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.Giddings, Joshua R. (Joshua Reed)
Philosophy
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.
Giddings, Joshua R. (Joshua Reed)
Maroons; Seminole War, 1st, 1817-1818; Seminole War, 2nd, 1835-1842
The case came up again on the tenth of April, when a resolution to close
debate in one hour was adopted. The House then resolved itself in
committee; and Mr. Bartlett, of Vermont, a Democrat, took the position
that the Government, nor its officers, had power to enter into any
agreement with Indians or white men, by which they should enjoy any
privilege, or receive any compensation, not authorized by law; that the
contract between General Jessup and the Creeks was of no validity, but
absolutely void; and every transaction touching the enslavement of the
Exiles was without authority, and of no effect.
Mr. Walsh, of Maryland, insisted that the Indian tribes were not
nations, and ought not to be treated as such; that it was not incumbent
on the friends of the bill to show that slavery existed among the
Seminoles; if they lived within a slave State, they might hold slaves;
that the Government had the right to enslave the negroes when captured.
Mr. Sweetzer, of Ohio, Democrat, denied the authority of General Jessup
to make any contract for the services of the Creek warriors other than
the law had provided; nor could he have authority to make any
stipulation as to the disposal of prisoners when captured.
Mr. Southerland, of New York, a Whig, thought the question of slavery
was not necessarily involved in this case; that the United States,
having sent the negroes West, were bound to indemnify Watson for his
loss.
Mr. Daniels, by the rules of the House, had one hour to reply, after the
expiration of the time for closing debate. He attempted to reply to some
of the arguments offered against the bill, but advanced no new position.
At the expiration of his speech the vote was taken, and the bill
reported to the House as agreed to in committee. The previous question
was then called, and under its operation the bill passed--seventy-nine
members voting in favor of its passage, and fifty-three against it.
One member from the slave States, Williamson R. W. Cobb, of Alabama,
voted against the bill. All the other members from the slave States
voted for it; and were aided by the votes of members from the free
States, as follows:
From _New Hampshire_: Harry Hibbard--1.
_Massachusetts_: Wm. Appleton, Zeno Scudder--2.
_New York_: Abram M. Schemmerhorn, James Brooks, Gilbert Dean, F. S.
Martin, Abram P. Stevens, Joseph Southerland--6.
_Connecticut_: Collins M. Ingersoll--1
_New Jersey_: R. M. Price--1.
_Pennsylvania_: Joseph R. Chandler, Thomas Florence, Joseph H. Kuhns,
Joseph McNair, Andrew Packer, John Robbins, Thomas Ross--7.
_Ohio_: John L. Taylor--1.
_Indiana_: Sam'l W. Parker, Richard W. Thompson--2.
_Michigan_: E. S. Penniman, Charles E. Stuart--2.
_Iowa_: Lincoln Clark, Bernard Henn--2.
_California_: Joseph W. McCorkle--1. In all the free States twenty-five.
The vote against the bill was given by the following members, from the
free States:
From _Maine_: E. K. Smart, Israel Washburn, jr.--2.
_New Hampshire_: Jared Perkins, Amos Tuck--2.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account