3.  “Am.  Arch.,” IV., Vol.  I., 394, 449, 469, etc.  He was generally called Dr. Conolly.

4.  See do., 463, 471, etc., especially St. Clair’s letters, passim.

5.  In most of the original treaties, “talks,” etc., preserved in the Archives of the State Department, where the translation is exact, the word “Big Knife” is used.

6.  Letter of John Penn, June 28, 1774.  “Am.  Arch.,” IV., Vol.  IV.

7.  “Am.  Archives,” do., 465.

8. Do., 722.

9. Do., 872.

10.  “Am.  Arch.,” IV., Vol.  I., p. 1015.

11.  McAfee MSS.  This is the point especially insisted on by Cornstalk in his speech to the adventurers in 1773; he would fight before seeing the whites drive off the game.

12.  In the McAfee MSS., as already quoted, there is an account of the Shawnee war party, whom the McAfees encountered in 1773 returning from a successful horse-stealing expedition.

13.  “Am.  Archives,” IV., Vol.  I., 872.  Dunmore in his speech enumerates 19 men, women, and children who had been killed by the Indians in 1771, ’72, and ’73, and these were but a small fraction of the whole.  “This was before a drop of Shawnee blood was shed.”

14.  “Trans-Alleghany Pioneers,” p. 262, gives an example that happened in 1772.

15.  “Am.  Archives,” IV., Vol.  I. Letter of Col.  Wm. Preston, Aug. 13, 1774.

16.  Many local historians, including Brantz Mayer (Logan and Cresap, p. 85), ascribe to the earl treacherous motives.  Brantz Mayer puts it thus:  “It was probably Lord Dunmore’s desire to incite a war which would arouse and band the savages of the west, so that in the anticipated struggle with the united colonies the British home-interest might ultimately avail itself of these children of the forest as ferocious and formidable allies in the onslaught on the Americans.”  This is much too futile a theory to need serious discussion.  The war was of the greatest advantage to the American cause; for it kept the northwestern Indians off our hands for the first two years of the Revolutionary struggle; and had Lord Dunmore been the far-seeing and malignant being that this theory supposes, it would have been impossible for him not also to foresee that such a result was absolutely inevitable.  There is no reason whatever to suppose that he was not doing his best for the Virginians; he deserved their gratitude; and he got it for the time being.  The accusations of treachery against him were afterthoughts, and must be set down to mere vulgar rancor, unless, at least, some faint shadow of proof is advanced.  When the Revolutionary war broke out, however, the earl, undoubtedly, like so many other British officials, advocated the most outrageous measures to put down the insurgent colonists.