METALLIC ORNAMENTS OF NEW YORK INDIANS 59 



This retains the ring- in the loop above, but this is commonly 

 lacking. ( )n the obverse the city is represented with houses, 

 church spires and the British flag', and has lines of defense between 

 it and the water. A small cartouche below incloses the letters 

 D. C. F. The reverse is perfectly smooth in this case. In others 

 the Indian's name is in script above, following the rim. The name 

 of the nation is in capitals, in a straight line across the center. 



As Mr McLachlan has given special attention to these medals, 

 some quotations are here made from his letters to the writer in 1891. 

 He differs from the latter regarding the date, connecting them with 

 Sir William Johnson's western trip in 1761. He says: 



He is at Oswego, ready to sail on July 21, 1761 : " Got everything 

 •on board the vessel, then met the Onondaga chiefs. When assem- 

 bled, I bid them welcome. . . Then delivered the medals sent 

 me by the General for those who went with us to Canada last year, 

 being twenty-three in number." The taking of Montreal was 

 almost the only engagement in which the New England Algonquin 

 tribes acted with the Iroquois. Montreal was invested, at the con- 

 quest, by an army in which the Indians under Sir William Johnson 

 took a prominent part, and there is no reason why the view of 

 Montreal should have been used for any other occasion than the 

 •conquest. 



In regard to other points, he adds that in his opinion an actual 

 instead of conventional view of Montreal would have been given 

 when better known: 



The D. C. F. is a stamp such as jewelers use to stamp their plate. 

 It has been stamped on after the medal was cast. That the name of 

 the tribe should be spelled differently from Sir William Johnson 

 does not matter, for the item states that they were ordered by the 

 General, probably Amherst. He therefore would adopt his own 

 spelling - . Medals given after the Revolution bear the head of George 

 3 and the royal arms. 



In a letter of June 4, 1902, Mr McLachlan maintains his position 

 and adds: 



I have claimed that the medal was made in New York. This is 

 borne out by the medal described by Betts, page 227, which bears 

 the same maker's mark. The medal is too crude in workmanship 

 to be of English manufacture. The New York Indian medal clearly 



