Original - North Central Michigan College Library

anfcwere in the house. M. Langlade replied thathe could not say he did not know of anyanswers in which he did not exceed the truth,for the Pani woman had not only hidden mesecret and her own.by stealth, but kept myM. Langlade was therefore, as I presume, as farfrom a wish to destroy me as he was carelessabout saving me, when he added to theseanswers that they might examine for themselves,and would soon be satisfied as to theobject of their question. Saying this, hebrought them to the garret door.5363 It seems apparent that Henry was in no positionto estimate properly the motives which actuated theconduct of Langlade. He possessed great influence overthese tribesmen, whom he had often led to war againstthe English; although he had made his peace with thelatter, his red followers had not done so, as Henry'sown account sufficiently shows. Even today in civilizedAmerica a frenzied mob intent on shedding blood willfrequently ignore the appeals for peace and mercy madeto it by a sheriff or other constituted authority. InIndian warfare mercy to the conquered was a thing unthoughtof. Thus Samuel Hearne, pleading with hisIndian friends to spare the life of an Eskimo girl, wasanswered with ridicule and contempt. John Kinziepossessed influence enough with the Indians to pass unscathed,with all his family, through the Fort Dearbornmassacre, but he had no influence to save the womenand children, his neighbors, who were slaughtered inhis presence. Captain Etherington testifies that Langladewas "very instrumental" in saving his own lifeand those of the soldiers after the massacre. It seemsreasonable to conclude that he recognized the futilityof any resistance to the Indians, as Henry himself haddone a few minutes before; and that under the cir-83