I desire the reader to note that this was the second
time assassination was proposed by these people, and each time frustrated by Captain Jack; and, further, that I was subsequently informed each time of their intended acts of treachery by Tobey Riddle, through her husband.
The council was held in a wild, desolate region of country, many miles from the nearest white settlement. Captain Jack and nearly all his men were present, and all armed.
It should be understood that at that time, as afterward in the Lava Bed, the Modocs were suspicious of Captain Jack’s firmness in carrying out the wishes of his people. This feeling was augmented by Schon-chin John, who was ambitious for the chieftainship, and constantly sought to implant distrust of Jack’s fidelity in the minds of the Modocs. This accounts for more than the number agreed upon in this, and, in fact, in all subsequent meetings. Jack, nevertheless, was the acknowledged chief, but not on the old basis of theory of absolute power; he was only a representative chief. That he had not absolute control over them was owing to his own act of teaching them the republican idea of a majority ruling; or it may be that the band had demanded this concession on his part.
Nearly all of them had associated with white men, and had thereby acquired crude ideas of American political economy.
It was in this case of the Modocs a curse, instead of a blessing. Had Jack exercised the old despotic prerogative of Indian chiefs, no war would have ensued, no great acts of treachery would ever have been committed. He could and would have buried in the grave, with other wrongs, the “Ben Wright” affair;
and while he would have clamored for liberty, in its common-sense meaning, he would have held his people in check until such times as our Government would have recognized his manhood and granted him the priceless boon of a citizen’s privileges.
Captain Jack came into this council simply as a diplomatic representative chief, and was not at liberty to do or say more than he was authorized by the Indians in council. He set forth the grievances of his people,—which were principally against the Klamath Indians, on account of the treatment he had received while on the Reservation; and against the Government, for not protecting him according to my promise made to him in December, 1869,—arguing that, since the Government failed to keep its compact, he was released from his obligation to obey its laws; further, that the crime of which he was charged—killing the Indian doctor—was not a crime under the Indian laws, and that he should not be held amenable to a law that was not his law. He declared that he could not live in peace with the Klamaths; that his people had made up their minds to try no more, since they had made two attempts.
He said he “should not object to the white men settling in his country,” and that he “would keep his people away from the settlements, and would prevent any trouble between white men and his Indians.”
The commissioners again offered him a home on any part of Klamath Reservation that was unoccupied. This he positively declined. He was assured of protection, but he referred to former promises broken. A proposition was made, for him to prevent his people going into the settlement until