22.  See, in the collection of the Tenn.  Hist.  Soc., at Nashville, the MS. notes containing an account of Sevier, given by one of the old settlers named Hillsman.  Hillsman especially dwells on the skill with which Sevier could persuade the backwoodsmen to come round to his own way of thinking, while at the same time making them believe that they were acting on their own ideas, and adds—­“whatever he had was at the service of his friends and for the promotion of the Sevier party, which sometimes embraced nearly all the population.”

23.  Mr. James Gilmore (Edmund Kirke), in his “John Sevier,” makes some assertions, totally unbacked by proof, about his hero’s alleged feats, when only a boy, in the wars between the Virginians and the Indians.  He gives no dates, but can only refer to Pontiac’s war.  Sevier was then eighteen years old, but nevertheless is portrayed, among other things, as leading “a hundred hardy borderers” into the Indian country, burning their villages and “often defeating bodies of five times his own numbers.”  These statements are supported by no better authority than traditions gathered a century and a quarter after the event and must be dismissed as mere fable.  They show a total and rather amusing ignorance not only of the conditions of Indian warfare, but also of the history of the particular contest referred to.  Mr. Gilmore forgets that we have numerous histories of the war in which Sevier is supposed to have distinguished himself, and that in not one of them is there a syllable hinting at what he says.  Neither Sevier nor any one else ever with a hundred men defeated “five times his number” of northwestern Indians in the woods, and during Sevier’s life in Virginia, the only defeat ever suffered by such a body of Indians was at Bushy Run, when Bouquet gained a hard-fought victory.  After the end of Pontiac’s war there was no expedition of importance undertaken by Virginians against the Indians until 1774, and of Pontiac’s war itself we have full knowledge.  Sevier was neither leader nor participant in any such marvellous feats as Mr. Gilmore describes, on the contrary, the skirmishes in which he may have been engaged were of such small importance that no record remains concerning them.  Had Sevier done any such deeds all the colonies would have rung with his exploits, instead of their remaining utterly unknown for a hundred and twenty-five years.  It is extraordinary that any author should be willing to put his name to such reckless misstatements, in what purports to be a history and not a book of fiction.

24.  The Watauga settlers and those of Carter’s Valley were the first to organize; the Nolichucky people came in later.

25.  Putnam, 30.

26.  The original articles of the Watauga Association have been lost, and no copies are extant.  All we know of the matter is derived from Haywood, Ramsey, and Putnam, three historians to whose praiseworthy industry Tennessee owes as much as Kentucky does to Marshall, Butler, and Collins.  Ramsey, by the way, chooses rather inappropriate adjectives when he calls the government “paternal and patriarchal.”