The Cherokee Nation of Indians. (1887 N 05 / 1883-1884 (pages 121-378))

by Charles C. Royce

HISTORICAL DATA.

ZEALOUS MEASURES FOR REMOVAL OF EASTERN CHEROKEES.

While the events connected with the negotiation and the execution of the treaty of 1828 with the Western Cherokees were occurring those Cherokees who yet remained in their old homes east of the Mississippi River were burdened with a continually increasing catalogue of distressing troubles. So soon as the treaty of 1828 was concluded it was made known to them that inducements were therein held out for a continuance of the emigration to the Arkansas country. Agent Montgomery was instructed[347] to use every means in his power to facilitate this scheme of removal, and especially among those Cherokees who resided within the chartered limits of Georgia.

Secret agents were appointed and $2,000 were authorized by the Secretary of War to be expended in purchasing the influence of the chiefs in favor of the project.[348] A. R. S. Hunter and J. S. Bridges were appointed[349] commissioners to value the improvements of the Cherokees who should elect to remove.

After nearly a year of zealous work in the cause, Agent Montgomery was only able to report the emigration of four hundred and thirty-one Indians and seventy-nine slaves, comparatively few of whom were from Georgia.[350] Nine months later three hundred and forty-six persons had emigrated from within the limits of that State.[351] The hostility manifested by the larger proportion of the Cherokees toward those who gave favorable consideration to the plan of removal was so great as to require the establishment of a garrison of United States troops within the nation for their protection.[350]

President Jackson's advice to the Cherokees.—Early in 1829,[352] a delegation from the nation proceeded to Washington to lay their grievances before President Jackson, but they found the Executive entertaining opinions about their rights very different from those which had been held by his predecessors. They were advised[353] that the answer to their claim of being an independent nation was to be found in the fact that during the Revolutionary war the Cherokees were the allies of Great Britain, a power claiming entire sovereignty of the thirteen colonies, which sovereignty, by virtue of the Declaration of Independence and the subsequent treaty of 1783, became vested respectively in the thirteen original States, including North Carolina, and Georgia. If they had since been permitted to abide on their lands, it was by permission, a circumstance giving no right to deny the sovereignty of those States. Under the treaty of 1785 the United States "give peace to all the Cherokees and receive them into favor and protection." Subsequently they had made war on the United States, and peace was not concluded until 1791. No guarantee, however, was given by the United States adverse to the sovereignty of Georgia, and none could be given. Their course in establishing an independent government within the limits of Georgia, adverse to her will, had been the cause of inducing her to depart from the forbearance she had so long practiced, and to provoke the passage of the recent[354] act of her legislature, extending her laws and jurisdiction over their country. The arms of the United States, the President remarked, would never be employed to stay any State of the Union from the exercise of the legitimate powers belonging to her in her sovereign capacity. No remedy for them, could be perceived except removal west of the Mississippi River, where alone peace and protection could be afforded them. To continue where they were could promise nothing but interruption and disquietude. Beyond the Mississippi the United States, possessing the sole sovereignty, could say to them that the land should be theirs while trees grow and water runs.

The delegation were much cast down by these expressions of the President, but they abated nothing of their demand for protection in what they considered to be the just rights of their people. They returned to their country more embittered than before against the Georgians, and lost no opportunity, by appeals to the patriotism as well as to the baser passions of their countrymen, to excite them to a determination to protect their country at all hazards against Georgian encroachment and occupation.[355]

GENERAL CARROLL'S REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF THE CHEROKEES.

About this time[356] General William Carroll was designated by the President to make a tour through the Cherokee and Creek Nations, with both of which he was supposed to possess much influence. His mission was to urge upon them, and especially upon the former, the expediency of their removal west of the Mississippi under the inducements held out by the treaty of 1828. A month later[357] Col. E. F. Tatnall and on the 8th of July General John Coffee were appointed to co-operate with General Carroll in the accomplishment of his mission. The results of this tour were communicated[358] to the War Department by General Carroll in a report in which he remarked that nothing could be done with the Cherokees by secret methods; they were too intelligent and too well posted on the current news of the day to be long kept in ignorance of the methods and motives of those who came among them. He had met their leading men at Newtown and had submitted a proposal for their removal which was peremptorily rejected. The advancement the Cherokees had made in religion, morality, general information, and agriculture had astonished him beyond measure. They had regular preachers in their churches, the use of spirituous liquors was in great degree prohibited, their farms were worked much after the manner of white people, and were generally in good order. Many families possessed all the comforts and some of the luxuries of life. Cattle, sheep, hogs, and fowl of every kind were found in great abundance. The Cherokees had been induced by Eastern papers to believe the President was not sustained by the people in his views of their proposed removal. Eastern members of Congress had given their delegation to understand while in Washington the preceding spring that the memorial left by them protesting against the extension of the laws of Georgia and Alabama over Cherokee territory would be sustained by Congress, and that until that memorial had been definitely acted on by that body all propositions to them looking toward removal would be worse than useless.

Cherokees refuse to cede lands in North Carolina.—In the early summer of 1829[359] a commission had also been appointed, consisting of Humphrey Posey and a Mr. Saunders, having in view the purchase from the Cherokees of that portion of their country within the limits of North Carolina, but it, too, failed wholly of accomplishing its purpose.

Coercive measures of the United States and Georgia.—Sundry expedients were resorted to, both by the General Government and by the authorities of Georgia, to compel the acquiescence of the Indians in the demands for their emigration.

The act of the Georgia legislature of December 20, 1828, already alluded to, was an act "to add the territory within this State and occupied by the Cherokee Indians to the counties of De Kalb et al., and to extend the laws of this State over the same." This was followed[360] by the passage of an act reasserting the territorial jurisdiction of Georgia and annulling all laws made by the Cherokee Indians. It further declared that in any controversy arising between white persons and Indians the latter should be disqualified as witnesses. Supplementary legislation of a similar character followed in quick succession, and the proclamation of the governor of the State was issued on the 3d of June, 1830, declaring the arrival of the date fixed by the aforesaid acts and the consequent subjection of the Cherokee territory to the State laws and jurisdiction.[361]

The President of the United States about the same time gave directions[362] to suspend the enrollment and removal of Cherokees to the west in small parties, accompanied by the remark that if they (the Cherokees) thought it for their interest to remain, they must take the consequences, but that the Executive of the United States had no power to interfere with the exercise of the sovereignty of any State over and upon all within its limits. The President also directed[363] that the previous practice of paying their annuities to the treasurer of the Cherokee Nation should be discontinued, and that they be thereafter distributed among the individual members of the tribe. Orders were shortly after[364] given to the commandant of troops in the Cherokee country to prevent all persons, including members of the tribe, from opening up or working any mineral deposits within their limits. All these additional annoyances and restrictions placed upon the free exercise of their supposed rights, so far from securing compliance with the wishes of the Government, had a tendency to harden the Cherokee heart.

FAILURE OF COLONEL LOWRY'S MISSION.

In this situation of affairs Col. John Lowry was appointed[365] a special commissioner to visit the Cherokee Nation and again lay before them a formal proposition for their removal west. The substance of Mr. Lowry's proposal as communicated by him to their national council[366] was: (1) To give to the Cherokees a country west of the Mississippi, equal in value to the country they would leave; (2) each warrior and widow living within the limits of Alabama or Tennessee was to be permitted, if so desiring, to select a reservation of 200 acres, which, if subsequently abandoned, was to be sold for the reservee's benefit; (3) each Indian desiring to become a citizen of the United States was to have a reservation in fee-simple; (4) all emigrants were to be removed and fed one year at the expense of the United States, and to be compensated for all property, except horses, they should leave behind them, and, (5) the nation was to be provided with a liberal school fund.

Again the result was an emphatic refusal[367] on the part of the Cherokees to enter into negotiations on the subject. Other special commissioners and emissaries, of whom several were appointed in the next few months, met with the same reception.

DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CHEROKEE NATION VS. GEORGIA.

Determined to test the constitutionality of the hostile legislation of Georgia, application was made at the January term, 1831, of the Supreme Court of the United States, by John Ross, as principal chief, in the name of the Cherokee Nation, for an injunction against the State of Georgia. The application was based on the theory that the Cherokee Nation was a sovereign and independent power in the sense of the language of the second section of the third article of the Constitution of the United States providing for judicial jurisdiction of cases arising between a State, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects. The majority of the court declared that the Cherokee Nation was not a foreign nation in the sense stated in the Constitution, and dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction. From this decision, however, Justices Thompson and Story dissented.[368]

FAILURE OF MR. CHESTER'S MISSION.

No further formal attempt was made to secure a compliance with the wishes of the Government until the winter and spring of 1831—'32. A delegation of Cherokees had visited Washington in the interests of their people, and though nothing was accomplished through them, the language used by some members of the delegation had led the Government authorities to hope that a change of sentiment on the subject of removal was rapidly taking place in their minds. In pursuance of this impression the Secretary of War, in the spring of 1832,[369] intrusted Mr. E. W. Chester with a mission to the Cherokees, and with instructions to offer them as a basis for the negotiation of a treaty the following terms:

1. The United States to provide them with a country west of Arkansas sufficiently large for their accommodation.

2. This country to be conveyed to them by patent under the act of Congress of May 28, 1830, and to be forever outside the limits of any State or Territory.

3. The Cherokees to retain and possess all the powers of self-government consistent with a supervisory authority of Congress.

4. To have an agent resident in Washington to represent their interest, who should be paid by the United States.

5. With the consent of Congress they should be organized as a Territory and be represented by a delegate in that body.

6. All white persons should be excluded from their country.

7. The United States to remove them to their new country and to pay the expenses of such removal, which might be conducted in either of three ways, viz:

(a) By a commutation in money, to be allowed either individuals or families.

(b) By persons to be appointed and paid by the United States.

(c) By arrangement among themselves, through which some competent person should remove them at a fixed rate.

8. The United States to provide them with subsistence for one year after removal.

9. An annuity to be secured to them proportioned to the value of the cession of territory they should make.

10. The United States to pay for all Indian improvements upon the ceded land.

11. Provision to be made for the support of schools, teachers, blacksmiths and their supplies, mills, school-houses, churches, council-houses, and houses for the principal chiefs.

12. A rifle to be presented to each adult male, and blankets, axes, plows, hoes, spinning-wheels, cards, and looms to each family.

13. Indian live stock to be valued and paid for by the United States.

14. Annuities under former treaties to be paid to them upon their arrival west of the Mississippi.

15. Provision to be made by the United States for Cherokee orphan children.

16. Protection to be guaranteed to the Cherokees against hostile Indians.

17. A few individual reservations to be permitted east of the Mississippi, but only on condition that the reservees shall become citizens of the State in which they reside, and that all reservations between them and the United States, founded upon their previous circumstances as Indians, must cease.

Cherokees contemplate removal to Columbia River.—In the discussion of these propositions the fact was developed that a project had been canvassed, and had received much favorable consideration among the Cherokees themselves (in view of the difficulties and harassing circumstances surrounding their situation), to abandon their eastern home and to remove to the country adjacent to the mouth of the Columbia River, on the Pacific coast. This proposition having reached the ears of the Secretary of War, he made haste, in a letter to Mr. Chester,[370] to discourage all idea of such a removal, predicated upon the theory that they would be surrounded by tribes of hostile savages, and would be too remote from the frontier and military posts of the United States to enable the latter to extend to them the arm of protection and support.

Nothing was accomplished by the negotiations of Mr. Chester, and in the autumn[371] of the same year Governor Lumpkin, of Georgia, was requested to attend the Cherokee council in October and renew the proposition upon the same basis. A similar fate attended this attempt.

DECISION OF SUPREME COURT IN WORCESTER VS. GEORGIA.

Among other laws passed by the State of Georgia was one that went into effect on the 1st of February, 1831, which prohibited the Cherokees from holding councils, or assembling for any purpose; provided for a distribution of their lands among her citizens; required all whites residing in the Cherokee Nation within her chartered limits to take an oath of allegiance to the State, and made it an offense punishable by four years' imprisonment in the penitentiary to refuse to do so. Under this law two missionaries, Messrs. Worcester and Butler, were indicted in the superior court of Gwinnett County for residing without license in that part of the Cherokee country attached to Georgia by her laws and in violation of the act of her legislature approved December 22, 1830. In the trial of Mr. Worcester's case, which was subsequently made the test case in the Supreme Court of the United States, he pleaded that he was a citizen of Vermont and entered the Cherokee country as a missionary with the permission of the President of the United States and the approval of the Cherokee Nation; that Georgia ought not to maintain the prosecution inasmuch as several treaties had been entered into by the United States with the Cherokee Nation, by which the latter were acknowledged as a sovereign nation, and by which the territory occupied by them had been guaranteed to them by the United States. The superior court overruled this plea, and Mr. Worcester was tried, convicted, and sentenced to four years in the penitentiary.

The case was carried up on a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States, and that court asserted its jurisdiction. In rendering its decision the court remarks that the principle that discovery of parts of the continent of America gave title to the government by whose subjects or by whose authority it was made against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession, was acknowledged by all Europeans because it was the interest of all to acknowledge it, and because it gave to the nation making the discovery, as its inevitable consequence, the sole right of acquiring the soil and of making settlements on it. It was an exclusive principle which shut out the right of competition among those who had agreed to it, but not one which could annul the rights of those who had not agreed to it. It regulated the rights of the discoverers among themselves, but could not affect the rights of those already in possession as aboriginal occupants. It gave the exclusive right of purchase, but did not found it on a denial of the right of the possessor to sell. The United States succeeded to all the claims of Great Britain, both territorial and political. Soon after Great Britain had determined on planting colonies in America the King granted sundry charters to his subjects. They purport generally to convey the soil from the Atlantic to the South Sea. The soil was occupied by numerous warlike nations, milling and able to defend their possessions. The absurd idea that feeble settlements made on the sea-coast acquired legitimate power to govern the people or occupy the lands from sea to sea did not then enter the mind of any man. These charters simply conferred the right of purchasing such lands as the natives were willing to sell. The acknowledgment of dependence made in the various Cherokee treaties with Great Britain and the United States merely bound them as a dependent ally claiming the protection of a powerful friend and neighbor and receiving the advantages of that protection, without involving a surrender of their national character. Neither the Government nor the Cherokees ever understood it otherwise. Protection did not imply the destruction of the protected.

Georgia herself had furnished conclusive evidence that her former opinions on the subject of the Indians concurred with those entertained by her sister States and by the Government of the United States. Various acts of her legislature had been cited in the argument of the case, including the contract of cession made in 1802, all tending to prove her acquiescence in the universal conviction that the Cherokee Nation possessed a full right to the lands they occupied, until that right should be extinguished by the United States with their consent; that their territory was separated from that of any State within whose chartered limits they might reside, by a boundary line established by treaties; that within their boundary they possessed rights with which no State could interfere, and that the whole power of regulating the intercourse with them was vested in the United States. The legislation of Georgia on this subject was therefore unconstitutional and void.[372]

Georgia refuses to submit to the decision of the Supreme Court.—Georgia refused to submit to the decision and alleged that the court possessed no right to pronounce it, she being by the Constitution of the United States a sovereign and independent State, and no new State could be formed within her limits without her consent.

President Jackson's dilemma.—The President was thus placed between two fires, Georgia demanding the force of his authority to protect her constitutional rights by refusing to enforce the decision of the court, and the Cherokees demanding the maintenance of their rights as guaranteed them under the treaty of 1791 and sustained by the decision of the Supreme Court.

It was manifest the request of both could not be complied with. If he assented to the desire of the Cherokees a civil war was likely to ensue with the State of Georgia. If he did not enforce the decision and protect the Cherokees, the faith of the nation would be violated.[373] In this dilemma a treaty was looked upon as the only alternative, by which the Cherokees should relinquish to the United States all their interest in lands east of the Mississippi and remove to the west of that river, and more earnest, urgent, and persistent pressure than before was applied from this time forward to compel their acquiescence in such a scheme.

DISPUTED BOUNDARIES BETWEEN CHEROKEES AND CREEKS.

Mention has already been made in discussing the terms of the treaty of September 22, 1816, of the complications arising out of the question of disputed boundaries between the Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws. These disputes related chiefly to an adjustment of boundaries within the Territory of Alabama, rendered necessary for the definite ascertainment of the limits of the Creek cession of 1814. But as a result of the Cherokee cession of 1817 and the Creek cessions of 1818, 1821, 1826, and 1827, the true boundary between the territories of these two latter nations became not only a matter of dispute, but one that for years lent additional bitterness to the contest between the people of Georgia and the Indians, especially the Cherokees. Prior to the Revolution, the latter had claimed to own the territory within the limits of Georgia, as far south as the waters of Broad River, and extending from the headwaters of that river westward. Some of this territory was also claimed by the Creeks, and the British Government had therefore in purchasing it accepted a cession from those tribes jointly.[374]

At the beginning of the Federal relations with the Cherokees, a definition of their boundaries had been made by treaty of November 28, 1785, extending on the south as far west as the headwaters of the Appalachee River. Beyond that point to the west no declaration as to the limits of the Cherokee territory was made, because, for the purposes of the Federal Government, none was at that time necessary. But when in course of time other cessions came to be made, both by the Cherokees and Creeks, it began to be essential to have an exact definition of the line of limits between them. Especially was this the case when, as by the terms of the Creek treaty of February 12, 1825,[375] they ceded all the territory to which they laid claim within the limits of Georgia, and although this treaty was afterwards declared void by the United States, because of alleged fraud, Georgia always maintained the propriety and validity of its negotiation.

As early as June 10, 1802, a delegation of Cherokees interviewed Colonel Hawkins and General Pickens, and after demanding the removal of certain settlers claimed to be on their lands, asserted the boundary of their nation in the direction of the Creeks to be the path running from Colonel Easley's, at High Shoals of the Appalachee, to Etowah River. This they had agreed upon in council with the Creeks. A delegation of the Creeks, whom they brought with them from the council, were then interrogated on the subject by Messrs. Hawkins and Pickens, and they replied that the statement of the Cherokees was correct.

In the spring of 1814 (May 15) Agent Meigs had written the Secretary of War that the Cherokees were sensible that the Creeks ought to cede to the United States sufficient land to fully compensate the latter for the expenses incurred in prosecuting the Creek war. However, they (the Cherokees) were incidentally interested in the arrangements, and hoped that the United States would not permit the Creeks to point out the specific boundaries of their cession until the division line between the two nations had been definitely determined. In the following year, in a discussion of the subject with Colonel Hawkins, the Creek agent, Colonel Meigs declares that the Cherokees repel the idea entertained by the Creeks that the Cherokee or Tennessee River was ever their southern boundary. On the contrary, the dividing line between the territories of the two nations should begin at Vann's Old Store, on the Ocmulgee River, thence pursuing such a course as would strike the Coosa River below the Ten Islands. This claim was predicated upon the assertion that the Cherokees had in the course of three successive wars with the Creeks driven them more than a degree of latitude below the point last named. Another Cherokee version was to the effect that at a joint council of the two nations, held prior to the Revolutionary War, the boundary question was a subject of discussion, when it was agreed to allow the oldest man in the Creek Nation to determine the point. This man was James McQueen, a soldier who had deserted from Oglethorpe's command soon after the settlement of Savannah. McQueen decided that the boundary should be a line drawn across the headwaters of Hatchet and Elk Creeks, the former being a branch of the Coosa and the latter a tributary of the Tallapoosa. This decision was predicated upon the fact that the Cherokees had driven the Creeks below this line, and it had been mutually agreed that it should constitute the boundary.

In contradiction of this it was asserted by the Creeks that in the year 1818 it had been admitted at a public meeting of the Creeks by "Sour Mush," a Cherokee chief, that the Creeks owned all the land up to the head of Coosa River, including all of its waters; that the Tennessee was the Cherokee River, and the territories of the two nations joined on the dividing ridge between those rivers. In former times, on the Chattahoochee, the Cherokees had claimed the country as low down as a branch of that river called Choky (Soquee) River. Subsequently they were told by the Coweta king, that they might live as low down as the Currahee Mountain, but that their young men had now extended their claim to Hog Mountain, without however any shadow of right or authority.[376]

With a view to an amicable adjustment of their respective rights a council was held between the chiefs and headmen of the two nations at the residence of General William McIntosh, in the Creek country, at which a treaty was concluded between themselves on the 11th of December, 1820. In the first article of this treaty the boundary line between the two nations was fixed as running from the Buzzard's Roost, on the Chattahoochee, in a direct line to the Coosa River, at a point opposite the mouth of Wills Town Creek, and thence down the Coosa River to a point opposite Fort Strother. This boundary was reaffirmed by them in a subsequent treaty concluded October 30, 1822.[377]

The Cherokee treaty of 1817 had assumed to cede a tract of country "Beginning at the high shoals of the Appalachy River and running thence along the boundary line between the Creek and Cherokee Nations westwardly to the Chatahouchy River," etc.

The Creek treaty of 1818[378] in turn ceded a tract the northern boundary of which extended from Suwanee Old Town, on the Chattahoochee, to the head of Appalachee River, and which overlapped a considerable portion of the Cherokee cession of 1817.

The Creek treaty of 1821[379] ceded a tract running as far north as the Shallow Ford of the Chattahoochee, which also included a portion of the territory within the limits of the Cherokee domain, as claimed by the latter.

By the treaty of 1825[380] with the Creeks they ceded all their remaining territory in Georgia. Complaint being made that this treaty had been entered into by only a small non-representative faction of that nation, an investigation was entered upon by the United States authorities, and as the result it was determined to declare the treaty void and to negotiate a new treaty with them, which was done on the 24th of January, 1826.[381]

By this last treaty as amended the Creeks ceded all their land east of the Chattahoochee River, as well as a tract north and west of that river. In the cession of this latter tract it was assumed that a point on Chattahoochee River known as the Buzzard's Roost was the northern limit of the Creek supremacy.

The authorities of Georgia strongly insisted that not only had the treaty of 1825 been legitimately concluded, whereby they were entitled to come into possession of all the Creek domain within her limits, but also that the true line of the Creek limits toward the north had been much higher up than would seem to have been the understanding of the parties to the treaty of 1826.

In the following year the Creeks ceded all remaining territory they might have within the limits of Georgia.[382] This left the only question to be decided between the State of Georgia and the Cherokees the one of just boundaries between the latter and the country recently acquired from the Creeks.

The War Department had been of the impression that the proper boundary between the two nations was a line to be run directly from the High Shoals of the Appalachee to the Ten Islands, or Turkeytown, on the Coosa River.[383] On this hypothesis Agent Mitchell, of the Creeks, had been instructed, if he could do so, "without exciting their sensibilities," to establish it as the northern line of the Creek Nation.

Georgia, on the contrary, claimed that the proper boundary extended from Suwanee Old Town, on the Chattahoochee, to Sixes Old Town, on the Etowah River; from thence to the junction of the Etowah and Oostanaula Rivers, and following the Creek path from that point to Tennessee River. In pursuance of this claim Governor Forsyth instructed[384] Mr. Samuel A. Wales as the surveyor for that State to proceed to establish the line of limits in accordance therewith. Mr. Wales, upon commencing operations, was met with a protest from Colonel Montgomery, the Cherokee agent,[385] notwithstanding which he continued his operations in conformity with his original instructions.

This action of the surveyor having produced a feeling of great excitement and hostility within the Cherokee Nation, rendering the danger of collision and bloodshed imminent, the United States authorities took the matter in hand, and, by direction of the President, General John Coffee was appointed and instructed[386] to proceed to the Cherokee Nation, and from the most reliable information and testimony attainable to report what, in his judgment, should in justice and fairness to all parties concerned be declared to be the true line of limits between Georgia, as the successor of the Creeks, and the Cherokee Nation.

General Coffee proceeded to the performance of the duty thus assigned him. A large mass of testimony and tradition on the subject was evoked, in summing up which General Coffee reported[387] to the Secretary of War that the line of demarkation between the two nations should begin at the lower Shallow Ford of the Chattahoochee, which was about 15 miles below the Suwanee Old Town. From thence the line should run westwardly in a direction to strike the ridge dividing the waters running into Little River (a branch of the Hightower or Etowah) from those running into Sweet Water Creek (a branch of the Chattahoochee emptying about 2 miles below Buzzard's Roost). From this point such ridge should be followed westwardly, leaving all the waters falling into Hightower and Coosa Rivers to the right and all the waters that run southwardly into Chattahoochee and Tallapoosa Rivers to the left, until such ridge should intersect the line (which had been previously as per agreement of 1821 between the Creeks and Cherokees themselves) run and marked from Buzzard Roost to Wills Creek, and thence with this line to the Coosa River opposite the mouth of Wills Creek.

Two weeks later[388] General Coffee, in a communication to the Secretary of War, alludes to the dissatisfaction of Georgia with the line as determined by him, and her claim to an additional tract of territory by remarking that "I have thought it right to give this statement for your own and the eye of the President only, that you may the better appreciate the character of the active agents and partisans of the Georgia claim, for really I cannot see any reasonable or plausible evidence on which she rests her claim."

The President, after a careful examination of the testimony and much solicitude upon the subject, decided to approve General Coffee's recommendation. The Cherokee agent was therefore directed[389] to notify all white settlers living north of Coffee's line to remove at once. The governor of Georgia was also notified of the President's decision, and, though strongly and persistently protesting against it, the President firmly refused to revoke his action.[390] The Cherokees were equally dissatisfied with the decision, because the line was not fixed as far south as Buzzard's Roost, in accordance with the agreement of 1821 between themselves and the Creeks.[391]

CHEROKEES PLEAD WITH CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT FOR JUSTICE.

A delegation of the Cherokees, with John Ross at their head, was quartered in Washington during the greater part of the winter of 1832—'33, bringing to bear in behalf of their nation every possible influence upon both Congress and the Executive. A voluminous correspondence was conducted between them and the War Department upon the subject of their proposed removal. In a communication on the 28th of January, 1833, they ask leave to say that, notwithstanding the various perplexities which the Cherokee people had experienced under the course of policy pursued toward them, they were yet unshaken in their objections to a removal west of the Mississippi River. On the question of their rights and the justice of their cause, their minds were equally unchangeable. They were, however, fully sensible that justice and weakness could not control the array of oppressive power, and that in the calamitous effects of such power, already witnessed, they could not fail to foresee with equal clearness that a removal to the west would be followed in a few years by consequences no less fatal.

They therefore suggested for the consideration of the President, whether it would not be practicable for the Government to satisfy the claims of Georgia by granting to those of her citizens who had in the lotteries of that State drawn lots of land within Cherokee limits other lands of the United States lying within the Territories and States of the Union, or in some other way.

The President urges their assent to removal.—The Secretary of War, in replying for the President (February 2,1833), was unable to see that any practicable plan could be adopted by which the reversionary rights held under the State of Georgia could be purchased upon such terms as would justify the Government in entering into a stipulation to that effect. Nor would it at all remove the difficulties and embarrassments of their condition. They would still be subject to the laws of Georgia, surrounded by white settlements and exposed to all those evils which had always attended the Indian race when placed in immediate contact with the white population. It was only by removing from these surroundings that they could expect to avoid the fate which had already swept away so many Indian tribes.

Reply of John Ross.—Ross retorted, in a communication couched in diplomatic language, that it was with great diffidence and deep regret he felt constrained to say, that in this scheme of Indian removal he could see more of expediency and policy to get rid of the Cherokees than to perpetuate their race upon any permanent, fundamental principle. If the doctrine that Indian tribes could not exist contiguous to a white population should prevail, and they should be compelled to remove west of the States and Territories of this republic, what was to prevent a similar removal of them from there for the same reason?

Without securing any promises of relief, and without reaching any definite understanding with the executive authorities of the Government, the delegation left for their homes in March, 1833. They agreed, however, to lay before their national council in the ensuing May a proposition made to them by the President, offering to pay them $2,500,000 in goods for their lands, with the proviso that they should remove themselves at their own expense.[392] This proposition, it is hardly necessary to remark, was not favorably considered by the council, though the Secretary of War designated[393] Mr. Benjamin F. Curry to attend the meeting and urge its acceptance.

Alleged attempted bribery of John Ross.—In this connection a story having been given currency that the Government had offered Chief Ross a bribe, provided he would secure the conclusion of a treaty of cession and removal, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs denied it as being "utterly without foundation, and one of those vile expedients that unprincipled men sometimes practice to accomplish an evil purpose," and as being "too incredible to do much injury."[394] While this story was perhaps without solid foundation in fact, its improbability would possibly have been more evident but for the fact that only five years earlier the Secretary of War had appointed secret agents and authorized them to expend $2,000 in bribing the chiefs for this very purpose, and had made his action in this respect a matter of public record.

CHEROKEES PROPOSE AN ADJUSTMENT.

In January, 1834, a few weeks after the assembling of Congress, the Cherokee delegation again arrived in Washington.[395] Sundry interviews and considerable correspondence with the War Department seemed barren of results or even hope. The delegation submitted[396] a proposition for adjustment in another form. Remarking upon their feeble numbers, and surrounded as they were by a nation so powerful as the United States, they could not but clearly see, they said, that their existence and permanent welfare as a people must depend upon that relation which should eventually lead to an amalgamation with the people of the United States. As the prospects of securing this object collectively, in their present location in the character of a territorial or State government, seemed to be seriously opposed and threatened by the States interested in their own aggrandizement, and as the Cherokees had refused, and would never voluntarily consent, to remove west of the Mississippi, the question was propounded whether the Government would enter into an arrangement on the basis of the Cherokees becoming prospectively citizens of the United States, provided the former would cede to the United States a portion of their territory for the use of Georgia; and whether the United States would agree to have the laws and treaties executed and enforced for the effectual protection of the Cherokees on the remainder of their territory for a definite period, with the understanding that upon the expiration of that period the Cherokees were to be subjected to the laws of the States within whose limits they might be, and to take an individual standing as citizens thereof, the same as other free citizens of the United States, with liberty to dispose of their surplus lands in such manner as might be agreed upon.

Cherokee proposals declined.—The reply[397] to this proposition was that the President did not see the slightest hope of a termination to the embarrassments under which the Cherokees labored except in their removal to the country west of the Mississippi.

Proposal of Andrew Ross.—In the mean time[398] Andrew Ross, who was a member of the Cherokee delegation, suggested to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs that if he were authorized so to do he would proceed to the Cherokee country and bring a few chiefs or respectable individuals of the nation to Washington, with whom a treaty could be effected for the cession of the whole or part of the Cherokee territory. His plan was approved, with the understanding that if a treaty should be concluded the expenses of the delegation would be paid by the United States. Ross succeeded in assembling some fifteen or twenty Cherokees at the Cherokee agency, all of whom were favorable to the scheme of emigration. Under the self-styled appellation of a committee, they proceeded to appoint a chief and assistant chief in the persons of William Hicks and John McIntosh, and selected eight of their own number as the remainder of the delegation to visit Washington.[399]

Protest of John Ross and thirteen thousand Cherokees.—Upon their arrival Hon. J. H. Eaton was designated[400] to conduct the negotiations with them. During the pendency of the negotiations Mr. Baton advised John Ross of the purpose in view and solicited his co-operation in the scheme. Mr. Ross refused[401] this proposal with much warmth, and took occasion to add in behalf of the Cherokee Nation that "in the face of Heaven and earth, before God and man, I most solemnly protest against any treaty whatever being entered into with those of whom you say one is in progress so as to affect the rights and interests of the Cherokee Nation east of the Mississippi River."

Chief Ross also presented a protest, alleged to have been signed by more than thirteen thousand Cherokees, against the negotiation of such a treaty.

Preliminary treaty concluded with Andrew Ross et al.—Disregarding the protest of Chief Ross and distrusting the verity of that purporting to have been so numerously signed in the nation, the negotiations proceeded, and a treaty or agreement was concluded on the 19th day of June, 1834. The treaty provided for the opening of emigrant enrolling books, with a memorandum heading declaring the assent of the subscriber to a treaty yet to be concluded with the United States based upon the terms previously offered by the President, covering a cession and removal, and with the proviso that if no such subsequent treaty should be concluded within the next few months then the subscribers would cede to the United States all their right and interest in the Cherokee lands east of the Mississippi. In consideration of this they were to be removed and subsisted for one year at the expense of the United States, to receive the ascertained value of their improvements, and to be entitled to all such stipulations as should thereafter be made in favor of those who should not then remove.

The treaty, however, failed of ratification, though the enrolling books were opened[402] and a few of the Cherokees entered their names for emigration.

CHEROKEES MEMORIALIZE CONGRESS.

While the negotiations leading up to the conclusion of this treaty were in progress John Ross and his delegation, finding no disposition on the part of the executive authority to enter into a discussion of Cherokee affairs predicated upon any other basis than an abandonment by them of their homes and country east of the Mississippi, presented[403] a memorial to Congress complaining of the injuries done them and praying for redress. Without affecting to pass judgment on the merits of the controversy, the writer thinks this memorial well deserving of reproduction here as evidencing the devoted and pathetic attachment with which the Cherokees clung to the land of their fathers, and, remembering the wrongs and humiliations of the past, refused to be convinced that justice, prosperity, and happiness awaited them beyond the Mississippi.

The memorial of the Cherokee Nation respectfully showeth, that they approach your honorable bodies as the representatives of the people of the United States, intrusted by them under the Constitution with the exercise of their sovereign power, to ask for protection of the rights of your memorialists and redress of their grievances.

They respectfully represent that their rights, being stipulated by numerous solemn treaties, which guaranteed to them protection, and guarded as they supposed by laws enacted by Congress, they had hoped that the approach of danger would be prevented by the interposition of the power of the Executive charged with the execution of treaties and laws; and that when their rights should come in question they would be finally and authoritatively decided by the judiciary, whose decrees it would be the duty of the Executive to see carried into effect. For many years these their just hopes were not disappointed.

The public faith of the United States, solemnly pledged to them, was duly kept in form and substance. Happy under the parental guardianship of the United States, they applied themselves assiduously and successfully to learn the lessons of civilization and peace, which, in the prosecution of a humane and Christian policy, the United States caused to be taught them. Of the advances they have made under the influence of this benevolent system, they might a few years ago have been tempted to speak with pride and satisfaction and with grateful hearts to those who have been their instructors. They could have pointed with pleasure to the houses they had built, the improvements they had made, the fields they were cultivating; they could have exhibited their domestic establishments, and shown how from wandering in the forests many of them had become the heads of families, with fixed habitations, each the center of a domestic circle like that which forms the happiness of civilized man. They could have shown, too, how the arts of industry, human knowledge, and letters had been introduced amongst them, and how the highest of all the knowledge had come to bless them, teaching them to know and to worship the Christian's God, bowing down to Him at the same seasons and in the same spirit with millions of His creatures who inhabit Christendom, and with them embracing the hopes and promises of the Gospel.

But now each of these blessings has been made to them an instrument of the keenest torture. Cupidity has fastened its eye upon their lands and their homes, and is seeking by force and by every variety of oppression and wrong to expel them from their lands and their homes and to tear them from all that has become endeared to them. Of what they have already suffered it is impossible for them to give the details, as they would make a history. Of what they are menaced with by unlawful power, every citizen of the United States who reads the public journals is aware. In this their distress they have appealed to the judiciary of the United States, where their rights have been solemnly established. They have appealed to the Executive of the United States to protect these rights according to the obligations of treaties and the injunctions of the laws. But this appeal to the Executive has been made in vain. In the hope that by yielding something of their clear rights they might succeed in obtaining security for the remainder, they have lately opened a correspondence with the Executive, offering to make a considerable cession from what had been reserved to them by solemn treaties, only upon condition that they might be protected in the part not ceded. But their earnest supplication has been unheeded, and the only answer they can get, informs them, in substance, that they must be left to their fate, or renounce the whole. What that fate is to be unhappily is too plain.

The State of Georgia has assumed jurisdiction over them, has invaded their territory, has claimed the right to dispose of their lands, and has actually proceeded to dispose of them, reserving only a small portion to individuals, and even these portions are threatened and will no doubt, soon be taken from them. Thus the nation is stripped of its territory and individuals of their property without the least color of right, and in open violation of the guarantee of treaties. At the same time the Cherokees, deprived of the protection of their own government and laws, are left without the protection of any other laws, outlawed as it were and exposed to indignities, imprisonment, persecution, and even to death, though they have committed no offense whatever, save and except that of seeking to enjoy what belongs to them, and refusing to yield it up to those who have no pretense of title to it. Of the acts of the legislature of Georgia your memorialists will endeavor to furnish copies to your honorable bodies, and of the doings of individuals they will furnish evidence if required. And your memorialists further respectfully represent that the Executive of the United States has not only refused to protect your memorialists against the wrongs they have suffered and are still suffering at the hands of unjust cupidity, but has done much more. It is but too plain that, for several years past, the power of the Executive has been exerted on the side of their oppressors and is co-operating with them in the work of destruction. Of two particulars in the conduct of the Executive your memorialists would make mention, not merely as matters of evidence but as specific subjects of complaint in addition to the more general ones already stated.

The first of these is the mode adopted to oppress and injure your memorialists under color of enrollments for emigration. Unfit persons are introduced as agents, acts are practiced by them that are unjust, unworthy, and demoralizing, and have no object but to force your memorialists to yield and abandon their rights by making their lives intolerably wretched. They forbear to go into particulars, which nevertheless they are prepared, at a proper time, to exhibit.

The other is calculated also to weaken and distress your memorialists, and is essentially unjust. Heretofore, until within the last four years, the money appropriated by Congress for annuities has been paid to the nation, by whom it was distributed and used for the benefit of the nation. And this method of payment was not only sanctioned by the usage of the Government of the United States, but was acceptable to the Cherokees. Yet, without any cause known to your memorialists, and contrary to their just expectations, the payment has been withheld for the period just mentioned, on the ground, then for the first time assumed, that the annuities were to be paid, not as hitherto, to the nation, but to the individual Cherokees, each his own small fraction, dividing the whole according to the numbers of the nation. The fact is, that for the last four years the annuities have not been paid at all.

The distribution in this new way was impracticable, if the Cherokees had been willing thus to receive it, but they were not willing; they have refused and the annuities have remained unpaid. Your memorialists forbear to advert to the motives of such conduct, leaving them to be considered and appreciated by Congress. All they will say is, that it has coincided with other measures adopted to reduce them to poverty and despair and to extort from their wretchedness a concession of their guaranteed rights. Having failed in their efforts to obtain relief elsewhere, your memorialists now appeal to Congress, and respectfully pray that your honorable bodies will look into their whole case, and that such measures may be adopted as will give them redress and security.

TREATY NEGOTIATIONS RESUMED.

Rival delegations headed by Ross and Ridge.—But little else was done and practically nothing was accomplished until the following winter. Early in February, 1835, two rival delegations, each claiming to represent the Cherokee Nation, arrived in Washington. One was headed by John Ross, who had long been the principal chief and who was the most intelligent and influential man in the nation. The rival delegation was led by John Ridge, who had been a subchief and a man of some considerable influence among his people.[404] The Ross delegation had been consistently and bitterly opposed to any negotiations having in view the surrender of their territory and a removal west of the Mississippi. Ridge and his delegation, though formerly of the same mind with Ross, had begun to perceive the futility of further opposition to the demands of the State and national authorities. Feeling the certainty that the approaching crisis in Cherokee affairs could have but one result, and perceiving an opportunity to enhance his own importance and to secure the discomfiture of his hitherto more powerful rival, Ridge caused it to be intimated to the United States authorities that he and his delegation were prepared to treat with them upon the basis previously laid down by President Jackson of a cession of their territory and a removal west.

Rev. J. F. Schermerhorn was therefore appointed,[405] and instructions were prepared authorizing him to meet Ridge and his party and to ascertain on what terms an amicable and satisfactory arrangement could be made. After the instructions had been delivered to Mr. Schermerhorn, but before he had commenced the negotiation, Ross and his party requested to be allowed to make a proposal to be submitted to the President for his approval. He was assured that his proposal would be considered, and in the mean time Mr. Schermerhorn was requested to suspend his operations. So much time, however, elapsed before anything more was heard from Ross and his party that the negotiations with the Ridge party were proceeded with. They terminated in a general understanding respecting the basis of an arrangement, leaving, however, many of the details to be filled up. The total amount of the various stipulations provided for, as a full consideration for the cession of their lands, was $3,250,000, besides the sum of $150,000 for depredation claims. In addition, a tract of 800,000 acres of land west of the Mississippi was to be added to the territory already promised them, amounting in the aggregate, including the western outlet, to about 13,800,000 acres.[406]

Proposition of John Ross.—On the 25th of February, Ross and his delegation, finding that the negotiations with Ridge were proceeding, submitted a proposition for removal based upon an allowance of $20,000,000 for the cession of the territory and the payment of a class of claims of uncertain number and value. This was considered so unreasonable as to render the seriousness of his proposition doubtful at the time, but it was finally modified by an assertion of his willingness to accept such sum as the Senate of the United States should declare to be just and proper.[407] Thereupon a statement of all the facts was placed in the hands of Senator King, of Georgia, who submitted the same to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on the 2d of March. It was not contemplated that any arrangement made with these Cherokee delegations at this time should be definitive, but that the Cherokee people should be assembled for the purpose of considering the subject, and their assent asked to such propositions as they might deem satisfactory.

Resolution of United States Senate on John Ross's proposition.—The Senate gave the matter prompt consideration, and on the 6th of March the Secretary of War advised Mr. Ross that by a resolution they had stated their opinion that "a sum not exceeding $5,000,000 should be paid to the Cherokee Indians for all their lands and possessions east of the Mississippi River," and he was invited to enter into negotiations upon that basis, but declined to do so.

Preliminary treaty concluded with the Ridge party.—The treaty between Schermerhorn and the Ridge party was thereupon completed with some modifications and duly signed on the 14th of March, but with the express stipulation that it should receive the approval of the Cherokee people in full council assembled before being considered of any binding force. The consideration was changed to read $4,500,000 and 800,000 acres of additional land, but in the main its provisions differed but little in the important objects sought to be secured from those contained in the treaty as finally concluded, December 29, 1835.

Schermerhorn and Carroll appointed to complete the treaty.—In the mean time,[408] two days after the conclusion of the preliminary Ridge treaty, President Jackson issued an address to the Cherokees, inviting them to a calm consideration of their condition and prospects, and urging upon them the benefits certain to inure to their nation by the ratification of the treaty just concluded and their removal to the western country. This address was intrusted to Rev. J. F. Schermerhorn and General William Carroll, whom the President had appointed on the 2d of April as commissioners to complete in the Cherokee country the negotiation of the treaty.

General Carroll being unable on account of ill-health to proceed from Nashville to the Cherokee Nation, Mr. Schermerhorn was compelled to assume the responsibilities of the negotiation alone. The entire summer and fall were spent in endeavors to reconcile differences of opinion, to adjust feuds among the different factions of the tribe, and to secure some definitive and consolidated action. Meeting with no substantial encouragement, he suggested, in a communication to the Secretary of War,[409] two alternative propositions, by either of which a treaty might be secured.

These propositions were: (1) That the appraising agents of the Government should ascertain from influential Cherokees their own opinion of the value of their improvements, and promise them the amount, if this estimate should be in any degree reasonable, and if they would take a decided stand in favor of the treaty and conclude the same. (2) To conclude the treaty with a portion of the nation only, should one with the whole be found impracticable, and compel the acquiescence of the remainder in its provisions.

He was at once[410] advised of the opposition of the President to any such action. If a treaty could not be concluded upon fair and open terms, he must abandon the effort and leave the nation to the consequences of its own stubbornness. He must make no particular promise to any individual, high or low, to gain his co-operation. The interest of the whole must not be sacrificed to the cupidity of a few, and if a treaty was concluded at all it must be one that would stand the test of the most rigid scrutiny.

The Ridge treaty rejected.—The Cherokee people in full council at Red Clay, in the following October, rejected the Ridge treaty. Mr. John Ridge and Elias Boudinot, who had been the main stay and support of Mr. Schermerhorn in the preceding negotiations, at this council, through fear or duplicity and unexpectedly to him, abandoned their support of his measures and coincided with the preponderance of Cherokee sentiment on the subject. In his report of this failure to bring the negotiations to a successful termination Commissioner Schermerhorn says: "I have pressed Ross so hard by the course I have adopted that although he got the general council to pass a resolution declaring that they would not treat on the basis of the $5,000,000, yet he has been forced to bring the nation to agree to a treaty, here or at Washington. They have used every effort to get by me and get to Washington again this winter. They dare not yet do it. You will perceive Ridge and his friends have taken apparently a strange course. I believe he began to be discouraged in contending with the power of Ross; and perhaps also considerations of personal safety have had their influence, but the Lord is able to overrule all things for good."[411]

Council at New Echota.—During the session of this council notice was given to the Cherokees to meet the United States commissioners on the third Monday in December following, at New Echota, for the purpose of negotiating and agreeing upon the terms of a treaty. The notice was also printed in Cherokee and circulated throughout the nation, informing the Indians that those who did not attend would be counted as assenting to any treaty that might be made.[412] In the mean time the Ross delegation, authorized by the Red Clay council to conclude a treaty either there or at Washington, finding that Schermerhorn had no authority to treat on any other basis than the one rejected by the nation, proceeded, according to their people's instructions, to Washington. Previous to their departure, John Ross was arrested. This took place immediately upon the breaking up of the council. He was detained some time under the surveillance of a strong guard, without any charge against him, and ultimately released without any apology or explanation. At this arrest all his papers were seized, including as well all his private correspondence and the proceedings of the Cherokee council.[413] In accordance with the call for a council at New Echota the Indians assembled at the appointed time and place, to the number of only three to five hundred, as reported[414] by Mr. Schermerhorn himself, who could hardly be accused of any tendency to underestimate the gathering. That gentleman opened the council December 22, 1835, in the absence of Governor Carroll, whose health was still such as to prevent his attendance. The objects of the council were fully explained, the small attendance being attributed to the influence of John Ross. It was also suggested by those unfriendly to the proposed treaty as a good reason for the absence of so large a proportion of the nation, that the right to convene a national council was vested in the principal chief, and they were unaware that that officer's authority had been delegated to Mr. Schermerhorn.[413]

Those present resolved on the 23d to enter into negotiations and appointed a committee of twenty to arrange the details with the Commissioner and to report the result to the whole council.

The following five days were occupied by the commissioner and the committee in discussing and agreeing upon the details of the treaty, one point of difference being as to whether the $5,000,000 consideration for their lands as mentioned in the resolution of the Senate was meant to include the damages to individual property sustained at the hands of white trespassers.

The Indians insisted that $300,000 additional should be allowed for that purpose, but it was finally agreed that the treaty should not be presented to the Senate without the consent of their delegation until they were satisfied the Senate had not included these claims in the sum named in the resolution of that body. It was also insisted by the Cherokee committee that reservations should be made to such of their people as desired to remain in their homes and become citizens of the United States.

As a compromise of this demand, it was agreed by the United States commissioner to allow pre-emptions of 160 acres each, not exceeding 400 in number, in the States of North Carolina, Tennessee, and Alabama, to such heads of Cherokee families only as were qualified to become useful members of society. None were to be entitled to this privilege unless their applications were recommended by a committee of their own people (a majority of which committee should be composed of those members of the tribe who were themselves enrolled for removal) and approved by the United States commissioners. The latter also proposed to make the reservations dependent upon the approval of the legislatures of the States within which they might be respectively located, but to this proposition a strenuous objection was offered by the Indians.

The articles as agreed upon were reported by the Cherokee committee to their people, and were approved, transcribed, and signed on the 29th.

The council adjourned on the 30th, after designating a committee to proceed to Washington and urge the ratification of the treaty, clothed with power to assent to any alterations made necessary by the action of the President or Senate.[415]

Commissioner Schermerhorn reports conclusion of a treaty.—Immediately following the adjournment of the council, Commissioner Schermerhorn wrote the Secretary of War, saying: "I have the extreme pleasure to announce to you that yesterday I concluded a treaty. * * * Ross after this treaty is prostrate. The power of the nation is taken from him, as well as the money, and the treaty will give general satisfaction."[416]

Supplemental treaty concluded.—Several provisions of the treaty met with the disapproval of the President, in order to meet which supplementary articles of agreement were concluded under date of March 1, 1836,[417] wherein it was stipulated that all pre-emption rights provided for should be declared void; also that, in lieu of the same and to cover expenses of removal and payment of claims against citizens of the United States, the sum of $600,000 should be allowed them in addition to the five millions allowed for cession of territory. And, furthermore, that the $100,000 stipulated to be expended for the poorer class of Cherokees who should remove west should be placed to the credit of the general national fund.[418]

Opposition of the Ross party.—Whilst these events were happening, and strenuous efforts were being made to encourage among Senators a sentiment favorable to the ratification of the treaty, John Ross was manifesting his usual zeal and activity in the opposite direction. Early in the spring of 1836 he made his appearance in Washington, accompanied by a delegation, and presented two protests against the ratification of the treaty, one purporting to have been signed by Cherokees residing within the limits of North Carolina to the number of 3,250, and the other representing the alleged sentiments of 12,714 persons residing within the main body of the nation. Mr. Ross also demanded the payment of the long withheld annuities to himself as the duly authorized representative of the nation, which was declined unless special direction to that effect should be given by an authentic vote of the tribe from year to year. He was further assured that the President had ceased to recognize any existing government among the Eastern Cherokees.[419]

Treaty ratified by United States Senate.—In spite of the opposition of Mr. Ross and his party, the treaty was assented to by the Senate by one more than the necessary two-thirds majority,[420] and was ratified and proclaimed by the President on the 23d of May, 1836.[421] By its terms two years were allowed within which the nation must remove west of the Mississippi.

Measures for execution of the treaty.—Preparatory steps were promptly taken for carrying the treaty into execution. On the 7th of June Gov. Wilson Lumpkin, of Georgia, and Gov. William Carroll, of Tennessee, were designated as commissioners under the 17th article, and vested with general supervisory authority over the execution of the treaty. The selection and general supervision (under the foregoing commissioners) of the agents to appraise the value of Cherokee improvements was placed in charge of Benjamin F. Curry, to whom detailed instructions were given[422] for his guidance. General John E. Wool was placed in command of the United States troops within the Cherokee Nation, but with instructions[423] that military force should only be applied in the event of hostilities being commenced by the Cherokees.

The Ross party refuse to acquiesce.—John Ross and his delegation, having returned home, at once proceeded to enter upon a vigorous campaign of opposition to the execution of the treaty. He used every means to incite the animosity of his people against Ridge and his friends, who had been instrumental in bringing it about and who were favorable to removal. Councils were held and resolutions were adopted denouncing in the severest terms the motives and action of the United States authorities and declaring the treaty in all its provisions absolutely null and void.[424] A copy of these resolutions having been transmitted to the Secretary of War by General Wool, the former was directed[425] by the President to express his astonishment that an officer of the Army should have received or transmitted a paper so disrespectful to the Executive, to the Senate, and through them to the people of the United States. To prevent any misapprehension on the subject of the treaty the Secretary was instructed to repeat in the most explicit terms the settled determination of the President that it should be executed without modification and with all the dispatch consistent with propriety and justice. Furthermore, that after delivering a copy of this letter to Mr. Ross no further communication should be held with him either orally or in writing in regard to the treaty.

To give a clearer idea of the actual state of feeling that pervaded the Cherokee Nation on the subject of removal, as well as the character of the methods that distinguished the negotiators on the part of the United States, a few quotations from the letters and reports of those in a position to observe the passing events may not be inappropriate.

REPORT OF MAJOR DAVIS.

Maj. William M. Davis had been appointed an agent by the Secretary of War for the enrollment of Cherokees desirous of removal to the West and for the appraisement of the value of their improvements. He had gone among the Cherokees for this specific purpose. He held his appointment by the grace and permission of the President. It was natural that his desire should be strongly in the line of securing the Executive approval of his labors.

Strong, however, as was that desire he was unable to bring himself to the support of the methods that were being pursued in the negotiation of the proposed treaty. On the 5th of March following the conclusion of the treaty of 1835, he wrote the Secretary of War thus:

I conceive that my duty to the President, to yourself, and to my country, reluctantly compels me to make a statement of facts in relation to a meeting of a small number of Cherokees at New Echota last December, who were met by Mr. Schermerhorn and articles of a general treaty entered into between them for the whole Cherokee Nation.

* * * I should not interpose in the matter at all but I discover that you do not receive impartial information on the subject; that you have to depend upon the ex parte, partial, and interested reports of a person who will not give you the truth. I will not be silent when I see that you are about to be imposed on by a gross and base betrayal of the high trust reposed in Rev. J. F. Schermerhorn by you. His conduct and course of policy was a series of blunders from first to last. * * * It has been wholly of a partisan character.

Sir, that paper * * * called a treaty is no treaty at all, because not sanctioned by the great body of the Cherokees and made without their participation or assent. I solemnly declare to you that upon its reference to the Cherokee people it would be instantly rejected by nine-tenths of them and I believe by nineteen-twentieths of them. There were not present at the conclusion of the treaty more than one hundred Cherokee voters, and not more than three hundred, including women and children, although the weather was everything that could be desired. The Indians had long been notified of the meeting, and blankets were promised to all who would come and vote for the treaty. The most cunning and artful means were resorted to to conceal the paucity of numbers present at the treaty. No enumeration of them was made by Schermerhorn. The business of making the treaty was transacted with a committee appointed by the Indians present, so as not to expose their numbers. The power of attorney under which the committee acted was signed only by the president and secretary of the meeting, so as not to disclose their weakness. * * * Mr. Schermerhorn's apparent design was to conceal the real number present and to impose on the public and the Government upon this point. The delegation taken to Washington by Mr. Schermerhorn had no more authority to make a treaty than any other dozen Cherokees accidentally picked up for that purpose. I now warn you and the President that if this paper of Schermerhorn's called a treaty is sent to the Senate and ratified you will bring trouble upon the Government and eventually destroy this (the Cherokee) nation. The Cherokees are a peaceable, harmless people, but you may drive them to desperation, and this treaty cannot be carried into effect except by the strong arm of force.[426]

ELIAS BOUDINOT'S VIEWS.

About this time there also appeared, in justification of the treaty and of his own action in signing it, a pamphlet address issued by Elias Boudinot of the Cherokee Nation. Mr. Boudinot was one of the ablest and most cultured of his people, and had long been the editor and publisher of a newspaper in the nation, printed both in English and Cherokee. The substance of his argument in vindication of the treaty may have been creditable from the standpoint of policy and a regard for the future welfare of his people, but in the abstract it is a dangerous doctrine. He said:

We cannot conceive of the acts of a minority to be so reprehensible and unjust as are represented by Mr. Ross. If one hundred persons are ignorant of their true situation and are so completely blinded as not to see the destruction that awaits them, we can see strong reasons to justify the action of a minority of fifty persons to do what the majority would do if they understood their condition, to save a nation from political thralldom and moral degradation.[427]

SPEECH OF GENERAL R. G. DUNLAP.

It having been extensively rumored, during the few months immediately succeeding the conclusion of the treaty, that John Ross and other evil disposed persons were seeking to incite the Cherokees to outbreak and bloodshed, the militia of the surrounding States were called into service for the protection of life and property from the supposed existing dangers. Brig. Gen. R. G. Dunlap commanded the East Tennessee volunteers. In a speech to his brigade at their disbandment in September, 1836, he used the following language:

I forthwith visited all the posts within the first three States and gave the Cherokees (the whites needed none) all the protection in my power. * * * My course has excited the hatred of a few of the lawless rabble in Georgia, who have long played the part of unfeeling petty tyrants, and that to the disgrace of the proud character of gallant soldiers and good citizens. I had determined that I would never dishonor the Tennessee arms in a servile service by aiding to carry into execution at the point of the bayonet a treaty made by a lean minority against the will and authority of the Cherokee people. * * * I soon discovered that the Indians had not the most distant thought of war with the United States, notwithstanding the common rights of humanity and justice had been denied them.[428]

REPORT OF GENERAL JOHN E. WOOL.

Again, February 18, 1837, General John E. Wool, of the United States Army, who had been ordered to the command of the troops that were being concentrated in the Cherokee country "to look down opposition" to the enforcement of the treaty, wrote Adjutant-General Jones, at Washington, thus:

I called them (the Cherokees) together and made a short speech. It is, however, vain to talk to a people almost universally opposed to the treaty and who maintain that they never made such a treaty. So determined are they in their opposition that not one of all those who were present and voted at the council held but a day or two since, however poor or destitute, would receive either rations or clothing from the United States lest they might compromise themselves in regard to the treaty. These same people, as well as those in the mountains of North Carolina, during the summer past, preferred living upon the roots and sap of trees rather than receive provisions from the United States, and thousands, as I have been informed, had no other food for weeks."

Four months later,[429] General Wool again, in the course of a letter to the Secretary of War concerning the death of Major Curry, who had been a prominent factor in promoting the conclusion of the treaty of 1835, said that—

Had Curry lived he would assuredly have been killed by the Indians. It is a truth that you have not a single agent, high or low, that has the slightest moral control over the Indians. It would be wise if persons appointed to civil stations in the nation could be taken from among those who have had nothing to do with making the late treaty.

REPORT OF JOHN MASON, JR.

In further testimony concerning the situation of affairs in the Cherokee Nation at this period, may be cited the report of John Mason, Jr., who was in the summer of 1837[430] sent as the confidential agent of the War Department to make observations and report. In the autumn[431] of that year he reported that—

The chiefs and better informed part of the nation are convinced that they cannot retain the country. But the opposition to the treaty is unanimous and irreconcilable. They say it cannot bind them because they did not make it; that it was made by a few unauthorized individuals; that the nation is not a party to it. * * * They retain the forms of their government in their proceedings among themselves, though they have had no election since 1830; the chiefs and headmen then in power having been authorized to act until their government shall again be regularly constituted. Under this arrangement John Ross retains the post of principal chief. * * * The influence of this chief is unbounded and unquestioned. The whole nation of eighteen thousand persons is with him, the few, about three hundred, who made the treaty having left the country. It is evident, therefore, that Ross and his party are in fact the Cherokee Nation. * * * Many who were opposed to the treaty have emigrated to secure the rations, or because of fear of an outbreak. * * * The officers say that, with all his power, Ross cannot, if he would, change the course he has heretofore pursued and to which he is held by the fixed determination of his people. He dislikes being seen in conversation with white men, and particularly with agents of the Government. Were he, as matters now stand, to advise the Indians to acknowledge the treaty, he would at once forfeit their confidence and probably his life. Yet though unwavering in his opposition to the treaty, Ross's influence has constantly been exerted to preserve the peace of the country, and Colonel Lindsay says that he (Ross) alone stands at this time between the whites and bloodshed. The opposition to the treaty on the part of the Indians is unanimous and sincere, and it is not a mere political game played by Ross for the maintenance of his ascendancy in the tribe.

HENRY CLAY'S SYMPATHY WITH THE CHEROKEES.

It is interesting in this connection, as indicating the strong and widespread public feeling manifested in the Cherokee question, to note that it became in some sense a test question among leaders of the two great political parties. The Democrats strenuously upheld the conduct of President Jackson on the subject, and the Whigs assailed him with extreme bitterness. The great Whig leader, Henry Clay, in replying[432] to a letter received by him from John Gunter, a Cherokee, took occasion to express his sympathy with the Cherokee people for the wrongs and sufferings experienced by them. He regretted them not only because of their injustice, but because they inflicted a deep wound on the character of the American Republic. He supposed that the principles which had uniformly governed our relations with the Indian nations had been too long and too firmly established to be disturbed. They had been proclaimed in the negotiation with Great Britain by the commissioners who concluded the treaty of peace, of whom he was one, and any violation of them by the United States he felt with sensibility. By those principles the Cherokee Nation had a right to establish its own form of government, to alter and amend it at pleasure, to live under its own laws, to be exempt from the United States laws or the laws of any individual State, and to claim the protection of the United States. He considered that the Chief Magistrate and his subordinates had acted in direct hostility to those principles and had thereby encouraged Georgia to usurp powers of legislation over the Cherokee Nation which she did not of right possess.

POLICY OF THE PRESIDENT CRITICISED—SPEECH OF COL. DAVID CROCKETT.

Among many men of note who denounced in most vigorous terms the policy of the Administration toward the Cherokees were Daniel Webster and Edward Everett, of Massachusetts; Theodore Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey; Peleg Sprague, of Maine; Henry R. Storrs, of New York; Henry A. Wise, of Virginia; and David Crockett, of Tennessee. The latter, in a speech in the House of Representatives, denounced the treatment to which the Indians had been subjected at the hands of the Government as unjust, dishonest, cruel, and short-sighted in the extreme. He alluded to the fact that he represented a district which bordered on the domain of the southern tribes, and that his constituents were perhaps as immediately interested in the removal of the Indians as those of any other member of the House. His voice would perhaps not be seconded by that of a single fellow member living within 500 miles of his home. He had been threatened that if he did not support the policy of forcible removal his public career would be summarily cut off. But while he was perhaps as desirous of pleasing his constituents and of coinciding with the wishes of his colleagues as any man in Congress, he could not permit himself to do so at the expense of his honor and conscience in the support of such a measure. He believed the American people could be relied on to approve their Representatives for daring, in the face of all opposition, to perform their conscientious duty, but if not, the approval of his own conscience was dearer to him than all else.

Governor Lumpkin, immediately upon his appointment as commissioner, had repaired to the Cherokee country, but Governor Carroll, owing to some pending negotiations with the Choctaws and subsequently to ill health, was unable to assume the duties assigned him. He was succeeded[433] by John Kennedy. To this commission a third member was added in the summer of 1837[434] in the person of Colonel Guild, who was found to be ineligible, however, by reason of being a member of the Tennessee legislature. His place was supplied by the appointment[435] of James W. Gwin, of North Carolina.

On the 22d of December James Liddell was also appointed, vice Governor Lumpkin resigned.[436]

Superintendent Currey having died, General Nathan Smith was appointed[437] to succeed him as superintendent of emigration.

Census of Cherokee Nation.—It appears from a statement about this time,[438] made by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, that from a census of the Cherokees, taken in the year 1835, the number residing in the States of Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee was 16,542, exclusive of slaves and of whites intermarried with Cherokees.[439]

In May, 1837,[440] General Wool was relieved from command at his own request, and his successor, Col. William Lindsay, was instructed to arrest John Ross and turn him over to the civil authorities in case he did anything further calculated to excite a spirit of hostility among the Cherokees on the subject of removal. This threat, however, seemed to have little effect, for we find Mr. Ross presiding over a general council, convened at his instigation, on the 31st of July, to attend which the Government hastily dispatched Mr. John Mason, Jr., with instructions to traverse and correct any misstatements of the position of the United States authorities that might be set forth by Ross and his followers. An extract from Mr. Mason's report has already been given.

Cherokee memorial in Congress.—Again, in the spring of 1838 Ross laid before Congress a protest and memorial for the redress of grievances, which, in the Senate, was laid upon the table[441] by a vote of 36 to 10, and a memorial from citizens of New York involving an inquiry into the validity of the treaty of 1835 shared a similar fate in the House of Representatives two days later by a vote of 102 to 75.

Speech of Henry A. Wise.—The discussion of these memorials in Congress took a wide range and excited the warmest interest, not only in that body, but throughout the country. The speeches were characterized by a depth and bitterness of feeling such as had never been exceeded even on the slavery question. Hon. Henry A. Wise, of Virginia, who was then a member of the House of Representatives from that State, was especially earnest in his denunciation of the treaty of 1835 and of the administration that had concluded it. He looked upon it as null and void. In order to make treaties binding the assent of both parties must be obtained, and he would assert without fear of contradiction that there was not one man in that House or out of it who had read the proceedings in the case who would say that there had ever been any assent given to that treaty by the Cherokee Nation. If this were the proper time he could go further and show that Georgia had done her part, too, in this oppression. He could show this by proving the policy of that State in relation to the Indians and the institutions of the General Government. That was the only State in the Union that had ever actually nullified, and she now tells you that if the United States should undertake to naturalize any portion of the Indian tribes within her limits as citizens of the United States she would do so again. He had not disparaged the surrounding people of Georgia, far from it—"but" (said he) "there are proofs around us in this city of the high advancement in civilization which characterizes the Cherokees." He would tell the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Halsey) that a statesman of his own State, who occupied a high and honorable post in this Government, would not gain greatly by a comparison, either in civilization or morals, with a Cherokee chief whom he could name. He would fearlessly institute such a comparison between John Ross and John Forsyth.[442]

Speech of Daniel Webster.—Mr. Webster, of Massachusetts, also took occasion[443] to remark in the Senate that "there is a strong and growing feeling in the country that great wrong has been done to the Cherokees by the treaty of New Echota."

President Van Buren proffers a compromise.—Public feeling became so deeply stirred on the subject that, in the interests of a compromise, President Van Buren, in May, 1838, formulated a proposition to allow the Cherokees two years further time in which to remove, subject to the approval of Congress and the executives of the States interested.

Georgia hostile to the compromise.—To the communication addressed to Governor Gilmer, of Georgia, on the subject, he responded:

* * * I can give it no sanction whatever. The proposal could not be carried into effect but in violation of the rights of this State. * * * It is necessary that I should know whether the President intends by the instructions to General Scott to require that the Indians shall be maintained in their occupancy by an armed force in opposition to the rights of the owners of the soil. If such be the intention, a direct collision between the authorities of the State and the General Government must ensue. My duty will require that I shall prevent any interference whatever by the troops with the rights of the State and its citizens. I shall not fail to perform it.

This called forth a hurried explanation from the Secretary of War that the instructions to General Scott were not intended to bear the construction placed upon them by the executive of Georgia, but, on the contrary, it was the desire and the determination of the President to secure the removal of the Cherokees at the earliest day practicable, and he made no doubt it could be effected the present season.[444]

GENERAL SCOTT ORDERED TO COMMAND TROOPS IN THE CHEROKEE COUNTRY.

The executive machinery under the treaty had in the mean time been placed in operation, and at the beginning of the year 1838, 2,103 Cherokees had been removed, of whom 1,282 had been permitted to remove themselves.[445]

Intelligence having reached the President, however, causing apprehension that the mass of the nation did not intend to remove as required by the treaty General Winfield Scott was ordered[446] to assume command of the troops already in the nation, and to collect an increased force, comprising a regiment of artillery, a regiment of infantry, and six companies of dragoons. He was further authorized, if deemed necessary, to call upon the governors of Tennessee, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama for militia and volunteers, not exceeding four thousand in number, and to put the Indians in motion for the West at the earliest moment possible, following the expiration of the two years specified in the treaty.

Proclamation of General Scott.—On reaching the scene of operations General Scott issued[447] a proclamation to the Cherokees in which he announced that—

The President of the United States has sent me with a powerful army to cause you, in obedience to the treaty of 1835, to join that part of your people who are already established in prosperity on the other side of the Mississippi. Unhappily the two years * * * allowed for that purpose you have suffered to pass away * * * without making any preparation to follow, and now * * * the emigration must be commenced in haste. * * * The full moon of May is already on the wane, and before another shall have passed away every Cherokee, man, woman, and child * * * must be in motion to join their brethren in the far West. * * * This is no sudden determination on the part of the President. * * * I have come to carry out that determination. My troops already occupy many positions, * * * and thousands and thousands are approaching from every quarter to render resistance and escape alike hopeless. * * * Will you then by resistance compel us to resort to arms? * * * Or will you by flight seek to hide yourselves in mountains and forests and thus oblige us to hunt you down? Remember that in pursuit it may be impossible to avoid conflicts. The blood of the white man or the blood of the red man may be spilt, and if spilt, however accidentally, it may be impossible for the discreet and humane among you, or among us, to prevent a general war and carnage.

JOHN ROSS PROPOSES A NEW TREATY.

John Ross, finding no sign of wavering in the determination of the President to promptly execute the treaty, then submitted[448] a project for the negotiation of a new treaty as a substitute for that of 1835, and differing but little from it in its proposed provisions, except in the idea of securing a somewhat larger consideration, as well as some minor advantages. He was assured in reply that while the United States were willing to extend every liberality of construction to the terms of the treaty of 1835 and to secure the Cherokee title to the western country by patent, they could not entertain the idea of a new treaty.

As soon as it became absolutely apparent, not only that the Cherokees must go but that no unnecessary delay would be tolerated beyond the limit fixed by the treaty, a more submissive spirit began to be manifested among them. During the summer of 1838 several parties of emigrants were dispatched under the direction of officers of the Army. The number thus removed aggregated about 6,000.[449]

CHEROKEES PERMITTED TO REMOVE THEMSELVES.

Later in the season John Ross and others, by virtue of a resolution of the national council, submitted a proposition to General Scott that the remainder of the business of emigration should be confided to the nation, and should take place in the following September and October, after the close of the sickly season, the estimated cost of such removal to be fixed at $65.88 per head. To this proposal assent was given,[450] and the last party of Cherokee emigrants began their march for the West on the 4th of December, 1838.[451] Scattered through the mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee, however, were many who had fled to avoid removal, and who, nearly a year later, were represented to number 1,046,[452] and Mr. James Murray was, in the spring of 1840, appointed[453] a commissioner to ascertain and enroll for removal those entitled to the benefits of the treaty of 1835.

DISSENSIONS AMONG CHEROKEES IN THEIR NEW HOME.

The removal of the Cherokees having at last been accomplished, the next important object of the Government was to insure their internal tranquillity, with a view to the increase and encouragement of those habits of industry, thrift, and respect for lawfully constituted authority which had made so much progress among them in their eastern home. But this was an undertaking of much difficulty. The instrumentalities used by the Government in securing the conclusion and approval of not only the treaty of 1835 but also those of 1817 and 1819 had caused much division and bitterness in their ranks, which had on many occasions in the past cropped out in acts of injustice and even violence.

Upon the coming together of the body of the nation in their new country west of the Mississippi, they found themselves torn and distracted by party dissensions and bitterness almost beyond hope of reconciliation. The parties were respectively denominated:

1. The "Old Settler" party, composed of those Cherokees who had prior to the treaty of 1835 voluntarily removed west of the Mississippi, and who were living under a regularly established form of government of their own.

2. The "Treaty" or "Ridge" party, being that portion of the nation led by John Ridge, and who encouraged and approved the negotiation of the treaty of 1835.

3. The "Government" or "Ross" party, comprising numerically a large majority of the nation, who followed in the lead of John Ross, for many years the principal chief of the nation, and who had been consistently and bitterly hostile to the treaty of 1835 and to any surrender of their territorial rights east of the Mississippi.

Upon the arrival of the emigrants in their new homes, the Ross party insisted upon the adoption of a new system of government and a code of laws for the whole nation. To this the Old Settler party objected, and were supported by the Ridge party, claiming that the government and laws already adopted and in force among the Old Settlers should continue to be binding until the general election should take place in the following October, when the newly elected legislature could enact such changes as wisdom and good policy should dictate.[454] A general council of the whole nation was, however, called to meet at the new council-house at Takuttokah, having in view a unification of interests and the pacification of all animosities. The council lasted from the 10th to the 22d of June, but resulted in no agreement. Some six thousand Cherokees were present. A second council was called by John Ross for a similar purpose, to meet at the Illinois camp-ground on the 1st of July, 1839.[455]

Murder of Boudinot and the Ridges.—Immediately following the adjournment of the Takuttokah council three of the leaders of the Treaty party, John Ridge, Major Ridge his father, and Elias Boudinot were murdered[456] in the most brutal and atrocious manner. The excitement throughout the nation became intense. Boudinot was murdered within 300 yards of his house, and only 2 miles distant from the residence of John Ross. The friends of the murdered men were persuaded that the crimes had been committed at the instigation of Ross, as it was well known that the murderers were among his followers. Ross's friends, however, at once rallied to his protection and a volunteer guard of six hundred patrolled the country in the vicinity of his residence.[457]

A number of the chiefs and prominent men of the Old Settler and Ridge parties fled to Port Gibson for safety. From there on the 28th of June, John Brown, John Looney, John Rogers, and John Smith, signing themselves as the executive council of the Western Cherokees, addressed a proposition to John Ross to send a delegation of the chiefs and principal men of his party with authority to meet an equal number of their own at Fort Gibson, with a view to reach an amicable agreement between the different factions. Ross responded[458] by inviting them to meet at the council convened upon his call on the 1st of July, which was declined. A memorial was thereupon[459] addressed to the authorities of the United States by Brown, Looney, and Rogers as chiefs of the Western Cherokees, demanding protection in the territory and government guaranteed to them by treaty. Against this appeal the Ross convention or council in session at Illinois camp-ground filed a protest.[460] Between the dates of the appeal and the protest a part of the Old Settlers, acting in concert with Ross and his adherents, passed resolutions[461] declaratory of their disapproval of the conduct of Brown and Rogers, and proclaimed their deposition from office as chiefs. Looney escaped deposition by transferring his fealty to the Ross party.

Unification of Eastern and Western Cherokees.—It is proper to remark in this connection that on the 12th of July the Ross council adopted resolutions uniting the Eastern and the Western Cherokees "into one body politic under the style and title of the Cherokee Nation." This paper, without mentioning or referring to the treaty of 1835, speaks of the late emigration as constrained by the force of circumstances. The council also passed[462] a decree, wherein after reciting the murders of the Ridges and Boudinot, and that they in conjunction with others had by their conduct rendered themselves liable to the penalties of outlawry, extended to the survivors a full amnesty for past offenses upon sundry very stringent and humiliating conditions. They also passed[463] a decree condoning the crime of the murderers, securing them from any prosecution or punishment by reason thereof, and declaring them fully restored to the confidence and favor of the community.

Treaty of 1835 declared void.—At a council held at Aquohee Camp a decree was passed on the 1st of August, declaring the treaty of 1835 void, and reasserting the Cherokee title to their old country east of the Mississippi. Later in the same month a decree was passed,[464] citing the appearance before them, under penalty of outlawry, of the signers of the treaty of 1835, to answer for their conduct. This act called forth[465] a vigorous protest from General Arbuckle, commanding Fort Gibson, and was supplemented by instructions[466] to him from the Secretary of War to cause the arrest and trial of Ross as accessory to the murder of the Ridges in case he should deem it wise to do so.

Constitution adopted by the Cherokee Nation.—A convention summoned by Ross and composed of his followers, together with such members of the Treaty and Old Settler parties as could be induced to participate, convened and remained in session at Tahlequah from the 6th to the 10th of September, 1839. This body adopted a constitution for the Cherokee Nation, which was subsequently accepted and adopted by the Old Settlers or Western Cherokees in council at Fort Gibson on the 26th of the following June, and an act of union was entered into between the two parties on that date.

Division of Cherokee territory proposed.—A proposition had been previously[467] submitted by the representatives of the Treaty and Old Settler parties, urging as the only method of securing peace the division of the Cherokee domain and annuities. They recommended that General Arbuckle and Captain Armstrong be designated to assign to them and to the Ross party each their proportionate share according to their numbers, but the adoption of this act of union avoided any necessity for the further consideration of the proposal. As a means also of relieving the Cherokees from further internal strife, General Arbuckle had,[468] pursuant to the direction of the Secretary of War, notified them that, in consequence of his public acts, John Ross would not be allowed to hold office in the nation, and that a similar penalty was denounced against William S. Coody for offensive opinions expressed in the presence of the Secretary of War.[469] Little practical effect was however produced upon the standing or influence of these men with their people.

Skeptical of the sincerity of the promises of peace and good feeling held out by the act of unification, John Brown, a noted leader and chief of the Old Settler Cherokees, in conjunction with many of his followers, among whom were a number of wandering Delawares, asked and obtained permission from the Mexican Government to settle within the jurisdiction of that power, and they were only persuaded to remain by the earnest assurances of the Secretary of War that the United States could and would fully protect their interests.[470]

CHEROKEES CHARGE THE UNITED STATES WITH BAD FAITH.

No sooner had the removal of the Cherokees been effectually accomplished than the latter began to manifest much dissatisfaction at what they characterized a lack of good faith on the part of the Government in carrying out the stipulations of the treaty of 1835. The default charged had reference to the matter of payment of their claims for spoliations, improvements, annuities, etc. Each winter at least one delegation from the nation maintained a residence in Washington and urged upon the Executive and Congress with untiring persistency an adjudication of all disputed matters arising under the treaty.

At length the term of President Van Buren expired and was succeeded by a Whig administration. Then as now, the official acts of an outgoing political party were considered to be the legitimate subject of criticism and investigation by its political enemies. President Harrison lived but a month after assuming the duties of his office, but Vice-President Tyler as his successor considered that the treatment to which the Cherokees had been subjected during Jackson's and Van Buren's administrations would afford a field for investigation fraught with a rich harvest of results in political capital for the Whig party.

President Tyler promises a new treaty.—Accordingly, therefore, in the fall of 1841, just previous to the departure of the Cherokee delegation from Washington to their homes, the President agreed to take proper measures for the settlement of all their difficulties, expressing a determination to open the whole subject of their complaints and to bring their affairs to a satisfactory conclusion through the medium of a new treaty. In conformity with this determination the Commissioner of Indian Affairs[471] instructed the agent for the Cherokees to procure all the information possible to be obtained upon every subject connected with Cherokee affairs having a tendency to throw any light upon the wrongs and injustice they might have sustained to the end that full amends could so far as possible be made therefor. Before much information was collected under the terms of these instructions a change seems to have taken place in the views of the President, and the order for investigation was revoked. The draft of the new treaty was, however, in the mean time prepared under direction of the Secretary of War. It contained provisions regulating the licensing of traders in the Cherokee country, the jurisdiction over crimes committed by citizens of the United States resident in that country, the allotment of their lands in severalty by the Cherokee authorities, and the establishment of post-offices and post-routes within their limits. It further contemplated the appointment of two commissioners, whenever Congress should make provision therefor, whose duty it should be to examine into and make a report to that body upon the character, validity, and equity of all claims of whatsoever kind presented by Cherokees against the United States, and also to afford the Cherokees pecuniary aid in the purchase of a printing press and type as well as in the erection of a national council-house. This treaty, however, was never consummated.

President Jackson's method for compelling Cherokee removal.—In connection with this subject of an investigation into the affairs of the Cherokees, a confidential letter is to be found on file in the office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, from Hon. P. M. Butler, of South Carolina, who had a few months previous to its date[472] been appointed United States agent for the Cherokees, interesting as throwing light on the negotiation and conclusion of the treaty of 1835. Mr. Butler says it is alleged, and claimed to be susceptible of proof, that Mr. Merriweather, of Georgia, in an interview with President Jackson, a considerable time before the treaty was negotiated, said to the President, "We want the Cherokee lands in Georgia, but the Cherokees will not consent to cede them," to which the President emphatically replied, "You must get clear of them [the Cherokees] by legislation. Take judicial jurisdiction over their country; build fires around them, and do indirectly what you cannot effect directly."

PER CAPITA PAYMENTS UNDER THE TREATY.

In the same letter Mr. Butler, in alluding to the existing difficulties in the Cherokee Nation, observes that prior to the preceding October the Ross party had been largely in the ascendency in the nation, but that at their last preceding election the question hinged upon whether the "per capita" money due them under the treaty of 1835 should be immediately paid over to the people. The result was in favor of the Ridge party, who assumed the affirmative of the question, the opposition of Ross and his party being predicated on the theory that an acceptance of this money would be an acknowledgment of the validity of the treaty of 1835. This, it was feared, would have an unfavorable effect on their efforts to secure the conclusion of a new treaty on more satisfactory terms. On the settlement of this per capita tax, Mr. Butler remarks, will depend the peace and safety of the Cherokee Nation, adding that should the rumors afloat prove true, to the effect that the per capita money was nearly exhausted, neither the national funds in the hands of the treasurer nor the life of Mr. Ross would be safe for an hour from the infuriated members of the tribe.

POLITICAL MURDERS IN CHEROKEE NATION.

In the spring of 1842 an event occurred which again threw the whole nation into a state of the wildest excitement. The friends of the murdered Ridges and Boudinot had never forgiven the act, nor had time served to soften the measure of their resentment against the perpetrators and their supposed abettors. Stand Watie had long been a leader among the Ridge party and had been marked for assassination at the time of the murders just alluded to. He was a brother of John Ridge, one of the murdered men, and he now, in virtue of his mission as an avenger, killed James Foreman, a member of the Ross party and one of the culprits in the murder of the Ridges. Although Stand Watie excused his conduct on the score of having come to a knowledge of certain threats against his life made by Foreman, no event could at that time have been more demoralizing and destructive of the earnestly desired era of peace and good feeling among the Cherokee people. From that time forward all hope of a sincere unification of the several tribal factions was at an end.

ADJUDICATION COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED.

In the autumn of 1842[473] the President appointed John H. Eaton and James Iredell as commissioners to adjudicate and settle claims under the treaty of 1835. Mr. Iredell declined, and Edward B. Hubley was appointed[474] to fill his place. This tribunal was created to continue the uncompleted work of the board appointed in 1836 under the provisions of the same article, the labors of which had terminated in March, 1839, having been in session more than two years.

---

TREATY CONCLUDED AUGUST 6, 1846; PROCLAIMED AUGUST 17, 1846.[475]

Held at Washington, D. C., between Edmund Burke, William Armstrong, and Albion K. Parris, commissioners on behalf of the United States, and delegates representing each of the three factions of the Cherokee Nation, known, respectively, as the "Government party," the "Treaty party," and the "Old Settler party."