The Exiles of Florida / or, The crimes committed by our government against the Maroons, who fled from South Carolina and other slave states, seeking protection under Spanish laws.

by Joshua R. Giddings

The Administration having been a party in the sale to Watson, determined to carry out the slave-dealing arrangement with him; at least so far as regarded the thirty-one negroes who yet remained in New Orleans. In order to effect this object, it was deemed necessary to have the coöperation and aid of General Taylor. The Adjutant General, therefore, addressed him on the subject, enclosing to him the letter of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, dated the ninth of May, addressed to the Secretary of War, and heretofore referred to. General Taylor evidently thought the honor of the service would be compromited by this slave-dealing transaction. He subsequently became President of the United States; and as the reader will feel anxious to understand precisely the views which he entertained, we give that portion of his letter to the Adjutant General which relates to this subject. It is in the following words:

“I have the honor to acknowledge your communication of the tenth of May, 1838, accompanied by one of the ninth from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, addressed to Captain Cooper, Acting Secretary of War, on the subject of turning over certain negroes, captured by the Creek warriors in Florida, to a Mr. Collins, their agent, in compliance with an engagement of General Jessup.

“I know nothing of the negroes in question, nor of the subject, further than what is contained in the communication above referred to; but I must state distinctly for the information of all concerned, that, while I shall hold myself ever ready to do the utmost in my power to get the Indians and their negroes out of Florida, as well as to remove them to their new homes west of the Mississippi, I CANNOT FOR A MOMENT CONSENT TO MEDDLE WITH THIS TRANSACTION, or to be concerned for the benefit of Collins, the Creek Indians, or any one else.”

This language was received at the War Department without reproof, although the Secretary was from South Carolina, bred up in the chivalrous doctrines of the Palmetto State. He quietly suffered a Brigadier General thus plainly to express his contempt for this slave-dealing transaction, in which not only the War Department, but the President of the United States, was involved. He appears to have been willing to encounter almost any kind of disrespect, rather than call public attention to the subject.

In the meantime other claims were presented to the Department for those Exiles, or portions of those, who had been captured by the Creeks.[120] Gad Humphreys filed with the Secretary of War a list of forty-seven slaves who had fled from him in 1830, stating that they had gone to the Seminoles, and that a part of them had been sent to Fort Pike.

Colonel Humphreys appeared to regard himself as entitled to the possession of those people; although by the treaty of Payne’s Landing the Seminoles had paid for all slaves residing with them prior to 1832; and had been released from all further demands on account of such slaves.

Colonel Humphreys stated that his claim had been examined by the late agent, General Wiley Thompson, and decided against him; but insisted that the decision was wrong, and avowed his ability to show it erroneous by proper proof whenever he should have an opportunity, and again demanded that the slaves should be brought back to Florida, where he could present his proof without trouble. This letter was inclosed in one directed to Mr. Downing, Delegate in Congress from Florida, and by him transmitted to the Secretary of War, and by that officer referred to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Thus driven to the wall, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs came out in plain and unmistakable language, asserting the doctrine, that the Government held the power and constitutional right to dispose of prisoners taken in war, whatever their character may be. This doctrine had been eloquently sustained by General Gaines, on the trial in New Orleans. It was the doctrine avowed by Hon. John Quincy Adams in the House of Representatives, during the next session of Congress; but it called down upon him much abuse in that body, and in the Democratic papers of the country. The Commissioner’s report to the Secretary of War set forth in distinct language, that the claims of individuals to slaves were precluded by the action of the Government in sending these people West; that they had been captured by the army and disposed of by the Executive, and the action of the Department could not be changed in consequence of individuals claiming them as slaves. In short, he repeated the doctrine advanced by General Gaines at New Orleans. The report also confirmed the policy of General Taylor in disregarding the claims of individuals to persons captured by the army, and was a tacit condemnation of that pursued by General Jessup, and previously sanctioned by the Secretary of War. This report was passed over to the Secretary.

That officer (Mr. Poinsett) having received this report, transmitted it to Colonel Humphreys. This drew from that gentleman a still more elaborate argument in favor of his claim, which occupies nearly four heavy pages in documentary form. This was also transmitted to Mr. Downing, and by him passed over to the Secretary of War; but we are not informed whether the Secretary of War replied to this second argument or not.

It is, however, important to the truth of history to notice this recognition of the doctrine by a slave-holding Secretary of War, that the Executive in time of war may separate slaves from their masters, and send them out of the country, without regard to the relation previously subsisting between them and their owners. The principle was thus recognized by Mr. Poinsett, although a citizen of South Carolina, acting under the advice and direction of Mr. Van Buren, a Democratic President of the United States.

General Jessup also, in a report to the War Department, declared, that, in his opinion, the treaty of Payne’s Landing exonerated the Indians from all claims for slaves which accrued prior to that date, and that Colonel Humphreys and other claimants could only demand a proportion of the seven thousand dollars allowed by the Indians for slaves then residing among them. This suggestion was obviously just, and was approved by the Secretary of War; and we are naturally led to inquire, why the same obviously just rule was not applied to some hundreds of other cases precisely like that of Colonel Humphreys?