[918] Treaty with the Wyandots and other tribes concluded at St. Mary's, September 17, 1818; treaty with the Delawares at the same place, October 3, 1818; treaty with the Miamis October 6, 1818; treaty with the Pottawatomies at Chicago in 1821.
[919] For the treaty see U.S. Statutes at Large, VII, 317-19. For the schedule of sums granted to individuals see ibid., 603-4.
It is unnecessary to speculate upon the question of the location of this land, for the Indians were powerless to alienate their land to individuals, a fact which was, of course, well known to the commissioners who negotiated the treaty. It is worth noting, however, that two of the signers of the treaty were Alexander Wolcott, son-in-law of Kinzie, and Robert Forsyth, the beneficiary of the smaller grant. Less than a year later, at the treaty concluded at Prairie du Chien with the Ottawas, Pottawatomies, and Chippewas, in July, 1829, the heirs of Kinzie again claimed and received the sum of thirty-five hundred dollars. The claim this time was "for depredations committed on him [Kinzie] by the Indians at the time of the massacre of Chicago and at St. Joseph's, during the winter of 1812."[920] The treaty stipulated that the sums paid to claimants were "in full satisfaction" of the claims brought by them against the Indians. Alexander Wolcott assisted in negotiating this treaty also, and both he and his brother-in-law, John H. Kinzie, signed it. Thus in 1829 the heirs of Kinzie obtained "full satisfaction" from the Pottawatomies and allied tribes for the losses sustained in 1812, despite the fact that by solemn treaty between the United States and the Indians mutual forgiveness and oblivion for the hostile acts of each had been decreed. But the payment in full in 1829 was as little successful in disposing of the matter as the treaty of 1815 had been, for the self-same claimants utilized the opportunity presented by the Pottawatomie cession of 1833 to raise themselves to comparative affluence by extracting, ostensibly from the Indians but in reality from the government, the sum of twenty thousand dollars more.
[920] For the treaty see ibid., 320-22; for the schedule of claims see ibid., 604.
Nor is the grant of two thousand dollars to Mrs. Helm by the Treaty of 1833 less dubious in character. Lieutenant Helm had come to Fort Dearborn in the summer of 1811 in straitened financial circumstances.[921] Since his pay was but twenty-five dollars a month, he can scarcely have increased his fortune materially in the ensuing period of a little over a year. In fact, during this time, his account with the government factory steadily increased, and when the store was closed by Irwin in July, 1812, was one of the largest on the factor's books.[922] In the nature of things he could not have lost any great amount of property at the time of the massacre. Whatever it was, however, Mrs. Helm had already been compensated for it. By the Treaty of Prairie du Chien of July, 1829, she received eight hundred dollars "for losses sustained at the time of the capture of Fort Dearborn, in 1812," with the stipulation, of course, that this payment was "in full satisfaction" of all claims. Like her half-brothers and sisters, however, she now again received compensation, and her claims, like theirs, had waxed greater with the passage of time and the increase of opportunity for collecting them. The ignoring of Lieutenant Helm's interest in the money collected for the destruction of his property was due to the fact that in the summer of 1829 Mrs. Helm obtained a divorce from him.[923] The decree provided that she should hold in her own right, as a part of the alimony allowed her, all of the money or other property granted to her as one of the heirs of John Kinzie in the late treaty of Prairie du Chien. Although the latter antedates the granting of the divorce decree by almost eleven weeks, it is evident that Mrs. Helm's spokesmen at the negotiation of the treaty had arranged its terms, as far as they related to her, with this provision of the decree in view.
[921] See supra, p. 177.
[922] Indian Trade Department, Chicago Petty Ledger, MS volume in Pension Building.
[923] McCulloch, Early Days of Peoria and Chicago, 108.
A few days after the treaty had been concluded the distribution of goods to the Indians for which it made provision was begun. Of the one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars' worth of goods which the Indians were to receive, eighty thousand dollars' worth were distributed at this time, in addition to the payment of the annuity in cash. But little reflection is required to show that the Indians themselves profited little by the wealth bestowed upon them. The greater part of it quickly passed from their hands to the coffers of the traders, much of it in exchange for bad whisky; and the red man was probably more injured than benefited by the mess of pottage for which he had surrendered his birthright.
Jeremiah Porter, the pioneer preacher, has left a vivid description of the proceedings which accompanied the payment to the Indians.[924] The money and goods were paid to heads of families according to the number in each household. The money was paid in silver half-dollars, and some heads of families received four hundred of these coins, which were thrown into the corner of their dirty blankets and "carried off in triumph." The scenes attending the payment were full of excitement. The distribution was continued on Sunday the same as during the week. "Thousands of human beings—some sitting, some standing, others lying on the grass in all imaginable positions, some riding, some fighting, and one bleeding to death, the main artery of his arm being cut off, while his murderer stood a prisoner, struggling in the arms of a female avenger of blood"—such were the scenes enacted that Sabbath day. Meanwhile the minister preached to his little flock from the text, "And he kneeled down and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge, and fell asleep."