Editing Jeffery Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst (section)

==Pontiac's War==
{{Main|Pontiac's War}}

The uprising of many Native American tribes in the Ohio Valley and Great Lakes region, commonly referred to as [[Pontiac (person)|Pontiac]]'s War after one of its most notable leaders, began in early 1763.  From 1753, when the French first invaded the territory, to February 1763, when peace was formally declared between the English and French, the Six Nations and tenant tribes always maintained that both the French and the British must remain east of the [[Allegheny Mountains]]. After the British failed to keep their word to withdraw from the Ohio and Allegheny valleys, a loose confederation of Native American tribes including the Delawares, the Shawnees, the Senecas, the Mingoes, the Mohicans, the Miamis, the Ottawas and the Wyandots, who were opposed to British post-war occupation of the region, banded together in an effort to drive the British out of their territory.<ref>''The Indian wars of Pennsylvania''; C. Hale Sipe; The Telegraph Press; 1921; pp. 407–438</ref><ref>Richard Middleton, ''Pontiac's War'', pp. 1–128.</ref>

One of the most infamous and well-documented issues during Pontiac's War was the use of [[biological warfare]] against Native Americans and Amherst's role in supporting it. [[Henry Bouquet|Colonel Henry Bouquet]], the commander of [[Fort Pitt (Pennsylvania)|Fort Pitt]], ordered [[Smallpox blanket|smallpox-infested blankets]] to be given Native Americans when a group of them [[Siege of Fort Pitt|laid siege to the fortification]] in June 1763.<ref name="scratch">{{Cite book|title=The Scratch of a Pen: 1763 and the Transformation of North America (Pivotal Moments in American History)|last=Calloway|first=Collin G. |publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2007|isbn=978-0195331271|page=73}}</ref><ref name="ration">{{Cite book|title=Rationalizing Epidemics|last=Jones|first=David S. |publisher=Harvard University Press|year=2004|isbn=978-0674013056|page=97}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=A Country Between: The Upper Ohio Valley and Its Peoples, 1724–1774|last=McConnel|first=Michael N. |publisher=University of Nebraska Press|year=1997|page=195}}</ref> During a parley in midst of the siege on 24 June 1763, Captain Simeon Ecuyer gave representatives of the besieging [[Lenape|Delaware]]s two blankets and a handkerchief enclosed in small metal boxes that had been exposed to smallpox, in an attempt to spread the disease to the Natives in order to end the siege.<ref>Anderson, ''Crucible of War'', 541–42; Jennings, ''Empire of Fortune'', 447n26.</ref> [[William Trent]], the trader turned militia commander who had come up with the plan, sent an [[invoice]] to the British colonial authorities in North America indicating that the purpose of giving the blankets was "to Convey the Smallpox to the Indians." The invoice was approved by [[Thomas Gage]], then serving as [[Commander-in-Chief, North America]].<ref name="scratch" /><ref name="ration"/> Reporting on parleys with Delaware chiefs on 24 June, Trent wrote: '[We] gave them two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect.' The military hospital records confirm that two blankets and handkerchiefs were 'taken from people in the Hospital to Convey the Smallpox to the Indians.' The fort commander paid for these items, which he certified 'were had for the uses above mentioned.'<ref name="Fenn"/><ref>Kiernan, p. 245</ref> A reported outbreak that began the spring before left as many as one hundred Native Americans dead in [[Ohio Country]] from 1763 to 1764. It is not clear, however, whether the smallpox was a result of the Fort Pitt incident or the virus was already present among the [[Lenape|Delaware people]] as outbreaks happened on their own every dozen or so years<ref>{{cite book|last1=King |first1=J. C. H. |title=Blood and Land: The Story of Native North America |date=2016 |publisher=Penguin UK |isbn=9781846148088 |page=73}}</ref> and the delegates were met again later and they seemingly had not contracted smallpox.<ref name=ranlet>{{cite journal|last1=Ranlet |first1=P |title=The British, the Indians, and smallpox: what actually happened at Fort Pitt in 1763? |journal=Pennsylvania History |date=2000 |volume=67 |issue=3 |pages=427–441 |pmid=17216901}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Barras V, Greub G | title = History of biological warfare and bioterrorism | journal = Clinical Microbiology and Infection | volume = 20 | issue = 6 | pages = 497–502 | date = June 2014 | pmid = 24894605 | doi = 10.1111/1469-0691.12706 | quote = However, in the light of contemporary knowledge, it remains doubtful whether his hopes were fulfilled, given the fact that the transmission of smallpox through this kind of vector is much less efficient than respiratory transmission, and that Native Americans had been in contact with smallpox >200 years before Ecuyer’s trickery, notably during Pizarro’s conquest of South America in the 16th century. As a whole, the analysis of the various ‘pre-micro- biological” attempts at BW illustrate the difficulty of differentiating attempted biological attack from naturally occurring epidemics. | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare|publisher=Government Printing Office|isbn=978-0-16-087238-9|page=3|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nm_AVg4hmJQC&pg=PA3|date=2007|quote=In retrospect, it is difficult to evaluate the tactical success of Captain Ecuyer's biological attack because smallpox may have been transmitted after other contacts with colonists, as had previously happened in New England and the South. Although scabs from smallpox patients are thought to be of low infectivity as a result of binding of the virus in fibrin metric, and transmission by fomites has been considered inefficient compared with respiratory droplet transmission.}}</ref>

A month later the use of smallpox blankets was discussed by Amherst himself in letters to Bouquet.<ref>{{Citation |author-link=Jacob M. Appel |last=Appel |first=J. M. |title=Is all fair in biological warfare? The controversy over genetically engineered biological weapons |journal=Journal of Medical Ethics |volume=35 |issue=7 |pages=429–432 |year=2009 |doi=10.1136/jme.2008.028944 |pmid=19567692|s2cid=1643086 }}</ref>  Amherst, having learned that smallpox had broken out among the garrison at Fort Pitt, and after learning of the loss of his forts at [[Fort Venango|Venango]], [[Fort Le Boeuf|Le Boeuf]] and [[Fort Presque Isle|Presqu'Isle]], wrote to Colonel Bouquet:<ref name="Fenn">Fenn, Elizabeth A. [http://www.politicsandthelifesciences.org/Biosecurity_course_folder/readings/fenn.html Biological Warfare in Eighteenth-Century North America: Beyond Jeffery Amherst] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150403033815/http://www.politicsandthelifesciences.org/Biosecurity_course_folder/readings/fenn.html |date= 3 April 2015 }};  The Journal of American History, Vol. 86, No. 4, March 2000</ref>

<blockquote>Could it not be contrived to send the small pox among the disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them.</blockquote>

Bouquet, who was already marching to relieve Fort Pitt from the siege, agreed with this suggestion in a postscript when he responded to Amherst just days later on 13 July 1763:<ref name=umass/>

<blockquote>P.S. I will try to inocculate {{sic}} the Indians by means of Blankets that may fall in their hands, taking care however not to get the disease myself. As it is pity to oppose good men against them, I wish we could make use of the Spaniard's Method, and hunt them with English Dogs. Supported by Rangers, and some Light Horse, who would I think effectively extirpate or remove that Vermine.</blockquote>

In response, also in a postscript, Amherst replied:<ref name=umass/>

<blockquote>P.S. You will Do well to try to Innoculate {{sic}} the Indians by means of Blankets, as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your Scheme for Hunting them Down by Dogs could take Effect, but England is at too great a Distance to think of that at present.</blockquote>

{{Campaignbox French and Indian War}}

Amherst was summoned home, ostensibly so that he could be consulted on future military plans in North America, and was replaced ''pro tem'' as [[Commander-in-Chief, North America]] by [[Thomas Gage]]. Amherst expected to be praised for his conquest of Canada, however, once in London, he was instead asked to account for the recent Native American rebellion.<ref>Anderson pp. 552–553</ref> He was forced to defend his conduct, and faced complaints made by [[Sir William Johnson, 1st Baronet|William Johnson]] and [[George Croghan]], who lobbied the Board of Trade for his removal and permanent replacement by Gage.  He was also severely criticised by military subordinates on both sides of the Atlantic.<ref>Middleton, ''Pontiac's War'', 127–28.  O'Toole p. 249</ref>  Nevertheless, Amherst was promoted to [[lieutenant-general]] on 26 March 1765,<ref>{{London Gazette|issue=10507|page=1|date=23 March 1765}}</ref> and became colonel of the [[Buffs (Royal East Kent Regiment)|3rd Regiment of Foot]] in November 1768.<ref name=heath25>Heathcote p. 25</ref>

On 22 October 1772, Amherst was appointed [[Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance]],<ref>{{London Gazette|issue=11294|page=1|date=20 October 1772}}</ref> and he soon gained the confidence of [[George III]], who had initially hoped the position would go to a member of the [[Royal Family]].<ref>Patterson p. 93</ref> On 6 November 1772, he became a member of the [[Privy Council of the United Kingdom|Privy Council]].<ref>{{London Gazette|issue=11298|page=1|date=3 November 1772}}</ref>