been inclosed in one common fence, and subjected to certain village regulations. We see here, a cus tom peculiar to the French. There was attached to almost every village, a common, belonging to the village in its municipal character, which was left unenclosed, for pasturage or other common purposes. No portion of this could be alienated or converted into private property, but by the unanimous act of the villagers. When a young couple married, or a person settled in the village, who was too indigent to purchase land, they sometimes made to such parties donations of a few acres of the common, by deed, signed by all the inhabitants; and the lot thus severed, became private property, and might be added, if conveniently situated, to the common field. The latter was owned in parcels by individuals, who held a larger or smaller number of acres, in separate lots, each tilling his own land, although the whole was surrounded by a single fence, and the several parts were not divided by enclosures.

Previous to the year 1748, Spain, France, and England, claimed the greater part of North America, by right of conquest, or of discoveries made under their patronage, respectively. The treaty of Aixe la Chapelle, made in that year, contained a provision for the restitution of the territories which each had wrested from the other, but was wholly silent as to boundaries. France, however, owned Canada on the north, and Lower Louisiana on the south, besides claiming the intermediate discoveries of La Salle and others, on the upper lakes, the Mississippi, and the Illinois.

The French government, at a very early period, adopted the policy of uniting their possessions in Canada with those in Louisiana, by a chain of posts, which, extending along the whole course of the northern lakes, and the Mississippi, should open a line of interior communication from Quebec to New Orleans, and which would secure to them the expansive territory of the west, by confining their English neighbors to the country east of the Alleghany ridge. It happened, however, with the French, as with the English, that all their calculations in reference to their American colonies, were formed upon a scale too small, as well in regard to the objects to be secured, as in relation to the extent of the means to be employed. The minds of their statesmen seem to have never embraced the whole vast field upon which their policy was to operate. They appear to have had but feeble conceptions of the great extent of the country, and to have been entirely ignorant of the amount and character of the means necessary for its subjection. Their schemes wanted unity of design, and the ill-assorted parts seldom harmonized together. Thus, although the French established military posts, and planted colonies throughout the whole of this region, they were so distant from each other, and so unconnected as to afford no mutual support, nor could they ever be brought to act efficiently together, as component parts of any colonial or military system. The plan -or want of plan-was happily conceived for our benefit; and was disadvantageous only to those whose want of wisdom, and of vigor, deprived them

of territory at an earlier period than that at which they would otherwise have lost it.

It is curious to reflect upon the situation of these colonists. Their nearest civilized neighbors were the English on the shores of the Atlantic, distant a thousand miles, from whom they were separated by a barrier then insurmountable, and with whom they had no more intercourse than with the Chinese. Their countrymen, it is true, had posts throughout the west, but they were too distant for frequent intercourse, and they were peopled by those, who, like themselves, were disconnected from all the rest of the world. But the French brought with them, or found in their vicinity, certain elements of prosperity, which enabled them to flourish in spite of the disadvantages of their unprotected situation. They were unambitious and contented. It was always their policy to conciliate the natives, whom they invariably treated with a kindness and consideration never shown to that unhappy race by other Europeans, and with whom they preserved a faith unbroken upon either side. In a few years, Kaskaskia grew into a town, whose population has been variously estimated, at from 1 to 8,000 inhabitants; the latter number is doubtless an exaggeration, but either of them indicates a wonderful population for a place having little commerce, no arts, and no surrounding territory. They lived chiefly by agriculture, hunting, and trading with the Indians. They possessed a country prolific in all the bounties of nature. The wild fruits were abundant. The grape, the plum, the persimmon, and the cherry, attain here a size unknown in less favored regions. The delicate

pecan, the hickory nut, the walnut, and the hazle, strew the ground during the autumn, excelling the corresponding productions of the Atlantic states, as much in size and flavor as in quantity. Of domestic fruits, the peach, the apple, and the pear, attain great perfection. Here the maple yields its sugar, and the cotton its fibre, the sweet potato and the Indian corn yield abundantly, while wheat, and many other of the productions of colder countries, come to perfection. The deer, the buffalo, and the elk, furnished in those days bountiful supplies- the rivers abounded with fish —while the furry and the feathered tribes afforded articles for comfort and for trade. Surrounded thus by good things, what more could a Frenchman have desired, unless it were a violin and a glass of claret? The former we are told they had, and we have good authority for saying, that they drank excellent wine from their own grapes.

Of their civil, military, and religious institutions we have little on record, but enough may be gathered to show that though simple and efficient, they were entirely anomalous. The priests seem to have been prudent men. At a time when religious intolerance was sufficiently fashionable, we hear of no trouble among our French. The good men who regulated their consciences seem to have prized "the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit," so highly, as to be content to pursue their own vocation in peace with all the world. The military sway, which was paramount, seems to have been equally mild-perhaps because it was equally undisputed-and as for the civil jurisdiction, we find so little trace of it, either

on record, or in tradition, as to induce the belief that the people seldom needed its interposition. Some old deeds which remain of record at Kaskaskia, are dated as far back as 1712, framed, of course, on the model of civil law, and written in a choice old provincial dialect. Their legal proceedings were brief and simple-so much so, that'we, with our notions, should have called them arbitrary. Yet such was their attachment to their ancient customs, that with the kindest feelings towards our country, and our people, they could ill brook the introduction of the common law, when their territory was ceded to our government. They thought its forms burthensome and complicated, and many of them removed to Louisiana, where the civil law was still in force.

Separated thus from all the world, these people acquired many peculiarities. In language, dress, and manners, they lost much of their original polish; but they retained, and still retain, many of the leading characteristics of their nation. They took care to keep up their ancient holidays and festivals; and with few luxuries and fewer wants, they were probably as cheerful and as happy a people as any in existence.

Kaskaskia, called in the old French records, "Notre dame de Cascasquias," is beautifully situated on the point of land formed by the junction of the Mississippi and Kaskaskia rivers. It is not at the point of confluence, but four miles above, where the rivers approach to within less than two miles of each other; and the original plan of the town extended across from river to river. In this respect, the position is precisely analogous to that of Philadelphia.