Notwithstanding all that was said and done by the opposition, the Marshpee Deputation left the field of battle with a song of triumph and rejoicing in their mouths, as will presently be seen. I shall give a brief sketch of the proceedings of one of the most enlightened committees that ever was drafted from a legislative body. Every thing was done to sour their minds against the Indians that could be done, but they were of the excellent of the earth, just and impartial.
The Committee was composed of Messrs. Barton and Strong, of the
Senate, and Messrs. Dwight of Stockbridge, Fuller of Springfield, and
Lewis of Pepperell, of the House. Benjamin F. Hallett, Esq. appeared
as Counsel for the Indians.
Lemuel Ewer, Esq. of South Sandwich, was a witness, and the only white
one who was in favor of the Indians. The Indian witnesses were Deacon
Coombs, Daniel B. Amos, Ebenezer Attaquin, Joseph B. Amos, and William
Apes.
On the other side appeared Kilburn Whitman, Esq. of Pembroke, as Counsel for the Overseers; Messrs. J.J. Fiske of Wrentham, and Elijah Swift of Falmouth, both of the Governor's Council; the Rev. Phineas Fish, the Marshpee missionary, sent by Harvard College; Judge Marston, Nathaniel Hinckley and Charles Marston, all of Barnstable; Gideon Hawley of South Sandwich, Judge Whitman of Boston, and two Indians, Nathan Pocknet and William Amos, by name. It was a notable piece of policy on the part of the Overseers, to make a few friends among the Indians, in order to use them for their own purposes. Thus do pigeon trappers use to set up a decoy. When the bird flutters, the flock settle round him, the net is sprung, and they are in fast hands. Judge Whitman, however, could not make his two decoy birds flutter to his satisfaction, and so he got no chance to spring his net. He had just told the Indians that they might as well think to move the rock of Gibraltar from its base, as to heave the heavy load of guardianship from their shoulders; and, when he first came before the committee, he said he did not care a snap of his finger about the matter, one way or the other. But he altered his mind before he got through the business, and began to say that he should be ruined if the bill passed for the relief of the Indians, and was, moreover, sure that Apes would reign, king of Marshpee. The old gentleman, indeed, made several perilous thrusts at me in his plea; but, when he came to cross-examination, he was so pleased with the correctness of my testimony, that he had nothing more to say to me. I shall now leave him, to attend to his friend Judge Marston.
This gentleman swore in court that he thought Indians an inferior race of men; and, of course, were incapable of managing their own affairs.
The testimony of the two decoy pigeons was, that they had liberty enough; more than they knew what to do with. They showed plainly enough that they knew nothing of the law they lived under. The testimony of the Rev. Mr. Fish was more directly against us. Some may think I do wrong to mention this gentleman's name so often. But why, when a man comes forward on a public occasion, should his name be kept out of sight, though he be a clergyman. I should think he would like to make his flock respected and respectable in his speech, which he well knew they never could be under the then existing laws. Is it more than a fair inference that it was self-interest that made him do otherwise, that he might be able to continue in possession of his strong hold? If he had said to the Indians, like an honest man, "I know I have no right to what is yours, and will willingly relinquish what I hold of it," I do not doubt that the Indians would have given him a house, and a life estate in a farm; and perhaps have conveyed it to him in fee simple, if he had behaved well. Such a course would have won him the love and esteem of the Indians, and his blind obstinacy was certainly the surest means he could have taken to gain their ill will. He may think slightly of their good opinion, and I think, from his whole course of conduct, that we are as dogs in his sight. I presume he could not die in peace if he thought he was to be buried beside our graves.
It is the general fault of those who go on missions, that they cannot sacrifice the pride of their hearts, in order to do good. It seems to have been usually the object to seat the Indians between two stools, in order that they might fall to the ground, by breaking up their government and forms of society, without giving them any others in their place. It does not appear to be the aim of the missionaries to improve the Indians by making citizens of them. Hence, in most cases, anarchy and confusion are the results. Nothing has more effectually contributed to the decay of several tribes than the course pursued by their missionaries. Let us look back to the first of them for proofs. From the days of Elliott, to the year 1834, have they made one citizen? The latter date marks the first instance of such an experiment. Is it not strange that free men should thus have been held in bondage more than two hundred years, and that setting them at liberty at this late day, should be called an experiment now?
I would not be understood to say, however, that the Rev. Mr. Fish's mission is any criterion to judge others by. No doubt, many of them have done much good; but I greatly doubt that any missionary has ever thought of making the Indian or African his equal. As soon as we begin to talk about equal rights, the cry of amalgamation is set up, as if men of color could not enjoy their natural rights without any necessity for intermarriage between the sons and daughters of the two races. Strange, strange indeed! Does it follow that the Indian or the African must go to the judge on his bench, or to the Governor, Senator, or indeed any other man, to ask for a help-meet, because his name may be found on the voter's list, or in the jury boxes? I promise all concerned, that we Marshpees have less inclination to seek their daughters than they have to seek ours. Should the worst come to the worst, does the proud white think that a dark skin is less honorable in the sight of God than his own beautiful hide? All are alike, the sheep of his pasture and the workmanship of his hands. To say they are not alike to him, is an insult to his justice. Who shall dare to call that in question?
Were I permitted to express an opinion, it would be that it is more honorable in the two races, to intermarry than to act as too many of them do. My advice to the white man is, to let the colored race alone. It will considerably diminish the annual amount of sin committed. Or else let them even marry our daughters, and no more ado about amalgamation. We desire none of their connection in that way. All we ask of them is peace and our rights. We can find wives enough without asking any favors of them. We have some wild flowers among us as fair, as blooming, and quite as pure as any they can show. But enough has been said on this subject, which I should not have mentioned at all, but that it has been rung in my ears by almost every white lecturer I ever had the misfortune to meet.
I will now entreat the reader's attention to the very able plea of Mr. Hallett, upon our petition and remonstrances. The following are his remarks after the law which gave us our liberty was passed by his exertions in our cause: