. and brought the first intelligence that Vincennes was again occupied by the British-that Col. Hamilton, with an expedition from Detroit, had again reduced the post under the British arms. There is an anecdote connected with the surrender of Vincennes to Hamilton by Capt. Helm, which may illustrate the character of the followers of Clark. They were indeed the very elite of the western country, the hardy sons of hardy pioneers-the genuine yeomanry of the west. When Col. Hamilton entered Vincennes, there were but two Americans in the fort, at that place-Capt. Helm and one Henry. The latter had charge of a loaded cannon which was placed in the open gate of the fort, while Helm stood by, with a lighted match in his hand. So soon, as Hamilton appeared at the head of his troops within convenient hailing distance, Helm cried out in a loud voice "halt." This stopped the movement of the British; and a surrender of the fort is demanded. Helm swears "no man shall enter here, until I know the terms,' "you shall have the honors of war," replies the British officer; and the fort was then surrendered with its garrison of one officer and one private. Hamilton was now in possession of this important point on the Wabash; but deferred operations against Clark, until the next spring. He, at that time, contemplated a grand campaign which Clark thus communicates to Gov. Jefferson. "After taking Kaskaskia," of which he entertained no doubt, "he was to be joined by 200 Indians from Mackinac and 500 northern ones with this force united to hisown, this British officer was to penetrate up the Ohio to Fort Pitt, sweeping the stations of Kentucky in his way with light brass cannon taken for the purpose. So flashed with the confidence of conquest was the British commander, that he made no doubt of breaking up all west of Augusta, as the western frontier of Virginia was then called. But Clark had learned from Vigo that the British had but 80 of their own men at Vincennes with three small cannon and some swivals mounted. With a promptitude inspired by his genius for war, Clark, like the great Hannibal, when John Randolph (no mean authority) always considered his most appropriate original, determined to carry the war into the enemy's country-in other words to march against Hamilton at Vincennes. Clark afterwards observed "I know if I did not take him, he would take me." Nor was it the practice of our hero to postpone the execution of his plans, like the British officer till spring. A Mississippi boat, a keel boat most likely, if so good, was immediately fitted out as a galley, mounting two four pounders and six swivals, obtained from the enemy's fort at Kaskaskia.This, he placed under the command of Capt. Rogers with a company of 46 men. This officer had orders to descend the Mississippi from Kaskaskia, ascend the Ohio as far as the mouth of the Wabash and proceed up that stream as far as White river, suffer nothing to pass her and wait there for further orders from Clark in person. The galley was accordingly dispatched on its bold errand the first of naval operations in the west; and while we leave it to prosecute its perilous enterprise, let us attend to another part of that expedition. When the enterprise against Vincennes was determined on, the French inhabitants of Kaskaskia and Cahokia, with the military spirit, which ever eharacterized their native country, raised two companies, commanded by Capt. McCarty and Charleville; these, added to Clark's original force diminished, by a detachment to the Falls of Ohio under Colonel Linn, amounted to no more than 170 men. ART. III. SCHOOL OF MINES. We beg to acknowledge our obligations to Dr. King, for the following copy of a letter, addressed by him to our representatives in Congress, on the subject of an appropriation of land for the establishment and "SCHOOL OF MINES; support of a and we join with the writer in earnestly urging upon Congress the importance of the measure. EDITORS. To the Honorable JAMES B. BOWLIN, W. V. N. BAY, JAMES S. GREEN, W. P. HALL and J. S. PHELPS, Representatives of the people of the State of Missouri in the Congress of the United States. GENTLEMEN-I had the honor yesterday of forwarding each of you by mail two numbers of the " Western Journal," containing articles advocating the memorial of the last session of the legislature of this State to the Congress of the United States, for an appropriation of public lands for a geological survey. I respectfully recommend these articles to your consideration and trust they will be found to contain facts and arguments which may be useful when the memorial is laid before the House of Representatives. To the people of Missouri this survey is a matter of the deepest importance, for in climate, soil, mineral productions, commercial and manufacturing facilities, nature has dealt with us in the most liberal manner, and our resources need but to be known, to be properly appreciated. Whilst, however, Missouri will be specially benefited, I have endeavored to show, and I hope successfully, that the general government, as well as the people of the other States, have an interest in the survey sufficient to justify us in asking this appropriation. I have not allowed myself to look upon this memorial as an application for eleemosynary favor. I cannot view it as such, whilst the government of the United States claim a proprietary claim to so large a portion of our territory. After showing the importance of this survey in a national point of view, I have exhibited the impossibility of making it without embracing the public lands: the illiberality of refusing co-operation when both parties are alike benefited; the unreasonableness of expecting the people of Missouri to incur the entire expense, and the fallaciousness of such an expectation; and finally the injustice of withholding from us the assistance that has been given to other States for similar purposes. No grounds, even for a plausible argument against the appropriation, presents itself to my m nd, and I cannot doubt, that with the able support you are so capable of giving the memorial, that Congress will readily grant it. There is one subject in the memorial, gentlemen, to which, as I have scarcely referred in my articles, I would now respectfully call your attention: that is, the proposition to establish a School of Mines and Agriculture. The mining interests of the United States have never received the attention from the general government, nor perhaps, from any of the State governments that they deserve. Since the days of Mr. Jefferson their importance in a national point of view has been astonishingly overlooked, and now we find ourselves suddenly possessed of the most extended and valuable mineral possession of any nation amongst civilized people, as unprepared to manage or direct operations in them as the wild Indians that recently roamed over them. This neglect is the more remarkable as we have had the example of all the leading governments of Europe on similar subjects before us, and even before the acquisition of New Mexico and California we were scarcely inferior to any one of them in our mineral resources. When the territory of Louisiana became a part of the United States it is quite possible Mr. Jefferson contemplated the organization of some system, for the management and government of our mines, similar to the system adopted by the continental governments of Europe. A statesman of his enlarged views could not avoid seeing the importance of their development, and the necessity of placing them beyond injury from ignorance or the spirit of speculation. The act of 1807, reserving the lead mines and salines from sale indicates this. The fundamental principle of the "droit regalien (Berg-regel Germ.) was laid down by this act. But if ever a school of mines and regular corps of mining engineers, or any other system for teaching the arts of mining and metallurgy, and securing a proper administration of the mining affairs of the country was contemplated, it seems to have been entirely abandoned; the government reserving to itself and exercising only the most. odious of its prerogatives, the privilege of a tax-gatherer. Missouri, after having waited patiently for more than twenty years, finding that nothing more was to be expected from the general government, obtained the passage of the act of March the 3d 1829, by which the mineral lands of this State, like other public lands became subject to private entry. This act annulled, or ought to have annulled all hopes that the government at Washington would take the course Mr. Jefferson seems to have had in view. By this act she abandoned the control over what was then, if it be not even now, one of her richest mineral possessions, and it is only remarkable after this, that she yielded with such apparently slow reluctance her right over the others. There is nothing left now but the recently acquired territories of New Mexico and California. The latter a magnificent possession, where "the glorious sun "Stays in his course, and plays the alchemist; It is extremely probable that the action of our government in this matter has been influenced by the example of Great Britain, as she is the only one of the several leading powers of Europe, that has not retained in some official form, a control over, or a supervision of her mining interests. The only one in which there is not a national school of mines to teach those upon whom the trust of directing or superintending this important interest may devolve, that knowledge which is absolutely necessary for rendering them competent to discharge their duties. If such was the case we were very unfortunate in the selection of a monitor. It is not necessary to enquire here why she has not such a control. The history of the organization of (King John, Act III. Scene I.) the Government tells that. But the great error lay in supposing that the high position she occupies in mining and metallurgic operations was a proof that these pursuits, like agricultural, manufacturing and commercial ones, should be left free from all control of or connection with the government. This argument is fallacious in its foundation. A mine is different from a farm, and has no similitude to a manufacturing or commercial establishment. A farm may be worked for an indefinite period of time, and yet, if properly cultivated, be as productive as when first opened. A manufactory may go on for years increasing its production without the fear of exhausting the supply of its raw material, if it be of a nature capable of reproduction. A commercial establishment may grow up from the smallest beginning until it spreads its operation to every quarter of the globe without lessening or materially affecting trade in general, whilst it adds immensely to the stock or the capital of the parties engaged. Not so with a mine. It has no expansive capacity, no reproductive quality. Every pound of ore, metal or mineral taken from it, is so much towards its exhaustion. Every day's work done on it not only shortens its existence, but generally increases to a certain extent the cost of that which will be produced by the next. The working of a mine is like the prodigality of the spend-thrift, incessantly lessening the treasure on which it operates. This is the important distinction between the mining and all other great pursuits of a country, and it is this difference that justifies the government in whose dominions it is conducted in seeing that it is carried on in the most prudent, economical, and intelligent manner. There may be minerals, as for instance, coal and iron in several countries, so abundant, that the wastefulness or ignorance of ages can have but little effect in lessening the original supply. And yet there are other countries in which these very articles may exist to so limited an extent and under such unfavorable circumstances that every care must be taken to prevent waste and to cheapen the price of production, for the public good. The first is the case with Great Britain, the second with most of the continental powers of Europe. Great Britain, may well, therefore, trust the management of her mines particularly of iron, coal and lead to those interested in them; for the time is very remote when their exhaustion is to be apprehended; and more especially as she has a class of population whose long practical experience enable them to work these mines in the most advantageous manner. All attempts at monopoly under such eircumstances would be absurd, and the people at large are thus protected from imposition, by competition, without the necessity of official interference. This is rarely the case in the territories of the continental governments. In many of these there are extensive mines giving employment to a large and industrious population, that would soon be ruined and abandoned, and consequently those dependent upon them rendered destitute, if it were not for the watchfulness of the ment and the extreme prudence with which they are managed. govern It is not because our mineral resources, especially coal and iron, and perhaps, lead and copper, do not equal those of Great Britain, that we committed an error in adopting her mining policy; but because we had not, and have not yet the mining population, the peculiar class of people that she has, that is necessary to render such a policy advisable. Nor unless we adopt some means of instructing them better than we now possess, can we have such a population for some generations to come, composed of our own citizens. These are the considerations that would have justified the government of the United States in the establishment of a school of mines and the organization of a corps of Engineers. This would have been a true protective policy, at least with regard to all our mineral productions. A policy that we think would not have been objected to, by any enlightened statesmen in the country. If, with this, the government had retained its proprietary right over the mines or disposed of them with a condition that they should be worked under the supervision of its officers, we should, at this time, be in a very different condition from what we are, in respect to our mining operations. The opinion is common, and, no doubt, has had its influence, that, as the English are the best practical miners, and Great Britain the most productive mining country of Europe, that, therefore, the science of mining and metallurgy is better known there than elsewhere. As strange as it may appear, the reverse of this is the fact. What is known there is well known and well applied. But it is local knowledge, the result of daily, yearly experience, under the same circumstances and in the same mines, and often in the same minerals, by men whose business was not to philosophise, but to dig and pick. The literature of a country is the best means of determining the amount of intellect that may be devoted to any particular pursuit in it. This standard shows us at once the relative position Great Britain bears to other European nations. Whilst the press of France, Germany, and other continental powers is constantly issuing works of the highest merit on mining and metallurgy, England presents us nothing better than an article compiled for some popular Dictionary or Encyclopedia, and even these few and far between." She is even indebted to foreigners for the best description of what she is doing. We look in vain in an English catalogue for such works as "The Voyage Metellurgique," "Traite des Essais," "De la Richesse Minerale," &c. With this explanation we can readily see the cause of the disastrous results that have attended English mining operations. in other countries. The new circumstances under which they had to be conducted required something more than mere practical experience. They required the application of the most profound principles of the science. But an Englishman learns with reluctance anything new, out of England. He is, moreover, the most inelastic of all civilized beings. He seeks to make everything bend to him and his pre-existant opinions. When this cannot be done, one or the other generally breaks and the history of the mining operations of South America and Mexico shows that it is, by far most frequently, the Englishman. The history of these unfortunate results on our own continent, should teach us the necessity of something more than even the best practical knowledge for conducting mining properly in a new country like ours, and make us feel how profoundly deficient we are in every thing relating to the subject. We are deficient-it is a humiliating confession, but the knowledge of it is the first step towards improvement-we are deficient in scientific and practical knowledge. We are children with an inheritance whose value is beyond calculation, if we will but learn how to use it. But where is the school? No where yet, in our own country. The government of the United |