USA > Florida > The purchase of Florida; its history and diplomacy > Part 17
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 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33
That Mexico today has an excellent constitution no one questions. So indeed has Venezuela and many of the other periodically revolu- tionizing southern nations. It seems to be not the form of govern- ment so much as the genius of the people that constitutes a nation great or insignificant. The climatic conditions must be considered largely as a factor entering into the character and disposition of the people.
..
1.
----
. ..
٠
٠
٠٠
١
ء
11177
٠٠
( ١١٠١
٠٠٠.
١ ٢٠٠
٠
؟
م
٢
٠
221
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations
of the neutrality of Florida in the war of 1812. De Onis de- clared that Spain had protested to Great Britain and to Europe against the forcible occupation of Florida and vio- lation of her neutrality, and that it was due to personal misconduct of the governor of West Florida. As a proof of this he called attention to the fact that the strictest neu- trality was observed in Cuba, East Florida and other Spanish possessions, thus absolving from all blame the Spanish ministry and government. Then began a long and tedious interchange of views and presentation of arguments on the western and eastern boundaries of Louisiana.
De Onis insisted that the territory extending to the Rio Bravo or del Norte had been under the dominion of Spain both before and since the treaty by which France had ceded Louisiana to his Catholic Majesty, that it had been under Spanish dominion from the time of the dis- covery and conquest of Mexico, without ever having passed by treaty to any other nation. He declared, in 1816, that the two Floridas had passed into the hands of England by cession from France and Spain in 1763, and were in the. legitimate possession of England from 1763 to 1783, and therefore France could not cede them -together with Louisiana -- to Spain, by the treaty of 1764, nor could Spain retrocede them to France, France not having received them from her, unless there should have been an article on this point, in which express and direct mention was made of that cession. Further the claim of the United States to any of the Floridas seemed to De Onis wholly intangible, for the two contracting parties, Spain and France, had declared in the most solemn manner, the first that she did not cede to France any part of the Floridas, the second that she had not acquired them by the treaty of San Ildefonso nor had the least intention to set up a claim to them. De Onis main- tained that according to all the principles of justice no one could be ousted from what he holds until the right of the
..
-
١٠٠٠٦٪
١٤٠
٠٠٠٤
٢٠١٢٠٠
1
:
٥٠
٠١٠
٠ ٠ ١٦٠
1.
١
222
The Purchase of Florida
claimant should be proved and recognized - that Spain having been in possession of West Florida when the United States claimed it, she should keep it until in a friendly nego- tiation this republic had shown a better right to it.
Taking an analogous case in private law, if A should say that he never sold B a certain plot of land, and B says that he never claimed ownership of it, would C, a purchaser from B, simply enter and take possession of the premises which A says he never bought? De Onis forwarded to Mon- roe copies of several letters confirming his representations on the filibustering expeditions which were continually being organized in the southwest. These implicated the former leader, John McIntosh, in a plot to recruit in Georgia a number of vagabonds to invade again East Florida. 1 De- spite presidential proclamations these violations of our neutrality became constantly more flagrant.
In reply to the representations of De Onis, Monroe en- tered into a careful review of the grounds of complaint of the United States against Spain. He rehashed the Spanish spoliation claims - the losses sustained by the seizure and condemnation of vessels in Spanish ports - the failure to ratify the convention of 1802, the suppression of the deposit at New Orleans, the negotiations preliminary to the pur- chase of Louisiana and the consequent dispute over boun- daries, our unsuccessful effort to secure Florida by pur- chase or trade and thus remove the dangerous element of jealousy and the resultant injuries to the two countries - how every proposition of the American envoys had been rejected and none made in return. Such conduct on the part of Spain, insisted Monroe, would have justified, if it did not even invite, decisive measures on the part of the United States. It left this nation free to pursue such a course as, in their judgment, a just regard to the honor,
1. Vol. III, De Onis to Monroe, Feb. 22, 1816. A translation of these letters bears out the charges made by De Onis. The question then arises whether the letters are authentic.
--
٥٠
٠٠
223
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations
the rights, and the interests of the nation might dictate. For the condition of affairs in the Spanish Peninsula and the Spanish provinces in America excited no apprehension of any serious consequences that might follow even a de- cisive action on our part. Besides the injuries already cata- logued there were the breaches of neutrality, which the Spanish government permitted, if indeed it did not author- ize, by British troops and British agents in Florida and through the Creeks and other Indian tribes in the late war.
"In reply to your demand for the exclusion of the flag of the revolting provinces," wrote Monroe, "I have to ob- serve that in consequence of the unsettled state of many countries and repeated changes of the ruling authority in each, there being at the same time several competitors, and each party bearing its appropriate flag, the President thought it proper some time past to give orders to the col- lectors not to make the flag of any vessel a criterion or con- dition of its admission into the ports of the United States. Having taken no part in the differences and convulsions which have disturbed those countries, it is consistent with the just principles, as it is with the interests of the United States, to receive the vessels of all countries into their ports, to whatever party belonging and under whatever flag sail- ing, pirates excepted, requiring of them only the payment of the duties and obedience to the laws while under their jurisdiction : without adverting to the question whether they had committed any violation of the allegiance or laws obligatory on them in the countries to which they belonged either in assuming such flag or in any other respect."
In answer to the complaints of De Onis that the United States was offering assistance to the revolted provinces and that, but for the support which the revolutionists received from the people of this nation, they must have long since miserably failed, Monroe wrote: "All that your govern- ment had a right to claim of the United States was that
: ١١٠٠
1
:
٢١٠٠
٤ ٠٫٫٢٠
.. . .......
1
مهالى
224
The Purchase of Florida
they should not interfere in the contest or promote by any active service the success of the revolution, admitting that they continued to overlook the injuries received from Spain and remained at peace. This right was common to the colonists. With equal justice might they claim that we would not interfere to their disadvantage; that our ports should remain open to both parties as they were before the commencement of the struggle; that our laws regulating commerce with foreign nations should not be changed to their injury. On these principles the United States have acted." 1
De Onis intimated that in a general treaty, which would settle all differences between the two countries, Spain might be willing to cede her claim to territory east of the Missis- sippi, in satisfaction of claims and in exchange for terri- tory west of that river. 2 However the king of Spain was unwilling to deprive himself of East Florida and the important port of Pensacola, the key to the Gulf of Mexico. In support of the contention that West Florida did not pass into the hands of France with the cession of Louisiana, De Onis quoted the sixth article of the treaty of 1778 between France and the United States, by which the former power engaged never to acquire West Florida or any of the ter- ritories ceded to England in 1763. In answer to our claims against Spain for spoliations by French cruisers and French prize courts, De Onis argued that these claims had been settled by France in her treaty with the United States in 1803, wherein the United States had released France from all liability by the provision for indemnification. At any rate Spain could in no way be held liable and, if the treaty of 1803 did not settle those claims, the responsibility rested with France alone.
Months were consumed in an exchange of arguments
1. Vol. II, Foreign Legations, p. 121, Monroe to Chevalier de Onis, Jan. 19, 1816.
2. Vol. VIII, Instructions, p. 32, Monroe to Erving, March 11, 1816.
:
-
٢٠٠١٣
٠
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations 225
concerning the Louisiana boundaries, without arriving at any conclusion .. Each party to the controversy presented some few new deductions in its own favor, but it was mostly a tiresome reiteration of the correspondence of a decade before, able neither to convince nor persuade. Monroe argued, with much show of reason, that had it been intended to exempt any portion of the former province of Louisiana from the operation of the treaty of San Ildefonso, it would have been easy to do so and in a manner to preclude all doubt of the intention of the parties. It might have been stated that Spain ceded back to France such part of the province as France had ceded to Spain. Or they might have defined the extent of the cession by a natural boundary which would have been equally distinct, concise, and satis- factory, and thus there could have arisen no controversy between France and Spain, nor between the United States and Spain respecting the eastern limits. 1 It is not neces- sary to review the arguments, already given at length, ad- vanced by the two nations.
We find the communications of De Onis to the secre- tary of state at this time, teeming with complaints against the unjust rulings of the American prize courts and the armament of vessels in our ports - filibustering expeditions. The "Fairy," the "Romp." the "Chasseur" and the "Comet" - the same vessel often sailing under different names - were frequently mentioned as offenders. One vessel in par- ticular, the "Caledonia," was being fitted out by a Xavier Mina, at Baltimore, to assist the Mexican insurgents. Her cargo consisted of twenty-five hundred muskets, fifty pair of pistols, two cases of swords and cutlasses, one hundred saddles, bridles and complete equipment for one hundred cavalry, a quantity of cavalry uniforms, barrels of powder, nine eight-pounders, a printing press for striking off procla-
1. Vol. II, Foreign Legations, p. 142, Monroe to Chevalier de Onis, June 10, 1816.
15
--
inis gris
.
,た ..
.
。
.
-1
1
.1
317【 .0
226
The Purchase of Florida
mations, etc., and all manner of provisions. In the same connection De Onis filed charges against the officer com- manding the naval forces of the United States on the New Orleans station, for encouraging and conniving at this fili- bustering. That many of the complaints of De Onis were misrepresentations and exaggerations we can well believe, but at the same time we are forced to admit that there was good cause for his protests.
It can scarcely be denied that except for the assistance rendered, directly or indirectly through the United States, most of the Spanish American revolutions must have mis- erably failed. It is also true that many Spanish vessels fell a prey to these South American privateers within fir- ing distance of our shores - a violation of the territory of the United States. And in many instances, particularly at Baltimore, Norfolk, and New Orleans, the fitting out of these armaments was only too clearly connived at by the American customs officials. Many of the charges of De Onis were substantiated by affidavits of American citizens who had been asked to enlist for service on these vessels, being assured "that they were being fitted out for the pur- pose of fighting the Spaniards." Nor did these privateers hesitate in the most wanton manner to prostitute the flag of the United States. As an instance, we may cite the case of the "Patricia Mexicana," commanded by José Esta- fanos, manned with citizens of the United States, and cov- ered by the American flag, under which they chased and brought to the Spanish polacre, the "Santa Maria," until, having effected her capture, the insurgent flag was hoisted. An unparalleled audacity these buccaneers dis- played by such predatory acts, in trampling under foot na- · tional rights and removing themselves from the protection of international law.
The so-called "Napoleon Propaganda" in the late sum- mer of 1817 aroused alike the French and Spanish ambas-
- ----
٠٠٠
٢٠
0.
٦٠٠٠١
-
م
٠٠١٤: ٤٠٠
227
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations
sadors. This was a plot, it seems, on the part of certain peo- ple who had emigrated to this country from Europe - ostensibly to settle western lands - to seduce the western inhabitants and organize, under color of forming a colony, an expedition to invade Mexico and there proclaim Joseph Bonaparte. The plot was supported by the very riches of which Joseph had plundered Spain. This matter was laid before the secretary of state by the French minister but, like many of the wild schemes so prevalent in that day and region, it seems to have rapidly vanished into thin air or to have died in the imaginations of those adventurous empire builders in whose minds alone it may have had its only existence.
We now come to treat of one of the most audacious and surprising incidents of American history.
The treaty of Fort Jackson, which terminated the Creek war of 1814, ceded to the United States several million acres of Indian land purposely selected so as to separate the In- dian settlements of Georgia and Alabama - an arrange- ment which it was expected would insure peace and order in that section. But, unfortunately for these hopes, many of the Creeks, still unsubdued and refusing to recognize the treaty, had fled to Florida and joined the Seminole Indians under their chief Boleck, or more popularly "Billy Bowlegs." Here as the allies of Great Britain, and relying upon the promises of that nation, they fully expected the restoration of their lands upon the conclusion of peace between England and the United States.
In this contention they were supported by a former British officer and adventurer, Colonel Edward Nicholls, who, claiming to be "on his Majesty's service," concluded an offensive and defensive alliance between England and the Seminoles, rebuilt an old fort on the Appalachicola some fif- teen miles from its mouth, supplied it with arms, made a de- mand on Colonel Hawkins for the evacuation of the Creek
----
٢٠٠٠
١٠٠٠٠
٢
٠٠٢٠١١
أو تجويف
٠ ٠٠
F.
··
٠٠٠
228
The Purchase of Florida
lands under the ninth article of our treaty with England, and requested the arrest of certain men charged with murder. Early in the summer of 1815 Nicholls with his troops, the Indian prophet Francis, and many of the leading Creeks, departed for London, leaving in the fort some 750 barrels of cannon powder, 2,500 muskets, casks of gunpowder, and many hundred carbines, pistols, swords and various accou- trements. These English officers, not under direct respon- sibility, and operating on foreign territory, acted with much arbitrary self will, seizing the opportunity to gratify their personal malice without being held to strict account. It is impossible to understand many of their actions consistently with any theory and it is certain that England would not have sanctioned much that was done in her name.
Besides the refugee Creeks there were in Florida at that time, many runaway slaves - probably a thousand or more - who had escaped from their Georgia owners. They had adopted the manner of life of the redskins. They were commanded by chiefs and had farms and grazing lands stretching fifty miles either way along the Appalachicola from the British post. After the departure of Nicholls and his followers these negroes seized the British post and it was henceforth known as the "Negro Fort." The blacks rapidly degenerated into an army of outlaws and plunderers. The Georgia frontier was especially the scene of their ef- forts. They harried the country, drove off cattle, freed slaves, rescued criminals, murdered those who resisted, fired upon boats passing up and down the river and became the terror of the region. General Jackson was directed by the secretary of war to demand of the Spanish governor of Pensacola the suppression of this nuisance. 1 Jackson promptly complied with the orders and intimated at the
1. Crawford to Jackson, March 15, 1816, State Papers, 2nd Ses- sion, 15th Congress, No. 122, p. 5.
٤٠٠
-
1
٦٢:١
١٠٠٠١:
٢٠٠
٠
٠٠٠
.101.8
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations 229
same time that if Spain did not destroy the fort and break up the outlaws, the United States would. 1
General Edmund Gaines had been instructed to take possession of the lands secured under the Fort Jackson treaty, build forts and block-houses and furnish suitable and sufficient protection for the surveyors engaged in run- ning the township and section lines. Colonel Clinch was deputed to undertake these duties. As Clinch moved down the Chattahoochee, General Gaines, fearing danger from the Negro Fort, asked and secured authority from General Jackson to build a fort on the Appalachicola, near the boundary, so as to effectively overawe the hostile negroes. 2 Jackson gave this permission to Gaines in no uncertain terms: "The growing hostility of the Indians," he said, "must be checked by prompt and energetic measures. Half peace and half war is a state of things which must not ex- ist. I have no doubt that this fort has been established by some villains for the purpose of murder, rapine, and plun- der, and that it ought to be blown up regardless of the ground it stands on. If you have come to the same con- clusion destroy it and restore the stolen negroes to their rightful owners." 3
Gaines immediately set about building the fort, after- wards called Fort Scott, near the junction of the Flint, Chattahoochee and Appalachicola rivers. Owing to the cost and hazards of land transportation he decided to bring his supplies from New Orleans by water. This of course necessitated passing the Negro Fort. Fearful of an attack at this point, Gaines requested Daniel Patterson, commander of the New Orleans station, to provide a convoy. 4 Jairus
1. Jackson to the Governor of Pensacola, State Papers, 2nd Ses- sion, 15th Congress, No. 122, p. S.
2. Gaines to Jackson, March 20, 1816, ibid., pp. 14, 15.
3. Jackson to Gaines, April 8, 1816.
4. Gaines to Patterson, May 22, 1816. State Papers, 2nd Session,
15th Congress, No. 122, pp. 118, 119.
.
1
أو
( ١٠٢٠١)؟
(١١٢٠٠٠٠ خد ٠٫٠
٢
٠٠٣
٢٠: ٠٠١ ٤
٠٠
230
The Purchase of Florida
Loomis was accordingly ordered to rendezvous with two gunboats at Pass Christian prepared to escort up the river two transports laden with ordnance and provisions. On July 10, 1816, the fleet arrived at the mouth of the Ap- palachicola.
In the meantime, hearing that the Indians were drink- ing the war medicine, and celebrating their martial dances, and confident that the passage of the fleet would be disputed at the Negro Fort, General Gaines ordered Colonel Clinch, with sufficient troops to move down the river, take a position near the Negro Fort and raze it at the first sign of an attack. Clinch and Loomis prepared to move at the same time. During the delay a boat crew, while seeking fresh water, was attacked by the negroes and three men were killed and one made prisoner.
Floating down the river from Fort Scott, Clinch met a party of negro-hunting Seminoles who joined him, hoping to secure possession again of their fort. A negro with a white scalp at his belt was captured. From him was learned the attack on the boat crew. Clinch now determined on his course, pushed forward and invested the fort. A de- mand for its surrender was answered by the hoisting of a red flag and the English Union Jack with a defiant dis- charge of cannon. Loomis, in response to the request of Clinch, came up with his boats and on the morning of July 27 opened fire. The ramparts were strong enough to with- stand unscathed the light guns of the vessels. It was then determined to burn the fort. After securing the range, a ball, red hot from the cook's galley, was sent sputtering over the wall into the magazine. The scene that followed defies description and the mind must take the place of the pen. There is no imagination so torpid as not to be able to con- ceive at once all the frightful colorings of the picture. Seven hundred barrels of gunpowder tore a vast hole in the ground, and hurled the wretched, screaming, mangled
---
-
C
١٠٠١
٦٠٠٠ .
٥٠٠
1.
1
!
231
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations
victims through the air. 1 The scene was of hell in all its fury. The tortures were of the damned. Some two hun- dred and seventy men, women, and children were instantly killed, while of the sixty or more taken alive the greater number soon found death a welcome relief from their suf- ferings. Garçon, the leader, and a Choctaw chief, taken alive, were consigned to the cruel tortures of the infuriated Seminoles.
As the curtain fell on this awful scene, peace and quiet along the frontier were secured, temporarily at least. The Seminoles were duly impressed with the strength of the federal power and the awful visitation upon the enemies of the United States which they had witnessed. With peace seemingly assured, and the prospect of an early acqui- sition of the province of Florida by the United States, many of the more prominent men of Tennessee started a wild speculation in Pensacola property. But the Seminole In- dians could not forget the wrongs they had suffered at the hands of the whites and awaited but a new provocation and an able leader to induce them to take the war-path and show that quiet is not pacification, nor is desolation peace.
The story now shifts to the east and for the next act the curtain rises upon Amelia Island. We need no effort of the mental faculties to realize the condition into which that island had fallen since the withdrawal of the American troops, who had earlier taken the place in conjunction with the so-called East Florida "patriots." We have further seen that this was essentially an era and com- munity of filibustering and privateering. The expedition of General Miranda who had sailed from New York to Carta- gena in 1806 was probably the first. His example was per- sistently followed. Amelia Island, from its location and its utter freedom from all law or recognized authority, was an
1. Jairus Loomis to Daniel Patterson, Aug. 13, 1816, State Papers, 2nd Session, 15th Congress, No. 119, pp. 15, 16.
-
--
-30
٠٠١٠٦ ١٫٠
1
٠٠
٢٥٠
٢
232
The Purchase of Florida
admirable depot for such undertakings. The people there had become quite accustomed to adventurers of all sorts, pirates, admirals, generals, and dignitaries of every kind and description suddenly appearing to assume authority, presently to vanish silently away. The island long feasted its eyes on the prodigious galloping and curvetting of red- sashed majors, gold laced colonels and epauletted gener- als.
Since the termination of the war of 1812, a motley and miscellaneous crew it was that had congregated there - British adventurers who had followed in the wake of the English army, Irish and French refugees; Scotch enthusi- asts, Mexican and Spanish insurgents; graduates of the Baratarian school; relics and remnants of a negro squad that had served in Mexico under Aury; privateersmen, slavers, traders and all manner of scoundrels - in short the nobility of deviltry were all there. And that they included many Americans we cannot for a moment doubt when we learn that among the first acts of the filibusters was the establishment of a newspaper. One of this brand of ad- venturers who had gravitated to the South American scenes of rebellion and revolution was a Gregor MacGregor, who claimed to be a brother-in-law of General Simon Bolivar. After an unsuccessful attempt against the Spanish posses- sions in Mexico, having recruited at Baltimore an expedi- tion to "wrest the Floridas from Spain," MacGregor arrived in Fernandina harbor late in June of 1817, and within a few days captured the fort. 1
Colonel Morales, the Spanish officer in command, sailed for St. Augustine while MacGregor took possession of the lower St. Johns and established a blockade of the city. MacGregor was, like most of those leaders, a man of intel- ligence and fine appearance. In demanding the surrender of Fernandina he had addressed a communication to Mor-
1. July 14 and 21, 1817.
--
-
٢٠
٠١٠
وعية
١٥
٠٠
٤٠
٢٠
١١٠٠
٠٠٠
233
Resumption of Diplomatic Relations
ales to which he had signed himself : "Gregor MacGregor, Brigadier General of the armies of the United Provinces of . New Granada and Venezuela, and General-in-chief of that destined to emancipate the provinces of both Floridas, under the commission of the Supreme Government of Mexico, and South America, etc., etc."
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.