It has been frequently urged upon me, by perhaps too partial friends, that "my long residence of exceeding sixty years in the place," (coming here when it was yet almost in its infancy, when there were yet still living a goodly number of its original settlers, with many of whom, from my familiarity with their language and customs, being descended from the same nationality, I had soon become on intimate terms) gave me facilities not, perhaps, possessed by any other one to the same extent, to prepare, so far as it could be done with the scant materials at command for the purpose, what had long been a desideratum not easily supplied, viz., an authentic history of St. Louis during its French and Spanish days, its origin and progress.

In compliance with that oft preferred request, and in furtherance of my own views on the subject, I submit to you, as the result of my long researches and investigations in that field, the following pages, with the simple observation that however deficient they may prove as a literary effort, they will at least possess the merit of authenticity and reliability; and, I flatter myself, will establish beyond controversy many facts heretofore vague and obscure, connected with the early history of our place.

I am well aware of the difficulty of eradicating from the minds of the majority of mankind their preconceived

ideas, however erroneous, upon any subject-matter whatsoever ideas that they have perhaps imbibed from their childhood, coming down to them with the authority and prestige of parents to children, particularly of occurrences that transpired before their day, and which have reached them through tradition alone, with its manifold errors and exaggerations; and the almost useless task one undertakes in endeavoring to correct these erroneous impressions. This I shall not endeavor to do, but will simply present the facts in all cases as I found them, derived from the original official Spanish and French documents, most of them translated by myself, some of them yet in the archives, and others placed in my possession by descendants of the original participants therein.

Much of the information I have gathered relating to St. Louis I have obtained from certain works on Illinois and Indiana, the materials for a reliable history of the early days of the settlement of this upper country on the other side of the river, now Illinois, Indiana, etc., being much more abundant and authentic than those of this side.

From the time the English received possession of that side in 1765, during the thirteen years they held it, and subsequently when taken by Clark for the Virginians in 1778, down to the date of the transfer of the country on the west side of the river to the United States in 1804, a period of nearly forty years, courts had been established and records kept, from which a reliable, although but a brief, history could be produced. But not so with the country on this side, which dates its settlement only from the time of that transfer to the British, and to which cir

cumstance mainly it owes its sudden growth. For whatever documents there might have been, if any, in the so-called Spanish archives of St. Louis of a political or historical nature, calculated to furnish materials for history, were carried away with the cannon and munitions of war at the evacuation by De Lassus in 1804. As by the terms of the treaty of purchase, and his instructions from the governor-general at New Orleans, he was directed to leave only such papers as related to the private affairs of individuals, such as deeds, concessions, etc., affording but little information of a historical nature, and throwing but little light upon matters of public interest, consequently much of what we have hitherto regarded as history of those early days had come down to us through oral tradition alone, with the manifold exaggerations and misstatements to which all unrecorded history is liable in transmission.

Many facts connected with the abandonment of Fort Chartres, St. Phillippe and Kaskaskia have been brought to light in works on these two States and Kentucky that cannot be found in any work on Upper Louisiana.

Major Amos Stoddard, United States army, was the first who ever wrote anything in the shape of a sketch of St. Louis, and here is all he has to say of it in 1804, from his own observation:

"In 1764 St. Louis was founded by Pierre Laclede, Maxan & Co., as a trading post. In 1766 the village received an accession of inhabitants from the other side of the river, who preferred the Spanish to the English government. It contains about 180 houses, the best of them of stone. A small sloping hill extends along the rear of

the town, on the summit of which is a garrison, and beyond it is an extensive prairie which affords plenty of hay.

"After the Indian attack on St. Louis in 1780, the government deemed it necessary to fortify the town. It was immediately stockaded and the stone bastion and the demilune at the upper end of it were constructed. The succeeding peace of 1783 lessened the danger and the works were suspended. In 1794, the garrison on the hill in the rear of the town and government house was completed. In 1797, when an unfriendly visit was expected from Canada, four stone towers were erected at nearly equal distances in a circular direction around the town, as also a wooden block house near the lower end of it. It was contemplated to enclose the town by a regular chain of works, and the towers were intended to answer the purposes of bastions. But as the times grew more auspicious the design was abandoned, and the works left in an unfinished state."

In his "Sketches of Louisiana," Phila., 1812, Stoddard says in his preface:

"It fell to my lot in the mouth of March, 1804, to take possession of Upper Louisiana under the treaty of cession. The records and other public documents were open to my inspection; and, as it was my fortune to be stationed about five years on various parts of the Lower Mississippi, and nearly six months on Red river, my inquiries gradually extended to Louisiana. in general.

"That country, even at that day, was less known than any other (inhabited by a civilized people), of the same extent on