but he appears to be the same with the Gabriel Godfroy who was given title by the Government (1811) to land on this trail at the site of Ypsilanti, and who had a post there as early as 1809.14

The amounts of population at the several points had apparently little relation to the relative extensions of settlement inland. The most populous settlement along the shore of the Detroit River above and below the village extended inland only the length of the farms. The Raisin River settlement, whose families numbered upward of one hundred and twenty, made a group almost four times as large as that on the Clinton.15 The settlement on the Rouge, a mile shorter than that on the Clinton, exceeded the latter in number of farms by about a dozen.16

14. History of Washtenaw County (1881), 1092-1093; Ann Arbor Folio, p. 1. See also the Greeley survey of French claims (1810). Jouett's report apparently aims to present the advantages of the lower Huron to eastern settlers. He speaks of "the deep and gentle current" of the river, navigable for boats twenty miles; of the "extensive prairies" and "beautiful sceneries," and even of the hazel brush, as affording "a pleasant shade to the delighted traveler." To a title, he says, Godfroy could have "no pretensions," the deed being signed by only one Indian chief, without a witness.

Another early purchase made by Godfroy (3000 French acres) was on the Rocky River. Francis Pepin, the second of the trio who established the post at the site of Ypsilanti, bought the same amount at about the same time (1786-1788) on the opposite bank.

15. A. S. P., Public Lands, I, 190, 192. This is approximately the relative proportion of claims shown in the Greeley survey of 1810. Jouett's usage in the employment of "occupants" and "inhabitants" is loose. He seems sometimes to mean heads of families. Occasionally he uses “farms" and "families."

16. Ibid., I, 191.

The desire of the French to be as near Detroit as possible and still be near the shore is illustrated by the almost unbroken continuity of the shore settlements about Detroit with those on neighboring streams. The influence of Detroit is apparent in the grouping of so large a colony on the Rouge," which really was an expansion up that stream of the shore settlements south of Detroit. Jouett reports a gap some two miles in extent between these groups, due to the marshy shore immediately north of the mouth of the Rouge; but the Greeley map (1810) shows no break in the continuity of the French claims. The group included by Greeley under "Detroit Settlement" begins with a claim fronting entirely on the Rouge.18 Associated closely on his map with the Rouge claims are those on the Ecorse. The claims which face the southern bank of the Rouge extend across one branch of the Ecorse; the Rouge claims nearest the shore abut on the northernmost Ecorse claim. A similar continuity is observed north of Detroit. Jouett records upward of a hundred farms grouped along the shore north of Detroit, and on the Greeley map the only break in their continuity with those on the Clinton is for a distance of about four miles above Grosse Pointe. On Greeley's map a marsh is shown there, apparently indicating a part of the unhealthful shore region mentioned by Jouett.

This break in the line of shore settlements, however, marks properly the northern limits of the Detroit group. The environment of the Clinton River and 17. The Greeley map shows seventy-five claims on the Rouge. 18. Claim No. 718.

of the shore of Lake St. Clair, as well as the character of the settlements, gives a distict individuality to the group beyond. The characteristic of this group was the comparative sparseness of settlement. Jouett states that he met but two settlers in the whole distance from the Clinton to the St. Clair River, and the number of families on the Clinton are reported as less than on the Rouge.19 The Clinton River, in general, appears to have offered excellent advantages for farming, but the lower course was marshy for some miles and the American shore of Lake St. Clair seems to have been regarded by the French as a succession of marshes and sand.20

A third area of settlement was along the St. Clair River. This had two groups of fair size, one of twelve farms fronting on the last six miles of the river's course, and a second of twenty-four farms near its junction with the Pine. 21

South of Detroit beyond the Ecorse the shore lands, though offering prime advantage for farming, were practically destitute of settlements for a distance of some twenty miles, to the Raisin River.22 Some three miles from the Raisin on either side of its mouth were 19. On the Clinton there were, according to Jouett, thirty-four families, a number corresponding approximately with the number of claims shown on the Greeley map.

20. On the Greeley map, the shore of Anchor Bay contains a Chippewa Reservation of 5760 acres,-apparent evidence that the land was not poor there, as the Indians rarely chose poor soil for their villages. The same map shows five large French claims just above the Clinton at the mouths of small streams.

21. A. S. P., Public Lands, I, 192, 193.

22. The Greeley map shows six claims at Brownstown Creek; four of them were apparently not French, bearing the names of Adam Brown and William Walker.

settlements on Sandy and Otter creeks which numbered together not over forty farms, overshadowed by the larger group on the Raisin. The Raisin River group was by far the largest inland group of French farms in the Territory, numbering upward of one hundred and twenty.23

These four areas of French settlement, on the Raisin, the Detroit, the Clinton and the St. Clair rivers, foreshadowed the division of this shore line among the present counties of Monroe, Wayne, Macomb and St. Clair.

The French-Canadian farms in Michigan differed from the usual "Yankee" farms in shape and size. With few exceptions they formed regular parallelograms; and in area there appear to have been mainly four classes, respectively of 80, 120, 160 and 200 French acres 23. In a communication made in January, 1806, a newly appointed associate judge of Michigan Territory (A. B. Woodward) reported to the Government the whole number of French farms in the Territory to be 442. A. S. P., Public Lands, I, 266. His figures, which agree substantially with those of Jouett, were probably not made from personal investigation of the settlements, since he had been less than a year in the Territory and apparently most of that time in Detroit. Probably he had access to Jouett's information, as the latter was then the Indian Agent at Detroit. Woodward's, materials, arranged differently from those in Jouett's report, form a chronological table showing the date of every addition of settlers to each site, the number of farms at each, and whether within the American title. The number of farms indicated by Jouett and Woodward is approximately the same as the number of claims in the survey of 1810 shown on the Greeley map.

according to the extent of water frontage.

24.

The French acre was a square, with a side of about eleven and two-thirds rods, equal to about four-fifths of an American acre.

In frontage they varied from about 23 to 58 rods; but almost uniformly they reached forty French acres 25 back from the water. There were some farms of 400 acres, but this large area appears to have resulted from duplication of the 200 acre farm by adding an equal parallelogram onto the rear of the one in front.26 This added part is what is referred to after the survey as "the second concession," usually a wooded area useful for timber and firewood; as will be seen later it explains the jagged rear boundary lines observable on the maps of the French claims. On the Raisin and Clinton rivers these irregularities were partly due to bogs extending along the rivers on either side and forming a natural rear boundary for the farms.27 Of the French farms, most however fall into the second class, of 120 French acres (96 American acres), with a frontage of about 23 rods and a depth of about 467 rods.

Another characteristic of the French settlement was its compactness. These farms all fronting on the water were with few exceptions close together, so that the side boundary of one farm made one boundary of a neighboring farm. This is the feature which gives to the maps of the French claims their well-known "gridiron" appearance. In this arrangement a domi25. About 467 rods. The early accounts appear to make the acre a linear measure. Thus a farm is designated as "two acres front and forty acres deep." In Jouett's report, a few illustrations are given of variations between 25 and 180 acres in depth.

26. On the Raisin, the Ecorse and the Rouge, farms of this size were reported by Jouett. See Woodward's explanation of this area in the report referred to in note 23.

27. A. S. P., Public Lands, I, 190, 192. The Greeley map shows the farms on the Clinton farthest inland as having a very large frontage but as extending only a little way from the river.