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
Emory's orders further comprehended a concentration of all the troops at
Fort Washita that were then at that place and at Forts Cobb and
Arbuckle;[140] but the orders were discretionary in their nature and
permitted his leaving a small force at the more northern posts should
circumstances warrant or demand it. On the nineteenth, General Scott had
had a conference with Senator Charles B. Mitchell of Arkansas and, in
deference to Mitchell's opinion, still further modified his orders to
Emory so that, while leaving him the bulk of his discretionary power, he
recommended that, if advisable, Emory retain one company at Fort
Cobb.[141] In any event, one company of infantry was to move in advance
from Fort Arbuckle to Fort Washita.[142]
Up to the twenty-fourth of March, at which time he left Memphis, Colonel
Emory made pretty good time in his attempt to reach his destination; but
from Memphis on his movements were unavoidably and considerably hampered.
Low water in the Arkansas detained him for several days so that he deemed
it prudent to send his orders on ahead to the commanding officer at Fort
Arbuckle "to commence the movement upon Fort Washita, and, in the event of
the latter place being threatened, to march to its support with his whole
force."[143] On reaching Fort Smith, Emory found that matters had come to
a crisis in Arkansas and, touching the disposition of his force and the
objects of his mission, allowed himself to be unduly influenced in his
judgment by men of local predilections.[144] It was upon their advice and
upon the urgent pleadings of Matthew Leeper,[145] Indian agent on the
Leased District, that he exercised his discretionary power as to the
disposal of troops, without listening to his military subordinates[146] or
having viewed the locality for himself. In the interests of these local
petitioners,[147] he even enlarged upon Mitchell's recommendation and
concluded to leave two companies at Fort Cobb as one was deemed altogether
inadequate to the protection of so isolated a post. It never seems to
have occurred to him that the attack would have to come from the south,
from the direction of Fort Washita, and that a force large enough to be
efficient at either Fort Washita or Fort Arbuckle would necessarily
protect Fort Cobb and the Indians of the Leased District.
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