Today in Chickamauga History - April 2
1781, April 2: Three months after the first Chickasaw attack on the Cumberland, the Cherokee's largest attack of the wars against the settlements came on 2 April 1781, culminating in what became known as the Battle of the Bluff, led by Dragging Canoe in person. It lasted until the next day. Afterward, settlers began to abandon the settlements until only three stations were left, a condition which lasted until 1783.
1791, April 2: Dealing with Discrepancies in Treaties Signed with the Creeks and Cherokees - The treaties the tribes signed with Georgia in 1783 and 1785 consider the boundary to be one described in a treaty made between South Carolina and the Cherokees in 1777.
Accordingly the precise words were copied that had been used by the State of Georgia in its' treaty with the Cherokees of the 31st of May 1783, and in its treaty with the Creeks on the 1st day of November of the same year, and also as used in the treaty made between the United States and the Cherokees at Hopewell on the 28th of November 1785.
- Art. 1. The Cherokee nations acknowledge, that the troops during last summer, repeatedly defeated their forces, victoriously penetrated through their lower towns, middle settlements and vallies, and quietly and unapposed built, held, and continue to occupy, the fort at Seneca, thereby did effect and maintain the conquest of all the Cherokee lands, eastward of the Unacaye mountain; and, to and for their people, did acquire, possess, and yet continue to hold, in and over the said lands, all and singular the rights incidental to conquest; and the Cherokee nation in consequence thereof, do cede the said lands to the said people, the people of South Carolina. - http://wardepartmentpapers.org/s/home/item/41315
1791, April 2: Dealing with Discrepancies in Treaties Signed with the Creeks and Cherokees - Knox thanks Izard for communicating General Pinckney's observations regarding the boundary between the Creeks and the Cherokees. Knox states that from Pinckney's observations it would seem that the treaty gave the Creeks a right to lands which were clearly in the possession of the Cherokees, and that the boundary between the two Indian tribes was clearly established and known. However, the legislature of Georgia apparently sent Congress a report in 1787 which described the same boundary between the tribe but notes that "both nations made the same relinquishment of mutual claims which had not before been settled between them." The treaties the tribes signed with Georgia in 1783 and 1785 consider the boundary to be one described in a treaty made between South Carolina and the Cherokees in 1777. Additionally, these treaties did not invest the Creeks with any territory of the Cherokees. Knox finishes by stating that the treaty which geographically laid out the boundaries of Creek territory was the most judicious and least likely to create complications. - https://wardepartmentpapers.org/s/home/item/41315
1791, April 2: Excerpts of Treaties Establishing the Western Border with the Creek and Cherokee Indians - Knox's letter establishes that the western boundary of the United States, where it comes into contact with the territory of the Creek and Cherokee Indians, has been firmly established by several treaties the tribes have signed with Georgia and South Carolina. The letter contains excerpts from several of the various treaties to illustrate where boundary lines were considered to have been drawn in each. - https://wardepartmentpapers.org/s/home/item/41316
1794, April 2: Permanent Additions to the Treaty of Holston - Listed are five articles that are permanent additions to the Treaty of Holston. The Cherokees will be fairly compensated for relinquishments of land, boundaries will be ascertained, an annuity of $5000 will be provided, and the Indians must cease the practice of stealing horses. - https://wardepartmentpapers.org/s/home/item/41688
1799, April 2: Receipt for pay as temporary Indian agent in the Cherokee nation - Thomas Lewis, Temporary Indian Agent in Cherokee Nation, received $400 on account of Indian Department. - https://wardepartmentpapers.org/s/home/item/67039
1828, April 2: ARKANSAS TERRITORIAL PAPERS VOL XX – Page 647 – 650 - THOMAS L. McKENNEY TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR - [NA:OIA, Lets. Sent, Bk. 4] - DEPARTMENT OF WAR, Off: Ind: Affairs, 12 th April, 1828.
To THE HoNbte JAMES BARBOUR, Secretary of War,
SIR, I have prepared the letter as directed by you, in answer to the subjects presented by the Cherokee Deputation, and as contained in their letter to you of the 28th Feby last.27
I would not be supposed, in any matter, as interfering in the Executive decisions. I know well how much more capable he is in all things, than I am, to decide correctly. But I should be wanting in the duty I owe to you, and the President also, if I did not explain why I fear the decision in regard to the privilege promised the Cherokees in the promised outlet to the West, may be hurtful.
When it is remembered how long the Indians have been disappointed in our pledges to them, anq. how, in fact the want of confidence arising out of our failure to make them good, has produced in them the conviction that we are not to be trusted; and when too we are laboring to introduce a system for their Government and future welfare, which requires all their confidence in us to be restored, before they will, for the want of it, even hear our propositions, does it not
beget an obligation in us to avoid any course, towards any of them, that would weaken their confidence? -Nay are we not bound by the high obligations to seek the future repose of this hapless people, so to act towards them as to recover the confidence, if possible, which is lost, and add to it?
Is it said that we are not bound to these people by anything further than absolute Treaty obligations? Be it so. But then can they distinguish between the solemn pledges of a President, confirmed by his War Minister, and a Treaty provision? So far from it, they cling with greater attachment to the President's words, the words of their Great Father than even to Treaty provisions, since these have been to them from the beginning only like ropes of sand.
But I respectfully suggest that there is in my opinion something more than a President's promise to these people in regard to Lovely's purchase. It was upon the promise made, and to enable the President to make it good, that a Treaty was made with the Quapaws and Osages. (See Mr Monroe's letter to them 28). Those tribes owned in part that Western outlet which was promised should be the Cherokees. The Congress provided the means for those Treaty obligations, and
hence, as I view it, the promise made to the Cherokees has this incidental. Treaty support.
But go back to the time when Mr Jefferson invited these people to go and look for a Country West of the Mississippi. There was nothing there then but boundless forests. They went, and across the stream beyond they hoped the white man would not go. They selected that district which has been since embraced by lines, and called Arkansa.29 They felt the white people pressing on them-and troubled on account of it, wished the way to the west kept open. · It was faithfully promised to them, and to make that promise good a. Treaty was made, and those who were in the way of its fulfilment were dispossessed, by purchase, of their right to it.
Shall these people be again hemm'd in? And again led to mark another breach of promise. For argue with them as we may they will view it in no other light. They cannot see the reason which may be given for this change, nor feel the force of it. It is words thrown away to reason with them on the waste which is left desolate under the promise made to them; and the fertility which the white man would introduce. They cannot see this. It is nothing to them if they could. But again. What right, either in reason, or justice have white people to go and settle a Country, and then require for their accommodation and comfort that the Executive pledge shall be violated for them? Is the land theirs? Do they own it by purchase? Are they not there this moment by Courtesy? I fear I am intruding those hasty and undigested remarks upon you. But I fear that this decision will make a breach in our policy in regard to the Indians that nothing will be able to repair-and all the high hopes of the humane will be blasted by it. The Cherokees on the East of the Mississippi will soon hear of this failure to maintain the Executive faith as pledged to their Western Brothers-so will the Chickasaws, Choctaws, and Creeks, and then I fear the effect will be fatal to our plan of Colonizing the whole.
Moreover, the condition of the Indians in Arkansa will be wretched. I need not speak of the hate which is cherished towards them by those new sett'lers-and who on being sustained in the plan of sett'ling Lovely's purchase will increase in consequence, as they will in power, when collisions will be produced, and I have no doubt, finally, a war. The immediate effect of the policy will be to hem in the Indians, who feeling the restraint will trespass, and one violent act will be followed by another until the peace and lives of these poor people will be destroyed. As to their having a right, or the privilege of a way out, and over the plantations of those people, that cannot be. We know it cannot. Instance the quarrel's in Florida, and in the Southern States, and the efforts which have been made, to keep Indians within their limits.
Do excuse these hasty remarks-and believe me to be with sincere and respectful regards,
Your Obed t Servt
THOa L. McKENNEY.
P. S. I confess I had hoped, nay I had no doubt of the final success of the policy which has been begun under such flattering auspices of sett'ling our unfortunate Indians in one last and good home, and under a suitable Government &c. But if those so far in the West, are not made to feel that there is something in our pledges, I shall despair.
Since writing the within, it has occurred to me that it might be best, or at least expected of me, to suggest some course in regard to the question of sett'ling Lovely's purchase. I would respectfully say that I would maintain the promises made, and refer to the reference which a call already made by Mr Sevier, 30 will make of it to Congress. Even should Congress enact that the Indians have no claim to have those promises fulfilled, it would break the force of the fall which these
people will now feel to be so grievous; and put off the answer, by refering it to the decision of Congress-and finally leave the Executive free from an apparently active and solely responsible agency, in blasting these people's hopes. And in communicating the decision, it might be done in a way, to preserve still, the sacred attachment which the Indians cherish for their "Great Father", and his words.-Thoa L. McKenney.