The wailings of the Cherokee, the Choctaw, and the Creek, may have been
wafted across the waters of the great salt lake, and the Pale-face in his
own land may have heard their lamentations;--but the distant voice is
scattered by the passing winds, and is heard like the whisper of a summer
breeze as it steals along the prairies of the west, or the cry of the
wish-ton-wish as it faintly reaches the ear of the navigator, when, in the
stilly night, he floats down "the old father of waters."
The present posture of Indian affairs, and the peculiar situation of the
Indian nations east of the Mississippi, have caused that unfortunate
people to be the topic of much political controversy and conversation; a
succinct account of the political condition of these tribes, and of the
policy which has been pursued, and which is being pursued towards them, by
the executive government, may not therefore be uninteresting.
When Georgia, by becoming a member of the Union, ceded part of her
sovereignty to the general executive, that government acknowledged her
claimed limits, and guaranteed to her the protection of the Union against
foreign and domestic violence. Subsequently, in the year of 1802, in
consideration of a certain portion of lands ceded, the United States
became bound to purchase for Georgia, any claim which the Cherokee nation
might have on lands within her boundaries, whenever such purchase could be
made on reasonable terms. On these positions are based the Georgian
claims, which the United States government has hitherto pleaded inability
to satisfy, inasmuch as all efforts to purchase the Indian lands have
proved fruitless.
After the lapse of twenty-seven years, Georgia, finding herself precisely
in the same condition in which she then stood, has determined on forcibly
taking possession of the Cherokee lands, and extending her sovereignty
over the Cherokee people. But as this cannot be effected without doing
manifest violence to the Indian rights, she brings forward arguments to
show, that _she_ never acknowledged the independence of the Cherokee
nation; that that nation, from the time of the first settlement made by
Europeans in America, stood in the position of a conquered people; that
the sovereignty consequently dwelt in the hands of Great Britain; and
that, on the Declaration of independence, Georgia, by becoming a free
state, became invested with all the powers of sovereignty claimed or
exercised by Great Britain over the Georgian territory: and further, that
in November, 1785, when the first and only treaty was concluded with the
Cherokees by the United States, during the articles of confederation, both
she and North Carolina entered their solemn protests against this alleged
violation of their legislative rights. The executive government pretends
not to argue the case with Georgia, and is left no alternative but either
to annul its _conditional_ treaty with that state, or to cancel _thirteen
distinct treaties_ entered into with the Indians, despoil them of their
lands, and rob them of their independence. Jackson's message says, "It is
too late to inquire whether it was just in the United States to include
them and their territory within bounds of new states, whose limits they
could control. That step cannot be retracted. A state cannot be
dismembered by Congress, or restrained in the exercise of her
constitutional powers." Here the executive government acknowledges that it
made promises to Georgia, which it has been unable to perform--that it
guaranteed to that state the possession of lands over which it had no
legitimate control, on the mere assumption of being able to make their
purchase.
The Cherokees in their petition and memorials to Congress show, that Great
Britain never exercised any sovereignty over them;--that in peace and in
war she always treated them as a free people, and never assumed to herself
the right of interfering with their internal government:--that in every
treaty made with them by the United States, their sovereignty and total
independence are clearly acknowledged, and that they have ever been
considered as a distinct nation, exercising all the privileges and
immunities enjoyed by any independent people. They say, "In addition to
that first of all rights, the right of inheritance and peaceable
possession, we have the faith and pledge of the United States, over and
over again, in treaties made at various times. By these treaties our
rights as a separate people are distinctly acknowledged, and guarantees
given that they shall be secured and protected. So we have also
understood the treaties. The conduct of the government towards us, from
its organization until very lately--the talks given to our beloved men by
the Presidents of the United States--and the speeches of the agents and
commissioners--all concur to show that we are not mistaken in our
interpretation. Some of our beloved men who signed the treaties are still
living, and their testimony tends to the same conclusion." * * * * "In
what light shall we view the conduct of the United States and Georgia in
their intercourse with us, in urging us to enter into treaties and cede
lands? If we were but tenants at will, why was it necessary that our
consent must first be obtained before these governments could take lawful
possession of our lands? The answer is obvious. These governments
perfectly understand our rights--our right to the country, and our right
to self-government. Our understanding of the treaties is further supported
by the intercourse law of the United States, which prohibits all
encroachment on our territory."
The arguments used by the Cherokees are unanswerable; but in what will
that avail them, when injustice is intended by a superior power, which,
regardless of national faith, has determined on taking possession of their
lands? The case stands thus: the executive government enters into an
agreement with Georgia, and engages to deliver over to the state the
Indian possessions within her claimed limits--without the Indians _having
any knowledge of, or participation in the transaction._ Now what, may I
ask, have the Indians to do with this? Ought they to be made answerable
for the gross misconduct of the two governments, and to be despoiled,
contrary to every principle of justice, and in defiance of the most plain
and fundamental law of property? It puts one in mind of the judgment of
the renowned "Walter the Doubter," who decided between two citizens, that,
as their account books appeared to be of equal _weight_, therefore their
accounts were balanced, and that _the constable_ should pay the costs. The
United States government has made several offers to the Cherokees for
their lands; which they have as constantly refused, and said, "that they
were very well contented where they were--that they did not wish to leave
the bones of their ancestors, and go beyond the Mississippi; but that, if
the country be so beautiful as their white brother represents it, they
would recommend their white brother to go there himself."
Georgia presses upon the executive; which, in this dilemma, comes forward
with affected sympathy--deplores the unfortunate situation in which it is
placed, but of course concludes that faith must be kept with Georgia, and
that the Cherokee must either go, or submit to laws that make it far
better for him to go than stay. It is true Jackson says in his message,
"This emigration should be voluntary; for it would be cruel as unjust to
compel the Aborigines to abandon the graves of their fathers, and seek a
home in a distant land." But General Jackson well knows that the laws of
Georgia leave the Indian no choice--as no community of men, civilized or
savage, could possibly exist under such laws. The benefit and protection
of the laws, to which the Indian is made subject, are entirely withheld
from him--he can be no party to a suit--he may be robbed and murdered with
impunity--his property may be taken, and he may be driven from his
dwelling--in fine, he is left liable to every species of insult, outrage,
cruelty, and dishonesty, without the most distant hope of obtaining
redress; for in Georgia _an Indian cannot be a witness to prove facts
against a white man._ Yet General Jackson says, "this emigration should be
_voluntary_;" and in the very same paragraph, with a single sweep of the
pen, he annihilates all the treaties that have been made with that
people--tramples under foot the laws of nations, and deprives the Indian
of his hunting-grounds, one of his sources of subsistence. He says,--"But
it seems to me visionary to suppose that, in this state of things, claims
can be allowed on tracts of country on which they have neither dwelt nor
made improvements, merely because they have seen them from the mountain,
or passed them in the chase." It certainly may be unphilosophical to
permit any man to possess more ground than he can till with his own hands;
yet surely arguments that we do not admit as regards ourselves, we can
with no sense of propriety use towards others, particularly when our own
acts are directly in the very teeth of this principle. There is more land
at present within the limits and in the possession of the United States
than would be sufficient to support thirty times the present
population--yet to this must be added the hunting-grounds of the Indians,
merely because "it is _visionary to suppose_ they have any claim on what
they do not _actually occupy!"_
I have now before me the particulars of thirteen treaties[15] made by the
United States with the Cherokee nation, from the year 1785 down to 1819
inclusive; in all of which the rights of the Indians are clearly
acknowledged, either directly, or by implication; and by the seventh
article of the treaty of Holston, executed in 1791, being the first
concluded with that people by the United States, under their present
constitution, all the lands not thereby ceded are solemnly guaranteed to
the Cherokee nation. The subsequent treaties are made with reference to,
and in confirmation of this, and continually reiterate the guarantees
therein tendered.
To talk of justice, and honour, would be idle and visionary, for these
seem to have been thrown overboard at the very commencement of the
contest; but I would ask the American _people_, is their conduct towards
the Indians politic?--is it politic in America, in the face of civilized
nations, to violate treaties? is it politic in her, to hold herself up to
the world as faithless and unjust--as a nation, which, in defiance of all
moral obligation, will break her most sacred contracts, whenever it
becomes no longer her interest to keep them, and she finds herself in a
condition to do so with impunity? is she not furnishing foreign statesmen
with a ready and powerful argument in defence of their violating treaties
with her? can they not with justice say--America has manifested in her
proceedings towards the Cherokee nation, that she is faithless--that she
keeps no treaties longer than it may be her _interest_ to do so--and are
_we_ to make ourselves the dupes of such a power, and wait until she finds
herself in a condition to deceive us? I could produce many arguments to
illustrate the impolicy of this conduct; but as I intend confining myself
to a mere sketch, I shall dwell but as short a time as may be consistent
on the several facts connected with the case.
That the Aborigines have been cruelly treated, cannot be doubted. The very
words of the Message admit this; and the tone of feeling and conciliation
which follows that admission, coupled as it is with the intended injustice
expressed in other paragraphs, can be viewed in no other light than as a
piece of political mockery. The Message says, "their present condition,
contrasted with what they once were, makes a most powerful appeal to our
sympathies. Our ancestors found them the uncontrolled possessors of these
vast regions. By persuasion and force, they have been made to retire from
river to river, and from mountain to mountain, until some of the tribes
have become extinct, and others have left but remnants, to preserve for a
while their once terrible names." Now the plan laid down by the president,
in order to prevent, if possible, the total decay of the Indian people,
is, to send them beyond the Mississippi, and _guarantee_ to them the
possession of ample territory west of that river. How far this is likely
to answer the purpose _expressed_, let us now examine.
The Cherokees, by their intercourse with and proximity to the white
people, have become half civilized; and how is it likely that _their_
condition will be improved by driving them into the forests and barren
prairies? That territory is at present the haunt of the Pawnees, the
Osages, and other warlike nations, who live almost entirely by the chase,
and are constantly waging war even with each other. As soon as the
Cherokees, and other half-civilized Indians, appear, they will be regarded
as common intruders, and be subject to the united attacks of these people.
There are even old feuds existing among themselves, which, it is but too
probable, may be renewed. Trappers and hunters, in large parties, yearly
make incursions into the country beyond the boundaries of the United
States, and in defiance of the Indians kill the beaver and the
buffalo--the latter merely for the _tongue and skin_, leaving the carcase
to rot upon the ground.[16] Thus is this unfortunate race robbed of their
means of subsistence. Moreover, what guarantee can the Indians have, that
the United States will keep faith for the future, when it is admitted that
they have not done so in times past? How can they be sure that they may
not further be driven from river to river, and from mountain to mountain,
until they reach the shores of the Pacific; and who can tell but that then
it may be found expedient to drive them into the ocean?
The policy of the United States government is evidently to get the Indians
to exterminate each other. Its whole proceedings from the time this
question was first agitated to the present, but too clearly indicate this
intention; and if we wanted proof, that the executive government of the
United States _would act_ on so barbarous and inhuman a policy, we need
only refer to the allocation of the Cherokees, who exchanged lands in
Tennessee for lands west of the Mississippi, pursuant to the treaty of
1819. It was well known that a deadly enmity existed between the Osages
and Cherokees, and that any proximity of the two people, would inevitably
lead to fatal results; yet, with this knowledge, the executive government
placed those Cherokees in the country lying between the Arkansaw and Red
rivers, _immediately joining the territory of the Osages._ It is
unnecessary to state that the result was _as anticipated_--they daily
committed outrages upon the persons and properties of each other, and the
death of many warriors, on both sides, ensued.
The sympathy expressed in that part of the Message relating to the
Indians, if expressed with sincerity, would do much honour to the feelings
that dictated it; but when we come to examine the facts, and investigate
the implied allegations, we shall find that they are most gratuitous; and,
consequently, that the regret of the president at the probable fate of the
Indian, should he remain east of the Mississippi, is grossly hypocritical.
He says, "surrounded by the whites, with their arts of civilization,
which, by destroying the resources of the savage, doom him to weakness and
decay:[17] the fate of the Mohegan, the Narragansett, and the Delaware, is
fast overtaking the Choctaw, the Cherokee, and the Creek. That this fate
surely awaits them, if they remain within the limits of the States, does
not admit of a doubt. Humanity and national honour demand that every
effort should be made to avert so great a calamity." From what facts the
president has drawn these conclusions does not appear. Neither the
statements of the Cherokees, nor of the Indian agents, nor the report of
the secretary of war, furnish any such information; on the contrary, with
the exception of one or two agents _at Washington_, all give the most
flattering accounts of advancement in civilization. The Rev. Samuel A.
Worcester, in his letter to the Rev. E.S. Ely, editor of the
"Philadelphian," completely refutes all the unfavourable statements that
have been got up to cover the base conduct of Jackson and the slavites.
This gentleman has resided for the last four years among the Cherokees,
and has surely had abundant means of observing their condition.
The letter of David Brown (a Cherokee), addressed, September 2, 1825, to
the editor of "The Family Visitor," at Richmond, Virginia, states, that
"the Cherokee plains are covered with herds of cattle--sheep, goats, and
swine, cover the valleys and hills--the plains and valleys are rich, and
produce Indian corn, cotton, tobacco, wheat, oats, indigo, sweet and Irish
potatoes, &c. The natives carry on a considerable trade with the adjoining
states, and some of them export cotton in boats down the Tennessee to the
Mississippi, and down that river to New Orleans. Orchards are
common--cheese, butter, &c. plenty--houses of entertainment are kept by
natives. Cotton and woollen cloths are manufactured in the nation, and
almost every family grows cotton for its own consumption. Agricultural
pursuits engage the chief attention of the nation--different branches of
mechanics are pursued. Schools are increasing every year, and education is
encouraged and rewarded." To quote David Brown verbatim, on the
population,--"In the year 1819, an estimate was made of the Cherokees.
Those on the west were estimated at 5,000, and those on the east of the
Mississippi, at 10,000 souls. The census of this division of the Cherokees
has again been taken within the current year (1825), and the returns are
thus made: native citizens, 13,563; white men married in the nation, 147;
white women ditto, 73; African slaves, 1177. If this summary of the
Cherokee population, from the census, is correct, to say nothing of those
of foreign extract, we find that in six years the increase has been 3,563
souls. National pride, patriotism, and a spirit of independence, mark the
Cherokee character." He further states, "the system of government is
founded on republican principles, and secures the respect of the people."
An alphabet has been invented by an Indian, named George Guess, the
Cherokee Cadmus, and a printing press has been established at New Echota,
the seat of government, where there is published weekly a paper entitled,
"The Cherokee Phoenix,"--one half being in the English language, and the
other in that of the Cherokee.
The report of the secretary of war, upon the present condition of the
Indians, states of the Chickesaws and Choctaws, all that has been above
said of the Cherokees. But of the last-mentioned people, the secretary's
accounts appear to be studiously defective. Yet the fact is notorious,
that both the Chickesaws and Choctaws are far behind the Cherokees in
civilization.
With these facts before our eyes, what are we to think of the grief of the
president, at the decay and increasing weakness of the Cherokees? Can it
be regarded in any way but as a piece of shameless hypocrisy, too glaring
in its character to escape the notice even of the most inobservant
individual. It has been said that the question involves many
difficulties--to me there appears none. The United States, in the year
1791, guarantee to the Indians the possession of all their lands not then
ceded--and confirm this by numerous subsequent treaties. In 1802, they
promise to Georgia, the possession of the Cherokee lands "_whenever such
purchase could be made on reasonable terms_" This is the simple state of
the case; and if the executive were inclined to act uprightly, the line of
conduct to be pursued could be determined on without much difficulty.
Georgia has no right to press upon the executive the fulfilment of
engagements which were made conditionally, and consequently with an
implied reservation; and the United States should not violate _many
positive treaties_, in order to fulfil _a conditional one_.[18]
I shall now advert to some of the charges touching the character of the
Indians. It is said, that they are debauched and insincere. This charge
has been particularly made against the Creeks, and I believe is not
altogether unfounded. Yet, if this be now the character of the once
warlike and noble Creek, let the white man ask himself who has made him
so? Who makes the "firewater," and who supplies the untutored savage with
the means of intoxication? The white-man, when he wishes to trade
profitably with the Indian, fills the cup, and holds it forth--he says,
'drink, my brother, it is good'--the red-man drinks, and the wily white
points at his condition, says he is uncivilized, and should go forth from
the land, for his presence is contamination!
As to the charge of hypocrisy--this too has been taught or forced upon the
Indians by the conduct of the whites. Missionaries have been constantly
going among them, teaching dogmas and doctrines, far beyond the
comprehension of some learned white-men, and to the savage totally
unintelligible. These gentlemen have told long stories; and when posed by
some quaint saying, or answered by some piece of traditional information,
handed down from generation to generation, by the fathers and mothers of
the tribe, have found it necessary to purchase the acquiescence of a few
Indians by bribes, in order that their labours might not seem to have been
altogether unsuccessful. This conduct of the Missionaries was soon
_understood_ by the Indians, and the temptation held out was too great to
be resisted. Blankets and gowns converted, when inspiration and gospel
truths had failed.
Mr. Houston of Tennessee, after having attained the honour of being
governor of his state, and having enjoyed all the consideration
necessarily attached to that office, at length became tired of civilized
life, and retired among the Creeks to end his days. He has resided long
among them, and knows their character well; yet, in one of his statements
made to the Indian board at New York, he says, that the attempts to
Christianize the Indians in their present state, he was of opinion, much
as he honoured the zeal that had prompted them, were fruitless, _or
worse._ The supposed conversions had produced no change of habits. So
degraded had become the character of this once independent people, that
professions of religious belief had been made, and the ordinances of
religion submitted to, "when an Indian wanted a new blanket, or a squaw a
new gown."[19] Thus, according to governor Houston, the only fruits
produced by the boasted labours of the missionaries, have been
dissimulation and deceit; and demoralization has been the result of
teaching _doctrinal_ Christianity to the children of the forest. Yet we
must, in candour, acknowledge that Mr. Houston is not singular in that
opinion, since we find, so far back as the year 1755, Cadwallader Calden
express himself much to the same effect. "The Five Nations," he says, "are
a poor and generally called barbarous people, bred under the darkest
ignorance; and yet a bright and noble genius shines through these black
clouds. None of the greatest Roman heroes have discovered a greater love
of country, or contempt of death, than these people, called barbarous,
have shown when liberty came in competition. Indeed I think our Indians
have outdone the Romans in this particular. Some of the greatest of those
Roman heroes have murdered themselves to avoid shame or torments; but our
Indians have refused to die meanly or with little pain, when they thought
their country's honour would be at stake by it; but have given their
bodies willingly to the most cruel torments of their enemies, to show, as
they said, that 'the Five Nations' consisted of men whose courage and
resolution could not be shaken. But what, alas! have we Christians done to
make them better? We have, indeed, reason to be ashamed that these
infidels, by our conversation and neighbourhood, are become worse than
they were before they knew us. Instead of virtue, we have only taught them
vice, that they were entirely free from before that time."[20] The Rev.
Timothy Flint, who was himself a missionary, in his "Ten Years' Residence
in the Valley of the Mississippi," observes, page 144,--"I have surely
had it in my heart to impress them with the importance of the subject
(religion). I have scarcely noticed an instance in which the subject was
not received either with indifference, rudeness, or jesting. Of all races
of men that I have seen, they seem most incapable of religious
impressions. They have, indeed, some notions of an invisible agent, but
they seemed generally to think that the Indians had their god as the
whites had theirs." And again, "nothing will eventually be gained to the
great cause by colouring and mis-statement," alluding to the practice of
the missionaries; "and however reluctant we may be to receive it, the real
state of things will eventually be known to us. We have heard of the
imperishable labours of an Elliott and a Brainard, in other days. But in
these times it is a melancholy truth, that Protestant exertions to
Christianize them have not been marked with apparent success. The
Catholics have caused many to hang a crucifix around their necks, which
they show as they show their medals and other ornaments, and this is too
often all they have to mark them as Christians. We have read the
narratives of the Catholics, which detailed the most glowing and animating
views of success. I have had accounts, however, from travellers in these
regions, that have been over the Stony mountains into the great missionary
settlements of St. Peter and St. Paul. These travellers (and some of them
were professed Catholics) unite in affirming that the converts will escape
from the missions whenever it is in their power, fly into their native
deserts, and resume at once their old mode of life."
That the vast sums expended on missions should have produced so little
effect, we may consider lamentable, but it is lamentably true; for in
addition to the mass of evidence we have to that effect, from
disinterested white men, we have also the speeches and communications of
the Indians themselves. The celebrated Seneca chief, Saguyuwhaha (keeper
awake), better known in the United States by the name of Red-jacket, in a
letter communicated to Governor De Witt Clinton, at a treaty held at
Albany, says, "Our great father, the President, has recommended to our
young men to be industrious, to plough and to sow. This we have done; and
we are thankful for the advice, and for the means he has afforded us of
carrying it into effect. We are happier in consequence of it; _but another
thing recommended to us, has created great confusion among us, and is
making us a quarrelsome and divided people; and that is, the introduction
of preachers into our nation_. These black-coats contrive to get the
consent of some of the Indians to preach among us; and whenever this is
the case, confusion and disorder are sure to follow, and the encroachment
of the whites on our lands is the inevitable consequence.
"The governor must not think hard of me for speaking thus of the
preachers: I have observed their progress, and whenever I look back to
see what has taken place of old, I perceive that whenever they came among
the Indians, they were the forerunners of their dispersion; that they
always excited enmities and quarrels amongst them; that they introduced
the white people on their lands, by whom they were robbed and plundered of
their property; and that the Indians were sure to dwindle and decrease,
and be driven back, in proportion to the number of preachers that came
among them.
"Each nation has its own customs and its own religion. The Indians have
theirs, given them by the Great Spirit, under which they were happy. It
was not intended that they should embrace the religion of the whites, and
be destroyed by the attempt to make them think differently on that subject
from their fathers.
"It is true, these preachers have got the consent of some of the chiefs to
stay and preach amongst us; but I and my friends know this to be wrong,
and that they ought to be removed; besides, we have been threatened by Mr.
Hyde--who came among us as a schoolmaster and a teacher of our children,
but has now become a black-coat, and refuses to teach them any more--that
unless we listen to his preaching and become Christians, we shall be
turned off our lands. We wish to know from the governor, if this is to be
so? and if he has no right to say so, we think _he_ ought to be turned off
our lands, and not allowed to plague us any more. We shall never be at
peace while he is among us.
"We are afraid too, that these preachers, by and by, will become poor,
_and force us to pay them for living among us, and disturbing us._
"Some of our chiefs have got lazy, and instead of cultivating their lands
themselves, employ white people to do so. There are now eleven families
living on our reservation at Buffalo; this is wrong, and ought not to be
permitted. The great source of all our grievances is, that the whites are
among us. Let _them_ be removed, and we will be happy and contented among
ourselves. We now cry to the governor for help, and hope that he will
attend to our complaints, and speedily give us redress."[21]
This melancholy hostility to the missionaries is not confined to a
particular tribe or nation of Indians, for all those people, in every
situation, from the base of the Alleghanies to the foot of the Rocky
mountains, declare the same sentiments on this subject; and although
policy or courtesy may induce some chiefs to express themselves less
strongly than Red-jacket has expressed himself, we have but too many
proofs that their feelings are not more moderate. On the fourth of
February, 1822, the president of the United States, in council, received a
deputation of Indians, from the principal nations west of the
Mississippi, who came under the protection of Major O'Fallon, when each
chief delivered a speech on the occasion. I shall here insert an extract
from that of the "Wandering Pawnee" chief, more as a specimen of Indian
wisdom and eloquence than as bearing particularly on the subject. Speaking
of the Great Spirit, he said, "We worship him not as you do. We differ
from you in appearance, and manners, as well as in our customs; and we
differ from you in our religion. We have no large houses, as you have, to
worship the Great Spirit in: if we had them to-day, we should want others
to-morrow; for we have not like you a fixed habitation--we have no settled
home except our villages, where we remain but two months in twelve. We,
like animals, rove through the country; whilst you whites reside between
us and heaven. But still, my great Father, we love the Great Spirit--we
acknowledge his supreme power--our peace, our health, and our happiness
depend upon him, and our lives belong to him--he made us, and he can
destroy us.
"My great Father,--some of your good chiefs, as they are called
(missionaries), have proposed to send some of their good people among us
to change our habits, to make us work for them, and live like the white
people. I will not tell a lie--I am going to tell the truth. You love your
country--you love your people--you love the manner in which they live, and
you think your people brave. I am like you, my great Father; I love my
country--I love my people--I love the manner in which we live, and think
myself and warriors brave.[22] Spare me then, my Father; let me enjoy my
country, and pursue the buffalo and the beaver, and the other wild animals
of our country, and I will trade their skins with your people. I have
grown up and lived thus long without work--I am in hopes you will suffer
me to die without it. We have plenty of buffalo, beaver, deer, and other
wild animals--we have also an abundance of horses--we have every thing we
want--we have plenty of land, _if you will keep your people off it_. My
Father has a piece on which he lives (Council bluffs), and we wish him to
enjoy it--we have enough without it--but we wish him to live near us, to
give us good council--to keep our ears and eyes open, that we may continue
to pursue the right road--the road to happiness. He settles all
differences between us and the whites, between the red-skins
themselves--he makes the whites do justice to the red-skins, and he makes
the red-skins do justice to the whites. He saves the effusion of human
blood, and restores peace and happiness in the land. You have already sent
us a father (Major O'Fallon); it is enough--he knows us, and we know
him--we keep our eye constantly upon him, and since we have heard _your_
words, we will listen more attentively to _his_.
"It is too soon, my great Father, to send those good chiefs amongst us.
_We are not starving yet_--we wish you to permit us to enjoy the chase
until the game of our country is exhausted--until the wild animals become
extinct. Let us exhaust our present resources before you make us toil and
interrupt our happiness. Let me continue to live as I have done; and after
I have passed to the good or evil spirit, from off the wilderness of my
present life, the subsistence of my children may become so precarious as
to need and embrace the assistance of those good people.
"There was a time when we did not know the whites--our wants were then
fewer than they are now. They were always within our control--we had then
seen nothing which we could not get. Before our intercourse with the
whites (who have caused such a destruction in our game) we could lie down
to sleep, and when we awoke we would find the buffalo feeding around our
camp--but now we are killing them for their skins, and feeding the wolves
with their flesh, to make our children cry over their bones.
"Here, my great Father, is a pipe which I present to you, as I am
accustomed to present pipes to all the Red-skins in peace with us. It is
filled with such tobacco as we were accustomed to smoke before we knew
the white people. It is pleasant, and the spontaneous growth of the most
remote parts of our country. I know that the robes, leggings, and
moccasins, and bear-claws are of little value to _you_; but we wish you to
have them deposited and preserved in some conspicuous part of your lodge,
so that when we are gone and the sod turned over our bones, if our
children should visit this place, as we do now, they may see and recognize
with pleasure the depositories of their fathers; and reflect on the times
that are past."
I shall now take leave of the Indians and their political condition, by
observing that the proceedings of the American government, throughout,
towards this brave but unfortunate race, have only been exceeded in
atrocity by the past and present conduct of the East India government
towards the pusillanimous but unoffending Hindoos.
_Note_.--This chapter I wrote during my stay in Kentucky, and the
first part of it, in substance, was inserted in the "Kentucky
Intelligencer," at the request of the talented editor and
proprietor, John Mullay, Esq.
FOOTNOTES:
[15] In November, 1785, during the articles of confederation, a treaty is
concluded with the Cherokees, which establishes a boundary, and allots to
the Indians a great extent of country, now within the limits of North
Carolina and Georgia.
In 1791, the treaty of Holston is concluded; by which a new boundary is
agreed upon. This was the first treaty made by the United States under
their present constitution; and by the seventh article, a solemn
guarantee is given for all the lands not then ceded.
On the 7th of February, 1792, by an additional article to the last
treaty, 500 dollars are added to the stipulated annuity.
In June, 1794, another treaty is entered into, in which the provisions of
the treaty of 1791 are revived, an addition is made to the annuity, and
provision made for marking the boundary line.
In October, 1798, a treaty is concluded which revives former treaties,
and curtails the boundary of Indian lands by a cession to the United
States, for an additional compensation.
In October, 1804, a treaty is concluded, by which, for a consideration
specified, more land is ceded.
In October, 1805, two treaties are made, by which an additional quantity
of land is ceded.
On 7th January, 1806, by another treaty, more land is ceded to the United
States.
In September, 1807, the boundary line intended in the last treaty, is
satisfactorily ascertained.
On 22d March, 1816, a treaty is concluded, by which lands in South
Carolina are ceded, for which the United States engage South Carolina
shall pay. On the same day another treaty is made, by which the Indians
agree to allow the use of the water-courses in their country, and also to
permit roads to be made through the same.
On the 14th of September, 1816, a treaty is made, by which an additional
quantity of land is ceded to the United States.
On the 8th of July, 1817, a treaty is concluded, by which an exchange of
lands is agreed on, and a plan for dividing the Cherokees settled.
On the 27th of February, 1819, another treaty is concluded, in execution
of the stipulations contained in that of 1817, in several particulars,
and in which an additional tract of country is ceded to the United
States.
[16] "The white hunter, on encamping in his journeys, cuts down green
trees, and builds a large fire of long logs, sitting at some distance
from it. The Indian hunts up a few dry limbs, cracks them into little
pieces a foot in length, builds a small fire, and sits close to it. He
gets as much warmth as the white hunter without half the labour, and does
not burn more than a fiftieth part of the wood. The Indian considers the
forest his own, and is careful in using and preserving every thing which
it affords. He never kills more than he has occasion for. The white
hunter destroys all before him, and cannot resist the opportunity of
killing game, although he neither wants the meat nor can carry the skins.
I was particularly struck with this wanton practice, which lately
occurred on White river. A hunter returning from the woods, heavily laden
with the flesh and skins of five bears, unexpectedly arrived in the midst
of a drove of buffalos, and wantonly shot down three, having no other
object than the sport of killing them. This is one of the causes
of the enmity existing between the white and red hunters of
Missouri".--_Schoolcroft's Tour in Missouri_, page 52.
[17] Does the General include among the arts of civilization, that of
systematically robbing the Indians of their farms and hunting grounds? If
so, no doubt _these arts of civilization_, must inevitably "destroy the
resources of the savage," and "doom him to weakness and decay."
[18] The Indians apply the term "Christian honesty," precisely in the
same sense that the Romans applied "_Punica fides_."
[19] There is an old Indian at present in the Missouri territory, to whom
his tribe has given the cognomen of "much-water," from the circumstance
of his having been baptized so frequently.
[20] Heriot says (page 320), "They have evinced a decided attachment to
their ancient habits, and have _gained_ less from the means that might
have smoothed the asperities of their condition, than they have _lost_ by
copying the vices of those, who exhibited to their view the arts of
civilization."
[21] This letter was dictated by Red-jacket, and interpreted by Henry
Obeal, in the presence of ten chiefs, whose names are affixed, at
Canandaigua, January 18, 1821.
[22] "The attachment which savages entertain for their mode of life
supersedes every allurement, however powerful, to change it. Many
Frenchmen have lived with them, and have imbibed such an invincible
partiality for that independent and erratic condition, that no means
could prevail on them to abandon it. On the contrary, no single instance
has yet occurred of a savage being able to reconcile himself to a state
of civilization. Infants have been taken from among the natives, and
educated with much care in France, where they could not possibly have
intercourse with their countrymen and relations. Although they had
remained several years in that country, and could not form the smallest
idea of the wilds of America, the force of blood predominated over that
of education: no sooner did they find themselves at liberty than they
tore their clothes in pieces, and went to traverse the forests in search
of their countrymen, whose mode of life appeared to them far more
agreeable than that which they had led among the French."--_-Heriot_, p.
354.
This passage of Heriot's is taken nearly verbatim from Charlevoix, v. 2,
p. 109.