Transactions of the Illinois State Historical Society--1905




(By J. P. Dunn)

There are no two states of the Union which have been so closely and yet so diversely united in their history as Illinois and Indiana. Since their admission as states their common interests have been, of course, much the same as, those of other adjoining states. In the territorial period, from 1800 to 1809, Illinois was a part of Indiana Territory, and, as the Indiana side was settled the more rapidly, it dominated in the territorial government. The seat of government, was within the bounds of Indiana. Under the Northwest Territory, both were subject to Ohio domination. Prior to American occupation, under the British both were ruled from Quebec through Detroit; but under the French both were ruled from New Orleans; and under both British and French rule Illinois was the dominating factor.

The dominance of Illinois began in the time of LaSalle, who induced all of the Indian tribes of Indiana to move into Illinois and join his confederacy, which was located around Starved Rock on the Illinois river, leaving Indiana uninhabited. After his death the tribes gradually moved back to their old homes on the Wabash, and north of it, but there were no permanent white settlements in Indiana for many years, though there were probably French trading houses near the site of Ft. Wayne as early as 1718, and at Ouiatarion in 1720. ("Indiana," American Commonwealth Series, Chapters I and 2.)

In this latter year there came to Kaskaskia a man who was destined to have a more permanent influence on the region than LaSalle. This was Nicolas Ignace de Beaubois, a Jesuit priest, born at Orleans, France, Oct. 15, 1689, who had come into Canada in 1718. When he was appointed cure at Kaskaskia, two years later, the place, which had until then been a mission only, was established as a parish. It should be understood that although the Bishop of Quebec was ecclesiastical superior over Louisiana as well as Canada, the church establishments of the two provinces were practically distinct, and that of Louisiana was largely controlled by the Company of the Indies which supported the priests and missionaries of that province. In


Used by permission of Mr. W. E. English

1722, owing to friction between the various religious orders, the Louisiana authorities divided the spiritual jurisdiction among them much as our Indian tribes were parceled out to the various churches by President Grant. All the region north of the Ohio was given to the Jesuits, while, south of the Ohio, the region east of the Mississippi was assigned to the Discalced Carmelites, and that west of the river to the Capuchins. This arrangement lasted about six months when the Bishop of Quebec, dissatisfied with the work of the Carmelites, added their district to that of the Capuchins. A year later, a the Capuchins did not furnish clergymen enough to suit the company, it gave to the Jesuits all the territory north of Natchez, and restricted the Capuchins to the region south. This move alarmed the Capuchins, who demanded guaranty against further aggressions, and finally, in 1725, the matter was permanently adjusted on the basis of the Natchez boundary, and confirmed by patent of the King.

From the time Father de Beaubois was stationed at Kaskaskia letters began to go to France urging the desirability of a post on the "Ouabache," under which name was included the Wabash proper and also the Ohio below the mouth of the Wabash,; for during the first half of the eighteenth century the French always described the Ohio as emptying into the Wabash, and the Wabash as emptying into the Mississippi. Father Charlevoix, LaHarpe, De Boisbriant, and De Beaubois himself, all joined in the call for a fort on the Ouabache.

Meanwhile the Louisiana authorities were being impressed with the fact that the Capuchins were not able to furnish the clergy needed in the province, and, on Feb. 20, 1726, they entered into an agreement with the Jesuits to supply missionaries not only for their own district but also for the Indians in the Capuchin district, and, in addition, to secure an establishment of nuns at New Orleans. To do all this Father de Beaubois was to go to France, and in aid of his mission the Chevalier de Bourgmont gathered at New Orleans twenty-two Indian chiefs and other tribal representatives who were to accompany him Just before they were to embark, the ship in which they were to sail sank at its moorings, and this so frightened the Indians that only half-a-dozen of them finally consented to go, the most important of these being the Mitchigamia chief Agapit Chicagou. In this connection, permit me to diverge for a moment to say that the controversy which has so long raged in Illinois over the meaning of this word "Chicagou," is disposed of by a memoir of La Mothe Cadillac, the founder of Detroit, written in 1695 from Michilimackinac, where he then commanded. In describing the various French posts and Indian villages, he says: "The post of Chicagou comes next. This word signifies the River of Garlic. because it produces naturally, without any cultivation, a very large quantity of it." (Margry's Decouvertes et Etablissements, Vol, 5, p. 123.)

De Beaubois and his Indians were well received in France. They were presented at court, and royally entertained. De Beaubois accomplished all his undertakings, and sent over the nuns who founded the famous Ursuline Convent at New Orleans, and a supply of missionaries, among whom was Father Stephen D'Outreleau, destined for the proposed establishment on the Ouabache. By this time the Ouabache project had taken definite shape, and apparently under inspiration of De Beaubois. During the French regime, all of Illinois except the northeast corner was included in Louisiana, but the dividing line between it and Canada crossed the Wabash near the present site of Terre Haute, and all of the Indians in Indiana lived north of that point. Consequently De Beaubois would have no Indians for his Onabache mission unless they could be induced to move; and the new plan was, instead of establishing a large and expensive fort, to build a small one, and bring enough Indians to the lower Wabash to protect it from the English. To secure this result, Sieur de Vincennes, who was with the Wabash Indians. and was very popular with them, was to be given a position in the Louisiana service, and to use his influence to induce the Indians to move. This plan was carried out, but not speedily, for not until the summer of 1731 did Vincennes get the Piankeshaws to leave their old village on the Vermilion, and begin building his fort. By that time De Beaubois had got into an awful row with the Louisiana authorities, and had been expelled from the province, while Father D'Outreleau had become weary of waiting and gone down the river. After narrowly escaping death at the hands of the Yazous, he located for a time at New Orleans, where he is said to have served as Spiritual Director of the Ursulines, and chaplain of the hospital. (The Mission to the Ouabacbe, Ind. Hist. Soc. Pubs., Vol. 3, No. 4; The Jesuit Relations, Vol. 67, V. 342; Vol. 70, p. 243; Vol. 71, p. 169.)

After the removal of Father De Beaubois the life seems to have. been taken out of the mission work north of the Ohio so far as aggressive development was concerned. There were still priests laboring in this region, but their efforts were rather to bold the ground already occupied than to open new fields, and from all appearances they had ample work to occupy all their time at that. They bad to cover a great deal of ground, and their flocks were not so deeply concerned with religious duties as they should have been. The preserved records of the Vincennes parish go back only to 1749, and what was done there prior to that time is uncertain. It appears, however, that there was some sort of church establishment at the place prior to that time, for the Abbe Tanguay states that Father Pacome Legrand, who died on Oct. 6, 1742, was at the time returning from a term of service at Vincennes. (Shea's Catholic Church in Colonial Days, p. 578.) In the period of the preserved records the priests who served at Vincennes bore names familiar in the Illinois parishes. The first entries were made by Father Sebastian Louis Meurin. In 1752 the name of Father Peter du Jaunay appears. In 1753 Father Louis Vivier, writer of the well known letter from the Illinois in 1750 which appears in the Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses, came to Vincennes for a three years' stay. He was succeeded in November, 1756, by Father Julian Devernai, who was the last of the old Jesuits at Vincennes.

The times on which Father Devernai fell were indeed troublous, for they covered the French and Indian war, which ended French rule in America. When the news of the Treaty of Paris reached the Illinois country the settlers were filled with alarm, for they were handed over to the mercies of the Protestant English, the ancient enemies of their country. Many of them left the settlements, some goingto New Orleans, and others to the region west of the Mississippi. Thither, to the new settlement of St. Louis, or Pain Court, as it was called, went Neyon de Villiers, commandant of the Illinois country, after calling St. Ange from Vincennes to take his place at Ft. Chartres.

You will pardon me for again diverging, to straighten out the St. Ange family, which has been sadly mixed by all of our historians. It has been a common impression that this St. Ange who came to the command of Ft. Chartres in 1764 was the same one that commanded there thirty years earlier. I corrected this error some years ago in my history of Indiana, getting a clue from a foot-note of Margry that, in 1736, after the disastrous Chickasaw campaign in which Sieur de Vincennes was killed, the St. Ange then at Ft. Chartres asked for his place for his son. (Decouvertes et Etablissements, Vol. 6, p. 448.) 1 sent to Paris, and through the kindness of Miss Jessie McDonald -granddaughter of the late Senator Jos. E. McDonald-obtained a copy of the passage to which be refers. It is in a letter from Bienville, dated at New Orleans, June 29, 1736, recommending appointments for the places of officers lost in the Chickasaw campaign, and reads as follows:

"The death of M. de Vincennes leaves vacant a position of half-pay lieutenant. M. de St. Ange, the father, who has served the king for more than fifty years, and who had a son killed at the Chickasaws, has asked me to request this 'place for the last son who remains to him. He is commanding at present a little post on the Missouri, and M. D'Artaguiette has often spoken to me of him as a brave youth and one of much merit."

Miss McDonald also obtained for me copies from the Alphabe Lafillard, or memorandum of appointments kept at Paris, of the following entries under the name St. Anget

"St. Ange (pere) capitaine d'armes a la 1/2 solde
enseigne reform6 (Louisiana)
11 11
confirme par le roi
capitaine reforme

"St. Ange (fils aine)
enseigne reforme
enseigne an pied
tue a la guerre des
sauvages & remplace


20 mai 1722

19 decembre 1722

4 avri11730

17 avril 1738

19 decembre 1722

1 avril 1730

17 aout 1732

"St. Ange (cadet) s sauvagek & remplac6 15 october 1736

lieutenant refo=6 15 october 1736

I also obtained from the Canadian archives a copy of a certificate made at St. Louis in 1773 by "Louis St. Ange de Bellerive," then in the Spanish service, that be commanded at Post Vincennes from 1,736 to 1764, succeeding Sieur de Vincennes in the command.

In 1885, Mr. 0. W. Collett, of St. Louis, published the will of "Mr. St. Ange de Bellerive," who died at St. Louis on Dec. 27, 1774, and among his listed effects were the following:

First, a commission or order from M. De La Buissoniere, who succeeded D'Artaguiette in command of the Illinois settlement, dated July 1, 1736, directing St. Ange to take command of the Post of the Pianguichats, which was the official title of Post Vincennes at that time; second, a commission from the King as lieutenant reforme, dated Oct. 16, 1736; third, a commission from the King as captain, dated Sept. 1, 1738. (Mag. of West Hist., Vol: 2, pp. 60-65.)

These documents make it plain that there were three St. Anges in the Louisiana service, a father and two sons; that the elder son was killed in 1736; that the second son commanded at Vincennes from 1736 to 1764, and then at Ft. Chartres; and that the father probably died in 1738, after the issue to him of the commission as captain reforme on April 17, 1738, and before the issue of the commission as captain reforme to the surviving son on Sept. 1 of the same year. This last presumption is confirmed by entries in the parish records of Prairie du Rocher, in 1743 and 1744, concerning "Madame St. Ange, widow of the late M. de St. Ange, captain reform6." (Pub. No. 8, Ill., Hist. Library, pp. 132, 138.) The record of his death will probably be found at some future time buried away in some of the parish records of Illinois.

It will be noted that Bienville calls the father "M. de St. Ange," and this title was usually given by his, contemporaries, as, for example, in his memorandum concerning the war with the Fox Indians in 1730, in recommending the St. Anges, father and elder son, for -promotion for meritorous service, Beauharnois calls the father "Sieur de St. Ange." In the son's certificate above mentioned, in his will, in the minutes of the formal surrender of Ft. Chartres (N. Y. Col. Docs., Vol. 10, p. 1161) and elsewhere, the son is called "St. Ange de Bellerive." American writers, myself among them, have adopted this nomenclature, and so careful and learned an investigator as the late E. G. Mason makes it "M. de St. Ange de Bellerive." But in years of research I have been unable to find any trace of any such title as "St. Ange" or "Bellerive," either in France or Canada. There was never any estate, seigniory or fief bearing either name. Whence then were these titles derived?

As we have seen, Bienville states in 1736 that the father had then been in the King's service over fifty years, although he had been on the Louisiana rolls less than fifteen years. It is a matter of history that a Canadian officer called St. Ange accompanied Father Charlevoix on his trip down the Mississippi in 1721. (In his "Historical Journal," or letters to the Duchess de Lesdigieres-letter No. 27--Charlevoix says: "M. de St. Ange who has since very much distinguished himself against the Foxes, commanded my escort.") Fortunately the parish records of Canada have been made accessible through the magnificent Dictionnaire Genealogique of the Abb6 Tanguay, and from it we find that the name "St. Ange" occurred in Canada only as a nickname, or "surnom" of one Robert Groston, who -was married at Quebec in 1693, and who was then a sergeant in the "Compagnie de Noyan." His bride was Marguerite, daughter of Christopher Crevier, who had already been three times widowed. She was first married to Jacquer, Fournier, May 14, 1657; second to Michel Gamelin in 1663; and third to Francois Renou, Aug. 21, 1683. She bore the nickname of "Bellerive." (Tanguay Diet. Geneal., Vol. 4, p. 382.) To this couple were born six sons and two daughters, as appears by the Canadian parish records. Of the sons, Jacques, the third, died in infancy. Joseph, the second, and Dominique, the fifth, married and lived in Canada. But of the eldest, Pierre, christened Nov. 17, 1693; the fourth, Louis, christened Oct. 16, 1698; and the sixth, Louis Daniel, christened Feb. 20, 1702, the Canadian records give no further trace. Obviously Pierre was the one killed in 1736, and Louis was the one who commanded at Vincennes. He probably took on his mother's nickname to distinguish himself from his father, or because his father bad survived the doughty Widow Renou and married again, for, as appears by the parish records of Prairie du Rocher,1 the name of the Madame St. Ange who survived him was Elizabeth St. Romin. The French indicated a nickname by the word ,"dit," and it is possible that "the St. Ange's themselves may have written it "do" without any thought of false pretense, for our French settlers were no slaves of custom in the matter of spelling. At any rate Louis Groston, dit St. Ange, dit Bellerive, was metamorphosed into Sieur de St. Ange de Bellerive in a permanent way. There was nothing remarkable in this change, for often these French nicknames superseded the original family names, and some of our Vincennes families have lost their original names altogether, and are known only by the nickname of some ancestor. Nor was it uncommon for an official to use his nickname for official signatures and to be so recognized officially. The last commandant at Vincennes was known officially only as "Ste Marie," but his real name was Jean Baptiste Racine. Our St. Ange's did not belong to the king-made nobility of the old world, but they were worthy pioneers in the nobility of America-God-made noblemen of high purposes, who served their generations well; and, incidentally, we may note with satisfaction that "the beautiful bank," which "Bellerive" signifies, was not a financial institution.

But to resume, British rule was not the most serious affliction of the clergy of the tipper country. Following the suppression of the Jesuits in France, on June 9, 1763, the Superior Council of Louisiana issued a decree suppressing the Jesuits in the Province, forbidding their performance of religious functions, ordering all their property except the personal clothing and books 4 the priests to be seized and sold at auction, and the priests themselves to be expelled from the country. Fathers Watrin, Aubert and Meurin were turned out of their homes and sent down the river and Father Devernai was brought over from Vincennes and sent with them. The provisions and other property of the missions were seized and sold. (Jesuit Relations, Vol. 70, p. 281.) It must be confessed that this was a highhanded proceeding, at least as to the country north of the Ohio, which had been ceded to Great Britain by the Treaty of Paris on Feb. 10, 1763; but King Pontiac was preventing the British from taking possession; and the Jesuit priests were bundled on to the "Minerve" and shipped to France on Feb. 6, 1.764, excepting Father de la Morinie, who was allowed to remain until spring, and Father Meurin. The latter insisted on returning to the Illinois country, which had been left almost destitute of clergymen, and was finally permitted to do so on signing an obligation to recognize no superior but the Superior of the Capuchins at New Orleans, and to hold no communication with Quebec or Rome.

It was indeed a deserted land to which Father Meurin returned, for not the Jesuits alone were gone. In 1698, when the missionary fever was on, the Seminary of Quebec, which was an outgrowth of the Seminary of Foreign Missions at Paris, had been given a grant of land at Cahokia, to found a residence for their mission to the Tamaroas at that point. This had been reconfirmed in 1717. In 1763 this post was held by the Rev. Francois Forget Duverger, a priest of the Foreign Missions. When be saw the country ceded to the English, and the Jesuits expelled, be sold all the property of the Seminary at Cahokia-house, land, mill, implements and slaves-notwithstanding the protests of his parishioners, and went down the river with the exiled Jesuits. The only priests then left in the upper country were two Franciscans at Ft. Chartres-Father Hippolyte and Father Luke Collet-and of these the former withdrew in 1764, and the latter died on Sept. 10, 1765--a month before the formal surrender of the fort to Capt. Stirling by Capt. Louis St. Ange.

Without means, and without expectation beyond the promise of the Louisiana authorities to solicit from the court an allowance of about $120 a year for his support, Father Meurin made his way up the Mississippi and went to work. The task was too great for one man, and with poignant grief he saw both French and Indian converts slipping away from the restraints of the church. He appealed for aid to New Orleans, to Quebec, to Paris, and to Philadelphia, but for some time with little success. On Jan, 21, 1776, Rev. Olivier Briand was confirmed Bishop of Quebec-the office having been vacant since the death of Bishop Pontbriand on June 8, 1760. The new bishop entered actively on the work of rehabilitating his demoralized see, but he did not get to take up his western domain for some months. In 1767 Father Meurin wrote to him: "This Illinois country consists of only six villages, each of about fifty to sixty homes, not including a considerable number of slaves. These villages, on account of their distance and situation, would each require a priest, especially in the English part-the parish of the Immaculate Conception at the Kaskaskias, that of St. Joseph at Prairie du Rocher (which is only a succursal of St. Anne at Fort Chartres, now abandoned by the inhabitants), and the parish of the Holy Family of the Kaokias or Tamaroas, and the Indians, It is twenty-five leagues from the first village to the last. On the French or Spanish side beyond the river are situated the village of Ste Genevieve, title of St. Joachim, on which depend la Saline and the mines, and thirty leagues higher up the new village of St. Louis which is made up of the remnants of St. Philip and Fort Chartres. These two villages are as large as the former in inhabitants or in red and black slaves. St. Joachim or St. Genevieve is my residence, as it was stipulated in the conditions for my return to this country. From it I come every spring and visit the other villages for Easter-tide. I return again in the autumn and whenever I am summoned on sick calls. This is all my infirmities and my means enable me to do, and this displeases and prejudices the people at St. Genevieve, who alone maintain and support me, and they complain of it. In this state the people, and especially the children and slaves, lack sufficient instruction, and, deprived of a pastor's vigilance, they are insensibly losing piety, and giving themselves up to vice.

"There are still many families here in which religion prevails, and who justly fear it will die out with them. They join me in beseeching you to take compassion on their children, and to send them at least two or three priests, if your Lordship cannot send four or five, who would be necessary, one of them with the title of Vicar General of your Lordship.

"I endeavor to keep up the use of the public offices and prayers in my absence, to aid them to sanctify Sundays and holy days. There are many already who no longer come to church, or come only to show disrespect. Some, indocile or insolent, say openly enough that I have no authority, that I am not their pastor, that I have no right to give them advice, and that they are not obliged to listen to me. They would not have dared to speak so while Messrs. Stirling and Farmer were commandants. Under the rule of these two, no one dared commit the least disrespect.

"For the last year St. Anne's Church has been without roof or doors, etc.

"The post of Vincennes on the Wabash among the Miami-Pinghichias, is as large as our best villages here, and needs a missionary even more. Disorders have always prevailed there; but have increased in the last three years. Some come here to be married or to perform their Easter duty. The majority cannot or will not. The guardian of the church publishes the banns for three Sundays. He gives certificates to those who are willing to come here, whom I publish myself before marrying them. Those who are unwilling to come here, declare their mutual consent aloud in the church. Can such a marriage be allowed?" (Life and Times of Archbishop Carroll, pp. 115-117.)

The keeper of the church here referred to was Etienne Phillibert, the village notary, who kept the church record in the absence of a priest, and gave private baptism to infants. He was commonly known by his nickname, "Orleans." He died April 25, 1786.

In the second letter to Bishop Briand, on May 9, 1767, Father Meurin wrote: "I am only sixty-one years old; but I am exhausted, broken down by twenty-five years mission work in this country, and of these nearly twenty years of malady and disease show me the gates of death…. I am incapable of long application or of bodily fatigue. I cannot therefore supply the spiritual necessities of this country, where the stoutest man could not long suffice, especially as the country is intersected by a very rapid and dangerous river, It would need four priests. If you can give only one, he should be appointed for Kaokia."

In June Bishop Briand sent a message of cheer in reply, appointing Father Meurin his Vicar-General for all the Illinois country. On Aug. 7, he sent another, promising two priests in the spring, and with this inclosed Father Meurin's commission as Vicar-General, and a pastoral letter addressed to "the inhabitants of Kaskaskia" but directed to be read in all the churches, exhorting the people to return to their duty and to give obedience to Vicar-General Meurin. This appointment came to the ears of Rocheblave, then commandant at New Orleans, who forbade Meurin to exercise any functions west of the Mississippi, and also issued a decree proscribing him, and ordering his arrest for recognizing a foreign authority in Spanish territory.

To the aid of this lone Jesuit, who was upholding the cross in the Upper Mississippi Valley, Father Pierre Gibault was sent in the spring of 1768. He was of an old Canadian family, his great grandfather, "Gabriel Gibaut, dit Poitevin," a native of Poitiers, France, having been married at Quebec, Oct. 30, 1667. His father and his grandfather, both of whom bore the same name of Pierre Gibaut (The Abbe Tanguay uses this spelling of the family name, and treats Gibault, Gibeau, etc., as variations), were natives of Canada. His mother's maiden name was Marie.Joseph St. Jean. His parents were married Nov. 14, 1735, at Sorel, and he, the eldest son, was christened on April 7, 1737, at Montreal. After his primary schooling, and some travel in the western wilds, he was educated in theology at the Seminary of Quebec, and, by an odd coincidence, the expense of his education was paid out of a remnant of the Cahokia Mission property, which had been invested as a "rente" or mortgage annuity of 333 livres a year, on the Hotel de Ville. He was ordained at Quebec on the feast of St. Joseph, March 19, 1768. He celebrated his first mass on the following day, in the Ursuline Church, and served for a short time in the Cathedral at Quebec, after which he set out for the Illinois country. His journey was delayed by adverse weather but he reached Michilimackinac in July, and put in a week there, confessing the voyageurs and converted Indians, baptizing the children, and blessing one marriage.

It was intended that he should locate at Cahokia, but on reaching the place a change of plans was made. Kaskaskia was the principal settlement, and the people there wanted the young priest., while the people of Cahokia wanted the veteran, so Father Meurin located there, taking charge also of Prairie du Rocher, and Father Gibault took up his residence at Kaskaskia, his first recorded service there being a baptism on Sept. 8, 1768.

Soon after arriving at Kaskaskia, Father Gibault was attacked by the ague. which was always prevalent there, and had a long and enervating struggle with it; but he kept on incessantly with his pastoral work. By his efforts he not only succeeded in getting the people to attend to their church duties but also to pay their tithes, which, according to the Canadian usage, were one-twenty-sixth of the produce, instead of one-tenth, but yet gave good support to the clergy in the times of the Virgin fertility of the soil. He also attended to the spiritual wants of the Missouri settlements, from which Father Meurin was debarred, and in 1769 blessed the-little chapel which the settlers had erected at St. Louis. In the same year, evidently at the desire of Father Meurin, Bishop Briand made him Vicar-General for this region. It was not until the winter of 1769-70 that be reached Vincennes, and then through peril; for hostile Indians beset the settlements, and twenty-two of the people had fallen victims to them since he reached the country. 'Shea says that "the frontier priest always, in these days of peril, carried a gun and two pistols," so that Maurice Thompson's description of the armament of "Father Beret," in "Alice of Old Vincennes," has historical basis. Father Gibault reached the little post in safety, and in a letter to Bishop Briand, after deploring the vices and disorder that prevailed there, he says:

"However, on my arrival, all crowded down to the banks of the 'River Wabash to receive me, some fell on their knees, unable to speak; others could speak only in sobs; some cried out: 'Father, save us, we are almost in hell;' others said: 'God has not then yet abandoned us, -for He has sent you to us to make us do penance for our sins…. Oh sir, why did you not come sooner, my poor wife, my dear father, my dear mother, my poor child, would not have died without the sacraments." (Life and Times of Archbishop Carroll, p. 128.)

For two months, Father Gibault remained at Vincennes, and not only revived the faith of the Catholics, but also brought into the fold a Presbyterian family which had settled there. The parishioners gave earnest of their zeal by erecting a new chureb-a wooden structure that was occupied for some fifteen years, (The somewhat more substantial church which followed this one was also erected through the efforts of Father Gibault. (Life and Times of Archbishop Carroll, p. 470.) and when he set out for Kaskaskia a guard of twenty men accompanied him across the Illinois prairies.

On his return be found the Spanish in possession of the region west of the Mississippi, but with no priests. He ministered to them until 1772, when Father Dagobert, Superior of the Capuchins at New Orleans sent Father Valentine as parish priest to St. Louis and, in the next year, Father Hilary to Ste. Genevieve. This left Father Gibault free to devote his time to the country east of the river, but that occupied him fully, for Father Meurin, was old and feeble, and in 1774 a crushing message came to him from New Orleans in the news that Pope Clement XIV had suppressed the Society of Jesus. In the whole Valley of the Mississippi Father Meurin, who bad labored so faithfully there, was the only priest affected by the Brief of Suppression; and he, who had kept on with his work for more than a decade without local or provincial superior, Dow threw himself on the mercy of Bishop Briand. and wrote to him: "Free, I would beseech and beg your charitable goodness to be a father to me, and admit absolutely among the number of your clergy, instead of an auxiliary as I have been since February 1, 1742. I should deem myself happy, if, in the little of life left me, I could repair the cowardice and negligence of which I have been guilty in the space of thirty-three years. If you will adopt me, I am sure you will pardon me and ask mercy for me."' (Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 129.)

In 1775 Father Gibault visited Canada, and on his return reached Michilimackinac in September. After waiting a month without finding opportunity to reach the Illinois. he returned for the winter to Detroit, making the journey in a canoe, with great peril and suffering. He wrote from Detroit, on Dee. 4, to Bishop Briand: The suffering I have undergone between Michilimackinac and this place has so' deadened my faculties that I only half feel my chagrin at being unable to proceed to the Illinois. I shall do my best not to be useless at Detroit, and to relieve the two venerable old priests who attend it. (Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 130.) He had visited Vincennes in March 1775, and did not reach that point again until the summer of 1777. Phillibert officiating in lay capacity in the meantime.

The Revolutionary War was now under way, and the harassing of the frontiers by Indian allies of the British--led to the memorable expedition of George Rogers Clark. Imagination could hardly picture anything more desperate than this undertaking. With a force of less than 200 men (English. Conquest of the Northwest. Vol. 1, p. 154.) kind a military chest supplied only with 8,000 pounds sterling of almost worthless Virginia scrip, he marched into the Northwest. It was evident that he could succeed only through the friendship and cooperation of the French settlers. and Clark realized it. And of all of these, Dow that their old military leaders were gone, no man's influence was so important as that of Father Gibault, who for ten years bad ministered to the spiritual wants of the people, had advised them in their business and other affairs, had baptized their children, had given consolation to their sick. had buried their dead. The astute American leader understood this, and was well pleased when after the capture of Kaskaskia, the priest came with half-a-dozen elderly citizens to ask the privilege of assembling the people in the church that they might prepare for their separation. He extended a little hope. and was not surprised when, after spending some time at the church, the delegation returned, with Father Gibault at its head. Says Clark. in his memoir: "They remained a considerable time in the church. after which the priest and many of the principal men came to me to return thanks for the indulgence shown them. and begged permission to address me further on the subject that was more dear to them than anything else; that their present situation was the fate of war; that the loss of their property they could reconcile; but were in hopes that I would not part them from their families: and that the women and children might be allowed to keep some of their clothes and a small quantity of provisions." This was the point of depression at which Clark was prepared to act. He says: "I asked them very abruptly whether or not they thought they were speaking to savages-, that I was certain they did from the tenor of their conversation. Did they suppose that we meant to strip the women and children, or take the bread out of their mouths or that we would condescend to make war on the women or children or 'the church? It was to prevent the effusion of innocent blood by the Indians, through the instigation of their commanders' emissaries, that caused us to visit them, and not the prospect of plunder; that as soon as that object was attained we should be perfectly satisfied; that as the King of France joined the Americans, there was a probability of there shortly being an end of the war (this information very apparently affected them.) They were at liberty to take which side they pleased, without any dread of losing their property or having their families destroyed. As for their church, all religions would be tolerated in America, and so far from our intermeddling with it, that any insult offered to it should be punished; and to convince them that we were not savages and plunderers, as they had conceived, that they might return to their families and inform them that they might conduct themselves as usual, with all freedom and without apprehensions of any danger.".

This declaration relieved all fear, and the town was soon in a noisy demonstration of joy and gratitude, And the effect was lasting, for the French volunteered to go to Cahokia and induce their friends there to join the American cause, and in a few days the Illinois settlements were peopled with men who had taken the oath of allegiance to the American colonies.

In his broad promise of religious toleration Clark was perhaps wiser than even he realized, for the church had suffered under British rule. Of course, the French authorities of Louisiana were responsible for the expulsion of the Jesuits, but it had occurred after the country had been subject to Great Britain. Moreover, church property, and especially that of the Seminary at Cahokia, which had been unlawfully disposed of, had not been restored. The English commandants were repeatedly asked to restore the Cahokia mission property, but refused to do so, and Gibault was never able to carry out his instructions from the Bishop of Quebec in regard to it. Moreover, Clark states in his letter to Mason that Gibault, in his recent visit to Canada had become somewhat acquainted with the issues between Great Britain and the colonies, and "was rather prejudiced in favor of us." He further states that when the declaration of religious freedom was made to Gibault, it "seemed to complete his happiness." Certainly Gibault was heart and soul with the Americans from that time, forward. He promoted the movement for bringing all the French of the Illinois settlements into allegiance; be volunteered to go to Post Vincennes and win over the people there; in company with Dr. Lefont he made this journey, administered the oath of allegiance to the French settlers, secured possession of the fort, and urged the Indians to take sides with the Americans as the French were doing. After Hamilton had recaptured Vincennes, when Clark started on his desperate winter march to retake it, Gibault made a patriotic address to the troops, and gave his blessing to them and their enterprise. Perhaps even more important were his services in a financial way for he publicly sold his own property to the Americans, accepting for it Virginia scrip at face value, and by his example be induced the French settlers and merchants to do the same. Judge Law did not at all overestimate Gibault's services when be said, "To him, next to Clark and Vigo, the United States are more indebted for the accession of the states comprised in what was the original northwestern territory than to any other man." (History of Vincennes, p. 55.)

There is perhaps a better measure of Father Gibault's sacrifices for the American cause in the testimony of his enemies than in that of his friends, for the British recognized the damage he had done to them even more keenly than the Americans recognized the service to their cause. Immediately after hearing of Clark's capture of Kaskaskia, Hamilton sent a dispatch with the information, in which he said: "The rebels have sent a detachment with an officer to Cahokia to receive the submission of the inhabitants, and the person who brought the account has no doubt but those of St. Vincennes are by this time summoned, as a French priest named Gibault had his horse ready saddled to proceed there, from Cahokia. with design to act as agent for the rebels. This Ecclesiastic is a fellow of infamous morals, and I believe very capable of acting such a part." (Griffin's Am. Cath. Hist. Researches, Vol. 8, No. 4, (Oct. 1891) p. 186.) In the year after Gen. Hamilton had retaken Vincennes, a half-dozen of the French militia, having deserted him, he wrote: "One of the deserters was a brother to Gibault, the priest, who had been an active agent for the rebels and whose vicious and immoral conduct was sufficient to do infinite mischief in a country where ignorance and bigotry give full scope to the depravity of a licentious ecclesiastic. This wretch it was who, -absolved the French inhabitants from their allegiance to the King of Great Britain. To enumerate the vices of the inhabitants would be to give a long catalogue, but to assert that they are not in possession of a single virtue is no more than truth and justice require; still the most eminently vicious and scandalous was the Reverend Monsieur Gibault." (English, Conquest of the Northwest, Vol. 1, p. 242 .)

These bursts of wrath from the "hair-buying general" would be almost amusing were it not that the slander here uttered was persistently repeated, and worked most serious injury to the victim. In 1779 Lt. Gov. St. Clair reported: "General Carlton and the Bishop sent up one Gibou, a priest, on a mission for reasons best known to themselves, the part which be at present takes in the rebel interest and may hereafter improve upon, requires in my humble opinion a mandate from Mon Seigneur for his appearance at Quebec. His conduct will certainly justify me to the General in making this representation, and I do it to avoid any future severity which may, by means of Indians, be necessary to direct against an individual of the sacred and respectable clergy. He removes to the Spanish and this side of the Mississippi occasionally, and may be addressed at the Cascaskies." (Letter of Lt. Gov. St. Clair to Capt. Brehm, dated Oct. 15, 1779. Haldimand papers- quoted in Am. Cath. Hist. Researches, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Jan. 1888) p. 52.) In 1780, perhaps in pursuance of this suggestion, the Bishop of Quebec ordered him to present himself and answer certain accusations that had been made against him. (Records of the American Catholic Historical Soc., Vol. 12, p. 488. Miss Peyton's prize essay.) The exact character of the accusation is not known, and it appears that the order was not pressed, for Gibault did not go to Quebec, though he made defense by letter in 1786 to the charges accumulated to date. In his letter of June 6, of that year, he gave the old and simple answer, "The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me"-putting it in these words:

"To all the pains and hardships I have undergone in my different journeys to most distant points, winter and summer, attending so many villages in Illinois distant from each other, in all weathers, night and day, snow or rain, wind, storm or fog on the Mississippi, so that I never slept four nights in a year in my own bed, never hesitating to start at a moment's notice. whether sick or well, how can a priest who sacrifices himself in this way, with no other view than God's glory, and the salvation of his neighbor, with no pecuniary reward, almost always ill-fed, unable to attend to both spiritual and temporal needs; bow, I say, can you know such a priest zealous to fulfill the duties of his holy ministry, careful to watch over his flock. instruct them in the most important tenets of religion, instruct the young unceasingly and untiringly not only in Christian doctrine but teaching the boys to read and write, as one who gives scandal, and i's addicted to intoxication?". (Life and Times of Archbishop Carroll, p. 470.)

All the evidence existing confirms this statement, and indicates that these charges were utterly unfounded. His own letters bear testimony. In this same year he writes to Bishop Briand from Vincennes: "I should be well enough pleased with the people, were it not for the wretched liquor trade which I cannot eradicate, and which compels me to refuse the sacraments to several, for the Indians commit horrible disorders when in liquor." (Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 470.) These were indeed strange sentiments for a man "addicted to intoxications-a man who carried his temperance reform work to the extent of refusing the sacraments of the church to a liquor dealer who refused to submit to regulation.

But Father Gibault's good character has other witnesses. Father Meurin, himself a post-graduate in the hardships of missionary life, bad always the warmest commendation for his assistant. He wrote: "M. Gibault is full of zeal. and for this reason he cannot last long, unless it pleases our God to renew ancient miracles; be has often to go on perilous journeys, across woods and mountains, exposed to weather, rivers and torrents. M. Gibault, since his arrival in this country, has always been sick of fevers-first great and dangerous, then slight and slow against which his courage has always sustained him so that be could perform his duties in the parish of the Immaculate Conception at Kaskaskia." (Records of Am. Cath. Hist. Soc., Vol. 12, p. 472,) That his superiors held him in esteem is conclusively shown by his retention as Vicar-General by the Bishop of Quebec so long as this region was in his jurisdiction. It is unquestionable that his people had high regard for him, and it is notable that in one of the few printed documents of the Illinois country of this period-a pamphlet printed about 1772, urging better government, the establishment of schools, etc.-is found the testimonial. "We have had a long experience of the exemplary piety and virtue of our worthy Fathers Meurin and Gibault." (Quoted in Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 132.) In the face of this evidence no one can credit such charges with so evident a source of malevolence in plain view. Nevertheless the reiterated slander bad some effect, and it was added to by a peculiar complication. After the treaty with Great Britain at the close of the Revolutionary war, the authorities at Rome made the church in the United States independent of the diocese of London; and in 1784 John Carroll of Baltimore, was made Prefect Apostolic for the United States, and, in 1790, Bishop of a diocese including them. He naturally assumed that the Illinois country was in his jurisdiction, and appointed Rev. Huet de la Valiniere his Vicar-General for the region. But Detroit and the country about the lakes was still held by the British, and the Bishop of Quebec still exercised control there. Neither Bishop Briand nor his successor, Bishop Hubert relieved Father Gibault of his responsibility as Vicar-General, and as he declined to give way without orders from his superior, a double spiritual rule ensued and continued until 1791, when Father Gibault withdrew from Cahokia, where he had been officiating, and retired to the Spanish territory west of the Mississippi. It is quite probable that this withdrawal was partly due to Father Gibault's treatment by the United States authorities.

In the spring of 1790, Congress having ordered donations of lands to those who had served in the militia, Father Gibault asked for a small return for his services. His letter addressed to Gov. St. Clair is well known, and there is a simple pathos in its recitation of his sacrifice of 7,800 livres in goods and money to aid Clark, not a cent of which had been repaid, of the straits to which he had been reduced on this account, of his hope that justice would be done, and of his continued service to the United States. He says, "The love of his country and of liberty has also led your memorialist to reject all of the advantages offered him by the Spanish government; and he endeavored by every means in his power, by exertions and exhortations, and by letters to the principal inhabitants, to retain every, person in the dominion of the United States in expectation of better times and giving them to understand that our lives and property, having been employed twelve years in the aggrandizement and preservation of the United States, would at last receive acknowledgment, and be compensated by the enlightened and upright ministers, who sooner or later would come to examine into and relieve our situation." He asked for the Old Cahokia mission property, about five acres, the title to which had been unsettled for so long that nobody seemed to have any claim to it. (Am. State Papers, Pub. Lands, Vol. 1, p. 21.) But, unfortunately for his hopes, St. Clair had no authority to make such a grant, and reported the request to Washington, saying, "I believe no injury would be done to anyone by his request being granted, but it was not for me to give away the lands of the United States." (Am. State Papers, Pub. Lands, Vol. 1, p. 14.)

Shea states that this request was granted, but that Bishop Carroll entered a protest against the proposal to convey church property to an individual, and "apparently in consequence the Rev. Mr. Gibault left the Diocese of Baltimore and retired to the Spanish territory beyond the Mississippi." (Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 472.) I find no basis for this statement. It is hardly possible that Bishop Carroll could have interposed while the matter was in Governor St. Clair's hands, and if he had St. Clair would probably have mentioned it. No one else had any authority to make the donation except Congress, and there is nothing to indicate any movement in that direction by Congress. It was a case of seeking relief from a wrong source, a mistake natural enough to one accustomed to the plenary power of the French' commandants, who made all the land grants in the olden time. There is mention made in a list of allotments to "heads of families" which had never been confirmed, but which "ought to be confirmed," of one to Pierre Gibault, but the owner of the claim at the time was John Rice Jones, to whom the original allottee had evidently been obliged by his necessities, to sell his claim, and if the claim was ever confirmed, it, of course, was to Jones.2

It has also been commonly stated by historians that Father Gibault received a "concession" of a small tract of land in Vincennes from Secretary Winthrop Sargent, the impression being given that this was a donation from the government. This is entirely erroneous. Sargent, as well as St. Clair, acted under the congressional resolution of August 29, 1788, which, among other things, provided for "confirming in their possessions and titles, the French and Canadian inhabitants and other settlers at Post St. Vincents who, on. or before the year 1783 had settled there, and had professed themselves citizens of the United States, or any of them and for laying off to them, at their own expense, the several tracts which they rightfully claim, and which may have been allotted to them according to the laws and usages of the government under which they have respectively settled." (Jounals of Congress, Vol. 4, p. 858.)

This was a legal obligation on the United States, expressly imposed by the deed of cession from Virginia, which stipulated that the private property rights of the French settlers should be protected. Sargent included this lot of Gibault's in his list of the "ancient rights" that were to be surveyed "at the expense of the proper claimants;" and the only "concession" he made was the concession that Father Gibault had shown by legal evidence that he was the owner of, and entitled to possession of it.

But even this confirmation of ancient titles, which was intended as an act of justice, was in reality a serious hardship to the French settlers, and Gibault and eighty-seven others united in a protest to the government against it. In this document they maintained that the order was neither necessary nor judicious, saying: "It does not appear necessary, because, from the establishment of the colony to this day, they have enjoyed their property and possessions without disputes or lawsuits on the subject of their limits; that the surveys of them were made at the time the concessions were obtained from their ancient kings, lords and commandants; and that each of them knew what belonged to him, without attempting an encroachment on his neighbor, or fearing that his neighbor would encroach on him. It does not appear adapted to pacify them, because, instead of assuring to them the peaceable possession of their ancient inheritance, as they have enjoyed it till now, that clause obliges them to bear expenses -which, in their present situation, they are absolutely incapable of paying, and for the failure of which they must be deprived of their lands.

"Your excellency is an eye-witness of the poverty to which the inhabitants are reduced, and of the total want of provisions to subsist on. Not knowing where to find a morsel of bread to nourish their families, by what means can they support the expense of a survey which has not been sought for oil their parts, and for which it is conceived by them there is no necessity? Loaded with misery, and groaning under the weight of misfortunes, accumulated since the Virginia troops entered their country, the unhappy inhabitants throw themselves under the protection of your excellency, and take the liberty to solicit you to lay their deplorable situation before Congress; and, as it may be interesting for the United States to know exactly the extent and limits of their ancient possessions, in order to ascertain the lands which are yet at the disposal of Congress, it appears to them, in their humble opinion, that the expense of survey ought more properly to be borne by Congress, for whom alone it is useful, than by them who do not. feel the necessity of it." (Am. State Papers, Public Lands, Vol. 1, p. 16.)

This may seem a dark picture, but it is not overdrawn. Even nature seemed to have turned against these people, and floods, frosts and droughts ruined their crops. There was actual famine. People lost -their lives by eating poisonous roots to satisfy their hunger. Gov. St. Clair and Major Hamtramck not only testified to the facts, but furnished corn from the government supplies to the starving people. (Dunn's Indiana, pp. 268-9.) In truth, our French friends fared 'hardly under American rule, and none so badly as Father Gibault, who did not get any return in land as a militiaman or the head of a family, and lost his ecclesiastical support on account of the chancre of jurisdiction. He never received a particle of compensation from Virgiana or the United States for his services, and he never received one cent of repayment for money and goods actually furnished to our troops. The situation seems almost incredible, but it was a horrible -reality. The French claimants had neither the knowledge nor the pecuniary ability to press their claims, and there was no one to do it for them. In truth, the situation of the French settlers justifies this conclusion of President Roosevelt:

"The conquest of the Illinois Territory was fraught with the deepest and most far-reaching benefits to all the American people; it likewise benefited, in at least an equal degree, the boldest and most energetic among the French inhabitants, those who could hold their own among freemen, who could swim in troubled waters; but it may well be doubted whether to the mass of the ignorant and simple creoles it was not a curse rather than a blessing." (Winning of the West, Vol. 2, p. 185.)

To Sargent's credit be it said that on July 31, 1790. be wrote to the President: "I must take the liberty of representing to Congress, by desire of the citizens of this country, and as a matter which I humbly conceive they should be informed of, that there are, not only at this place (Vincennes) but in the several villages upon the Mississippi considerable claims for supplies furnished troops of Virginia, before and since 1783, which no person yet has been authorized to attend to and which is very injurious to the interest and feelings of men who seem to have been exposed to a variety of distresses and imposition by characters pretending to have acted under the orders of that government."

This was sent to Congress, but nothing was done. It is not surprising that after years of weary waiting Father Gibault at length abandoned the country of his choice and went to the Spanish settlements beyond the Mississippi, where he might at least hope to avoid starvation. Of his life after that time the fullest information collected is by the Rev. J. Sasseville, cure of the Parish of Ste. Foye, near Quebec, who says: "In 1790, M. Gibault still resided at the parish of Cahokia, as the date in his memoir indicates. The registers of this parish still bear his signature the following year, when he disappeared without ever returning. In the archives of the Archbishop of St Louis. we find that -11. Gibault gave a mission among the Arkansas in 1792 and 1793, and that this same year be was nominated pastor of New Madrid in the southern part of the State of Missouri. This is the last trace we have of him. My final researches have been unsuccessful. It is certain that be died at New Madrid in the end of the last century or at the beginning of the present." (Lambing's Catholic Historical Researches, Vol. 2, p. 118.) Shea says that he died a New Madrid in 1804. (Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 596.) Unfortunately the old parish records of New Madrid were destroyed by fire during the Civil War, and it may now be impossible to ascertain the date with certainty. The probability is, as stated by Edmond Mallet that he passed his last days "in unmerited poverty and obscurity among his compatriots of the Mississippi Valley, and that his ashes repose in the land which he illumined by his charity and patriotism The Republic may yet repair its neglect of this great patriot, and the Great West may yet erect a monument to his memory. Be that as it may, his name must ever be cherished by American Catholics as one of the foremost of those glorious heroes of the faith who merited well of their country during the struggle for American Independence.' ("Very Rev. Pierre Gibault, the Patriot Priest of the West," in Washington Catholic, September 30, 1882. By an evidently erroneous citation of this article, Air. Shea does a great injustice to its author by charging him with holding Father Gibault responsible for executions for witchcraft in the Illinois country. Life of Archbishop Carroll, p. 190. There is absolutely no reference to the subject in the article. I have never found the charge anywhere except in Roosevelt's Winning of the West, Vol. 2, p. 175. It is there based on an inferential argument that is very far from being conclusive.)

It is cause for congratulation that the Illinois State Historical Society has taken up the task of seeing that a suitable memorial is given to this American patriot, for one may well question whether we of this generation have room to criticise our predecessors, his contemporaries, for their neglect. True they neglected him in his life, but we have neglected him in the tomb. They were more closely acquainted with his great and unquestionable services, but they who knew this region as the wilderness of more than a century ago bad no conception of the magnitude of those services as have we, who know to-day the empire he contributed so largely to give us. We realize, as they did not, that his service to our country was not only in the aid given to Clark. but also in the long life of arduous labor for the welfare of the people and the reclamation of the fertile land we enjoy, and yet we have let the record of those labors lie in our midst unpublished, almost inaccessible, and in danger of destruction by fire as occurred to the parish records of New Madrid and Pensacola-or from other cause. And we have done this to our own hurt, for we profess to be interested in the history of this region, and yet we have spent years puzzling over questions that would be readily answered if the ancient records of the parishes in which Father Gibault officiated were published. I have mentioned how we have stumbled and groped in the dark in the case of the St. Ange family, and how even now we lack information concerning them that lies within our reach. This is but one of many cases. Indiana historians blundered for years concerning William Clark, one of the first judges of the Territorial Court of Indiana. Some confused him with William Clark, a prominent land surveyor of the territory. Some confused him with William Clark, brother of George Rogers Clark, and subsequently of the celebrated Lewis and Clark expedition. At length Hon. W. H. English thought to have an investigation made of the parish records of Vincennes, and there was found the record of his death and burial, fully explaining the mystery. (Conquest of the Northwest, Vol. 2, p. 1015.)

Moreover, while the Eastern states are collecting and publishing all the information that can be obtained concerning their revolutionary soldiers, shall we neglect this mine of information concerning the revolutionary soldiers of this region who served under George Rogers Clark and whose services were recognized and rewarded by their American contemporaries? Do we not owe them something?

It may be thought that the work proposed is large. In reality it is small as compared with the similar work covering all the ancient parish records of Canada, every item of which is made available in the great Genealogical Dictionary of Canada by the Abbe Tanguay. Shall not this generation do its duty to that past generation and to Father Gibault by the publication of a Gibault Memorial Volume which shall include the ancient parish records of this region, and the correspondence from the clergy that lies unpublished in the archives of the Bishop of Quebec? Surely Illinois, Indiana and Missouri owe this much to the man who was Vicar General of this region for twenty years, and who did so much to bring it into the United States.

It may be said that this would be more a service to ourselves than a memorial to him. Not so. We can do him no direct service. In such a situation, confronted by unrequited merit, we may well remember the solemn words:

"Can storied urn or animated bust
Back to its mansion call the fleeting breath?
Can honor's voice provoke the silent dust?
Can flattery soothe the dull, cold ear of death?


The utmost we can do for Father Gibault is to hold him in grateful memory, and make the record of his service known to the world, that others may do likewise. But if he could speak,-if we could ask him what memorial he would prefer-can we doubt, knowing his life of self-sacrifice and labors for others, that he would answer, "Whatever would most benefit my fellow men." And he would answer rightly, for in that service man attains title to the highest tribute that can be paid to the dead: "He rests from his labors, and his works do follow him."


1 The Present Population of Prairie do Rocher, and many others, pronounce this name if it were Prairie du Roche. This is merely an instance of the inveterate French habit of abbreviation. which gave us "Okas" for Kaskaskia, "Okos" for Cahokia, and "Opee" for Peoria. The name could not have been Prairie du Roche originally, because Roche is a feminine noun. and therefore would have been Prairie de la Roche. The final syllable of Rocher was formerly sounded, for Clark, who usually spelled phonetically, wrote it "Paraderushi."

2 American State Papers, Public Lands, 11, 229.