Bundling the soiled gifts inside a sheet served to conceal what was going on from those not involved in the scheme; it also was probably intended to make sure that moving those items out from the hospital would not spread disease among Fort Pitt's garrison. What little evidence exists sug gests that only Ecuyer and William Trent knew what was being done. This content downloaded from meon Wed, 27 May 2015 15:33:34 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The British, the Indians, and Smallpox 437 Trent is the most logical suspect for the mastermind behind the smallpox stratagem. Captain William Trent was a militia officer whose military skills were not highly regarded, although Ecuyer, obviously inexperienced, leaned heavily on Trent, who had spent much time on the frontier. He had been a business partner of Croghan's and had helped him with Indian relations in the past. Trent had even helped Ecuyer set up the smallpox hospital in the fort after the outbreak of the disease there. In 1757 Trent had seen firsthand smallpox's effect upon Indians when, at peace talks, some of them died from it.38 Indians fighting in the French and Indian War had infuriated Trent. In 1755 an anguished Trent had written about one Indian raid: "one whole fam ily was burnt to Death in an House. The Indians destroy all before them; firing Houses, Barns, Stackyards and every thing that will burn. . . . they have killed more, and keep on killing, the woods is alive with them." By 1758 Cherokees refused to enter Pennsylvania because they believed that Trent had been responsible for an attack on their forces. To worsen his attitude, the war had greatly hurt his trade and his finances; in 1761 some Indians had tried to steal ten horses from him.39 Then came Pontiacs Rebellion. Trent's business was not aided by the re sumption of fighting. In addition, in his journal Trent recorded that the Indi ans were now at war again despite having made peace. This factor infuriated army officers and Trent probably reacted in the same way. And, in his journal, he wrote that "we" had given infected items to the Indians. Trent seems to have been seeking revenge over many things.40 The failed attempt at germ warfare did not raise the siege of Fort Pitt. Rather, it was Bouquet's success in August 1763 at what has been dubbed the battle of Bushy Run that did so. Over 25 miles from the fort, Bouquet's relief force was ambushed. Fighting spread over two days, with heavy casualties on both sides. Bouquet won by withholding some of his soldiers from the battle and then throwing them at the surprised Indians.41 The natives' tough fight ing suggests that they were not then weakened by smallpox emanating from Fort Pitt. What about Jennings's claim that two prominent Indians, Shingas and Pisquetomen, disappeared from the record because they died from Fort Pitt's germ warfare? Shingas, in fact, does appear after the gift of soiled cloth. On July 26, 1763, well after that affair, Trent wrote: "The Indians came over Shingess, Wingenum, Grey Eyes . . with . several other Warriors. ..." Shingas had been "very Sick" much earlier, in June 1762, according to Kenny, and one authority states that Shingas "died during the winter of 1763-1764," well af ter smallpox should have killed him.42 As for Pisquetomen, he had had a long career dealing with the colonists. Pisquetomen does not appear in Trent's journal after the evil gift, but he is not This content downloaded from meon Wed, 27 May 2015 15:33:34 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 438 Pennsylvania History mentioned in it before the incident either. Kenny described Pisquetomen as an "old man" in 1759. Perhaps he died before the siege at Fort Pitt. Besides, as he was elderly (as was Shingas), he may have already had smallpox years be fore.43 Furthermore, a list can easily be made of Indians who survived well past the toll that successful germ warfare would have taken. King Beaver, described by Kenny as "middle aged" in 1759, lived until 1769. Newcomer survived until 1776. Another Indian mentioned by Kenny, Killbuck, died in 1811. Grey Eyes was still breathing in 1773 and White Eyes made it to 1778. Turtle's Heart, who received the bundle of blankets, played a prominent role in the conference in 1764 (where he was called "young") that brought peace to the area. His comrade, Mamaltee, does disappear after his reemergence in July 1763, but, as the Delawares suffered heavily at Bushy Run, Mamaltee prob ably died there. Ironically, most of these Indians outlived Henry Bouquet. Posted to Florida, in 1765 he caught yellow fever, another disease he had never had, which killed him.44 If the spreading of smallpox was, as Jennings and others insist, so success ful, why did Amherst keep on raving against the Indians? On November 5, 1763 the general complained that "the whole race of Indians who have so unjustly commenced, and are still carrying on Hostilities against Us" should be "effectually reduced, and severely punished."45 If smallpox had "reduced" the Indians, as Amherst had wished, he should have been pleased and have had no need to call for still more punishment. Teedyuscung, at a peace conference in 1757, gave a speech meant for the British monarch which was heard by William Trent: Now as much blood is spilt I desire you will join with me to clear this way. . . We, . on our Parts, gather up the Leaves that have been sprinkled with Blood; we gather up the Blood, the Bodies, and Bones; but when we look round we see no place where to put them; but when we look up we see the Great Spirit above. It is our Duty, therefore, to join in Prayer, that he would hide these things, that they may never be seen by our Posterity, and that the Great Spirit would bless our Children, that they may hereafter Live in Love together; that it may never be in the Power of the evil spirit, or any evil minded Persons, to cause any breach between [our] Posterity.46 Despite Teedyuscung's wishes, evil must be exposed, not covered up. De liberately trying to spread disease is despicable in whatever century it might take place, but the smallpox incident has been blown out of all proportion, given that it was likely a total failure. Jennings suggestion that smallpox was also planted during the French and Indian War is unwarranted. Smallpox, widespread in that war, attacked everyone?Indians, colonists, and members of the British army?and this major outbreak of the 1750s and 1760s prob This content downloaded from meon Wed, 27 May 2015 15:33:34 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The British, the Indians, and Smallpox 439 ably originated in French Canada in 1755.47 The time is long overdue for what happened at Fort Pitt in 1763 to be discussed rationally and on the basis of evidence rather than unsupported and repetitious assumptions.