76 THE FRENCH, ENGLISH, AND INDIANS. [1625-1750. 



be burnt alive to strike terror into his countrymen ; 

 and Louvigny, French commandant at Michillimac- 

 kinac, in 1695, tortured an Iroquois ambassador to 

 death, that he might break off a negotiation between 

 that people and the WyandotsJ Nor are these 

 the only well-attested instances of such execrable 

 inhumanity. But if the French were guilty of 

 these cruelties against their Indian enemies, they 

 were no less guilty of unworthy compliance with 

 the demands of their Indian friends, in cases where 

 Christianity and civilization would have dictated a 

 prompt refusal. Even Montcalm stained his bright 

 name by abandoning the hapless defenders of 

 Oswego and William Henry to the tender mercies 

 of an Indian mob. 



In general, however, the Indian policy of the 

 French cannot be charged with obsequiousness. 

 Complaisance was tempered with dignity. At an 

 early period, they discerned the peculiarities of the 

 native character, and clearly saw that while on 

 the one hand it was necessary to avoid giving 

 offence, it was not less necessary on the other to 

 assume a bold demeanor and a show of power ; to 

 caress with one hand, and grasp a drawn sword 

 with the other.^ Every crime against a Frenchman 

 was promptly chastised by the sharp agency of 

 military law ; while among the English, the offender 



1 La Hontan, I. 177. Potherie, Hist. Am. Sept. 11. 298 (Paris, 1722). 



These facts afford no ground for national reflections, when it is recol- 

 lected that while Iroquois prisoners were tortured in the wilds of Canada, 

 Elizabeth Gaunt was burned to death at Tyburn for yielding to the dic- 

 tates of compassion, and giving shelter to a political offender. 



2 Le Jeune, Rel. de la N. F. 1636, 193. 



