USA > Louisiana > Louisiana; comprising sketches of counties, towns, events, institutions, and persons, Volume I > Part 70
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 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79
Speaking of the Siouan or Dakotan linguistic stock, Brinton says: "The western water-shed of the Mississippi river was largely in the possession of the Dakota or Sioux stock. Its various tribes extended in an unbroken line from the Arkansas river on the south to the Saskatchewan on the north, populating the whole of the Missouri valley as far up as the Yellowstone. Their principal tribes in the south were the Quapaws, Kansas and Osages; in the central region the Poncas, Omahas and Mandans; to the north were the Sioux, Assiniboins and Crows; while about Green Bay on Lake Michigan lived the Winnebagos. In the extreme south, almost on the gulf coast of Louisiana, lived some small bands of Dakotas, known as Biloxis, Opelousas, Pascagoulas, etc. They were long supposed to speak an independent tongue, and only of late "years has their proper position been defined." (The American Race. pp. 98-99). During the colonial period the Lonis- iana colony maintained friendly trade relations with a number of important Siouan tribes, particularly the Osage, Missouri, Kansa, Omalia, and Oto.
The Tonika (Tunica) tribe of Indians, when the French first arrived in Louisiana. had some of their settlements on the Yazoo river. Another village was located on the Mississippi a few miles
511
LOUISIANA
below the mouth of Red river, and one was in Tunica county. Miss., which takes its name from the tribe. Early French annals make frequent mention of this tribe. They were at enmity with - the Chickasaws and in 1706 were forced to seek an asylum farther south among the Bayagoulas and Houmas. They poorly repaid this hospitality soon after by rising against their protectors and nearly exterminating them. The tribe was always much attached to the French, and it was a detachment of these Indians which ambushed Maj. Loftus at Davion's bluff on the Missisippi in 1764, when that officer with some 400 troops sought to ascend the Mis- sissippi to take possession of the Illinois post. Says Halbert : "In 1817, the entire Tunica tribe emigrated to Louisiana, one sec- tion now living near Marksville, and another near Lake Charles City. Their language has no affinity with any other Indian tongue. Their tribal name, Tunica, signifies in their language 'the people.'"
The French also frequently refer to a number of small tribes living on the Yazoo river in colonial times. Nothing is known concerning the language of these tribes, except that it was quite distinct from the Choctaw. Of these tribes the Yazoos (Yasous) lived nearest the mouth. Halbert inclines to the belief that the word Yazoo signifies "leaf," and that it is a U'chee word, as Yazoo has no significance in the Choctaw tongue and there is evidence that the Uchce lived in Mississippi in prehistoric times. The Yazoos followed the example of the Natchez and murdered the French in their midst early in 1730. In the latter part of the 18th century the tribe was living in about 100 cabins. At this time other small tribes on the Yazoo were as follows: The Ofogoulas, or "dog people," living in some 60 cabins; the Coroas, living in also neighbors of the Tapouchas, but nothing is known of their number. These tribes were incorporated with the Chickasaw nation in 1836, as was the once important tribe of the Chakchuma, which spoke the Choctaw language, and in their later days lived on the Yazoo, between the Chickasaws and Choctaws. It is recorded that 40 cabins; and the Tapouchas, living in 20. The Ibetoupas were the Ibetoupa, Chakchuma and Tapoucha tribes were united in one village on the upper Yazoo by 1798.
Natchez .- This famous tribe of Indians is now practically extinct, but is historically important, not so much on account of its num- - bers or of any peculiarity attaching to its manners and customs, but because of the dangerous uprising of the tribe against the French in 1729, which placed the whole colony in jeopardy and gave rise to a long series of expensive campaigns against this tribe and their allies, the Chickasaws. (See Indian Wars and Natchez Massacre.) Natchez tradition asserts that they were once a very numerous people numbering many thousands of war- riors, but history. discloses them as a comparatively small tribe occupying a region of moderate extent on the Mississippi in the near vicinity of the present city of Natchez. Their 4 or 5 villages lay along St. Catharine's creek. a short distance back from the river. Father Charlevoix visited the tribe in 1721 and states that
512
LOUISIANA
they did not differ from the other Indians of Louisiana or Canada in external appearance. He estimated the number of their warriors at 2,000, but probably five or six hundred would be nearer the mark, judging from the details of their wars with the French a few years later. The tribe spoke a language which had no etymological affin- ity with any other. Gayarre has given the world an excellent account of the tribe in his History of Louisiana to which the reader . is referred. Says Gallatin: "It is among the Natchez alone that we find, connected together, a highly privileged class, a despotic government, and something like a regular form of religious wor- ship. They were divided into four classes or clans, on the same principle and under the same regulations as those of the other southern tribes. They worshipped the sun, from whom the sov- ereign and the privileged classes pretended to be descended, and they preserved a perpetual sacred fire in an edifice devoted to that purpose. The hereditary dignity of chief, or Great Sun, descended as usual by the female line, and he as well as all the other men- bers of his clan, whether male or female, could marry only persons of an inferior clan. Hence the barbarous custom of sacrificing at their funerals the consorts of the Great Sun and of his mother. Her influence was powerful, and his authority apparently despotic, though checked by her and by some select counsellors of his own clan." The plebeian or common people among the Natchez were called "Stinkards" (miche-quipy), and were in a high degree sub- missive to the suns, nobles and men of rank, constituting the membership of the higher clans. This element also spoke a com- mon or vulgar dialect of their own, which had no affinity with that spoken by the nobles and by the women. The dwelling or hut of the Great Sun stood near the center of the main village on an arti- ficial mound or platform. This practice of erecting their dwellings on artificially elevated sites was quite common among the Missis- sippi valley Indians, and throughout the south generally. Their temples were likewise so disposed. Says the early chronicler Le Page du Pratz, who lived for 8 years near the Natchez: "As I was an intimate friend of the sovereign of the Natchez he showed me their temple, which is about 30 feet square, and stands on an artificial mound about 8 feet high, by the side of a small river." Gayarre in his account of the Natchez speaks in high terms of their extensive knowledge of the healing art, and says: "It cer- tainly speaks much in favor of their powers of observation. of investigation, and of discrimination, that they should have arrived at discovering more than three hundred medical plants, of which the king's commissary, De la Chaise, sent a collection to France with a memoir written on the subject by Le Page du Pratz." The Taensa tribe of Indians was a branch of the Natchez, but had their habitat on the west side of the Mississippi.
Indian Treaties .- Throughout the colonial period of Louisiana , the French, Spanish and English found it both necessary and wise to enter into more or less formal agreements with the several Indian tribes and nations that surrounded them. In the very in-
1
.
573
LOUISIANA
fancy of the colony, Bienville made a point of entering into treaty relations with the tribes he visited, and with the various deputa- tions of chiefs and warriors who came to visit the settlements at Mobile and Biloxi. His policy was followed by all his successors in office, and peace and the lasting friendship of many of the tribes were thus secured. The French were particularly successful in gaining and holding the good will of the Indians of French Lonisi- ana, except in the case of the Natchez, Chickasaws, and a few of the minor tribes. Indeed, so attached to the French were many of these lesser tribes that, when they witnessed the withdrawal of the French flag at the beginning of the Spanish domination, they abandoned their ancient homes and lands and came to New Orleans. They were commended for their fidelity and were permitted to settle on new lands west of the Mississippi. Even a number of the great Choctaw nation adopted this course, being unwilling to trans- fer their allegiance to the English government at Pensacola. While France, Spain and England were contending for the mastery of the Mississippi valley in the last half of the 18th century, the good will of the Indians was sought by all those nations, and the various tribes became important pawns in the great game of war and strategy, one tribe being played off against another. The chief objects of most of the early treaties were the establishment of tribal boundaries, the promotion of trade relations, furnishing of supplies, to fix terms of peace, questions of allegiance, etc., with an occasional cession of land.
During the period of the French and Spanish dominations in Louisiana, when the white settlements were few in number and widely scattered, the pressure of the white population upon the domain of the natives was little felt, and the question of land acqui- sition was one of slight importance. As a rule, both the French and Spanish were content to leave the Indians where they found them, the treaties with the various tribes having in view the establishment of favorable trade relations and the formation of offensive or de- fensive alliances, rather than the acquisition of any considerable tracts of Indian lands. Indeed, many of the early treaties formally guaranteed to the Indians the peaceful enjoyment and occupancy of their hunting grounds. It was the established policy of the British government, after the peace of 1763, to prohibit the whites from settling on Indian lands. After the Revolution, the same course was pursued by the United States for several years, during which it was the uniform policy of the Federal government to treat . the tribes as quasi-nationalities, devoid of sovereignty but having an absolute right to the soil and its usufruct, with power to cede this right, to make peace and to regulate the boundaries of the districts ceded and the hunting-grounds retained. Under this policy numerons Indian treaties were concluded, the majority of which, in conformity with the paternal attitude assumed by the government toward the tribes, provided for a system of annuities whereby the Indians were given the means of subsistence in return
·
.
514
LOUISIANA
for the relinquishment of their lands, and they were encouraged to adopt civilized modes of life.
The United States had scarcely acquired the province of Louisi- ana when steps were taken looking to a removal of some of the tribes east of the Mississippi to lands west of the river. The act of 1804, which divided the province into two territories, also pro- vided for the removal of such Indians as could be induced to make the change. The plan was to give, acre for acre, lands beyond the Mississippi in exchange for their old domain on the east side. The policy met with stubborn resistance from most of the tribes, but the government gradually effected its purpose, and this period wit- nessed the conclusion of most of the important treaties of cession and removal. As the Indians ceded their lands east of the river for purposes of settlement and their hunting grounds there became more restricted in area, they were forced to accept the terms offered by the government and remove to other lands provided for them in the West. Some of the smaller tribes early complied with the government's request and were guided to their homes in their new domain.
Unfortunately, the law of 1804 contained no provision for the expenses incident to carrying out the treaties and effecting the removal of those tribes which ceded their lands east of the Missis- sippi. After 1816 this defect was remedied by a law which author- ized the president of the United States "to negotiate treaties with the Indian tribes, which treaties shall have for their object an exchange of territory owned by any tribe residing east of the Mis- sissippi for other lands west of that river," and made an appro- priation to carry out the provisions of the act. Numerous treaties immediately followed. Before this however, President Jefferson, in an open letter of Jan. 9, 1809, granted to such of the Cherokees as might desire to do so, permission to remove to the Arkansas river, in what is now the State of Oklahoma. Several small bands of the Cherokees, Choctaws, Chickasaws, and other tribes accepted the offer. In 1816 the western boundary of the territories of Mis- souri and Arkansas were established, beyond which the soil was reserved for the use of the Indians, and the following year a large body of Cherokees formally made the exchange, receiving a large tract of land between the White and Arkansas rivers.
The plan of concentrating the Indian tribes west of the Missis- sippi, on lands especially appropriated to their use, was strongly urged by President Monroe in his message of Jan. 25, 1825. but it remained for President Jackson to put the plan in practical opera- tion. Jackson, in his message of 1829. emphasized the importance of the movement, and in his message of Dec. 4, 1830, said: "Two important tribes, the Chickasaws and Choctaws, have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress. and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining , tribes also to seek the same advantages." In his message of 1:31 he stated: "At the last session of Congress I had the happiness to announce that the Chickasaws and Choctaws had accepted the
575
LOUISIANA
generous offer of the government and agreed to remove beyond the Mississippi river, by which the whole State of Mississippi and the western part of Alabama will be freed from Indian occupancy and opened to a civilized population. The treaties with these tribes are in course of execution, and their removal, it is hoped, will be completed in the course of 1832."
The vast western territory, designed for the exclusive occupancy of the Indians, was defined by the Congressional act of May 20. 1834, and was estimated to contain over 132,000,000 acres, including the region bounded on the east by the Arkansas and Missouri rivers, on the north by the Platte, and on the west and south by the Mexican possessions, except that district in Missouri later known as the "Platte Purchase." The report of the house committee in May, 1834, says: "This territory is to be dedicated to the use of the Indian tribes forever by a guaranty, the most sacred known among civilized communities-the faith of the nation." The com- mitte admitted that the guaranties of the past had not always been faithfully observed, but excused the action of the government in not redeeming them on the grounds that they should not have been given, and concluded the report by saying: "Our inability to per- form our treaty guaranties arose from the conflicts between the rights of the states and the United States. Nor is it surprising that questions arising out of such a conflict, which have bewildered wiser heads, should not be readily comprehended or appreciated by the unlettered Indians."
According to government reports the following Indians had been removed to the West by the close of the year 1837: Chickasaws, 549; Chippewas, Ottawas and Pottawatomies, 2,244; Choctaws, 15,000; Creeks, 20,437 ; Quapaws, 476; Seminoles, 407: Apalachi- colas, 265; Cherokees, 7,911: Kickapoos, 588; Delawares, 826; Shawanese, 1,272, Ottawas, 374; Weas, 222; Piankeshaws, 162; Peorias and Kaskaskias, 132; Senecas and Shawanese, 462; a total of 51,327. The policy of removal was firmly adhered to by the government, and the migration of the Indians continued until the white man was left in undisputed possession of all the country east of the Mississippi.
In 1871 a radical change took place in the attitude of the govern- ment toward its Indian wards. On March 3 of that year Congress declared " that hereafter no Indian nation or tribe within the terri- tory of the United States shall be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe or power, with whom the United States may contract by treaty." This marked the end of the treaty system and the policy adhered to for almost a century was overthrown. The new order of affairs involved the solution of many new and difficult problems. In theory there had been over 65 semi-inde- pendent nations within the borders of the United States, but now all was changed. The Indian commissioners declared that "the bounty of the government has pauperized them (the Indians), and in some cases has tended to brutalize more, than to civilize." Cash annuities were said to be wrong in principle, as the money went in
.
576
LOUISIANA
advance to greedy white sharpers. The law of 1871 and the sub- sequent acts calling for a complete survey of all the Indian reser- vations and the creation of various commissions, foreshadowed the Indian Crimes act of 1885 and the general allotment act of Feb., 1887. The latter was one of the most important steps ever taken in Indian legislation, and will eventually lead to the allotment in severalty of all Indian lands. Following is an epitome of Indian treaties that have directly or indirectly affected Louisiana :
Treaty of Mobile, 1765 .- This treaty was concluded by the Brit- ish government of the province of West Florida, with a great count- cil of the Choctaws, March 26, 1765, and resulted in the cession by that nation of a region on the Moblie river and its tributaries and the gulf coast south of about the line of 31º north latitude, between Mobile bay and the most western point to which the Choctaws had control, practically to the Mississippi river. The treaty pro- vided: "The boundary to be settled by a line extended from Grosse point, in the island of Mount Louis, by the course of the western coast of Mobile bay, to the mouth of the eastern branch of the Tombecbee river, and north by the course of said river to the con- fluence of Alibamont and Tombecbee rivers to the mouth of Chickianoce river, and from the confluence of Chickianoce and Alibamont rivers a straight line to the confluence of Bance and Tombechee rivers; thence by a line along the western bank of Bance river till its confluence with the Tallatukpe river; from thence by a straight line to the Tombecbee river opposite to Atcha- likpe (Hatchatigbee bluff) ; and from Atchalikpe by a straight line to the most northerly part of Buckatanne river, and down the course of Buckatanne river to its confluence with the river Pasca- goula, and down by the course of the river Pascagoula, within twelve leagues of the sea coast ; and thence, by a due west line, as far as the Choctaw nation have a right to grant. * * And none of his majesty's white subjects shall be permitted to settle on the Tombecbee river to the northward of the rivulet called Centebonck (Sentabogue or Snake creek)."
Treaty of Mobile, 1784 .- On June 22, 1784, a great body of Indians-Choctaws. Chickasaws, Alibamons and smaller tribes- assembled at Mobile in response to the Spanish invitation, and the treaties there concluded amounted to taking under Spanish pro- tection and guarantee the territorial claims of the Indian nations. These treaties were made at the suggestion of Alexander McGil- livray, chief of the Tallapoosas, and that of the British trading house of Panton, Leslie & Co. McGillivray gave as a reason for suggesting the treaty the probability of the formation of a new and independent American government by the frontier settlers of the Mississippi valley, who would invade the Spanish domain at the earliest opportunity. He represented to Gov. Miro that there was danger of an Indian alliance with that movement, and he proposed , to throw the Indian strength to Spain in return for commercial advantages and privileges for his people. In terms this treaty was identical with the treaty made about the same time with the Talla-
.
577
LOUISIANA
poosas (Creeks) and Cherokees, through McGillivray, at Pensacola, by Gov. O'Neill.
The Indians promised to "maintain an inviolable peace and fidelity" with Spain and among themselves. "We undertake to expose for the royal service of his Catholic majesty our lives and fortunes ; and we promise to obey the sovereign orders which, in a case of necessity, shall be communicated to us by the captain- general of the provinces of Louisiana and Florida, and in his name by the respective governor or particular commander of said prov- inces." They further agreed to turn over to the Spanish authorities any enemies that might enter their nation, and to admit among themselves no white person without a Spanish passport. They renounced "forever the practice of taking scalps or making slaves of the whites," and promised humane treatment of white prisoners, with the right of exchange. All white prisoners, subjects of the United States, were to be delivered to the governor-general. Other provisions were made to prevent the common crimes of the frontier.
The Spanish were represented by Don Estevan Miro, governor of Louisiana, and Don Martin Navarro, intendant-general of the provinces of Louisiana and West Florida. The Spanish officers promised to establish a permanent commerce at the most equitable prices, the tariffs and regulations to be then and there fixed. They asked the Indians for no lands and promised security and guaranty for the lands they actually held, "according to the right of property with which they possess them, on condition that they are compre- hended within the lines and limits of his Catholic majesty." If enemies of Spain should dispossess the Indians, Spain would pro- vide them with new homes in any vacant land available.
As a result of these negotiations, the trading houses of William Panton at Pensacola, and James Mather at Mobile, were intrusted by the Spanish with the commercial care of the Indians, and Spain acquired the right, as she claimed, to defend the Indian title to all the country from the Oconee river in Georgia to the Mississippi and north to the Ohio. On the basis of these treaties the Spanish government explicitly denied the claim of the United States to sovereignty over the Indian nations, or the exclusive right to acquire lands from them. Spain now maintained the right, in apparent violation of the peace treaties which ended the War of the Revolution, to maintain military posts from Memphis down, within the agreed limits of the United States, and to assert control over the Indians of the Southwest, as did Great Britain in the Northwest.
Treaties of Hopewell and Seneca .- There was no provision made for the Indian nations who had been allies of the king when Great Britain and the United States made peace in 1783. At first some of the states attempted to make binding treaties with the Indians on their frontiers, but they proved abortive. In 1785 Benjamin Hawkins, Andrew Pickens, Joseph Martin and Lachlin McIntosh were appointed commissioners plenipotentiary of the United States, to make peace with all the Indians of the South, to settle the status
578
1
LOUISIANA
of the red men and to arrange satisfactory limits. When, after much delay, the commissioners invited the Creeks, through Mlc- Gillivray, to enter into a treaty, they were told that the Creeks had already made a treaty with . Spain and the United States was too late. (See Treaty of Mobile, 1784.) As only two towns of the Creeks were represented at Galphinton, where they were invited, the American commissioners refused to do business with so few, and proceeded to the Kiowee river to treat with other nations, who had been summoned for that purpose. Here, on Nov. 28, 1785, at Seneca, a treaty was made with about 1,000 Cherokees, defining limits and recognizing the supremacy of the United States. Agents of both Georgia and North Carolina were present at this treaty, and protested against the treaty as being in derogation of the rights of the states.
Late in December of the same year the U. S. commissioners met at Hopewell, "a seat of Gen. Pickens," a large delegation of Choc- taw chiefs, who had made a long and difficult journey of 77 days in order to treat. They appeared determined to seek an alliance . with the United States, and expressed a deep aversion to the Spanish and Creeks. The Choctaws brought with them their British medals and commissions to exchange for American, of which, unfortunately, there were none, and also asked for 3 stands of colors. A conference extending over several days was held, in which John Pitchlyn served as interpreter for the board, and finally, on Jan. 3, 1786, a treaty of alliance and friendship was made, which also confirmed the bounds of the Choctaw nation as it had existed in 1782.
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.