USA > Colorado > El Paso County > The Indians of the Pike's peak region > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
II
162
A Defense of
and I saw but one woman who had been killed, and one who had hanged herself; I saw no dead children. From all I could learn, I arrived at the conclusion that but few women or children had been slain. I am of the opinion that when the attack was made on the Indian camp the greater number of squaws and children made their es- cape, while the warriors remained to fight my troops.
"I do not know that any Indians were wounded that were not killed; if there were any wounded, I do not think they could have been made prisoners without endangering the lives of the soldiers; Indians usually fight as long as they have strength to resist. Eight Indians fell into the hands of the troops alive, to my knowledge; these with one exception were sent to Fort Lyon and properly cared for.
"My reason for making the attack on the Indian camp was that I believed the Indians in the camp were hostile to the whites. That they were of the same tribes with those who had murdered many persons and destroyed much valuable property on the Platte and Arkansas rivers during the previous spring, summer, and fall was beyond a doubt. When a tribe of Indians is at war with the whites, it is im- possible to determine what party or band of the tribe or the name of the Indian or Indians belonging to the tribe so at war, are guilty of the acts of hostility. The most that can be ascertained is that Indians of the tribe have performed the acts. During the spring, summer, and fall of the year 1864, the Arapahoe and Cheyenne Indians, in some instances assisted or led on by Sioux, Kiowas, Comanches, and Apaches, had committed many acts of hostility in the country lying between the Little Blue and the Rocky Moun- tains and the Platte and Arkansas rivers. They had
163
The Battle of Sand Creek
murdered many of the whites and taken others prisoners, and had destroyed valuable property, probably amounting to $200,000 or $300,000. Their rendezvous was on the headwaters of the Republican, probably one hundred miles from where the Indian camp was located. I had every reason to believe that these Indians were either directly or indirectly concerned in the outrages that had been committed upon the whites. I had no means of ascertaining what were the names of the Indians who had com- mitted these outrages other than the declarations of the Indians themselves; and the character of Indi- ans in the western country for truth and veracity, like their respect for the chastity of women who may be- come prisoners in their hands, is not of that order which is calculated to inspire confidence in what they may say. In this view I was supported by Major Anthony, Ist Colorado Cavalry, commanding at Fort Lyon, and Samuel G. Colley, United States Indian Agent, who, as they had been in com- munication with these Indians, were more com- petent to judge of their disposition toward the whites than myself. Previous to the battle they expressed to me the opinion that the Indians should be punished. We found in the camp the scalps of nineteen white persons. One of the surgeons in- formed me that one of these scalps had been taken from the victim's head not more than four days pre- viously. I can furnish a child captured at camp ornamented with six white women's scalps. These scalps must have been taken by these Indians or fur- nished to them for their gratification and amusement by some of their brethren, who, like themselves, were in amity with the whites.
I64
A Defense of
"I had no reason to believe that Black Kettle and the Indians with him were in good faith at peace with the whites. The day before the attack Major Scott J. Anthony, Ist Colorado Cavalry, then commander at Fort Lyon, told me that these Indians were hostile ; that he had ordered his sentinels to fire on them if they attempted to come into the post, and that the senti- nels had fired on them; that he was apprehensive of an attack from these Indians and had taken every precaution to prevent a surprise. Major Samuel G. Colley, United States Indian Agent for these Indians, told me on the same day that he had done everything in his power to make them behave themselves, and that for the last six months he could do nothing with them; that nothing but a sound whipping would bring a lasting peace with them. These statements werc made to me in the presence of the officers of my staff whose statements can be obtained to corroborate the foregoing.
"Since August, 1863, I had been in possession of the most conclusive evidence of the alliance, for the purposes of hostility against the whites, of the Sioux, Cheyennes, Arapahoes, Comanche, Kiowa and Apache Indians.
"Their plan was to interrupt, or, if possible, en- tirely prevent all travel on the routes along the Arkansas and Platte rivers, from the states to the Rocky Mountains, and thereby depopulate this country.
"With very few troops at my command, I could do little to protect the settlers, except to collect the latest intelligence from the Indians' country, commu- nicate it to General Curtis, commanding department of Missouri, and warn the settlers of the relations
165
The Battle of Sand Creek
existing between the Indians and the whites, and the probability of trouble, all of which I did. .
"Commanding only a district with very few troops under my control, with hundreds of miles between my headquarters and the rendezvous of the Indians, with a large portion of the Santa Fe and Platte routes, besides the sparsely settled and distant settlements of this Territory to protect, I could not do anything till the 3rd regiment was organized and equipped, when I determined to strike a blow against this savage and determined foe. When I reached Fort Lyon, after passing over from three to five feet of snow, and greatly suffering from the intensity of the cold, the thermometer ranging from 28 to 30 degrees below zero, I questioned Major Anthony in regard to the whereabouts of hostile Indians. He said there was a camp of Cheyennes and Arapahoes about fifty miles distant; that he would have attacked before, but did not consider his force sufficient; that these Indians had threatened to attack the post, etc., and ought to be whipped, all of which was concurred in by Major Colley, Indian agent for the district of the Arkansas, which information with the positive orders of Major-General Curtis,commanding the department, to punish these Indians, decided my course, and resulted in the battle of Sand Creek, which has created such a sensation in Congress through the lying reports of interested and malicious parties.
"On my arrival at Fort Lyon, in all my conversa- tions with Major Anthony, commanding the post, and Major Colley, Indian Agent, I heard nothing of this recent statement that the Indians were under the protection of the government, etc., but Major Anthony repeatedly stated to me that he had at
166
A Defense of
different times fired upon these Indians, and that they were hostilc, and, during my stay at Fort Lyon, urged the necessity of my immediately attacking the Indians before they could learn of the number of troops at Fort Lyon, and so desirous was Major Collcy, Indian agent, that I should find and also attack the Arapahoes, that he sent a messenger after the fight at Sand Creek nearly forty miles to inform me where I could find the Arapahoes and Kiowas; yet, strange to say, I have learned recently that these mncn, Anthony and Colley, are the most bitter in their denunciations of the attack upon the Indians at Sand Creek. Therefore, I would, in conclusion, most respectfully demand, as an act of justice to myself and the brave men whom I have had the honor to command in one of the hardest campaigns ever made in this country, whether against white men or red, that we be allowed the right guaranteed to every American citizen, of introducing evidence in our bchalf to sustain us in what we believe to have been an act of duty to ourselves and to civilization."
Colonel George L. Shoup, in a deposition pre- sented to the military commission investigating the battle of Sand Creek, among other things, says:
On or about the 12th of November, 1864, I left Denver for Fort Lyon, with Companies C, D, and F of my regiment and Company H of the First Colorado Cavalry, and on or about the 18th of November joined Major Sayre at Boonville with that portion of the regiment which had been left at Bijou Basin
167
The Battle of Sand Creek
(he having been ordered to precede me), consisting of Companies A, B, and E, and I and M. On or about the 20th Captain Baxter joined the command with Company G, and the day following Colonel John M. Chivington, commander of the district of Colo- rado, arrived and assumed command of the column, I still commanding my regiment. On or about the 22d the column, consisting of my regiment and a battalion of the first, marched from Boonville towards Fort Lyon and reached Fort Lyon on the 28th, and went into camp. On the evening of the 28th I received orders from the colonel commanding to prepare three days' cooked rations, and be ready to march at eight o'clock the same evening. At eight o'clock the column marched in the following order: the first regiment on the right, my regiment on the left. I had under my immediate command between five hundred and fifty and six hundred men mounted. My transportation was left at Fort Lyon. The column marched all night in a northerly direction. About daylight the next morning came in sight of an Indian village. Colonel Chivington and myself being about three-fourths of a mile in advance of the column, it was determined to make an immediate attack. Lieutenant Wilson, commanding a battalion of the first, was ordered to cut off the ponies of the Indians at the northeast of the village. By order of Colonel Chivington, I was ordered to send men to the southwest of the village, to cut off the ponies in that direction, and then to immediately engage the Indians.
"Did Colonel Chivington make any remarks to the troops, in your hearing?"
"He did not."
"Did you approach the camp of the Indians
168
A Defense of
in line of battle with your men mounted, or dismounted?"
"Kept my men in columns of fours till I arrived at the village, when I formed them in line of battle, and to the left of a battalion of the first, commanded by Lieutenant Wilson, my men mounted."
"At what distance was your command from the village when you commenced fire upon it?"
"I did not allow my men to fire when I formed my first line; the battalion on my right was firing. I wheeled my men into column of fours and marched to the rear of the battalion on my right, to the right of that battalion, to obtain a better position. I marched up Sand Creek some distance, following the Indians who were retreating up the creek. When opposite the main body of Indians, wheeled my men into line, dismounted, and opened fire."
"Did you know what band of Indians it was at the time of the attack?"
"I heard while at Fort Lyon that Left Hand, of the Arapahoes, and Black Kettle, of the Cheyennes, were at the village."
"Did you, at any time prior to the attack, hear Colonel Chivington say that he was going to attack Black Kettle's band?"
"I did not."
"How long did the fight last?"
"The fighting did not entirely cease until about three o'clock in the afternoon."
"Did you camp with your regiment near the battle- ground?"
"We camped on ground occupied by the Indians before the battle."
169
The Battle of Sand Creek
"What was done with the Indians and other property?"
"The lodges were burned. The ponies, numbering, as I was told, five hundred and four, were placed in charge of the provost marshal. A few remained in the hands of the troops."
"What were the casualties of your regiment?"
"Ten killed, one missing, about forty wounded."
"In your opinion how many Indians were killed?"
"From my own observation I should say about three hundred."
"Were they men, or women and children?"
"Some of each."
"Did you witness any scalping or other mutilation of the dead by your command?"
"I saw one or two men who were in the act of scalping, but I am not positive."
"Were you present in council with some Indian chiefs in Denver, some time last summer or fall?"
"I was."
" Who were present-whites and Indians?"
"Governor Evans, Colonel Chivington, Captain S. M. Robbins, Major Wynkoop, Major Whiteley, Amos Steck, J. Bright Smith, Nelson Sargent, Cap- tain John Wanless, Black Kettle, White Antelope, and five or six other Indians, and John Smith and Sam Ashcroft, interpreters."
"Did the Indians express a desire for peace with the whites?"
"Yes."
"Upon what terms did they desire peace?"
"That they have protection and supplies while the war was carried on against hostile Indians."
170
A Defense of
"Was peace guaranteed to them on any terms?"
"They were told by Colonel Chivington that if they would come in and surrender themselves, he would then tell them what to do."
"What did the governor tell them?"
"That as they had violated all treaties they would have to treat with the military authorities, to whom he had given up all the authority."
"Did Colonel Chivington tell them that he would guarantee them peace only on condition that they would come into the post and lay down their arms?"
"Colonel Chivington did not guarantee them peace upon any terms, but if they would come into the post, surrender themselves, and lay down their arms, he would tell them what to do."
" Did the Indians say that they would do so?"
"They said that they would go back to their people, tell them and advise them to do so."
"Did you have any conversation with Major Colley, Indian agent for the Arapahoes and Cheyennes of the Upper Arkansas, respecting the disposition of the Indians and the policy that ought to be pursued towards them? If so, state what he said."
"I had an interview with Major Colley, on the evening of the 28th of November, in which he stated to me that these Indians had violated their treaty; that there were a few Indians that he would not like to see punished, but as long as they affiliated with the hostile Indians we could not discriminate; that no treaty could be made that would be lasting till they were all severely chastised; he also told me where these Indians were camped."
"State what you heard Major Scott J. Anthony
I71
The Battle of Sand Creek
say in reference to these Indians on the 28th of November last."
"He said he would have fought these Indians before if he had had a force strong enough to do so, and left a sufficient garrison at Fort Lyon, he being at the time in command of Fort Lyon."
The Hon. S. H. Elbert, Acting Governor of Colorado, in a message to the Legislature, a few months after the affair, reflects the general attitude of the people toward the battle, and those partici- pating in it. The following is an extract from it:
The before unbroken peace of our Territory has been disturbed since the last spring, by an Indian war. Allied and hostile tribes have attacked our frontier settlements, driven in our settlers, destroyed their homes, attacked, burned, and plundered our freight and emigrant trains, and thus suspended agricultural pursuits in portions of our country, and interrupted our trade and commerce with the States. This has for the time seriously retarded the prosperity of our Territory.
At the commencement of the war the General Government, taxed to the utmost in subduing the rebellion, was unable to help us, and it became neces- sary to look to our own citizens for protection. They everywhere responded with patriotism and alacrity. Militia companies were organized in the frontier counties and secured local protection. Much credit is due to Captain Tyler's company of militia for the important service they rendered in opening and pro- tecting our line of communication with the States.
172
A Defense of
In response to the call of the governor for a regi- ment of cavalry for one hundred day service, over a thousand of our citizens -- the large majority of them leaving lucrative employment-rapidly volunteered, and in that short time, despite the greatest difficulties in securing proper equipments, organized, armed, made a long and severe campaign amid the snows and storms of winter, and visited upon these merciless murderers of the plains a chastisement smiting and deserved. The gratitude of the country is due to the men who thus sacrificed so largely their personal interests for the public good, and rendered such important service to the Territory; and their work, if it can be followed up with a vigorous winter cam- paign, would result in a permanent peace.
The necessity of such a campaign, and the impera- tive demand for immediate and complete protection for our line of communication with the States has been, and is now being, earnestly urged on the Govern- ment at Washington, and with a prospect of success. These efforts should be seconded by your honorable body with whatever influence there may be in resolu- tion or memorial, setting forth the facts and necessi- ties of our situation.
The testimony of Governor Evans, Major Anthony, Colonel Chivington, Colonel Shoup, and Acting Governor Elbert covers every phase of the matter in controversy. Governor Evans's state- ment proves beyond question that the Cheyennes and Arapahoes were viciously hostile during the entire summer preceding the battle of Sand Creek,
173
The Battle of Sand Creek
and this was admitted by Black Kettle in his letter to Major Colley, the Indian agent, and by the other chiefs in the council at Denver. Governor Evans also makes it plain that he refused to consider the question of making peace, and turned the Indians over to the military. The telegram of General Curtis, commander of the Military Department, sent at the time the council was being held, says, "No peace must be made without my direction." And peace had not been made when the battle was fought. Major Anthony, com- mander of the military post of Fort Lyon, near the Cheyenne and Arapahoe Indian agency, says that the Indians attacked were hostile and not under his protection, and that he would have punished them had his force been strong enough to fight also the large band on the Smoky Hill River. Colonel Chivington's testimony confirms the statement of Governor Evans as to the hos- tility of both Cheyennes and Arapahoes, and both he and Colonel Shoup say that this was corro- borated by Major Anthony, and Major Colley, the Indian agent, each of whom told them, while at Fort Lyon prior to the battle, that the Indians camped on Sand Creek were hostile and should be punished. Major Anthony admits that there were Arapahoes camped near the Fort when he assumed
174
A Defense of
command, and that, in compliance with his de- mand, they surrendered twenty head of stock, stolen from the whites, and a few worthless guns; and added that a week or two later he returned the guns, and told the Indians that he could no longer feed them and ordered them to go out on the plains, where they could kill buffalo for food; whereupon they left.
The only Arapahoes that by any stretch of the imagination could be said to have been under the protection of the military were the small part of the tribe under the control of Left Hand, a sub-chief; while there is no doubt whatever as to the hostility of the head chief Raven and his followers, who constituted a large majority of the tribe. It is generally conceded that the chief Left Hand and a few of his adherents were peaceably inclined. But, unfortunately, he and the occupants of six or eight lodges of his people, about forty persons in all, including women and children, were in the camp of the hostile Chey- ennes and Arapahoes at the time the attack was made, and suffered accordingly. Left Hand knew that the Cheyennes and a very large part of his own people were at war with the whites, and of the chance he was taking in being in company with the hostiles. If it resulted disastrously, he had
175
The Battle of Sand Creek
no one but himself to blame. It was utterly impossible to discriminate between Indians in the midst of the battle. In those days, Indians seldom permitted themselves to be taken pris- oners in battle, and an attempt to do so, even if the Indian was badly wounded, was a dangerous undertaking. This was the reason that no pris- oners were taken at Sand Creek. Major Anthony, who was not friendly to Colonel Chivington, says that while in some instances the Indians killed at Sand Creek were mutilated, he saw nothing to the extent since stated.
Colonel Chivington's statement concerning the matter is:
Officers who passed over the field by my orders after the battle, for the purpose of ascertaining the number of Indians killed, report that they saw but few women and children dead; no more than would certainly fall in an attack upon a camp in which they were. I my- self passed over some portions of the field after the fight, and saw but one woman who had been killed and one who had hanged herself. I saw no dead children.
In this connection, I wish to refer back to my own statement concerning the matter, as Colonel Chivington's observations were identical with mine.
All this shows that the charge that the battle
I76
A Defense of
was merely a massacre is as untruthful as are most of the other statements made by the coterie of disgruntled army officers, Indian agents, traders, interpreters, and half-breeds. Much of the testi- mony given at the Congressional and military hearings was hearsay evidence of statements said to have been made by persons who claimed to have been in the battle. Possibly, some such state- ments may have been made by irresponsible braggarts belonging to the two regiments that formed the command, for in every regiment during the Rebellion, Eastern as well as Western, there were a few men who were no credit to their com- rades, and who have since told of many fictitious happenings, or those having only the slightest basis of truth. Statements of this character may, perhaps, have been made by irresponsible members of the First and Third Colorado regiments.
It is inconceivable to any one who knew the members of the latter regiment that either its offi- cers or enlisted men, with possibly a rare exception, would have approved of, and much less have participated in, the wanton acts of cruelty claimed to have been perpetrated. No unprejudiced person can believe a charge of such a character against Colonel Shoup, afterwards for many years an honored United States Senator from the State
177
The Battle of Sand Creek
of Idaho; or of Major Hal Sayre, one of Colorado's most respected mining engineers; or of Captain Harper Orahood, who, later, was for many years a law partner of Senator H. M. Teller; or of Captain Baxter of Pueblo, or Captain Nichols of Boulder, both afterwards members of the Legisla- ture of Colorado and honored citizens in the community in which they lived; or in fact against any of the officers of the Third Colorado, as practically all of them were men of high standing in their respective communities.
I was on the battle-field within fifteen minutes after the fight began, and during the day, with a part of our company, I went along the south side of Sand Creek from the scene of one engagement to another, until I had covered the full length of the battle-field on that side of the creek. We then crossed over to the north side and followed up the creek as far as the engagement had extended. On our return to camp, we went over the entire length of the scene of the fighting on the north side of the creek, thus covering almost the entire battle-field, as after the first half-hour in the morning there was but little fighting except near the banks of the creek. During that time I saw much of the battle, but not once did I see any one shoot at a squaw or a child, nor did I see any one take a scalp, although
I2
178
A Defense of
it is true that scalps were taken, for as I returned to camp I saw a number of dead Indians whose scalps had been taken, and among them a few squaws. They had probably been scalped by some of the reckless persons referred to, or possibly by some of the many men in the regiment whose relatives or friends had been killed and brutally mutilated by the savages during the preceding summer. I am not apologizing for the acts of these people, but every fair-minded person must admit that there may have been extenuating circumstances connected with the offense, and no one unfamiliar with the horrors of savage warfare can appreciate the feelings of those who have suffered from their attacks. I did not see a dead or wounded child, and it is inconceivable that any were killed during the fight except accidentally. The incident of the child who wished me to take it up as I was returning to the camp indicates the sympathetic attitude of our men towards the innocent non-combatants.
I think the proof I have presented shows conclu- sively that every one of the charges made by the enemies of Colonel Chivington was untrue; that, on the contrary, the Indians attacked at Sand Creek were, and had been during the previous summer, viciously hostile to the whites; that they
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.