Digital Paxton: Digital Collection, Critical Edition, and Teaching Platform

An Answer to the Pamphlet Entitled "The Conduct of the Paxton Men" - 7

this write speaks the Truth,) here is not so much as a single Indians Affirmative, to prove the Assertion; no not any Evidence at all. “Again the Indians were induced to look upon Israel, as the first Man, or Chief Cechim of the Province, (why so, because they say his Haughtiness and the Contempt with which he treated his fellow Subjects;”---then I conclude, our Author must be of Opinion, that this has been a slandering Rule with our Governors, (viz.) Haughtiness and Contempt--by which the Indians hath known them. (He just now said Mr. H.-------n. was a Quaker, and now calls him something else fie upon such a fellow) he must have had a high Opinion of the Indians judgement, or he would not have made it the chief Bases of his Argument, and by this means of false Reasoning, unjustly blam’d the Quakers. Here I shall take some notice of his Note in Page the 7th, where he sayeth, one Patrick Ignew, of the Burrough of Lancaster, who upon Oath sayed, that at the late Treaty at Lancaster, he was commanded to make Proclamation by the Governor, to forbid any Person to either sell, or give, Spiritious Liquors to the Indians; and when he proclaimed, and said by order of the Governour, the Infamous Tediuskung, as he is called, in Page the 4th. Cryed out, D---n your G-------nr, D----n your G------nr. Pm----tn is our Governor, he allows Rum enough: Who also upon his Oath, declares, that notwithstanding the Proclamation, the Indians where privately entertained at a certain Tavern in the Town: Well and what does all this make for him? suppose Tediuskung did say that, Pm-------tn allows Rum Enough; so did his Honour too. But at that Time, and upon such Important Business, the Governor, being ap-

Contents of this annotation: