USA > Georgia > The history of Georgia from its earliest settlement to the present time > Part 14
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
The eastern ship-owning states were in favour of empowering Congress to enact navigation laws. The southern states dreaded any such laws, as likely to enhance the cost of transportation.
The prohibition of the' slave-trade was no new idea. The Continental Congress had long before resolved " that no slave be imported into any of the United States."
Delaware, Virginia, and Maryland, and all the more northern states, had expressly acquiesced in the prohibition. Notwithstanding this, mer- chant vessels belonging to the northern states continued to carry on the traffic elsewhere, and already, since the acknowledgment of independ- ence, some New England ships were engaged in transporting slaves from Africa into Georgia and South Carolina ; and the latter expressed them- selves determined to maintain, not the institution of slavery only, but the importation of slaves likewise.
In the midst of this conflict of interests, a
COMPROMISES. 243
bargain was struck between the commercial re- presentatives of the northern states and the dele- gates of South Carolina and Georgia, by which the unrestricted power of Congress to enact navigation laws was conceded to the northern merchants, and to the Carolina rice-planters, as an equivalent, twenty years' continuance of the slave-trade.
This was the third great compromise of the constitution. The other two were the conces- sion to the smaller states of an equal representa- tion in the senate, and to the slaveholders the counting three-fifths of the slaves in determining the ratio of representation.
After some few other amendments, offered with a view to conciliate conflicting interests, the con- stitution as reported received its final corrections and the sanction of the convention.
This sanction was not given by the members of the convention without a gloomy presentiment that its numerous imperfections would lead to the ruin of the confederacy.
Mason declared his belief that the proposed constitution would terminate in a monarchy, or a tyrannical aristocracy. Randolph, Mason, and Gerry, all expressed their dissatisfaction at the extended and indefinite powers conferred on Congress and the executive. Pinckney, and other southern members, on the contrary, ob-
1
24.4
HISTORY OF GEORGIA ..
jected to the contemptible weakness and depend- ence of the executive.
So opposite and inharmónious were the feel- ings of the members in relation to the instru- ment, the articles of which they had examined and passed clause by clause, that it required all the address of Franklin and other influential members, to gain for the new constitution unani- mous signature.
A form was proposed which might be signed without implying personal approval of the con- stitution ; it read thus : "Done by consent of the states present. In testimony whereof we have subscribed, &c." Hamilton, though opposed to the plan, urged the infinite misehief that might arise from refusing to sign it. Washington also addressed the convention in its favour. These ap- peals succeeded with some of the dissatisfied mem- bers, but Randolph, Mason, and Gerry could not be prevailed upon to subscribe their names.
The federal constitution, thus laboriously pro- duced, was laid before Congress, then sitting at New York, with a letter from its framers recom- mending its reference, for approval or rejection, to state conventions, to be called by the state legis- latures. Congress hesitated at first in comply- ing with this request ; but finally, on September 28th, 1787, a bill was passed, transmitting the document to the state legislatures, to be acted upon as the convention had suggested; and in
245
WESTERN LANDS CEDED.
the beginning of the year 1788, it was formally ratified by the state of Georgia.
During the latter part of 1787, an important territorial suit occurred between the states of 1 Georgia and South Carolina. This suit origi- nated in difficulties relative to their respective boundaries toward the sources of the Savannah, and especially as to the jurisdiction of the terri- tory west of the Alatamaha, claimed by Carolina under her charter, and by Georgia under the proclamation of 1763, which annexed to Georgia the territory between the Alatamaha and the St. Mary's. It was finally arrranged by mutual con- sent, and on the 22d of April the settlement was announced to Congress, and the suit discontinued.
Georgia, being now loudly called upon for the cession of her western claims, offered to cede all the territory west of the Chattahoochee, and between the thirty-first and thirty-second paral- lels of north latitude ; but demanded, in return, a guarantee of the remaining territory north of the thirty-second parallel. To this, Congress would not accede; nor would it accept the terri- tory offered, unless so extended as to include all the district west of the Chattahoochee. After the lapse of several years, a cession was finally obtained by purchase, and on conditions very onerous to the United States.
During the session of Congress in 1790, and in the midst of the agitation as to the public
21*
246
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
debt, the house became involved in another dis- cussion, still more exciting, in reference to sla- very and the slave-trade.
Slavery still existed in every state of the Union, except Massachusetts. In the latter state it had been abolished a few years previous ; while Pennsylvania,, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire, had introduced a system of gradual emancipation. other eight states retained their old colonial systems.
A few days after the commencement of the debate on the public debt, a petition from the yearly meeting of the Quakers of Philadelphia, seconded by another from the Quakers of New York, had been laid before the house, in which it was suggested whether, " notwithstanding seem- ing impediments, it was not in the power of Con- gress to exercise justice and mercy, which if ad- hered to, the petitioners did not doubt would produce the abolition of the slave-trade."
A still stronger petition was laid before the house the next day from the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery. It was signed by Franklin as president-one of the last public acts of his long and diversified career. He died within a few weeks afterward.
This memorial, after reasoning upon the pro- positions " that all mankind are formed by the same Almighty Being," and " that equal liberty was originally the portion, and is still the birth-
247
ABOLITION PETITIONS.
right of all men," concluded by praying Con- gress, " to step to the very verge of its power for discouraging every species of traffic in the 1
persons of our fellow men." 0
These petitions gave rise to a most exciting series of debates. Hartley called up the Quaker memorial, and moved its commitment. Tucker and Burke opposed it on the ground of unconsti- tutionality ; and the latter expressed himself certain that the commitment "would sound an alarm, and blow the trumpet of sedition through- out all the southern states." Scott defended its constitutionality, but acknowledged the in- capacity of Congress to do more than lay a tax of ten dollars upon the head of every slave im-
ported into the country. Jackson argued from Bible authority, that religion and slavery were not incompatible. Sherman could see no diffi- culty in committing the memorial, and trusted the committee would be able to bring in such a report as would satisfy both sides of the house. Baldwin regretted the introduction of petitions
upon so delicate a subject. He referred to the difficulty which the members who framed the constitution had previously experienced. He
reminded the house that the constitution had only been adopted by mutual concessions, and that any encroachment beyond its strict limits must tend to unsettle the public confidence. He concluded by arguing that, as the petition did in
1
248
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
fact pray for the abolition of the slave-trade, the house had nothing more to do with it than it would have to establish an order of nobility or a national religion.
Similar ground was taken by Smith of South Carolina. He contended that the unconstitution- ality of the object prayed for was a sufficient reason for not committing the memorial. He said further : « When we entered into a political con- nection with the other states, this property was there. It had been acquired under a former go- vernment, conformably to the laws and consti- tution ; and every attempt to deprive us of it must be in the nature of an ex post facto law, and, as such, forbidden by our political compact."
Madison, Page, and Gerry advocated the com- mitment. The former suggested that, " Though Congress were restricted by the constitution from immediately abolishing the slave-trade, yet there were a variety of ways by which they might countenance the abolition of that trafic. They might, for example, respecting the introduction of slaves into the new states to be formed out of the western territory, make regulations such as were beyond their power in relation to the old settled states ; an object which he thought well worthy of consideration."
The question being taken by yeas and nays, the reference was carried, forty-three to eleven Of these eleven, six were from Georgia and Caro
249
DISCUSSION ON SLAVERY.
lina, being all the members present from those two states; two were from Virginia, two from Maryland, and one from New York.
The special committee to whom the memorial was referred consisted of one member from each of the following states : New Hampshire, Massa- chusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. They reported, after a month's delay, the following resolutions :
1st. That the general government was ex- pressly restrained until the year 1808, from pro- hibiting the importation of slaves.
2d. That by a fair construction of the consti- tution, Congress was equally restrained from interfering to emancipate slaves within the states.
3d. That Congress had no power to interfere in the internal regulation of particular states relative to the physical or moral well-being of slaves, or to the seizure, transportation, and sale of free negroes ; but entertained the fullest con- fidence in the wisdom and humanity of the state legislatures, that, from time to time, they would revise their laws, and promote these and all other measures tending to the happiness of the slaves.
4th. That Congress had authority to levy a tax of ten dollars upon every person imported under the special permission of any of the states.
5th. That Congress had power to interdict, or to regulate the African slave-trade so far as it
250
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
might be carried on by citizens of the United States for the supply of foreign countries.
6th. That Congress had a right to prohibit foreigners from fitting out vessels in the United States, to be employed in the supply of foreign countries with slaves from Africa.
The seventh, and last, expressed an intention on the part of Congress to exercise their au- thority to its full extent to promote the humane objects aimed at in the memorial.
Such was the report of the committee, upon which there immediately ensued a discussion of six days' duration, and of the most angry and violent character.
The final conclusions to which Congress came upon this most delicate subject are embodied in the following resolutions, which were carried by a vote of twenty-nine to twenty-five.
" That the migration 'or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, cannot be prohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808.
" That Congress have no authority to inter- fere in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treat- ment of them in any of the. states, it remaining with the several states alone to provide any regu- lations therein which humanity and true policy require.
" That Congress have authority to restrain the citizens of the United States from carrying on
251
RESOLUTIONS ON SLAVERY. €
the African slave-trade for the purpose of sup- plying foreigners with slaves, and of providing by proper regulations for the humane treatment, during their passage, of slaves imported by the said citizens into the said states admitting such importation.
" That Congress have also authority to pro- hibit foreigners from fitting out vessels in any port of the United States for transporting per- sons from Africa to any foreign port."
A clear view of this remarkable discussion, together with the results arrived at by the Con- gress of 1790, has become of singular importance at this time from the many attempts which have been subsequently made, and are yet apparently in contemplation, in relation to this vexed ques- tion of slavery.
The whole course of the debate upon this ques- tion is instructive, and shows that the arguments which have been used in later days are by no means novel, nor have they acquired any new force beyond those which were presented at the period when the first memorial was fully and ably discussed, and the suggestions growing out of it so pointedly disposed of.
252
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
CHAPTER XXII. -
Recapitulation of the various treaties made between Georgia and the Indians-Oglethorpe's treaty-Treaty of Augusta- Florida restored to the Spaniards-Frontier war commenced -Treaty of Galphinton-Treaty of Shoulderbone-Conti- nuation of Indian hostilities-Washington appoints commis- sioners to treat with McGillivray-Romantic history of the latter-Conference at Rock Landing-Failure of negotiations -Colonel Willett sent on a secret mission-Interview with McGillivray-Indian council at Ositchy-Speech of the Hol- lowing King-McGillivray departs for New York-His reception-Treaty of New York-Its reception by Georgia -Dissatisfaction of the Creeks-Bowles the freebooter- McGillivray in Florida-Capture of Bowles.
No sooner was the independence of the United States acknowledged by Great Britain, than Geor- gia began to increase both in wealth and popula- tion. She had, however, many sources of dis- quietude, some of which were of an alarming character. To enable the reader the better to understand what follows, it will be necessary to recapitulate briefly, the previous history of the negotiations between Georgia and the Creeks and Cherokees.
The first boundaries of the province, as con- ceded to Oglethorpe by treaty, were confined to a narrow strip of country lying between the Sa- vannah and Ogechee rivers. By the subsequent
-
253
INDIAN TREATIES.
treaty of 1773, these boundaries were extended north of the original lines, and beyond Broad River.
By another treaty, concluded at Augusta on the 31st of May, 1783, the Cherokee delegates ceded to Georgia the country upon the western side of Tugalo, including the head waters of the Oconee. To this cession, a few Creeks subscribed their names on the 1st of November of the same year. A very large majority of the nation, who had always been adverse to the sale of their lands, denounced the act in the strongest terms, and expressed a resolution to maintain their right to the soil.
As Georgia persisted in asserting her sove- reignty over the territory thus acquired, a hostile feeling was, naturally enough, engendered among the Indians of those towns whose delegates were not present at Augusta when the treaty was signed.
In addition to this fruitful source of future difficulty, by an arrangement entered into be- tween Great Britain and Spain, in the early part of the year 1783, the former restored to the latter her old province of Florida; and by this means, Georgia was again made to suffer many annoy- ances at the hands of her ancient neighbour and enemy.
In 1785, the dissatisfaction between the Creeks and Georgians being fomented by the artifices of
22
254
HISTORY OF GEORGIA. -
the Spaniards, a border war commenced, which the provisional government, then struggling through the last stages of the Revolutionary war, sought to close peacefully by sending commissioners to treat with the Creeks and Cherokees for the pur- chase of their lands. The commissioners thus appointed invited delegates from the Indian towns to meet them at Galphinton; but as only the chiefs from two towns, with fifty warriors, at- tended, the object of the mission was not attained, and the commissioners returned home.
They had no sooner left the appointed place of rendezvous, than three commissioners-whoin Georgia, tenacious of her rights, had despatched thither to protest against any proceedings on the part of the provisional government-con- cluded a treaty with the Creeks then present, which confirmed not only the treaty of 1783, but extended the territorial limits of Georgia, from the junction of the Oconee and Ocmulgee to the St. Mary's River.
The treaty thus made was, like its predecessor, indignantly spurned by the chiefs of ninety-eight towns ; who denied the right of any two of their country to make a cession of land which could only be valid by consent of the whole nation as joint proprietors in common.
Numerous collisions between the Georgians and the Indians succeeded. At length, a meeting for the purpose of settling existing differences was
255
INDIAN TROUBLES.
agreed upon, and in October, 1786, commission- ers on the part of Georgia met a delegation of Creek chiefs and warriors, at a place called Shoulderbone, on the Oconee.
Here another treaty was entered into, which the Creeks subsequently asserted was wrung from them by the unexpected presence of a large body of armed men professing hostile intentions.
This charge the authorities of Georgia most emphatically denied. They contended that all the grants were procured fairly and honourably, and without either force or coercion; that the upper Creeks, who never occupied the Oconee lands, had no right to a voice in the matter. They admitted that armed troops were present at the treaty of Shoulderbone,-not, however, to provoke hostilities, but to suppress them if they arose.
Incursions and retaliations of course continued. Congress several times sought to interpose, but the Creeks would listen to no overtures until the Georgians were first removed from the Oconee lands. 1
In an earnest endeavour to put an end to this state of things, General Washington-who was now president-appointed four commission- ers to treat with the celebrated Creek chief, Alex- ander McGillivray. This extraordinary man was the son of Lachlan McGillivray, an enterprising Scotsman of good family, trading among the In-
256
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
dians, and of Sehoy Marchand, a beautiful half- breed Creek girl, whose mother was of the tribe of the Wind, the most powerful and influential family in the Creek nation. The advantages in the way of commercial facilities which this mar- riage gave to the elder McGillivray, enabled him to rapidly accumulate a large fortune. Besides plantations and negroes upon the Savannah River, Lachlan McGillivray soon became the owner of stores filled with Indian merchandise, in the towns of Savannah and Augusta.
When his son Alexander had reached the age of fourteen years, he withdrew him, with the con- sent of his mother, from the Creek nation, in the midst of which he had hitherto resided, and placed him in a school at Charleston; from whence, on the completion of his studies, he was transferred to a counting-room in Savannah. But a mercan- tile life was soon discovered to be unfitted for a youth of Alexander McGillivray's studious and retiring disposition ; and he was sent back to Charleston, to acquire, under the teaching of a clergyman of that city, a knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages.
As he grew up to manhood, the remembrance of his youthful forest haunts ; the sports and games of the tribe to which he was allied by blood; the faces of the dusky warriors, who regarded him as their future chief ; and the mother and sister who still resided on the banks of the Coosa, proved
257.
ALEXANDER MCGILLIVRAY.
stronger than the ties which civilized society had thrown around him. With the old wild-woods feeling stirring his heart, he turned his back upon the settlements of the whites, and rejoined the warriors who had cherished his childish years in the midst of their sylvan recesses.
His return was warmly welcomed. Crafty, sagacious, enterprising, and well educated, he was gradually enabled so to extend his influence over the Creek and Cherokee nations, that in a few years he was invested with the supreme authority, to which he was entitled by his birth, according to the Indian custom.
When the Revolutionary war broke out, Alex- ander McGillivray received the rank and pay of a colonel in the British service, and during the whole of that eventful period remained, like his father, a firm and devoted loyalist ; often acting in concert with McGirth and his Florida rangers, in harassing the frontiers of Georgia.
As the war drew to a close, the British were compelled to evacuate Savannah, taking with them many active and influential loyalists, among whom was Lachlan McGillivray. Having suc- ceeded in getting together a considerable portion of his wealth, the elder McGillivray returned to his own country, entertaining the hope that in his absence his wife and family, then living in the Creek nation, might be suffered to take peaceable possession of the plantations and ne-
22*
258
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
groes he had abandoned. The confiscation of the property of fugitive loyalists soon after, not only frustrated the hopes of McGillivray, but com- pelled his wife and daughters to remain at their old home on the Coosa.
Colonel McGillivray, the son,-who had some time before this become the principal chief of the Creek and Cherokee nations,-finding himself thus deprived, at one blow, of British protection and the estates previously owned by his father, threw himself into the arms of Spain, with whose authorities in Florida he formed, on behalf of his nation, a treaty of alliance.
The chief reasons which induced him to court this alliance arose from his apprehensions of the Americans, who, as he contended, had confiscated his estates, banished his father, threatened him with death, and were constantly encroaching upon the Creek soil. The Spaniards wanted no lands, desired only his friendship, and had not en- croached upon him or his people. Besides, they were the first to offer him promotion and commer- cial advantages. When he had signed the treaty, they made him a Spanish commissary, with the rank and pay of a colonel.
The commissioners appointed by Washington, reached Rock Landing on the Oconee about the middle of September, 1789, where they found McGillivray, who, at the head of two thousand warriors, had been encamped on the eastern bank
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CREEKS. 259
of the river for more than a week. The commis- sioners pitched their camp on the western bank.
For several days the prospect of attaining the object the commissioners had in view seemed pe- culiarly favourable. They had several private conferences with McGillivray, by whom they were received with great courtesy and politeness. The chiefs, also, whom they visited previous to open- ing more formal negotiations, appeared to be animated with the most friendly spirit. All the indications promised to result in a treaty satisfac- tory to both parties.
On the 24th, negotiations were commenced, and a copy of the proposed treaty read to the Indians. It stipulated that the boundaries de- fined by the former treaties entered into between the Creeks and Georgians should remain un- changed ; that the United States would guarantee the territory west of those boundaries to the Creeks for ever ; that a free trade should be es- tablished with the Indians from ports upon the Alatamaha, through which they could import and export, upon the same terms as the citizens of the United States ; and that all negroes, horses, goods, and American citizens taken by the In- dians, should be restored.
It is a matter of surprise to this day, how in- telligent commissioners could have supposed that a treaty, which took so much from the Indians, and granted so little in return, would be accept-
-
260
HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
able either to McGillivray or to the chieftains under his control.
Andrew Pickens did indeed remonstrate. He well knew that the lands on the Oconee, which the Georgians were already cultivating, would never be suffered to remain peaceably in the possession of the latter, unless some compensation was made to the Indians.
The result justified his sagacity. After the commissioners had recrossed the river to their own camp, McGillivray and his chiefs met in grand council. The next morning the commis- sioners were informed by a letter from McGilli- vray, that the terms which had been proposed were unsatisfactory, and that the Indians had resolved to break up their camp and return home.
The commissioners, startled by so abrupt a conclusion to their negotiations, now saw at once the whole folly of their course. They sought every means to induce McGillivray to remain, and begged him to state his grounds of objection to the draft of the treaty. But he broke up his encampment, and falling back upon the Ockmul- gee, wrote from thence a letter to the commis- sioners, in which he stated that finding a restitu- tion of territory and hunting-grounds was not to be the basis of a treaty between them, he had resolved to return to the nation and defer all further treaty until the next spring.
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.