37 6 The Winning of the West 



and infamous liar. The men who argue that the 

 speech was fictitious are also obliged to explain what 

 motive there could possibly have been for the de- 

 ception; they accordingly advance the theory that 

 it was part of Dunmore's (imaginary) treacherous 

 conduct, as he wished to discredit Cresap, because 

 he knew apparently by divination that the latter 

 was going to be a whig. Even granting the Earl 

 corrupt motives and a prophetic soul, it remains to 

 be explained why he should wish to injure an ob- 

 scure borderer, whom nobody has ever heard of ex- 

 cept in connection with Logan ; it would have served 

 the purpose quite as well to have used the equally 

 unknown name of the real offender, Greathouse. 

 The fabrication of the speech would have been an 

 absolutely motiveless and foolish -transaction; to 

 which Gibson, a pronounced whig, must needs have 

 been a party. This last fact shows that there could 

 have been no intention of using the speech in the 

 British interest. 



(2) The statement of General George Rogers 

 Clark. (Like the preceding, this can be seen in 

 the Jefferson Papers.) Clark was present in Dun- 

 more's camp at the time. He says : "Logan's speech 

 to Dunmore now came forward as related by Mr. 

 Jefferson and was generally believed and indeed not 

 doubted to have been genuine and dictated by Logan 

 The Army knew it was wrong so far as it re- 

 spected Cresap, and afforded an opportunity of ral- 

 lying that Gentleman on the subject I discovered 

 that Cresap was displeased and told him that he 



