SWANTONI INDIAN TIMP.KS OK TlIK L()\VKI{ M ISSISSI IM'I VALLKV 241 



CMiiilxtnic imrnit i\i'. wliicli (lie w rilcr has j:;('mM"ally rdllowcd. the 

 Xatrlu'Z escaped to the ()|)|)()>ite side of the Mi.ssissip])i with all of their 

 ])ossessioiis and all tiieif pliin<U'r that was of any value." Dii Prat/ and 

 (TAitaijiiette intimate that tliis could not have been done without the 

 connivance of some of their enemies.'' yet since practically all that 

 was needed was to cross the river itself, if we suppose the Choctaw 

 to have been too disgruntled or indilTerent to keep a close watch, it 

 was not an impossible feat. Another accitsation. made by Dumont 

 and practically indorsed by Du Pratz, is that De Loiibois had granted 

 peace and agreed not to enter the Natchez forts only to secure the 

 release of the i)risoners. and that afterward he had intended to break 

 his word and return to the assault, but that the Indians suspected his 

 design/' 'IMie tiuth of this accusation depends entirely upon the 

 actual terms of the treaty, which were evidently not committed to 

 writing and can not now be know^n. Charlevoix, T^e Petit, and the 

 Claiborne manuscript give these as simply in^"()lving the surrender 

 of the prisoners on the one side and the withdrawal of the French 

 to the river on the other, without stating Avhether there was a specifi- 

 cation that this withdrawal was to be permanent or for a limited 

 period, or, indeed, Avhether any time was mentioned.'' As De Loubois 

 is otherwise well spoken of, it is hardly fair to accuse him of such 

 a piece of treachery Avithout better evidence. It looks rather as if 

 the Natchez had already laid their plans to escape and took the 

 measures they did in order to gam time and remove the French from 

 their neighborhood until the project could be carried out. 



All that now remained for De Lof.bois was to erect an earthwork to 

 take the place of the old stockaded Fort Rosalie, leave d'Artaguette, 

 who had distinguished him.self in the campaign, or the Baron de Cres- 

 nav' in connnand,'' ransom the prisoners from the ChoctaAv. to whom 

 they had been delivered, and return to New Orleans.'^ The fact that 

 De Loubois allowed the prisoners to be surrendered to the Choctaw^ 

 instead of to himself seems strange, and still more so that no one has 

 connnented upon it. Could it be possible that those proficient 

 double dealers, the Clioctaw, had secured the custodianship of the 

 prisoners from the Natchez as hush money for conniving at or wink- 

 ing at their escape ? That they were quite capable of such a maneuver 

 seems apparent. We must not lay too much to their charge, but that 



"Charlevoix, Hist. Louisiana, vi, 100; Du Pratz, Hist, de La Loulsiane, in, 291-292. 



* Du Pratz, Hist, de La Louisianc, in, 292; Gayarr^, Ilist. Louisiana, i, 434. 



"Dumont, M^m. Hist, sur La Louisiane, ii, 189; Du Pratz, Hist, de La Louisiane, iii, 

 29,3. 



'' riiarlevoix, lUst. Louisiana, vi, 99 ; Le Petit in .Tos. Rcl.. i.xviii, 19.3 ; .Tournal in 

 Claiborne, Hist. Miss., i^ 47. 



" Du Pratz and Dumont, followed by Gayarre (i, 4.35), say tlie Baron de Cresnay ; 

 Cbarlevoix and Lo Petit say d'.Vrtaj^uotto. 



'Charlevoix, Hist. Louisiana, vr, 100; Du Pratz, Hist, de La Louisiane, iii, 293. 



83220— Bull. 43—10 16 



