SWANTON] INDIAN TRIBES OF THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY 241

Claiborne narrative, which the writer has generally followed, the
Natchez escaped to the opposite side of the Mississippi with all of their
possessions and all their plunder that was of any value." Du Pratz and
d'Artaguette intimate that this could not have been done without the
connivance of some of their enemies,b yet since practically all that
was needed was to cross the river itself, if we suppose the Choctaw
to have been too disgruntled or indifferent to keep a close watch, it
was not an impossible feat. Another accusation, made by Diimont
and practically indorsed by Du Pratz, is that De Loubois had granted
peace and agreed not to enter the Natchez forts only to secure the
release of the prisoners, and that afterward he had intended to break
his word and return to the assault, but that the Indians suspected his
design.' The truth of this accusation depends entirely upon the
actual terms of the treaty, which were evidently not committed to
writing aln can not now be known. Charlevoix, Le Petit, and the
Claiborne manuscript give these as simply involving the surrender
of the .prisoners on the one side and the withdrawal of the French
to the river on the other, without stating whether there was a specifi-
cation that this withdrawal was to be permanent or for a limited
period, or, indeed, whether any time was mentioned.A' As De Loubois
is otherwise well spoken of, it is hardly fair to accuse him of such
a piece of treachery without better evidence. It looks rather as if
the Natchez had already laid their plans to escape and took the
measures they did in order to gain time and remove the French from
their neighborhood until the project could be carried out.
 All that now remained for De Loubois was to erect an earthwork to
 take the place of the old stockaded Fort Rosalie, leave d'Artaguette,
 who had distinguished himself in the campaign, or the Baron de Cres-
 nay in command," ransom the prisoners from the Choctaw, to whom
 they had been delivered, and return to New Orlcans.r The fact that
 De Loubois allowed the prisoners to be surrendered to the Choctaw
 instead of to himself seems strange, and still more so that no one has
 commented upon it. Could it be possible that those proficient
 double dealers, the Choctaw, had secured the custodianship of the
 prisoners from the Natchez as hush money for conniving at or wink-
 ing at their escape? That they were quite capable of such a maneuver
 seems apparent. We must not lay too much to their charge, but that
 a Charlevoix, Iist. Louisiana, vi, 100: Du Pratz, Hist. de La Louisiane, III, 291-292.
 Du Pratz, Ilist. de La Louisinne. ili, 2!12; Gayarr6, Hist. Louisiana, 1, 434.
 SDumont, M6m. Hist. sur La Louisiane, Ii, 180; Du Pratz, Hist. de La Louisiane, iiI,
 293.
 d Charlevoix, IIist. Louisiana, vi, 99; Le Petit in Jes. Rel., LxvIII, 193; Journal in
 Claiborne, Hist. Miss., I, 47.
 SDu Pratz and Dumont, followed by Gayarre (1, 435), say the Baron de Cresnay;
 Charlevoix and Le Petit say d'Arlaguette.
 SCharlevoix, list. Louisiana, vi, 100; Du Pratz, Hist. de La Louisiane, II, 293.
 83220-Bull. 43-10- 16