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 Commissioners of the United States made report of their proceedings
to Congress; and those of Georgia reported to the governor of that
State.[7] Their report was transmitted to the Legislature, and that
body, with an arrogance that commands our admiration, passed strong
resolutions denouncing the action of the Federal Commissioners,
commending the action of those of Georgia, and asserting her State
sovereignty in language somewhat bombastic.
[Sidenote: 1786.]
[Sidenote: 1787.]
Soon after the making of this pretended treaty, the Creeks commenced
hostilities, murdering the people on the frontiers of Georgia, and
burning their dwellings. The Spanish authorities of Florida were charged
with fomenting these difficulties, and the Congress of the United States
felt constrained to interfere.[8] The Commissioners previously appointed
to form a treaty with the Creeks, were, by a resolution of the
Continental Congress, adopted Oct. 26, instructed to obtain a treaty
with the Indians which would secure a return of all prisoners, of
whatever age, sex or complexion, and to _restore all fugitive slaves
belonging to citizens of the United States_.[9]
This resolution was the first act on the part of the Continental
Congress in favor of restoring fugitive slaves. It was adopted under the
articles of Confederation, before the adoption of our present
constitution, and of course constitutes no precedent under our present
government; yet it introduced a practice that has long agitated the
nation, and may yet lead to important and even sanguinary results.
[Sidenote: 1788.]
Without awaiting the action of Congress, the authorities of Georgia, by
her agents, entered into another treaty, at a place called
"Shoulderbone," by which the Creeks appear to have acknowledged the
violation of the Treaty of Galphinton, and again stipulated to observe
its covenants.[10]
We have no reliable information as to the number of the Creek towns
represented at the making of this third treaty by Georgia. The whole
transaction was by the State, in her own name, by her own authority,
without consent of Congress, and all papers relating to it, if any
exist, would of course be among the manuscript files of that State. It
is believed that Georgia never printed any of these treaties; and we can
only state their contents from recitals which we find among the State
papers of the Federal Government. It is however certain, that the Creeks
denied that any such treaty had been entered into; and they continued
hostilities, as though no such treaty had been thought of by them. This
pretended Treaty of Shoulderbone exerted no more moral influence among
the Creeks than did that of Galphinton. The war continued between the
people of Georgia and the Creeks. The savages appeared to be aroused to
indignation by what they regarded as palpable frauds. Excited at such
efforts to impose upon them stipulations degrading to their character,
they prosecuted the war with increased bitterness.
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