﻿ALLEN.] 
  NEVER 
  EANGED 
  IN 
  PRESENT 
  LIMITS 
  OF 
  FLORIDA. 
  493 
  

  

  absent 
  from 
  them 
  all.* 
  It 
  was 
  also 
  absent 
  from 
  this 
  region 
  at 
  the 
  time 
  

   when 
  Lawson, 
  Brickell, 
  and 
  Catesby 
  explored 
  the 
  Carolinas 
  with 
  special 
  

   reference 
  to 
  their 
  natural 
  products. 
  In 
  the 
  extreme 
  southeastern 
  part 
  

   of 
  Georgia 
  (Camden 
  County), 
  however, 
  there 
  is 
  found 
  a 
  small 
  creek 
  

   emptying 
  into 
  the 
  Santilla 
  Eiver, 
  at 
  its 
  great 
  bend 
  to 
  the 
  eastward, 
  

   which 
  still 
  bears 
  the 
  name 
  of 
  " 
  Buffalo 
  Creek." 
  If 
  this 
  is 
  to 
  be 
  taken 
  

   as 
  sufficient 
  proof 
  of 
  the 
  former 
  presence 
  there 
  of 
  buffaloes, 
  it 
  may 
  im- 
  

   ply 
  that 
  the 
  region 
  was 
  casually 
  visited 
  by 
  a 
  roving 
  band 
  of 
  buffaloes 
  

   from 
  the 
  region 
  northward 
  some 
  time 
  probably 
  between 
  the 
  years 
  1700 
  

   and 
  1770. 
  As 
  above 
  noted, 
  this 
  region 
  was 
  traversed 
  during 
  the 
  six- 
  

   teenth 
  and 
  seventeenth 
  centuries 
  by 
  several 
  different 
  explorers, 
  who, 
  as 
  

   is 
  evident 
  from 
  their 
  writings, 
  did 
  not 
  meet 
  with 
  or 
  hear 
  of 
  buffaloes 
  

   here. 
  It 
  is, 
  however^ 
  quite 
  possible 
  that 
  subsequently 
  buffaloes 
  may 
  

   have 
  occasionally 
  wandered 
  to 
  Southeastern 
  Georgia, 
  and 
  even 
  to 
  the 
  

   northern 
  portions 
  of 
  Florida. 
  In 
  all 
  other 
  cases 
  the 
  name 
  " 
  Buffalo 
  

   Creek 
  " 
  proves 
  to 
  have 
  had 
  its 
  origin 
  in 
  the 
  former 
  presence 
  of 
  buffaloes 
  

   in 
  the 
  vicinity 
  of 
  the 
  streams 
  so 
  named. 
  

  

  The 
  Buffalo 
  not 
  found 
  ivithin 
  the 
  present 
  limits 
  of 
  Florida. 
  — 
  The 
  buf- 
  

   falo 
  is 
  also 
  believed 
  by 
  some 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  found 
  within 
  the 
  present 
  

   limits 
  of 
  Florida, 
  and 
  throughout 
  the 
  Gulf 
  States 
  down 
  to 
  the 
  Gulf 
  of 
  

   Mexico. 
  This, 
  however, 
  is 
  a 
  mistake, 
  mainly 
  arising, 
  probably, 
  from 
  

   the 
  former 
  vast 
  extent 
  of 
  Florida 
  as 
  compared 
  with 
  its 
  present 
  limits.! 
  

  

  These 
  writers 
  are 
  Forbes,! 
  who 
  as 
  recently 
  as 
  1821 
  wrote, 
  "The 
  

   buffalo 
  is 
  said 
  to 
  be 
  among 
  the 
  number 
  of 
  wild 
  beasts, 
  but 
  not 
  com- 
  

   monly 
  seen" 
  ! 
  Davis 
  also 
  says, 
  on 
  the 
  authority 
  of 
  Eomaus, 
  that 
  " 
  their 
  

   tracks 
  have 
  been 
  seen 
  as 
  far 
  south 
  and 
  southeast 
  as 
  the 
  Withlacooche 
  

   Eiver." 
  § 
  But 
  from 
  the 
  context 
  of 
  Eomans's 
  work, 
  and 
  from 
  the 
  known 
  

   range 
  of 
  the 
  buffalo 
  at 
  the 
  time 
  he 
  wrote 
  (177G), 
  he 
  must 
  have 
  been 
  

   mistaken 
  in 
  respect 
  to 
  the 
  identity 
  of 
  the 
  tracks. 
  Eomans 
  says: 
  

   " 
  . 
  ■. 
  . 
  . 
  at 
  the 
  junction 
  of 
  Flint 
  Eiver 
  and 
  the 
  river 
  in 
  the 
  south 
  

   extreme 
  of 
  this 
  division 
  is 
  the 
  head 
  of 
  Manatee 
  Eiver, 
  between 
  

   which 
  and 
  the 
  Amaxura 
  I 
  saw 
  a 
  vast 
  number 
  of 
  deer, 
  and 
  the 
  marks 
  

   of 
  many 
  of 
  the 
  hunting-camps 
  of 
  the 
  savages. 
  We 
  found 
  the 
  footsteps 
  

   of 
  six 
  or 
  eight 
  buffaloes 
  hereabouts, 
  so 
  plain 
  as 
  to 
  be 
  convinced 
  of 
  the 
  

   track 
  being 
  made 
  by 
  those 
  animals."|| 
  Professor 
  Baird, 
  in 
  1852, 
  says, 
  

  

  * 
  Among 
  the 
  authors 
  here 
  referred 
  to 
  are 
  Robert 
  Horn 
  (Briefe 
  Description 
  of 
  the 
  Prov- 
  

   ince 
  of 
  Carolina 
  on 
  the 
  Coasts 
  of 
  Floreda, 
  etc., 
  16ti6) 
  ; 
  Samuel 
  Wilson 
  (An 
  Account 
  of 
  

   the 
  Province 
  of 
  Carolina, 
  in 
  America, 
  etc., 
  1682); 
  " 
  T. 
  A." 
  [Thomas 
  Ash] 
  (Carolina; 
  

   or 
  a 
  Description 
  of 
  the 
  Present 
  State 
  of 
  that 
  Country 
  and 
  the 
  Natural 
  Excellencies 
  

   thereof, 
  etc., 
  by 
  T. 
  A., 
  Gent., 
  1682); 
  and 
  John 
  Archdale 
  (A 
  New 
  Description 
  of 
  that 
  

   fertile 
  and 
  pleasant 
  Province 
  of 
  Carolina, 
  etc., 
  1707). 
  Reprinted 
  in 
  Carroll's 
  Hist. 
  

   Coll. 
  of 
  S. 
  Car., 
  Vol. 
  II. 
  See 
  also 
  Hakluyt, 
  Voyages, 
  etc., 
  Vol. 
  IV, 
  for 
  these 
  papers. 
  

  

  t 
  As 
  is 
  well 
  known, 
  for 
  many 
  years 
  subsequent 
  to 
  the 
  disastrous 
  expedition 
  of 
  De 
  

   Soto, 
  Florida, 
  as 
  claimed 
  by 
  Spain, 
  embraced 
  all 
  the 
  Atlantic 
  coast 
  as 
  far 
  north 
  as 
  the 
  

   Gulf 
  of 
  St. 
  Lawrence, 
  and 
  for 
  more 
  than 
  a 
  century 
  after, 
  or 
  till 
  1651, 
  extended 
  north- 
  

   ward 
  to 
  the 
  present 
  southern 
  boundary 
  of 
  Virginia, 
  and 
  comprised 
  an 
  immense 
  unex- 
  

   plored 
  region 
  in 
  the 
  interior. 
  Not 
  till 
  1721 
  was 
  its 
  western 
  boundary 
  restricted 
  to 
  its 
  

   present 
  limits. 
  In 
  1764, 
  the 
  year 
  following 
  its 
  acquisition 
  by 
  the 
  British 
  crown,^its 
  

   western 
  boundary 
  was 
  again 
  temporarily 
  extended 
  to 
  the 
  Mississippi 
  River. 
  — 
  Monetie^s 
  

   Hist, 
  of 
  the 
  Valley 
  of 
  the 
  Mississqjpi, 
  Vol. 
  I, 
  pp. 
  65-77. 
  • 
  

  

  In 
  1745 
  the 
  British 
  possessions 
  in 
  North 
  America 
  embraced 
  not 
  only 
  that 
  portion 
  of 
  

   the 
  United 
  States 
  north 
  of 
  the 
  present 
  limits 
  of 
  Florida, 
  east 
  of 
  the 
  Alleghanies, 
  ex- 
  

   clusive, 
  however, 
  of 
  those 
  portions 
  of 
  New 
  York 
  and 
  Vermont 
  north 
  of 
  the 
  44th 
  par- 
  

   allel. 
  The 
  whole 
  vast 
  interior 
  belonged 
  to 
  the 
  French, 
  and 
  while 
  almost 
  the 
  whole 
  

   basin 
  of 
  the 
  Mississippi 
  was 
  denominated 
  Louisiana, 
  ov 
  the 
  Proinnce 
  of 
  Louis, 
  the 
  north- 
  

   eastern 
  part, 
  including 
  not 
  only 
  the 
  present 
  Canadas, 
  but 
  nearly 
  all 
  the 
  territory 
  north 
  

   of 
  the 
  Ohio, 
  was 
  called 
  Canada, 
  or 
  New 
  France. 
  — 
  Ibid., 
  Vol. 
  I, 
  map. 
  

  

  t 
  Sketches, 
  Historical 
  and 
  Topographical, 
  of 
  the 
  Floridas 
  ; 
  more 
  especially 
  of 
  East 
  

   Florida, 
  p. 
  67. 
  

  

  § 
  Conquest 
  of 
  New 
  Mexico, 
  1869, 
  p. 
  67, 
  footnote. 
  

  

  II 
  A 
  Concise 
  Natural 
  History 
  of 
  East 
  and 
  West 
  Florida, 
  pp. 
  280, 
  281. 
  

  

  