The Winning of the West, Volume 4: Louisiana and the Northwest, 1791-1807 — John Shaqi
The Winning of the West, Volume 4: Louisiana and the Northwest, 1791-1807Roosevelt, Theodore
History
The Winning of the West, Volume 4: Louisiana and the Northwest, 1791-1807
Roosevelt, Theodore
Northwest, Old -- History; United States -- Territorial expansion; West (U.S.) -- History
In the South the United States Commissioners, in endeavoring to conclude
treaties with the Creeks and Cherokees, had been continually hampered by
the attitude of Georgia and the Franklin frontiersmen. The Franklin men
made war and peace with the Cherokees just as they chose, and utterly
refused to be bound by the treaties concluded on behalf of the United
States. Georgia played the same part with regard to the Creeks. The
Georgian authorities paid no heed whatever to the desires of Congress,
and negotiated on their own account a series of treaties with the Creeks
at Augusta, Galphinton, and Shoulder-bone, in 1783, 1785, and 1786. But
these treaties amounted to nothing, for nobody could tell exactly which
towns or tribes owned a given tract of land, or what individuals were
competent to speak for the Indians as a whole; the Creeks and Cherokees
went through the form of surrendering the same territory on the Oconee.
[Footnote: American State Papers, IV., 15. Letter of Knox, July 6,
1789.] The Georgians knew that the Indians with whom they treated had no
power to surrender the lands; but all they wished was some shadowy color
of title, that might serve as an excuse for their seizing the coveted
territory. On the other hand the Creeks, loudly though they declaimed
against the methods of the Georgian treaty-makers, themselves
shamelessly disregarded the solemn engagements which their authorized
representatives made with the United States. Moreover their murderous
forays on the Georgian settlers were often as unprovoked as were the
aggressions of the brutal Georgia borderers.
Mutual Wrongs of the Creeks and the Borderers.
The Creeks were prompt to seize every advantage given by the
impossibility of defining the rights of the various component parts of
their loosely knit confederacy. They claimed or disclaimed
responsibility as best suited their plans for the moment. When at
Galphinton two of the Creek towns signed away a large tract of
territory, McGillivray, the famous half-breed, and the other chiefs,
loudly protested that the land belonged to the whole confederacy, and
that the separate towns could do nothing save by consent of all. But in
May, 1787, a party of Creeks from the upper towns made an unprovoked
foray into Georgia, killed two settlers, and carried off a negro and
fourteen horses; the militia who followed them attacked the first
Indians they fell in with, who happened to be from the lower towns, and
killed twelve; whereupon the same chiefs disavowed all responsibility
for the deeds of the Upper Town warriors, and demanded the immediate
surrender of the militia who had killed the Lower Town people--to the
huge indignation of the Governor of Georgia. [Footnote: American State
Papers, Vol. IV., 31, 32, 33. Letter of Governor Matthews, August 4,
1787, etc.]
Difficulties of the Federal Treaty-Makers.
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