torical Collections of Wisconsin," it is expressly stated that the name originated from the French name of the game of ball played by the Indians at this point, viz., le jeu de crosse. A combination of the first and last syllables gives the modernized name.

the name:

N. Myrick, who was made the first Postmaster in 1844, thus speaks of his connection with "The name of Prairie de la Crosse was of course French, and was changed by myself to La Crosse, and the post office so called at my suggestion." What is said of the last name should be conclusive; but, as some strenuously contend for the other theories, it is thought best to submit a presentation of the subject in full.

THE GAME OF LA CROSSE.

The earliest notice of this game as played by the Indians of Wisconsin, is probably that of Capt. Carver, who visited the State in 1766, and may be found on page 364 of his book entitled North America," and is as follows:

They amuse themselves at several sorts of games, but the principal and most esteemed among them is that of the ball, which is not unlike the European game of tennis. The balls they use are rather larger than those made use of at tennis, and are formed of a piece of deerskin, which being moistened to render it supple, is stuffed hard with the hair of the same creature, and sewed with its sinews. The ball-sticks are about three feet long, at the end of which there is a kind of racket, resembling the palm of the hand, and fashioned of thongs cut from a deer skin. In these they catch the ball, and throw it to a great distance, if they are not prevented by some of the opposite party, who fly to intercept it. This game is generally played by large companies, that sometimes consist of more than three hundred, and it is not uncommon for different bands to play against each other.

They begin by fixing two poles in the ground at about six hundred yards apart, and one of these goals belongs to each party of the combatants. The ball is thrown up high in the center of the ground, and in a directed line between the goals, toward which each party endeavors to strike it, and whichever side causes it to reach their own goal, reckons toward the game. They are so exceeding dextrous in this manly exercise, that the ball is usually kept flying in different directions by the force of the rackets, without touching the ground during the whole contention. for they are not allowed to catch it with their hands. They run with amazing velocity in pursuit of each other, and when one is on the point of hurling it a great distance, an antagonist overtakes him, and by a sudden stroke dashes down the ball. They play with so much vehemence that they frequently wound each other, and sometimes a bone is broken; but not withstanding these accidents, there never appears to be any spite or wanton exertions of strength to effect them, nor do any disputes ever happen between the parties.

BEGINNING OF SETTLEMENT.

The first settlements, perfected by permanent occupation in La Crosse County were not undertaken, it is believed, prior to 1840, though Mr. H. B. Coons, of Potosi, Grant County, avers his father was a resident of subsequent La Crosse as early as 1836. There may have been visitors into the present county before 1840, but if so, they were made up of transients and adventurers to whom no place was home, and the pressing experiences of the hour, the uncertain lines wherein their lives were cast.

Settlements had grown up in the regions adjoining La Crosse at a date anterior to that mentioned herein, notably at Prairie du Chien, and other points which afterward became sources of supplies to pioneer husbandmen and miners, who in those early days ran the gauntlet of the mining district. Indeed it would seem strange, but is nevertheless true, that the settlement of La Crosse was procrastinated beyond that of other points possessing no more fruitful sources of wealth nor advantages for settlers. Roving traders and agents of fur companies who operated throughout the Northwest could hardly have overlooked the value of sites since fringed with flourishing cities and villages that have been built up and have become the residences of intelligence, enterprise and wealth. They may have come into the wilderness annually, and, remaining long enough to exchange their commodities for furs, return to their abiding-places without leaving any trace of their aboriginal existence to guide the historian in his pursuit of facts. But thus far, no records of such occupation have been discovered, and the only positive evidence of settlements available after decades have elapsed is to be found in the statements of those to whom, with but one exception, the award is made by universal acclamation. In this connection the surprise is expressed that among those who came during the first years of the building up of La Crosse, some one of them has not put in permanent and enduring form, a reliable record of

events as they transpired here in those days. Possessing leisure which they have justly won, literary tastes and devoted attachments to the city to whose growth and prosperity they have so liberally contributed, familiar with its early history rapidly passing into tradition, it is truly strange that they have not perpetuated the material in historic form, which they can successfully command.

At the date when the first settlement of La Crosse was ventured, the present county was almost an uninhabited wilderness, possessing as would seem from the presumed refusal of traders and strollers to remain within its limits, but few attractions and those few of the most limited character. The nearest towns were Prairie du Chien, Dubuque and Galena, at that time landings of some importance, but struggling for existence, though comparatively of the importance. as St. Louis subsequently assumed. The population of Chicago was then less than 5,000, while Milwaukee was yet in its infancy, and neither gave very promising indications from location or immigration tending thitherward of what was reserved for the future to disclose. There was little then as compared with the present between the flourishing cities of the East and the impromptu municipal weaklings in the great West which has since reflected back the star of empire. The confines of civilization were then limited to the towns and settlements contiguous to the lakes on the west, and he who struck out for a home in the Territories was regarded as an adventurous soldier of fortune whose return was a question chance rather than probability.

This, then, was the condition of affairs as they existed forty years ago, according to sources of information in that behalf, presumably correct. There was little to attract save the intrinsic merit of the location and surroundings, which combined with the hopes of a future, were sufficient to direct the residents of Southern and Eastern States to Wisconsin Territory. To those at home who were independent, the country furnished inducements that would enable men of means to add to their accumulations. To the imprudent or impoverished, pulling with steady stroke against the current of an adversity, both pitiless and uncompromising, a hope for better days. To the speculator it afforded a field of operations incalculably valuable; to the scientist an opportunity for discovery; to the scholar, the Christian and the husbandman, the occasion for labors that have since returned to bless their inventors.

As a consequent, the class of people who established themselves in La Crosse County, and have since been identified with its growth and the development of its wealth, were men of rare excellence. Earnest, frank and kind, they made all men friends by being the friends of all men. Illustrating by example rather than precept, they bridged the brief interval between purity and sin by the power of kindness, and looked with eyes of charity upon the mistakes and failings of their fellows. Brave but tender, they were, in short, the most generous of men who have ever left "the shore touched by a mysterious sea that has never yet borne on any man the image of a homeward sail," their deficiences made up by the Recording angel, from the love they bore humanity.

And so, too, the pioneer women, those who braved the absence of home, friends and congenial associations to accompany their fathers, husbands and sons into the trackless waste of the Northwest, and contemplated the present as also the future, the horizon of which was darkened by discouragement and gloom. And yet they faltered not, but sustained their husbands by a trust in the outlook that was constant, and bore an abundant harvest. As wives, they were the most agreeable of companions; as friends, the most faithful and affectionate; as mothers, gentle as children ever had the misfortune to lose, who corrected the most pernicious of evils by the most tender of management. Prudent from affection, though most liberal of nature, they practiced economy from the love they bore their husbands, and at critical periods, preserved order in affairs from the care of which those husbands were relieved; she reclaimed her choice from despair, urged his indolence to exertion, and constantly admonished him to industry, integrity and manhood.

In the accounts furnished regarding the first settlement of the county, it is found that the principal events have ever kept pace with the rapid improvements of the age. The site of the city seems to have been a resort for the Indians from time immemorial, and this is said to have

induced French traders to meet them there at an early day for the purpose of trade. Who they were, where they obtained supplies, and other factors of importance regarding their occupation of the present county, either permanently or as transients, are wanting, and the conclusion seems irresistible to an unpredjudiced juror of the facts, that the statements sprang from the fertile soil of romance.

In the examinations made with a view to definitely determine the facts regarding the first settlement of La Crosse, the seeker after knowledge has been made the Trustee of information in that behalf both cumulative and persuasive. Mr. H. B. Coons claims the distinguished honor for his father, whom he alleges settled at La Crosse in 1836, while Col. N. Myrick is equally positive that Mr. Coons is in error, notwithstanding his statements are in part supported by public documents, and that he was the first white man to establish a permanent occupation of the county. The weight of authorities, it is but proper to observe, indicate Mr. Myrick as the gentleman to whom this dignity properly belongs; Morrison McMillan, in his history of the early settlement of La Crosse and Monroe Counties, makes the award to Mr. Myrick. He states that no trading-post was established in the vicinity of La Crosse prior to 1840, at which time a man named La Batt or La Bathe opened a store one mile below the present city, but did not remain long.

Mr. Coons insists that his father and Mr. Cubbage opened a trading-post in 1836, within the limits of the present city, which was destroyed by the Indians in 1837. It was rebuilt, but again burned, and, in 1838, Messrs. Coons & Cubbage made a claim for damages thus sustained, which was allowed and deducted from the annuities due the Indians. The Interior Department at Washington furnishes proof that the claim was made, but casts a doubt upon the allegation that the same was paid. From this, it would appear that the averment made by Mr. Coons, in behalf of his parent, is entitled to considerable weight. A prolonged correspondence resulted from this claim which is herewith furnished, that the reader may determine the question, as the evidence appears conclusive of the facts or faults, but this is done with the statement that among the pioneers of the county still living, the opinion obtains that Mr. Myrick was the first settler to locate permanently on the present city site, and that Coons possibly located on the island opposite.

WESTERN HISTORICAL CO.:

MR. COON'S PLEA.

In reply to your letter of inquiry, I have the honor to submit the following:

POTOSI, Wis., May 10.

John R. Coons was born in Lexington, Ky., A. D. 1800; came to St. Louis 1808; educated in a French school; came to Gratiot Grove in the employ of Gratiot, Cheauteuse & Co., fur traders and smelters, as a clerk, in 1827; took part, to some extent, in the Black Hawk war of 1832; at the close of the war, got a smelter's grant from the Government, and under it smelted lead at Dubuque up to the year 1835. In that year he engaged in farming and mercantile business at Belmont, La Fayette County. In 1836, he formed a partnership with Col. Cubbage (who then lived at Davenport, Iowa, I think), for the purpose of trading with the Indians, and, getting a permit from the Governor, established a trading house at what is now known as La Crosse, upon the ground occupied by a hotel on the corner of Front and Pearl streets, Col. Cubbage doing most of the business. In the spring of 1837, during the absence of the Colonel, the Indians, instigated by some members of (it was supposed) the American Fur Company, burned the traders' house and its contents. Coons & Cubbage rebuilt and it was burned again. The firm made out a claim against the Indians for their losses in 1838, and presented it to Col. Joe Street, Indian Agent, established at Prairie du Chien. The Government, at their annual payment, had Commissioners appointed to adjust these claims, and they were allowed and the amount deducted from their annuities.

Col. Cubbage named the place Guadalquiver, after a small river in Spain (I think), noted in an old song with a pretty air, that my mother sung and the Colonel admired, and all letters written to Maj. Coons were headed as stated. and sent by Indians and half breeds to Prairie du Chien for mailing.

The financial crisis of 1837 and 1838 wrecked almost all engaged in business in the West, and among them the firm of Hooper, Peck, Scales & Co., of Galena, with which firm John R. Coons was connected under the firm name of Coons, Woolley & Co., of Potosi. All of the members of said firms are now dead, except William Hooper, of Salt Lake, a noted Mormon, who has several times represented Utah as a delegate in Congress. This crisis stopped proceedings for a time at Guadalquiver, and Col. Cubbage drew out altogether. Maj. Coons, knowing that there was a future for the Upper Mississippi, tried to keep his claim on the land, and to that end sent two men under wages— Scott and Lear-with teams and full outfit of provisions, tools etc., with instructions to build a house upon the same ground, in fact upon the ashes of the houses burned in the fall of 1841 or 1842. This they did not do, but built a house on the island now known as " Barron's Island." They came down in the spring with a small raft of pine logs, cut on Black River, and reported all right, Coons not knowing anything to the contrary until the following fall; and, while preparing to send men back, he learned that, through a neglected trust on the part of his men, the clain. had

forfeited, a result that Myrick & Miller, then located, I think, at Bad Ax, had been waiting for. I was personally acquainted with Miller in 1856 and 1857, as I lived in La Crosse at that time, and by Miller was shown the exact spot that had been occupied by the trading-houses of Coons & Cubbage. In 1854, I visited La Crosse, and at that time the ground was occupied by a small frame house and known as a hotel or tavern, and, if I am not mistaken, kept by Miller. In 1856, the Augusta House was built by J. M. Levy and kept by Bicknell & Rice.

In regard to the name of La Crosse, my understanding is that it was named about the same time that Prairie du Chien was named, and by the same French Catholic missionaries, who, in their voyage down the Mississippi, encamped upon the prairie, erected a cross, and called it Prairie La Crosse, and by that name it was called by the Indians and half-breeds (French and Indian).

The name once mentioned as Koontz, is in all probability Coons, and the "Stoltz" an approximation. In making the foregoing statements, I don't wish to deprive any one of the honor of being the "first settler," but make them at your request, and upon the facts and information stamped on the early recollections of one who takes some interest in family history. Respectfully, HENRY B. COONS. P. S.-In the foregoing hastily-written communication you may find some things that you can make a chapter of. You are at liberty to shape so as to make readable. Judge Lord, W. T. Price, William Hull, Orrin Smith, and others, are references, as I am well known to them. C. LA CROSSE, May 14.

To the Editor of the Chronicle:

I have read with pleasure the letter from Henry B. Coons to Mr. King, published in your issue of the 13th inst., in relation to the early settlement of La Crosse. As a general thing, the letter of Mr. Coons contains many truths, and is deserving of credit and respect.

In May, 1838, I, with others, with two Mackinaw boats, descended the Mississippi River, and encamped for a night at a point where the Bellevue House now stands. At that time, there was no settlement or building, or any evidence of any having been on this prairie, in sight from the river. I went ashore, and if there were any such evidences I could have seen them. The country near the river was then a continuous range of sand-hills, some of them timbered, especially that near what is now the location of Zeisler's brewery and Dean, Smith & Co's foundry. On the top of the hill were some Indian graves. There were no other evidences that this prairie had ever had a habitation upon it.

In 1841, it was my pleasure to become acquainted, at Potosi, with Maj. John R. Coons and his estimable lady. I have heard from Maj. Coons the facts of his effort to make a claim at Prairie La crosse and his failure. In the same year (1841), I know that he sent Lear and Scott to reclaim their lost chance, which was unsuccessful.

The name of La Crosse is not taken from any symbol of the cross, but is a name applied to a game of ball played by the Indians, and this prairie was the ground upon which they played, hence the name "Prairie La Crosse," the prairie where the game was played. "Croix" is the French for cross. La Crosse means nothing of the kind.

Yours,

WILLIAM HULL.

COL. MYRICK'S ANSWER.

ST. PAUL, May 20.

WESTERN HISTORICAL COMPANY:

*

* * I went to La Crosse and settled there in the fall of 1841. I built my house on what is now called Barron's Island, because of the logs there, and the difficulty of getting them on the prairie, which is the site of the city. I remained on the island until February, 1842, when, having got out the requisite timber, I moved from the island on to the prairie, where I remained.

Neither at that time, nor at the time of my arrival, was there any settlement or building, or any remains of a building, or any evidence of any having been on the prairie in sight of the river at the point mentioned by Mr. Coons, or elsewhere. On this subject, I refer you to the accompanying letter of Hon. H. H. Sibley, who is, perhaps, more familiar with the history of the North west than any one now living. Gen. Sibley was at La Crosse in 1835 and 1836, and he says that "there was no vestige of claim or settlement when he conceived the idea of taking possession," and Gen. Sibley informed me, in addition to his letter, that he camped on the La Crosse prairie in 1837 on a trip from Mendota to Washington, having been frozen in at that point, and having to pack his baggage to Prairie du Chien, and that there was no house there at that time.

Hon. Henry M. Rice informs us that in 1839 and 1840, he passed the La Crosse prairie, and that there were no buildings or any evidence of any buildings on the spot at that time. Hon. William Hull, of your city, in his letter in the Chronicle of May 15, 1881, says that in May, 1838, only one year after the alleged burning of the house o Coons & Cubbage, he encamped for the night on the present site of the city, and that at that time there was no settlement or building, or any evidence of any having been on this prairie in sight of the river.

,

Now Mr. Henry B. Coons says that Coons & Cubbage built a trading house there in the spring of 1837, and that it was burned by the Indians, instigated by some of the members of the American Fur Company, that Coons & Cubbage rebuilt, and that it was burned again." All this was done in 1837, he says, and yet according to Gen. Sibley, there was no settlement there in 1835, nor in 1837, and according to Hon. William Hall, there was no building there on any evidence of one in May, 1838, and according to Hon. Henry M. Rice, no building or evidence of one in 1839 or 1840. The gratuitous fling at the American Fur Company and at Myrick & Miller, by Mr. Coons is unworthy of that gentleman, and is not the material out of which to make history.

It is well known to all the early settlers that the Indians opposed the settlement by any whites of that section, on the ground that they had not ceded the lands to the United States Government. This opposition extended to myself as well as others, but I knew that they were in error, and that the treaty of cession had been made and confirmed.

In 1842, I think, in the early part of the season, Maj. Coons came up and made a claim adjoining mine, which had, early in 1841, been staked off, and on which I had built and was living.

Coons built a shanty on it, and soon after left. In the fall of 1842, Peter Cameron came up, and finding no one in possession of the claim, took it and kept it. Scott and Lear came up in 1843, I think, and finding the Coons claim taken, went away without making any claim either on the main land or on the island or elsewhere.

I never had an interest in the Coons claim, and the insinuation of Mr. Henry B. Coons was uncalled for, and does me great injustice.

When I went to La Crosse in 1841, so far as I could see, there had never been any settlement there. I do not mean to say that in the mystic past, prior to that time, there might not have been temporary trading houses, but if such ever existed, they and all traces of them had disappeared.

There were, however, on what is called now Barron's Island, when I built there in 1841, the remains of a stone fire-place or chimney, indicating former habitation, and about one mile and a half below the present city, on the timbered bottom near the river, there was a cabin half rotted down, and about two miles below this, opposite the mouth of Root River, on an island, was Labathe's cabin, where he traded up to 1848. With the exception of some puncheons set up on end in the ground, about 12x10 feet square, by the soldiers on the prairie who were camped there in 1840, for the purpose of keeping the Indians on the west side of the river, these were the only signs or evidences, of habitation at La Crosse, or in its vicinity, when I settled there in 1841. The present site of the International Hotel, on the corner of Front and Pearl streets, was first built on in 1842, by Col. Mills, with my permission. There was then no trace of any building on that corner. Col. Mills built a house with hewed pine logs on the lot, and after occupying it for a time sold, I think, to Jacob Spaulding, and left for Dubuque. Mr. Spaulding afterward sold the house to J. M. Levy, Esq., according to my best recollection, and in pursuance of my agreement with Mills in 1843, I deeded the property to Mr. Levy in 1842, the time when I obtained the title from the United States Government. The same house was occupied afterward by Dr. B. Bunnell, who came to La Crosse with his family in 1844. The Augusta Hotel was afterward built on the site which was burned down, and the present International erected in its place.

It has been my sole purpose in this protracted narrative, to gather the scattered threads of the early settlement of La Crosse to be woven into a web of truthful history to be read by our children and countrymen long after the pioneer settlers who laid the foundations amid the adventures, sufferings and dangers of frontier life have passed away. NATHAN MYRICK.

GEN. SIBLEY'S LETTER.

ST. PAUL, May 18, 1881.

NATHAN MYRICK, Esq., City: Dear Sir-In reply to your verbal inquiry as to the first claim made upon the land where the thriving city of La Crosse, in Wisconsin, now stands, you are respectfully informed that the initial movement in that direction was taken by the late H. L. Dousman, of Prairie du Chien, François La Bathe and myself in the year 1835. We went to the expense of having cut and hauled about 20,000 rails for the purpose of inclosing a considerable portion of the then unsurveyed prairie. The matter was left in the hands of La Bathe, who neglected to carry out the measures requisite to secure the claim, and the rails were subsequently appropriated by passing steamers for fuel. There was no vestige of claim or settlement when we conceived the idea of taking possession.

The name of La Crosse, given at an early day to the prairie, was universally believed by the old-time French voyageurs to have originated in the fact that the plain was the favorite resort for the Indians to play the ball game called by that name, and I have no doubt that such is the true explanation.

WESTERN HISTORICAL COMPANY: In making reply to your queries in regard to the early history of La Crosse, I stated that I didn't want to deprive any one of the honor of being first settler. I did not expect to open a controversy, nor am I anxious to continue it. Yet I have had a residence in what is now within the bounds of the State of Wisconsin that is verging on fifty-three years, and having to some extent that love for the locality that gave me birth, that finds an eternal abiding-place in the hearts of men of all nationalities, I am as much interested as any one in "the scattered threads" of the "truthful history" of our State, whether "woven into a web" or not; yet I am not so desirous of placing my name or that of my family on the pages of that "truthful history," as to make statements that are without foundation of facts. Nor am I one that gives way to a large amount of sickly sentimentalism over old pioneers or first settlers; yet they are a necessity; without them "the star of empire" would have moved slowly westward. They are meat and drink for historians, but a long residence among them has taught me that it was not philanthropy that made the first settlers, or the pure and generous motive of "paving the way for future genera tions," but to gratify a desire that nature planted in them, to lead a nomadic life, or like the emigration that is daily pouring in upon us from the countries of the Old World, to better their condition. 'Tis true that among the old pioneers of the great West, there was a large proportion of them God's noblemen, honest, warm-hearted and ener getic. 'Tis also true that there were among them some who came that their days might be lengthened, and that they might be permitted to breathe God's pure air awhile longer, former localities having become unhealthy. Yet they are pioneers, and in after years become heroes, and "we love them for the battles they have won" over hardships and privations. They "pave the way."

But I am taking up time and space with ideas, not history, and will now try with all deference and respect due from a gentleman to age and ambition, to briefly answer the communication in the Chronicle of the 22d inst., in which Mr. Myrick states that he settled on Barron's Island in 1841, and on the mainland in February, 1842. This I am not prepared to deny. He further states that at that time there was no building, or any remains or evidence of a building at the point mentioned by me or elsewhere, and by verbal statements and letters, endeavors to cover the