ous.

Even while the treaty was going on, and immediately. afterward, proof of their bad faith was patent to every one. They failed to carry out the principal article of the treaty and virtually repudiated the whole contract by deserting their villages in the very presence of the troops. In "orders" issued to the regiment, August 29th, upon the return of the expedition to Fort Atkinson, Colonel Leavenworth said: "The blood of our countrymen has been honorably avenged, the Aricaras humbled, and in such manner as will teach them and other Indian tribes to respect the American name and character." Such was not the opinion of those conversant with the facts. The affair was then considered a complete fiasco, and its fame as such persisted in tradition until the details were wholly forgotten. Ten years. afterward Maximillian thus referred to it: "The inhabitants of the banks of the Missouri affirm that this enterprise was conducted with very little energy; they retired from the enemy's villages without destroying them or doing much injury to the inhabitants, at which the allied Indians especially were much dissatisfied. The Aricaras, on the other hand, became extremely arrogant, and henceforth attacked and murdered all white men who were so unfortunate as to fall in their way."

Scarcely had Colonel Leavenworth read his orders to the troops at Fort Atkinson when several trappers were massacred by these Indians near the Mandan villages. In the following winter several were killed by them in the valley of the Platte, and similar outrages were of frequent occurrence for many years thereafter. It is true that General Atkinson, in 1825, found them humble and peaceably inclined, but his visit was in company with a formidable military force. The history of the twenty years following this affair, far from justifying the hopeful predictions of Colonel Leavenworth, were rather a literal fulfillment of the despondent prophecy of Major Pilcher in a letter to Benjamin O'Fallon within a week after the troops left the Aricara villages. "It is my sincere and candid opinion," he wrote, "that the expedition against the Aricaras, from which so much service might have been rendered to this dwindling and bleeding commerce, will rather tend to increase, than diminish, the evil; that the situation of affairs in this country is worsted materially; that instead of raising the American character in the estimation of its inhabitants and impressing them with the power and spirit

of our government, the contrary effect has been produced; and that the outrages of the Indians will increase in consequence. That a most unfavorable impression has been left upon the minds. of our Indian allies, is a fact that I am sorry to communicate." It is difficult to fathom the motives which actuated Colonel Leavenworth in this campaign. It was not lack of courage, for his excellent record was evidence against any such theory. It is probable that he felt alarmed at the responsibility that he had voluntarily assumed. He might reasonably doubt that his superiors would approve of his action in taking so large a command to so great a distance simply to punish an outrage against a party of traders and trappers. The lamentable accident in the wreck of the keel boat doubtless increased his anxiety and made him doubly anxious to achieve the object of the expedition without further loss. Finally, he may have distrusted his Indian allies, and even the trappers and mountaineers, and have feared. that a successful assault of the villages might have ended in a massacre of its inhabitants. He was well aware that such a result would have raised a storm back in the states, where the circumstances would be imperfectly understood. It is only from considerations of this character that it is possible to explain his conduct at the Aricara towns, and his deliberate choice of a course which could not fail to tarnish his reputation and bring down the contempt of the Indians upon the American arms.

One of the most regrettable features of the whole affair was the feeling of bitter animosity that was engendered between Colonel Leavenworth and Joshua Pilcher. Both were men of high character and unblemished reputation. Colonel Leavenworth had already won enviable distinction in his country's service, particularly in the battles of Chippewa and Niagara Falls in the war of 1812. He was a true soldier and a good officer, and, whatever may have been his error of judgment in the present case, there was no suspicion that he acted from any but the most disinterested, motives.

Mr. Pilcher was one of the ablest of the traders and had succeeded Manuel Lisa in the presidency of the Missouri Fur Company. His character was above reproach; he was well informed, and his opinions on matters relating to the Indian trade were more than once sought by the government. He had apparently joined the expedition purely from a desire to help punish the

Aricaras, for, as he had now withdrawn all of his establishments above the Sioux, he was not protecting his own interests to the same extent that Ashley was. Leavenworth was highly pleased with him up to the time when he began his negotiations for peace. He says in one of his reports: "Allow me to say that up to this time I had been very well pleased with Mr. Pilcher in every respect, particularly as sub-agent. He had neglected no opportunity to be serviceable to the expedition and had done everything in his power to ensure its success."

Colonel Leavenworth's decision to negotiate peace without a victory excited the indignation of Pilcher, who had just seen his Sioux auxiliaries draw off in disgust at the failure to accomplish anything. He refused to be a party to the treaty, and probably did all that he could to cause this part of the proceedings to fail. His conduct naturally aroused the ire of Colonel Leavenworth, who considered him bound to obey orders as long as he was attached to the command. The burning of the villages. after the troops had left, was at once attributed by Colonel Leavenworth to Pilcher, but it was probably one of Pilcher's men, William Gordon. Pilcher positively denied being a party to the act, and disclaimed any knowledge of who the guilty party was, at the same time intimating that in his opinion the act was altogether justifiable.

Colonel Leavenworth added fuel to the flame of discord by issuing an order on the day of departure from the Aricara towns, in which he directly charged the Missouri Fur Company with the destruction of the villages, and declared that, "with such men he would have no further intercourse." From this ban of displeasure he excepted Major Henry Vanderburgh and Moses B. Carson. But these gentlemen would not accept the colonel's indulgence, and wrote to Pilcher on the day following, that they felt "extremely mortified at having been selected as the object of his (Leavenworth's) approbation and praise." Pilcher himself was enraged at Leavenworth's order, and permitted his indignation to get the better of his judgment entirely. On the 23rd of August, at Fort Recovery, he addressed a letter to Colonel Leavenworth, which, whatever truth it might contain, was couched in such violent and abusive language as to produce the opposite effect upon the public from what was intended. His provocation was indeed great, and he was not a man given to

the mincing of words, but he ought at least to have refrained from personal abuse. He closed his letter with the following passage, in which, it must be acknowledged, there was more truth than the partisans of Colonel Leavenworth would have. been willing to admit. "I am well aware," he wrote, "that humanity and philanthropy are mighty shields for you against those who are entirely ignorant of the disposition and character of Indians, but with those who have experienced the fatal and ruinous consequence of their treachery and barbarity these considerations will avail nothing. You came to restore peace and tranquillity to the country and to leave an impression which would insure its continuance. Your operations have been such as to produce the contrary effect, and to impress the different Indian tribes with the greatest possible contempt for the American character. You came (to use your own language) to 'open and make good this great road'; instead of which you have, by the imbecility of your conduct and operations, created and left impassable barriers." (American Fur Trade, pages 600 et seq.)