The American Indian as Slaveholder and Seccessionist: An Omitted Chapter in the Diplomatic History of the Southern ConfederacyAbel, Annie Heloise
History
The American Indian as Slaveholder and Seccessionist: An Omitted Chapter in the Diplomatic History of the Southern Confederacy
Abel, Annie Heloise
Indian Territory; Slavery -- United States; United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865
for orders as to what he should do in the event of an emergency and had
received none. The circumstance of his surrender and the resulting triumph
of the secessionist element could not fail to have its effect upon the
watchful Indians to whom the exhibition of present power was everything.
That the Texan secessionists fully appreciated the strategic position of
the Indian nations and the absolute necessity of making some sort of terms
with them was brought out by the action of the convention at its first
session. An ordinance was passed "to secure the friendship and
co-operation of the Choctaw, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek, and Seminole
Nations of Indians;" and three men, James E. Harrison, James Bourland, and
Charles A. Hamilton, were appointed as commissioners[128] "to proceed to
said nations and invite their prompt co-operation in the formation of a
Southern Confederacy."[129]
Now before following these men in the execution of their mission, it may
be advisable, for breadth of view, to illustrate how Texas still further
made Indian relations an issue most prominent in all the earlier stages of
her secession movement; but at the very outset it must be admitted that,
in so doing, she differentiated carefully between the civilized and the
uncivilized tribes. With the one group she was ready to seek an alliance,
offensive and defensive, but with the other to wage a relentless,
exterminating war. The failure of the United States central government to
protect her against the aggressions and the atrocities so-called of the
wild tribes was cited by her as one principal justification for withdrawal
from the Union,[130] her obvious purpose being to gain thereby the
adherence of the northern counties, non-slaveholding but frontier. Almost
conversely, on the other hand, Governor Houston gave as one good and
sufficient reason for not withdrawing from the Union, the fear that should
the Union be dissolved the wild tribes, who were now, in a measure,
restrained from committing depredations and enormities by the very nature
of their treaty guaranties, would be literally let loose upon Texas.[131]
As far as the civilized tribes were concerned, however, all were of one
mind and that took the form of the conviction that so great was the
necessity of gaining and holding the confidence of the Indians, that Texas
must not procrastinate in joining her fortunes with those of her sister
states in the Confederacy.[132]
James E. Harrison and his colleagues started out upon the performance of
the duties assigned them, February 27, 1861. Their report[133] of
operations and of observations being somewhat difficult of access and its
contents not easily summarized, is herewith appended. Its fullness of
detail is especially to be commended.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account