Mrs. Dousman says that charges had been preferred against Gov.  Sinclair (the term constantly used by the old inhabitants) for extravagance.  He had, as an example, paid at the rate of a dollar per stump for clearing a cedar swamp, which is now part of the public fields.

Respecting the massacre in 1763, she says that Mr. Solomons and a Mr. Clark, the latter long resident with Mr. Abbot, were present.

30th.  Mr. Abbot (Sam.) says he arrived at Mackinack in 1803.  The government-house was then occupied by Col.  Hunt.  A man named Clark, who had formerly lived with him, was a boy in the employ of Solomons at the massacre of old Mackinack.  He crept up a chimney, where he remained a day or two, and was thus saved.  Solomons hid himself under a heap of corn, and was thus saved.

Mr. Abbot does not know, with certainty, the date of the transfer of the post, but says the papers of all the notaries, including all grants of commanding officers, are in a trunk at Mr. Dousman’s.  Thinks these, by showing the date of the earliest grants, will decide the question.

Dec. 1st.  Finished an article for the Literary and Theological Review, on the influence of the native priests, or metais, and the adaptation of the general principles of Christianity to the North American Indians.  Some of the phenomena of the Chippewa language are of deep interest.  The substantive verb to be, deemed by many philologists to be wanting in the Indian language of this continent, is perceived to be freely used by Mr. Peter Jones in the translation of John, as in c. i. 1, 6, 15, &c.  The existence of this verb in the northern dialects may be adverted to as affording the probable root of many active verbs.  It is a subject eliciting discussion, as bearing on a point early stated by theologians, viz., the origin of the tribes.  The verb iau, spelled “ahyah” in the verses referred to, with the particle, for past tense, “ke,” prefixed, and “bun” suffixed, appears to be restricted in its use to objects possessed of vitality, but cannot, it seems, be applied to mere passion or feeling.  These, by a peculiarity of the grammar, are referred to as subordinate parts, or increments inanimate of the organization, i. e., as things without flesh and blood, and not as units or whole bodies.  The native speaker does not, therefore, say I am glad, I am sorry, &c., but merely I glad, I sorry, &c.  This has, probably, led philologists to observe that the verb declarative of existence, was wanting, and discouraged them in the search of it.  But is it so?  When it becomes necessary for the Indian to describe the abstract truth of existence—­as that God is—­the appropriate pronominal form of the verb iau or I-e-au is used, and apparently with great force and propriety.  It is a rule of this grammar, not to apply it to emotions.  When nouns inanimate proper are used, or objects of a non-vital character, the corresponding verb is atta.  The present tense, indicative of these two parallel verbs, for material and for god-like existence, are as follows:—­