correct, he "coined" the term.
Not so fast. These "wild man" eyewitness accounts may not use the name Sasquatch, but they clearly describe such an animal, so there is no reason to exclude them from the discussion. You can verify this yourself by reading Tirademan's Historical Archive, there are dozens of articles which demonstrate this and you are a premium member.
Here is an example from California 1870:
Bodhi, you are basically attempting to commit a logical fallacy based on semantics, but don't worry, I won't let you.