Ohio History Journal

FORTS LORAMIE AND PICKAWILLANY.

 

BY R. W. MCFARLAND, LL. D.

 

One of the functions of an Historical Society is, or at least,

ought to be, to criticize doubtful and inexact statements in works

professing to be History, and where practicable, to make known

the truth.

Let us apply this principle to some of the statements made by

different writers in reference to the places named at the head of

this article. But first it is well to give the location of the forts,

both of which were long ago demolished, and nearly every

vestige obliterated.

In the summer of 1899, the writer visited the first named

place twice, and the latter once. For the exact position of Picka-

willany, I am indebted to the venerable Major Stephen Johnston,

of Piqua, who was born in the vicinity in 1812, and who has been

familiar with the locality all his long life. In the second place,

my thanks are due to Mr. C. B. Jamison, an attorney much

given to historical research and who has made particular examina-

tion of the site.

Loramie's creek enters the Miami on the west side about three

miles north of Piqua, and nearly a mile north of the farm-house

formerly owned and long occupied by Col. John Johnston, who for

about half a century was Indian agent for the United States

government. This house is nearly a century old, and stands on

the west bank of the Miami, twenty-five or thirty rods north of

Fort Piqua, (built by Wayne in 1794,) and, as before said, at a

greater distance from Fort Pickawillany.

About a hundred yards below the mouth of Loramie's creek,

the bank of the river, here fifteen or twenty feet above low water,

turns abruptly towards the west, and runs probably twenty rods

or more before resuming its generally southern trend. On this

shoulder of land just below the mouth of the creek stood Fort

Pickawillany. It was made of logs which were set on end in

trenches dug for the purpose,-a stockade, such as was built by

(479)

• 1
 

480        Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.

 

the score during the war of the rebellion from 1861 to 1865. A

well was dug within the fort, which was erected late in the fall

of 1750, and was destroyed by the French and Indians in June

1752, having stood about a year and a half;-and not four years

as asserted by one historian.

Mr. Jamison says that when the ground is freshly plowed,

it still shows discoloration from the disturbance of the soil in

digging the trenches and the well. Mr. J. has many relics gath-

ered on the site of the fort, and of the houses outside of the fort;--

pieces of pottery and of table ware, and part of a fork which had

rusted nearly away. It was an easy matter to find other relics

of the household on the day of my visit. The site of the fort is

then fully determined. In later years the Indian village extend-

ing from the river to the hills half a mile to the west, was called

Upper Piqua, and was the scene of a sanguinary battle in 1763,

participated in chiefly by Indians. A tribe of Indians living in

the vicinity was called by the French, "Picqualinees". The Eng-

lish varied the spelling both of the tribe and of the village;

Peccaway,-Pickaway, and two or three other ways. Lower

Piqua, the site of the present city was sometimes called Chillicothe.

Fort Loramie was on the west side of the same creek about

fifteen miles nearly northwest of Pickawillany, and about half a

mile from the village of Berlin in the western part of Shelby

county. The location is given in the map of the original survey

of the land, made in 1819, and on record in the land office in

Columbus. It was in the northeast quarter of section 10, town-

ship eight, south, range four east of the Miami meridian; and

near the middle of the east line of the quarter section. It is

also marked on the plat of the original survey of land south of the

Greenville treaty line, made in 1800, long before the fort was

destroyed. This plat is also on record in the land office. Every

vestige of the fort itself seems entirely obliterated. A large stone

in place is still shown as having been one of the foundations of

a house built outside of the fort.

The farm house stands but a few feet from this rock, and

a large barn a few rods away may possibly stand on the site of the

old fort. The owner of the farm pointed out to me some graves

in his garden, one of which was called the grave of General

• 2
 

Forts Loramie and Pickawillany.          481

Richard Butler, who was killed in St. Clair's defeat, November

4, 1791, at Fort Recovery, twenty miles away. [See note A at

the end of this article.]

Now let us see what some of our histories say as to the

location of these forts. In Knapp's History of the Maumee Val-

ley, published in Toledo in 1872, on page 21, I find the following

statements: "Late in that year (1750) a party of twenty-five per-

sons from eastern Pennsylvania, built a station on the Great

Miami, at the mouth of what is now known as Loramie's creek,

sixteen miles northwest of Sidney, Shelby County. It was called

Pickawillany. The place was not widely known until 1769, when

a Canadian French trader, named Peter Loramie, established a

store there. After his arrival the place was called Loramie's

station. Clark attacked it in 1782. The site of Pickawillany

and Loramie's store has never been rebuilt."

The mouth of Loramie's creek is nine miles southwest of

Sidney, and Fort Loramie fifteen miles nearly northwest, at the

beginning of the portage beween Loramie's creek and the head

waters of the St. Mary's river. Clark attacked the Indian vil-

lage at the mouth of the Loramie, and a detachment of his army

made thence a night march to Loramie's station, fifteen miles

away, looted the store and burned all the buildings, as is fully

described in Howe's History of Ohio.

In a small historical work published in Cincinnati by Robert

Clarke are the statements given below. The book is called the

"Journal of Capt. Wm. Trent from Logstown to Pickawillany

in 1752", edited by Mr. Goodman. Logstown was a few miles

down the river from the site of Pittsburg, quoted variously from

fourteen to twenty miles. Of course most readers of this article

know that in 1752, there was neither town nor fort where that

city now stands. In addition to the Journal of Capt. Trent, many

brief narratives of other events are given. Here are the extracts

already alluded to.

On p. 32, after stating that in the year 1750, certain Penn-

sylvanians had sent large presents to a tribe of Indians living on

the Big Miami, the account says that in return therefor, the Eng-

lish had permission "to build a strong trading house at the town

on the Miami at the mouth of Loramie's creek." [The creek

Vol. VIII-31.

• 3
 

482       Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.

did not bear that name in 1750.] The book goes on to say

that "The English in the fall of 1750, began the erection of a

stockade, as a place of protection ..... when the main build-

ing was completed it was surrounded with a high wall of split

logs, having three gateways. Within the enclosures the traders

dug a well." ..... Christopher Gist was there in February

1751. .... [he says] ..... "on Feb 18 we walked about and

viewed the fort which wanted some repairs" ..... "In June

1752 the French captured he fort." P. 54. "A Canadian trader,

Peter Loramie, established a store at old Pickawillany .....

After his arrival the town was called Loramie's Station.....

Geo. Rogers Clarke in the fall of 1782, attacked the town, the

store was looted and burned, and so all the other buildings ....

The site of Pickawillany and Loramie's Station has never been

rebuilt." This last sentence is identical with the last sentence

in the extract from Knapp's History. It is plain that one writer

copied from the other, or both copied from some third source.

Both accounts make Pickawillany and Loramie's Station occupy

the same ground;-one account puts them 16 miles northwest of

Sidney; the other, 9 miles southwest of the same city. But the

two forts were not at the same place; and both histories are at

fault.

In a foot-note on p. 84, it is stated that "on Evans's map,

made in 1755, the fort [Pickawillany] was on the west bank of

Loramie's creek, at its mouth." The map was right.

In a history of Darke county, p. 99, I find this statement:

"This failure was not so bitter as the English effort to sustain

their trading post in 1749, on the Great Miami, afterwards called

Loramie's store. It pursued a feeble existence till 1752, when a

French raid upon the Twightwees and the English colonists

proved fatal." So this writer puts Loramie's store at the site of

Pickawillany-the same error which was made by the editor

of Trent's Journal.

In a history of Logan County I find the following statement;

"A Canadian Frenchman named Loramie established a store on

the site [Pickawillany]. .... A fort was built on the site of the

store, by Wayne and named fort Loramie."

So this writer puts both forts and the store at the same point

• 4
 

Forts Loramie and Pickawillany.         483

on the Miami. From these four accounts who could tell where

either of the forts stood? All four of the writers are wrong in

some of their statements; and it is evident that no effort was made

to ascertain the facts. What are such histories worth? In the

new edition of Howe's History of Ohio, the facts are correctly

stated under the heading "Shelby County."

NOTE A. In the body of this article it was incidentally re-

marked that the body of Gen. Butler was buried at Fort Loramie.

Let us examine this claim. The remnant of St. Clair's army after

the defeat was forced to retreat immediately, and was pursued by

the Indians 10 or 12 miles from the battle ground. Three months

after, i. e., about the 1st of February 1792, Gen. Wilkinson, who

succeeded St. Clair in the command of the troops, sent a mounted

force of about 500 men to bury the dead, and to recover the aban-

doned cannon, if possible.

Howe, under the head of "Mercer county", gives part of a

letter written by Capt. Buntin to St. Clair. The Capt. was in the

detachment which went to the battlefield. He says. "We found

three whole carriages, the other five were so much damaged that

they were rendered useless. [The cannon had been hidden by the

Indians, but one of the pieces was dug up on the field in 1830.]

By the general's orders pits were dug in different places, and all

the dead bodies that were exposed to view, or could conveniently

be found (the snow being very deep) were buried." McDowell

a participant in the battel and in the burying party is quoted as

saying, "Although the bodies were much abused and stripped of

all of value, they recognized and interred them in four large graves.

Gen. Butler was found in the shattered remains of his tent." We

shall see further on this point presently.

In December 1793, more than two years after the battle,

Wayne's forces buried the bones of others, "⁶⁰⁰ skulls being found

among them." Inasmuch as about 900 had been killed, the first

party had found only about one third of the dead, for they

were covered by a deep snow and were scattered far and wide.

There is direct testimony that the snow was nearly a foot deep.

The question arises even if Gen. Butler's body had been

recognized, whether by any possibility, it could after burial have

ever been again identified. The dead were buried in four large

• 5
 

484       Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.

pits, the position of three of those pits is unknown to this day.

In 1851 after a heavy rain which washed the earth away from

one of these pits disclosing a skeleton in the streets of Recovery,

the place of one pit was ascertained, and about 60 skeletons were

taken up and publicly buried; an account of the proceedings was

published far and wide,-many of those who assisted in the sad

rites are still living.

Under "Mercer County" Howe gives a sketch of the battle-

field, of the encampment before the battle, of the place where the

cannon was found in 1830, the spot where Gen. Butler was buried,

etc. This last statement must be received with large allowance

for error. The sketch was made by Mr. Huston, a surveyor of

Celina, the county seat of Mercer. The sketch shows Butler's

grave on the south side of a small creek running nearly west into

the Wabash, and about 100 rods from that river. The creek

borders on the south side of the battle ground. Mr. Huston

claimed that the place was pointed out to him by the same Mr.

McDowell before mentioned, who lived in the vicinity and died

in 1847. I have had correspondence lately with Capt. John S.

Rhodes of Fort Recovery, a resident of that vicinity for more than

55 years, and who knew McDowell well and often talked with him

of the battle and its incidents. In reference to the place marked

as the grave of Gen. Butler, as shown in Huston's map, the

Capt. says, "The place on the bank of the creek you speak of,

has come to my knowledge in the last thirty years." No one now

knows whether it is one of the trenches dug in 1792, or is the

burial place of the soldiers who fell in the two engagements around

Fort Recovery in 1794. The Capt. further says, "He [McDowell]

always said the body of General Butler could not be identified

from the others, or it would have been placed in a grave by itself."

Remembering that the bodies of the soldiers had been strip-

ped and in many cases mutilated, that they had been exposed to

the weather and to the ravages of wild beasts and of fowls, for

three months, and further, taking into consideration the above

account of the inclemency of the weather, and the positive declar-

ation of one who aided in the burial, it is evident that the body of

Gen. Butler was never taken to fort Loramie, and that the story of

his burial at that Fort has grown up from some other source.

• 6
 

Forts Loramie and Pickawillany.         485

And that source seems to be fairly set forth in some incidents

related to Mr. Howe in 1846 by Col. Johnston before men-

tioned. Under the heading "Shelby" county, Howe says, speak-

ing of Fort Loramie, "The last officer who commanded here was

Col. Butler, nephew of Gen. Richard Butler, who fell at St.

Clair's defeat." Says Col. Johnston, "His wife and children were

with him during his command. A very interesting son of his,

about eight years old, died at the fort. The agonized father and

mother were inconsolable. The grave was enclosed with a very

handsome and painted railing, at the foot of which honeysuckles

were planted, grew luxuriantly, twined the paling, and finally

enveloped the whole grave. Nothing could appear more beau-

tiful than this arbor when in full bloom. The peace withdrew

Capt. Butler and his troops to other scenes on the Mississippi.

I never passed the fort without a melancholy thought about the

lovely boy who rested there ..... the whole remained perfect

until the war of 1812, when all was destroyed."

This historical incident then most probably gave rise to the

story that Gen. Butler's grave is at Fort Loramie.

NOTE B.-Here is another statement which does not conform

to the facts. Howe says, "The site of Loramie's store was a

prominent point in the Greenville treaty boundary line." It was

not in that line at all, and was more than half a mile away. In

Article 3, of that treaty you find these words: "The general

boundary line between the lands of the United States and the

lands of the said Indian tribes, shall begin at the mouth of the

Cuyahoga river, and run thence up the same to the portage be-

tween that and the Tuscarawas branch of the Muskingum; thence

down that branch to the crossing place above fort Lawrence;

thence westerly to a fork of that branch of the Great Miami river,

running into the Ohio, at or near which fork stood Loramie's

store, and where commences the portage between the Miami of

the Ohio, and St. Mary's river, which is a branch of the Miami

which runs into Lake Erie; thence a westerly course to Fort

Recovery." [The Maumee, or Omee, was in the early part of this

century called the Miami of the Lakes.]

Here it is plain that Loramie's store was not in the line,

and the more certainly, because it had been destroyed by fire

• 7
 

486       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.

 

nearly thirteen years before the treaty was made. The part of

this boundary line, from the mouth of the Cuyahoga to the port-

age on Loramie's creek was not new. It was first given in the

treaty with the Wyandots and the Delawares, made at Fort Mc-

Intosh on the Ohio, on the 21st of January 1785. It was repeated

in the treaty made at Fort Harmar, at the mouth of the Mus-

kingum, January ₉th 1789. These two treaties use almost iden-

tical words, the latter saying "to the portage on that branch of

the Big Miami river which runs into the Ohio, at the mouth of

which branch the fort stood which was taken by the French in

the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and fifty two."

This fort you recognize as Pickawillany. Wayne seems to have

tried to be more definite in marking the western end of the old

boundary line, saying "a fork of that branch etc., ....  thence

westerly," etc. The word "thence" implies that the western exten-

sion of the line began where the eastern terminated. But there

is a jog in the line, the portion running west begins at the old

junction of Mile creek with Loramie's, while the terminus of the

other part was and is nearly half a mile up the creek, in the

direction of Fort Loramie. This fork is a mile below the place

of the old fort, and the name of the subsidiary stream-Mile

creek-indicates Wayne as the person responsible for such an

appellation. His practical mind gave similar names to the creeks

which he crossed in his march northward from Fort Hamilton,-

Two Mile creek, Four Mile, Seven Mile, Fourteen Mile creek.-

names which the streams still bear. The jog appears on all the

maps in the land office at Columbus, and on the auditor's books

in Sidney.

• 8