The conduct of the Chiefs and their Agent in the distribution of the $90000 and the enclosed letter from Mr Jacoway U S Marshal of this District, whose acquaintance you have made, taken in connection with the declarations of the Chiefs, that they will not go without him (or that they desire that he should go with and have charge of them) justifies the apprehension that there is another scheme in embryo between them to perpetrate another swindle. Should circumstances favour its accomplishment; and if it is the intention of the Department to charge me with conducting the negotiations of a Delegation to Florida, I must decline the performance of this duty if one in whom I have so little confidence is permited to accompany the Delegation in the capacity of Agent; for I hesitate not to say, that if disappointed in his hopes of making a profitable employment of his influence he would exert himself to defeat any negotiations that might be set on foot, and there is good reason to fear that he might be successful,—
For these reasons I beg leave respectfully to urge upon the Department the immediate removal of Mr Washbourne and the appointment in his stead of some gentleman who will perform the duties of the office with a high appreciation of the trust confided to him and with a view, rather to the honest discharge of this trust, than to his own profit,
I make this communication direct to the Sec’t of Interior instead of sending it through the Indian office for the reason that I learn that the Comr Ind Affrs is absent on official acct.
[477] Agent Elder to Coffin, September 30, 1861 [Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Report, 1861, p. 37]; Coffin to Dole, October 2, 1861 [ibid., p. 38]; Moore’s Rebellion Record, vol. iii, 33.
[478] We the loyal Cherokee Delegation acknowledge the execution of the treaty of Oct. 7, 1861. But we solemnly declare that the execution of the Treaty was procured by the coercion of the rebel army [Land Files, Indian Talks, Councils, etc., Box 4, 1865-1866].
[479] Hon. J. S. Phelps to C. B. Smith, dated Rolla, Mo., October 3, 1861 [General Files, Cherokee, 1859-1865, P44].
[480] A difference of opinion seems to exist as to the original object of the organization of Drew’s regiment. When Ross wrote his despatches to McCulloch concerning the proceedings at Tahlequah, he sent them for transmission to the C. S. A. quartermaster at Fort Smith, Major George W. Clark, to whom he imparted the information that the Cherokees were going to raise a regiment of mounted men immediately and place it under the command of Colonel John Drew, “to meet any emergency that may arise.” “Having espoused,” said he, “the cause of the Confederate States, we hope to render efficient service in the protracted war which now threatens the country, and to be treated with a liberality and confidence becoming the Confederate States.”—Moore’s Rebellion Record, vol. iii, 155, Document 63½.
Those, who afterwards wanted to put the Cherokee position in the best possible light, declared repeatedly that Drew’s regiment had no sectional bias in the work mapped out for it, that it was nothing more than a home guard. Writing to Dole, January 21, 1862, the Reverend Evan Jones said,
A regiment of Cherokees was raised for home protection, composed of one company for each of eight Districts, and either two or three companies for the District of Tahlequah. But these were altogether separate and distinct from the rebel force.... The great majority of officers and men, in this case, being decidedly loyal Union men Four of the Captains and four hundred men, gave evidence of their loyalty, in the part they acted, at the battle in which Opothleyoholo was attacked by the Texan rangers & rebel Creeks & Choctaws, under Cooper....—General Files, Cherokee, 1859-1865, J556.
[481] Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Report, 1865, p. 355.