history of exiles continued.
character of abraham—his knowledge of the treaty of payne’s landing—its stipulations—general jessup’s assurances—confirmed by other officers of government—disappointment of exiles on reaching western country—they refuse to enter creek jurisdiction—creeks disappointed—general cass’s policy of reuniting tribes—agent attempts to pacify exiles—hospitality of cherokees—discontent of all the tribes—seminoles loud in their complaints—hostilities apprehended—conduct of executive—agents selected to negotiate another treaty—treaty stipulations—attempts to falsify history—executive action unknown to the people.
1844.
the exiles were now all located on the cherokee lands, west of the state of arkansas. they had been removed from florida at great expense of blood and treasure; but they were yet free, and the object of the administration had not been attained. conscious of the designs of the creeks, the seminoles and exiles refused to trust themselves within creek jurisdiction. they were tenants at will of the cherokees, whose hospitality had furnished them with temporary homes until the government should fulfill its treaty stipulations, in furnishing them a territory to their separate use.
abraham was, perhaps, the most influential man among the exiles. he had been a witness and interpreter in making the treaty of payne’s landing, and had dictated the important provision in the supplemental treaty; he had exerted his influence in favor of emigration; to him, therefore, his people looked with more confidence than to any other individual. in all his intercourse with our officers, he had been assured of the intention to fulfill those treaties; and when he found the government hesitating on that point, he became indignant, and so did others of his band. but he could only express his indignation to the agent appointed to superintend their affairs and supply their wants. these complaints were made known to the indian bureau, at washington; but they were unheeded, and the exiles and their friends lived on in the vain hope that the administration would at some day redeem the pledged faith of the nation, and assign them a territory for their separate use, where they could live independent of the creeks, as they had done for nearly a century past.
nor is it easy for men at this day to appreciate that feeling which so stubbornly sought their enslavement; we can only account for this unyielding purpose, from the long-established practice of so wielding the power and influence of the nation as best to promote the interests of slavery. it is certain, that it would have cost the united states no more to set off to the exiles and seminole indians a separate territory, on which they could live free and independent, than it would to constrain them to settle on the creek lands, and subject them to creek laws, and creek despotism, and creek servitude.
general jackson, in 1816, had ordered blount’s fort to be destroyed and the negroes returned to those who owned them. to effect this latter object, in 1822, he proposed to compel the seminole indians to return and reunite with the creeks. if at any time there were other reasons for the frauds committed upon the exiles and indians—for the violations of the pledged faith of the nation—it is hoped that some of the officers who acted a prominent part in those scenes of treachery and turpitude, or their biographers, will yet inform the public of their existence.
settled, as the seminoles and exiles now were on the cherokee lands, all parties concerned were necessarily dissatisfied. the creeks were disappointed, and greatly dissatisfied at not having the exiles in their power, and charged our government with bad faith in not delivering that extraordinary people into their hands. the cherokees had assured the seminoles and exiles that our government would deal honorably with them, and would faithfully carry out the treaty of payne’s landing, with the proviso contained in the supplemental treaty; and they were now greatly dissatisfied at the refusal of the executive to observe this solemn stipulation; while the seminoles and exiles were indignant at the deception, fraud and perfidy practiced upon them.
complaints against the government now became general among all these tribes. all had been deceived; all had been wronged; and all became loud in their denunciations of the government. this feeling became more intense as time passed away. it was in vain that our indian agents and military officers at the west endeavored to quiet this state of general discontent. the newspapers of that day gave intimations of difficulties among the indians at the west; they stated, in general terms, the danger of hostilities, but omitted all allusion to the cause of this disquietude.
the executive appeared to be paralyzed with the difficulties now thrown in his way. he urged upon the indian agents and military officers to use all possible efforts to suppress these feelings of hostility, which now appeared ready to burst forth upon the first occasion; coolly insisting that, at some future day, the seminoles and exiles would consent to remove on to the creek territory.
at length the danger of hostilities became so imminent, that the executive deemed it necessary to enter upon further negotiation in order to effect the long cherished purpose of subjecting the exiles to creek jurisdiction and consequent slavery. to effect this object it was necessary to select suitable instruments. four indian agents, holding their offices by the executive favor, were appointed to hold a council with their discontented tribes, and if possible to negotiate a new treaty with them. it is somewhat singular that no statesman, no person favorably known to the public, or possessing public confidence, was selected for so important a service.
1845.
of course any treaty formed under such circumstances and by such agents would conform to the executive will. the treaty bears date on the twenty-fifth of january; and we insert the preamble and those articles which have particular relation to the subject matter of which we are speaking. they are as follows:
“articles of a treaty made by wm. armstrong, p. m. butler, james segan and thomas s. judge, commissioners in behalf of the united states, of the first part; the creek tribe of indians of the second part, and the seminole indians of the third part:”
“whereas, it was stipulated in the fourth article of the creek treaty of 1833, that the seminoles should thence forward be considered a constituent part of the creek nation, and that a permanent and comfortable home should be secured for them on the lands set apart in said treaty as the country of the creeks; and whereas, many of the seminoles have settled and are now living in the creek country, while others, constituting a large portion of the tribe, have refused to make their homes in any part thereof, assigning, as a reason, that they are unwilling to submit to creek laws and government, and that they are apprehensive of being deprived by the creek authorities of their property; and whereas, repeated complaints have been made to the united states government, that those of the seminoles who refuse to go into the creek country have, without authority or right, settled upon lands secured to other tribes, and that they have committed numerous and extensive depredations upon the property of those upon whose lands they have intruded:”
“now, therefore, in order to reconcile all difficulties respecting location and jurisdiction; to settle all disputed questions which have arisen, or may hereafter arise, in regard to rights of property; and, especially, to preserve the peace of the frontier, seriously endangered by the restless and warlike spirit of the intruding seminoles, the parties to this treaty have agreed to the following stipulations:”
“article 1. the creeks agree that the seminoles shall be entitled to settle in a body, or separately, as they please, in any part of the creek country; that they shall make their own town regulations, subject, however, to the general control of the creek council in which they shall be represented; and, in short, that no distinction shall be made between the two tribes in any respect, except in the management of their pecuniary affairs; in which neither shall interfere with the other.”
“art 2. the seminoles agree that those of their tribe who have not done so before the ratification of this treaty, shall immediately thereafter remove to, and permanently settle in, the creek country.”
“art. 3. it is mutually agreed by the creeks and seminoles that all contested cases between the two tribes, concerning the right of property growing out of sales or transactions that may have occurred previous to the ratification of this treaty, shall be subject to the decision of the president of the united states.”
the leading feature of this treaty, is a studied effort to make no allusion to the exiles, or to recognize their existence in any way. general jessup, in the articles of capitulation, had expressly stipulated for the protection of the persons and property of the “allies” of the seminoles; but for half a century efforts had been made to exclude them from the page of our national history, and never was that policy more strikingly illustrated than in this treaty.
as heretofore stated, the seminoles were said to own some forty slaves; but the author has been unable to find any hint or intimation that any one of those slaves was claimed by the creeks: yet efforts were made to falsify the truth of history by representing the four or five hundred exiles now living with the seminoles to be slaves to their friends and “allies.”
the next extraordinary feature of the treaty, is the recital of the creek treaty as binding upon the seminoles, when they had been no party to it, nor even had knowledge of its existence.
but the third article is that on which both exiles and seminoles appear to have relied. thinking the president would do justice; feeling themselves subject to the power of the executive, and pressed on all sides to accede to terms of pacification, they signed the treaty as the best alternative that lay before them.
in accordance with the past policy of the administration, this treaty was withheld from publication. it was of course submitted to the senate in secret session for approval. it was then amended, and still kept from the public for nearly two years after its negotiation.
note—at the session of congress, 1845-6, a bill containing, among many other things, an appropriation to carry out this treaty, was reported by the committee on ways and means, of the house of representatives. the treaty itself yet lay concealed in the office of the secretary of the senate, where it had been ratified in secret session, and not a member of the house of representatives had seen it, unless it was the chairman of the committee of ways and means, or other confidential friends of the executive, to whom it was given for personal examination.
the bill was printed, and the author seeing this provision, determined to know something of the treaty, before voting money to carry it into effect. for this purpose, he called on one of the senators from ohio (hon. thomas corwin), to get a copy of the treaty. mr. corwin went with him to the office of the secretary of the senate, and after much inquiry, and passing from one clerk to another, a copy was obtained.
when the bill came up for discussion, inquiry was made as to the treaty, its character and object. no member appeared to have any knowledge of it, save the chairman of the committee of ways and means, (mr. mckay of north carolina). the author of this work endeavored to give the house some idea of its origin, and, in the course of his remarks, referred to the manner in which the state of georgia had been implicated in the persecution of the exiles. this reference to the state of georgia awakened the ire of mr. black, a representative from that state, who advanced toward the author with uplifted cane, as if to inflict personal chastisement, and quite a scène followed, which at the time created some sensation in the country.
