop La Salle one degree north of the point reached by 
 Jolliet and given by the Canadian as the latitude 36 degrees, 
 where the Ohio met the Mississippi. As is known, Cairo is on the 
 37th degree, for Jolliet made a mistake of one degree in his calcu- 
 lations; and the rapids near Louisville, the only falls on the 
 Ohio, are on the 38th degree. The very great river that comes 
 from the north can only be the Wabash and this does not flow 
 into the Ohio above the rapids, but some 130 miles below. The 
 fall of the Ohio is not "great," there is a drop of twenty-seven 
 feet over a course of two and a half miles. There are no marshes. 
 But it is argued that there might have been a flood that year, 
 and, for the French clauses il la suivit jusques a un endroit oil 
 elle tombe de fort haut dans de vastes marais, an ingenious if 
 somewhat fantastic explanation has been suggested. In order to 
 do away with this bothersome fall, this sentence is translated: 
 "he followed it to a place where it empties after a long course, 
 into vast marshes." 75 
 
 This explanation to all appearances was advanced, because 
 
 La Salle's arrival in Canada, cf. Faillon, III, 228; Rochemonteix, III, 48; 
 Gilbert J. Garraghan, "Some Newly Discovered Marquette and La Salle 
 Letters," in Archivum Historicum Societatis Jesu, IV, 1935, 277; id., "La 
 Salle's Jesuit Days," in Mid-America, XLX, 1937, 98. 
 
 73 Faillon, III, 229, found a document in the greffe of Montreal that 
 in the winter of 1668, La Salle granted 200 arpents of pasture land from 
 his own fief to Barthelemy Vinet. 
 
 74 The sale of his property to the Sulpicians is of the beginning of 
 1669. Faillon, in, 288. 
 
 75 J. p. Dunn, Indiana, A Redemption from Slavery, Boston and New 
 York, 1905, 10, note. The philological discussion in this note is not perti- 
 nent. To be of any value this explanation should have been supported by 
 a text from the letters of La Salle — or in this case from those of Bernou, 
 since he is the author of the memoir — where "tomber de fort haut" refers 
 to the length of the stream. Indeed, the text in Margry II, 80, has "fort 
 haut," but the full expression is "remonter jusques fort haut," which 
 meant then as it means now "to go far up a stream." The verb "tomber" 
 as in Margry, II, 128, referring to the discharge of a river, and the two 
 words "fort haut" in the expression "remonter jusques fort haut" cannot 
 be combined as in Bernou's text to mean the length of a river. 
 
20 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 it was supposed that La Salle had written the memoir, and it is 
 a desperate attempt at reconciling the text with the geography 
 of the country it purports to describe. The explorer, if he had 
 in reality been near the rapids at Louisville, could not have made 
 such a mistake. The memoir is Bernou's; and it is the abbe who 
 interprets the "grand sault ou cheute d'eau" of the Iroquois in 
 Galinee's account by "tomber de fort haut." In 1682, when Bernou 
 sent the memoir 76 to Seignelay, together with the so-called Re- 
 lation officielle, the word Ohio is not even mentioned, and the 
 journey down this river to the great fall at the 37° of latitude 
 has also disappeared. "He (La Salle) was the first to conceive 
 the project of these discoveries, which he mentioned more than 
 fifteen years ago 77 to M. de Courcelles, governor, and to M. 
 Talon, intendant of Canada, who approved it. He then made 
 several journeys in that direction (Mississippi River), among 
 others in 1669, with MM. Dollier and Galinee, priests of the 
 Seminary of St. Sulpice." 78 The conclusiveness of this statement 
 is strengthened when it is remembered that Bernou is here an- 
 swering an objection made that La Salle was not the first to 
 discover the River Colbert, that is, the Mississippi. All the opera- 
 tions of the explorer are recounted, the building of Fort Fron- 
 tenac, the construction of the Griffon, the discovery of the Sioux 
 country. If La Salle had discovered the Ohio, here was the place 
 where mention of it would certainly have been made. Finally, 
 there is an avowal by Bernou showing that he drew upon his 
 imagination when he composed his account of La Salle's travel 
 
 76 This memoir, BN, Clairambault, 1016:190-193, printed in Margry, II, 
 277-288, in the handwriting of Bernou, cf. Margry, III, 629, was certainly 
 composed by the abbe. The ideas, the style, and certain peculiarities of 
 spelling remove all reasonable doubt. Bernou is also the author of the so- 
 called Relation officielle, BN, Clairambault, 1016-85-91 v., which is an 
 abridgment of the relation printed in Margry, I, 435 ff. This, as well as the 
 long relation of La Salle, BN, Clairambault, 1016:92-147, bear all internal 
 marks of being Bernou's work, but these two documents are in the hand 
 of a copyist, the same copyist. For other details, cf. Leland, Guide, 172. 
 
 77 Bernou still thought that La Salle went to Canada in 1666. This dates 
 the document, 1682. 
 
 78 The Relation officielle as printed in Margry, I, 436, reads: "H (La 
 Salle) communiqua ensuite au Sieur de Courcelles, gouverneur du Canada, 
 le dessein qu'il avoit de travailler a ceste descouverte, et il le trouva si 
 bien fonde" qu'il l'encouragea a l'exScuter au plus tost. Le Sieur de la Salle 
 pour prendre des mesures plus justes, fit dievers voyages, tantost avec des 
 Francois, tantost avec des Sauvages, et mesme avec MM. Dollier et Ga- 
 linee, prestres du sSminaire de Saint-Sulpice, l'ann£e 1669; mais une vio- 
 lente fievre l'obligea a les quitter a l'entr^e." The text in Bernou up to 
 here is the same as that reproduced by Margry. but the abbe" has three 
 words after "l'entrSe" which change somewhat the text: "mais une vio- 
 lente fievre l'obligea a les quitter a l'entree du lac Erie," BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:85. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 21 
 
 down the Ohio in 1669-1670. La Salle was then in France (1684) ; 
 the abbe wrote to Renaudot: "Give him (La Salle) the relation 
 I wrote, which I left with you. He will be able to use it as an 
 outline (canevas) ; let him correct it or lengthen it, if this 
 should be easier for him, although I would prefer him to re- 
 write it not being myself very much satisfied with it, especially 
 with regard to the beginning for which I lacked dates and 
 memoirs." 79 
 
 La Salle himself mentions the Ohio several times, but not 
 as one who had a direct knowledge of that river. In September, 
 1680, he refers to it as a river que fax trouvee, as a better means 
 of communication to bring back the products of the Illinois 
 country to Fort Frontenac than by way of the Great Lakes. 
 
 This river, which I call Baudrane, the Iroquois name Ohio, and the 
 Ottawa, Olighin-cipou.so . . . This river Baudrane rises behind Oneida, and 
 after a westward course of about 450 leagues, almost always equally large 
 and more than the Seine at Rouen, but much deeper, discharges itself into 
 the River Colbert, twenty to twenty five leagues, South-south-west of the 
 mouth by which the Illinois river flows into the same stream. A barque can 
 go up this river very far near to Tsonnontouan.si 
 
 Margry italicized the words que fai trouvee, as if La Salle had 
 made the discovery, whereas La Salle had merely heard about it 
 from the Indians, 82 just as he had heard from the Iroquois of 
 the great falls ; the latter have disappeared altogether from this 
 account. He says that this Baudrane-Ohio-Olighin-cipou river 
 can be ascended very far by barques, that is, by decked ships 
 like the Griffon, as opposed to canoes. 
 
 In his letter of August 22, 1682, La Salle speaks of the 
 Maumee as being "called Tiotontaraeton by the Iroquois, . . . 
 — without doubt the passage to go to the Ohio or Olighinsipou, 
 which means in Iroquois and in Ottawa, Beautiful River." The 
 route between this Tiotontaraeton and the Ohio, on the other 
 hand, is too long and too difficult, but at one day's journey from 
 the mouth of the Maumee, there is a little lake whence flows a 
 creek which soon becomes a river. After a course of one hun- 
 
 79 "Donnez luy ma relation que vous avez qui pourra luy servir de 
 canevas, ou qu'il pourra corriger et augmenter si cela luy est pluscommode, 
 quoyque j'aimerois mieux qu'il la fit de nouveau, n'en estant pas moi 
 mesme beaucoup satisfait, surtout dans le commencemens ou je manquois 
 de dates et de memoires." BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:89. 
 
 so Margry, II, 141. 
 
 si Margry, II, 80; cf. ibid., 98. 
 
 82 The distance given, twenty to twenty-five leagues, is less than a 
 third of the actual distance. 
 
22 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 dred leagues the river receives the Miami, and finally discharges 
 itself into the Illinois river, "two leagues below the village," and 
 then into the Mississippi. This river without rapids, which flows 
 into the Illinois is "the Wabash or the Aramoni (Vermilion)." 83 
 La Salle was evidently speaking from hearsay. He had met a 
 Shawnee chief the year before, who had mentioned a great river 
 (the Wabash) "which flows into the Ohio, and thence into the 
 Mississippi." 
 
 It is easy to understand that Bernou was puzzled when he 
 read all this. The abbe wanted La Salle to make a clear distinc- 
 tion between what he himself had seen and what he had heard 
 from the Indians. He wrote to Renaudot to urge La Salle to 
 write a detailed account of his travels from the time the explorer 
 left Fort Frontenac in a canoe after the defeat of the deserters, 
 and to urge La Salle to draw a map, "but I have two things to 
 tell you on this subject. First, it is necessary that he (La Salle) 
 add the true shape of all the lakes, for he told me that Lake 
 Ontario was not as it is represented (on maps) and that it is 
 narrower toward the middle. He must add the course of the 
 rivers and the (direction and lay) of the mountains which he 
 did not see, but according as he will have learned from the 
 Savages or from the French, (such items) as the Aramoni 
 River, the old Ohio River, etc., indicating on the map what he 
 saw and what he heard." 84 The second thing Bernou is asking 
 for, is that a copy of the map be sent to him in Rome. 
 
 The other passages where La Salle speaks of the Ohio will be 
 treated later. The two notices by Tonty 85 and by Nicholas de la 
 Salle 86 of the Ohio River in their account of the journey down 
 to the mouth of the Mississippi are negative arguments cor- 
 roborating the view that La Salle never went down the Ohio 
 either in 1669-1670, or at any other time. 
 
 83Margry, II, 243. This autograph letter of La Salle has been tam- 
 pered with by Bernou; cf. Leland, Guide, 172; the changes come after 
 the passage quoted in the text. 
 
 s* "Mais j'ay deux choses a vous dire sur ce sujet. La premiere qu'il 
 est necessaire qu'il y joigne la figure veritable de tous les lacs telle qu'elle 
 est, car il m'a dit que le lac Ontario n'estoit pas fait comme on le repre- 
 sentor, et qu'il se retrecissait vers le milieu, qu'il ajoute le cours des ri- 
 vieres et des montagnes qu'il n'aura pas viies selon ce qu'il en aura appris 
 des sauvages ou des francois comme la riviere Aramoni l'anciene riviere 
 Ohio &c, marquant sur la carte ce qu'il a veu et ce qu'il a olry." BN, Mss. 
 fr. n. a., 7497: 89 v. 
 
 ssMargry, I, 596. 
 
 seMargry, I, 550. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 
 
 PART TWO: THE CARTOGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE 
 
 The discussion to this point of the movements of La Salle 
 between the years 1669 and 1673 has, it is hoped, revealed sev- 
 eral interesting items. The shady historical status of Pierre 
 Margry may be considered as well known to a few students of 
 history, but his underlying motives in falsifying documents for 
 the glorification of La Salle have not been widely published. A 
 century before Margry, Abbe Bernou and Abbe Renaudot played 
 their part in the manufacture of documents, the former a dupe 
 of the latter. Renaudot looms as an influential figure in the affairs 
 of La Salle, and it is time now to turn to his document, before 
 weighing the cartographical evidence for La Salle's Ohio trip. 
 
 Renaudot's Version 
 The Recit d'un ami de Vabbe de Galinee is attributed by Mar- 
 gry to Renaudot, 1 and Parkman accepted the statement of author- 
 ship with some diffidence and not without qualms. 2 To begin with, 
 it is a copy, by whom made and at what time made nobody 
 knows, and it is a copy of a document devoid of the same essen- 
 tial information of authorship and time. In publishing it Margry 
 places at its head "Recital of a friend of the Abbe de Galinee." 
 He adds in a note, "and of the Abbe Arnauld. The name of this 
 illustrious Jansenist which will be found in the text should natu- 
 rally put us on guard against the author of the document, the 
 original of which is found in a collection of papers all hostile to 
 the Jesuits." 3 This admitted hostility, together with the data 
 found in the second part pertaining to La Salle's discovery of 
 the Ohio and his priority in the discovery of the Mississippi, was 
 undoubtedly reason sufficient for Margry to fit it into the pat- 
 tern he was weaving. It is clear, however, that the author had 
 the relation of the Sulpician before him when he wrote, just 
 as it is clear that respect for the truth was least among his 
 concerns. Incidents that happened before the departure of the 
 expedition of 1669 as narrated by Galinee are so disfigured in 
 the Recital that no one will be accused of maligning its author 
 
 i Margry, I, 345. 
 
 2 La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West, 95, note 1. 
 
 3 Margry, I, 346. 
 
 23 
 
24 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 in asserting that he was determined to be inaccurate, or, in 
 plainer English, that he willfully lied. 
 
 The Recit is composed from ten or twelve supposed conver- 
 sations which the friend of Galinee had had with La Salle when 
 the explorer was in Paris. 4 Most of the aforementioned confer- 
 ences, the author continues, took place in the presence of 
 "friends of mine, all very intelligent gentlemen, most of them 
 having an excellent memory." He explains that he wrote these 
 conversations on the spot (sur-le-champ), taking especial care 
 to set down those details which one is most likely to forget, such 
 as dates and names. 5 This meticulous and almost stenographic 
 care appears to have been taken in vain, since the author in- 
 forms his readers after a few pages, that he does not remember 
 names, and finds it more convenient to omit dates. Such a method 
 of presenting facts may be classified as a variant of the sine ira 
 et studk> type of historical writing. Rhetorical writers addicted 
 to the method of making childish assertions of impartiality as 
 preludes to unhistorical statements should surely leave no his- 
 torian off guard as to their veraciousness, yet this and similar 
 rhetoric has deceived many. 6 After the account was written, it 
 was communicated to the other very intelligent hearers endowed 
 with excellent memories, and these separately asserted that they 
 well remembered how all this had been said by La Salle. 
 
 The document is divided into two parts. The first portion is 
 merely a rehash of some Jansenistic lampoon, abounding in spite 
 and breathing hatred. 7 The author, carried away at times by his 
 
 4 That La Salle was interviewed by various persons while in Paris at 
 this time is clear from the document published in the Canadian Historical 
 Review, XVIII, 1937, 167-177, and from Margry, II, 236. 
 
 s Margry, I, 345-346. 
 
 e Cf . Hennepin's assertion : "I here protest to you before God, that my 
 narrative is faithful and sincere and that you may believe everything re- 
 lated in it." Nouvelle Decouverte, Amsterdam, 1698, Avis an lecteur. Yet, 
 the "narrative of which he speaks is a rare monument of brazen mendac- 
 ity," Parkman, La Salle, 123. 
 
 7 Why Parkman should have devoted to this a whole chapter, VII in 
 his La Salle, is not easy to understand. Closing the chapter, he wrote: 
 "Here ends this remarkable memoir, which, criticise it as we may, does 
 not exaggerate the jealousies and enmities that beset the path of the 
 discoverer." The difficulties referred to by Parkman were mainly the out- 
 come of La Salle's character, who, to say the least, was a paranoiac, 
 according to Marc de Villiers, L' expedition de Cavelier de la Salle dans le 
 Golfe du Mexique, Paris, 1931, 178; he saw "enemies" lurking behind every 
 tree in the wilderness. "La Salle was not the victim of the 'envious' not even 
 of his numerous adversaries, but simply of his disorderly imagination," 
 De Villiers, ibid., 143. La Salle was "un peu frappeV' as people who observed 
 him in Rochefort remarked, Margry, II, 445. He attributed nearly all his 
 reverses and misfortunes to his "enemies," Jesuits mostly and their crea- 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 25 
 
 rigoristic zeal, almost forgets that La Salle is supposed to be 
 making the remarks, but he catches himself and hastens to drag 
 in the explorer. We are not concerned with the contents of the 
 first part, except for one short passage. "He (La Salle) is 33 or 
 34 years old. He has been traveling in North America for the 
 past twelve years." It is presumably on the strength of this 
 statement that the document is dated 1678; for the author, like 
 Bernou, must see to it that La Salle is dispatched to Canada in 
 1666, in order to allow the explorer time to make trips to the 
 north, which he never made, and to learn all of the Indian lan- 
 guages he was supposed to have mastered by 1669. "And the 
 journeys he made," continues the narrator, "comprise the ter- 
 ritory between the 330° and the 268° of longitude, the 55° and the 
 36° of latitude." 8 La Salle's facilities for taking longitude were 
 woefully inadequate, it is true, but he knew better than to give 
 such impossible coordinates. The 330th degree crossed the 
 western part of the Newfoundland Bank, a few hundred miles out 
 in the Atlantic. This longitude is also the line of demarcation 
 agreed upon by Spain and Portugal in the discussion as to what 
 was meant by the Treaty of Tordesillas. As will be seen, all sorts 
 of fantastic geographical data, picked up at random by the author 
 of this document, will be inserted in this narrative supposed to 
 be La Salle's. The 268th degree on maps of this period 9 ran 
 through the western part of Kansas. The 55th parallel crosses 
 Labrador and the 36th is the latitude where Joliet had said that 
 the Ohio emptied into the Mississippi. La Salle, Bernou, and 
 Renaudot had indeed the narrative of Jolliet and his maps, as 
 well as Marquette's relations. 10 
 
 tures. The phobia of seeing the hand of "enemies" everywhere, except for 
 its chronic and acute stage, was not peculiar to La Salle; it was common 
 to the whole officialdom in New France, as will appear to any one who reads 
 the official correspondence. The authorities in Paris listened for years to 
 this enemy phobia, without once telling those who thus complained to 
 examine their own conduct for causes of misfortunes. It was only after 
 the French regime had ended that General Johnstone gave the answer 
 that should have been given long before that time. He wrote to Montberaut 
 from Mobile: "I am sorry you have so many enemies, and you are likely 
 to have so many enemies for the time to come unless God shall work a 
 change which is not likely to happen at your time of life." AE, Mem. et 
 Doc, Amerique, 11:216. 
 
 s Margry, I, 347. 
 
 » Cf. Louis Karpinski, Bibliography of Printed Maps of Michigan (1801^- 
 1880), Lansing, Michigan, 1931, 40. 
 
 io Margry, II, 81, 95, 137, 166, 170, 179, 245. "You should have written 
 the dissertation of M. de la Salle against Father Marquette and against M. 
 Thevenot; at least you ought to have him annotate the relation of said 
 R. N." Bernou to Renaudot, Margry, II, 74. G. J. Garraghan, "Some Newly 
 
26 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 The second part of the Recit, entitled Histoire de M. de la 
 Salle, begins with saying that La Salle left France when 21 or 
 22 years old. La Salle was nearly 24 when he went to Canada. 
 The unbelievable manner in which the text of Galinee is tam- 
 pered with needs not to be treated here. 
 
 After having separated from the Sulpicians, we are told : 
 
 Meanwhile M. de la Salle continued his way on a river which goes 
 from east to west and passes to Onontague (Onondaga), then to six or 
 seven leagues below Lac Erie, and having reached the 280° or 283° of 
 longitude and as far as the 41° of latitude, found a cataract which falls 
 westward in a low marshy country, all covered with old stumps, some of 
 which are still standing. He was forced to land, and following a ridge 
 which might have led him far, he found some Indians, who told him that 
 very far from there, this same river which lost itself in this low and vast 
 country, united again in a single bed. He accordingly continued his way; 
 but, as the hardship was great, 23 or 24 men whom he had conducted to 
 that point, all left him in one night, regained the river and escaped, some 
 to New Netherland, the others to New England. He then beheld himself 
 alone four hundred leagues from his home, to which nevertheless he suc- 
 ceeded in returning ascending the river, and living by hunting, on herbs 
 and what the Indians whom he met on the way gave him.n 
 
 If Bernou's account of La Salle's discovery and exploration 
 of the Ohio in 1669-1670 is fanciful, this one, attributed to Re- 
 naudot, is so absolutely fantastic as to be absurd. Worthless as 
 it is, it was made outstandingly so when used by subsequent 
 writers, under the lead of Margry. 12 Every detail of this geo- 
 
 Discovered Marquette and La Salle Letters," in Archivum Historicum So- 
 cietatis Jesu, IV, 1935, 279, note 38, says: "Bernou's attitude towards the 
 (Jesuit) order is indicated in his letter of April 18, 1684, asking Renaudot 
 to return 'his notes against Marquette.' " Father Garraghan bases this 
 statement on the entry in Leland's Guide, 99, which is misleading. The 
 notes are not Bernou's but La Salle's, and from the text, it does not neces- 
 sarily follow that these notes are adverse, although when Bernou's request 
 is compared with the quotation given above from his letter printed in 
 Margry, we may be quite sure of the type of "notes" Bernou expected from 
 La Salle. The passage reads: "Vous m'obligerez infiniment de m'envoyer 
 par le l er courrier extraord nre ses (that is, La Salle's) notes in Marquetam 
 quand elles seront faites. II seroit bien necessaire aussi de luy en faire 
 sur ma relation, vous me l'aviez promis mais vous ne m'en parlez plus." 
 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:118 v. 
 
 ii Margry, I, 377-378. 
 
 12 When Gravier, Cavelier de la Salle, 22, tells us that the contents of 
 this document are "a peu pres intelligible," he merely repeats what Park- 
 man, La Salle, 22, had said, that the statements of the Recit "are in some 
 measure intelligible." Chesnel, Histoire de Cavelier de la Salle, 37, states 
 that "le fond du r6cit est vrai." This author does not hold the desertion en 
 masse; there is one at least who did not abandon La Salle, "ce fut l'esclave 
 Chaouanon, le fidele Nica." Charles E. Slocum, in his article, "Sieur de la 
 Salle," in the Ohio Archeological and Historical Society Publications, XII, 
 1903, 107-113, says that "a very liberal translation of this excerpt (of the 
 R6cit) is necessary to make it intelligible." The translation is so very lib- 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 27 
 
 graphical romance is as imaginary as the old stumps of trees. 
 
 The Sulpicians had left La Salle on the northern shore of 
 Lake Ontario, on the upper reaches of the Grand River, in the 
 vicinity of the present Hamilton, Canada. The account under dis- 
 cussion was designed to bring him to the Ohio River whose head- 
 waters were, if we take the Allegheny branch, to the southward. 
 But the account transports La Salle suddenly eastward from 
 Hamilton to a river rising east of Onondaga, in the Syracuse 
 region, and then flowing westward 20 miles below Lake Erie, 
 and transports him without further difficulty, even in mid-winter, 
 to a waterfall hundreds of miles away. Thus La Salle, supposedly 
 in quest of the Ohio, according to the Recit, which he reputedly 
 gave to the friend of the Abbe de Galinee, proceeded to travel 
 250 miles away from the river he was seeking. Yet Gravier, us- 
 ing as a basis for his contention that La Salle went to the Ohio 
 this same Recit, states that the explorer "made straight for it." 
 
 As has been observed, if La Salle went to Onondaga, "there 
 was no possible passage by water in the direction of the waters 
 of the Allegheny. All the waters between these two points flow 
 either north into Lake Ontario or south into the Susquehanna 
 or Delaware. No rivers or streams of any kind suitable for canoe 
 navigation run east and west between these two points, and the 
 entire distance is over the highlands of New York which divide 
 the waters of the north from the waters of the South." 13 
 
 The lack of geographical data noted previously in Bernou's 
 account is more than compensated for in the Recit. The wealth 
 of coordinates, however, appears somewhat strange when we re- 
 member that La Salle, who is supposed to have given all these 
 details, could not compute the longitude, for Galinee had taken 
 the instruments along with him, and that only trained astrono- 
 mers, which La Salle emphatically was not, were able to deter- 
 mine the longitude in those days. 14 
 
 It is apparent that the author of the Recit had Hennepin's 
 map of 1683 before him. On this map the 280° is very prominent, 
 it is the meridian of Fort Crevecoeur, which is on that same map 
 on the 39th degree of latitude. Two degrees higher, on the same 
 meridian, give a point north of the Madison-Milwaukee parallel ; 
 
 eral that it enables him to identify the rivers spoken of as the Maumee and 
 the Wabash. 
 
 13 E. L. Taylor, "La Salle's Route down the Ohio," Ohio Archeological 
 and Historical Society Publications, XIX, 1910, 385. 
 
 14 There is an error of 13 degrees in the longitude given by La Salle 
 in Margry, II, 180. 
 
28 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 if the longitude 283° and the latitude 41° are combined, the co- 
 ordinates give a point somewhere on the east shore of Lake 
 Michigan, all these places being far away from the Ohio. 
 
 La Salle's partisans cannot claim that the standard meridian 
 is that of Ferro Island, as used after the experiments of Cassini, 
 for the results of the observations of astronomers were only 
 embodied in the maps of the cartographers at the beginning of 
 the eighteenth century. Even granting such an anachronism, the 
 coordinates would not bring La Salle near the Ohio, but to cen- 
 tral Iowa in 1669-1670. 
 
 It may be recalled that this account is but another version of 
 that of Bernou, according to which La Salle reached the 37th 
 degree ; according to the present one, he reached the 41st degree. 
 
 The waterfall spoken of by the Iroquois Indians in Galinee's 
 account is again met with, but old stumps are now added to it 
 for good measure. Another detail, introduced it seems to inspire 
 confidence, is the number of La Salle's men deserting during this 
 expedition. Twenty-one men had left Montreal in July, 1669. 
 Galinee points out that none of the nine men hired to accompany 
 Dollier and himself was willing to abandon the missionaries. The 
 La Salle party, when it left the Sulpicians, numbered twelve men ; 
 some of these returned to Montreal. Perrot met him with five or 
 six Frenchmen on the Ottawa River the following summer. Yet 
 we are told that twenty-three or twenty-four men abandoned La 
 Salle, deserting to New England and New Netherland from be- 
 yond the Louisville rapids. 
 
 The sources from which the author of this geographical ro- 
 mance culled his data are easily ascertained. The name of Onon- 
 daga was known in France since Champlain's time and is found 
 in Galinee's account. The southernmost latitude of the Recit is 
 that of Jolliet's account. The longitude 330 degrees was a by- 
 word in Europe during the seventeenth century. In his letter of 
 September, 1679, ten years after this supposed desertion en 
 masse on the banks of the Ohio, La Salle speaks of twenty men 15 
 deserting to New Netherland, 16 and in his letter of 1682, August 
 22, he specifies that twenty- two men abandoned him. 17 As the 
 author of this * 'curious monument" did not know these details 
 until the early part of 1683, 18 we may safely assume that this 
 
 isMargry, II, 70. 
 
 ifiMargry, II, 68, 70, 103. 
 
 i7Margry, II, 225. 
 
 is Cf. Bernou to Renaudot, February 1, 1684; BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:89. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 29 
 
 "remarkable paper" is posterior to this date. Again, for the last 
 detail, La Salle, in his interview with the naturalist Docard in 
 1678, is reported as having said: "They (the Indians) travel 
 through trackless woods and without star or magnetic needle 
 they seldom lose their way though they make journeys of 500 
 leagues. They go by the rising and setting sun. Frenchmen who 
 have lived among them for a considerable time imitate them in 
 this respect; and Mr. de la Salle has returned alone after having 
 been deserted by the men who were with him at a place more 
 than 350 leagues distant from his habitation." 19 
 
 The evidence brought forward by Margry to show that La 
 Salle discovered and explored the Ohio in 1669-1670, namely the 
 account of Bernou and that attributed to Renaudot, is wholly 
 fictitious. It seems unnecessary to discuss other documents al- 
 legedly proving the discovery of the Ohio at this time, such as 
 Patoulet's letter of November 11, 1669. In this letter the official 
 in Quebec said that Messrs. La Salle and Dollier, accompanied 
 by twelve men, had set out to discover a passage which they 
 expected to find communicating with Japan and China, 20 as if 
 such text were evidence that La Salle discovered the Ohio, 21 and 
 as if all this were not already known from Galinee's account. 
 Nobody ever denied that La Salle went to discover a passage to 
 China, but that he went down, or even near the Ohio in 1669-1670 
 is pure fiction resting on worthless evidence. 
 
 The Cartographical Evidence 
 
 Another proof is also adduced, namely, the cartographical as 
 distinguished from the documentary evidence, supposedly up- 
 holding the contention that La Salle discovered the Ohio. This 
 cartographical proof consists in two sets of seventeenth century 
 manuscript maps which will now be examined. 
 
 There were in New France in the latter part of the seven- 
 teenth century two outstanding cartographers whose maps are 
 preserved in the Archives of Paris where they were sent, J. B. L. 
 Franquelin and Louis Jolliet. Gabriel Marcel noted that bio- 
 graphical data on Franquelin were extremely scarce. 22 The two 
 
 is Canadian Historical Review, XVIII, 1937, 174. 
 
 20 Margry, I, 81. The twelve men are those hired by La Salle. 
 
 2i J. P. Dunn, Indiana and Indians, A History of Aboriginal and Ter- 
 ritorial Indiana and the Century of Statehood, Chicago and New York, 
 1919, I, 100. 
 
 22 G. Marcel, Cartographie de la Nouvelle France, supplement a Vouv- 
 rage de M. Harrisse, Paris, 1885, 13. 
 
30 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 memoirs quoted by this continuator of Harrisse contain little 
 about Franquelin himself, but there are several other memoirs 
 in which this excellent cartographer outlined his own career. 23 
 Franquelin was born in France in 1653 and came to Canada in 
 1670 or 1671 with the intention of becoming a merchant. In 1674, 
 being the only one in Canada who knew how to make maps, he 
 says in a memoir to Seignelay, 24 that he was employed by Fron- 
 tenac and Duchesneau in that capacity. For the next nineteen 
 years, the succeeding governors and intendants of New France 
 commissioned him to draw the maps found today in the various 
 depots of the French Archives. In 1683, he married a widow, 
 Elisabeth Aubert. 25 Until 1686, Franquelin's work for the gov- 
 ernment was not paid for, and it is only from that year on, when 
 he was appointed Royal Hydrographer, that he began to draw 
 a salary of 400 livres a year. 26 All the while he had been draw- 
 ing new maps or completing former ones as the knowledge of 
 the geography of the continent progressed consequent upon fur- 
 ther explorations by the French toward the West and the 
 South. 27 
 
 In 1687, he asked to be given the place of Villeneuve, 28 the 
 engineer of the colony, as well as the pay attached to his posi- 
 tion. 29 He made several journeys to France, notably in 1684 30 and 
 in 1688. Although sent by the officials of Canada to bring to the 
 mother country the maps he had drawn in the interval he had 
 to pay his own expenses. 31 In the last journey, he brought the 
 map of 1687. 32 
 
 Franquelin was again in France in 1692. "Seeing that he could 
 
 23 BN, Clairambault, 879:278-294. 
 
 24 Ibid., 283. 
 
 25 c. Tanguay, Dictionnaire genealogique des families canadiennes, 
 Montreal, 1871-1890, IV, 102. 
 
 26 AC, C 11 A, 9:159 v. 
 
 27 BN, Clairambault, 879:285. 
 
 28 Cf. AC, C 11A, 9:10 v., and E. B. O'Callaghan, ed., Documents Rela- 
 tive to the Colonial History of the State of New York, Albany, 1855, IX, 
 289. One of his maps is in SHA, 127-6-4. 
 
 29 AC, C 11A, 9:10 v. 
 
 30 BN, Clairambault, 879:294 v. While in France at this time he was 
 assigned as draughtsman to La Salle, Margry, II, 426-427, 437. 
 
 si Denonville and Champigny offered to send Franquelin to the Ottawa 
 country in 1688 to make a map of that region. In lieu of pay, he was given 
 a trade permit, but was forbidden to sell brandy in the Upper Country, BN, 
 Clairambault, 879:280. Franquelin did not make this journey, but went to 
 France instead. 
 
 32 De Chabaud to de Lancet, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 2610:44 v., the passage 
 from this letter pertaining to Franquelin is in Marcel, Cartographic 14. 
 The map dedicated to Seignelay, is in SHB, B 4040-6, it is the neat draft 
 of that in the Archives des Affaires Etrangeres. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 31 
 
 not support his family in Canada," he says in his autobiographi- 
 cal memoir of 1694, "having spent all his money in the service 
 of the King, in the hope that his services would earn him some 
 reward, he resolved, last year, to call his family to France, with 
 the intention of settling his wife and children on a small prop- 
 erty he owned in Touraine. Alone, he would be able to subsist 
 in Canada and to continue his services. But to top his misfor- 
 tunes, he just learned that the boat on which his wife and chil- 
 dren had embarked with their poor belongings had shipwrecked, 33 
 and now he found himself bereft of all that he held dear in this 
 world." 34 He asked the Minister for the means to pay the debts 
 he contracted during the last fifteen months he had been in 
 France and to be given free passage to Canada, where he in- 
 tended to make other maps, and to teach drawing in Quebec dur- 
 ing the winter and piloting during the summer. But Franquelin 
 did not return; 35 he remained in France, and the place of Royal 
 Hydrographer was given, in 1697, to his friend Jolliet. 36 
 
 The Canadian besides being an explorer was also a cartog- 
 rapher, although his draughtsmanship is inferior to that of 
 Franquelin. Jolliet's first map, made shortly after his return 
 from the Mississippi, 1674, was sent by Frontenac to Colbert. 37 
 Others followed, such as that of Hudson Bay, in 1679, 38 and that 
 of the Gulf and River of the St. Lawrence, in 1685. 39 On the 
 strength of this cartographical work 40 Jolliet succeeded Fran- 
 
 ss The Corossol, AC, C 11 A, 12:350 v. 
 
 34 BN, Clairambault, 879:294-295. Two of his children and his wife lost 
 their lives, the two youngest seem to have remained in Canada; cf. 
 Tanguay, IV, 102. 
 
 35 AC, C 11 A, 13:22 V.-23. 
 
 36 E. Gagnon, Louis Jolliet, decouveur du Mississippi et du pays des 
 Illinois, premier seigneur de Vile d'Anticosti, Quebec, 1902, 234. Franquelin 
 made use of Jolliet's maps and memoirs for some of his maps. Thus Denon- 
 ville wrote to the Minister, November 13, 1685: "J'ay faict designer par le 
 Sieur Franquelin l'ouvrage du Sieur Joliet qui est homme assez aplique et 
 qui me paroist avoir for etudie le bas de notre fleuve," in Collection de 
 Manuscripts, contenant lettres, memoires et autres documents historiques 
 relatifs a la Nouvelle-France, recueillis aux Archives de la Province de 
 Quebec, ou copies a Vetranger, Quebec, 1884, I, 346. Cf. Harrisse, Notes, 
 166 and SHA, 126-1-3. Franquelin also redrew Jolliet's map of the dis- 
 covery of the Mississippi, SHB, B 4040-11. 
 
 37 AC, C 11A, 4:82. 
 
 38 AC, C 11 A, 9:281 v.; A. L. Pinart, Recueil de Cartes, Plans et Vues 
 relatifs aux Etats-Unis et au Canada . . ., Paris, 1893, n. 23; Marcel, Car- 
 tographic, 23; id., Catalogue des documents giographiques exposes a la 
 Section des Cartes et Plans de la Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris, 1892, 23. 
 
 39 AC, C 11A, 7:117. This letter is printed in Gagnon, 118-119; AC, C 
 11 A, 9:278 v., AC, C HE, 13:135-36, Marcel, Cartographic 14. 
 
 40 AC, C HA, 13:324 v. 
 
32 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 quelin as Royal Hydrographer in 1697 41 and held this post until 
 his death in 1700. 42 It seems that Franquelin was then reap- 
 pointed to the post of hydrographer in Canada, 43 but it is not 
 known whether he actually returned to Quebec. 
 
 With regard to the maps of Jolliet representing the Missis- 
 sippi Valley, those which are undoubtedly drawn by the explorer 
 and which have not been tampered with certainly do not show 
 that La Salle went down the Ohio. Gravier, analyzing Jolliet's 
 map of 1674, wrote that "the two travellers (Jolliet and Mar- 
 quette) are satisfied with showing on this map the end of the 
 Ohio, and say not a word of the discovery which was made of 
 the river in 1669 by Cavelier de la Salle. In his later maps, Jol- 
 liet with a better knowledge will trace the whole course of this 
 river and will recall the name of this explorer, but Marquette 
 will ignore him until the end." 44 
 
 Jolliet in his later maps did not credit La Salle with a journey 
 the latter never made. The map of Jolliet of 1674, known as the 
 "larger map," has indeed the full length of the Ohio, but this 
 has been interpolated by a later, clumsy hand. C. A. Hanna, who 
 could only judge of this interpolation from the reduced sketch 
 of this map in Winsor, called attention, after Winsor, to this 
 fact. He wrote : "The lines of the latter draughtsman cross both 
 the vignette and the lines indicating the mouth of the River on 
 the original." 45 Margry, while copying the documents in the 
 
 4i Gagnon, 234, 238. 
 
 42 Ibid., 238, note 1. 
 
 43 Callieres and Champigny to Pontchartrain, October 18, 1700, AC, C 
 11A, 18:12 and 31 v., Gagnon, 238, note 1. The date of Franquelin's death 
 is not ascertained. Harrisse, Notes, 215 and 218, erroneously surmised that 
 Franquelin died before 1695; the letter of Callieres and Champigny shows 
 that he was still alive in 1700. 
 
 44 Etude sur une carte inconnue, la premiere dresse"e par Louis Joliet, 
 en 1674, apres son exploration du Mississipi avec le P. Jacques Marquette 
 en 1673, Paris, 1880, 40. Gravier adds in note: "II est d'ailleurs a remarquer 
 que dans leurs Relations de 1666 a 1672, les PP. JSsuites ne trouvent pas 
 une seule fois l'occasion de citer le nom de Cavelier de la Salle." It would 
 have been much more remarkable if the Jesuits had mentioned La Salle's 
 exploits several years before his arrival in Canada. The earliest possible 
 mention of La Salle in the Relations should be that of 1672, after his return 
 to Montreal following the fiasco of the 1669-1670 expedition. This was the 
 year when the Jesuits stopped publishing their Relations. Furthermore 
 there was not the slightest reason why the Jesuits should mention the 
 doings of every trader who roamed the woods of the Iroquois country. 
 La Salle broke into the news after his "indecent procedure," in Montreal, 
 Easter, 1674; Parkman, La Salle, 95. 
 
 45 The Wilderness Trail, II, 212-213. Harrisse, Notes, 194, n. 203, merely 
 mentions this map; Parkman, La Salle, 25, note 1, describes it, but does 
 not call the reader's attention to this disturbing fact. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 33 
 
 French Archives, also made tracings of maps, 46 and the same 
 clumsiness of the interpolator is noticeable in his tracing of this 
 map. With the arrival of the photostatic process of reproduction, 
 one is better equipped than were those who studied before the 
 invention. This map is in the Karpinski collection. 47 The interpo- 
 lation is evident; the handwriting and the ink are clearly differ- 
 ent. The draughtsman thought fit to insert five little figures that 
 are supposed to represent Indian huts, and which are only found 
 along this nameless river. The wording of the interpolation Route 
 du Sieur de la Salle pour Alter dans le Mexique, gives an approx- 
 imate date for the tampering, namely, after 1680; for La Salle 
 did not think of going to Mexico before that date. 
 
 The other map used to prove La Sailed discovery of the Ohio 
 is known as Parkman n. 3. The proof consists in the legend writ- 
 ten along the river, and this also states that La Salle followed 
 this course to Mexico. Parkman says: "About two years after 
 Galinee made the map mentioned above (the historian had just 
 described the Sulpician's map of 1670), another, indicating a 
 greatly increased knowledge of the country by some person 
 whose name does not appear, but who seems to have been La 
 
 46 a volume of maps was to accompany the six volumes of documents, 
 Smith College Studies, VIII, 150. This project was not carried out. Margry 
 was not satisfied with having to deal with Congress. He would much have 
 preferred to deal with a publisher who would have accepted with his eyes 
 closed more documents of the kind of the R6cit. Parkman wrote to him 
 February 7, 1892: "People have asked me more than once if the maps of 
 your Memoires et Documents had been published. I had nothing to answer. 
 Will you kindly give me some information about this?" Letter of Parkman 
 in the Ayer Collection. But Margry had taken the matter in his own hands 
 the previous year. On July 21, 1891, after an interview with Lambert 
 Tree, he wrote to this U. S. Minister to France, that from 1843 to 1851, he 
 had gathered the documents published under the auspices of Congress. 
 The number of volumes was inadequate, he says; the discovery of the West 
 was not treated as it should be; "the text of this section is incomplete, 
 but it is easy to remedy to this, if an English translation of the six volumes 
 is to be made." Meanwhile those interested in the history of the West will 
 find a valuable source of information in the maps of which he had made 
 tracings. He wished Tree to publish those tracings. The American was 
 willing to do this on condition that Margry "had each of the maps authen- 
 ticated by the present custodian of the Archives" in Paris. Margry agreed, 
 but said that he was then too busy to have this authentication made. He 
 died two years later. His family sold his books, transcripts, and tracings 
 to a bookdealer. The tracings were later bought by Edward E. Ayer, and 
 are now a part of the collection in the Newberry Library. 
 
 47 Service Hydrographique, Bibliotheque, B 4044-37. 
 
 48 On his tracing of this map, Margry added in a note : "Dans une plus 
 petite (carte) — known as Jolliet's smaller map — mais Sgalement de la main 
 de Jolliet on lit Riviere par ou descendit le Sieur de la Salle au sortir du 
 Lac Erie pour aller dans le Mexique" This map so generously attributed 
 to the Canadian, is not Jolliet's but Bernou's. 
 
 49 Winsor, IV, 215-217. 
 
34 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Salle himself." 50 In passing, it should be said that there is not a 
 single La Salle map known to exist. The explorer drew maps, but 
 these seem to have disappeared. 51 Harrisse described what he 
 judged to be a fragment of Parkman n. 3. 52 The authorship of 
 this map and its date are of great importance for the question 
 of La Salle on the Ohio. 
 
 In the Service Hydrographique, Bibliotheque, Paris, there are 
 four maps without title, author, or date. The geographical re- 
 gions represented are: on the first map, Lac Ontario ou Fron- 
 tenac; 53 on the second map, Lac Huron ou Karegnondi ou Mer 
 Douce des Hurons; 5 * on the third, Fleuve St. Laurent, Lac Cham- 
 plain, Nouvelle Angleterre, Nouvelle Yorck; 55 on the fourth, 
 Lake Superior. 56 Harrisse, listing these maps, says that they 
 seem to be the work of Jolliet, 57 and M. de la Ronciere thinks 
 that they are all by the same author, who might be Jolliet. 58 The 
 
 so The Discovery of the Great West, 406. The quotation is from the fifth 
 edition, Boston, 1871. The corresponding passage from the eleventh edition 
 reads: "Three years or more after GalinSe made up the map mentioned 
 above, another indicating a greatly increased knowledge of the country 
 was made up by some person whose name does not appear," La Salle and 
 the Discovery of the Great West, Boston, 1907, 450. It is evident that Park- 
 man revised his judgment as to the date and the authorship of this map. 
 
 51 Bernou in his letters to Renaudot often refers to maps made by La 
 Salle, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:92; the abbe insisted that a copy be sent to 
 him in Rome, ibid., 98, Margry, III, 74; the explorer even "promised" to 
 send a map to Bernou, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:115; Margry III, 78; but 
 La Salle went away leaving no maps with Renaudot, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 
 7497:127, 129; instead, when he left Paris in 1684, he took away Renaudot's 
 copies of his relations, ibid., 142, 169; these, however, were returned from 
 La Rochelle, ibid., 171 v. Only one very sketchy map seems to have re- 
 mained with the Minister, Seignelay, ibid., 245. For other references to 
 La Salle's maps, cf. Margry, II, 301, 355, 429, etc.; the cartouche of Minet's 
 map, SHB, C 4044-4. Margry thought that the map listed in the Biblio- 
 theque Nationale, Ge DD 2987-8782, was a tracing of one of La Salle's 
 maps. La Salle lost most of his papers in the shipwreck of the Belle. 
 
 52 Notes, 195-197, n. 205. 
 
 5s SHB, B 4044-43, facsimile in Pinart, n. 15. 
 
 54 SHB, B 4044-44, facsimile in Pinart, n. 16. The map in BN, Ge D 
 8075 is a duplicate; there are a few additions by a different hand referring 
 to changes in the location of Indian villages near Lac Skekouen ou Nipissing, 
 cf. Marcel, Cartographie, 24. The Indian name Karegnondi given to Lake 
 Huron is also found in Sanson's map of 1656. Anticipating what will be 
 said below in the text, this name is a further indication of the sources 
 Bernou made use of. The abbe made an extensive study of Sanson's maps. 
 He wrote to Renaudot, June 27, 1683, to tell Coronelli "not to trust at all 
 the Sanson maps of Hudson Bay and of the other parts of North America 
 for they are worthless," BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:19; cf. ibid., 55-55 v. 
 
 55 SHB, B 4044-45, facsimile in Pinart, n. 14. 
 
 se SHB, B 4044-46. The map in BN, Ge D 8078 is a duplicate, in which 
 the words Lac Superieur are added in pencil. 
 
 57 Notes, 198, n. 210. 
 
 58 Catalogue general des Manuscrits des Bibliotheques publtques de 
 France, Bibliotheque de la Marine, Paris, 1907, 237. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 35 
 
 legends of Parkman n. 3, as given in Winsor 59 for Lake Ontario, 
 Lake Huron, and Lake Superior, are exactly the same as those 
 found in the three corresponding maps in the above-mentioned 
 series of the Bibliotheque du Service Hydrographique. The only 
 difference between the legends as given in Winsor for the course 
 of the St. Lawrence, for New England, and for New York, is 
 that they are less numerous than on the map of the Bibliotheque. 
 The other two great lakes, Erie and Michigan, in Parkman n. 3, 
 are also found in the same series in the Marine Archives with 
 legends identical with those for the three other great lakes. 60 
 Harrisse analyzed at great length the map of Lake Michigan, 
 and for some unknown and unaccountable reason, asserts that 
 the author is Jolliet. 61 
 
 The author of the four maps referred to, which represent 
 severally the three northern lakes and the course of the St. 
 Lawrence, is Abbe Claude Bernou, and he is the author also of 
 the map of Lake Michigan, as a cursory comparison of the hand- 
 writing of the autograph letters of the abbe with the handwrit- 
 ing of the legends of these maps will reveal. The evidence for his 
 authorship of the map of Lake Erie, based on the handwriting 
 alone, is not as conclusive as for the other maps, for the legends 
 are printed in block letters. But Bernou had certain peculiarities 
 of spelling, such as writing the contracted plural article aux 
 with an "s," aus, instead of with an "x," omitting the reduplica- 
 tion of letters in the body of words where such reduplication is 
 the correct spelling, etc., all of which peculiarities are found in 
 the spelling of the legends of these maps. Moreover, he is also 
 the author of the map known as "Jolliet's smaller map." 62 This 
 is also in the abbe's handwriting. Bernou reduced Jolliet's larger 
 map to a smaller scale, transferred the letter on the left side of 
 the larger map to the foot of the smaller one, and inserted along 
 the Ohio River, the legend: Riviere par ou descendit le Sieur de 
 la Salle uu sortir du lac Erie pour aller dans le Mexique. 63 
 
 59 Narrative and Critical History of America, IV, 216-217. 
 eo SHB, B 4044-48 and 50. 
 
 6i Notes, 195-196, n. 205. M. de la Ronciere, Catalogue, 237, is not as 
 emphatic as Harrisse; the former has Oeuvre de Jolliet? 
 
 62 SHB, B 4044-49, facsimile in G. Marcel, Reproductions de cartes et 
 de globes relatifs a la decouverte de VAmerique du XV I e au XVII e siecle, 
 avec le texte explicatif, Paris, 1892, n. 27. 
 
 63 Jolliet's map of 1674 was redrawn by Franquelin and entitled Carte 
 Gnlle de la France Septentrionnalle, SHB, B 4040-11, and dedicated to 
 Colbert by Duchesneau. Several changes were made, notably the name of 
 the Mississippi which is no longer called Riviere Buade, but Riviere de 
 Messisipi; the letter of Jolliet is not reproduced on this map. What is known 
 
36 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Bernou was indeed very much interested in cartography, and 
 particularly in the cartography of New France. He had been 
 making maps, sketches, and tracings for a long time. He had 
 tracings of most of Jolliet's and Franquelin's maps in his posses- 
 sion. Thus he wrote to Renaudot, June 27, 1683, asking him to 
 give Jolliet's map of 1679 to Coronelli and to urge the Italian 
 cartographer to finish the map of North America "which I helped 
 to make." 64 The accuracy of the map Parkman n. 3 astonished the 
 American in view of the period to which he supposed it belonged. 
 However, the date of this map is not a few years after Galinee's 
 map as Parkman believed, but after 1680, probably toward 1686, 
 more than ten years later than the American thought, and at 
 least five years later than Marcel thought. 65 
 
 The six maps, those namely of the five great lakes and the 
 course of the St. Lawrence, which are thus identified as Bernou's, 
 are so strikingly similar to the maps of Franquelin that one 
 would be entitled to draw the conclusion that the abbe's maps 
 are tracings of those of the cartographer. Bernou, however, has 
 relieved us from drawing such a conclusion. Among his papers 
 are found sixteen partial maps, that is, of sections of New 
 France, which are so many parts of Franquelin's map of 1686. 66 
 He inserted, f ° 140, the title and the author of the map on which 
 he made those tracings : Amerique septentrionale depuis environ 
 21 jusqu'a 62 degrez de Latitude. Par J. Bapt. Louis franquelin 
 
 as Jolliet's larger map with the arms of Frontenac, SHB, B 4044-37, the 
 map with the interpolation, shows the course of the Mississippi down to 
 the Ohio only. The letter of Jolliet is reproduced but with many changes, 
 additions and omissions; a whole sentence of the letter is written under the 
 Illinois River, and the Mississippi is now called Riviere Colbert. There are 
 still further changes in Jolliet's smaller map, that is, Bernou's drawing of 
 the larger map. The abbe evidently copied the letter from Jolliet's larger 
 map, and touched up a few passages. The Wisconsin River is nameless, 
 and the legend under this river in the larger map, Chemin ou Riviere par 
 lequel le S r Jolliet est entre dans la Riviere Colbert qui se descharge dans 
 Mexique, is omitted by Bernou. On the other hand the interpolated Ohio 
 is linked to a nameless river, — missing in the original of Jolliet and in 
 Franquelin's drawing — supposedly the Maumee, by a portage interpolated 
 in Jolliet's larger map, and naturally copied by Bernou. The abbe, lest the 
 meaning of the dots be overlooked, wrote the word Portage on his map. 
 The "stump" of the Ouabouskiqou in Jolliet's original map has grown to 
 a full length river in Franquelin's map of 1681, SHB, B 4040-4, where it 
 is labelled Riviere Ouabouski-Quou ou Oiiio ou Belle Riviere, and rises 
 south of Lake Erie; there is no portage between it and the nameless river 
 — the Maumee — flowing into Lake Erie. 
 e* BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:19. 
 
 65 Catalogue, 44. 
 
 66 BN, Clairambault, 1017:133 V.-143. The map on which these tracings 
 were made is in the Archives des Affaires Etrangeres, Paris, and it is a 
 draft of that dated 1687, dedicated to Seignelay, in SHB, B 4040-6. 
 
LA SALLE AND THE OHIO 37 
 
 geographe du Roy a Quebec 1686. It is illuminating to note that 
 Bernou at this date, namely in the late 80's or the early 90's 
 when he made these tracings, did not add anything about La 
 Salle going down the Ohio River to Mexico. 
 
 There remains only one question about Parkman n. 3: on 
 which map was the tracing given to Parkman by Margry made ? 
 In 1870, when preparing his cartographical list, Harrisse did not 
 find this map in the French Archives. 67 He found only that of 
 Lake Michigan, which he says has exactly the same legends as 
 that geographical section of Parkman n. 3. When he examined 
 the maps of the other lakes Harrisse failed to realize that their 
 legends were also identical with those of the corresponding sec- 
 tions of Parkman n. 3. The latter is not listed by M. de la Ron- 
 ciere, nor has the present writer found any reference to it in 
 other cartographical lists. Of course, maps do disappear, but 
 knowing Margry's antecedents, a suspicion may well arise that 
 one might be in the presence of some more rigging on his part. 
 This suspicion becomes a conviction when the legends of Park- 
 man n. 3 as found in Winsor are compared with the legends of 
 the maps of the four other lakes, namely, the conviction that the 
 tracing given to Parkman is not a tracing of one map but of 
 the six tracings of Bernou which were attributed to Jolliet. Mar- 
 gry made it appear as if it were one map, giving no date, no 
 title, no author, no provenience, as usual. The proof that this 
 took place is found on the maps themselves. Thus on the map 
 of Lac Ontario there is a pencil note in Margry's handwriting: 
 Le If. au dessous; on the map of Lake Erie: Jf au dessous du 2 
 et 3; on the map of Lake Michigan: 5 a cote du 3 entre le 1 et 
 
 lek- 
 
 Finally, there are printed maps which show that Bernou re- 
 vised his judgment about La Salle's descending the Ohio, if he 
 is the author of the interpolation on Jolliet's larger map. It 
 should be recalled here that the abbe knew more about La Salle 
 and his travels than anybody else in France, with the possible 
 exception of Renaudot, that Bernou had La Salle's interests and 
 success very much at heart, and that he had written most of the 
 memoirs presented to the government to forward La Salle's plans 
 for further discoveries. 
 
 Mark Vincent Coronelli, the Venetian Conventual friar, was 
 commissioned by Cardinal d'Estrees, in 1680, to construct a huge 
 
 67 Notes, 196. 
 
38 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 globe of the world, which was later presented by the Cardinal 
 to Louis XIV and is known as the globe de Marly. 68 Coronelli was 
 a close friend of Bernou and Renaudot. 69 While preparing his 
 globe he made several sojourns in Paris 70 and had all the infor- 
 mation Bernou and Renaudot had about La Salle's travels. Coro- 
 nelli returned to Italy in 1683, and went to Venice 71 to supervise 
 the printing of his atlas. 72 The map of Louisiana in this work 
 makes no mention of the Ohio. It shows the Mississippi River 
 down to the fortieth parallel. The legend under Lake Erie reads : 
 "11 lago Erie, e altrimente chiamato Teioch-Rontiong , 6 Conty, 
 6 du Chat." This peculiar Indian name, Teioch-Rontiong, is also 
 found in Bernou' s map of the same lake. 73 With regard to the 
 discovery of the Ohio by La Salle, since this map does not show 
 the course of that river, nothing can be concluded, except that it 
 indicates, besides what is found in the letters of Bernou to 
 Renaudot, whence Coronelli derived his information. 74 
 
 But in Coronelli's larger atlas, published in Venice the follow- 
 ing year, the map entitled America Settentrionale colle nuove 
 scoperte fin all' anno 1688™ the Mississippi empties into the 
 Gulf of Mexico, near Matagorda Bay, as is the case with all the 
 maps of the period, those of Franquelin, Minet, and so forth. 
 Below the Illinois River, the Wabash flows directly into the Mis- 
 sissippi; 76 and below the Wabash, at about the same distance as 
 
 68 Louis Moreri, Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique, Paris, 1759, Leland, 
 Guide, 42; BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:25, 42; Margry, II, 276. 
 
 69 BN, Mss. fr. n. a. 7497:19. 
 
 70 ibid., 38, 44 v., 55. 
 
 7i Ibid., 98 v., 104-104 v., Margry, III, 78, 84. 
 
 72 Citta, Fortezze, Isole, e Porti Principali dell'Europa, Venice, 1688. 
 
 73 The table of the inscriptions of the Marly globe, BN, Mss. fr., 13365, 
 has, p. 76: "Les environs du Lac Erie autrement dit Tehiocrontiong, ou 
 Conty, et du Chat, a l'extremite du Lac Frontenac ou Ontario et Skansa- 
 dario, ont este trouves infectez par la nation des Andastogheronons qui a 
 este detruite depuis quelques annees par les anglois a la solicitation des 
 Iroquois." The Coronelli-Tillemont map of 1688, has Teiocharontiong ; Mar- 
 cel, Cartographie, 11, lists a map in which one of the legends has: "Lac 
 Erie dit par les Iroquois Techaronskion." Lake Erie is called Techaronkion 
 in the account of the voyage of Courcelle to the Iroquois country, Margry, 
 I, 172. 
 
 74 Bernou wrote to Renaudot, February 1, 1684, that he wished for a 
 prompt return of Coronelli "to perfect (the map of) America, in which he 
 will make a very honorable mention of M. de la Salle," BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 
 7497:89 v., cf. ibid., 92, 98 v. 
 
 75 Atlante Veneto, T. I, Venice, 1690. 
 
 76 The Kaskaskia river is probably meant. Nicholas de la Salle, who 
 accompanied his namesake in the 1682 expedition, wrote in a report, dated 
 Toulon, September 3, 1698: "La Riviere Ouabache et la Riviere Oyau ont 
 plus de 400 lieues chacune et partout navigables," (Italics inserted) ASH, 
 67: n. 15. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 39 
 
 the latter is from the Illinois River, the mouth of the Ohio is 
 given, but the course of the river eastward is shown by a double 
 dotted line, with the following legend: R. Ohio o la Belle Riviere, 
 quale secondo la relatione de selvaggi ha la sua origine vicini al 
 Lago di Frontenac. 77 There is not the slightest indication that 
 La Salle knew of this river, except what he had heard from the 
 Indians more than ten years after the time when he was sup- 
 posed to have explored the Ohio. 
 
 Summing up the data furnished by an analysis of the carto- 
 graphical evidence examined, there remains not the slightest 
 doubt that the legends of the maps indicating that La Salle de- 
 scended the Ohio were interpolations on Jolliet's larger map, and 
 that the other mention of La Salle going down the Ohio to Mex- 
 ico is found on a map which had been held as Jolliet's whereas 
 it is a copy made by Bernou. Parkman n. 3 is a composite map 
 made up by Margry with partial maps whose author is Bernou, 
 and their date should be after 1680. Late in the 80's Bernou no 
 longer inserted the legend on the tracings he made of Franque- 
 lin's maps, nor did he give such information to Coronelli. The 
 cartographical evidence then, that is, the legends interpolated in 
 earlier maps and left out in maps drawn later by Bernou, is 
 worthless as documentary proof that La Salle was on the Ohio 
 in 1669-1670. 
 
 77 The inscription of the Marly globe, BN, Mss. fr., 13365:75, has: "La 
 Riviere Ohio, ou la Belle Riviere, ainsy appelee pour sa beaute, par laquelle 
 les Europeens n'ont pas encore descendu qu'a Vembouchure a 31 degrez 26 
 minutes dans la Riviere Mississipi, mais par les relations des Sauvages on 
 croit qu'elle a sa source vis-a-vis du lac frontenac, d'ou on se rend par un 
 portage dans la dite Riviere" (Italics inserted). Cf. Margry, II, 276; the 
 map of Father Raffeix, Parties les plus Occidentales du Canada, BN, Ge D 
 8042, legend E, sketch in Winsor, IV, 233. 
 
THE DISCOVERY 
 
 of the 
 MISSISSIPPI 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 
 
 To Margry and to his followers La Salle's discovery of the 
 Ohio in 1669-1670 was so evident that neither he nor they deemed 
 it necessary to produce any further proof over and above the 
 two documents previously analyzed. They bolstered these, as is 
 clear from foregoing passages, with references to certain maps. 
 One of these maps contains interpolations; another is attributed 
 to Jolliet, although the Canadian most probably never saw it; 
 and the third of the cartographical references is to the series of 
 drawings so juxtaposed by Margry as to appear to be a single 
 authentic map. 
 
 While the Ohio hoax met with a tolerable amount of success, 
 the contention that La Salle reached the Mississippi before Jolliet 
 and Marquette was attacked as ludicrous from the moment it 
 became public. 1 Piqued over the reception of his idea, Margry 
 assumed a front of offended dignity. He was determined to main- 
 tain his bluff even though the chorus of disapproval swelled, but 
 when Parkman came forth against the validity of the proofs, 2 
 and when Gravier was the only backer Margry could descry on 
 the historical horizon, he considered himself reduced to the ex- 
 pediency of producing his arguments, or, as he said, his "proofs." 
 And hence, on July 4, 1879, he presented his case in a letter to 
 Lyman C. Draper, Corresponding Secretary of the Wisconsin His- 
 torical Society, and as a conclusion wrote as follows : 
 
 If La Salle had wished to practice deception, and to claim a merit that 
 was not his, nothing would have prevented him from saying that he had 
 gone further down the River Mississippi or Colbert than he does say he 
 went, whereas, he left to Joliet and to Father Marquette the honor of having 
 penetrated to that river by way of the Wisconsin, and of having descended 
 the Mississippi three degrees further than he, and that, before the enter- 
 prise of 1678. 
 
 These facts I have considered it my duty to establish in opposition to 
 the allegations of those who affirm that La Salle did not conceive any pro- 
 jects of discovery till after the voyage of Joliet — which is just the contrary 
 of truth.s 
 
 Comments upon the hypothetical portion of the above citation 
 
 i Shea, The Bursting of Pierre Margry's La Salle Bubble; Harrisse, 
 Notes, 121-143 ; J. Tailhan ( ed. ) , Memoire sur les Moeurs, 279-299. 
 
 2 La Salle, 26-27. 
 
 3 Report and Collections of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin 
 for the years 1880, 1881, and 1882, IX, 112. This letter is also printed in the 
 American Antiquarian, II, 1880, 206-209. 
 
 43 
 
44 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 seem unnecessary. The inference that La Salle merits praise be- 
 cause he refrained from practicing deception when a great occa- 
 sion arose, is an unfamiliar kind of ethics. The last sentence 
 serves as an illustration not only of the quality of Margry's rea- 
 soning ability but also of its duration, for it reveals him as a 
 debater who has completely lost track of the point at issue. The 
 statement is merely an echo of what Bernou wrote of La Salle, 
 namely, "He was the first to conceive the project of these dis- 
 coveries which he communicated more than fifteen years ago to 
 M. de Courcelle, governor, and to M. Talon, intendant of Canada, 
 who approved of it." 4 Nobody was denying or objecting to the 
 statement that La Salle conceived projects of discovery before 
 Jolliet went to the Mississippi in 1673, but what all deny, with 
 the exception of Messrs. Margry, Gravier, and Chesnel, is that 
 La Salle ever saw the Mississippi before 1680. 
 
 The four proofs in the letter to Draper, on which Margry 
 reposes his belief in La Salle's priority, are: (1) the Recit d'wn 
 ami de Vabbe de Galinee; (2) a letter of La Salle's niece under 
 date of 1756, wherein the writer affirms she has possession of 
 maps belonging to La Salle in 1676 ; the said maps demonstrate 
 that previously to 1676 her uncle had made two voyages of dis- 
 covery, and furthermore, in them the Colbert or Mississippi 
 River is inscribed; (3) a letter of Frontenac to Colbert, which, it 
 is alleged, places the voyage of Jolliet after that of La Salle; (4) 
 the general antagonism between the Jesuits and the merchants. 
 
 The contents of the Recit in their application to the discovery 
 of the Ohio have been rather amply analyzed in preceding pages 
 of this work. What the fourth of the items contributes toward 
 clinching the case is nothing; what it affects to prove is far from 
 plain; what it reveals is Margry's hobby of Jesuit baiting; and 
 if it be accepted as valid proof for La Salle's discovery of the 
 Mississippi, it might be adduced as strong evidence that he dis- 
 covered the North Pole. 
 
 4 BN, Clairambault, 1016:192v; this autograph memoir of Bernou is 
 printed by Margry, II, 285, who omitted the marginal notes. Next to the 
 passage just quoted, Bernou wrote: "II a este" le premier a songer a ces 
 decouvertes et a travailler a y faire des colonies." If it is such a praise- 
 worthy achievement to "conceive" a project of discoveries, then all honor 
 must go to those who caused that conception, the Iroquois Indians. In his 
 Histoire du Montreal, published by the Literary and Historical Society of 
 Quebec, third series, 1871, 112, Dollier wrote: "Un nomine" M. de la Salle 
 ayant autrefois ou'i parler des pays ou on (i. e. the Dollier-GalinSe expedi- 
 tion) allait par les Iroquois qui lui avaient fait venir la pensie de faire ce 
 voyage." Cf. also the Relation des dicouvertes, by Bernou, BN, Clairam- 
 bault, 1016:51, printed in Margry, I, 435, the first paragraph. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 45 
 
 Madeleine Cavelier's letter, as a proof of the priority of her 
 uncle's discovery, has never been taken seriously. 5 The inquiry 
 of the French Government, which was the occasion for this letter, 
 dealt with the discovery of the Ohio by La Salle, a discovery ex- 
 tremely vital as proof in Paris against the pretensions of Eng- 
 land. The boundary disputes between the two nations were not 
 restricted to the Ohio Valley alone, but were concerned with the 
 whole of the Northwest. This question had been agitated in the 
 seventeenth century, and in the documents produced by the 
 French government to prove its claims, the exploration of Jolliet 
 is invariably set forth as the prime reason for France's right to 
 the Mississippi Valley. Thus, in an official memoir of August 12, 
 1687, it is stated that the rights of France to the Western terri- 
 tory are certain and unimpeachable from the ceremonies of tak- 
 ing possession by St. Lusson in 1671, and "with regard to the 
 Illinois, Chaouanons and other tribes who live in the country, 
 unknown to Europeans, on both banks of the Mississippi, it is 
 certain that it was discovered in 1672 by the Sieur Jolliet, and 
 5 or 6 years afterwards by the Sieur de la Salle, who have taken 
 possession of that country." 6 
 
 The other two documents, the Recti and the letter of Fron- 
 tenac, will be hereafter examined more in detail. In the examin- 
 ation of the Recit, it is important to keep in mind the chronology 
 of La Salle's movements during the time when the supposed ex- 
 ploration took place, as far as can be ascertained from official 
 documents. One thing is certain: La Salle was in Montreal 
 August 6, 1671, and December 18, 1672. On the first of the dates 
 mentioned he received on credit, owing to "the great need and 
 stress" in which he found himself, merchandise for the value 
 of 454 livres tournois, and in December, 1672, he promised to 
 repay that sum in silver and in pelts. The historian Faillon, who 
 found these in the registers of the greffe in Montreal, argues from 
 them: "It is evident that La Salle continued his explorations." 7 
 
 sMargry, I, 379. 
 
 e AC, C lie, l:155-163v. This is repeated in the memoir of March 8, 
 1688, printed in O'Callaghan, Documents, IX, 382, 383-384. In the list of 
 letters produced by the French Government, the exploration of Jolliet is 
 always given first as the basis of the rights of France to the Mississippi 
 Valley, AC, C 11 A, 9:270-278v. 
 
 7 Histoire de la colonie francaise en Canada, III, 382. On the treatment 
 of the priority of the discovery of the Mississippi by Faillon, cf. C. de 
 Rochemonteix, Les Jesuites et la Nouvelle-F ranee au XVII e Steele, Paris, 
 1896, III, 67, note 2, who "notes with regret that M. Faillon has not treated 
 this question with the frankness expected from a historian." There was a 
 social reason for this particular attitude of Faillon in that he was a great 
 friend of Margry. 
 
46 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 As a matter of fact the only thing that is evident from them is 
 that La Salle was in Montreal and in dire straits. He could not 
 very well appeal for help to the Sulpicians, after having sold to 
 them the land they had given him freely less than two years 
 before. He was in need of merchandise, which he would trade 
 with the Indians for the purpose of financing the journey he had 
 been commissioned by the intendant Talon to make. There is 
 nothing more in these documents ; any other deduction from them 
 is gratuitous, and especially so the inference that La Salle went 
 to the Mississippi at that time. 
 
 Talon was not in Canada in 1669, at the time of the Galinee 
 expedition. The intendant returned in May, 1670. In the summer 
 of the same 1670, La Salle is known to have been on the Ottawa 
 River. Assuredly, he returned to Quebec, for on November 10, 
 
 1670, Talon wrote to Colbert that he had sent La Salle and St. 
 Lusson on exploratory expeditions. 8 This is quite distinct from 
 the Galinee expedition, which is mentioned separately in the same 
 dispatch. La Salle, then, supposedly had gone to Quebec after the 
 alleged discovery of the Ohio, had said nothing, and was now 
 allegedly retracing his steps to the Ohio to "discover a passage 
 to the Gulf of Mexico." St. Lusson went to Sault Ste Marie, and 
 took possession of the region, in June, 1671. 9 This must have 
 been the time when La Salle went to the Mississippi, for his was 
 to be the southern expedition corresponding to the western one 
 of St. Lusson. Reasoning from this La Salle must have gone to 
 the Mississippi in mid- winter, 1671, for in August he was still in 
 Montreal raising money, and in November, 1671, Talon, notifying 
 the king by mail that St. Lusson had returned, explicitly states 
 that La Salle had not yet returned. 10 
 
 La Salle then did not go to the Mississippi in the summer of 
 
 1671, else he would have reported his return to Talon before 
 November; and when he was in Montreal, in August of that year, 
 he certainly had not gone to nor returned from the Mississippi. 
 If he returned to Quebec, it must have been after the departure 
 of the ships in November with the mail, that is, in December, 
 1671, or in January, 1672. If La Salle had made the discovery, 
 can it reasonably be supposed that he would not have hastened 
 to Quebec with the great news, and if he had returned to Quebec 
 
 s Margry, I, 87. This text, which is rather obscure, is probably the au- 
 thority for the assertion that La Salle made journeys to the North, cf. the 
 answer of Colbert in O'Callaghan, Documents, IX, 70. 
 
 9 Margry, I, 96; O'Callaghan, Documents, IX, 803. 
 
 io Margry, I, 92. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 47 
 
 after the departure of the mail boats, that he did not tell Talon 
 where he had gone, that is, to the Mississippi and down to the 
 36th degree, precisely where his admirers took him? La Salle's 
 silence on this occasion, according to those who wished to exalt 
 him, is explained by his reticent character. Yet La Salle was not 
 inclined to keep his light hidden under a bushel. 11 But in this 
 particular case he had been sent by the intendant on an official 
 mission. Would he withhold the report of his voyage from Talon ? 
 The adventurers sent on such expeditions, as the intendant wrote 
 to the king, were "to keep journals in all instances, and reply, on 
 their return, to the written instruction I had given them; in all 
 cases they are to take possession, display the king's arms and 
 draw up proces-verbaux to serve as titles." 12 We can be quite 
 sure that if La Salle had discovered the Mississippi, or even if he 
 had discovered anything worth while, he would have been only 
 too anxious to secure the approval of the authorities in Canada, 
 and financial help for further explorations, and only too inter- 
 ested to refrain from reporting his voyage to Talon. And if, 
 late in the winter of 1671, for this is the only time he can have 
 been in Quebec, he did narrate to Talon, officially or unofficially, 
 the tale of his discovery of the Mississippi, how will the sending 
 of Jolliet in the summer of 1672 be explained? 13 Either Talon 
 disbelieved La Salle's account, or, he forgot it as soon as he heard 
 it, or La Salle did not have any discovery or trip to report, for 
 Jolliet was dispatched to make the discovery. Talon is not known 
 for acting the part of an imbecile on any occasion much less on 
 one of such major import as this in the New World destiny of 
 France. 
 
 We must also suppose that La Salle, after having successfully 
 carried out the order of Talon, was shelved on his return and in 
 the very moment of triumph, for we find him at Montreal in 
 December, 1672. Moreover, he was renewing the note of the pre- 
 vious year. That month, or early in January, 1673, La Salle re- 
 ceived a commission from Frontenac. The governor had planned 
 this trip to the Iroquois country shortly after his arrival in 
 Canada. Lest the Indians take umbrage, Frontenac sent a mes- 
 senger to the Jesuit missionaries to prepare the meeting : 
 
 For this purpose, he selected Sieur de la Salle as a person qualified for 
 such service by the different journeys he had made in that country and by 
 
 ii Margry, II, 291, 447, 449. 
 
 12 O'Callaghan, Documents, IX, 64. 
 
 is Letter of Frontenac to Colbert, AC, C 11 A, 3:293v. 
 
48 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 the acquaintances he had contracted with the Indians. He sent him orders 
 to leave Montreal as soon as navigation would permit and to proceed to 
 Onondaga as the place where all the nations assemble for transacting their 
 business, and to invite them to send delegates to Kente towards the end of 
 June; he was to carry the same message, should he think proper, to the 
 four other villages.** 
 
 From this passage written by Dollier, 15 who knew of the jour- 
 neys if any one knew, and according to it all the discoveries, the 
 further explorations, spoken of by Faillon, all amounted merely 
 to several trading trips to the Iroquois country, made by means 
 of the money La Salle had previously borrowed in Montreal. 
 
 This is apparently confirmed by several statements in a letter 
 of Frontenac to Colbert, dated November 13, 1673, and published 
 in the Rapport de VArchiviste de la Province de Quebec, 1926- 
 1927. In it the recently arrived governor-general tells the Min- 
 ister of his journey to Lake Ontario during the summer of 1673. 
 He wrote: 
 
 As I was notified this Winter (of 1672) by Sieur de la Salle, who was 
 among the Iroquois, and by the Jesuit Fathers, whose letters you will find 
 enclosed, that the English were undoubtedly doing all they could to force 
 the Iroquois to make peace with the Ottawa. ... I immediately sent Sieur 
 de la Salle with presents, as is customary, to notify them of my journey to 
 their country. After having long poured over a map of the whole of Lake 
 Ontario, which Sieur de la Salle had sent me, I resolved to go to the 
 Catarocoui River. 
 
 At the end of August, 1673, Frontenac received a letter from 
 Father Bruyas announcing the capture of New York by the 
 Dutch. The governor was nonplussed. How could they dare attack 
 the English colony when they were already being warred upon 
 by the Great Monarch, his master? He pursues his remarks: 
 
 It seems to me that the rumor heard this spring ( 1673 ) , that Manathe 
 (New York) and Orange (Albany) had been taken, was a veritable proph- 
 ecy, since it took place in the same way as it was then published. Although 
 Sieur de la Salle told me (at Catarocoui) diverse particular circumstances, 
 even (asserting) that he heard the guns, I still can hardly believe it, con- 
 sidering the state to which the King has reduced the Dutch, who have 
 enough to do to defend their own country without thinking of conquering 
 others. In order to be better enlightened about this matter, I dispatched a 
 canoe to Father Bruyas, who is among the Mohawks, ordering him to send 
 some of his trusted Indians to Albany to get more details. 
 
 It has been suggested that during these years La Salle made 
 
 i*Margry, I, 198. Italics ours. 
 is Leland, Guide, 49. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 49 
 
 voyages on Lake Erie, and that he might even have gone to 
 Green Bay. 16 Such jaunts are quite possible, but they are only in 
 the realm of possibilities, for which there is no documentary 
 proof, and yet they are much more likely journeys than the 
 mythical voyage to the Mississippi. 
 
 The quotation from the Recit d'un ami de Vdbbe de Galinee, 
 on which Margry rested his case reads as follows : 
 
 Some time after he made a second attempt on the same river, which he 
 left below Lake Erie, making a portage of six or seven leagues for the 
 purpose of embarking on that lake, which he crossed to the north, ascended 
 the river which forms this lake, passed Salt Water Lake, entered the Fresh 
 Water Sea, doubled the point of land which divides this lake in two, and 
 descending it from north to south, leaving on the west the Bay of the 
 Puants (Green Bay), discovered a bay incomparably larger, at the bottom 
 of which on the west he found a very fine harbor, and at the head of this 
 harbor a river that runs from east to west. He followed this river and 
 having reached about the 280° of longitude and 39° of latitude where he 
 found it was advisable to stop, contenting himself with the almost certain 
 hope of being one day able to pass, by following the course of this river, 
 to the Gulf of Mexico, and not daring with the small party he had, to 
 hazard an enterprise in the course of which he might find some obstacle 
 insuperable to the means which he had.i? 
 
 Margry must have been harrassed for proofs when he based 
 his contention on a document of this sort. In this journey of La 
 Salle no date is given except the vague "some time after"; no de- 
 tails as to the number of men who accompanied the explorer, ex- 
 cept "the small party" ; no indication of the time required to make 
 this journey; no mention of an Indian tribe met on the way; no 
 name for any one of the rivers. The account clearly is nothing 
 else than a variant of Jolliet's return voyage. And it is clear that 
 the author had a copy of Jolliet's map of 1674 before him when 
 he wrote, for the Canadian, drawing his map from memory, 18 
 erroneously drew a large bay south of Lake Michigan. The co- 
 ordinates are those of Fort Crevecoeur of the map of Hennepin, 
 1683; the latitude 36° is that of Jolliet's narrative. The last sen- 
 tences are merely a paraphrase mixture of Bernou's account of 
 La Salle's journey on the Ohio, of Jolliet's narrative, and of a 
 letter of La Salle of 1681. 19 
 
 A decade after the time of this supposed discovery, that is, 
 in 1680, La Salle himself wrote from the Illinois country that he 
 
 is De Villiers, La Decouverte du Missouri, 14-15. 
 
 17 Margry, I, 377-378. 
 
 is BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7485:176; AC, C 11 A, 4:82; Margry, I, 258. 
 
 19 Margry, II, 135. 
 
50 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 asked a young warrior "about the Colbert River, feigning to have 
 a rather extended knowledge of it"; and the following day, he 
 impressed the Indians "with the description he had learned the 
 evening before." 20 Furthermore, in the same letter he speaks of 
 everything he has heard and everything he can guess about that 
 river. 21 "Even at a later date when he (La Salle) made the voyage 
 down (the Mississippi) . . . , he merely criticized Jolliet's ac- 
 count, admitting his voyage, without pretending to have antici- 
 pated him." 22 While Margry was in the process of putting La 
 Salle on a pedestal in the long line of "firsts," he printed, besides 
 the avowals of the explorer himself, tacit or expressed, another 
 document written by Bernou, 23 in which the abbe stated: "It is 
 true that Jolliet to forestall M. de la Salle made a voyage to the 
 River Colbert in 1673, but it was with the sole purpose of trad- 
 ing." 24 Whatever Jolliet's purpose was, is beside the point; his 
 priority is here asserted ; Bernou knew, and everybody else knew 
 that Jolliet and Marquette went down the Mississippi before La 
 Salle sighted it, that is, every one knew until Margry appeared 
 on the scene. 
 
 Besides this "virtual" admission, 25 as Winsor calls it, there is 
 another and much clearer statement by Bernou, and one quite 
 sufficient to dispel any doubt as to the priority of the discovery 
 of the Mississippi. The force of this statement is better realized 
 when it is recalled how very anxious Bernou was to be made 
 bishop of the territory discovered by La Salle. Some references 
 in Bernou's correspondence may appear ironical, but it remains 
 none the less true that the abbe ambitioned the mitre and eccle- 
 siastical jurisdiction in the rich country, 26 New Biscay, to the 
 conquest of which he bent all his efforts. Nothing was more 
 
 20 Margry, II, 52-53; cf. BN, Clairambault, 1016:647. 
 
 21 Margry, II, 79. 
 
 22 Shea, The Bursting of Pierre Margry's La Salle Bubble, 22 : ; Har- 
 risse, Notes, 132. 
 
 23 What Margry printed is the autograph of Bernou, in BN, Clairam- 
 bault, 1016:190-193. 
 
 24 Margry, II, 285. It is rather amusing to hear Bernou speak dispar- 
 agingly of Jolliet's journey because the Canadian's purpose was trade, and 
 to hear the abbe compare the mercenary spirit of Jolliet with that of La 
 Salle, when more than half the letters of the latter deal with trading 
 schemes. It was not Jolliet's fault if he had not started an etablissemeoit. 
 
 25 Narrative, IV, 245. It could be shown that this statement of Bernou 
 in 1678-1679 is more than a virtual admission. The discussion in the text 
 of Bernou's other admission has been selected because the pecuniary inter- 
 ests of the abbe were at stake when he made it. 
 
 2«; BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497 :30v, 54, 100, 108, 198; Margry, III, 80. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 51 
 
 natural than that he, La Salle's agent 27 and originator of the 
 scheme, should so profit from its successful issue. 28 Consequently, 
 one can easily imagine the chagrin of the self-appointed prelate- 
 to-be when the Bishop of Quebec claimed the territory explored 
 by La Salle as part of his jurisdiction. The document containing 
 the formal statement of Bernou will presently be placed in its 
 context, and with it the antecedents for his admission of the 
 Jolliet-Marquette priority on the Mississippi. 29 
 
 On May 24, 1684, the Abbes Jean Cavelier and Frangois 
 Chefdeville obtained from the Archbishop of Rouen the neces- 
 sary powers to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction "in those re- 
 gions of New France in which there is neither bishop nor vicar- 
 apostolic." 30 These powers were to be used by the priests in the 
 countries which La Salle was to discover in his last expedition 
 to the Gulf of Mexico. 31 On November 27, 1684, the Provincial of 
 the Recollects of the Province of St. Denis applied to Rome for 
 faculties for his subordinates, who had left on an expedition to 
 an unknown part of America. 32 The Provincial of the Recollects, 
 receiving no answer, renewed his petition when the general meet- 
 ing of the Congregation of Propaganda was held, January 8, 
 1685. It appears that Propaganda had placed the Recollects under 
 the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Quebec. The Provincial objected 
 that such an arrangement was unpractical, for from that island 
 which has been named Louisiana, there is a distance of 500 
 French leagues, which makes 1,500 Italian miles. 33 Thereupon, 
 the decrees constituting the Provincial Prefect and the Recollects 
 as apostolic missionaries were granted. 34 
 
 This was, of course, agreeable to Bernou. Should the country 
 discovered by La Salle in 1682, and the territory he had just left 
 to discover, be a part of the Diocese of Quebec, his hopes of be- 
 
 27Margry, III, 82; BN, Clairambault, 1016:483. 
 
 28 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:100. 
 
 29 De Villiers, La Louisiane, Histoire de son nom, 2-3. 
 soMargry, II, 476. 
 
 3i M. A. Habig, O. F. M., The Franciscan Pere Marquette, New York 
 (1934?), 132, writes: "The Sulpicians received the necessary faculties from 
 Archbishop Colbert; and, no doubt, the Franciscans also received the or- 
 dinary faculties before their departure." 
 
 32 Propaganda Fide Archives, Rome, Atti, 1684, November 27, ff. 166- 
 167, n. 8. 
 
 ss Ibid., 1685, January 8, ff. 20-21. De Villiers, La Louisiane, 2, says that 
 the term "island" applied to Louisiana was intended to baffle the Congre- 
 gation of Propaganda; what was said or done by Bernou is not known, but 
 he was aware of the "ignorance de la Propagande en geographic" BN, 
 Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:99, and could easily lead the members of this body astray. 
 
 34Margry, II, 476; Le Clercq, Premier Etablissement, II, 196-197; the 
 pontifical rescript in Margry, II, 477-478. 
 
52 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 coming bishop would be indefinitely postponed. It is easy to 
 understand that the abbe was disturbed and angry when the 
 Bishop of Quebec claimed jurisdiction over Bernou's "diocese." 
 He wrote to Renaudot, from Rome, January 20, 1685, twelve 
 days after the granting of faculties to the Recollects : 
 
 Know then that, on Monday, the 8th of this month, there was a general 
 congregation of Propaganda to which the Cardinal (d'Estrees) reported on 
 a memoir of the agent of the Order of St. Francis, asking the powers of 
 apostolic missionaries for the Recollects who have left with M. de la Salle. 
 Such powers are not granted for those places where there is a bishop in 
 the vicinity; but the moral impossibility of having recourse to Quebec has 
 been the reason why these Recollects were granted their petitions I never 
 thought that anybody would object to this concession. I was grossly mis- 
 taken, for the vicar-general of the Bishop of Quebec, who, as far as I recall, 
 is one M. Duduit;36 and, slanderers claim, all he does in Paris, is bellare bella 
 Domini, that is, he litigates, he canvasses at Court against this, that, and 
 the other, and attends to the revenues of the two abbayes. This M. Duduit 
 then got wind of the pretentions of the Provincial of the Recollects of Paris, 
 and claimed that it was detrimental to the Bishop, who on his part contends 
 that he sent the first missionaries to this new territory — although I am not 
 aware that Father Marquette and Jolliet went thither under his orders — that 
 consequently, these new countries, although 7 or 800 leagues distant from 
 Quebec, and separated from it by impractical regions inhabited by bar- 
 barous peoples, must be a part of his bishopric, and the missionaries must 
 go to Quebec to receive his orders. That vicar-general wrote as much to the 
 Abbe Palu, agent for the Missions Etrangeres, and nephew of the Bishop of 
 Heliopolis, asking him to speak about the matter to Propaganda. Abbe Palu 
 came yesterday to discuss this affair with the Cardinal (d'Estrees), who 
 disagreed with him, and told me to write to you. You may notify M. Morel 
 and those whom it may concern to sidetrack the said vicar-general, or pre- 
 vent him from disturbing this young colony which, to my mind, is outside 
 the range of the Quebec guns. It seems to me that he is meddling in things 
 that do not concern him; for M. de la Salle may die on the way over, and 
 it would have been time enough to take alarm when the colony is estab- 
 lished. This law-suit seems to me extraordinary, but I had to do my duty. 
 It is for you to do yours now, or to entrust this affair to M. de Callieres or 
 to somebody else. Let me know what you have done.37 
 
 Two weeks later Bernou wrote a long disquisition in another 
 letter to Renaudot in which he recapitulates the riches of the 
 Bishop of Quebec; all this prelate has in view is, he says, "his 
 own interest which goes before everything else." 38 When the abbe 
 heard, February 24, of the resignation of Laval, he wrote : 
 
 ss Cf . Le Clercq, II, 275-276. 
 
 se On the ecclesiastic M. Dudouyt, cf . Report on Canadian Archives for 
 1885, Ottawa, 1886, x-xi; Bertrand de la Tour, Memoires sur la vie de M. 
 de Laval, Cologne, 1769, 86, 103. 
 
 37 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497: 191-191 v. 
 
 ss Ibid., 198-198v. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 53 
 
 You have done so much that you (succeeded in) ridding Canada of its 
 first bishop. You have now a fine opportunity to exercise your charity toward 
 that poor colony. It is said that his successor is a good man. You can easily 
 become a friend of his. . . . Let me know on what conditions the defunct 
 has left the place, and every other interesting thing you know on the 
 subject.39 
 
 It is hard to see what is meant by this, whether Bernou in- 
 dulged in subtle flattery of Renaudot, or whether he was simply 
 teasing his friend. Although the abbe in Paris was past master 
 in intrigue, he had, of course, nothing to do with the resignation 
 of Laval. It would be interesting to see the letter which prompted 
 the answer quoted above. In March the new Bishop of Quebec, 
 St. Vallier, was still considered a great improvement on Laval: 
 
 It is true, as you guessed, that I worked for the Recollects. They had 
 failed. Acting on my advice, they renewed their petition, which this time 
 went through. I am delighted to hear that M. Duduit is astounded. Inspire 
 the new bishop to send a more charitable, more peaceful vicar-general.40 
 
 Bernou soon learned that St. Vallier was not a person to tol- 
 erate any encroachment on what the bishop believed to be the 
 rights of his see. Bernou had labored under the impression that 
 if La Salle were ever to go to the Gulf, the explorer would con- 
 quer New Biscay almost without striking a blow, and that the 
 whole country from the mouth of the Mississippi westward, in- 
 cluding lands of untold wealth, would be ruled by La Salle in its 
 temporal aspects and by Bernou in spiritual matters. Instead of 
 such a felicitous arrangement, the rich bishopric of the abbe's 
 dreams was being possessed by the Bishop of Quebec. Bernou 
 voices his disappointment with St. Vallier, who was renewing the 
 claims of M. Dudouyt, in a letter to Renaudot of April, 1685. 
 Behind all this Bernou found the dark power of the Jesuits. 
 
 The new Bishop of Quebec is a good disciple of his predecessor, and is 
 following his footsteps. He wrote to the Cardinal (d'Estrees) and sent a 
 memoir stating his rights over the territory at the mouth of the Mississippi 
 and even one thousand leagues beyond. His Eminence has given me the 
 letter and the memoir and has commissioned me to answer to these pre- 
 tensions. I have done so with a four page memoir, which the Cardinal will 
 send to the Court and to the said bishop. When copies of it are made, I shall 
 withdraw the original and send you an autograph copy. You see that he 
 stands in need of being instructed by you, and it seems to me that (word 
 illegible) M. Tronson, he seeks advice from his predecessor and from 
 M(onsieur) R(obe) N(oire).4i 
 
 39 Ibid., 201v. 
 
 40 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:204v. 
 4i BN., Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:113. 
 
54 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 The following week another letter was sent to Renaudot: 
 
 What you wrote me and what I wrote you last week about M. de St. 
 Vallier and Denonville confirms the thought I had that they had fallen into 
 the hands of M. R. N. . . . I am sending enclosed the memoir of Abbe de 
 St. Vallier. You will see by the contents that it was dictated by M. R. N. 
 . . . You will see my answer and my comments. The Cardinal has sent a 
 copy to the Abbe de St. Vallier and another one to the Court. Show yours 
 to M. de Callieres and to M. Morel, if the latter has not yet seen it, and to 
 a few others, but without naming me [as its author]. You had rightly de- 
 picted the character of that abbe, I recognized it in his letter. It augurs ill 
 for the future of Canada, because he will be even more easy to preposess 
 than the other (bishop). 42 
 
 The memoir of St. Vallier and Bernou's answer are found in 
 the abbe's papers. The document sent by St. Vallier to which 
 Bernou refers in the above letter is entitled : Memoir e pour faire 
 connoitre a Mgr. le Card al DEstrees que tous les mission™ 8 de la 
 Nouvelle-F ranee y doivent travailler sous la dependence de 
 UEveque de Quebec jusqu'a ce qu'on y erige d'autres evechez.^ 
 This is a copy of the one sent by St. Vallier. It is also found in 
 two other documents in the same volume of the French Archives. 
 One of these two documents, in two columns, is Bernou's auto- 
 graph, the original mentioned in his letter to Renaudot; the sec- 
 ond column contains the answer and comments of Bernou. The 
 second document is in three columns; beside the first two col- 
 umns, identical with the preceding document, the third column 
 appears as a rebuttal to Bernou's answer, either by St. Vallier 
 or Dudouyt. 44 The statement about the priority of Jolliet and 
 Marquette is found in Bernou's autograph. 
 
 Bernou begins by saying that there could be no objection to 
 the claims of the Bishop, if they embraced only what is contained 
 in the title. He argues that St. Vallier is indeed Bishop of New 
 France, but his memoir reveals his wish to extend his jurisdiction 
 "over the new discoveries down to the Gulf of Mexico. These 
 lands are not in New France but in Florida, as can be seen in 
 all the maps." 
 
 The rebuttal of the bishop in the third column consists in a 
 simple quotation of a clause of the Bull of erection of the See 
 of Quebec, according to which all the territory discovered in 
 North America is to be under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of 
 
 42 Ibid., 214v. 
 
 43 BN, Clairambault, 1016:646-646v. 
 
 44 Ibid., 629 and 630-631v; for other details, Leland, Guide, 176. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 55 
 
 Quebec, until it pleases the king to set limits to this bishopric. 
 
 The first paragraph of St. Vallier's memoir states that it is 
 more than twenty years since missionaries of the See of Quebec 
 labored among the Ottawa, the Illinois, and other nations still 
 more distant, located on the Mississippi River. Bernou countered : 
 "the ecclesiastics and the Recollects in question are not going to 
 the Ottawa or to other peoples where there are organized mis- 
 sions, but much farther than this, nearer to the mouth of the 
 Mississippi." To this the bishop said that even in such a case the 
 missionaries would only be about eighty leagues from the point 
 reached by Marquette and Jolliet, and that there have been mis- 
 sions in the country beyond Lake Michigan. 
 
 The second paragraph of St. Vallier's memoir, the answer of 
 Bernou and the rebuttal of the bishop are given below in full. 
 What has been said thus far is sufficient to demonstrate the 
 cardinal point that if any one knew to whom the priority of the 
 discovery of the Mississippi belonged, that man was Bernou. In 
 the present case too much was at stake for the abbe, and if La 
 Salle had been the first to sight the river, before Jolliet and Mar- 
 quette, Bernou would surely have emphasized the point. More- 
 over, this was sent to Renaudot, the author, according to Margry, 
 of the Recit on which the theory of the priority of the discovery 
 was built, yet Renaudot did not protest, did not reassert what 
 he thought to be the truth. A month after he had sent his memoir 
 and his answer to his friend in Paris, Bernou wrote: "The 
 new Bishop of Quebec is bending all his efforts to place that yet 
 unborn colony under his jurisdiction. I notice that you have not 
 said one word, nor taken one step to thwart it, and that I should 
 have to be in two places at once." 45 All of which shows how, in 
 1685, two centuries before Margry entered the scene, the man 
 who wrote La Salle's relations, how La Salle's friends in Paris 
 were regarding that priority. 
 
 St. Vallier wrote : 
 
 Father Marquette, Jesuit, accompanied by Sieur Jolliet, brought up in 
 the Quebec seminary, has been the first to discover the Mississippi and all 
 the nations in that region, where he preached the Gospel, baptized the 
 savages, more than twelve years ago, and the missionary died on his return 
 journey. 
 
 Bernou answered: 
 
 It is true that Father Marquette has been the first to discover the 
 
 «BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:231. 
 
56 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Mississippi River, but he merely passed through that country,46 and it does 
 not therefore follow that he took possession of the whole course of this 
 river, which is 600 leagues long, in the name of the King, nor does it follow 
 that he placed all the nations and lands along the river under the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Bishop of Quebec, since there remains more than 600 leagues 
 along this river down to its mouth which this Father did not see; a prince 
 who would be the lord of the sources of the Danube would not for that 
 reason be the master of its mouth. 
 
 It was not like St. Vallier to leave some of the statements of 
 this answer pass unchallenged. In his rebuttal he says : 
 
 There is so little truth in the statement that Father Marquette merely 
 passed through Mississippi that, on the contrary, it is known for a cer- 
 tainty that he made two voyages, and that, coming back from the second 
 he died in a mission located on the shore near the middle of Lake Michigan, 
 as can be seen in the original map in Paris, drawn by Jolliet. The latter, 
 having undertaken this discovery by order of the Governor of Canada set 
 up the arms of the king down to the 22y 2 ° (sic) at every place where Father 
 Marquette sent by the Bishop of Quebec planted the cross. So that the 
 mouth of the Mississippi being situated at about the 28°, these two travel- 
 lers were only 80 leagues from the Gulf of Mexico. 
 
 Despite inaccuracies of detail in this quotation, the main fact 
 remains true, namely, the priority of Jolliet and Marquette. With 
 the admission of Bernou, 47 this discussion could be closed, but 
 there is in the interesting document one more statement about 
 the Ohio, which throws light on the purported discovery of this 
 river by La Salle. 
 
 In the third paragraph of his memoir, St. Vallier states that 
 since Marquette's time, missionaries sent by the Bishop of Que- 
 bec have evangelized the Illinois, with whom the tribes of the 
 banks of the Mississippi have communications. This drew a sharp 
 retort from Bernou: there has never been any mission farther 
 than Lake Superior and Green Bay, and it is not true that "all 
 the savages who live on the banks of the Mississippi are in re- 
 lation with the Illinois, and that even if they were, they would 
 not for this reason be subjects of the king and under the juris- 
 
 46 "ii est vrai que le pere Marquette a decouvert le l er la Riviere de 
 Mississipi mais il n'y a fait que passer," reads the autograph of Bernou, 
 BN, Clairambault, 1016:630; the copyist left out the first sentence, and 
 began with the words: "mais il n'y a fait que passer," ibid., 629. 
 
 47 in a memoir written in the late 1670's in which Pefialosa is supposed 
 to be speaking, but which was written by Bernou, the author to illustrate 
 the fact that a small exploring party is better than a numerous one, says: 
 "Le R. P. Marquette et le S r Jolliet en ont fait depuis peu l'experience 
 traversant tant de vastes pays parmy des peuples inconnus jusques aupres 
 du golfe de Mexique sans recevoir aucun mauvais traitement." BN, Clair- 
 ambault, 1016:213. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 57 
 
 diction of the Bishop of Quebec." However this be, said St. 
 Vallier in his rebuttal, the discovery of the mouth of the Missis- 
 sippi, under the leadership of La Salle, was made by Frenchmen 
 and Indians from Quebec. One of Bernou's objections to the 
 jurisdiction, and the reason apparently determining Propaganda 
 to grant faculties to the Provincial of the Recollects, was the 
 enormous distance between Quebec and the mouth of the Missis- 
 sippi and the difficulties of the route. St. Vallier affirmed in his 
 memoir that the route was "very easy." Bernou remarked: "It 
 would be desirable that the route were as easy as it is claimed." 
 The distance, 800 leagues, 48 would be a serious enough obstacle, 
 but the rivers are full of rapids, and the territory of barbarous 
 nations must be traversed. "These difficulties," he continued, 
 "have seemed so great to the Court that the discovery of these 
 countries has been neglected and looked upon as useless until 
 the mouth of the Mississippi be found." 
 
 "The distance from Quebec to the mouth of the Mississippi 
 is not 800 leagues," answered the bishop, 
 
 but about 600 by water, namely, 60 leagues to Montreal; from Montreal to 
 Lake Ontario also about 60 leagues; 60 to 80 leagues to cross this lake; as 
 many to cross Lake Erie, and without entering Lake Superior which they 
 leave far behind, the Mississippi is met about the middle of its course, that 
 is about 300 leagues from its mouth. There is no traveling over land, and 
 rapids are only found between Montreal and Lake Ontario; but neither these 
 rapids, nor the winds, nor the wild country prevent the French from crossing 
 these lakes regularly; and Sieur de la Salle took only two months to come 
 back to Quebec from the mouth of the Mississippi. It is clear that it would 
 take less time to go from Quebec thither. Add to this that there is a route 
 considerably easier by the Ohio River and the Iroquois country, where the 
 Jesuits missionaries are established. There are no rapids on this river, and 
 it flows directly in the Mississippi. 49 Where is that impossibility or so-called 
 difficulty of communications between Quebec and the colony which is 
 planned at the mouth of the Mississippi? 
 
 The contents of the rest of this document, although interest- 
 ing, like everything Bernou wrote, have no relation to the dis- 
 covery of either the Ohio or the Mississippi. Bernou "extended 
 his remarks" for two more pages, and expressed the hope that 
 
 48 La Salle had found 625 to 635 leagues from Quebec to the mouth of 
 the Mississippi, Margry, II, 248; Bernou in a rough draft, BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:642, combined these data with other distances found in the same letter 
 of the explorer, Margry, II, 244. The abbe" has a neat table of distances from 
 Quebec to the mouth of the "riviere divine," 505 leagues, BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:643. 
 
 49 Cf . Father Raffeix's map, BN, Ge D 8042, sketch in Winsor, Narra- 
 tive, IV, 233. 
 
58 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 the success of La Salle's expedition might be so great that the 
 king might wish to create a bishopric of the country discovered, 
 or "as the Antilles are in need of a bishop," that the king would 
 make this territory depend on the prelate in the French West 
 Indies. Bernou, indeed, had begun to cast his eyes in that di- 
 rection. 
 
 Six weeks after the abbe had sent his memoir to Renaudot, 
 the answer came from the Court. The king had examined the 
 memoir sent by Cardinal d'Estrees, reads the decision of May 19, 
 1685. As La Salle had not yet returned, the practicability of 
 going to the unknown country by way of the Gulf of Mexico was 
 still in dispute. Hence missionaries could reach that region only 
 via Quebec, and they should get their faculties from the Bishop 
 there. The king having as yet set no limits to the see, the Bishop 
 of Quebec, in virtue of the Bull of erection, had jurisdiction over 
 all the lands discovered by the French. If 
 
 later the country called Louisiana were to become better known and settled 
 by Frenchmen, it would be necessary, not indeed to send missionaries from 
 Rome, but in time to erect a new bishopric. In this case definite limits would 
 be given to that of Quebec, and thus the objection to that immense area in 
 the memoirs which have been sent, will be answered. s° 
 
 Before Bernou heard of this decision of the king, he had com- 
 plained to Renaudot of his lack of co-operation in thwarting 
 what the abbe considered encroachments on the part of the 
 Bishop of Quebec. After June, 1685, the abbe dropped the sub- 
 ject. He had also written memoirs for the erection of a bishopric 
 in the French Antilles, 51 and, pending news of the success of 
 La Salle's expedition, he let the matter rest. 
 
 Margry, who is never very particular about his proofs when 
 there is question of La Salle, gives as the third reason for his 
 opinion on La Salle's discovery of the Mississippi before Jolliet 
 and Marquette, the letter of Frontenac to Colbert, dated 1677. 
 The passage about La Salle's alleged priority occurs in the fol- 
 lowing paragraph: 
 
 It is for this reason, my Lord, that they (clergy, and especially the 
 Jesuits) have undertaken two things in concert with M. du Chesneau and 
 the Sieur Bazire; the first is that, having learned that the Sieur de la Salle 
 intended to ask for the Lake Erie and Lake Michigan concession, — the first 
 of which is as it were a continuation of his commercial concession of Fort 
 
 so AC, F 5A, 3:164-167. 
 
 • r 'i BN, Clairambault, 1016:633-634, 669-671v; Bernou was unsuccessful; 
 the advisability of having a French bishop in the French West Indies was 
 still discussed long after the abbe had disappeared from the scene, cf. Cath- 
 olic Historical Review; XX, 1934, 411-414. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 59 
 
 Frontenac, most of the trade coming hither from Lake Erie, where the Sieur 
 de la Salle must necessarily build a fort to prevent the English from getting 
 hold of that trade, for according to the report of the Jesuit Fathers them- 
 selves, the English have recently sent a deserter called Turquet to recon- 
 noiter, — having heard then of the intention of Sieur de la Salle, they re- 
 solved to ask this concession for the Sieurs Jolliet and Lebert, who are com- 
 pletely won over to them, the first one of these two they have so much 
 boosted beforehand, although he traveled only after Sieur de la Salle, who 
 will testify to you that the relation of Sieur Jolliet is false in many things. 
 Their second pretension is to reestablish the trade permits. . . .52 
 
 It has been previously remarked how the many false things 
 in Jolliet's relation, so complacently pointed out by Sieur de la 
 Salle, were after all nothing but trifles, incomparably less im- 
 portant than the really false things found in La Salle's writings, 
 especially with regard to the geography of the Mississippi Valley. 
 With a certain amount of sophistry it may be said that Jolliet 
 traveled after La Salle. The year La Salle arrived in Canada, 
 1667, Jolliet had gone to France, 53 and returned to the colony 
 the following year. In this fashion La Salle traveled before 
 Jolliet, but the letter does not say in what country, or in what 
 part of New France such traveling took place. Margry was bent 
 upon distorting the meaning of the passage regarding the priority 
 of La Salle for the discovery of the Mississippi. 
 
 Those who hold that in this letter Frontenac is maintaining 
 the right of La Salle to the discovery of the Mississippi against 
 the pretensions of Jolliet, Harrisse pointed out, are facing an 
 insuperable difficulty. 54 They are forced to accuse Frontenac of 
 self contradiction, for the statement belies what the governor 
 had written, November 14, 1674, when he made record of Jolliet's 
 accomplishment of the Mississippi discovery. 55 Even if such were 
 the sense of Frontenac's letter, for the governor to contradict 
 himself is not an insuperable difficulty to the present writer, espe- 
 cially when it is remembered that, in 1676-1677 Frontenac and 
 Jolliet belonged to two different parties. One contradiction more 
 or less would not stop Frontenac. That Frontenac wrote a letter at 
 this time is certain, 56 but we do not know whether he wrote it in 
 
 52 Margry, I, 324. 
 
 53 Gagnon, 13. 
 
 54 Notes, 132-133. 
 
 55 AC, C 11 A, 4:81v.-82. 
 
 se "M. de Frontenac has written what he is in the habit of saying 
 against you and your clergy, and against the Intendant. His letters have not 
 been communicated to me to be answered. I believe it was because they 
 were full of exaggerated calumnies, which would have compelled many 
 things to be said," Letter of M. Dudouyt to Laval, dated Paris, 1677, in 
 Report on Canadian Archives for 1885, Ottawa, 1886, lxxi. 
 
60 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 the form in which it has come down to us. The only copy extant 
 is a draft in the handwriting of Bernou, 57 and it is this draft 
 which Margry printed. What became of the original is not known, 
 and a diligent search in guides and lists of letters putting forth 
 France's claims against those of England over the West in the 
 official correspondence, failed to locate it. It is therefore impos- 
 sible to say how faithful Bernou's transcription is, even if we 
 suppose the abbe to have had the original or some copy before 
 him. Bernou does not give the name of the sender, nor that of 
 the addressee; "Frontenac to Colbert," as well as the date, 1677, 
 have been supplied. What leads one to think that the abbe had 
 not the original is the fact that he transcribed such indications 
 when they were found in the letters he copied. As the question 
 stands we are in ignorance of these important points, and before 
 attributing a contradiction to Frontenac himself, even if the 
 sense were such as is claimed by Margry and others, it would be 
 necessary to find the original of the letter. 
 
 It must also be supposed that Frontenac was ignorant of the 
 great discovery, for he strongly recommends La Salle to the 
 Minister in the same letter in which he notifies Colbert, in 1674, 
 of the discovery of the Mississippi by Jolliet. Finally La Salle 
 had a copy of Jolliet's map in which the Canadian unmistakably 
 attributed to himself the discovery of the great river. Can we 
 possibly believe that La Salle would not have protested against 
 a claim which, if he had sighted the Mississippi and had gone 
 down to the 36° before Jolliet, rightfully belonged to him? 
 
 La Salle worried about imaginary enemies, and the misfor- 
 tunes which dogged his every step to the tragic conclusion of 
 his career were many. Yet in the years before and after his death 
 his very associates and protagonists have gone far toward in- 
 volving him in a petty proceeding. The fame of La Salle, as 
 De Villiers says, suffered little from the attacks of his contem- 
 poraries, but, with respect to this Mississippi affair, his more 
 modern admirers have jeopardized, if they have not almost de- 
 stroyed, his standing. 58 Here, too, over-zealous friends and bitter 
 enemies have all unintentionally conspired by their writings to 
 transform the great explorer into an elaborate hoaxer. In all 
 justice, let it be repeated, Cavelier de La Salle never made per- 
 sonal pretences to the explorations, imagined and arranged for 
 his fame by Eusebe Renaudot and his followers, Messrs. Margry, 
 
 57Leland, Guide, 172. 
 
 58 De Villiers, La decouverte du Missouri, 4. 
 
THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 61 
 
 Gravier, Chesnel, and many others. The jeopardy to his fame 
 occasioned by presumed friends, was as nothing compared to 
 the jeopardy into which his very life was cast by those who were 
 instrumental in arranging his expedition to Texas. 
 
PENALOSA'S 
 EXPEDITION 
 
 and 
 
 LA SALLE 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 
 
 Besides throwing light on the imaginary voyage of La Salle to 
 the Ohio and on his alleged priority in the discovery of the Mis- 
 sissippi, an examination of Bernou's correspondence and papers 
 elucidates some phases of the origin of a real voyage undertaken 
 by La Salle, namely, the last expedition to the Gulf of Mexico 
 and its connection with the scheme of Pefialosa. For there were 
 plans and there have been theories about the settlement and occu- 
 pation by the French of strategic bases in or around the Spanish 
 colonial lands of North America. There is discussion in the fol- 
 lowing pages, then, of the Spanish adventurer Pehalosa and his 
 projected attack on northern New Spain, of Bernou's place in 
 the plan, of La Salle's scheme, and of French governmental atti- 
 tude toward concerted action in the affair. 
 
 The correspondence in the two plans of La Salle and Pefialosa, the 
 adaptability with which they would lend themselves to co-operation, and 
 stray references forcibly misinterpreted or unduly magnified in importance, 
 have furnished foundation for the theory that the two proposals were com- 
 bined by the government, that La Salle was dispatched first to execute his 
 part of the scheme, and that the failure of Pefialosa to co-operate was due 
 to the Peace (truce) of Ratisbon, concluded between France and Spain, 
 August 15, 1684. Shea in behalf of this theory goes as far as to contend 
 that La Salle went designedly past the mouth of the Mississippi and landed 
 in the region known as Texas in order to establish there a base of operations. 
 Such a theory explains away some of the difficulties connected with the 
 subject of the expedition, and apparently its advantage in this respect alone 
 has commended it to some historians, but more difficulties are raised by 
 such a theory than are settled by it, the mass of evidence undoubtedly being 
 against it. 1 
 
 The writer of these words was not aware of the authorship 
 of the various memoirs he summarized. He did not see how they 
 are all traceable to Bernou, how they were later expanded, how 
 adapted by Renaudot, or by a member of Renaudot's clique. The 
 tying up of the two schemes, as will appear, is not a theory but 
 a fact, and Bernou's correspondence shows how the connection 
 came to be made. 
 
 Before the treatment in Winsor 2 and Shea 3 referred to in the 
 
 i E. T. Miller, "The Connection of Pefialosa with the La Salle Expedi- 
 tion," The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, V 1901 
 101-102. ' ' ' 
 
 2 Justin Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, Boston and New York 1894 
 308-310. 
 
 3 John Gilmary Shea, The Expedition of Don Diego de Penalosa, Gov- 
 
 65 
 
66 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 above quotation, Parkman rendered a verdict on the relation be- 
 tween Penalosa's and La Salle's plan in a footnote in a later edi- 
 tion of his Discovery of the Great West: 
 
 It is extremely probable that his (La Salle's) knowledge of Penalosa's 
 original proposal had some influence in stimulating him to lay before the 
 court proposals of his own, equally attractive. Peace was concluded before 
 the plans of the Spanish adventurer could be carried into effects 
 
 De Villiers in his well balanced account of the expedition 
 speaks only incidentally of the connection between the two 
 schemes. He says that when La Salle arrived in France in 1683, 
 "he learned that an expedition directed against New Biscay 
 seemed to interest Seignelay much more than a mere project of 
 colonization in Louisiana. He hastened to explain how his late 
 discoveries would considerably facilitate the realization of Pena- 
 losa's projects." 5 Father Habig also treated this question in his 
 biography on Father Membre 6 and adopted the views of Miller. 
 
 All of the authors mentioned were lacking Bernou's papers, 
 and were consequently unable to ascertain the authorship of the 
 original memoir in which the plan of Penalosa is first outlined. 7 
 Since they could not identify the original, naturally they had no 
 way of seeing the dependence of the four offspring documents 
 in which the connection between the Penalosa plan and the La 
 
 ernor of New Mexico, from Santa Fe to the River Mischipi and Qnivira in 
 1662, as described by Father Nicholas de Freytas, O. S. F., New York, 1882, 
 Introduction. Cf. C. W. Hackett, "New Light on Don Diego de Penalosa: 
 Proof that he never made an Expedition from Santa Fe to Quivira and the 
 Mississippi River in 1662," The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, VI, 
 1919, 313-335; and Letter of Bernou to Renaudot, Margry, III, 84. 
 
 4 Parkman, La Salle, 328, note 1. 
 
 5 Marc de Villiers du Terrage, L 'expedition de Cavelier de la Salle dans 
 le Golfe du Mexique, Paris, 1931, 30. 
 
 e Marion Habig, O. F. M., The Franciscan Pere Marquette, 122 ff. 
 
 7 This memoir, in the hand of a copyist, printed in Margry, III, 44-48, is 
 in BN, Clairambault, 1016:206-207, and is a variant of the memoir, ibid., 
 216-217. It is based on several rough drafts in the handwriting of Bernou 
 with corrections and erasures. The first draft, Bernou's autograph, is on the 
 justice of the war against the Spaniards in America; one of the reasons 
 was that the Spaniards had seized in time of peace several French ships; 
 it is found ibid., 194-198; another draft dealing with the same subject, 
 ibid., 653-654v. A memoir — copy — for the establishment of a colony "in 
 Florida at the mouth of the Rio Bravo," is in ibid., 199-205v., in which many 
 items of that of f. 211-215, are found. There is also a project, in the hand- 
 writing of Bernou, for the establishment of a colony north of "Panuco or 
 Tampico," ibid., 644-645. The plan for attacking the Spaniards in New 
 Spain, written by Bernou, is found, ibid., 208-209v.; the conquest of New 
 Biscay was to be only an alternative scheme ibid., 216-217, to the plan of 
 discovering and conquering Quivira and Theguayo, ibid., 211-215; in the 
 latter memoir Penalosa is supposed to be speaking, but the document is in 
 the handwriting of Bernou. Finally there is a rough draft on the mines of 
 New Biscay, ibid., 218-219. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 67 
 
 Salle plan is made. Moreover, the writers had not the correspond- 
 ence of Bernou at their disposal and hence could not perceive 
 how the relation between the two plans was effected. 
 
 On January 18, 1682, Bernou sent his memoir to Seignelay 8 
 outlining a plan for beginning a French colony "in Florida, at 
 the mouth of the river called Rio Bravo." "This part of Florida," 
 says the abbe "is not occupied by Europeans, and is situated be- 
 tween the 25° and 30° latitude." 9 The mouth of the Rio Bravo is 
 two leagues wide, its course more than 400 leagues. 10 The settlers 
 
 sMargry, III, 44-48. 
 
 9 "Cette grande province a plus de 600 lieues de longueur depuis le rio 
 de Palmas jusqu'a la Virginie," BN, Clairambault, 1016:199v.; in the Propo- 
 sition pour etablir une colonie en terre ferme a 60 lieues au Nord de Panuco 
 ou Tampico . . . , ibid., 644-645, Bernou wrote: "Ce pays est situe entre le 
 25 e et 30 e degre de latitude au fond du golfe du Mexique." 
 
 io Margry gives forty leagues long, III, 45 ; the memoir in BN, Clairam- 
 bault, 1016:206, has four hundred. With regard to the course later to be 
 given to the Mississippi, the two following quotations indicate the sources 
 from which the description was taken: "Cette grande riviere (the Rio 
 Bravo)," wrote Bernou, in his Proposition pour etablir une colonie dans la 
 Floride a V embouchure du fleuve appelle Bio Bravo . . . , BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:199v.-200, "prend son origine au nord du Nouveau Mexique . . . sous 
 le nom de riviere du Nord. Elle a plus de 500 lieues de cours, et elle coule 
 du nord au sud jusques a une habitation des Espagnols appellee le Passo, 
 d'ou elle tourne vers l'orient, et apres avoir receu grand nombre de rivieres, 
 elle se jette dans le golfe du Mexique au 27 e degre de latitude ou son 
 embouchure a pres de trois lieues de largeur." Again, in his Proiet pour 
 attaquer les Espagnols dans la Nouvelle Espagne, "On peut y aller (to 
 New Biscay) par trois chemins. par la riviere de Panuco navigable 60 
 lieues au dessus de son embouchure et qui vient de la Nouvelle biscaye. Par 
 la riviere de Palmas qui en est a 30 lieues au Nord, et par le Rio bravo 
 scituee entre le 27 e et le 28 e degre de latitude Nord, dont l'embouchure est 
 large de trois lieues, qui recoit plusieurs autres grandes rivieres et qui a 5 
 ou 600 lieues de cours que Ton connoist parfaitement." BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:209. 
 
 The Relation officielle describing the Mississippi reads: "II a suivi 
 durant 350 lieues la riviere Mississippi qui conserve jusqu'a la mer sa largeur 
 de pres d'un quart de lieue. Elle est fort profonde partout, sans aucun 
 banc ny rien qui empesche la navigation, quoy qu'on eut en France publie 
 le contraire. Elle tombe dans le golfe du Mexique au dela de la baye du 
 Saint-Esprit, entre le 27 e et le 28 e degre de latitude, et a l'endroit ou quelques 
 cartes marquent le Rio de la Madalena, et d'autres Rio Escondido: elle est 
 eloignee d'environ 30 lieues de Rio Bravo, de 60 de Rio de Palmas, et de 
 90 a 100 lieues de Rio Panero, ou est la plus prochaine habitation des Es- 
 pagnols sur la coste. Le sieur de la Salle, qui porte toujours dans ses voy- 
 ages un astrolabe, a pris la hauteur precise de cette embouchure." R. 
 Thomassy, Geologie pratique de la Louisiane, New Orleans and Paris, 1860, 
 14-15. 
 
 The parallel passage in Father Membre's Relation of the voyage of 
 1682 is as follows: "Le sieur de la Salle qui portoit toujours une Astrolabe, 
 prit la hauteur de cette embouchure, quoy qu'il s'en soit reserve le point 
 precis, nous avons connu que ce Fleuve tombe dans le Golphe de Mexique 
 entre le 27 & 28 degre de latitude, & comme Ton croit a l'endroit ou les 
 Cartes marquent le Rio Escondido. Cette embouchure est eloignee d'environ 
 30 lieues de Rio Brave, de 60 de Rio de Palmas & de 90, ou 100 lieues de 
 Rio de Panuco ou est la plus prochaine habitation des Espagnols sur la cote. 
 Nous estimions la Baye du Saint Esprit au Nord est de notre embouchure; 
 
68 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 would be the freebooters of Santo Domingo, who number about 
 1,800, "all good soldiers and sailors." 11 To keep such good sub- 
 jects in the service of His Majesty, is one of the reasons for 
 founding the new colony. 12 No subsidy of any kind is asked; all 
 that is requested is ' 'leave to lead" these freebooters to that part 
 of Florida. Several advantages of such a colony are then enumer- 
 ated: a thriving commerce with neighboring tribes; it will fur- 
 nish France with an abundance of cattle; and there is hope of 
 discovering gold, silver, copper, and lead mines. But the greatest 
 advantage is that once the freebooters are settled there, under 
 the leadership of good chiefs with a perfect knowledge of that 
 country, they will be ready, during the next war with Spain, and 
 when it please the king to give them leave to do so, to make an 
 important conquest for his Majesty, 
 
 the conquest of New Biscay, where there are abundant silver mines not far 
 from this new colony, the main ones being those of Hendehe\ of San Juan 
 de Guncame, of Sombrerette, of Sonora, and those of Parral recently dis- 
 
 nous sommes tou jours allez depuis la riviere des Illinois au Sud, & Sud 
 Ouest, le Fleuve serpente un peu, conserve jusques a la Mer sa largeur de 
 pr6s d'un quart de lieue, est fort profond partout sans aucum banc, ny 
 rien qui empesche la navigation, quoy que Ton aye public au contraire. On 
 estime ce Fleuve de huit cens lieues de profondeur, nous en avons fait pour 
 le moins trois cens cinquante depuis l'embouchure de la riviere de Seigne- 
 lay." C. Le Clercq, Premier etablissement de la Foy, Paris, 1691, 237-239. 
 
 It has been claimed, Habig, The Franciscan Pere Marquette, 234 ff., 
 that Father Membre is the author of the Relation officielle, the official re- 
 port of La Salle's expedition of 1682, presented to the French court in 1683. 
 "That the Abbe" Bernou, the man who had prepared the other official report 
 of the years 1679-1681," it is said ibid., 237, "did not compile the report 
 for the expedition of 1682 is evident from the fact that he was not at that 
 time on friendly terms with La Salle, and was not reconciled with the ex- 
 plorer until March 28, 1684." The ground for this evidence is a sentence 
 in one of Bernou's letters, Margry, III, 74, which de Villiers misread, La 
 Louisiane, Histoire de son nom, 19. Bernou was certainly not on unfriendly 
 terms with La Salle at that time. Father MembrS's relation was certainly 
 not handed to the court as the Recollect wrote it; the greater part if not 
 the whole of it was recast. That Bernou and Renaudot had this relation is 
 clear from what Bernou wrote to his friend in Paris, June 27, 1683: "Le 
 Pere Zenobe, Recollect et ma conclusion de la Relation des decouvertes de 
 M. de la Salle luy (Coronelli) serviront a marquer le cours de la riviere 
 Mississipi jusqu'a la mer," BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:19. Any one compar- 
 ing the two quotations from Bernou's memoirs given above with that from 
 Le Clercq and from Thomassy, readily sees that the latter two are taken 
 from Bernou's writings. Whether Bernou himself applied to the MISSIS- 
 SIPPI the description which he had given as that of the RIO BRAVO, has 
 not been ascertained and is immaterial. The point, in this particular in- 
 stance, is that Le Clercq's work has been "edited" not by Frontenac, but 
 by some one of the Renaudot firm of text jugglers. 
 
 ii Cf. BN, Clairambault, 1016:208. 
 
 12 In all the various memoirs referred to above, the freebooters of Santo 
 Domingo were an integral part of the various plans; cf. also BN, Mss. fr. n. 
 a., 7497:72; they were Bernou's "little children," fillots, ibid., 201v., 313, 
 325, etc. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 69 
 
 covered and richer than all the others; besides, there are the gold mines of 
 San Diego, the lead mines of Santa Barbara, all of which supply the 
 Spaniards with more gold and silver than all the other mines of New Spain 
 put together. 
 
 This to Bernou's mind would prove an easy conquest, for "it 
 is known to a certainty from well informed people," that there 
 are only 400 or 500 men capable of bearing arms. These Spaniards 
 could not be helped from Mexico City, which is nearly 250 
 leagues away. It would take three months for the viceroy to raise 
 at the most 400 or 500 soldiers, and in the meantime the free- 
 booters would have fortified themselves and could easily keep out 
 the Spanish army. 13 Moreover, there is general dissatisfaction 
 among the Indians, half-breeds, and Creoles against those born 
 in Spain, and they are only waiting for the opportunity to re- 
 volt, 14 "which they would sooner do in favor of the French rather 
 than any other nation, because like them the French are Cath- 
 olics and are much more human than the Spaniards." It will be 
 easy to keep the conquered New Biscay by means of the colony 
 at the mouth of the Rio Bravo, because of the facilities of com- 
 munications between this colony and Santo Domingo ; and thus it 
 will prove to be the most advantageous of all French colonies, 
 whether in time of peace or in time of war. 13 At the conclusion, 
 the attention of Seignelay, to whom this unusual proposal was 
 made, is again drawn to the fact that no financial help is asked. 16 
 
 Bernou had first proposed this plan to Penalosa in 1678. Since 
 then it had gradually taken shape in the fertile mind of the abbe, 
 and now, in 1682, having, as he thought, foreseen all contingen- 
 cies, he submitted it to the French authorities. For Penalosa is 
 the "well informed people" spoken of in the memoir. This "Indian 
 of Spanish race" had had trouble in Mexico with the Inquisition, 17 
 
 is Cf. BN, Clairambault, 1016:200v.-203. 
 
 14 Cf . ibid., 199-199v. 
 
 is Cf. ibid., 203-203V. 
 
 isMargry, III, 44-48. 
 
 17 Besides the sketch given by Margry, III, 39-44, Bernou, in a short 
 note, BN, Clairambault, 1016:210, adds other biographical details: "Nous 
 avons une personne de marque, criolle de grand calibe (sic), et qui a ocupee 
 les plus hautes emplois du Perou sa patrie, et de la nouvelle espagne; 
 naturalizee francois, et marie a Paris: pour metre a la teste des troupes, 
 et qui aura la direction de l'afaire, et gouvernera en chef . . ." In the 
 memoir for the conquest of Quivira and Theguayo, Penalosa, in his short 
 autobiographical sketch, says that the Inquisitor "ayant excite contre luy 
 tout le corps formidable de l'inquisition la reduit voyant qu'il ne pouvoit 
 obtenir aucune justice a se retirer en france la patrie commune des 
 estrangers ou il s'est estably et marie . . ." Relatively little was known 
 about Penalosa until American students began to search the Spanish 
 archives; cf. Herbert E. Bolton, "The Spanish Occupation of Texas, 1519- 
 
70 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 and "had his own reasons for wishing to get into the good graces 
 of the French government." 18 
 
 Bernou, as was seen before, was very much interested in the 
 expansion of the French colonies. He had excellent reasons of 
 his own for being interested in La Salle's explorations. The colony 
 at the mouth of the Rio Bravo and the conquest of New Biscay, 
 some of the many irons the abbe had in the fire, 19 were to com- 
 prise a separate undertaking, 20 until he heard that La Salle had 
 gone to the mouth of the Mississippi during the year 1682. At 
 the beginning of 1684, when La Salle was in France, he tenta- 
 tively approached Renaudot regarding the possibility of linking 
 the conquest of New Biscay with La Salle's undertaking. The 
 abbe, then in Rome, wrote to his friend in Paris, January 25, 
 1684, urging him to do all he could for La Salle. He recommended 
 that the explorer 
 
 put up, at least for a time, with M. R. N. f who can do him much harm, and 
 also render him great services, above all if he (La Salle) intends to settle 
 among 'my children' the Illinois or among the Arkansas, and if he should 
 go back thither by way of Canada. Such policy with R. N. would be good, but 
 would not be so necessary if he were to return by way of the Gulf of Mexico, 
 as I would advise him to do if he could find some help in Paris. In the latter 
 case, his plan must be kept very secret, and one or two ships would be 
 armed at La Rochelle, in such a manner that nobody gets wind of it. Thus 
 our great design would be linked to his, and the settlements founded by him 
 would in a short time insure the success of the New Biscay (scheme). It 
 would be easy for him to get definite information about this province, since 
 the mouth of the Mississippi cannot be far from that of the Rio Bravo.21 We 
 
 1890," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XVI, 1912, 6, 17; William E. 
 Dunn, Spanish and French Rivalry in the Gulf Region of the United States, 
 1678-1702: The Beginnings of Texas and Pensacola, Austin, 1917, 13 ff.; 
 C. W. Hackett, "New Light on Diego de Peiialosa," 313-315. 
 is Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, 309. 
 
 19 He was also supposed to rewrite the petitions to be presented to the 
 minister on behalf of Canadians trying to secure a fishing monopoly of He 
 Percee, cf. BN, Clairambault, 1016:295-337. La Salle had at one time been a 
 partner in this monoply, ibid., 305, after the death of his "enemy," Bazire. 
 
 20 in his Proposition pour etablir une colonie en terre ferme a 60 lieues 
 au nord de Panuco ou de Tampico . . . , probably written before 1682, 
 Bernou says: "On pourroit aussy faire des decouvertes, des diversions et 
 des conquestes importantes et dont on ne pourroit pas estre chasse par 
 terre a cause de la foiblesse des Espagnols, de la grande distance et des 
 pays desers qu'il leur faudroit traverser on ne pourroit pas aussi en estre 
 chasse par mer a cause qu'il ny a que deux embouchures de rivieres a garder 
 outre que dans deux ans on pourroit joindre ces pays aux decouvertes que 
 le Sr. de la Sale acheve au Sudouest de la Nouvelle France et qui aboutis- 
 sent au golfe de Mexique par une tres grande riviere." BN, Clairambault, 
 1016:644. (Italics inserted.) 
 
 21 In 1680, Bernou in a Memoire sur les decouvertes et commerce de 
 VAmerique Septentrionale, wrote that it had been learned that La Salle, 
 in a ship of 50 to 60 tons was on his way to the Gulf of Mexico (cf. letter 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 71 
 
 should make known to him all our plans for the execution of which he would 
 be very much helped by our friend (Cussy) in Santo Domingo.-"- I am tell- 
 ing you all this aimlessly, for I know not his thoughts nor the state of his 
 affairs. I am saying all this because of my great desire of making a second 
 Cortes of him. I would perhaps be able to speak more to the point, if you 
 let me know his own plans; I am asking him, as well as you, to communicate 
 them to me, although you do not need my advice. -'^ 
 
 Margry printed a memoir dated January, 1684 24 — the same 
 month as the letter of Bernou just quoted — the provenience of 
 which he does not give in the table of contents at the end of this 
 third volume of the Decouvertes. In the Calendar of Manuscripts, 
 this memoir is said to be in a volume of miscellaneous colonial 
 papers. 25 It is not among Bernou's papers. The present writer 
 has not seen this memoir except in the form in which it is printed 
 in Margry, and he is unable to determine its author. In this case, 
 however, the authorship is immaterial, for all the ideas of the 
 memoirs are Bernou's, and the connection between the Penalosa 
 scheme and La Salle's enterprise spoken of by Bernou has come 
 to pass. If a more specific date were given than January, 1684, 
 and if this memoir is not antedated, it would be possible to de- 
 termine whether, in Paris, Renaudot and others interested in 
 La Salle and in Penalosa, had linked the two enterprises before 
 or after the reception of Bernou's letters. 
 
 The words of introduction of the January memoir of 1684, 
 are a synopsis of Bernou's memoir of 1682. "The Spaniard's 
 having just declared war on his Majesty," reads the opening sen- 
 tence, "he seems to be fully justified in employing the great 
 means which Providence affords him of profiting by so rash a 
 declaration." The difference between the first part of this memoir 
 and Bernou's consists in the fact that the latter is more specific ; 
 thus, the chief of the freebooters is and was the notorious Gram- 
 mont, 26 the well-informed man is Penalosa. In the memoir of 
 1682, nothing but the leave to make the conquest was asked; 
 in the memoir of 1684 two men-of-war are requested with all 
 that is necessary for the voyage, for the security of the cross- 
 
 of La Salle, Margry, II, 76 ff.), where "according to all the maps he will 
 not be more than 250 leagues away from the gold and silver mines of New 
 Biscay," BN, Clairambault, 1016:647-647v. As can be seen the Mississippi 
 kept coming closer to the fabulous mines as the years went on. 
 
 22 Cussy was a member of the Renaudot coterie, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 
 7497 :30v., 38, 54, etc. 
 
 "BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:86v.-87. 
 
 -'4 Margry, III, 48-63. 
 
 25 AC, C 13C, 3:81. 
 
 26 W. E. Dunn, Spanish and French Rivalry . . . , 36. 
 
72 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 ing, as well as for bringing back to France the silver bars from 
 New Biscay. An order should be sent to Cussy, to collect one 
 thousand or twelve hundred freebooters, together with two com- 
 missions from his Majesty, one of governor for Penalosa, and 
 the other of king's lieutenant for Grammont. 27 According to the 
 second part of the memoir of January 1684: 
 
 The other means to bring about the successful conquest of New Biscay 
 is to ascend the river called by the Spaniards Rio Bravo, which luckily hap- 
 pens to be the same as that which the savages call Mississippi, which Sieur 
 de la Salle, governor for the king of Fort Frontenac, in New France, has 
 just explored down to the sea and has arrived recently in Paris to give an 
 account of his discovery. 
 
 It is not the purpose of this study to single out each of 
 the exaggerations and misstatements contained in this second 
 part. It will suffice to point out a few. The impression is 
 the same as that following a reading of the Recit d'un ami 
 de Vabbe de Galinee. Truth and facts are simply and purely 
 set aside for securing a definite end. The first sentence of 
 this memoir begins on a false note, for the Mississippi is iden- 
 tified with the Rio Bravo. We are told that there is at Fort 
 St. Louis a French garrison and "four thousand Indians, armed 
 and drilled by La Salle from among the eighteen thousand who 
 have settled in the vicinity of this fort;" 28 that La Salle knows 
 ten different Indian languages; that the principal result which 
 La Salle expected from his journey down the Mississippi was to 
 find a port in the Gulf and found a French settlement, "in order 
 to make conquests on the Spaniards as soon as there should be 
 a war with France." The River which he discovered "is an ex- 
 cellent harbor which the greatest ships can ascend more than 
 one hundred leagues, and barks more than five hundred." This 
 river "flows very near New Biscay." Two hundred and fifty 
 Pana Indians came on horseback 29 to meet Sieur de la Salle, 
 "who contends that with their help and that of other Indians he 
 will chase the Spaniards out of New Biscay, when it pleases His 
 Majesty to give the order." The explorer intends to build a fort 
 one hundred leagues from the mouth of the River, "whereto the 
 great vessels can ascend and where he is assured he can assem- 
 
 27 Cf. BN, Clairambault, 1016:205. 
 
 28 This is probably an echo of La Salle's gasconnade, Margry, II, 201 ; 
 cf. Joutel in ASH, 115-9 :n. 12. 
 
 29 La Salle had written that he had seen one Pana, who spoke about 
 the horses which were in his country five hundred miles to the west, Margry, 
 II, 202. Earlier, Bernou had written that the hoof of one horse had been 
 brought to La Salle by the Matontenta, ibid., 95. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 73 
 
 ble an army of 15,000 Indians/' and with 200 Frenchmen at 
 their head, he will invade New Biscay. All La Salle requests is 
 a single vessel to transport him safely to the Gulf of Mexico 
 at the mouth of the river he discovered. He would even be satis- 
 fied with a flute instead of a man-of-war, one of 200 tons, 
 equipped with arms, ammunition, and food for 300 Frenchmen 
 he would levy in France. Either or both of the two means can 
 be used without going to great expenses. If both are chosen, 
 "the two vessels asked in the first part would suffice for both 
 expeditions, because having gone to the Gulf together, one ship 
 would go to Panuco and the other to the mouth of the new 
 River, which is only 60 leagues away." 
 
 After the conquest of this province, "at any time that would 
 be judged proper," the whole of New Spain could be conquered. 
 But the conquest of New Biscay alone would be worth while, 
 and it would be useful for bargaining purposes, when peace with 
 Spain is to be signed. The king should not fear the jealousy of 
 Holland or England, for the enterprise will be kept a deep secret 
 until the conquest is actually effected. 
 
 The memorialist then answers two objections such as "ill 
 informed people might make." The new settlement might de- 
 populate Canada, or later France, for everybody will want to 
 migrate to the new country. There is no question, he says, "of 
 going to Louisiana or New Biscay by way of New France, 
 which is too far away," and the communications between these 
 parts too difficult; 30 nor is there anything common between Lou- 
 isiana and Canada. As for the question of depopulation of France 
 which would follow the conquest, he avers it is not the conquest 
 of the Indies that depopulated Spain, but the expulsion of the 
 Moors and the wars of Flanders and Italy. 31 
 
 In February, 1684, another memoir was sent to Seignelay, in 
 which all that had been said before about the expedition of Peria- 
 losa is repeated in a different form with emphasis on the easi- 
 ness of the undertaking and the riches of the country. But a 
 scheme is added for organizing the conquered province, means 
 are enumerated for winning over the population to their new 
 rulers, and the author expatiates at greater length on the prepa- 
 rations for the expedition. 
 
 so The communications between Canada and Louisiana, for Bernou, 
 Margry, II, 283, and supra p. 52, and for La Salle, Margry, II, 168, 293, 
 were difficult or easy according to the needs of the moment. 
 
 31 This argument is also Bernou's, cf. BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:98, and 
 Margry, n, 280. 
 
74 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 It would be highly desirable, should it please His Majesty, to send 
 promptly the Sieur de la Salle with the succour he asked. This would enable 
 him to go to the Gulf of Mexico, ascend his river, muster his army of sav- 
 ages, with which he contends he can invade New Biscay next September 
 (1684), from three different places at once. . . . The undertaking of Count 
 Peiialosa and that of Sieur de la Salle will serve to support each other. The 
 latter will begin next winter to spread terror in that part of New Biscay 
 which lies next to the river he discovered, and when Count Peiialosa comes 
 with his small army of freebooters to Panuco, he will find it easier to reach, 
 as he intends to do, the South Sea (Gulf of California). 
 
 The next thing proposed in this marvelous plan is to chase 
 the Spaniards out of the whole of New Spain, which according 
 to the memorialist will be very easy. 32 Two more undated mem- 
 oirs more or less repeat what is contained in that of January 
 and February, 1684. 33 
 
 While this was going on in Paris, the author of the Peiialosa 
 project, the man who had suggested the linking up of La Salle's 
 enterprise and the Peiialosa scheme for conquering New Biscay, 
 was unaware of the developments his project had undergone. On 
 February 1, 1684, he wrote from Rome to Renaudot: 
 
 What you are writing about R.N. and the Governor (of Canada) does 
 not surprise me. The first must be handled with caution if he (La Salle) 
 should return by way of Canada, which route I do not at all advise him to 
 take, because I am convinced that the route through the Gulf of Mexico is 
 much better. If he takes the latter route, my opinion would be to join the 
 New Biscay project to his. The Minister (Seignelay) could be told that his 
 river (Mississippi) will cause less jealousy than the Rio Bravo because it is 
 farther away from the Spaniards, and that La Salle will settle at first far 
 from the sea, and will found, in a short time, a powerful colony, because 
 of the facilities of subsistence and of the thriving commerce in peltries, 
 hemp etc. ,34 to say nothing of pearls,35 etc. (He may add) that when he has 
 armed the savages of the west, the Iroquois will no longer have to be feared, 
 
 32Margry, III, 63-70. 
 
 33 Margry, II, 359-369, III, 17-28. 
 
 34 Cf . Bernou's memoir in Margry, II, 279. 
 
 35 Bernou was obsessed with the idea of finding pearls in the new terri- 
 tory. In the code used in his correspondence with Renaudot, they are called 
 "green peas," BN, Mss. fr., n. a., 7497:119v., 125; cf. ibid., 154. Renaudot 
 does not seem to have satisfied his friend's curiosity. La Salle had been told 
 that there were precious stones in the Pana country, which "I believe are 
 turquoises," he added, Margry, II, 202. In his letter from Michillimackinac, 
 after his journey to the Gulf, the explorer wrote: "I say nothing of the 
 pearls which we found," ibid., 293. La Salle was more accurate with his 
 companions. With regard to the pearls, Joutel wrote: "II est bien vray que 
 m r de la salle nous a dit en avoir vu quelques unes lesquelles etoient gatees 
 en les persant Et lesquelles devoient avoir este" trouvees par lesdits sauvages 
 (Taensas) dans des huitres dont il se trouve nombre au bas du fleuve 
 (Mississippi) mais que lesdittes perles ne valoient pas grand chose." ASH, 
 115-9 :n. 12. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 75 
 
 because the former will hold them in check. ... In the mean time, La 
 Salle can gather exact information about the Country of the Iberians, and 
 make himself ready to share their riches by trading in time of peace and 
 by force in time of war. 
 
 These details would lead the king to grant the two vessels 
 necessary for the enterprise, and might interest the revenue con- 
 tractors in the enterprise, for Bernou does not think La Salle 
 rich enough to carry on the undertaking without financial help 
 from other people. 
 
 In case he can get no help from the Court, this might be done, but must 
 be kept secret. With the little money he has, or the money of a few friends, 
 such as the Judge or others, he could sail from Nantes or La Rochelle, go 
 to M. de Cussy, whom he could take as a partner, and who would . . . fur- 
 nish him with all that is necessary. M. Desnambuc, M. the Commandeur de 
 Poincy, and others did not need any permission from the Court to settle in 
 the Islands. Ergo, etc. Such are in brief my thoughts on the matter which 
 I submit to your censure, to that of M. de Callieres, and to that of M. de 
 La Salle. Let me know, please, what you think of it, and what you are doing 
 in this respect, and all that La Salle was told at the court.36 
 
 In other words, Bernou suggested that if the Court were to 
 look unfavorably on the scheme, La Salle should go on the ma- 
 rauding expedition even against the government's wishes. The 
 desirability of the Gulf route is again emphasized in a letter 
 written a week later. 37 In another letter, after Bernou had re- 
 ceived word from Renaudot that La Salle had had an audience 
 with Seignelay, 38 he writes that he hopes the issue will be in 
 keeping with the great promises Renaudot had made : 
 
 You are teasing the old abbe saying that his American pen is needed in 
 Paris. I know that his undertaking (La Salle's) is in better hands than in 
 mine, being in yours and in those of M. de Callieres. But with regard to the 
 great design, do not make fun of it, I may not be useless to you. I know 
 certain things which I doubt very much were told you. If you think it 
 worth while, I shall send you two or three short memoirs which you can use 
 opportunely, one to answer the objection of depopulation of France^ an- 
 other on the usefulness of this undertaking, still another on the means to 
 take in order to make it a success and to forestall the inconveniences that 
 may arise in the execution, and finally one on how just is this enter- 
 priser ... I spoke to the Cardinal (d'Estrees) of this affair; he strongly 
 
 36 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:89v.-90. 
 
 37 Ibid., 92-92v. 
 
 38Margry, II, 354, 355; Le Clercq, First Establishment, U, 203. 
 
 39 There is an interesting memoir on the vital statistics of Canada 
 among Bernou's papers, BN, Clairambault, 1016:398-399; and cf. ibid., 191, 
 Margry, II, 28. 
 
 40 These memoirs have been listed at the beginning of this section, p. 58. 
 
76 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 approves of it, and thinks it very important that it should be kept secret. 
 ... To come back to our friend. He is so clever, and both you and M. de 
 Callieres are also so clever, that you don't need my help. I shall tell you, 
 however, that as great minds run in the same channels, you will notice that 
 in one of my letters, two weeks ago, I hit upon your thoughts. I strongly 
 approve his offer to remove his fort one hundred leagues, he cannot do too 
 much to allay distrust. He must make all the promises they want, let him 
 give up completely the five great lakes and even the Lac des Puans (Green 
 Bay) ; let him be satisfied with the Mississippi River and its affluents, all 
 the Indians in the vicinity will be his anyway; and if the help promised by 
 the court is given him, he can consider himself, in my opinion, as free of 
 all obstacles and in a position to eclipse the glory of Cortes. Do not proudly 
 attribute to yourself the honor of increasing the king's revenues, but leave 
 a small portion of these revenues to me. I spoke of this project a long time 
 ago, but I leave all the glory to you, provided you see to it that this enter- 
 prise succeed. . . . Keep the negotiations of our friend a strict secret until 
 he has left, for no matter what face the R. N. put on, they will never approve 
 of it; he knows this as well as you, since they will not have such free scope 
 (in the new colony as they have in New France). I tell you, I deem the 
 happy issue of this undertaking a greater "opera" than all those of M. Lully. 
 Ask M. de La Salle to write me what he has learned about the pearls and the 
 copper mines. . . . By the way, could it not have helped me to have in- 
 sinuated to M. de Seignelay that it is I who am the first author of the New 
 Biscay (scheme), and that I have jurisdiction over the whole of America? 
 It's for you to judge.41 
 
 It is patent that Bernou was unaware that two memoirs had 
 been handed to Seignelay in January and February. As was shown 
 above, all the arguments are Bernou's, but arranged by some one 
 of the Renaudot group. Renaudot knew his friend's attitude of 
 mind; he knew that as much as Bernou wanted the scheme to 
 succeed, he would hardly have countenanced the fantastic details 
 inserted for the purpose of swaying the minister to grant the 
 requests of La Salle for financial help. 42 The authorship of those 
 memoirs, as said above, has not been ascertained. Whether they 
 were fathered by La Salle, or Renaudot, or by some of the Paris 
 camarilla remains uncertain. But with regard to the fanciful 
 geography of the Lower Mississippi Valley, an important item 
 in the deception of Seignelay, La Salle, who so virtuously pointed 
 out the mistakes in Jolliet's map, must bear the burden of the 
 blame alone. 
 
 Between February 22 and February 29, Bernou heard for the 
 first time that memoirs had been presented to Seignelay. He 
 wrote : 
 
 41 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:98-98v., and 100. 
 
 42 Bernou wanted La Salle to tell the truth, but not the whole truth, at 
 least to certain people, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:245v. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 77 
 
 I thought, when I read that M. de la Salle had written two memoirs 
 which he brought to Versailles, that I would read next that I would receive 
 copies of them by the next mail; I believe you did not even think of it. Am 
 I suspect in this affair, to which I would gladly devote mind, body and 
 goods ? 
 
 Bernou was not precisely suspected by his confreres, but 
 they wished to utilize his knowledge of the new country as 
 embodied in his memoirs, while they had no intention of telling 
 him how they had manipulated his descriptions. They knew his 
 esteem for the truth would lead him to protest against such 
 unscrupulousness. 
 
 The abbe in Rome mentions how glad he is to hear of the 
 interview managed by Callieres between Pefialosa and La Salle. 
 The Spaniard seems to have made a bad impression on the ex- 
 plorer. 43 With this in mind Bernou cautioned his fellows to pro- 
 ceed diplomatically. "M. de la Salle will do well to carry on busi- 
 ness with the aforementioned Sieur Count, both to satisfy M. 
 de Seignelay and to learn everything there is to be learned, so 
 that if the said Iberian should happen to die, he (La Salle) 
 could execute our designs." Bernou, always diplomatic, tells Re- 
 naudot to instruct La Salle to praise Pefialosa, present or absent, 
 for he must gain absolutely the Spaniard's confidence. 
 
 The joining of the two enterprises can be useful only to M. de la Salle. 
 It will interest the Minister more strongly in his enterprise if consideration 
 (be made) of the other. It will also be to his own advantage, for he will 
 acquire knowledge and means to become the head of Peiialosa's (enter- 
 prise) and sole prince of Moctezuma. For, either the undertaking of the 
 Count will take place before the peace (with Spain), or it will be post- 
 poned. In the first case he may, if he wishes, either take part directly in it, 
 or, leaving with Pefialosa, he may go to his own place, using the pretext 
 that it is not necessary for him to go to the other, and that it is better to 
 put the finishing touches to his own colony, which, in case of need, might 
 serve as a retreat and be used as a link between New Biscay and Canada, 
 whence help, in case of necessity, could be had in a short time, etc. I am 
 confirmed in this by what M. de Villermont writes me, namely, that M. de 
 La Salle told him that he had found a river coming from the West, of a 
 length of thirty days march, which flows in the Mississippi 40 or 60 leagues 
 from the sea.44 If it should happen to be the Rio Bravo, it would supply a 
 
 4*Ibid., 119. 
 
 *4 in one of the two undated memoirs presented to the Minister, it is 
 said that the Seignelay River, meaning the Red River, and not the Illinois, 
 had been ascended 60 leagues, Margry, II, 367. To Margry, who italicized 
 these words, it is clear that this is another unrecorded exploration. He 
 comes back to it in the Introduction of volume IV, ii, of his compilation, 
 and states that "his (La Salle's) men had gone up 60 leagues." It is per- 
 fectly clear from the accounts of the exploration down the Mississippi in 
 
78 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 very safe and very easy means of communication with New Leon, New 
 Biscay, and New Mexico. Should the Peiialosa expedition be delayed, he 
 will all the more be able to persuade the Ministers of the necessity of his 
 going ahead to begin his settlement and of learning all that is necessary. 
 With this information everything else can be undertaken without fear of 
 making any mistake. 
 
 With regard to what you say about M. de la Salle making this voyage 
 alone, so that no one can share the glory with him, I confess I do not under- 
 stand what you mean. I do not think that he claims to have discovered the 
 Gulf of Mexico, and I do not see who can dispute with him the honor of 
 having discovered the (mouth of the) Mississippi. If however, he can suc- 
 ceed in persuading the Ministers and show them that it is safer, as I be- 
 lieve it is, for him to go to make inquiries about everything, I am not op- 
 posed to this plan; on the contrary, I would be very happy, because he 
 would be the sole author of this enterprise and the cause of the others 
 
 The appearance of the river mentioned in the quotation shows 
 the stage of the evolution of La Salle's fanciful geography of the 
 Mississippi Valley, a geography which he was soon to complete, 
 and one which outdid all the imaginative efforts of Father Hen- 
 nepin. La Salle's geographical ideas underwent amazing changes. 
 He was obsessed by the account of Garcilaso de la Vega, and even 
 after his expedition of 1682, he still thought that he would one 
 day rediscover the Chukagoua of de Soto. 46 
 
 In the proces- verbal of 1682, he took possession of a Loui- 
 siana extending from the "mouth of the great River St. Louis 
 in the east, also called Ohio, Olighin-Sipou, or Chukagoua 47 
 ... as well as along the River Colbert, or Mississippi . . . 
 from its source beyond the country of the Sioux . . . down to 
 its mouth to the sea or gulf of Mexico, at about the 27° degree 
 latitude . . ." 48 The Ohio with its quadruple nomenclature was 
 to be called Louisianef 9 and, when La Salle heard from a Shaw- 
 nee chief that a great river, the Wabash, flowed into the Ohio, 
 not knowing what to do with it, he proceeded to baptize the hy- 
 brid river Baudrane. 50 The head waters of this multiple-named 
 river were also varied: The Ohio-Olighin-Sipou rose near Lake 
 Ontario; the Wabash near Lake Erie; the Baudrane, behind 
 Oneida, and the Chukagoua, north of Virginia. 
 
 1682 that nobody of La Salle's party went up the Red River. Joutel in his 
 criticism of the Dernier -es decouvertes, ASH, 115-9 :n. 12, twice emphati- 
 cally denied any such side trip. 
 
 45Margry, III, 73-77. 
 
 46Margry, II, 196-202, 292, 296. 
 
 47 Cf. D. Coxe, A Description of the English Province of Carolana . . . , 
 London, 1722, 4. 
 
 48Margry, II, 191. 
 
 49 Ibid., 293. 
 
 so ibid., 80, 141. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 79 
 
 Now the course of the Colbert was on the whole well deter- 
 mined at this time, even before La Salle went down to its mouth. 
 Thus, Jolliet indicated on his map the general direction, north- 
 south from the point where he had stopped. Franquelin on his 
 map of 1681 followed Jolliet, and Bernou had written that past 
 the Illinois River, the Colbert continued to flow southward. All 
 this was in a process of being changed to suit the new plans of 
 La Salle. 
 
 La Salle evidently knew better than any one else the general 
 direction of the Lower Mississippi. True, he had lost his compass 
 while descending the Illinois river, but La Salle, when he wanted 
 to be, was a good observer. Yet the maps, made under his direc- 
 tion after his return to France in 1684, show a deliberate tam- 
 pering with the geography of the Lower Mississippi such as 
 can be explained only by his will to deceive Seignelay by mak- 
 ing the river flow near New Biscay. The map of 1683-1684 51 
 already shows the lower course of the Mississippi flowing 
 due west for some ten degrees at about the 34° latitude. 
 Where this wandering river was supposed to empty cannot be 
 ascertained, for the section of the map indicating this has been 
 torn out. This section, however, is found in Minet's map. 52 The 
 St. Louis River of the former has lost a few of its names. What 
 is supposed to be the course of the Ohio is labeled successively 
 R. Ouhabache and R. le Choucagoua. 53 This river, at about the 
 35° latitude and the 281° longitude, is swollen by the Missicipi 
 coming from the Northwest, and at this point the two streams 
 take a sharp turn to the west for about 10 degrees, then swing 
 back in a southeast direction, and empty into the Gulf on the 
 277° longitude, regaining six degrees lost in the excursion. Dur- 
 ing the journey, the river which, after the junction of the Mis- 
 sissippi with the Choucagoua-Ouhabache, is called Fleuve Col- 
 bert, receives as an affluent the R. des Acoasea, and on the 30° 
 latitude, the "Fleuve?' Seignelay (Red River). It would indeed 
 have been bad politics on the part of La Salle to call any river 
 bearing the name of Seignelay less than "fleuve" — such a mis- 
 
 5i BN, Ge DD 2987-8782, facsimile in Margry, III. 
 
 52 SHB, C 4044-4. 
 
 53 There are two Choucagouas in Minet's map. The second Choucagoua, 
 clearly a reminiscence of what La Salle had seen in Sanson's map of 1656, 
 runs parallel to the first, the Ohio, and empties into the B. du S l . esprit. It 
 is this second that La Salle wanted to discover, and it is this second of 
 which he wrote: "I can not honestly say whether these two rivers — the 
 Mississippi which he had explored and the Choucagoua of de Soto — meet." 
 Margry, II, 197. 
 
80 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 take had been made earlier. The same fantastic course of the 
 Mississippi is found in one of Franquelin's maps. 54 
 
 All this information, it must be remembered, was derived 
 from La Salle himself. The cartographers copied La Salle's 
 sketches or drew into their maps details supplied for them by 
 the explorer. In the light of this evidence, La Salle's strictures 
 of Jolliet's map can be appraised at their just value. When it 
 suited his purposes to deceive people, he was not one to be both- 
 ered with scruples. If he did not actually write the memoirs in 
 favor of the Pefialosa expedition, incorporating false geography 
 with malice aforethought, to deceive Seignelay, he countenanced 
 the deception and thus he certainly cannot be held innocent of 
 willful falsifications with regard to the maps. 55 
 
 When did La Salle become a party to this scheme? Before 
 his journey down to the Gulf it apparently formed no part of 
 his plans, for he had the intention of settling in the Illinois coun- 
 try. 56 In the letter written after his return, 57 he speaks of the 
 usefulness of the discovery he just made, the proximity of the 
 mouth of the Mississippi to the Spanish territory, the ease with 
 which the country might be defended, and its fertility. There 
 are, he then adds: 
 
 seven or eight rivers as large as the Mississippi emptying into it, five of 
 which come from New Biscay and New Mexico, where the Spaniards have 
 found so many mines. From this region New Spain can be much harassed 
 and even totally ruined, if we only arm the savages who can be easily civil- 
 ized, for they already have temples and chiefs to whom they show great 
 submission and they naturallyss hate the Spaniards because they enslave 
 themss. 
 
 It is quite possible that Bernou had mentioned this in a letter 
 to La Salle, as de Villiers seems to think, 60 but this plan was not 
 
 54 SHB, B 4040-6 and 6 bis . The change of the course of the Mississippi 
 is in keeping with the contents of the memoirs of 1684; the Colbert goes 
 out of its way to meet the Rio Bravo. 
 
 55 Parkman, La Salle, 326, speaking of the plans as found in the mem- 
 oirs of 1684, says: "First it is to be observed that it is based on a geographi- 
 cal blunder, the nature of which is explained by the map of La Salle's 
 discoveries made this very year." What Parkman terms a blunder is in 
 reality a deception. 
 
 seMargry, II, 248. 
 
 57 This autograph letter of La Salle is without date, and without place, 
 in BN, Clairambault, 1016:148-150v.; Michillimackinak, October, 1682, is 
 supplied by Margry, II, 288-301. 
 
 ss The text of La Salle's letter, BN, Clairambault, 1016:148v., reads: 
 "et qui hayssent naturellement les Espagnols." Margry, II, 293, read "mor- 
 tellement." 
 
 59 Margry, II, 292-293. Shortly before, La Salle had written that the 
 Indians were fickle and could not be relied upon. 
 
 eo U expedition, 31. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 81 
 
 taken seriously by the explorer. What he planned first and fore- 
 most was not an attack on New Spain but the construction of a 
 chain of fortified trading centers, 61 with the principal one at the 
 mouth of the Mississippi. 62 When he arrived in France at the 
 the end of 1683, he first tried to interest merchants of Rochefort 
 and La Rochelle, 63 and later those of Paris and Rouen, "to form 
 a society to finance an expedition to the mouth of the Missis- 
 sippi, and a settlement in the Taensa country." 64 As he was un- 
 successful, he then turned to the government. But Seignelay was 
 much more interested in an expedition against New Biscay than 
 in a colonization project in Louisiana. La Salle adapted the 
 geography of the river he had explored in order to secure finan- 
 cial help, for he realized "that he needed a more glittering lure 
 to attract the eyes of Louis and Seignelay." 65 
 
 In the words of the Spanish Ambassador in England, Don 
 Pedro Ronquillo, 
 
 Toward the end of the year 1683, La Salle came to France about this 
 pretended discovery of the mouth of the Mississippi. He found a great wel- 
 come with Monsieur de Seignelay, to whom he presented a map marked 
 with latitudes and longitudes that would make plausible his proposals. On 
 his word they believed in him and in his map. He made them believe what 
 he wanted them to believe. He offered to build two forts on the banks of 
 the mouth of the river if they would equip him for his undertaking. By 
 building these forts, he would prevent everybody from entering the river to 
 take the treasures that were there. He convinced everyone except the 
 Jesuits (whom he held as enemies) and Monsieur Morel, who a little later 
 succeeded Belinzani as head of the Merchant Marine, of which he was the 
 director under Monsieur de Seignelay.66 
 
 With regard to the scheme itself, Parkman aptly wrote : 
 
 Unless we assume that his scheme of invading Mexico was thrown out 
 as a bait to the king, it is hard to reconcile it with the supposition of mental 
 soundness. To base so critical an attempt on a geographical conjecture, 
 which rested on the slightest possible information, and was, in fact a total 
 error; to postpone the perfectly sound plan of securing the mouth of the 
 
 6i Margry, H, 294. 
 
 62 Ibid., 301. 
 
 63 Ibid., II, 451. 
 
 64 De Villiers, Ueocy edition, 32. De Villiers is here quoting from the 
 unpublished journal of Minet, which was then in a private collection where 
 he consulted it, and which has since been sold at auction. 
 
 65 Parkman, La Salle, 328. The historian adds : "Such a procedure may 
 be charged with indirectness; but there is a different explanation, which 
 we shall suggest hereafter, and which implies no such reproach." The efforts 
 of Parkman to absolve his hero from indirectness — a rather mild term for 
 deception — are totally unconvincing. 
 
 66 M id- America, XVIII, 1936, 121. 
 
82 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 Mississippi, to a wild project of leading fifteen thousand savages for an 
 unknown distance, through an unknown country, to attack an unknown 
 enemy, was something more than Quixotic daring. The king and the min- 
 ister saw nothing impracticable in it, for they did not know the country or 
 its inhabitants. They saw no insuperable difficulty in mustering and keeping 
 together fifteen thousand of the most wayward and unstable savages on 
 earth, split into a score and more of tribes, some hostile to each other and 
 some to the French; nor in the problem of feeding such a mob, on a march 
 of hundreds of miles; nor in the plan of drawing four thousand of them 
 from the Illinois, nearly two thousand miles distant, though some of these 
 intended allies had no canoes or other means of transportation, and though 
 travelling in such numbers, they would infallibly starve on the way to the 
 rendezvous. It is difficult not to see in all this the chimera of an over- 
 wrought brain, no longer able to distinguish between the possible and the 
 impossible. 67 
 
 This long quotation is warranted by the fact that it would 
 be difficult to find a better criticism of the wild scheme. How- 
 ever, the plan is not La Salle's, but that of the coterie of theo- 
 rizing abbes whose knowledge of the conditions in the New World 
 was aprioristic, the knowledge of armchair explorers bent on 
 using La Salle to put the chimera of their own overwrought 
 brains to the test. Why La Salle, who knew the conditions in 
 the New World, should have become a party to this plan is ex- 
 plained by his anxiety to carry on his explorations. 
 
 While Bernou's letter of February 29, quoted above, was on 
 its way to Paris, the deception practiced on Seignelay and Louis 
 XIV was bearing its fruits. On March 4, Cussy was given the 
 order to assemble the freebooters for the attack against New 
 Biscay. He was to have them ready for the following October. 68 
 Except those immediately concerned, the new enterprise was 
 kept secret from all. 69 Even Bernou was unaware of what was 
 going on, although the abbe was dying to know. 70 On March 23, 
 a statement was issued by the minister enumerating all that had 
 been granted to La Salle, 71 and on the same day the king ap- 
 pointed Pingault captain of the Joly. 72 Seignelay wrote to Du- 
 mont, acting intendant at Rochefort, that "the king had granted 
 
 67 La Salle, 340-341. 
 
 es Margry, II, 377. In his Proiet pour attaquer les Espagnols dans la 
 Nouvelle Espagne, Bernou had written: "On pretend se servir des fribustiers 
 (sic) qui sont au nombre d'environ 2000 dans l'lsle de St. Domingue, et 
 dont 1000 ou 1200 seront plus que suffisans pour executer cette entreprise," 
 BN, Clairambault, 1016:208. 
 
 eo Margry, II, 354. 
 
 70 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:107. 
 
 7i Margry, II, 378-380. 
 
 72 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 21330:64; Margry, II, 381. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 83 
 
 to sieur de la Salle the ship Joly, to go to Canada." 73 The route 
 of the expedition was not made public, for fear of the Jesuits. 74 
 Bernou at the end of March expressed his satisfaction that La 
 Salle was going alone and that perhaps the Perialosa expedition 
 would take place in 1685. 75 Precisely what the abbe knew at this 
 time is difficult to gather from his letters. Those which Renaudot 
 wrote are not available, but from several passages of Bernou's 
 letter, it is clear that he knew something; he was probably told 
 not to mention it in his answers. Renaudot, fearing an intercep- 
 tion of his letters and a revelation of the secret, used to write 
 to his friend in Rome in pentecostal tongues. 76 
 
 Toward the end of March, La Salle having obtained what he 
 had asked from the king wrote about his plans to Bernou. The 
 abbe was jubilant over the letter he had received from "a con- 
 queror, for that's what he is." 77 More: "He has a better right to 
 the title than many a Spaniard who became immortal at a 
 cheaper price." La Salle was undecided whether to depart in this 
 same year or to wait until the next year. "I believe," wrote 
 Bernou, "he would do much better to leave (as soon as possible) , 
 because, as it usually happens with the court, they may change 
 their mind, and M. R. N. might find out the mare's nest and spoil 
 everything; besides, other people might block our friend." La 
 Salle in his opinion could make the trip in two months, or even 
 in less time. If he should leave France in May, he would have 
 the whole of the month of August to unload, and would have 
 time enough to send the ship back to France, although he would 
 do better to keep the ship there, and send it back in April 
 loaded — presumably with the silver bars of New Biscay as bal- 
 last. Whatever Bernou knew, he was in ignorance of the new 
 geography. The Mississippi had been described in those memoirs 
 as a natural harbor, which the greatest ships could ascend one 
 hundred leagues, etc. If the La Salle's ship were to be kept in 
 the Gulf during the winter, the abbe wrote, "it would be neces- 
 sary . . . that there be a port, or that his ship be able to enter 
 his river for shelter, all of which he ought to know. With regard 
 
 73 Margry, II, 380. 
 74Margry, III, 80. 
 
 75 ibid., 81. 
 
 76 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:107. 
 
 77 This rather coarse adulation indulged in by Bernou and Renaudot, 
 Margry, H, 313, 442, 610, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:87, 94, 114, was later 
 retracted by them when La Salle showed signs of independence, BN, Mss. 
 fr. n. a., 7497:169, 171. 
 
84 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 to the sand banks which he fears would block his vessel, I do 
 not think there is any reason for such fear, for I have read noth- 
 ing of the kind in the travel accounts of the Spaniards." 78 His 
 explanation for the absence of sand banks at the mouth of the 
 Mississippi was to find its way in La Salle's letters written at 
 Matagorda Bay. 
 
 The fear expressed by Bernou about a change of mind on 
 the part of Louis XIV and Seignelay was groundless, for, a few 
 days after he had written, La Salle received a commission from 
 the king. By virtue of this he was "to command under our 
 authority, as well in the country which will be subject anew to 
 our dominion in North America, from Fort St. Louis on the 
 river of the Illinois unto New Biscay, as well among the French 
 and Indians, whom he will employ in the expeditions we have 
 entrusted to his care." 79 
 
 La Salle's discovery was popular in Paris, even though his or 
 Renaudot's fairy tales were not believed by everybody, 80 least of 
 all by men outside of France. Bernou seemed to think that all 
 was a secret, not only the route to be followed, but that there 
 would be any expedition; and hence his surprise when he read 
 of the expedition in a newspaper published in Holland. He made 
 no secret of his displeasure over the whole matter as soon as 
 it was aired by the Dutch tattler. 
 
 You are telling me that I know more about his affairs (La Salle's) 
 than anybody else; allow me, salva pace, not to believe one word of it. Wit- 
 ness my writings to you of what I had learned from M. de Vill(ermont) ; to 
 this I may add that this affair is not as secret as you believe, since the 
 principal features are already known in Holland, where a foolish commen- 
 tator on current events inserted them in a long and narrow sheet called 
 Le Lardon, which you can find in Paris. It is in the number printed May 
 23.8i Here is what he says: "We must admit that everything contributes to 
 the glory of France. According to news received from Paris, the Sieur de la 
 Salle has gone to America and has penetrated so far that it can be said he 
 has discovered a new world in the New World, a country very rich especially 
 in silver mines. He has rendered an account of his voyage to the king«2 who 
 has given him money and ships to return thither. But it is to be feared that 
 this marvellous expedition might turn out to be as much of a myth as that 
 to the Pines Islands and that this great journey which is to be achieved on 
 
 78 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:114-114v. 
 
 79 Margry, II, 383. 
 
 so Jbid., 354, 355-356. 
 
 si This is probably an error for March, Bernou's letter is dated Rome, 
 April 18, 1684. 
 
 82 The interview with the king took place at the beginning of March, 
 Margry, II, 353. 
 
 83 On this allusion, cf. Margry, IV, vi, note 1. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 85 
 
 the word of one man come to nothing. What looks rather suspicious is that 
 the map of the country he visited is kept so well concealed. Moreover, there 
 is a clumsy contradiction in the account, stating that the tribes he saw 
 were unknown until now, and yet it is maintained that said Sieur de la Salle 
 spoke to them all in their own languages, knowing as many as ten different 
 languages in use in their country.84 I leave to you the possibility of such a 
 thing happening, that one can learn the language of a people never seen 
 and never heard of before."85 
 
 Thus wrote that fine commentator. It seemed to me curious enough to 
 send to you, thinking that you had not seen it. From this I draw the fol- 
 lowing conclusion: the expedition is not as secret as you think it is, and 
 for fear of trouble, I persist in my first idea that he (La Salle) must leave 
 this year. ss 
 
 Better secrecy was observed as to the route of the expedi- 
 tion. Renaudot told Bernou nothing. He kept what the latter 
 considered a maddening, unfair reticence. But through Viller- 
 mont, he learned most of the details about the Mississippi River, 
 and its mouth, and what help La Salle had received from the 
 king. Villermont had entered into very many convincing details, 
 and Bernou could not avoid the conclusion: "All this seems to 
 me to be true, but he misses the main point when he says that 
 our friend is going straight to Quebec." 87 From his letters it can 
 not be deduced when Bernou was notified that La Salle would 
 go via the Gulf to his river. Bernou probably had no need of 
 notification, for he never thought that any other route would be 
 taken. As was seen above, the order of the king directed La 
 Salle to go by way of Canada, and this was generally accepted 
 as the way. Renaudot undeceived Nicolas Thoynard, 88 a friend 
 
 84 in 1681, La Salle confessed his inability to speak Illinois, Margry, II, 
 157; Bernou, in 1682, wrote that the explorer spoke or understood four of 
 the Indian languages, Margry, II, 287. La Salle must have learned the five 
 or six other Indian languages rather quickly. The same number, ten, is 
 found in the extract from the Mercure Galant, Margry, II, 356. Joutel, 
 Margry, III, 126, merely states that La Salle knew several Indian languages. 
 
 ss See the extract from the Mercure Galant, for May, 1684, in Margry, 
 II, 355-356. Renaudot warned La Salle that Beaujeu was making public the 
 explorer's plan; the officer wrote to Villermont putting the abb<§ in his 
 place; all that he knew he had read in the Gazette de Hollande, cf. Beaujeu's 
 letter in Margry, II, 441-442. The famous "secret" was badly kept; the 
 Sulpician, Tronson, and Franquelin, the cartographer, were accused in turn 
 of betraying it; Bernou wrote that Villermont was guilty, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 
 7497 : 108, 125, but the camarilla dared not quarrel with Villermont, because 
 of his influence at the court, ibid., 115v., 123v. 
 
 se BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:119. The extract from the Dutch newspaper 
 is printed in Margry, IV, vii, with no indication of provenience as usual. 
 Replaced in its context, the sententious comments of Margry can be ap- 
 praised at their true value. 
 
 87 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:128. 
 
 ss Cf. Margry, IV, xviii. 
 
86 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 and supporter of La Salle, April 30, 1684. This letter is a fair 
 specimen of the kind of letters the polyglot Orientalist wrote. 89 
 It is in French, but contains one Arabic word, three Italian, four 
 Greek words, and several lines in Hebrew: 
 
 There is at present a rumor bruited throughout the land of Israel — 
 which is repeated in a low whisper for fear of the Jesuits from whom this 
 affair is concealed, for this (word unintelligible) is grave. Thou must keep 
 the secret in the bottom of thy heart, the captain of the ship himself does 
 not know it, a secret decree has been rendered in the king's council, by which 
 La Salle, crossing the Ocean (is directed to go) to the new river Mississippi 
 and not to Canada.9o 
 
 The captain of the ship here referred to is Beaujeu, who had 
 replaced Pingault. 91 
 
 When Bernou heard of the change, he expressed himself as 
 delighted. 92 He praised Beaujeu, in his letters to Renaudot, as 
 a brave soldier, an excellent sailor, but above all as being very 
 clever in drawing maps and plans. 93 It seems that Beaujeu was 
 substituted for Pingault through the influence of Villermont. 94 
 Later, when Renaudot wrote to Rome about the difficulties that 
 had taken place between the captain of the Joly and La Salle, 
 Bernou answered that he was dissatisfied with the news; how- 
 ever, he divided the blame between Beaujeu and the explorer, 
 greatly exculpating the latter, whose cantankerous character is 
 attributed to the — Jesuits. 95 Beaujeu had the sympathies of those 
 who knew both men, and who had witnessed the antics of La 
 Salle at La Rochelle and at Rochefort. 96 Beaujeu, thanks to the 
 mendacious accounts of La Salle's brother, Jean Cavelier, 97 has 
 been vilified by La Sallolaters and held as the cause of the failure 
 of La Salle's 1684 expedition. 98 Historians have believed Jean 
 
 89 Bernou complained at times of his friend's polyglot correspondence; 
 Renaudot wrote once in Portuguese, again "en language Iroquois." Bernou 
 expected a letter in Persian or in Arabic next. It has been seen that in this 
 exchange of letters, the Jesuits were M. R. N.; La Salle was Ontcouanta- 
 guete; Villermont, who limped, was Gambacorta; Penalosa was Ste Foy; 
 Cussy, le dominicain. Sometimes the name of an individual was translated 
 into another language, thus Groseillers is Gooseberry, etc., cf. BN, Mss. fr. 
 n. a., 7497:107, 125, 216, etc. 
 
 so There are two texts and two translations in Margry, II, 413, and 
 III, 656. Dr. Pierce Butler of the University of Chicago kindly checked 
 these translations and wrote that the second is the correct one. 
 
 9i Margry, II, 382. 
 
 92 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:123; cf. Le Clercq, II, 206-207. 
 
 93 Ibid., 142. 
 
 94 Ibid., 125v. 
 
 95 ibid., 142-142v. 
 
 96Machault de Rougemont to Villermont, BN, Mss. fr. 22799:240. 
 
 97 Cf. de Villiers, L 'expedition, 95, 99, 174. 
 
 98 ibid., 147 ff. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 87 
 
 Cavelier implicitly regarding Beaujeu's guilt, and Gravier above 
 all seems to have lost his mental balance when he learned that 
 Madame de Beaujeu had a Jesuit as spiritual director." It is but 
 another La Salle legend, which not even the publication of the 
 naval officer's account by Margry himself, succeeded in killing. 100 
 Recently de Villiers has shown beyond all reasonable doubt that 
 Beaujeu can not be held responsible for the failure of the expe- 
 dition to the Gulf of Mexico. 101 This phase of La Salle's last 
 journey, however, is not to be discussed here, but references 
 will be culled from the captain's letters, clearly indicating the 
 uneasy bewilderment of La Salle after he had deceived the min- 
 ister and the king. The explorer went to the Gulf, trusting to his 
 lucky star for eventual success of the expedition based on a geo- 
 graphical conjecture. The future would take care of itself. La 
 Salle could not very well admit that he had misled the king and 
 the minister. Barring the punishment, it would mean an end to 
 all further explorations, all financial help, and La Salle was in 
 dire need of the latter. 
 
 Two days after La Salle arrived at Rochefort from Paris, 
 Beaujeu wrote to Villermont that the commissary of this port 
 told him how all of the arrangements, made the month before 
 in Paris, had been changed. The destination of the expedition 
 would be given later. The captain says he was told by Arnoul, 
 the Rochefort intendant, who had returned to his post in the 
 meantime: "We had to have an important conference on this 
 subject, and Arnoul was very much surprised that M. de la Salle, 
 who would explain everything to us, had not arrived yet. He did 
 not seem to be in the secret, for he told me that we three must 
 be all together to make a thorough examination of this affair 
 and that we must try to fathom the mind of the minister." 102 
 
 La Salle went to La Rochelle the following week, and told 
 Beaujeu the destination was the Gulf of Mexico. The captain 
 objected to making the voyage with food for only six months. 
 
 99 The texts will be found in a letter of Madame de Beaujeu's husband, 
 Margry, II, 449, 451. Miller in his article "The Connection of Penalosa with 
 the La Salle Expedition," loc. cit., 106, improves upon these texts, and bland- 
 ly asserts that Madame de Beaujeu was a Jesuit! 
 
 ioo Thus Chesnel, Histoire de Cavelier de la Salle, 184 ff. "One is often 
 asking oneself if some of La Salle's biographers are not merely making fun 
 of their readers. It is true that for three of them (Margry, Gravier, and 
 Chesnel) the most outstanding merit of the Discoverer consists in his 
 morbid hatred of the Jesuits," remarks de Villiers, L' expedition, 151. 
 
 ioi Ibid., 114 ff., 147, etc. 
 
 102 Margry, II, 421. 
 
88 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 He foresaw — and the event proved him to be right — that they 
 would not be able to leave before July, and that if all went well, 
 owing to the weather conditions in the Gulf from September to 
 February, he could not be back in France before May, 1685. 103 
 
 Five days later La Salle had changed his mind. He was going 
 instead to Canada. Beaujeu thought such an itinerary more pru- 
 dent, for the season was too far advanced to go to the Gulf. The 
 officer was selecting his men, and La Salle, noticing he did not 
 take a pilot, asked for the reason. 
 
 I told him that when he would make up his mind where he intended to 
 go I would select a pilot who had been there. He answered me that the 
 pilot should know the St. Lawrence; and having asked him if this was 
 enough, he answered that it would be well if he should also know the coast 
 of Santo Domingo and the Gulf of Mexico, where we might go from Canada. 
 He added that we were only the forerunners of the men whom we went to 
 see (Peiialosa) the day we had dinner at M. Morel's house, and who, as- 
 suredly would follow us next year with considerable forces; that M. de 
 Seignelay wanted it to be this year, which nearly happened, but that it was 
 postponed till next year, because he (La Salle) had asked for the rest of 
 this year and that an experienced man go to reconnoiter the place. He then 
 showed me a relation of Spanish missionaries,^ which he told me he copied 
 out of a book in Seignelay's library, in which there is a very faithful 
 description of his river, and effectively, it is near enough to all I have heard 
 him say, either because he has seen these things himself, or because he 
 learned them from his relation, which gives the name of fifteen or sixteen 
 mines through which this river passes, and of which he told me he himself 
 knew one.105 The description of the mouth of the river in this relation also 
 agrees with his own description and with that of his map.ioe 
 
 The indecision of the explorer with respect to the route to be 
 taken shows his perplexity. He had allowed himself to be per- 
 suaded by Renaudot and others to carry on a wild scheme, and, 
 to force the hand of the king and of the minister, he had con- 
 cocted a geography which he knew to be false. La Salle knew the 
 route up the St. Lawrence and with the supplies he had been 
 given, he could have built a fort either at the Arkansas river, or 
 farther south. With his proprietorship of Fort Frontenac, and 
 
 103 ibid., 398-399. 
 
 104 Shea thinks that it was the account of the expedition of Peiialosa, by 
 Father Nicholas Freytas. 
 
 105 One cannot help wondering which mine this is. He knew of a huge 
 copper boulder, Margry, II, 178; he had found a "piece of copper and a 
 kind of metal . . . which I think to be bronze, if there is a mine of it (!) ," 
 Margry, II, 175. This will become "M. de la Salle has found a number of 
 mines," in the Mercure Gdlant, Margry, II, 352. Neither Villermont, BN, 
 Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:153v., nor Machault de Rougemont, BN, Mss. fr. 
 22799 :254v., believed in those mines. 
 
 io6 Margry, II, 428-429. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 89 
 
 Fort St. Louis of the Illinois, he would rule over a vast empire, 
 and, with an exclusive monopoly of trade, he would soon be able to 
 repay his debts. Going by way of the Gulf everything was prob- 
 lematical. This state of mind might be a partial explanation of 
 his morbid irritability, of his bickerings, his quarrels with 
 Beaujeu and with everybody else in Rochefort and La Rochelle. 
 La Salle's difficult temperament was not improved by the thought 
 that the expedition might end disastrously. He knew that his 
 present difficulties had their root in the deception practiced upon 
 the minister. That this thought was preying on his mind may 
 safely be assumed from his repeated exclamation during his de- 
 lirium at Santo Domingo. "I have deceived M. de Seignelay." 107 
 A little more than a week after the conversation narrated by 
 Beaujeu, La Salle had again changed his mind. "This gentleman 
 (La Salle) told me no later than yesterday that he wanted to 
 go by way of the Gulf, that he still had enough time. I wrote 
 to you a little while ago, it was to be by way of Canada." 108 
 Since, as La Salle himself had said, he was only the forerunner 
 of Penalosa, and the Spaniard's scheme, or rather Bernou's, 
 adapted by Renaudot and the Paris camarilla, demanded that 
 somebody go and reconnoiter the country, he had to take the 
 route of the Gulf. La Salle did not care for Penalosa, he would 
 have preferred somebody else to lead the following expedition, 
 once he had paved the way to New Biscay. He knew that he 
 hadn't 4,000 armed savages at Fort St. Louis to invade the Span- 
 ish province. Wrote Beaujeu: "M. Minet, our engineer, told us 
 that M. de la Salle last Sunday told the Marshall (d'Estrees) 
 that he well knew the Marshall would soon follow him and that 
 the Marshall told La Salle that he well knew it too and that he 
 was very glad of it." 109 This of course interested Beaujeu. Three 
 days later, the officer visited the Marshall: 
 
 We spoke of the Sieur de la Salle; I told him that the said sieur told 
 me he was soon to follow us, and that even M. de Seignelay desired it to be 
 this year, but that the minister had changed this plan, and told La Salle 
 that a ship must first be sent to make sure there was a port. The Marshall 
 told me that there was no truth in this, and that surely the Court had put 
 over one on La Salle. I could get nothing more out of him.no 
 
 107 De Villiers, L' expedition, 21, quoting Minet's unpublished journal. 
 
 los Margry, II, 434. 
 
 109 Ibid., 435. 
 
 no Ibid., 436. At La Rochelle La Salle was eagerly looking for a pretext 
 to abandon the enterprise, when it became clear to him that the king was 
 not to send a squadron to the Gulf. He warned Beaujeu that "if he (Beau- 
 jeu) found the season too far advanced in Santo Domingo, he could come 
 
90 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 On June 21, the Joly was ready to sail, and Beaujeu wrote 
 that day to Seignelay, 
 
 M. de la Salle can leave any time he wishes. Provisions for only six 
 months for 100 soldiers, and eight months for 68 sailors, could be embarked. 
 As M. de La Salle has not communicated his plan to me until now, and as 
 he is constantly changing his mind, I cannot say whether the provisions 
 embarked will suffice for the expedition. He is a man so suspicious, and so 
 afraid that one will penetrate his secrets, that I dare not ask him any thing. 
 He was shocked when one day I told him it would be well to know which 
 route he would take, in order to select a pilot who had been in those parts. 
 Until now he has refused to explain himself clearly, with the result that we 
 have no pilot yet.m 
 
 On the eve of the departure Beaujeu was not yet sure in what 
 direction the expedition was headed. 112 It had become evident 
 that La Salle, having lost all confidence in the wild scheme of 
 the conquest of New Biscay and sailing toward the unknown, 
 was already beginning to cast about for a scape-goat. "I beg you 
 to consider," wrote Beaujeu to Seignelay, "that the Sieur de la 
 Salle has undertaken an enterprise of which he is not sure, and 
 that if he does not meet with the success he promised you, he 
 will not fail to throw the blame on some one or on several peo- 
 ple. . . . His speeches and his actions make this clear to every- 
 body. ... It vexes me, devoted to you as I am, that you should 
 have been involved in a business the success of which is very 
 uncertain, and its promoter beginning to doubt it himself." 113 
 
 During the whole time the preparations lasted, there was a 
 lively exchange of letters, but none by La Salle himself seems 
 to be extant, except what Margry printed in his second volume, 
 namely, a resume of the explorer's letter to Seignelay, vaguely 
 dated, August, 1684. 114 When the reader turns to the table of 
 contents of the third volume, he finds no indication whatever as 
 to the provenience of the letter. In it La Salle is supposed to 
 have written that he had met freebooters, presumably on the 
 high sea. These told him that, during the September moon, navi- 
 gation on the Gulf was very dangerous. The letter implies that 
 a wait was inevitable, and hence, whether he waited in Santo 
 Domingo until October or in La Rochelle appeared in no way to 
 jeopardize the success of the enterprise. 
 
 back to France; but for himself, he would continue his journey with his 
 men, his bark and his flute, and would do or die," Margry, II, 452. 
 
 in Margry, II, 400. 
 
 112 Ibid., 451. 
 
 us Ibid., 406, cf. 394. 
 
 ii4 Ibid., 469-470. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 91 
 
 We may ask why neither Joutel, nor Beaujeu, nor La Sailed 
 brother mention this meeting with the freebooters? This occur- 
 rence was important enough, for the delay had started every- 
 body worrying. How did La Salle get this letter to Seignelay? 
 Certainly he did not send it from Petit Coave, for the next 
 sentence of the resume reads : ' 'Moreover, he is surer to find the 
 mouth of the river about the month of October." Was this be- 
 cause he had seen the mouth of the Mississippi in April? La 
 Salle arrived at Santo Domingo at the end of September and 
 was taken ill at the beginning of October. The next paragraphs 
 so puzzled Parkman that he wrote: "The attitude of La Salle 
 in this matter is incomprehensible." 115 The explorer is made 
 to say in this resume, that he is afraid La Barre will use the 
 Iroquois war as a pretext to prevent La Forest from making the 
 journey to the Illinois. La Barre would by this means jeopardize 
 a part of La Salle's plans, and in this emergency, while the fort 
 which La Salle had been ordered to build was being erected, La 
 Salle himself would try to go up the Mississippi, and meet the 
 Illinois warriors. The final result would be that in any case, in 
 five or six months from the date of the letter, the minister would 
 hear of his departure for New Biscay to attack the Spaniards." 116 
 Finally, according to La Salle's letter, if the minister should 
 wish to give him orders about the Iroquois he is ready to execute 
 them, for they will not interfere with the success of the enter- 
 prise. After having given a synopsis of the resume Parkman 
 commented: "Either this is sheer folly, or else it is meant to 
 delude the minister." 117 But should these mad statements be at- 
 tributed to La Salle? Why did not Margry print the whole let- 
 ter, if he had it? It seems that it was important enough to war- 
 rant its publication, for as said above, it is the only one written 
 by La Salle during the preparations for the expedition. Why did 
 Margry omit to give a reference to its provenience? Why is it 
 that no traces of it can be found today ? Until the letter is found, 
 the present writer is of opinion that it was concocted by Margry. 
 
 To deal with the disastrous events at Matagorda Bay and in 
 the interior of Texas is outside the scope of this essay. Yet, al- 
 though the maneuvers by which the expedition originated have 
 been finished with, the sequel can be briefly treated. For this 
 
 us La Salle, 330, note 4. 
 
 lie De Villiers, L' expedition, 45, notes that it would require at least 
 fifteen months for news to reach Seignelay. 
 n7 La Salle, 330, note 4. 
 
92 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 the correspondence of Bernou and his papers are of little help, 
 for the first ceased with the return of the abbe to France in June, 
 1686, and there are only a few references to La Salle in the 
 second. 
 
 La Salle is said to have gone to Matagorda Bay because he 
 had been unable to take the longitude of the mouth of the Mis- 
 sissippi in 1682, and lacking this important datum, missed the 
 river in 1684. 118 But there is another question which presents 
 itself : Did La Salle wish to go to the mouth of the Mississippi in 
 1684 ? or, we might frame it, did he wish to go thither directly, 
 or, was he supposed to go where he had been in 1682 ? 119 These 
 questions are legitimate in view of several points: the origin of 
 the expedition, statements found in the letters of the explorer, 
 his activities subsequent to his landing, and in view of the lati- 
 tude whereat the mouth of the river was to be found. 
 
 If La Salle wanted to go to the Mississippi it must be ad- 
 mitted that he made an error of one or two degrees in his com- 
 putation of the latitude. It is believed he took possession of the 
 Mississippi Valley in 1682, near Venice, Louisiana, at about the 
 29° 13' or 14' latitude. 120 La Salle first mentions the latitude of 
 the mouth of the river in his letter from Michilimackinac, Oc- 
 tober, 1682. He wrote: "I have gone down the Mississippi to the 
 Gulf of Mexico, at the 27° latitude." 121 At the beginning of 1684, 
 
 us J. F. Steward, "La Salle a Victim of his Error in Longitude," in 
 Transactions of the Illinois State Historical Society for the year 1910, XV, 
 129-136. 
 
 us Cf. the postscript of Beaujeu's letter to Seignelay, Margry, II, 491. 
 The references given in The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Asso- 
 ciation, V, 1901, 109-110, are beside the point; what other people believed 
 about La Salle's destination, and that destination itself are two different 
 things. Joutel was asked by Delisle in 1703 to send his remarks on the map 
 just issued by the geographer. La Salle's companion wrote: "Et sy ledit 
 fieuve se gette dans la mer a un cap aussy avance" que lauteur (Delisle) le 
 marque il est a croire quon ne lauroit pas du manquer il est vray que nous 
 avons marche" les nuits nous rengions souvent la terre de fort pres." ASH, 
 115-9 :n. 12. Dr. Bolton wrote: "For reasons which have never been fully 
 explained, the mouth of the Mississippi was missed and a landing made 
 near Passa Cavallo on Matagorda Bay," "The Location of La Salle's Colony 
 on the Gulf of Mexico," in the Mississippi Valley Historical Review, II, 
 1915, 166; Shea had contended that La Salle went intentionally to Texas as 
 part of the operations against New Biscay, The Expedition of . . . Peiialosa, 
 Introduction, 22; which view, Bolton, loc. cit., said "seems unwarranted." 
 With new evidence at his disposal Dr. Hackett, a former student of Dr. 
 Bolton's, arrived at a different conclusion, cf. C. H. Hackett (ed), Historical 
 Documents relating to New Mexico, Nueva Vizcaya, and Approaches thereto, 
 to 1773, Washington, D. C, 1926, II, 49, 234-289; id., Pichardo's Treatise 
 on the Limits of Louisiana and Texas, Austin, 1931, 436. 
 
 120 De Villiers, La Louisiane, Histoire de son nom, 22, note 1. 
 
 121 Margry, II, 288; see also the proces-verbal of La Metairie, ibid., 
 191, about the 27°; and La Salle's mutilated letter, ibid., 199. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 93 
 
 he had an interview in Paris with M. Tronson, the superior of 
 the St. Sulpice Seminary. M. Tronson wrote to the Abbe de Bel- 
 mont: 
 
 I had a long conversation with M. de la Salle about his discovery; he 
 gave me a very beautiful map. What the two men who accompanied him 
 told you does not agree with what he himself told me. For he contends he 
 entered the Gulf of Mexico not at the Bay of the Holy Spirit, but at the 
 27° latitude, and the same parallel as that of Panuco, which is at the end 
 of the Gulf and much farther than the Bay.122 
 
 This interview, it may be noted here, took place after La 
 Salle had been received by the minister and the king, at a time 
 when he had committed himself to carry out the "great design" 
 of Bernou and Renaudot. Beaujeu, upon his return to France, 
 said or wrote to Villermont that La Salle had missed the mouth 
 of the Mississippi. Villermont communicated the news to Bernou, 
 who was still in Rome. In a long letter to Renaudot, the abbe 
 refuted the arguments of Villermont, saying in part : 
 
 I answered him (Villermont) that to argue the way he does, he must 
 not have seen either the map of M. de la Salle, nor his relations, nor must he 
 have seen M. de la Salle himself, nor Father Membre; otherwise he would 
 know that M. de la Salle places the mouth of his river at the 27° and a few 
 minutes latitude. This fact alone upsets all his proofs. M. de la Salle has not 
 to explore those lagoons, for they are all located to the north and to the 
 east of the place where he landed, along the northern coast of the Gulf of 
 Mexico. All he has to do is to go 20 or 30 leagues toward the south to find 
 the latitude of his river, which he took with an astrolabe, and which he 
 cannot miss, for the coast runs north-south. This is evident and easy to 
 understand. 123 
 
 As was previously noted, the 27° latitude given by Bernou 
 as that of the Rio Bravo, was inserted in Membre's relation as 
 the latitude of the Mississippi: "The Sieur de la Salle, who al- 
 ways carried an astrolabe, took the latitude of this mouth. Al- 
 though he kept to himself the exact point, we have learned that 
 the river falls into the gulf of Mexico, between latitude 27° and 
 2go »i24 j ou tel in his criticism of the pseudo-Tonty objects to the 
 latitude, assigned by the compiler of this book to the mouth of 
 the Mississippi as 22°, 125 and writes that "M. de la Salle always 
 looked for it between the 27° and the 28°." 126 After the return 
 of d'Esmanville to France, M. Tronson wrote again to the Abbe 
 
 122 Margry, II, 355. 
 
 123 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:249v. 
 
 124 Le Clercq, H, 237. 
 
 125 Dernieres decouvertes, Paris, 1697, 192; but confer. La Salle's letter, 
 Margry, II, 530. 
 
 126 ASH, 115-9 :n. 12. 
 
94 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 de Belmont: "If what he (d'Esmanville) told us is true, M. de la 
 Salle made a mistake, for he did not find his river at the 27° or 
 28° latitude, as he thought he would." 127 In his letter to Beaujeu 
 La Salle wrote that the mouth of the river was 28° 20' lati- 
 tude. 128 The same position is given in the proces-verbal of Feb- 
 ruary, 1685 ; 129 to Seignelay, he stated, he was at the 28° 18' to 
 20' at one of the mouths of the Colbert. 130 Twice La Salle sent 
 Beaujeu away to make the discovery of the mouth of the Mis- 
 sissippi, 131 located, he claimed, north of where they were, while 
 he would attend to the success of "what he had been commis- 
 sioned to do." 
 
 The commission referred to was contained in the instructions 
 both of the king and of the minister. Unfortunately they are lost, 
 along with quite a number of documents unfavorable to La Salle, 
 which have mysteriously disappeared from the archives in Paris 
 during the past fifty years. 132 The last instructions certainly di- 
 rected the explorer to go as near as possible to Mexico 133 to find 
 a port and build a fortress. It may be that once these two things 
 were done, La Salle could, at his own risks, 134 lead an expedition 
 against the Spaniards, 135 as a prelude to the greater expedition 
 
 127 Margry, H, 578. 
 
 128 Jbid., 522, and cf . 592. 
 
 129 ibid., 539. 
 iso Ibid., 560. 
 
 isi Ibid., 527-528, 538. 
 
 132 De Villiers, L'expedition, 60. As early as the end of the seventeenth 
 century, whole sections were torn out of Joutel's journal, cf. ASH, 115- 
 9:n. 12, letter of Delisle to Joutel, and Joutel's answer. 
 
 133 La Salle's enterprise "would apparently have had at least a portion 
 of the success expected from it, had there been in view only a settlement 
 at the mouth of the Micissipi, as many people were persuaded; for it is 
 certain that de la Sale, seeing himself cast ashore in St. Bernard's Bay, and 
 ere long convinced that he was west of the river he sought, might — had he 
 no design but to find it — at the time of his first journey to the Cenis, have 
 obtained guides from those Indians, since, in the sequel, they gave guides 
 to Joutel; but he was desirous of approaching the Spaniards to obtain in- 
 formation in regard to the mines of Santa Barbara; and, in endeavoring 
 to do too much, he not only did nothing at all, but ruined himself, and was 
 lamented by none." Charlevoix, History, Shea's Translation, IV, 115. Char- 
 levoix's account of the whole career of La Salle, based on Joutel's memoirs, 
 is well balanced and fair. Margry's objections, I, Introduction, iv, to the 
 portrait of La Salle drawn by Charlevoix mean absolutely nothing; it is to 
 be expected that any one pointing to some of the defects of the explorer, 
 especially if he happen to be a Jesuit, would be accused of prejudice by 
 Margry. 
 
 134 Margry, II, 489, 492. 
 
 135 "He told me that he was resolved to take the soldiers and march 
 against the Spaniards in New Biscay, and that he would not bother about 
 finding . . . (sic) since he was where the king had sent him," Margry, 
 II, 515. This statement of D'Esmanville is termed "preposterous" by E. T. 
 Miller, loc. cit., 108-109, a qualification dutifully repeated by Father Habig, 
 The Franciscan Pere Marquette, 265. The arguments set forth by the first 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 95 
 
 in project after the arrival of Pefialosa. La Salle constantly as- 
 serts that he is "where the king sent him." 136 Well did he know 
 the impossibility of building a fort in the marshy land of Loui- 
 siana, visited in 1682, and hence his decision to find another site. 
 Joutel wrote : "M. de la Salle always told us that the Mississippi 
 must be ascended nearly sixty leagues to find a place for settle- 
 ments, since the lower part of the said river was uninhabitable 
 owing to floods and mud." 137 If La Salle, on the other hand, was 
 not to build a fort, what could possibly be the use of all the 
 artillery he had taken along with him ? 138 
 
 La Salle was also commissioned to find a port. 139 He knew 
 such was non-existent in the locality visited in 1682, at least 
 there was no such port as had been described in the memoirs 
 handed to Seignelay in the first months of 1684. He thought the 
 Mississippi emptied into the salt lake behind the island blocking 
 Matagorda Bay "where the river formed a fine harbor." 140 Such 
 was the information sent to Seignelay. He trusted that the min- 
 ister would not find it amiss if he were to advance "a little far- 
 ther up the river to be out of reach of the Spaniards, 141 while 
 waiting for the help which he hopes His Highness will send." 142 
 
 writer are based on feelings, and the surmises made to explain away the 
 statement appear to be just as preposterous as the statement itself, for the 
 physical courage of the Sulpician is questioned and the accusation of vanity 
 is leveled against him. An assault upon the Spaniards under the circum- 
 stances with a handful of soldiers may be readily admitted as preposterous, 
 but was not the entire scheme upon which La Salle had embarked, absurd ? 
 One has not to read far in La Salle's letters in order to find other prepos- 
 terous statements. 
 
 136 Margry, II, 526, 595, 603. 
 
 137 ASH, 115-9 :n. 12. 
 
 138 Cf. Margry, II, 546, 549, 598; de Villiers, U expedition, 48. Cf. Cave- 
 lier's report, AGI, Seville, 145-1-9, "Our tarrying in Santo Domingo served 
 to prepare everything so as to enable us to enter the Mississippi River when 
 we reach it, and then to erect a good fort at its mouth." This passage is 
 not found in Cavelier's second report printed by Shea, Early Voyages Up 
 and Down the Mississippi, Albany, 1861, 15-42. [A study on this unpublished 
 report will appear soon. Ed.] 
 
 139 Margry, II, 530; cf. the conclusion of Cavelier's report, AGI, Seville, 
 145-1-9. 
 
 140 One of the reasons leading La Salle to this belief is stated in Joutel's 
 criticism of the pseudo-Tonty. La Salle, we read in the Dernieres decou- 
 vertes, Paris, 1697, 188, found in 1682 that the Mississippi divided into three 
 channels, and each channel was followed by a different group; all of which 
 is false, says Joutel. "All they found was one branch or channel which the 
 river makes about 60 leagues from its mouth, and which they did not even 
 follow. This is what led M. de la Salle to believe that it must be that arm 
 which empties into St. Louis Bay. In this he was wrong." ASH, 115-9 :n. 12. 
 
 141 Less than a month before La Salle had written to Beaujeu that there 
 was nothing to fear from the Spaniards in this season, Margry, II, 535. 
 
 142 Margry, II, 559-563. 
 
96 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 This help, it may be concluded, is the main part of the expedition 
 of which La Salle headed the vanguard. 148 
 
 The reason why Peiialosa did not follow La Salle has been 
 attributed to the truce of Ratisbon, signed August 15, 1684, two 
 weeks after La Salle left France. Another explanation appears 
 to suggest itself. The forerunner failed to find a port and to 
 build the fortification serviceable as a base of operations for 
 subsequent inroads against New Biscay, and therefore the main 
 expedition was also postponed. According to a statement of La 
 Salle himself, Seignelay at first wanted Peiialosa to go in 1684, 
 but he, La Salle, had persuaded the minister to let him recon- 
 noiter the country and find a port. In Paris, they waited for 
 news, and had La Salle been successful they might have allowed 
 Peiialosa to carry out Bernou's plan, that is, if this wild scheme 
 was ever taken seriously by the French Government. 144 
 
 Beaujeu arrived in Rochefort, July 3, 1685. 145 The officer de- 
 clared that he had left La Salle with all his men "at a place 
 which La Salle pretends is the mouth of the river he went to 
 search for." There was no time for further explanations as the 
 mail was ready to leave. 146 A few days later Beaujeu sent an 
 account to Seignelay, 147 and Arnoul, the intendant of Rochefort, 
 forwarding it to the minister wrote: 
 
 I noticed that in his (Beaujeu's) letter, which he showed me, he does 
 not tell you what he thinks. He believes that M. de la Salle is really not at 
 the mouth of the river he was looking for. ... I thought, my lord, that I 
 ought to notify you of this, so that if you should wish to know something 
 more definite, you might order M. de Beaujeu either to come and see you 
 or to write to you what he thinks. He might be mistaken however, and he 
 thought I ought to tell him and his officers how desirable it was for him to 
 say nothing contradicting the belief that M. de la Salle is at the mouth of 
 
 143 Either Peiialosa or some other was to be the leader. La Salle's 
 brother noted that until the end of 1686, they based all their hopes on the 
 succor the king might be able to send from France, Early Voyages, 33. E. T. 
 Miller, loc. cit., 108, objects to the use of this text in support of the theory 
 of cooperation, "since the succor might more plausibly refer to that which 
 could well be expected to follow upon Beaujeu's return to France and his 
 report of the misfortunes attending the landing of the expedition on the 
 coast of Texas." (Italics inserted.) Aside from the arguments from the 
 letters and the papers of Bernou, the "plausibility" is in favor of the theory 
 of cooperation. La Salle had made no secret of his being the forerunner of 
 either Peiialosa or d'Estr6es, and the members of the expedition did not 
 know that Beaujeu had returned to France. 
 
 144 De Villiers, L 'expedition, 42. 
 
 145 Arnoul to Seignelay, BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 21331:300. 
 
 146 ibid., 304. 
 
 147 Margry, II, 577-584. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 97 
 
 his river, and even that it is not impossible that he will go to it by land or 
 in the Belle. . . .i« 
 
 Beaujeu was not believed; 149 on the contrary, the king 
 thought the captain of the Joly prejudiced against La Salle, and 
 commended the precaution taken by Arnoul to prevent any un- 
 toward statement against the enterprise of Sieur de la Salle. 150 
 Beaujeu, however, spoke his mind to his friend Villermont. 
 Bernou, to whom the latter communicated what Beaujeu had 
 written, informed Renaudot on the several points in a letter 
 dated August 14, 1685, saying La Salle did not make the mis- 
 take spoken of by Beaujeu, and moreover, he could not have 
 made such a mistake, and finally, he really was at the mouth of 
 the Mississippi. 151 The trouble with Villermont and Beaujeu, 
 Bernou says in another letter two weeks later, is that they are 
 both prejudiced against La Salle. And the abbe proceeds to 
 prove that La Salle was, must be at the mouth of the Mississippi ; 
 and if he was not, all he had to do was to go south 20 or 30 
 leagues. 152 
 
 News came slowly. At the beginning of 1685 the king wrote 
 to the Governor of Canada of his impatient wait for word from 
 La Salle. 153 But at the same time the French government aban- 
 doned the scheme. Penalosa died that year. 154 Since the man who 
 was to lead the main expedition had passed away, the plan was 
 shelved. One of the trump cards in Bernou's game was precisely 
 the person of Penalosa, who was acquainted with the country 
 to be invaded. There was another reason why no help was sent 
 to the colony stranded on the sand of the Gulf coast. It is given 
 by the Spanish ambassador in London in a letter to his master 
 dated February 7, 1687. After recounting a summary of 
 Beaujeu's report of his voyage to Seignelay and of the state in 
 which Beaujeu had left La Salle, the ambassador continued: 
 
 To obtain it (the report), I have had more trouble than you can im- 
 agine, for as yet they want to keep the matter a deep secret. Not long ago 
 Seignelay sent a ship of seven hundred tons to Santo Domingo, loaded with 
 one hundred and thirty women, who are to marry the buccaneers, with 
 whom the French are on very friendly terms. Beaujeu suggested that on 
 
 148 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 21331:307. 
 i*9Margry, II, 604-605. 
 iso BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 21331 :371v. 
 isi BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:245v.-246. 
 
 152 Ibid., 249v.-250v. 
 
 153 AC, C 11A, 8:176. 
 is* Margry, III, 44. 
 
98 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 this ship help be sent to La Salle, but they would not listen to him. The 
 reason for this is that money is lacking, and they assure me that this 
 undertaking has already cost the King more than the discovery of America 
 cost Ferdinand and Isabella. For the present they will not even think of 
 doing anything, unless La Salle personally can arouse interest in the en- 
 terprise.^ 
 
 When this letter was written La Salle was somewhere in 
 Texas on his way to the Illinois country, and when his brother 
 arrived in France in 1688, he had nothing to offer as a stimulant 
 to the interest of the king and of Seignelay. 156 Moreover, the 
 times were less propitious than ever. Louis XIV had begun the 
 war of the League of Augsburg. The complex nature of his 
 kingly cares precluded any hearkening to the vaporous ideas of 
 Bernou and Renaudot with regard to the ease with which New 
 Biscay could be conquered. 
 
 The silence afterwards of the two promoters of this wild 
 scheme is significant. Renaudot, who was supposed to be a 
 staunch friend of La Salle, was excessively angry with the ex- 
 plorer, once he had left for the Gulf of Mexico. 157 La Salle could 
 regain his good graces, only and if, after having succeeded in 
 the undertaking, he came back and shared the profits with Abbe 
 Renaudot. 158 Bernou returned from Rome to Prance, to "Chris- 
 tendom," as he says, in June, 1686. He received letters from 
 Tonty. In these La Salle's lieutenant speaks of his vain search 
 for his chief. 159 As late as the beginning of 1688, Bernou copied 
 a letter of Callieres, in which the following sentences are found : 
 
 There was no news of M. de la Salle in Quebec on July 18 ( 1687 ) ; it is 
 a very bad sign. It is a pity. I beg you to communicate this news to M. 
 l'abbe Bernou as something which belongs to his department, and to ask 
 him to send me all he will have learned about him.iso 
 
 There are no more references to the unfortunate explorer in 
 Bernou's papers after the last date mentioned, at least the pres- 
 ent writer has not found any. 
 
 In final analysis, then, the appearances of things surrounding 
 the organization and departure of La Salle's Matagorda expedi- 
 tion are anything but savory. The inevitable failure, the tragic 
 
 155 Mid-America, XVII, 1936, 124. 
 ise Cf. his memoir in Margry, III, 586-596. 
 157 BN, Mss. fr. n. a., 7497:169-169v. 
 iss ibid., 171-171V. 
 
 159 BN, Clairambault, 1016:286-286v., and 287-287v., printed in Margry, 
 III, 559-562. 
 
 i6o BN, Clairambault, 1016:483-483v. 
 
PENALOSA'S EXPEDITION AND LA SALLE 99 
 
 end of the explorer in the wilds of Texas, the massacre and death 
 of the majority of those who entrusted themselves to his guid- 
 ance, are elements already sufficiently deplored by other writers. 
 Even while La Salle feared and berated imaginary enemies, he 
 cast his lot with two theory-spinning abbes who meant him no 
 good. They concocted a madcap enterprise, they assigned him 
 the role of a pawn, which he accepted, they got him moved into 
 a desperate position, they abandoned him to his fate. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 
 
 As indicated by the title no attempt is here made to give a complete 
 bibliography on La Salle, or even a complete list of the books consulted 
 for this study. Valuable bibliographical data on La Salle will be found in 
 M. A. Habig, O. F. M., The Franciscan Pere Marquette, New York (1934), 
 258-285. 
 
 The two main manuscript sources used for this study are: (1) Biblio- 
 theque Nationale, Manuscrits Francais, nouvelles acquisitions (Collection 
 Renaudot), vol. 7497, (formerly Renaudot 42); and (2) Bibliotheque Na- 
 tionale, Collection Clairambault, vol. 1016. The first is a volume of auto- 
 graph letters from Bernou to Renaudot written during the years 1683-1686, 
 while Bernou was in Rome. These letters explain or refer to the contents 
 of the documents of the second source, which contains the papers of Bernou. 
 Many of the documents are in his hand. 
 
 Additional information was found in two other volumes of the series 
 BN, Mss. fr. n. a. (Collection Arnoul), in vols. 21330 and 21331. The first 
 comprises the letters sent by Seignelay, 1684, to Arnoul, the intendant at 
 Rochefort, and the second, copies of letters of Arnoul to Seignelay, 1685. 
 The following were found serviceable: two letters of Machault de Rouge- 
 mont to Villermont, BN, Mss. fr., 27999 :239v-240; 254-254v; the Memoire 
 sur les Missions de Canada, which is the reply of the Court to the memoir 
 of Cardinal d'Estrees, in Archives des Colonies, F 5 A 3:164-166; a short 
 report of Nicolas de la Salle, dated Toulon, September 3, 1698, on the ex- 
 pedition of 1682, in Archives du Service Hydrographique, Carton 67 :n. 15; 
 in the same series ASH, 115-9 :n. 12 is a detailed criticism by Henri Joutel, 
 La Salle's companion, of the book attributed to Henri de Tonty, Dernieres 
 decouvertes dans VAmerique Septentrionale de M. de la Salle, published 
 in Paris in 1697. The title of this document reads: "Remarques tirees du 
 livre intitule les dernieres decouvertes dans la merique septentrionalle Mis 
 au jour par Monsieur le chevalier de tonty gouverneur du fort de St. Louis 
 aux illinois donne au public au mois de Janvier de l'annee 1697 ou lautheur 
 avance quantite de choses fauces et inventees." Photostats or transcripts 
 of the above documents are in the Library of Congress. Finally, the manu- 
 script journal of Jean Cavelier, La Salle's brother, in Archivo General de 
 Indias, Seville, 145-1-9, photostat in the Newberry Library, E. E. Ayer Col- 
 lection, Chicago. 
 
 There is little on La Salle in the Archives des Colonies, Correspondance 
 Generate, Canada, C 11A, which is not found in E. B. O'Callaghan, edit., 
 Documents relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, 
 Albany, 1855, vol. IX. The most important body of printed material avail- 
 able on La Salle is found in the first three volumes of Pierre Margry, 
 Decouvertes et Etablissements des Frangais dans VOuest et dans le Sud de 
 VAmerique Septentrionale, 1614-1754, 6 vols., Paris, 1876-1888. The editing 
 was carelessly done, and it will repay one to check the printed text on the 
 documents; the choice and the arrangement of the material published leaves 
 much to be desired. There is no complete English translation of this com- 
 pilation; sections of it, however, especially from the first three volumes 
 
 101 
 
102 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS 
 
 have been translated in compilations of texts by M. Anderson, I. J. Cox, 
 T. Falconer, B. F. French, L. P. Kellogg, M. M. Quaife, and others. 
 
 Important sources for La Salle's voyages are the printed histories of 
 Fathers Le Clercq and Hennepin. The narratives of Father Membre and 
 Douay are found in the second volume of Chrestien Le Clercq, Premier 
 etablissement de la Foy dans la Nouvelle France, Paris, 1691, translated 
 by J. G. Shea, First Establishment of the Faith in New France, New York, 
 1881-1882. Louis Hennepin is the author of three different works treating 
 of La Salle's expeditions, namely, Description de la Louisiane, Paris, 1683, 
 translated by J. G. Shea, A Description of Louisiana, New York, 1880; 
 Nouvelle decouverte, Utrecht, 1697, translated and published in London, in 
 1698; and the Nouveau Voyage, Utrecht, 1698, published as volume II of 
 the Nouvelle decouverte. Both volumes have been re-issued by R. G. 
 Thwaites, under the title A New Discovery, Chicago, 1903. 
 
 Jean Cavelier's incomplete report, Relation du voyage . . . , was pub- 
 lished by Shea as n. 5 of the Cramoisy series, in 1858; and an English 
 translation of the same by Shea appeared in Early Voyages up and down 
 the Mississippi, Albany, 1861. Some documents from the Archivo General 
 de Indias, Seville, referring to the aftermath of the Texas expedition were 
 published in Mid-America, XVIII, 1936, 96 ff. 
 
 The best known and most colorful complete study on La Salle in 
 English is that of F. Parkman, La Salle and the Discovery of the Great 
 West, Boston, 1907. It can be objected that Parkman made an uncritical 
 use of the documents supplied to him by Margry, but Parkman was at a 
 disadvantage since he had only defective copies of the material in question. 
 Biographies of La Salle are not lacking either in English or in French. 
 Chesnel, de la Ronciere, Gaither, Gravier, Jacks, Lockridge, Sparks, and 
 others, have told the story of the explorer's adventures. 
 
 There are also partial critical studies of various phases of La Salle's 
 life. On La Salle's Jesuit days, the only reliable data are in C. de Roche- 
 monteix, Les Jesuites et la Nouvelle France au XVIIe siecle, Paris, 1896, 
 
 III, 10 ff., and G. J. Garraghan, in Archivum Historicum Societatis Jesu, 
 
 IV, 1935, 268 ff. "Some Newly Discovered Marquette and La Salle Letters"; 
 by the same author will be found in Mid-America, XIX, 1937, 93 ff., "La 
 Salle's Jesuit Days." Three important critical studies on La Salle's journeys 
 are those of Marc de Villiers du Terrage, La decouverte du Missouri et 
 Vhistoire du Fort d' Orleans, 1673-1738, Paris, 1925; "La Louisiane, Histoire 
 de son nom et de ses frontieres successives, 1681-1819," in Journal de la 
 Societe des Americanistes de Paris, n. s., XXI, 1929, 4ff.; L 'expedition de 
 Cavelier de la Salle dans le Golfe du Mexique, 1681^-1687, Paris, 1931. 
 
 Studies on La Salle's early travels are the following: O. H. Marshall, 
 The Building and Voyage of the "Griffin," published as n. 1 of the publica- 
 tions of the Buffalo Historical Society; C. Whittlesey, "Discovery of the 
 Ohio River by Robert Cavelier de la Salle, 1669-1670," in Western Reserve 
 and Northern Ohio Historical Society, Tract 38, 9ff.; E. L. Taylor, "La 
 Salle's Route down the Ohio," in Ohio Archeological and Historical Society 
 Publications, XDC, 1910, 382 ff.; C. A. Hanna, The Wilderness Trail, New 
 York, 1911, II, 87 ff. The two most detailed critiques of the claims to the 
 priority of the discovery of the Mississippi are that of J. Tailhan, ed., in 
 Memoir e sur les Moeurs, Coustumes et Relligion des Sauvages de VAmerique 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 103 
 
 septentrionale par Nicolas Perrot, Leipzig, 1864, 279 ff.; and that of J. G. 
 Shea, The Bursting of Pierre Margry's La Salle Bubble, New York, 1879. 
 E. T. Miller treated of "The Connection of Penalosa with the La Salle Ex- 
 pedition," in the Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, V, 
 1902, 97 ff . ; Dr. H. E. Bolton has an article on "The Location of La Salle's 
 Colony on the Gulf of Mexico," in the Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 
 II, 1915, 165 ff.; and B. Suite wrote a paper "La mort de Cavelier de la 
 Salle," published in the Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society 
 of Canada, Ser. 2, IV, 1898, Sect. 1, 3 ff. 
 
 Besides maps of the period separately printed or found in contemporary 
 atlases, a few of the manuscript maps were seen in facsimile in A. L. 
 Pinart, Recueil de Cartes, Plans et Vues relatifs aux Etats-Unis et au 
 Canada, Paris, 1893, and in G. Marcel, Reproductions de cartes et de globes 
 relatifs a la decouverte de VAmerique du XVJ e au XVII e siecle, avec le text 
 explicatif, Paris, 1892. The other manuscript maps were seen in the Kar- 
 pinski collection. They are: in the series Service Hydrographique, Biblio- 
 theque, B 4040, 4, 6, 11; 4044, 37, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50; C 4044, 4; in the Biblio- 
 theque Nationale, Ge D 8042, 1 8078; Ge DD 2987-8782. One map is among 
 Bernou's papers, BN, Clairambault, 1017:133v-143. The table of the legends 
 inscribed upon the globe of Coronelli, is in BN, Mss. fr., 13365, the whole 
 volume. The two indispensable guides to these maps are H. Harrisse, Notes 
 pour servir a Vhistoire, a la bibliographie et a la cartographie de la Nou- 
 velle-France et des pays adjacents, 15^5-1100, Paris, 1872, and G. Marcel, 
 Cartographie de la Nouvelle France, Paris, 1885. 
 

 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 973.18D37S C001 
 
 SOME LA SALLE JOURNEYS CHGO 
 
 30112 
 
 025362671