trouble me if I had it. The Father Dupy had a Warehouse where I put all the woolen linnen shot & powder as well as the Blanketting & gun you got for me since the Canno of the Hurones was here I added those things to his Merchandize for him to make the best profit. As for me I am Contented & I think well paid. The Wine shall be put into the Cellar to be mixt wth that of the House. If the Tobacco were here it should be put into the Magazine.

I am very much Obliged to you my Revd. Father for the Care you take of me. You are willing I should live as a Chanoine till the Spring by the plentiful supply that you have sent me by Pauscawen. I have yet considerable for my self for the Winter. Since they sent me some Wine I take a glass after my Mass but I don't find it keeps me so well as a Dram of Brandy. I want nothing but Spanish Wine for the Mass. I have enough for myself for about 12 months. Therefore I pray for the 3d time to send me no more Wine. I shall send for more when I want it.

Not finished.

SIR

LT. GOVRS. LETTER TO THE Govt. of Canada.

LT. GOVR. DUMMER TO GOVR. VAUdreuil.

BOSTON N ENGLAND January 19th. 1724.

Your Letter dated Quebec October 29th pr Henry Edgar one of the English Captives came safe to me; on perusal thereof I am greatly Surprized at the matters Contained therein, which are so unjustly represented, that I cannot Satisfy my self to pass them by unanswered. In the first place As to what you say relating to the death of Monsr. Rallé the Jesuit, which you set forth as so Inhumane & Barbarous; I readily acknowledge that he was slain, amongst other of our Enemies at Norridgewalk; and if he had Confined himself unto the professed Duty of his ffunction viz to Instruct the Indians in the Christian Religion, had kept himself within the bounds of the French Dominions, and had not Instigated the Indians to War & Rapine there might then have been some ground of Complaint; But when instead of Preaching Peace, Love and Friendship Agreeable to the Doctrines of the Christian Religion, he has been a Constant and Notorious Fomenter & Incendiary to the Indians to kill burn & Destroy, as flagrantly appears by many original Letters and manuscripts, I have of his by me, and when in open Violation of an Act of Parliament of Great Britain, and the Laws of this Province strictly forbidding Jesuits to reside or teach within the British Dominions, he has not only resided, but also once & again appeared at the head of great numbers of Indians, in an Hostile manner threatning and Insulting, as also publickly assaulting the subjects of His British Majesty; I say, If after all, such an Incendiary has happened to be slain in the heat of Action, among our open and Declared Enemies, surely

none can be blamed, therefor but himself, nor can any safeguard from you, or any other Justify him in such proceedings; and I think I have much greater Cause to Complain, that Mr. Willard the minister of Rut land (who never had been guilty of the Facts charged upon Mr. Rallé & applied himself solely to the preaching of the Gospel) was by the Indians you sent to Attack that Town Assaulted, slain & scalpt, & his scalp Carried in Triumph to Quebec.

As to the next article you mention, That St. Georges River was in the year 1700 by order of the two Crowns Marked as the bounds of the English & French Lands whereby it appeared That Penobscot was given to you, and that one La ffevre had a right to the Land therebounts, & that all Vessels paid a Duty to him, and that Mr. Capon Envoy of England when King George came u pon the Throne, went to ask the Penobscot In dians to submit themselves to England, which they refused-I have no difficulty to answer to each of the aforesd Points; And as to the last relating to Mr. Capon you Labour under a very great Mistake to mention him as an Envoy of England, he being far below any such Character, and only an Inferiour Officer, Commissary or Victualler to the Garrison of Annapolis, & sometime after that was taken and yielded up to the English, sent by the Lieutenant Govr. of that place to visit the French settlements within that District & to require an Oath of Allegiance and Fidelity from them to Queen Anne; but he had no Occasion to Come and Entice the Penobscot Indians to submit themselves to England, for they as well as the Norridgwalk Indians & many other Tribes had done that long before even in the year 1693 at a Treaty of Sr. William Phipps Governor of this Province, by which Treaty, I can make it appear, that they not only submitted themselves as subjects to the Crown of England, but also renounced the French Interest & Quitted Claim to the Lands bought and possessed by the English; But since King Georg came to the Throne Mr. Capon has not been in those parts at all, as I am Informed by the People of that Country.

As to St. Georges River being the bounds and La ffevres pretended Right it seems very wonderful you should make any mention of those things or lay any weight upon them at this time, when if the Case were formerly as you now represent it, which I do not allow, all such Claim and pretension is wholly superceeded, and at an end; whereof you may soon and easily satisfy your self by Consulting the Treaty of peace at Utrech Concluded bet the two Crowns in the year 1713 by the twelfth Article, whereof it is provided, "That all Nova Scotia or L'Accadie "with its Ancient Boundaries &c. together with the Dominion property " & possession of the 2d Islands Lands & places, and all right to which, the "Most Christian King, the Crown of France, or any of the subjects "thereof have hitherto had to the Islands Lands & places, and the In"habitants of the same are Yielded & made over to the Queen of Great "Britain & to her Crown forever-Now, by the aforesd. Resignation, the French King Quitted all Right not only to the Lands, but also the Inhabitants whether ffrench or Indians, or whatsoever they were & trans

ferred the same to the Crown of Great Britain forever, whereby you are Entirely Cut off from any Claim to the subjection of the said Indians, from thence forward; and we are not Ignorant how far the ffrench King understood the Countrey of L'Accadie to Extend Westward by his Patent Granted to Monsr. D'Aleney tho you seem to be a stranger to it.

As to the whole Nation of the Indians Exclaiming against some of their Tribe, as pretending they were suborned to give Deeds for their Lands, if it be matter of Fact, that they do so, which is hard to be Conceived, it is a most unjust Imputation, & must Argue a wonderful Deceitfulness & self Contradiction in them, since they have upon all Treatys when the whole Tribes were together Constantly acknowledged and submitted to the English Titles and possessions, which they had by honest and Lawful purchase Acquired.

As to the Building of Forts any where within the British Dominions I suppose you will not scruple to acknowledge that the King of Great Britain has as good a right to Erect Fortresses or places of Defence within His Dominions, as the ffrench King has in his And therefore when you shall please to Give me Instances of the French Kings Applying himself to the Indians for leave to build a Fort or Forts for the Defence of His subjects I shall then give you a further answer to that Argument-And in the mean time I must tell you we have always treated the Indians with sincerity, & never thought it proper to make Apologies for Building Forts within our own Jurisdiction (as you Insinuate) but on the Contrary in all our Treatys with them have Ascerted our undoubted right so to do.

You likewise signify that we must Blame no body but our selves for the Violence and Hostilities Committed against Our nation by the Indians. But syr, If the blame must lye where it ought I must Impute their Outrages, falsness & Ill Conduct towards us, not so much, to their own Inclinations, as to the Instigations of the Jesuit Rallé & others Under your Government, whereof we have had sufficient Information from time to time, as also of your own forcing the Indians against their wills upon our Frontiers to destroy & Cutt off our People which Cannot be otherwise lookt upon as a direct & Notorious Violation of the Treaty of Peace at Utrecht.

Nevertheless sir, After all, I have much greater Inclination to live in Amity & good Correspondence with you than otherwise, And therefore I have sent Collo. Samuel Thaxter one of His Majesties Council, and Collo. William Dudley one of the House of Representatives who are Commissioned to Confer with you Pursuant to such Instructions as they have received from me; and I Desire that you will Give Credence to them accordingly.

I am

Sir

Your Most Humble &
Most Obedt. servant

WM. DUMMER.

THE BRITISH OCCUPATION OF PENOBSCOT DURING THE REVOLUTION.

Read before the Maine Historical Society, December 21, 1883.

BY JOSEPH WILLIAMSON.

THE investment of Penobscot, now Castine, during the war of the Revolution; the successful defense of the place during a protracted siege against the strongest force which could be brought against it, and its uninterrupted retention by the enemy for over four years, and until after such retention had formed the subject of many vexed questions of diplomacy, and constituted the last vestige of British authority in the old thirteen colonies;- form one of the most interesting passages in our history. Whether this interest is due to the importance which had been attached to the locality for five generations, from associations with the Pilgrim fathers, with La Tour and D'Aulnay, with the representatives of Cromwell and of the Prince of Orange, with the pious followers of Loyola and Castine, or whether it is due merely for military reasons to the natural strength of the place, do not form the object of present inquiry. Nor is it intended to dwell upon the details of the siege, but simply to trace the history of the place from August, 1776, when the Americans were dispersed, until its restoration to them four years afterward.

The commander of the armed vessels which warded off the attack was Captain Henry Mowat; of the land forces, General Francis McLean. As the former was at the head of the two most important events that took place in Maine during the revolution, and as little has been written concerning him, a brief account of his life and service may not be inappropriate.

HENRY MOWAT.

Henry Mowat was born in Scotland, in 1734. He was son of Captain Patrick Mowat, of Her Majesty's ship "Dolphin.' After an experience at sea of six years he was commissioned as

lieutenant of the ship "Baltimore" in 1758. The certificate of his "passing" by the admiralty records sets forth that " He produceth journals kept by himself in the Chesterfield & Ramilies (as midshipman), and certificates from Captains Ogle and Hobbs of his Diligence, etc.; he can splice, knot, reef a sail, etc., and is qualified to do the duty of an able Seaman and Midshipman." In 1764, he was promoted to be a commander and served as such on the "Canceaux " for twelve years. At the time of the destruction of Falmouth he was forty-one years old. His next vessel, the sloop " Albany," was the flag-ship of the squadron at Penobscot. After a service of thirty years on our coast, he died of apoplexy, April 14, 1798, aged sixty-four, on board his ship, the "Assistance," near Cape Henry. His remains were interred at Hampton, Virginia. He had three brothers in the navy, of whom two were killed in action on the "London," off St. Domingo, and the other, Alexander, died in command of the "Rattlesnake," in the West Indies, in 1793. He left a son, John Alexander, who entered the navy in 1804, and who is probably the one placed under the educational charge of Rev.Jacob Bailey the Episcopal missionary at Pownalboro.

Captain Mowat left no will, and no letters of administration on his estate appear on record in England. A short time before his death he wrote "A Relation of the Services in which I was Engaged in America, from 1759, to the close of the American War in 1783." Probably it was never printed. An exhaustive search for it at the British Museum and in the principal libraries of the United Kingdom has been without success. Advertisements in the "London Times," and in "Notes and Queries," offering a liberal reward for information of its existence have proved equally unavailing. The last trace of its title is found in "Rodd's Catalogue of Books and MSS.," published in London, in 1843, where it is described as a folio, and placed at eighteen shillings. Its discovery would shed much light upon our revolutionary history. We should learn from it the particulars of dismantling Fort Pownal soon after the battle of Bunker Hill, and should also be informed of the reasons which induced the occupation of Penobscot. We should also learn whether the author instigated the destruction of Falmouth, or acted under the strict orders of his superior officer; and whether the denunciations which have