The Exiles of Florida. Giddings Joshua Reed

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ charged the Commissioners of the United States with improper conduct; but in no instance did they name the Seminoles, nor allude to any obligation, on the part of the Creeks, to return the Exiles resident among the Seminoles. It should however be borne in mind, that these Commissioners on behalf of Georgia left the council in disgust, before the close of the negotiation. In the treaty itself, however, there is a stipulation that the treaty of New York shall remain in force, except such parts as were expressly changed by that entered into at Colerain; and that portion of the treaty of New York by which the Creeks assumed to bind the Seminoles, was not changed.19

      The seventh article of the Treaty of Colerain reads as follows: – “The Creek nation shall deliver, as soon as practicable, to the Superintendent of Indian Affairs, at such place as he may direct, all the citizens of the United States, white inhabitants and negroes, who are now prisoners in any part of the said nation, agreeably to the treaty at New York; and also all citizens, white inhabitants, negroes and property, taken since the signing of that treaty. And if any such prisoners, negroes, or property, should not be delivered on or before the first day of January next, the Governor of Georgia may empower three persons to repair to the said nation, in order to claim and receive such prisoners, negroes and property, under the direction of the President of the United States.” This stipulation was understood by the Creeks, and they were willing to perform it; but it is very obvious, from all the circumstances, that they had no idea of binding the Seminoles to return the Exiles resident in Florida.

      The State of Georgia obtained very little territory by this treaty, and no further indemnity for the loss of their fugitive bondmen. The people of that State, therefore, were greatly dissatisfied with it. But the extraordinary feature of this treaty, consists in the subsequent construction placed upon it by the authorities of Georgia, who, twenty-five years subsequently, insisted that the Seminoles were in fact a part of the Creek tribe, bound by the Creek treaties, and that the Creek nation were under obligation to compel the Seminoles to observe treaties made by the Creeks.

      In each of the treaties made between the State of Georgia and the Creeks, as well as in that made at New York, between the United States and the Creek nation, attempts had been made to bind the Seminoles, although that tribe had steadily and uniformly denied the authority of the Creeks to bind them; and being sustained by the Spanish authorities, it became evident that all further efforts to induce them to submit to the government of the Creeks would be useless. This independence they had maintained for nearly half a century. They had in no instance acknowledged the authority of the Creeks since they left Georgia, in 1750; nor is it reasonable to suppose the authorities of that State, or those of the United States, were ignorant of that important circumstance.

      The flagrant injustice of holding the Creeks responsible for fugitive slaves resident in Florida, and under protection of the Spanish crown, must be obvious to every reader; and the inquiry will at once arise. Why did the Creek chiefs at New York consent to such a stipulation? The answer perhaps may be found in the secret article of that treaty, giving to the Creeks fifteen hundred dollars annually, forever, and to McGillivray twelve hundred dollars during life, and to six other chiefs one hundred dollars annually. These direct and positive bribes could not fail to have effect. The necessity for keeping this article secret from the Indians generally, and from the people of the United States, is very apparent; as the propriety of thus taking money, drawn from the free States to bribe Indian chiefs to obligate their nation to seize and return fugitive slaves, would have been doubted by savages as well as civilized men. But the duty of the Creeks to seize and return the Exiles was legally recognized by the treaty of Colerain, which admitted the treaty of New York to be in force. This was regarded as a continuance of the claims of Georgia, although the Creeks appear to have had no idea of entering into such stipulations.

1797

      Many circumstances now combined to quiet the apprehensions of the fugitive bondmen in Florida. The elder Adams had been elected President in the autumn of 1796, and assumed the duties of his office on the fourth of March following. A descendant of the Pilgrims, he had been reared and educated among the lovers of liberty; he had long served in Congress; he had reported upon the rights of the people of the Colonies in 1774, and was chairman of the committee who reported the Declaration of Independence, in 1776, and to its doctrines he had ever exhibited an unfaltering devotion. From such an Administration the claimants in Georgia could expect but little aid.

      Another consideration, cheering to the friends of Freedom, was the total failure of the claims on Great Britain, for slaves lost during the War of the Revolution. The influence of those claimants was no longer felt in the Government. The public indignation was also somewhat excited against the institution of Slavery by incidents of a barbarous character, which had then recently transpired in North Carolina. After the promulgation of the Declaration of Independence, the Quakers of that State, conscious of its momentous truths, proceeded in good faith to emancipate their slaves; believing that the only mode in which they could evince their adherence to its doctrines.

      The advocates of oppression were offended at this practical recognition of the “equal right of all men to liberty,” and, to manifest their abhorrence of such doctrines, arrested the slaves so emancipated as fugitives from labor. The Quakers, ever true to their convictions of justice, lent their influence, and contributed their funds, to test the legal rights of the persons thus set at liberty, before the proper tribunals of the State; and the question was carried to the Court of Appeals, where a final judgment was rendered in favor of their freedom. This decision appears to have disappointed general expectation among the advocates of slavery, and created much excitement throughout the State.

      At the next session of the Legislature, an act was passed authorizing persons possessing landed property to seize and reënslave the people thus emancipated. But the planters of that State were usually possessed of wealth and intelligence, and, holding principles of honor, they refused to perform so degrading a service; and the liberated negroes continued to enjoy their freedom.

      But the opponents of liberty became so clamorous against the example thus set in favor of freedom, that the Legislature passed an amendatory act, authorizing any person to seize, imprison and sell, as slaves, any negro who had been emancipated in said State, except those who had served in the army of the United States during the war of the Revolution.

      Persons of desperate character, gamblers, slave-dealers and horse thieves, were now authorized to gratify their cupidity, by seizing and selling persons who had for years enjoyed their liberty; and the scenes which followed, were in no respect creditable to the State, to the civilization or Christianity of the age. Emancipated families were broken up and separated for ever. In some instances the wife escaped, while the husband was captured. Parents were seized, and their children escaped. Bloodhounds were employed to chase down those who fled to the forests and swamps, in order to avoid men more cruel than bloodhounds.

      The Quakers, so far as able, assisted these persecuted people to escape to other States. Some left North Carolina on board ships; others fled north by land; and many reached the free States, where their descendants yet live. But even our free States did not afford a safe retreat from the cruelty of inexorable slave-catchers. Those free persons were seized in Philadelphia, and, under the fugitive slave law of 1793, were imprisoned in that city; and, what excites still greater wonder, were delivered up and carried back to bondage.20

      Some of these people, while in Pennsylvania, sent petitions to Congress, praying protection against such barbarity; and great excitement was aroused among Southern members by the presentation of such petitions. The Quakers of that State, and of New Jersey, also sent petitions to Congress, praying that these people may be protected against such piratical persecution. The popular feeling of the nation was shocked at these things, and great indignation against the institution, generally, was aroused.

      We have no record of further attempts on the part of the claimants to obtain a return of the Exiles, after the Treaty of Colerain, until the close of Mr. Adams’s administration. During СКАЧАТЬ