NEW ORLEANS AND ENVIRONS. By BM Norman 1845

[Jd755]

A closer look at this singular book specifically its telling of the past prior to 1845.

NEW ORLEANS AND ENVIRONS.

A BRIEF SKETCH OF THE DISCOVERY AND TERRITORIAL HISTORY OF LOUISIANA​

In consequence of the premature death of Ponce de Leon, the expedition was given up, and little more was known of these regions until 1538, when Hernandez de Soto, having been made Governor of Cuba, and Adelantado of Florida, undertook, with a company of six hundred men, to explore these his western dominions. He penetrated Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky, and struck the Mississippi not far from the place now known as the Chickasaw Bluffs. Thence he passed over to the Red River, and descending that, had nearly reached its mouth, when he was seized with a sudden fever, and died. To prevent his body from falling into the hands of the Indians, it was sunk in the stream at the mouth of Red River, near its junction with "the father of waters."

The expedition of de Soto consumed four years, during which, his adventures, among the various tribes and nations then teeming in these quiet regions, were diversified and full of the most romantic interest. A Governor out of his appointed post off exploring for four years then snuffing it whilst still exploring.

Reads like an episode of Star Trek where the entire bridge crew leave the ship to go exploring. Only difference is the Star Trek captains don't snuff it.
It gets dafter.

He was succeeded in 1542 by Lewis de Moscoso, or Mucoso, who, with none of the address or enterprise of de Soto, found himself and his small company, now reduced by disease and constant warfare with the natives, to about three hundred men, encompassed with difficulty, and in danger of being entirely cut off.

Not only a dead governor but 300 dead men to boot.

They built seven brigantines, probably the first specimens of scientific ship building on the Mississippi, and then dropped down the river.

So 300 men who cannot have been in the best of health and having witnessed the loss of half their company, low I would guess on ammunition not to mention supplies, especially clobber and boots, were lucky enough to have among their number shipwrights, carpenters and sail makers, tools and materials not to mention sufficient knowledge of this unexplored regions tree species, to knock up seven wooden brigantines and take to the river. Not only that but there must have been at least seven men who knew how to sail boats and what the hell did they use for sails, their shirts?
Honestly no idea where Mr Normans friends lifted this nonsense from but my god.

Pursued by thousands of exasperated Indians in their canoes, harassed, wounded, and some of them slain, the miserable remnant at length found their way out of the river, about the middle of July.

The Indians of course being so numerous yet so stupid they didn't think to launch some canoes down the river thus ahead of the direction of travel of the 300 and trap them between their two groups of canoes nor sneak up to the brigantines in the night and either hole them, set fire to them or otherwise kill the 300 at the very least keep them on the move until exhaustion rendered them easy prey, so too speak.

Its pure boys own bullshit to my eye.

It is manifest from the narrative of de Soto's expedition, that a dense population once covered this whole territory. It is equally manifest that they were a race infinitely superior to the almost exterminated tribes which still remain. In the arts of what we term civilization, in the comforts and conveniences of social life, in the organization of society, in works of taste, in a knowledge of the principles, and an appreciation of the beauties of architecture, and in the application of the various mechanical powers requisite to the construction of buildings on a grand and magnificent scale, they may challenge comparison with some of the proudest nations of antiquity, in the old world.

Contrast that with what Mr Norman had to say about antiquity in America on his trip to Cuba. Either he is a bare faced liar or he didn't read whatever his gentlemen friends lifted from those history books they consulted.

What has become of those mysterious nations, we are at a loss to conjecture; but their works remain, though in ruins, eternal monuments of their genius and power. As far as they have been explored, they afford ample evidence that the appellation "New World" is an entire misnomer.

Again a complete contrast to what he wrote in the Cuba book.

As the eloquent Mr. Wirt once said—"This is the old World," and the day may come, when the antiquarian will find as much that is attractive and interesting in the time hallowed ruins and the almost buried cities, of America, as those of Pompeii and Herculaneum, of Thebes and Palmyra.

Mr Wirt who was he?

In 1673, Marquette, a French monk, and Joliet, a trader, starting from Quebec, traversed the great northern Lakes, ascended the Fox River to its source, made a small portage west to the Wisconsin, and descended that river to the Mississippi, where they arrived on the 7th of July. Committing themselves to the current, the two solitary travellers reached a village of the Illinois, near the mouth of the Missouri, where they were kindly received and hospitably entertained. After a brief stay, they proceeded down to a settlement of the Arkansas, near the river of that name. They did not proceed farther at this time, but returned to Quebec, by the same route, fully impressed with the belief that they could reach the Gulf of Mexico, by continuing their course on the great river.

Two men presumably in a canoe travelled up and down the river completely unmolested by any natives either on the river or adjacent to it. Quite remarkable given the 600/300's adventures.

Six years after the return of Marquette and Joliet, Robert, Chevalier de la Salle, commenced operations for a further exploration of the Mississippi. With seventeen men, he proceeded to the Little Miami, near the mouth of which he built a fort.

Six years pass, god knows why Marquette and Joilet didn't have another bash in the meantime.
And de la Salle and seventeen men, in marked contrast to the two lone explorers and the 600 governor de soto took with him, were capable enough and fit enough, to knock up a fort and presumably man it. Of course no idea what a fort constituted but still. The men these explorers take with them have all the skills needed...for the story if nothing else.

In his next voyage, having met with the same disappointment, he erected a fort in the Bay of St. Bernard, near the mouth of the Colorado.

Blimey he and his men did it again!

Ascending that river, about sixteen miles, he established another fort, which, however, he soon destroyed, and returned to the first settlement.

And again!!

Here he built houses, erected another fort, which he called St. Louis, and prepared the ground for cultivation.

And again!!
But this time they knocked up houses and cleared ground for agriculture to boot.
Reminds me of those wonder men the Romans who could do just about everything from fighting and subjugating to building whilst on their all conquering marches over Europe and here in Blighty.

At length, a conspiracy was formed among his own party, and he was cruelly murdered by Dehault, on the 19th of March, 1687, near the western branch of Trinity River. Thus fell, in the midst of his toils, and in the prime of his years, by the hand of an assassin, one of the most renowned adventurers of the 17th century—a man who may be justly claimed as an honor to the country that gave him birth.

Wonder what de la Salle did to warrant such an act?

He deserved a better fate. In cool courage, in hardy enterprise, and in fertility of resources, he was second only to Columbus. And in the power of subduing the wild spirits of his men, and bending all their energies to the one object before him, he displayed much of the sagacity and tact of that great navigator.

Hello, these wild spirited men built forts, houses, sailed and cleared land for this man. Who the hell were they?
Presumably Frenchmen but who knows.

In 1699, eighteen years after La Salle had demonstrated the connection of the Mississippi with the Gulf of Mexico, by passing out at its mouth, Iberville succeeded in entering it from the Gulf. Ascending as far as the junction of Red River, he returned, and proceeded, by way of the Gulf, into Lake Pontchartrain.

Eighteen years between some bloke sailing down and out of the Mississippi and a different bloke sailing into and up the Mississippi. Makes no sense to me.

He formed a settlement and erected a fort, at Biloxi, which he left under the command of his brother Bienville, while he returned to France, to induce others to join the colony.

Yet another fort builder. And this one buggers off to France to drum up some colonists.

Soon after he left, the new commander ascended the Mississippi as far as the present site of New Orleans. In returning, he met a British vessel of sixteen guns, under the command of Capt. Bard, who enquired the bearings of the great river, intimating that it was his intention to establish a colony upon its banks. Bienville, in reply, directed him to go farther west, and thus induced him to turn about; from which circumstance, the place of their meeting was called "The English Turn," a name which it retains to this day.

Iberville accompanied by a considerable accession of force, comprising hardy settlers, and scientific men, soon returned to the colony. Finding things in a promising condition, he proceeded up the river as far as Natchez, and planted a settlement there. Leaving Bienville and St. Denys in command, he again took leave, and sailed for France.

I find it odd that the further through the chronology we get the exact numbers disappear. Hardy settlers and scientific men cannot have all been single.
And why does this French Canadian captain not seek men from French Canada which has to be much closer than France?

Finding that they derived no immediate advantage from this new accession of territory, the French Government, in 1712, granted to Antonio Crozat, a rich merchant of Paris, the monopoly of the trade of Louisiana, which he surrendered back in 1717.

In 1717, a new charter was issued, under the style of "The Western Company," with the exclusive privilege of the trade of Louisiana for twenty-five years. Bienville was again chosen Governor, and in the following year, 1718, he laid the foundation of New Orleans.

Hitherto the pursuits of agriculture had been entirely neglected. Whether this neglect was attributable to the hostility of the Indians, compelling them to concentrate their little force in one spot, or to the flattering promises of trade, or to the illusive hope of discovering mines of gold, which occupied all their time, or to all these causes combined, we cannot now determine. We only know, that, up to this period, they had depended almost entirely upon supplies sent from France, for the common necessaries of life.

Again why long distance France when Canada was much closer?
It would appear from the text, the formerly good relations with the natives the two canoeists had found had soured again back to what it was during de sotos adventure, possibly to the point where the river northwards was no longer safe for the French and French Canadians to travel on but that said France is a long way off.

The chief personage in this "Western Company," was the notorious John Law, a Scotch financier, one of those universal speculators, who experiment upon every thing, human and divine, who revel only in change, and to whom mere innovation becomes the professional business of a life.

Why would the French government appoint a Scot to such a position?
Surely the language and accent differences would have caused misunderstanding if nothing else. Surely there were more able Frenchmen around.
Let's not even go into the obvious linguistic problems all of these these tales across the ages ignore.

That's it for now. I'll add more as and when as its interesting and revealing.

 

[Jd755]

In the mean time war was declared between France and Spain. The colonists, sympathizing with the mother country, commenced offensive operations against their neighbors in Florida, and took possession of Pensacola; which, however, the Spaniards soon recovered. The trade of war was never very profitable, even to conquerors.

The trade of war is highly profitable. I struggle to accept Mr Norman being unaware of this. Its one reason why I think Mr Norman never read any of the historical book 'copies'. Someone else compiled them and presented the segment as a finished article.
Notice its the French who are claimed to be doing the attacking not the Spaniards.

No sooner were the different colonies of pale faces at loggerheads among themselves, than their natural enemies, the Indians, began to take advantage of their divisions, and to endeavor to exterminate them both.

Pure fantasy. Pale faces indeed. Were western novels a thing 176 years ago?

A horrible massacre took place at Natchez, in 1729. This was but part of a plan which had been formed among the Mississippi tribes, for a general butchery throughout the colony.

The wordage. Its sensational. It is a novel that's been copied.

The Natchez tribe, mistaking the day appointed for the sacrifice, commenced their work of blood too soon, and thus gave timely warning of the plot to all the other settlements. The war which followed was a destructive one, but the Indians were ultimately defeated.

Once again stupid and incompetent Indians who not only went a day early they fessed up to the French colonists who were able to alert all the other French settlements in less than a day trouble was afoot. How isn't mentioned.

In 1732, ten years before the legal expiration of their monopoly, the "Western Company" returned their charter to the King.

I wonder why?

In the winter of 1747-8, the orange plantations were visited by a severe frost, such as had never been known before, which not only cut off the crop for the season, but almost destroyed the prospects of that branch of business in the colony.

Climate change, obviously.

A large accession was made to the population of the colony in 1754, by the arrival of emigrants from Acadia, (Nova Scotia) which they were compelled to leave, owing to the oppressive measures of the British Government, by which that province had just been conquered. A few years afterwards, great numbers of Canadians, fleeing from the same oppressions, found refuge in the sunny valleys of the south, and brought a very considerable acquisition of strength and wealth to the colony.

Amazing. The British just let these French Canadians leg it carrying their wealth with them. Did they travel overland, on the sea, on the river?
Did the Indians not attack and steal their wealth, women and children?

The seven years' war" between France and England, ended in the cession, to the latter power, of all the French possessions in North America, except Louisiana. It was stipulated, between the two crowns, that the boundary line of their respective dominions, in the New World, should run along the middle of the Mississippi, from its source as far as the Iberville, and along the middle of that river, and of Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain. This was in 1763.

In the course of the same year, Louisiana was transferred by treaty to the crown of Spain. The tidings of this unexpected cession, which were not promulgated until two years after the execution of the treaty, spread dismay through the colony. The idea of being passed over, nolens volens, to the domination of Spaniards, was revolting to the thousands of true hearted and loyal Frenchmen, who had acquired and defended the territory, and claimed it as their own.

They resolved, as one man, to resist this unceremonious change of masters, apparently determined, if their old mother, France, persisted in casting them off, to set up for themselves.

In pursuance of this resolution, they refused to receive Don Ulloa, whom the King of Spain despatched in 1766, to take possession of the Province, and to assume the Government, as his representative. The point was disputed at the cannon's mouth, but the colony prevailed, and Don Ulloa returned with his dishonored commission, to his master. Charles was as indignant as his crest-fallen servant, at this unexpected repulse.[Pg 23] But he was too busy with his own troubles at home, to pursue the matter at that moment.

These were the same men who had just left Nova Scotia to escape British rule. They presumably had resisted the British one way or another and gave it up as a bad job yet here they are now being given away to Spain.
I do wonder why the French strived to hang on to Louisiana in the face of the British only to give it away to Spain a few years later.
Something seems well of with this story.

A fit instrument of Royal vengeance was at length found, in the person of Don O'Reilly, a renegade Irishman, who, in 1769, was appointed to subdue and rule over the refractory province. A more perfect exemplification of the remark, that the most depraved unprincipled man may gain the confidence and regard of Kings, can scarcely be found.

This is a repeat and reworking of the story above where a Scot was appointed by the French and he was a nasty piece of work. Here French become Spanish and a scot becomes an Irishman who is also a nasty piece of work.
Its remarkable how neither of these colonial powers couldn't find anyone from within their own nations to sort the mess out.

 

[Quiahuitl]

I do wonder why the French strived to hang on to Louisiana in the face of the British only to give it away to Spain a few years later.

Maybe I can help you join the dots. Maybe not, who knows?

All the top 'Conspiracy theorists' like David Icke etc have been saying for years that the real power is in the French branch of the Rothschild family. These people like to work several distances removed, so apparently, if you look into these things, a lot of the institutions we know of like the UN, the Bank of international Settlements and so on are owned by them. The London stock exchange is owned by them too. And the Crown, most likely.

In the 1700s the French empire was the most powerful and the French franc was the international reserve currency. During the 1800s the British empire gained the ascendancy and the pound became the international reserve currency. However what really happened was the Rothschilds took control of the London Stock exchange directly after the defeat of Napoleon. (The controlling cabal gained news of Wellington's victory a day early and used their control of the UK media to publish headlines 'Wellington defeated' which caused the stock market to collapse and the Red shield people then bought up everything at one tenth the price. A day later they said 'Whoops! Looks like Wellington won after all!' and everything they had bought increased in value tenfold. That was the moment the Red shield gained control of the Bank of England as well as the London Stock exchange.)

So the same controlling entity was behind the French and subsequent British empires. And are still in control to this day.

In light of this we can re-interpret several things. For example the Louisiana purchase was just one Red shield shell company transferring its assets to another red shield shell company.

Another interesting observation is the French have always seemed to control the EU. All EU laws seem to be designed to benefit the French, and the French have no problems ignoring any EU laws they don't like; unlike in the UK where our government has always seemed to obey all EU diktats blindly.

Another very interesting point - In the last 8 years I have learnt to speak Spanish and spent a lot of time in Spain and Mexico. It's amazing how totally different the Spanish view of history is compared to what I was taught at school in England. I even went to the museum of the Spanish empire which is in Seville, if memory serves. Literally nothing I was told there matched up with anything I had previously heard. The Spanish only teach their children about their military victories, just like we only teach half the story to our children here in England.

The amazing thing I heard was that the Spanish empire was entirely financed by London, so the Spanish made very little money out of it, all the profits went to London. That's what I was told.

 

[Jd755]

The controlling cabal gained news of Wellington's victory a day early and used their control of the UK media to publish headlines 'Wellington defeated' which caused the stock market to collapse and the Red shield people then bought up everything at one tenth the price. A day later they said 'Whoops! Looks like Wellington won after all!' and everything they had bought increased in value tenfold. That was the moment the Red shield gained control of the Bank of England as well as the London Stock exchange.)

I have looked into that tale a few times and found nothing concrete to show its true. It certainly endures that much is true. I did a deep dive into Waterloo triggered by Lady Antonia Frasers excellent book whose title escapes me, a few years back and its a very dubious tale. Sorry head full of Jews and goldsmiths just now and I am wrecked.

Waterloo comes across as a series of fights is the best way I can put it. Also there are more than a few characters in the story that appear to me to be fictitious. Inserted to big it up.
Another anomaly is all of my male ancestors at the time, that I have traced to date, were ideal men for soldiering in that they were almost all agricultural labourers and yet not a one left the land to go and fight. Okay they all lived here in the northwest of england in the main, save a few in Lincolnshire but not a one served in any military outfit nor did they die overseas.

Back in the dive down the fmotl rabbit hole which involved the Rothschild's they came across as front men for a hidden hand. Much like the Jews I am currently slogging through they are duplicitous liars who use books written by men about sky fairies to justify all sorts of dancing with the devil.

It honestly comes as no surprise to read the Spanish get fed a different story. I reckon history is not written by victors but by chroniclers who are to the Crown whatever it is (my current guess is its an idea. Above the crown sits god and nothing else and no man can go there so a bunch of believers who use their "god given authority to do as they please to anything and everything under the crown, including each other) in the same vein as the scrivenors are to government.

As for the British Empire why was it never present at any of the expositions as an empire?

For now nothing I have posted from Mr Normans book makes sense. I live in hope.

 

[Jd755]

In 1785, a new firebrand was thrown into the midst of these combustible elements. An attempt was made to establish an office of the Inquisition in Louisiana. It was fearlessly opposed, and fortunately crushed without bloodshed. The agent, to whom the obnoxious business was entrusted, was seized in his bed, conveyed forcibly on board a vessel, and sent home to Spain.

A census of the province, taken in 1788, just ninety years from the date of the first settlement, showed a population of 42,611. Of these, 19,445 were whites, 21,465 slaves, and 1701 colored freemen. New Orleans, then 70 years old, contained 5,338 inhabitants.

The Baron de Carondelet was appointed Governor in 1792. During his administration, in the year 1794, the first newspaper, called "Le Moniteur," was published in Louisiana. At the same period the Canal Carondelet was commenced; and the cultivation of indigo and the sugar cane, which had hitherto been the great staples of the colony, was suspended.

So in the space of just nine years these colonials had gone from throwing out an Inquisitor, not just bumping him off, to printing a newspaper. A time of speedy change in contrast to the slower pace of change in previous years as recorded in whatever books were being copied from.
And in the midst a census was taken. I am admittedly clueless as to how large Louisiana is but the total population figure of the census seems small in contrast to area. Surely the natives populations outnumbered the colonials by some margin.

In 1795, by the treaty of St. Lorenzo, the navigation of the Mississippi was opened to the western States of the Union, and the great impulse given to the commercial prosperity of New Orleans, which secured forever the pre-eminence of the Crescent City. The same treaty defined the boundaries, as they now exist, between Florida and Mississippi. But Carondelet, being rather more tardy in yielding possession, than suited the active, enterprising spirit of the Americans, the territory was seized by an armed force, under Andrew Elliott.

Oh dear once again Americans are portrayed as seizing land by force of arms (a recurring event in the crafting of the United States of America) and of course from the bigging up of America "the enterprising spirit of the Americans" its obvious whatever book was being copied its author was an American.

In 1803, Louisiana was re-transferred to France, and immediately sold to the United States for 15,000,000 of dollars. The treaty which accomplished this important object was entered into on the 30th of April. Possession was taken, in behalf of the United States, by General Wilkinson and William C. Claiborne, amid the rejoicings of a people attached to liberty, and eager to grasp at any opportunity to shake off the yoke of Spain.

Not surprising the people were rejoicing they were French and French Canadians for the most part who likely saw themselves as French not Spanish. Though quite why Frenchmen would rejoice at effectively being sold to the Americans by their fellow Frenchmen I know not.
And why would the French accept payment in the US dollar paper currency?
Land and people sold for foreign paper seems a rum deal to me.

The population of Louisiana, at the time of the purchase, did not exceed fifty thousand, exclusive of the Indians, and these were scattered over every part of its immense territory. Seven years after, the population had nearly trebled, and her prosperity had advanced in equal proportion.

1788 population 42,611. 1803 population did not exceed fifty thousand. Surely it would have made sense for a census to have been taken just before the sale was completed so the Americans new how many colonials they were buying.
But seven years later the population had tebled, huzzah. Who needs accurate figures when telling a story except prior to this figures had featured strongly in these stories,


That concludes my wander through Mr Normans historical portion of his singular book.
Next up the historical tales of New Orleans.