speech to Lord Dunmore, which has become familiar wherever the English language is spoken : "I appeal to any white man to say if he ever entered Logan's cabin hungry, and he gave him not meat; if ever he came cold and naked, and he clothed him not. During the course of the last long and bloody war, Logan remained idle in his cabin, an advocate for peace. Such was my love for the whites, that my countrymen pointed, as they passed, and said, 'Logan is the friend of the white men.' I had even thought to have lived with you, but for the injuries of one man. Colonel Cresap, the last Spring, in cold blood and unprovoked, murdered all the relations of Logan, not even sparing my women and children. There runs not a drop of my blood in the veins of any living creature. This called on me for revenge. I have sought it; I have killed many; I have fully glutted my vengeance. For my country, I rejoice at the beams of peace; but do not harbour a thought that mine is the joy of fear. Logan never felt fear. He will not turn on his heel to save his life. Who is there to mourn for Logan? Not one." This speech has ever been regarded as one of the most eloquent passages in the English language. Mr. Jefferson remarked of it" I may challenge the whole orations of Demosthenes, "and of Cicero, and of any more eminent orator, if Europe "has furnished more eminent, to produce a single passage su"perior to it ;" and an American statesman and scholar,* scarcely less illustrious than the author of this noble eulogium, has subscribed to that opinion.† De Witt Clinton. †Thatcher's Ind. Biography. It is due in candour to state, that the authenticity of this celebrated speech has been questioned. On the first publication of Jefferson's Notes, the relatives and friends of Cresap made a great outcry against the charge of his having murdered Logan's family. Among other arguments in his defence, it was contended that the speech attributed to Logan had, in substance and almost in words, been delivered to the General Assembly of Virginia by a sachem named Lonan, twenty years before the date assigned to it by Mr. Jefferson. The speech referred to was discovered in the travels of Robin, a Frenchman, who visited the Colonies at an early period of the war of the Revolution. The passage stands thus in the English translation of "Robin's New Travels in America:”— "Speech of the savage Lonan, in a General Assembly, as it was sent to the Governor of Virginia, anno 1754: "Lonan will no longer oppose making the proposed peace with the white men. You are sensible he never knew what fear is-that he never turned his back in the Lord Dunmore, it is believed, was sincerely desirous of peace-from motives of humanity, we are ready to believe, although writers of less charity have attributed his course to a more unworthy feeling. Peace, therefore, was the result of the council. But it will readily be conceded that the Indian warriors could not have retired to their respective tribes and homes, with any feelings of particular friendship toward the white men. On the contrary, the pain of defeat, and the loss of the warriors who fell, were causes of irritating reflection, in addition to the original and grievous wrong they had suffered at the hands of Cresap and Greathouse. The Six Nations, as a confederacy, had not taken part in the war of the Virginia border; but many of their warriors were engaged in it, especially the Cayugas, to which nation Logan belonged, and the warriors of the Six Nations colonized on the banks of the Susquehanna and its tributary the Shamokin. These, it may be reasonably inferred, returned from the contest only to brood longer over their accumulated wrongs, and in a temper not over-inclined to cultivate the most amicable relations with the Colonies. In one word, the temper of the whole Indian race, with the exception of the Oneidas, was soured by these occurrences of the year 1774 ;—a day of battle. No one has more love for the white men than I have. The war we have had with them has been long and bloody on both sides. Rivers of blood have run on all parts, and yet no good has resulted therefrom to any. I once more repeat it-let us be at peace with these men. I will forget our injuries; the interest of my country demands it. I will forget--but difficult, indeed, is the task! Yes, I will forget that Major cruelly and inhumanly murdered, in their canoes, my wife, my children, my father, my mother, and all my kindred. This roused me to deeds of vengeance! I was cruel in despite of myself. I will die content if my country is once more at peace. But when Lonan shall be no more, who, alas! will drop a tear to the memory of Lonan?" If the date to this speech be the true one, there is an end to the claim of Logan. But the resemblance in many manuscripts, between the figures 4 and 7, is so close as to induce a belief, (Dr. Barton's Journal of 1808 to the contrary notwithstanding) that the error may have been made by the English translator. This opinion is strengthened by the similarity between the name given by Robin,-Lonan—and Logan. The difference consists in a single letter, and might well have been the error of the Frenchman, when writing the identical story of Logan. In the course of his investigations, Mr. Jefferson was furnished with a note, written by Logan, and sent to a white settlement, attached to a war-club, by the hand of an Indian runner. Heckewelder also says the speech was authenticated by Col. Gibson, and adds:"For my part I am convinced that it was delivered precisely as it was related to us, with this only difference, that it possessed a force and expression in the Indian language, which it is impossible to translate into our own." -- most unfortunate circumstance, since events were then following in rapid succession, which within a twelvemonth rendered the friendship of the nations not only desirable, but an object of vast importance. But before the direct narrative leading to those events is resumed, it may be well to end the melancholy tale of Logan, "which can be dismissed with no relief to its gloomy colours." After the peace of Chilicothe he sank into a state of deep mental depression, declaring that life was a torment to him. He became in some measure delirious;* went to Detroit, and there yielded himself to habits of intoxication. In the end he became a victim to the same ferocious cruelty which had already rendered him a desolate man. Not long after the treaty, a party of whites murdered him as he was returning from Detroit to his own country.f CHAPTER III. Unyielding course of the parent Government-Efforts of the Earl of Chatham unavailing Address to the Crown from New-York-Leslie's Expedition to SalemAffair of Lexington-Unwise movements of Tryon County loyalists-Reaction -Public meetings-The Sammons family-Interference of the JohnsonsQuarrel at Caughnawaga-Spirited indications at Cherry Valley-Counteracting efforts of the Johnsons among their retainers-Intrigues with the IndiansMassachusetts attempts the same-Correspondence with the Stockbridge Indians -Letter to Mr. Kirkland-His removal by Guy Johnson-Neutrality of the Oneidas-Intercepted despatch from Brant to the Oneidas-Apprehensions of Guy Johnson-Correspondence-Farther precautions of the Committees-Reverence for the Laws-Letter of Guy Johnson to the Committees of Albany and Schenectady-Substance of the reply. THE parent government did not relax its coercive measures, notwithstanding the efforts of the Earl of Chatham, now venerable for his years, who, after a long retirement, returned once more into public life, to interpose his eloquence and the influence of his great name in behalf of the Colonies. His lordship's address to the King for the removal of the troops from Boston, was rejected by a large majority. His conciliatory bill was also rejected. On the 26th of January, Messrs. Bolland, Franklin, and Lee, the Committee from the Colonies, charged with presenting the petition of the Continental Congress for a redress of grievances, brought the subject before the House of Commons, and after an angry debate they refused to receive it by a decisive vote. Meantime bills were passed, by large majorities, restraining all the thirteen Colonies, excepting only New-York, Delaware, and North Carolina, from the prosecution of any foreign commerce other than with Great Britain and her dependencies. The Eastern States were likewise exIcluded from the fisheries of Newfoundland. But notwithstanding that, from motives of policy, New-York had been thus excepted from the restraining law, its local legislature was at the same time engaged in preparing a memorial to the Crown for a redress of grievances—a fact which the ministers soon learned, and not without mortification. The New-York address was a strong denunciation of the measures of the Government toward the Colonies, and an energetic appeal for redress. "We feel," said they, "the most ardent desire to promote a cordial reconciliation with the parent state, which can be rendered permanent and solid only by ascertaining the line of Parliamentary authority and American freedom, on just, equitable, and constitutional grounds. *** From the year 1683 till the close of the late war, they had enjoyed a legislature consisting of three distinct branches, a Governor, Council, and general Assembly; under which political frame the representatives had uniformly exercised the right of their own civil government, and the administration of justice in the Colony. It is, therefore, with inexpressible grief that we have of late years seen measures adopted by the British Parliament, subversive of that constitution under which the good people of this Colony have always enjoyed the same rights and privileges, so highly and deservedly prized by their fellow-subjects of Great Britain." Adverting to the essential privilege of trial by a jury of the vicinage, they "view with horror the construction of the statute of the 35th of Henry the VIII. as held up by the joint address of both houses of Parliament in 1769, advising his Majesty to send for persons guilty of treasons and misprisions of treasons, in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, in order to be tried in England;" and they "are equally alarmed at the late acts, empowering his Majesty to send persons guilty of offences in one colony, to be tried in another or within the realm of England." They complain of the act of 7th of George the III. requiring the legislature of this Colony to make provision for the expense of the troops quartered among them; of the act suspending their legislative powers till they should have complied; and of the Quebec act; considering themselves as interested in whatever may affect their sister Colonies; they cannot help feeling for the distresses of their brethren in Massachusetts, from the operation of the several acts of Parliament passed relative to that province, and earnestly remonstrating in their behalf. "We claim," said they, "but a restoration of those rights which we enjoyed by general consent before the close of the last war; we desire no more than a continuation of that ancient government to which we are entitled by the principles of the British constitution, and by which alone can be secured to us the rights of Englishmen." The address was presented to the House of Commons by Mr. Burke, but was never called up.* * Holmes's Annals. |