fort at Ruddle's Station was in no condition to resist so powerful an
enemy backed by artillery, the defenses being nowise superior to those
we have before described.

They were summoned to surrender in the name of his Britannic Majesty,
with the promise of protection for their lives only. What could they
do? The idea of resisting such a force was vain. The question presented
itself to them thus. Whether they should surrender at once and give up
their property, or enrage the Indians by a fruitless resistance, and
lose their property and lives also. The decision was quickly made, the
post was surrendered and the enemy thronged in, eager for plunder. The
inmates of the fort were instantly seized, families were separated; for
each Indian caught the first person whom he met, and claimed him or her
as his prisoner. Three who made some resistance, were killed upon the
spot. It was in vain that the settlers remonstrated with the British
commander. He said it was impossible to restrain them. This doubtless
was true enough, but he should have thought of it before he assumed
the command of such a horde, and consented to lead them against weak
settlements.

The Indians demanded to be led at once against Martin's Fort, a post
about five miles distant. Some say that the same scene was enacted over
here; but another account states that so strongly was Colonel Byrd
affected by the barbarities of the Indians, that he refused to advance
further, unless they would consent to allow him to take charge of all
the prisoners who should be taken. The same account goes on to say that
the demand was complied with, and that on the surrender of Martin's
Fort, this arrangement was actually made; the Indians taking possession
of the property and the British of the prisoners. However this may be,
the capture of this last-mentioned place, which was surrendered under