FURTHER EFFORTS TO RESTORE EXILES.
Seminoles repudiate Treaty of New York--Attempts to induce Spanish
authorities to deliver up the Exiles--Their refusal--Lower Creeks
hostile to Treaty--McGillivray--His parentage and
character--Georgia hostile to Treaty--Makes war upon
Creeks--General Washington announces failure to maintain
Peace--General Knox's recommendation--Decision of United States
Court--Exertions--Combination of various classes of
Claimants--Washington finds his influence powerless--Appoints Judge
Jay--Failure of claims on England--Condition and habits of
Exiles--Effect on Slaves of Georgia--Treaty of
Colerain--Commissioners of Georgia leave Council in
disgust--Election of the elder Adams--His Administration--Election
of Jefferson--His Administration.
The long pending difficulties between Georgia and the neighboring tribes
of Indians were now (1791) believed to be permanently settled, and it
was thought the new government would proceed in the discharge of its
duties without further perplexity. But it was soon found impossible for
the Creeks to comply with their stipulations. The Seminoles refused to
recognize the treaty, insisting that they were not bound by any compact,
arrangement or agreement, made by the United States and the Creeks, to
which they were not a party, and of which they had no notice; that they
were a separate, independent tribe; that this fact was well known to
both Creeks and the United States; and that the attempt of those parties
to declare what the Seminoles should do, or should not do, was insulting
to their dignity, to their self-respect, and only worthy of their
contempt. They therefore wholly discarded the treaty, and repudiated all
its provisions. They resided in Florida, under the jurisdiction of
Spanish laws, subject only to the crown of Spain. There they enjoyed
that liberty so congenial to savages, as well as civilized men. The
Creeks dared not attempt to bring back the Exiles by force, and the
Government of the United States was unwilling to invade a Spanish colony
for the purpose of recapturing those who had escaped from the bonds of
oppression, and had become legally _free_.
[Sidenote: 1792.]
In this state of affairs, an agent by the name of Seagrove was sent to
Florida for the purpose of negotiating with the Spanish authorities for
the return of the Exiles. He had been agent to the Creek Indians, and
well understood their views in regard to the treaty. When he reached
Florida, he found the authorities of that Province entirely opposed to
the surrender of any subjects of the Spanish crown to slavery. The
Exiles were regarded as holding the same rights which the white citizens
held; and it was evident, that the representatives of the King of Spain
encouraged both the Seminole Indians and Exiles, to refuse compliance
with the treaty of New York.[14]
Nor was the Creek nation united upon this subject. The "lower Creeks,"
or those who resided on the southern frontier of Georgia, were not
zealous in their support of the treaty; and it was said that
McGillivray, the principal chief of the Creeks, was himself becoming
unfriendly to the United States, and rather disposed to unite with the
Spanish authorities. This man exerted great influence with the Indians.
He was the son of an Indian trader, a Scotchman, by a Creek woman, the
daughter of a distinguished chief. He had received a good English
education; but his father had joined the English during the Revolution,
and he, having been offended by some leading men of Georgia, had taken
up his residence with the Indians and become their principal chief, in
whom they reposed implicit confidence.
Amid these difficulties, the people of Georgia manifested an equal
hostility to the treaty, inasmuch as it surrendered a large territory
to that State, which the authorities of Georgia pretended to have
obtained by the treaty of Galphinton. The general feeling in that State
was far from being satisfied with the action of the Federal Government.
Seagrove, writing to the Secretary of War on this subject, declared,
that "to such lengths have matters gone, that they (the Georgians) now
consider the troops and servants of the United States who are placed
among them, nearly as great enemies as they do the Indians."[15]
Under these circumstances, the Governor of Georgia was addressed, by
order of the President; but he evidently participated in the popular
feeling of his State. While the Spanish authorities and Seminoles, both
Indians and Exiles, repudiated the treaty of New York, Governor
Tellfair, of Georgia, declared that the people of his State "_would
recognize no treaty in which her commissioners were not consulted_."
Instead of observing its stipulations of peace, he proceeded to raise an
army; invaded the Creek country, attacked one of their towns said to be
friendly to Georgia, killed some of their people, took others prisoners,
burned their dwellings, and destroyed their crops.
[Sidenote: 1794.]
The Creeks declared their inability to return the Exiles,[16] and, on
the thirtieth of January, General Washington, in a Special Message to
Congress, announced the failure of all efforts to maintain tranquillity
between the people of Georgia and the Creek Indians. Such were the
difficulties surrounding the subject of regaining the Exiles, that
General Knox, Secretary of War, in a written communication addressed to
the President, recommended that Congress should make an appropriation to
their owners, from the public treasury, as the only practicable manner
in which that matter could be settled.[17] This communication was
transmitted to Congress by the President, accompanied by a special
message, recommending it to the consideration of that body; but the
members appeared unwilling to adopt the policy thus suggested. They
seem to have entertained doubts as to the propriety of appropriating the
money of the people to pay for fugitive slaves. They respectfully laid
the Message, and the recommendation of the Secretary of War, upon the
table, and ordered them to be printed.[18]
The claimants of the Exiles were again encouraged and strengthened in
their expectations by the excitement prevailing in the southern portion
of the Union, arising from a decision of the Circuit Court of the United
States, held at Richmond, Virginia. At the commencement of the war, the
States prohibited the collection of debts due British subjects from
citizens of the Colonies. These debts had remained unpaid for some
sixteen years; and although the debtors entertained an expectation of
paying them at some future period, many intended meeting those demands
by the funds which they supposed would be awarded them as indemnity for
slaves carried away in British vessels during the Revolution, and for
those enlisted into the British army.
These laws, enacted at the commencement of the Revolution, were declared
by the Court to have been superseded by the treaty of peace, in 1783;
and the debtors in the several States thus became liable to the payment
of those debts, while their demands of indemnity for slaves were
pending, and the British Government had thus far refused to acknowledge
their validity. These claimants became impatient of delay, and demanded
that another treaty be formed with England, by which they could obtain
indemnity for the loss of their slaves. These uniting with those who
claimed a return of the Exiles in Florida, constituted an influential
portion of the people of the Southern States, whose joint influence was
exerted to involve the Government in the support of slavery.
Notwithstanding these clamors, the Government was powerless as to
obtaining relief for either class. The British Ministry refused
indemnity, and the Seminoles, supported and encouraged by the Spanish
authorities, were inexorable in their refusal to surrender the Exiles.
At that early period of our history, the subject of slavery greatly
perplexed the Federal Administration; nor was the genius, or the
influence of Washington, sufficiently powerful to silence the
malcontents. He was fortunate in selecting Judge Jay, of New York, as a
Minister Plenipotentiary, for negotiating a treaty with Great Britain.
This illustrious patriot possessed great purity of character; had long
been distinguished for his devotion to the welfare of the nation; and,
although a Northern man, Southern slave claimants could raise no
objection to him.
But every step towards the adjustment of the claims arising for slaves
carried away by the English ships, or enlisted into the British army,
had the effect to render the owners of Exiles more importunate. There
was only one recourse, however, left for the Administration; they could
do no more than to call on the Creeks for a new treaty, in order to
adjust these claims.
[Sidenote: 1795]
As the President was about to take measures for obtaining another treaty
with the Creeks, news arrived from England that Judge Jay, in forming a
new treaty with the British Crown, had been constrained to surrender all
claims of our citizens for slaves carried from the United States in
British vessels during the war, or for those who had enlisted into the
British service. This news created much excitement among the
slaveholders of the Southern States. The treaty was denounced by the
public Press, and a strong effort was made to defeat its approval by the
Senate. But failing in that, the slave power was rallied in opposition
to making any appropriation, by the House of Representatives, for
carrying the treaty into effect, and perhaps at no time since the Union
was formed, has it been in greater danger of disruption; but the friends
of the treaty prevailed in both Houses of Congress, and it became a
paramount law of the nation.
While those incidents were transpiring, the Exiles were engaged in
cultivating their lands, extending their plantations and increasing
their flocks and herds, and consolidating their friendships with the
Indians around them. Of all these facts the bondmen of Georgia had full
knowledge. It were impossible for them to contemplate their friends, in
the enjoyment of these rights and privileges, without a strong desire to
share in those blessings of freedom. The example of the Exiles was thus
constantly exerting an influence upon those who remained in bondage.
Many of them sought opportunities to flee into Florida, where they, in
like manner, became free subjects of Spain.
[Sidenote: 1796.]
This condition of things induced General Washington to make another
effort to remedy existing evils, and prevent their recurrence in future.
He took measures to obtain the attendance of the Chiefs, head men and
warriors of the Creek nation, at a place called Colerain, for the
purpose of forming another treaty. He again appointed Benjamin Hawkins,
George Clymer and Andrew Pickens, Commissioners, to meet the Indians in
Council, and agree upon the proper adjustment of pending difficulties.
These men were interested in the institution of Slavery, and were
supposed to be perfectly acceptable to the claimants, as well as to the
authorities of Georgia.
The parties met at the place appointed, and proceeded to the
consideration of the proposed treaty. The Creeks were not disposed to
make further grants of territory; nor were they able to give any better
assurance for the return of the Exiles than had been given at New York.
They insisted that, by the treaty of New York, they were only bound to
return those negroes who had been captured _since_ the treaty of peace
between the United States and Great Britain; these they had delivered
up, so far as they were able to surrender them. They admitted there were
more negroes among them, whom they might probably obtain at some future
day, and expressed a willingness to do so. It is however evident, from
the talk of the various Chiefs, that they had no idea of returning those
Exiles who were residing in Florida--no allusion being made to them by
either of the Commissioners, on the part of the United States, nor by
the Indians. The Council was also attended by Commissioners on the part
of Georgia, who attempted to dictate the manner of transacting the
business, and, even in offensive language, charged the Commissioners of
the United States with improper conduct; but in no instance did they
name the Seminoles, nor allude to any obligation, on the part of the
Creeks, to return the Exiles resident among the Seminoles. It should
however be borne in mind, that these Commissioners on behalf of Georgia
left the council in disgust, before the close of the negotiation. In the
treaty itself, however, there is a stipulation that the treaty of New
York shall remain in force, except such parts as were expressly changed
by that entered into at Colerain; and that portion of the treaty of New
York by which the Creeks assumed to bind the Seminoles, was not
changed.[19]
The seventh article of the Treaty of Colerain reads as follows:--"The
Creek nation shall deliver, as soon as practicable, to the
Superintendent of Indian Affairs, at such place as he may direct, all
the citizens of the United States, white inhabitants and negroes, who
are now prisoners in any part of the said nation, agreeably to the
treaty at New York; and also all citizens, white inhabitants, negroes
and property, taken since the signing of that treaty. And if any such
prisoners, negroes, or property, should not be delivered on or before
the first day of January next, the Governor of Georgia may empower three
persons to repair to the said nation, in order to claim and receive such
prisoners, negroes and property, under the direction of the President of
the United States." This stipulation was understood by the Creeks, and
they were willing to perform it; but it is very obvious, from all the
circumstances, that they had no idea of binding the Seminoles to return
the Exiles resident in Florida.
The State of Georgia obtained very little territory by this treaty, and
no further indemnity for the loss of their fugitive bondmen. The people
of that State, therefore, were greatly dissatisfied with it. But the
extraordinary feature of this treaty, consists in the subsequent
construction placed upon it by the authorities of Georgia, who,
twenty-five years subsequently, insisted that the Seminoles were in fact
a part of the Creek tribe, bound by the Creek treaties, and that the
Creek nation were under obligation to compel the Seminoles to observe
treaties made by the Creeks.
In each of the treaties made between the State of Georgia and the
Creeks, as well as in that made at New York, between the United States
and the Creek nation, attempts had been made to bind the Seminoles,
although that tribe had steadily and uniformly denied the authority of
the Creeks to bind them; and being sustained by the Spanish authorities,
it became evident that all further efforts to induce them to submit to
the government of the Creeks would be useless. This independence they
had maintained for nearly half a century. They had in no instance
acknowledged the authority of the Creeks since they left Georgia, in
1750; nor is it reasonable to suppose the authorities of that State, or
those of the United States, were ignorant of that important
circumstance.
The flagrant injustice of holding the Creeks responsible for fugitive
slaves resident in Florida, and under protection of the Spanish crown,
must be obvious to every reader; and the inquiry will at once arise. Why
did the Creek chiefs at New York consent to such a stipulation? The
answer _perhaps_ may be found in the secret article of that treaty,
giving to the Creeks fifteen hundred dollars annually, _forever_, and to
McGillivray _twelve hundred dollars during life_, and to six other
chiefs _one hundred dollars annually_. These direct and positive bribes
could not fail to have effect. The necessity for keeping this article
secret from the Indians generally, and from the people of the United
States, is very apparent; as the propriety of thus taking money, drawn
from the free States to bribe Indian chiefs to obligate their nation to
seize and return fugitive slaves, would have been doubted by savages as
well as civilized men. But the duty of the Creeks to seize and return
the Exiles was legally recognized by the treaty of Colerain, which
admitted the treaty of New York to be in force. This was regarded as a
continuance of the claims of Georgia, although the Creeks appear to have
had no idea of entering into such stipulations.
[Sidenote: 1797.]
Many circumstances now combined to quiet the apprehensions of the
fugitive bondmen in Florida. The elder Adams had been elected President
in the autumn of 1796, and assumed the duties of his office on the
fourth of March following. A descendant of the Pilgrims, he had been
reared and educated among the lovers of liberty; he had long served in
Congress; he had reported upon the rights of the people of the Colonies
in 1774, and was chairman of the committee who reported the Declaration
of Independence, in 1776, and to its doctrines he had ever exhibited an
unfaltering devotion. From such an Administration the claimants in
Georgia could expect but little aid.
Another consideration, cheering to the friends of Freedom, was the total
failure of the claims on Great Britain, for slaves lost during the War
of the Revolution. The influence of those claimants was no longer felt
in the Government. The public indignation was also somewhat excited
against the institution of Slavery by incidents of a barbarous
character, which had then recently transpired in North Carolina. After
the promulgation of the Declaration of Independence, the Quakers of that
State, conscious of its momentous truths, proceeded in good faith to
emancipate their slaves; believing that the only mode in which they
could evince their adherence to its doctrines.
The advocates of oppression were offended at this practical recognition
of the "equal right of all men to liberty," and, to manifest their
abhorrence of such doctrines, arrested the slaves so emancipated as
_fugitives from labor_. The Quakers, ever true to their convictions of
justice, lent their influence, and contributed their funds, to test the
legal rights of the persons thus set at liberty, before the proper
tribunals of the State; and the question was carried to the Court of
Appeals, where a final judgment was rendered in favor of their freedom.
This decision appears to have disappointed general expectation among the
advocates of slavery, and created much excitement throughout the State.
At the next session of the Legislature, an act was passed authorizing
persons possessing landed property to seize and reënslave the people
thus emancipated. But the planters of that State were usually possessed
of wealth and intelligence, and, holding principles of honor, they
refused to perform so degrading a service; and the liberated negroes
continued to enjoy their freedom.
But the opponents of liberty became so clamorous against the example
thus set in favor of freedom, that the Legislature passed an amendatory
act, authorizing _any person_ to seize, imprison and sell, as slaves,
any negro who had been emancipated in said State, _except those who had
served in the army of the United States during the war of the
Revolution_.
Persons of desperate character, gamblers, slave-dealers and horse
thieves, were now authorized to gratify their cupidity, by seizing and
selling persons who had for years enjoyed their liberty; and the scenes
which followed, were in no respect creditable to the State, to the
civilization or Christianity of the age. Emancipated families were
broken up and separated for ever. In some instances the wife escaped,
while the husband was captured. Parents were seized, and their children
escaped. Bloodhounds were employed to chase down those who fled to the
forests and swamps, in order to avoid men more cruel than bloodhounds.
The Quakers, so far as able, assisted these persecuted people to escape
to other States. Some left North Carolina on board ships; others fled
north by land; and many reached the free States, where their descendants
yet live. But even our free States did not afford a safe retreat from
the cruelty of inexorable slave-catchers. Those free persons were seized
in Philadelphia, and, under the fugitive slave law of 1793, were
imprisoned in that city; and, what excites still greater wonder, were
delivered up and carried back to bondage.[20]
Some of these people, while in Pennsylvania, sent petitions to Congress,
praying protection against such barbarity; and great excitement was
aroused among Southern members by the presentation of such petitions.
The Quakers of that State, and of New Jersey, also sent petitions to
Congress, praying that these people may be protected against such
piratical persecution. The popular feeling of the nation was shocked at
these things, and great indignation against the institution, generally,
was aroused.
* * * * *
We have no record of further attempts on the part of the claimants to
obtain a return of the Exiles, after the Treaty of Colerain, until the
close of Mr. Adams's administration. During that period, the fugitives
remained quietly in their homes, undisturbed by their former masters.
Their numbers were often increased by new arrivals, as well as by the
natural laws of population, and they began to assume the appearance of
an established community.
In 1801, Mr. Jefferson entered upon the duties of President. He had
himself penned the Declaration of Independence, and manifested a deep
devotion to its doctrines. Nor do we find that any attempt was made by
him for the return of the Exiles; nor were there any measures adopted to
obtain indemnity for the loss of the claimants during the eight years of
his Administration.
In 1802, a new law regulating intercourse with the Indian tribes was
enacted, by which the holders of slaves were secured for the price or
value of any bondmen who should leave his master and take up his
residence with any Indian tribe resident in the United States, or
Territories thereof--at least such was the construction given to this
statute.
The Creeks, Cherokees, and other Southern tribes, had gradually adopted
the institution of Slavery, so long practiced by their more civilized
neighbors, and thus became interested in every effort to extinguish the
hope cherished among their own bondmen, of regaining freedom by fleeing
from their masters. And many circumstances now appeared to favor the
idea, that no more attempts would be made to compel a return of the
Exiles to bondage.