"He was a man of great wit, humor and vivacity, fond of the company of gentlemen and delighted in good eating. When I knew him he had two wives living with him under the same roof in the greatest harmony. This distinguished chief died at Fort Wayne of a confirmed case of gout, brought on by high living, and was buried with military honors by the troops of the United States."
"He was a man of great wit, humor and vivacity, fond of the company of gentlemen and delighted in good eating. When I knew him he had two wives living with him under the same roof in the greatest harmony. This distinguished chief died at Fort Wayne of a confirmed case of gout, brought on by high living, and was buried with military honors by the troops of the United States."
He died July 14, 1812, and was buried on the west bank of the river at Fort Wayne. His portrait hangs on the walls of the War Department at Washington.
In 1809 Captain Wells took his niece, Rebekah, with him to Fort Wayne on a visit. Captain Heald was thenon duty at Fort Wayne, and it was doubtless there that the love-making took place which led to the marriage of the two young people in 1811.
The following interesting bits concerning Captain Wells are taken from a letter written by A. H. Edwards to Hon. John Wentworth (Fergus' Hist. Series No. 16), the remainder of which letter is given later in this volume. (SeeAppendix G.)
Captain Wells, after being captured by the Indians when a boy, remained with them until the treaty with the Miamis. Somewhere about the year 1795 he was a chief and an adopted brother of the celebrated chief Little Turtle. Captain Wells signed the marriage certificate, as officiating magistrate, of my father and mother at Fort Wayne, June, 1805. The certificate is now in my possession.
Captain Wells, after being captured by the Indians when a boy, remained with them until the treaty with the Miamis. Somewhere about the year 1795 he was a chief and an adopted brother of the celebrated chief Little Turtle. Captain Wells signed the marriage certificate, as officiating magistrate, of my father and mother at Fort Wayne, June, 1805. The certificate is now in my possession.
"Fort Wayne, 4th June.
"I do hereby certify that I joined Dr. Abraham Edwards and Ruthy Hunt in the holy bonds of matrimony, on the third instant, according to the law."Given under my Hand and Seal, the day and year above written.
"I do hereby certify that I joined Dr. Abraham Edwards and Ruthy Hunt in the holy bonds of matrimony, on the third instant, according to the law.
"Given under my Hand and Seal, the day and year above written.
"William Wells, Esq."
* * * Captain Wells urged Major Heald not to leave the fort, as he did not like the way the Indians acted, and was well acquainted with all their movements as learned from his Indian allies, who deserted him the moment the firing commenced. Captain N. Heald's story is as I heard it from the mouth of one who saw it all, the girl and her mother, the one living in our family for many years, and the mother in Detroit. Their name was Cooper.Captain Wells, soon after leaving the Indians, was appointed interpreter at the request of General Wayne, and was with him in his campaign against the Indians as captain of a company of spies, and many thrilling accounts were given me of his daring and remarkable adventures as such, related by one who received them from his own lips, and in confirmation of one of his adventures pointed at an Indian present, and said: "That Indian," says he, "belongs to me, and sticks to me like a brother," and then told how he captured him with his rifle on his shoulder. This Indian was the one who gave Mrs. Wells the first intimation of his death and then disappeared, supposed to have returned to his people.Captain William Wells was acting Indian Agent and Justice of the Peace at Port Wayne at the time he married my father and mother, and was considered a remarkably brave and resolute man. I will give you a sketch of one of his feats as told me by my mother, who was present and witnessed it all. The Indians were collected at Fort Wayne on the way for the purpose of meeting the Miamis and other Indians in council. While camped there they invited the officers of the fort to come out and witness a grand dance, and other performances, previous to their departure for the Indian conference. Wells advised the commander of the fort not to go, as he did not like the actions of the Indians; but his advice was overruled,and all hands went out, including the officers' ladies. But the troops in the fort were on the alert, their guns were loaded and sentries were doubled, as it was in the evening. A very large tent was provided for the purpose of the grand dance. After many preliminary dances and talks, a large and powerful chief arose and commenced his dance around the ring, and made many flourishes with his tomahawk. Then he came up to Wells, who stood next my mother, and spoke in Indian and made demonstrations with his tomahawk that looked dangerous, and then took his seat. But no sooner than he did so Wells gave one of the most unearthly war-whoops she ever heard, and sprang up into the air as high as her head, and picked up the jaw bone of a horse or ox that lay near by, and went around the ring in a more vigorous and artistic Indian style than had been seen that evening; and wound up by going up to the big Indian and flourishing his jaw-bone, and told him that he had killed more Indians than white men, and had killed one that looked just like him, and he believed it was his brother, only much better looking and a better brave than he was. The Indians were perfectly taken by surprise. Wells turned to the officers and told them to be going. He hurried them off to the fort, and had all hands on the alert during the night. When questioned as to his action and what he said, he replied that he had told the Indians what I have related. Then he enquired of those present if they did not see that the Indians standing on the opposite side of the tent had their rifles wrapped up in their blankets."If I had not done just as I had, and talked to that Indian as I did, we would all have been shot in five minutes; but my actions required a council, as their plans were, as they supposed, frustrated, and that the troops would be down on them at the first hostile move they made." He saw the game when he first went in, as his Indian training taught him, and he waited just for the demonstration that was made as the signal for action. Wells saw no time was to be lost, and made good his resolve, and the big Indian cowed under the demonstration of Wells. My mother said he looked as if he expected Wells to make an end of him for what he had said to Wells in his dance. "I had to meet bravado with bravado, and I think I beat," said Wells. You could see it in the countenances of all the Indians. The same advice given to Heald, if attended to, would have saved the massacre of Fort Dearborn. * * * *A. H. Edwards.
* * * Captain Wells urged Major Heald not to leave the fort, as he did not like the way the Indians acted, and was well acquainted with all their movements as learned from his Indian allies, who deserted him the moment the firing commenced. Captain N. Heald's story is as I heard it from the mouth of one who saw it all, the girl and her mother, the one living in our family for many years, and the mother in Detroit. Their name was Cooper.
Captain Wells, soon after leaving the Indians, was appointed interpreter at the request of General Wayne, and was with him in his campaign against the Indians as captain of a company of spies, and many thrilling accounts were given me of his daring and remarkable adventures as such, related by one who received them from his own lips, and in confirmation of one of his adventures pointed at an Indian present, and said: "That Indian," says he, "belongs to me, and sticks to me like a brother," and then told how he captured him with his rifle on his shoulder. This Indian was the one who gave Mrs. Wells the first intimation of his death and then disappeared, supposed to have returned to his people.
Captain William Wells was acting Indian Agent and Justice of the Peace at Port Wayne at the time he married my father and mother, and was considered a remarkably brave and resolute man. I will give you a sketch of one of his feats as told me by my mother, who was present and witnessed it all. The Indians were collected at Fort Wayne on the way for the purpose of meeting the Miamis and other Indians in council. While camped there they invited the officers of the fort to come out and witness a grand dance, and other performances, previous to their departure for the Indian conference. Wells advised the commander of the fort not to go, as he did not like the actions of the Indians; but his advice was overruled,and all hands went out, including the officers' ladies. But the troops in the fort were on the alert, their guns were loaded and sentries were doubled, as it was in the evening. A very large tent was provided for the purpose of the grand dance. After many preliminary dances and talks, a large and powerful chief arose and commenced his dance around the ring, and made many flourishes with his tomahawk. Then he came up to Wells, who stood next my mother, and spoke in Indian and made demonstrations with his tomahawk that looked dangerous, and then took his seat. But no sooner than he did so Wells gave one of the most unearthly war-whoops she ever heard, and sprang up into the air as high as her head, and picked up the jaw bone of a horse or ox that lay near by, and went around the ring in a more vigorous and artistic Indian style than had been seen that evening; and wound up by going up to the big Indian and flourishing his jaw-bone, and told him that he had killed more Indians than white men, and had killed one that looked just like him, and he believed it was his brother, only much better looking and a better brave than he was. The Indians were perfectly taken by surprise. Wells turned to the officers and told them to be going. He hurried them off to the fort, and had all hands on the alert during the night. When questioned as to his action and what he said, he replied that he had told the Indians what I have related. Then he enquired of those present if they did not see that the Indians standing on the opposite side of the tent had their rifles wrapped up in their blankets.
"If I had not done just as I had, and talked to that Indian as I did, we would all have been shot in five minutes; but my actions required a council, as their plans were, as they supposed, frustrated, and that the troops would be down on them at the first hostile move they made." He saw the game when he first went in, as his Indian training taught him, and he waited just for the demonstration that was made as the signal for action. Wells saw no time was to be lost, and made good his resolve, and the big Indian cowed under the demonstration of Wells. My mother said he looked as if he expected Wells to make an end of him for what he had said to Wells in his dance. "I had to meet bravado with bravado, and I think I beat," said Wells. You could see it in the countenances of all the Indians. The same advice given to Heald, if attended to, would have saved the massacre of Fort Dearborn. * * * *
A. H. Edwards.
James Madison Wolcott, grandson of Captain Wells (through Ah-mah-quah-zah-quah, who married Judge James Wolcott) wrote to Mr. Wentworth as follows:
We are proud of our Little Turtle [Indian] blood and of our Captain Wells blood. We try to keep up the customs of our ancestors, and dress occasionally in Indian costumes. We take no exception when people speak of our Indian parentage. We take pleasure in sending you the tomahawk which Captain William Wells had at the time of his death, and which was brought to his family by an Indian who was in the battle. We also have a dress-swordwhich was presented to him by General W. H. Harrison, and a great many books which he had; showing that even when he lived among the Indians, he was trying to improve himself. He did all he could to educate his children. Captain Wells, in the year of his death, sent to President Madison, at Little Turtle's request, the interpretation of the speech that that chief made to General W. H. Harrison, January 25, 1812.
We are proud of our Little Turtle [Indian] blood and of our Captain Wells blood. We try to keep up the customs of our ancestors, and dress occasionally in Indian costumes. We take no exception when people speak of our Indian parentage. We take pleasure in sending you the tomahawk which Captain William Wells had at the time of his death, and which was brought to his family by an Indian who was in the battle. We also have a dress-swordwhich was presented to him by General W. H. Harrison, and a great many books which he had; showing that even when he lived among the Indians, he was trying to improve himself. He did all he could to educate his children. Captain Wells, in the year of his death, sent to President Madison, at Little Turtle's request, the interpretation of the speech that that chief made to General W. H. Harrison, January 25, 1812.
Captain Heald never got rid of the effect of his wound. The bullet remained embedded in his hip and doubtless is in his coffin. He resigned shortly after the war, and the family (in 1817) settled at Stockland, Missouri. The new name of the place, O'Fallon, recalls the fact that the well known Colonel O'Fallon, of St. Louis, was an old friend of the family, and himself redeemed the things which the Indians had captured at the massacre (the same articles now cherished as relics of the historic event) and sent them to Colonel Samuel Wells at Louisville, where they arrived during the interval when all supposed that Nathan and Rebekah had perished with the members of the garrison and their fellow-sufferers.
Among the articles captured by the Indians and, after their transportation from Chicago to Peoria and from Peoria to Saint Louis, bought by Colonel O'Fallon and sent to the Falls of the Ohio (Louisville) to Samuel Wells, are the following, all of which were brought to Chicago by the Hon. Darius Heald, exhibited to his relatives (the family of Gen. A. L. Chetlain), and their friends, and here reproduced.
Captain Heald's sword.A shawl-pin he wore which, when recovered, had been bent to serve as a nose-ring.Part of his uniform coat, which seems to have been divided among his captors.Six silver table-spoons and one soup-ladle, each marked "N. R. H.," doubtless the wedding-present made by Colonel Samuel Wells to Nathan and Rebekah Heald.A hair brooch marked "S. W.," supposed to contain the hair of Samuel Wells.A finger-ring marked "R. W." (Probably one of the girlish treasures of Rebekah Wells.)A fine tortoise-shell comb, cut somewhat in the shape of an eagle's beak and having silver ornaments representing the bird's eye, nostril, etc.
Captain Heald's sword.
A shawl-pin he wore which, when recovered, had been bent to serve as a nose-ring.
Part of his uniform coat, which seems to have been divided among his captors.
Six silver table-spoons and one soup-ladle, each marked "N. R. H.," doubtless the wedding-present made by Colonel Samuel Wells to Nathan and Rebekah Heald.
A hair brooch marked "S. W.," supposed to contain the hair of Samuel Wells.
A finger-ring marked "R. W." (Probably one of the girlish treasures of Rebekah Wells.)
A fine tortoise-shell comb, cut somewhat in the shape of an eagle's beak and having silver ornaments representing the bird's eye, nostril, etc.
DARIUS HEALD, WITH SWORD AND OTHER MASSACRE RELICS.
DARIUS HEALD, WITH SWORD AND OTHER MASSACRE RELICS.
Mr. Wentworth further says:
In the biographical sketches of the members of the Corinthian Lodge of Masons, at Concord, Mass., I find the following:Nathan Heald, initiated in 1797, died at Stockland (now O'Fallon) in St. Charles County, Missouri, where he had resided some years, in 1832, aged 57 years. He was born in Ipswich, N. H., September 29, 1775, was the third sou of Colonel Thomas and Sybel (Adams) Heald and in early life joined the U. S. Army. Mrs. Maria (Heald) Edwards, of this city, born at Ipswich, N. H, in 1803, mother of Mrs. General Chetlain, was the eldest child of his brother, Hon. Thomas Heald, one of the Associate Judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama. (Fergus' Hist. Series No. 16.)
In the biographical sketches of the members of the Corinthian Lodge of Masons, at Concord, Mass., I find the following:
Nathan Heald, initiated in 1797, died at Stockland (now O'Fallon) in St. Charles County, Missouri, where he had resided some years, in 1832, aged 57 years. He was born in Ipswich, N. H., September 29, 1775, was the third sou of Colonel Thomas and Sybel (Adams) Heald and in early life joined the U. S. Army. Mrs. Maria (Heald) Edwards, of this city, born at Ipswich, N. H, in 1803, mother of Mrs. General Chetlain, was the eldest child of his brother, Hon. Thomas Heald, one of the Associate Judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama. (Fergus' Hist. Series No. 16.)
A considerable part of Captain Heald's first report of the massacre appears in our old friend Niles' Weekly Register, Nov. 7, 1812. (I have quoted it, to a great extent, in connection with the story of the event.)
Extract of a letter from Captain Heald, late commandant at Fort Chicago, dated at Pittsburg, October 23, 1812:On the 9th of August, I received orders from General Hull to evacuate the post and proceed with my command to Detroit, by land, leaving it at my discretion to dispose of the public property as I thought proper. The neighboring Indians got the information as soon as I did, and came in from all quarters to receive goods in the factory-store, which they understood were to be given to them. On the 13th, Captain Wells, of Fort Wayne, arrived with about thirty Miamis, for the purpose of escorting us in, by request of General Hull. On the 14th I delivered to the Indians all the goods of the factory-store, and a considerable quantity of provisions which we could not take with us. The surplus arms and ammunition I thought proper to destroy, fearing they would make bad use of it, if put in their possession. I also destroyed all liquor on hand soon after they began to collect.The collection was unusually large for that place, but they conducted with the strictest propriety until after I left the fort. On the 15th, at 9 A. M., we commenced our march. A part of the Miamis were detached in front, the remainder in our rear, as guards, under the direction of Captain Wells. The situation of the country rendered it necessary for us to take the beach, with the lake on our left and a high sand-bank on our right at about one hundred yards distance. We had proceeded about a mile and a half when it was discovered that the Indians were prepared to attack us from behind the bank. I immediately marched up, with the company, to the top of the bank, when the action commenced; after firing one round we charged, and the Indians gave way in front and joined those on our flanks. In about fifteen minutes they got possession of all our horses, provisions, and baggage of every description, and, finding the Miamis did not assist us, I drew off the men I had left and took possession of a small elevation in the open prairie, out of shot of the bank or any other cover. The Indians did not follow me but assembled in a body on the top of the bank, and after some private consultation among themselves, made signs for me to approach them. I advanced toward them alone and was met by one of the Pottowatomie chiefs called Black-bird, with an interpreter.After shaking hands, he requested me to surrender, promising to spare the lives of all the prisoners. On a few moments consideration I concluded it would be most prudent to comply with his request, although I did not put entire confidence in his promise. After delivering up our arms we were taken back to their encampment near the fort, and distributed among the different tribes.The next morning they set fire to the fort and left the place, taking the prisoners with them. Their number of warriors was between four and five hundred, mostly from the Pottowatomie nation, and their loss, from the best information I could get, was about fifteen. Our strength was about fifty-four regulars and twelve militia, out of which twenty-six regulars and all the militia were killed in the action, with two women and twelve children. Ensign George Ronan and Dr. Isaac Van Voorhis of my company, with Captain Wells of Fort Wayne, to my great sorrow, are numbered among the dead. Lieutenant Linai T. Helm, with twenty-five non-commissioned officers and privates and eleven women and children, were prisoners when we separated.Mrs. Heald and myself were taken to the mouth of the river St. Joseph, and, being both badly wounded, were permitted to reside with Mr. Burnett, an Indian trader. In a few days after our arrival there, the Indians went off to take Fort Wayne, and in their absence I engaged a Frenchman to take us to Michilimackinac by water, where I gave myself up as a prisoner of war, with one of my sergeants. The commanding officer, Captain Roberts, offered me every assistance in his power to render our situation comfortable while we remained there, and to enable us to proceed on our journey. To him I gave my parole of honor, and came to Detroit and reported myself to Colonel Proctor, who gave us a passage to Buffalo, from that place I came by way of Presque-Isle, and arrived here yesterday.Nathan Heald.
Extract of a letter from Captain Heald, late commandant at Fort Chicago, dated at Pittsburg, October 23, 1812:
On the 9th of August, I received orders from General Hull to evacuate the post and proceed with my command to Detroit, by land, leaving it at my discretion to dispose of the public property as I thought proper. The neighboring Indians got the information as soon as I did, and came in from all quarters to receive goods in the factory-store, which they understood were to be given to them. On the 13th, Captain Wells, of Fort Wayne, arrived with about thirty Miamis, for the purpose of escorting us in, by request of General Hull. On the 14th I delivered to the Indians all the goods of the factory-store, and a considerable quantity of provisions which we could not take with us. The surplus arms and ammunition I thought proper to destroy, fearing they would make bad use of it, if put in their possession. I also destroyed all liquor on hand soon after they began to collect.
The collection was unusually large for that place, but they conducted with the strictest propriety until after I left the fort. On the 15th, at 9 A. M., we commenced our march. A part of the Miamis were detached in front, the remainder in our rear, as guards, under the direction of Captain Wells. The situation of the country rendered it necessary for us to take the beach, with the lake on our left and a high sand-bank on our right at about one hundred yards distance. We had proceeded about a mile and a half when it was discovered that the Indians were prepared to attack us from behind the bank. I immediately marched up, with the company, to the top of the bank, when the action commenced; after firing one round we charged, and the Indians gave way in front and joined those on our flanks. In about fifteen minutes they got possession of all our horses, provisions, and baggage of every description, and, finding the Miamis did not assist us, I drew off the men I had left and took possession of a small elevation in the open prairie, out of shot of the bank or any other cover. The Indians did not follow me but assembled in a body on the top of the bank, and after some private consultation among themselves, made signs for me to approach them. I advanced toward them alone and was met by one of the Pottowatomie chiefs called Black-bird, with an interpreter.After shaking hands, he requested me to surrender, promising to spare the lives of all the prisoners. On a few moments consideration I concluded it would be most prudent to comply with his request, although I did not put entire confidence in his promise. After delivering up our arms we were taken back to their encampment near the fort, and distributed among the different tribes.
The next morning they set fire to the fort and left the place, taking the prisoners with them. Their number of warriors was between four and five hundred, mostly from the Pottowatomie nation, and their loss, from the best information I could get, was about fifteen. Our strength was about fifty-four regulars and twelve militia, out of which twenty-six regulars and all the militia were killed in the action, with two women and twelve children. Ensign George Ronan and Dr. Isaac Van Voorhis of my company, with Captain Wells of Fort Wayne, to my great sorrow, are numbered among the dead. Lieutenant Linai T. Helm, with twenty-five non-commissioned officers and privates and eleven women and children, were prisoners when we separated.
Mrs. Heald and myself were taken to the mouth of the river St. Joseph, and, being both badly wounded, were permitted to reside with Mr. Burnett, an Indian trader. In a few days after our arrival there, the Indians went off to take Fort Wayne, and in their absence I engaged a Frenchman to take us to Michilimackinac by water, where I gave myself up as a prisoner of war, with one of my sergeants. The commanding officer, Captain Roberts, offered me every assistance in his power to render our situation comfortable while we remained there, and to enable us to proceed on our journey. To him I gave my parole of honor, and came to Detroit and reported myself to Colonel Proctor, who gave us a passage to Buffalo, from that place I came by way of Presque-Isle, and arrived here yesterday.
Nathan Heald.
The following letter from Captain Heald, written three years after taking up his residence in Missouri, speaks for itself:
St. Charles, Missouri Territory May 18th, 1820.Sir:—I had the honor of receiving your letter of the 30th of March, a few days since. The garrison at Chicago commanded by me at the time Detroit was surrendered by General Hull, were every man paid up to the 30th of June, 1812, inclusive, officers' subsistence and forage included.The last payment embraced nine months, and was made by myself as the agent of Mr. Eastman, but I cannot say what the amount was. Every paper relative to that transaction was soon after lost. I am, however, confident that there was no deposit with me to pay the garrison for the three months subsequent to the 30th of June, 1812.The receipt-rolls which I had taken from Mr. Eastman, together with the balance of money in my hands, fell into the hands of the Indians on the 15th of August, 1812, when the troops under my command were defeated near Chicago; what became of them afterwards I know not. I have no papers in my possession relative to that garrison, excepting one muster-roll for the month of May, 1812. By it I find that the garrison there consisted of one captain, one 2nd lieutenant, one ensign, one surgeon's mate, four sergeants, two corporals, four musicians and forty-one privates. I cannot determine what the strength of the garrison was at any other time during the years 1811 and 1812, but it was on the decline. Monthly returns were regularly submitted to the Adjutant and Inspector-General's office, at Washington City, which, I suppose, can be found at any time.I am respectfully sir, your most obedient servant,Nathan Heald.Peter Hagner, Esq.,3rd Auditor's Office, TreasuryDepartment, Washington City.}
St. Charles, Missouri Territory May 18th, 1820.
Sir:—I had the honor of receiving your letter of the 30th of March, a few days since. The garrison at Chicago commanded by me at the time Detroit was surrendered by General Hull, were every man paid up to the 30th of June, 1812, inclusive, officers' subsistence and forage included.
The last payment embraced nine months, and was made by myself as the agent of Mr. Eastman, but I cannot say what the amount was. Every paper relative to that transaction was soon after lost. I am, however, confident that there was no deposit with me to pay the garrison for the three months subsequent to the 30th of June, 1812.
The receipt-rolls which I had taken from Mr. Eastman, together with the balance of money in my hands, fell into the hands of the Indians on the 15th of August, 1812, when the troops under my command were defeated near Chicago; what became of them afterwards I know not. I have no papers in my possession relative to that garrison, excepting one muster-roll for the month of May, 1812. By it I find that the garrison there consisted of one captain, one 2nd lieutenant, one ensign, one surgeon's mate, four sergeants, two corporals, four musicians and forty-one privates. I cannot determine what the strength of the garrison was at any other time during the years 1811 and 1812, but it was on the decline. Monthly returns were regularly submitted to the Adjutant and Inspector-General's office, at Washington City, which, I suppose, can be found at any time.
I am respectfully sir, your most obedient servant,
Nathan Heald.
This brings up to the mind of every officer the terrors of the "Auditors of the Treasury." Not victory or defeat, not wounds or even death—nay, not old Time himself can clear a soldier from the terrible ordeal of the "Accounting Department." Poor Heald had evidently been asked: "Where is the money which was in your hands before the savages surrounded you, slaughtered your troops, wounded yourself and your wife, massacred the civilians under your care, tortured to death your wounded and burned your fort?" At the same time the ordnance bureau doubtless asked what had become of the arms, ammunition, accoutrements and cooking utensils; the commissary bureau asked after the stores and the quartermaster's bureau after the equippage. Scores of thousands of volunteer officers in the Union war found to their cost that their fighting was the only thing which the War Department kept no record of; that their account-keeping and reporting was what must be most carefully looked after if they would free themselves, their heirs, executors and assigns, from imperishable obligations. For the governmentknows no "statute of limitations"—takes no account of the lapse of time any more than does Nature in her operations. "Contra regem tempus non occurret."Yet, paradoxical as it may seem, this is right. If all men were honest, "red tape" could be done away with; but as men are, individual accountability is indispensable. Without it, the army might fall into negligence leading to corruption, instead of being, as it is, the very example of administrational honor and probity.
This brings up to the mind of every officer the terrors of the "Auditors of the Treasury." Not victory or defeat, not wounds or even death—nay, not old Time himself can clear a soldier from the terrible ordeal of the "Accounting Department." Poor Heald had evidently been asked: "Where is the money which was in your hands before the savages surrounded you, slaughtered your troops, wounded yourself and your wife, massacred the civilians under your care, tortured to death your wounded and burned your fort?" At the same time the ordnance bureau doubtless asked what had become of the arms, ammunition, accoutrements and cooking utensils; the commissary bureau asked after the stores and the quartermaster's bureau after the equippage. Scores of thousands of volunteer officers in the Union war found to their cost that their fighting was the only thing which the War Department kept no record of; that their account-keeping and reporting was what must be most carefully looked after if they would free themselves, their heirs, executors and assigns, from imperishable obligations. For the governmentknows no "statute of limitations"—takes no account of the lapse of time any more than does Nature in her operations. "Contra regem tempus non occurret."
Yet, paradoxical as it may seem, this is right. If all men were honest, "red tape" could be done away with; but as men are, individual accountability is indispensable. Without it, the army might fall into negligence leading to corruption, instead of being, as it is, the very example of administrational honor and probity.
It so happens that the death of Mrs. Maria (Heald) Edwards, niece of Captain Nathan Heald and mother of Mrs. General Chetlain, is announced after the above matter had been put in print. She died on May 6, 1893, at the residence of General Chetlain, in this city, at the ripe age of ninety years.
It stirs the heart to think that, almost up to this very day, there was living among us so near a relative to the gallant and unfortunate captain; a woman who was a girl nine years old when her uncle passed through the direful ordeal.
MASSACRE TREE AND PART OF PULLMAN HOUSE.
MASSACRE TREE AND PART OF PULLMAN HOUSE.
THE BONES OF JOHN LALIME.—SUBSTANCE OF A PAPER READ BY JOSEPH KIRKLAND BEFORE THE CHICAGO HISTORICAL SOCIETY, ON THE OCCASION OF THE PRESENTATION TO THE SOCIETY OF CERTAIN HUMAN RELICS, JULY 21, 1891.
S
SOME ominous threatenings were heard at old Ft. Dearborn before the bursting of the storm of August 15, 1812. Among them was the killing of the interpreter for the government, John Lalime.
John Kinzie arrived at Fort Dearborn in 1804, and with his family occupied a house built of squared logs, which, up to about 1840, stood where the corner of Cass and Kinzie streets now is. He was an Indian-trader, furnishing what the savages desired and taking furs in exchange. The government also had an Indian agent, or trader, there.
Various circumstances tend to show that before 1812 considerable rivalry existed between the government fur-trading agency and the civilian dealers. The former had certain advantages in the cheapness of purchase and transportation, but were restricted as to selling liquor. The latter were nominally under the same restriction, but practically free, and the Indians, like other dipsomaniacs, hated every man who tried to restrain their drinking. The short-sighted savages mistook their friends fortheir enemies, their enemies for their friends. They loved the poison and the poisoner.
Remains unearthed April 26th and presented to the Historical Society July 27, 1891.
Mrs. Kinzie, in Wau-Bun, says that there were two factions in the garrison, the Kinzies sympathizing with the opposition. Also that, though the garrison was massacred, no Kinzie was injured, the immunity extending even to Lieutenant Linai T. Helm, who had married Mr. Kinzie's step-daughter. Also that while the fort was burned, the Kinzie mansion was left untouched, and remained standing up to within the memory of living men.
For several years before 1812, John Lalime, a Frenchman, had been the government's salaried interpreter at Fort Dearborn. The earliest mention of the name occurs in a letter written from St. Joseph by William Burnett to his Detroit correspondent, which begins with the words: "When Mr. Lalime was in Detroit last you was pleased to tell him that if I should want anything at your house, it should be at my service." The next intelligence about him is in two letters he wrote concerning Indian matters. The first was to Wm. Clark, Governor of Missouri, and reads as follows:
Chicago, 26th May, 1811.Sir—An Indian from the Peorias passed here yesterday and has given me information that the Indians about that place have been about the settlements of Kaskasia and Vincennes and have stolen from fifteen to twenty horses. It appears by the information given me that the principal actors are two brothers of the wife of Main Foe. He is residing on the Peoria, or a little above it, at a place they call "Prairie du Corbeau." By the express going to Fort Wayne I will communicate this to the agent. I presume, sir, that you will communicate this to the Governor of Kaskasia and General Harrison. I am sir, with respect,Y'r h'ble serv't,J. Lalime.
Chicago, 26th May, 1811.
Sir—An Indian from the Peorias passed here yesterday and has given me information that the Indians about that place have been about the settlements of Kaskasia and Vincennes and have stolen from fifteen to twenty horses. It appears by the information given me that the principal actors are two brothers of the wife of Main Foe. He is residing on the Peoria, or a little above it, at a place they call "Prairie du Corbeau." By the express going to Fort Wayne I will communicate this to the agent. I presume, sir, that you will communicate this to the Governor of Kaskasia and General Harrison. I am sir, with respect,
Y'r h'ble serv't,
J. Lalime.
The second letter is the one mentioned in the first. It is written to John Johnson, United States factor at Fort Wayne, dated July 7th, 1811, and reads as follows:
Since my last to you we have news of other depredations and murders committed about the settlement of Cahokia. The first news we received was that the brother-in-law of Main Poc went down and stole a number of horses. Second, another party went down, stole some horses, killed a man and took off a young woman, but they being pursued were obliged to leave her to save themselves. Third, they have been there and killed and destroyed a whole family. The cause of it in part is from the Little Chief that came last fall to see Governor Harrison under the feigned name of Wapepa. He told the Indians that he had told the governor that the Americans were settling on their lands, and asked him what should be done with them. He told the Indians that the Governor had told him they were bad people.
Since my last to you we have news of other depredations and murders committed about the settlement of Cahokia. The first news we received was that the brother-in-law of Main Poc went down and stole a number of horses. Second, another party went down, stole some horses, killed a man and took off a young woman, but they being pursued were obliged to leave her to save themselves. Third, they have been there and killed and destroyed a whole family. The cause of it in part is from the Little Chief that came last fall to see Governor Harrison under the feigned name of Wapepa. He told the Indians that he had told the governor that the Americans were settling on their lands, and asked him what should be done with them. He told the Indians that the Governor had told him they were bad people.
We observe that the Peoria chief, Main Poc, is mentioned as blameworthy for these wrongs. It may be interesting to know Main Poc's side of the question. Said he:
You astonish me with your talk! Whenever you do wrong there is nothing said or done; but when we do anything you immediately take us and tie us by the neck with a rope. You say, what will become of our women and children if there is war? On the other hand, what will become of your women and children? It is best to avoid war.
You astonish me with your talk! Whenever you do wrong there is nothing said or done; but when we do anything you immediately take us and tie us by the neck with a rope. You say, what will become of our women and children if there is war? On the other hand, what will become of your women and children? It is best to avoid war.
Lalime's letters show that he was a man of ability and education. We also guess, from a clause in Article III of the treaty of 1821, that Lalime lived after the manner of those days, and left at least one half-breed child. The clause reserves a half-section of land for "John B. Lalime, son of Noke-no-qua."
Miss Noke-no-qua is not otherwise known to history.
The next knowledge we have of Lalime relates to his violent death in the spring of 1812, about five months before the massacre, at a point on the south bank of the river within a stone's throw of where is now the south end of Rush Street bridge.
GURDON SALTONSTALL HUBBARD. (Last picture taken of him.)
GURDON SALTONSTALL HUBBARD. (Last picture taken of him.)
In a letter written by the lamented Gurdon Hubbard to John Wentworth, June 25th, 1881, we read:
As regards the unfortunate killing of Mr. Lalime by Mr. John Kinzie, I have heard the account of it related by Mrs. Kinzie and her daughter, Mrs. Helm. Mr. Kinzie never, in my hearing, alluded to or spoke of it. He deeply regretted the act. Knowing his aversion to conversing on the subject, I never spoke to him about it.Mrs. Kinzie said that her husband and Lalime had for several years been on unfriendly terms, and had had frequent altercations; that at the time of the encounter Mr. Kinzie had crossed the river alone, in a canoe, going to the fort, and that Lalime met him outside the garrison and shot him, the ball cutting the side of his neck. She supposed that Lalime saw her husband crossing, and taking his pistol went through the gate purposely to meet him. Mr. Kinzie, closing with Lalime, stabbed him and returned to the house covered with blood. He told his wife what he had done, that he feared he had killed Lalime, and probably a squad would be sent for him and that he must hide. She, in haste, took bandages and with him retreated to the woods, where as soon as possible she dressed his wounds, returning just in time to meet an officer with a squad with orders to seize her husband. He could not be found. For several days he was hid in the bush and cared for by his wife.Lalime was, I understand, an educated man, and quite a favorite with the officers, who were greatly excited. They decided he should be buried near Kinzie's house, in plain view from his front door and piazza. The grave was enclosed in a picket fence, which Mr. Kinzie, in his lifetime, kept in perfect order. My impression has ever been that Mr. Kinzie acted, as he told his wife, in self-defence. This is borne out by the fact that, after a full investigation by the officers, whose friend the deceased was, they acquitted Mr. Kinzie, who then returned to his family.In some of these details I may be in error, but the fact has always been firm in my mind that Lalime made the attack, provoking the killing, in self-defence. Mr. Kinzie deeply regretted the result, and avoided any reference to it.Yours,G. S. Hubbard.
As regards the unfortunate killing of Mr. Lalime by Mr. John Kinzie, I have heard the account of it related by Mrs. Kinzie and her daughter, Mrs. Helm. Mr. Kinzie never, in my hearing, alluded to or spoke of it. He deeply regretted the act. Knowing his aversion to conversing on the subject, I never spoke to him about it.
Mrs. Kinzie said that her husband and Lalime had for several years been on unfriendly terms, and had had frequent altercations; that at the time of the encounter Mr. Kinzie had crossed the river alone, in a canoe, going to the fort, and that Lalime met him outside the garrison and shot him, the ball cutting the side of his neck. She supposed that Lalime saw her husband crossing, and taking his pistol went through the gate purposely to meet him. Mr. Kinzie, closing with Lalime, stabbed him and returned to the house covered with blood. He told his wife what he had done, that he feared he had killed Lalime, and probably a squad would be sent for him and that he must hide. She, in haste, took bandages and with him retreated to the woods, where as soon as possible she dressed his wounds, returning just in time to meet an officer with a squad with orders to seize her husband. He could not be found. For several days he was hid in the bush and cared for by his wife.
Lalime was, I understand, an educated man, and quite a favorite with the officers, who were greatly excited. They decided he should be buried near Kinzie's house, in plain view from his front door and piazza. The grave was enclosed in a picket fence, which Mr. Kinzie, in his lifetime, kept in perfect order. My impression has ever been that Mr. Kinzie acted, as he told his wife, in self-defence. This is borne out by the fact that, after a full investigation by the officers, whose friend the deceased was, they acquitted Mr. Kinzie, who then returned to his family.
In some of these details I may be in error, but the fact has always been firm in my mind that Lalime made the attack, provoking the killing, in self-defence. Mr. Kinzie deeply regretted the result, and avoided any reference to it.
Yours,
G. S. Hubbard.
Mr. Hubbard does not say he remembers having seen the grave. He did not come to Chicago to live until 1836. Judge Blodgett, as we shall see hereafter, describes its position as not on the river bank, but back in the timber.
A somewhat different account of the affair was given by Mrs. Porthier (Victoire Mirandeau,) and printed in Captain Andreas' History of Chicago, Vol. II, page 105.
My sister Madeline and I saw the fight between John Kinzie and Lalime, when Lalime was killed. It was sunset, when they used to shut the gates of the fort. Kinzie and Lalime came out together, and soon we heard Lieutenant Helm call out for Mr. Kinzie to look out for Lalime, as he had a pistol. Quick we saw the men come together. We heard the pistol go off and saw the smoke. Then they fell down together. I don't know as Lalime got up at all, but Kinzie got home pretty quick. Blood was running from his shoulder, where Lalime had shot him. In the night he packed up some things and my father took him to Milwaukee, where he stayed until his shoulder got well and he found he would not be troubled if he came back. You see, Kinzie wasn't to blame at all. He didn'thave any pistol nor knife—nothing. After Lalime shot him and Kinzie got his arms around him, he (Lalime) pulled out his dirk, and as they fell he was stabbed with his own knife. That is what they all said. I didn't see the knife at all. I don't remember where Lalime was buried. I don't think his grave was very near Kinzie's house. I don't remember that Mr. Kinzie ever took care of the grave. That is all I know about it. I don't know what the quarrel was about. It was an old one—business, I guess.
My sister Madeline and I saw the fight between John Kinzie and Lalime, when Lalime was killed. It was sunset, when they used to shut the gates of the fort. Kinzie and Lalime came out together, and soon we heard Lieutenant Helm call out for Mr. Kinzie to look out for Lalime, as he had a pistol. Quick we saw the men come together. We heard the pistol go off and saw the smoke. Then they fell down together. I don't know as Lalime got up at all, but Kinzie got home pretty quick. Blood was running from his shoulder, where Lalime had shot him. In the night he packed up some things and my father took him to Milwaukee, where he stayed until his shoulder got well and he found he would not be troubled if he came back. You see, Kinzie wasn't to blame at all. He didn'thave any pistol nor knife—nothing. After Lalime shot him and Kinzie got his arms around him, he (Lalime) pulled out his dirk, and as they fell he was stabbed with his own knife. That is what they all said. I didn't see the knife at all. I don't remember where Lalime was buried. I don't think his grave was very near Kinzie's house. I don't remember that Mr. Kinzie ever took care of the grave. That is all I know about it. I don't know what the quarrel was about. It was an old one—business, I guess.
This bears all the thumb-marks of truth. It comes at first hand from a disinterested eye-witness. Even if we suppose Mrs. Kinzie to have seen the affray, which she does not say, it was doubtless from the opposite side of the river, while Victoire and her sister were in the fort itself. No other account, direct from an eye-witness, has ever been published.
Now, without pretending to certainty, it strikes me as probable that up to this time Kinzie stood on the Indian side of the irrepressible conflict between white men and red men, while the army and Lalime took the other. Mrs. Helm's narrative in Wau-Bun is decidedly hostile to the good sense of the commandant of the fort, and even to the courage of some of his faithful subordinates, while obviously friendly to the mutinous element in his command. Therefore it seems to me quite likely that Lalime's crazy attack on Kinzie was not entirely disconnected with that irrepressible conflict, that this long-standing quarrel had more than appears on the surface to do with the admitted success of Kinzie's trade and the well-known unprofitableness of the business carried on by the government agency.
On April 29th, 1891, there was unearthed at the southwest corner of Cass and Illinois streets, a skeleton. Workmen were digging a cellar there for a large new building, and were startled by having the shovel stopped by a skull, wherein its edge made a slight abrasion. Further examination brought to light some spinal vertebrae, some fragments of ribs, some remains of shoulder-blades and pelvis-bones, some bones of the upper and lower arms and the hip-bones, besides two bones of the lower part of one leg; also fragments, nearly crumbled away, of a rude pine coffin. The rumor of the discovery spread through the neighborhood, and luckily reached the ears of Mr. Scott Fergus, son of the veteran printer, Robert Fergus,whose establishment stands within ten feet of the place where these relics of mortality had so long lain unnoticed.
Mr. Fergus at once tried to save and collect the bones, and finding some disposition on the part of the laborers to disregard his requests, he rang for the police-patrol wagon, which bundled the little lot into a soap-box and carried them to the East Chicago Avenue station.
I was out of town at this time and did not hear of the interesting occurrence until Mr. Fergus told me of it upon my return, about a month later. I then went to the station, only to learn that the bones, being unclaimed, had been sent in the patrol-wagon to the morgue at the County Hospital, on the West Side. However, on looking up the officer who carried them over, he freely and kindly offered to try to reclaim them, and have them delivered to the Historical Society. The morgue officials, after a few days, at a merely nominal expense, complied with the request, and they are now here. Was this,isthis the skeleton of John Lalime?
The place where the bones were found is within a stone's throw of the exact spot indicated by Gurdon Hubbard as the place where the picket fence marked the grave, "two hundred yards west of the Kinzie house."
Dr. Arthur B. Hosmer, and Dr. Otto Freer, who have examined the relics independently of each other, and assisted me in arranging them in human semblance, consider them to be the skeleton of a slender white man, about five feet and four inches in height.
The color, consistency and general conditions indicate that they had lain in the ground (dry sand) for a very long time, reaching probably or possibly the seventy-nine years which have elapsed since Lalime's death.
Now, admitting their expert judgment to be correct, this man died not far from 1812. At that time there had not and never had been in all these parts more than some fifty to one hundred white men, nearly all of whom were soldiers, living in the fort and subject to burial in the fort burying-ground, adjoining the present site of Michigan Avenue and Randolph street. At a later date, say fifty years ago, isolated burials were not uncommon, but even then they could scarcely have occurred in so publica spot as the north bank cf the river, close to the docks and warehouses which had been by that time built there.
John C. Haines, Fernando Jones and others remember perfectly the existence of that lonely little fenced enclosure, and even that it was said to mark the resting-place of a man killed in a fight. They and all others agree that no other burials were made thereabouts, so far as known. Another point, favorable or otherwise to this identification, is the fact that the place where the skeleton was found is the lot whereon stood the first St. James Church, and that the attendants there, as I was informed by one of them, Mr. Ezra McCagg, never heard of any burial as having taken place in the church-yard.
On the other hand, Mr. Hubbard designates "the river bank" as the place of burial, and the memory of Mr. Fernando Jones is to the effect that the fenced enclosure was nearer to the place of Rush Street bridge than is the spot of finding.
But in contradiction to this view. Judge Blodgett tells me that he was here in 1831 and 1832, which was several years before either Mr. Jones or Mr. Haines, and before Mr. Hubbard came here to live, he being then trading at Danville. The Judge adds that with the Beaubien and Laframboise boys he paddled canoes on the creek, played in the old Kinzie log-house and wandered all about the numerous paths that ran along the river bank, and back into the thick, tangled underbrush which filled the woods, covering almost all the North Side west of the shore sand-hills. He says that one path over which they traveled back and forth ran from the old house west to the forks of the river, passing north of the old Agency house—"Cobweb Castle"—which stood near the northeast corner of Kinzie and State Streets. Also that from that path behind Cobweb Castle the boys pointed further north to where they said there was a grave where the man was buried whom John Kinzie had killed, but they never went out to that spot, and so far as he remembered he never saw the grave. A kind of awe kept him quite clear of that place. All he knows is that it was somewhere out in the brush behind the Agency house.
This seems to locate the grave as nearly as possible at the corner of Illinois and Cass streets, where these relicswere found. Fernando Jones suggests that even if the grave was originally elsewhere, the remains might have got into the church lot in this way: In 1832 Robert Kinzie entered and subdivided Kinzie's Addition, bounded by Chicago Avenue on the north, the lake on the east, Kinzie Street on the south and State Street on the west, and gradually he and his brother John sold the lots. In 1835 they gave the St. James Society the two lots where the church was built and wherein this skeleton was found. What more likely than that on selling the lot whereon the original interment took place (supposing it to be other than where the bones were unearthed) the sellers were compelled, either by the buyer's stipulation or their own sense of duty to their father's manifest wishes, to find a new place for the coffin of poor Lalime, and thereupon selected the spare room in the new church-yard?
It is worthy of note, that as, with the skeleton, were found the remains of a coffin—a single bit of pine board, showing the well-known "shoulder angle," though decayed so that only a crumbling strip half an inch thick was left—this could not have been a secret interment, made to conceal the death of a man. It would seem utterly improbable that two men's bodies should have been coffined and buried within the little space of ground, in the few years of time pointed out by all these circumstances. We learn that Lalime was so buried; also that, so far as known, all other excavations thereabouts have failed to expose his remains; also that these relics have now come to light. Everyone must draw his own conclusion. I have drawn mine. If it be erroneous, this exploitation of the subject will be likely to bring out the truth.
LETTER FROM FERNANDO JONES.
Chicago, July 20th, 1891.Joseph Kirkland, Esquire:Dear Sir—In answer to your inquiry as to any incidents coming to my knowledge as to the grave of John Lalime, who was buried near the mouth of the Chicago River in the year 1812, I furnish the following statement:When I arrived in Chicago, on my sixteenth birthday, May 26th, 1835, I landed on the north side of the present river, near its mouth, very near to the old John Kinzie homestead. I was escorted to the historic Cobweb Castle and the Dearborn Street bridge by the children of an old friend of my father's, Samuel Jackson, who was employed upon the north pier harbor work, and who had been an old neighbor in Buffalo, New York, where he had also been employed upon the government harbor. The little boy, Ezra, and the girl, Abigail, pointed out a grave situated a little to the north of our path and several hundred feet west of the Kinzie house. The grave was surrounded by a neat white picket fence. I passed it many times afterward, during that and the succeeding summer, and often visited it with children about my own age. The history of this lonely grave, as detailed by them, gave it a peculiar fascination to me, and to them, and to others who saw it. I recall now, after an interval of mere than half a century, a number of persons who visited this grave with me, among whom were the Indian wife of Captain Jamison; the wife of Lieut. Thompson, a half-breed woman; Virginia Baxley, daughter of Captain Baxley, of the fort; Pierre Laframboise, son of a chief and interpreter; Alexander Beaubien, son of a trader, and John C. Haines, who was also a clerk near me on South Water Street.The tradition in regard to this grave was that it was the last resting-place of a Frenchman named Lalime, who was government interpreter at the fort, and who was killed in an encounter with the old Indian-trader, John Kinzie. It was said that the officers of the garrison had the body buried in sight of Mr. Kinzie's house in resentment for his murder. But it seems that old Mr. Kinzie took the sting from this reproach by carefully tending the spot during his lifetime, and his son, John H. Kinzie, continued the same care over it.Soon after the erection of St. James Episcopal Church, about the year 1838, a grave was noticed on the north side of the lot and in the rear of the church, which was situated on the southwest corner of Cass and Illinois Streets, and opposite the new house of John H. Kinzie. The lot upon which the Frenchman was buried had been sold by Mr. John H. Kinzie, and was built upon, and Mr. Kinzie had given the lot upon the corner for the church. Mr. Alonzo C. Wood, the builder of the church, who still survives, informs me that the grave appeared there mysteriously, and his remembrance is that the Rev. Mr. Hallam, the priest in charge, informed him that the remains were placed there by the direction of Mr. Kinzie, or Mrs. Kinzie, but he has no further distinct recollection in regard to it. I, myself, never mentioned the subject to Mr. John H. Kinzie, but remember a conversation with his brother, Robert A. Kinzie, U. S. Paymaster, in which he expressed satisfaction that his brother had taken care of the bones of poor Lalime. It was understood by the few conversant with the history of Lalime's death that both the elder Kinzie and his son, John H., were averse to speaking of the matter, but "Bob" was very like an Indian, and not at all reticent on the question, and that the legend among those who took any interest in the matter has always been that this solitary gravein the church-yard was the grave of the "little Frenchman" who was first buried near the spot. Under the circumstances, it is not strange that the removal should have been quietly made, and I have little doubt in my own mind that the tradition is correct.Very sincerely yours,Fernando Jones.
Chicago, July 20th, 1891.
Joseph Kirkland, Esquire:
Dear Sir—In answer to your inquiry as to any incidents coming to my knowledge as to the grave of John Lalime, who was buried near the mouth of the Chicago River in the year 1812, I furnish the following statement:
When I arrived in Chicago, on my sixteenth birthday, May 26th, 1835, I landed on the north side of the present river, near its mouth, very near to the old John Kinzie homestead. I was escorted to the historic Cobweb Castle and the Dearborn Street bridge by the children of an old friend of my father's, Samuel Jackson, who was employed upon the north pier harbor work, and who had been an old neighbor in Buffalo, New York, where he had also been employed upon the government harbor. The little boy, Ezra, and the girl, Abigail, pointed out a grave situated a little to the north of our path and several hundred feet west of the Kinzie house. The grave was surrounded by a neat white picket fence. I passed it many times afterward, during that and the succeeding summer, and often visited it with children about my own age. The history of this lonely grave, as detailed by them, gave it a peculiar fascination to me, and to them, and to others who saw it. I recall now, after an interval of mere than half a century, a number of persons who visited this grave with me, among whom were the Indian wife of Captain Jamison; the wife of Lieut. Thompson, a half-breed woman; Virginia Baxley, daughter of Captain Baxley, of the fort; Pierre Laframboise, son of a chief and interpreter; Alexander Beaubien, son of a trader, and John C. Haines, who was also a clerk near me on South Water Street.
The tradition in regard to this grave was that it was the last resting-place of a Frenchman named Lalime, who was government interpreter at the fort, and who was killed in an encounter with the old Indian-trader, John Kinzie. It was said that the officers of the garrison had the body buried in sight of Mr. Kinzie's house in resentment for his murder. But it seems that old Mr. Kinzie took the sting from this reproach by carefully tending the spot during his lifetime, and his son, John H. Kinzie, continued the same care over it.
Soon after the erection of St. James Episcopal Church, about the year 1838, a grave was noticed on the north side of the lot and in the rear of the church, which was situated on the southwest corner of Cass and Illinois Streets, and opposite the new house of John H. Kinzie. The lot upon which the Frenchman was buried had been sold by Mr. John H. Kinzie, and was built upon, and Mr. Kinzie had given the lot upon the corner for the church. Mr. Alonzo C. Wood, the builder of the church, who still survives, informs me that the grave appeared there mysteriously, and his remembrance is that the Rev. Mr. Hallam, the priest in charge, informed him that the remains were placed there by the direction of Mr. Kinzie, or Mrs. Kinzie, but he has no further distinct recollection in regard to it. I, myself, never mentioned the subject to Mr. John H. Kinzie, but remember a conversation with his brother, Robert A. Kinzie, U. S. Paymaster, in which he expressed satisfaction that his brother had taken care of the bones of poor Lalime. It was understood by the few conversant with the history of Lalime's death that both the elder Kinzie and his son, John H., were averse to speaking of the matter, but "Bob" was very like an Indian, and not at all reticent on the question, and that the legend among those who took any interest in the matter has always been that this solitary gravein the church-yard was the grave of the "little Frenchman" who was first buried near the spot. Under the circumstances, it is not strange that the removal should have been quietly made, and I have little doubt in my own mind that the tradition is correct.
Very sincerely yours,Fernando Jones.
LETTER FROM THE HON. J. C. HAINES.
Chicago, 15 July, 1891.Major J. Kirkland:Without very definite recollection as to just where the grave of John Lalime stood in 1835, when I came to Chicago, I can say that I knew of its existence and have an impression it stood in St. James' Church lot, corner of Cass and Michigan Streets.John C. Haines.
Chicago, 15 July, 1891.
Major J. Kirkland:
Without very definite recollection as to just where the grave of John Lalime stood in 1835, when I came to Chicago, I can say that I knew of its existence and have an impression it stood in St. James' Church lot, corner of Cass and Michigan Streets.
John C. Haines.
DR. HOSMER'S LETTER.
The bones shown me at this date at the Chicago Historical Society, constitute the major portion of a human skeleton—that of an adult white male of slender build and about five feet four to five inches in height. There is evidence of a partial or complete fracture of the left femur, at some time in his life, thoroughly repaired and with some permanent thickening of the bone.Judging by the color, weight and rotten condition of the bones, I believe that they have been in the ground (supposing it to be sandy and above water-level) at least sixty (60) but not to exceed one hundred (100) years.A. B. Hosmer, M. D.
The bones shown me at this date at the Chicago Historical Society, constitute the major portion of a human skeleton—that of an adult white male of slender build and about five feet four to five inches in height. There is evidence of a partial or complete fracture of the left femur, at some time in his life, thoroughly repaired and with some permanent thickening of the bone.
Judging by the color, weight and rotten condition of the bones, I believe that they have been in the ground (supposing it to be sandy and above water-level) at least sixty (60) but not to exceed one hundred (100) years.
A. B. Hosmer, M. D.
DR. FREER'S LETTER.
The skeleton shown me by Mr. Joseph Kirkland is without doubt of great age and resembles in appearance fragments of others that have lain for many years in sandy soil. All animal matter has departed from the bones, leaving them very light and consisting of the mineral portions alone.The type of skeleton is that of a man of moderate stature and light build. The skull is that of a white man and of great symmetry. The lower jaw is missing, but the upper perfect, barring loss of all teeth but one. The presence of the third molar's sockets speaks for the complete maturity of the man. It is impossible exactly to estimate the exact time that the skeleton has been in the ground, but its appearance would tally well with the eighty years it is supposed to have lain there.Dr. O. T. Freer.July 20th, 1891.
The skeleton shown me by Mr. Joseph Kirkland is without doubt of great age and resembles in appearance fragments of others that have lain for many years in sandy soil. All animal matter has departed from the bones, leaving them very light and consisting of the mineral portions alone.
The type of skeleton is that of a man of moderate stature and light build. The skull is that of a white man and of great symmetry. The lower jaw is missing, but the upper perfect, barring loss of all teeth but one. The presence of the third molar's sockets speaks for the complete maturity of the man. It is impossible exactly to estimate the exact time that the skeleton has been in the ground, but its appearance would tally well with the eighty years it is supposed to have lain there.
Dr. O. T. Freer.
July 20th, 1891.
THE LATE CALUMET CLUB-HOUSE.
THE LATE CALUMET CLUB-HOUSE.
IMPORTANT REMINISCENCES OF AN OLD SETTLER (A. H. EDWARDS).—[from "FORT DEARBORN"; FERGUS' HISTORICAL SERIES, NO. 16.]
Sheboygan(Wis.), May 24th, 1891.
Hon. John Wentworth: