USA > New York > The Pennsylvania and New York frontier : history of from 1720 to the close of the Revolution > Part 3
USA > Pennsylvania > The Pennsylvania and New York frontier : history of from 1720 to the close of the Revolution > Part 3
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
The Iroquois title having been obtained by the Tulpehocken deed, the next step in the scheme was the determination of the boundaries, which was accomplished by the celebrated "Walking Purchase." Much fertile land lies between the Delaware and Lehigh rivers, which the Penns desired for the lucrative quit rents the anxious settlers were willing to pay. This "Walking Purchase" is surrounded with suspicion. Two conferences had been held with the so-called chiefs of the Delawares, one at Durham and the other at Pennsbury, which were followed by a final meeting at Phila- delphia, August 24, 1737. At the latter, which was attended by Nootamis or Nutimus and three other chiefs, a copy of a deed was produced by Logan, bearing date August 28, 1680, but probably of August 28, 1686, according to a note in Pennsylvania Archives, volume 1, page 539, and Smith's Laws, volume 2, page 116, to which reference is made for an account of the transaction. This deed, made to William Penn, purported to convey all the land beginning at a spruce tree by the Delaware river near Makeeretton, thence to the Indian town of Plawicky and thence to Neshaminy and extending back into the woods, "as far as a man can go in one day and a half." The Quakers pronounced this deed a forgery and upon this charge based most of their attacks against the Penn heirs and their agents. After the controversy had raged violently for years and the charge had been iterated time and again, an investigation disclosed facts which completely refute the charge of forgery.
According to the investigating committee's report, the deed was made by the Indians, August 28, 1686; and was procured by Captain Thomas Holme, surveyor general and Penn's land agent, who had a copy made and sent to Penn in England, which copy was in the handwriting of Philip Thlehnman, a clerk in the land office, who died in 1687. The diary of William Markham, who was secretary of the province, also disclosed that Holme was negotiating, with the Indians, for the purchase of lands near
15
the forks of the Delaware, shortly prior to the date of the deed. The original deed was lost and Thlehnman's copy was discovered, in 1732, by Thomas Penn, among some old papers of his father. (See report in Col. Recs 8, pages 248 and 249).
On the following day, August 25, 1737, the four chiefs signed a con- firmation and ratification of the deed of 1686; but before signing, made the declaration, "That, nevertheless, as the Indians and white people have ever lived together in a good Understanding, they the Indians would request that they may be permitted to remain on their present settlements and Planatations, tho within that purchase without being molested." In answer to which "the assurances, that were given on this head at Penns- bury were repeated and' confirmed to them." (Pa. Archs 1 page 541) The minutes of this conference do not appear on the records of the council, nor any reference to it; but were found written on a loose sheet, and this suspicious circumstance has given rise to the conjecture, they were pur- posely omitted but transcribed and filed, so that they could be used or suppressed, as expediency required.
It was in the determination of the boundaries, as Teedyuscung main- tained, that the great fraud was perpetrated. It is said, Sheriff Smith of Bucks county was instructed to have a preliminary walk made, prepare the way and engage the fastest walkers. He selected three noted frontiersmen, Solomon Jennings, James Yeates and Edward Marshall. Marshall was a famous hunter of gigantic stature and strength and indomitable will; and as the event proved, evidently, the best walker in the country. They were attended by Sheriff Smith, Surveyor General Eastburne, a delegation of Indians and a curious crowd.
At daybreak, September 19, 1737, the sheriff, leaning against the tree in front of Wrightstown meeting house, shouted "Go" and the great walk began. Yeates, slim and fleet of feet, led the race, and Jennings, short and stout, followed not far behind. Marshall, carelessly swinging his hatchet, trailed them and far out of sight. At Red Hill in Bedminister, Jen- nings gave out and he and two Indian walkers quit. When, the sun set, Marshall and Yeates were north of the Blue mountains. At sunrise the next day, these two resumed the walk, but had gone, only, a little way, when Yeates fainted and fell. Marshall continued with the same gigantic strides and unabated pace, leading the sheriff, surveyor general and other watchers on horseback, who could hardly keep him in sight. At noon, he drove his hatchet in a tree, standing on the summit of the Pocono mountains, not far from the headwaters of the Lehigh. He had made the greatest and most profitable walk in history.
The Indians grumbled and complained, that it was a cheat and fraud. The tradition, which has come down through the generations, that one of them said, at the time, best voices their complaint : "No eat, no smoke, no sleep, no walk, just lun! lun! lun! They expected it would be performed, as a man ordinarily walked; and we must admit, that is the logical and legal interpretation of the deed.
Not content with what they had gained, the Penns and Logan had
16
the surveyor general, instead of drawing a line to the nearest point on the Delaware river, project it at right angles, which included all the lands south of the Lackawaxen. Retribution followed not on the Penn family, beneficiaries of the fraud, which waxed rich and strong; but on the mean instrument of its perpetration. The Indians murdered Marshall's wife and son, and slew the innocent backwoodsmen of Pennsylvania by scores.
Neither Shikellimy nor Conrad Weiser had anything to do with the "Walking Purchase."
In July, 1742, the Iroquois chiefs visited Philadelphia and were paid the consideration for their previous sale of land west of the Susquehanna. They demanded that the squatters on unpurchased lands, along the Juniata, should be evicted, which was agreed to; but, in doing so, the governor required the Six Nations to eject the Delawares from the lands obtained by the Walking Purchase. Canassatego replied and, turning to Nutimus and the Forks Indians, said : "We conquered you, we made women of you, you know you are women and can no more sell land than women. This land you claim is gone through your guts. We, therefore, assign you two places to go, either to Wyoming or Shamokin. This wampum is to forbid you, your children and grandchildren to the latest posterity from ever meddling in land affairs, neither you, nor any, who shall descend from you are hereafter to presume to sell any land."33
Canassatego has been called a bibulous old chief, a noisy wind-jammer etc. He rarely drank and never until his business was concluded. He spoke that day, as the great constable of the Iroquois, and did his duty in main- taining the sovereignty of the Six Nations over their subject people.
NOTES-CHAPTER TWO
1. The writer knows of only three examples of fair land distribution in the United States. The New England system, whereby a number of intending settlers, called proprietors, associated themselves together, purchased, from the Indians, a tract of land large enough for a township, divided it into parcels and distributed them to the proprietors by lot, to be thereafter held in severalty and fee simple without the payment of price or rent to king or colony. One other was the equitable distribution of land in Utah, by the Mormon settlers, according to occupations. The third was the "Homestead Act," whereby a portion, of the public lands, was allotted to actual settlers upon payment, only, of the small cost of survey and registration.
2. Presumably, the Delaware Indians had a moral right to the lands, along the Delaware river, which they occupied and tilled and which they fished and hunted upon. To contend, that because the Indians were here before the whites came, they had the right to, withhold, from progress and civilization, an immense domain, they occasionally wandered over and hunted upon, is absurd. Reservations, sufficient for their needs, should have been made and held inviolable; but to contend they should have been of such great extent as to preserve their hunting and fishing state, is equally absurd.
3. Observations of Bartram, pages 9 to 20.
17
4. Proceedings of Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 3, Address of John H. Carter.
5. Col. Recs. 3, 435.
6. Memorials of the Moravian Church, note page 3.
7. John H. Carter in Proceedings of Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 3.
8. Col. Recs., 3 pages 334 to 337.
9. Dr. George P. Donehoo, Proceedings Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 3, 38.
10. Col. Recs. 3, 409.
11. Ibid, 425. 12. Charles Fisher Snyder, Proceedings Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 14.
13. Pa. Archs. 1, 661.
14. Ibid, 665.
15. Pa. Archs. 3, 23.
16. John H. Carter, Proceedings Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 3. 17. Notes on Virginia, Jefferson's Works, Vol. 8, 308.
18. Col. Recs. 5, 136-138.
19. Ibid, 222.
20. Ibid, 285.
21. Memorials of Moravian Church, note page 83.
22. John H. Carter, Proceedings Northumberland Historical Society, Vol. 3.
23. Autobiography of Conrad Weiser, Appendix in Life by C. J. Weiser.
24. Statement, of Rev. H. M. Muhlenuburg, in Hallesch Nachrichten, 1, 244.
25. Wallace, Life of Conrad Weiser, 33.
26. Autobiography of Conrad Weiser, Appendix, Life of, by C. J. Weiser.
27. Col. Recs. 3, 451.
28. Pa. Archs. 1, 494.
29. Ibid, 498; Logan Papers, X, 64, Historical Society of Pennsylvania.
30. Conrad Weiser and Indian Policy etc .; also Enquiry into Causes of Alienation of Delaware and Shawanese Indians.
31. Heckewelder, Indian Nations, 54 to 70.
32. Walton, Indian Policy, 63.
33. Col. Recs. 4, 578 to 580.
18
CHAPTER THREE
THE GREAT LANCASTER TREATY
During the summer months, in making their way southward, to wage their interminable war against the Catawbas, the warriors of the Six Nations passed through the backwoods settlements of Pennsylvania and Virginia. In Pensylvania, there was little friction, as the Indians, upon application to a magistrate, were given a pass, which gave them free access ; and if they, now and then killed a cow or stole a pig, the owners, by prov- ing their losses, were recompensed by the government, which losses, by arrangements with the Iroquois, were charged to the latter's account and deducted from the purchase price of their next sale of lands. In Virginia, it was otherwise, as there a drastic law prevailed, authorizing the arrest of prowling Indians, and if they resisted, the officers were justified in shooting them. This law was severely executed and disputes, brawls and tragedies ensued.
Governor Gooch of Virginia became alarmed at the situation and late in 1736, persuaded the Catawbas to negotiate peace with the Iroquois. He, then, wrote James Logan requesting his assistance in securing the presence of the Iroquois chiefs at a peace council with the Catawbas, at Williams- burg. The situation disclosed by Gooch, alarmed Logan, who realized that should hostilities occur, Pennsylvania would be drawn into the quarrel and its frontier devastated. He sent for Conrad Weiser, and it was agreed the latter and Shikellimy should go to Onondaga, before the trails opened in the spring and the warriors began their southern march, and there make the best arrangements possible.
Weiser was unable to leave until the last of February, as the winter was unusually severe and the woods still deep with snow. He was accom- panied by Stoffel Stump and an Onondaga Indian, named Owisgera. The Susquehanna was so swollen with the spring floods, that they were unable to ford it, and from Shamokin they proceeded on foot. Shikellimy and another Indian, Tawagaret joined them. The Indians, from whom they expected to obtain food, were so destitute, that their impending journey, through the mountains, was threatened with famine. At Madame Montour's, they obtained a limited supply of food.1
This party of five men left her place March 21, 1737, took the great Sheshequin path and began their winter journey of danger, misery and
19
famine.2 They footed it over snow two feet deep and crusted hard with ice. They went by the Big Loyalsock, whose deep, dark' waters dash swiftly and sullenly over numerous cascades and wind their way through narrow mountain canyons, still flanked by a dense growth of laurel, spruce and pine. At the outlet of a little stream, they entered a valley with encom- passing mountains rising perpendicularly from the very verge of the water, and clambered along the precipitous sides clinging to the laurel and with their hatchets making foot holes in the ice. Near the summit of the moun- tain, they slept on the crusted snow and breakfasted with a little boiled corn and beans.
The Diadaclitu, (Lycoming creek) the bewildered stream, they could not ford, and as on the day before they clambered along the mountain sides. On the edge, of a sharp declivity of considerable extent, below which was a rocky precipice more than a hundred feet high, Shikellimy slipped on a loosened stone and slid down the incline on the glassy crust. Unable to check or stop his descent, by clutching the scattered bushes, his speed increased with the distance. Terrorized, his companions clung to the laurel and silently stared. A plunge over the precipice and certain death seemed inevitable. Indian fashion, he bore a pack on his back, strapped. about his breast. In his course, one of the straps broke and the partly loosened pack spread out on the ice. A sappling stood near the edge of the cliff. His body passed on one side of it and the pack on the other. The strap held and with great difficulty, his companions succeeded in rescuing him from his position.
At Onondaga, where they arrived April 10th, Weiser was so worn and emaciated, his friends hardly knew him, some saying it was he and others that it was not. At last, they were in a land of plenty, and the good food and rest, soon restored his strength and spirits. The Iroquois refused to send their chiefs to Williamsburg, suggesting Albany instead; but they agreed to a cessation of hostilities, for a year, and the real purpose for which they came was accomplished. Plentifully supplied with food, they left and floating down the rivers in the canoes supplied them, safely came to Shamokin, where Weiser found his horse near where he had left him. He arrived home May 1st.
In 1743, the Virginia trouble bobbed up again, and assumed a more serious aspect. Some thirty Iroquois warriors, on their way to the Catawba war, had an altercation with a party of Virginia backwoodsmen; and in the skirmish, which ensued, several on both sides were killed or wounded. The Indians said the whites were the aggressors, but the Virginians claimed otherwise. However, Governor Gooch of Virginia, in the settle- ment, he later, made with the Six Nations, adopted the opinion of Gov- ernor Thomas of Pennsylvania, who said he would always prefer the testi- mony of an Iroquois to that of a backwoodsman.
Thomas McKee, an Indian trader at the Big Island (Lock Haven), who obtained his information from some of the warriors on their way back to Onondaga, brought the news to Philadelphia. Governor Thomas, imme- diately dispatched Conrad Weiser to Shamokin to confer with Shikellimy.
20
In order to avert the threatened war, Shikellimy went to Onondaga and endeavored to persuade the Iroquois chiefs to hold a conference, some- where in the Susquehanna region, with Virginia and Maryland, in settle- ment of the skirmish trouble, and also the Iroquois land claims against those colonies. The Great Council refused and declared, that unless Vir- ginia took the hatchet out of the heads of the Six Nations, there would be war.
Governor Gooch, now thoroughly alarmed, authorized the Pennsyl- vania government to purchase £100 worth of presents for the families of the slain and wounded Indians, as atonement for the wrong done; and also to employ Conrad Weiser to remove Virginia's hatchet from the heads of the Six Nations. Weiser accompanied by Shikellimy, John Bar- tram, the botanist and Lewis Evans, the map maker made the trip, by the Sheshequin trail, arriving at Onondaga, July 21st.
In order to observe the formalities of the Great Council, Shikellimy and Weiser had a secret conference, or as the Indians called it "in the bushes," with Canassatego. All having been arranged by them, the Great Council convened July 31st. Shikellimy represented Onas, the Indian designation of the Penns, Weiser stood for Assaryquoa, their name for the governor of Virginia, and Canassatego, he being conversant with all the rites and ceremonies of the Iroquois, was speaker for Virginia.
When the council fire had been fanned into a merry flame, and the sachems had squatted on the ground about it, Canassatego made an elo- quent harangue, recounting the intercession of Onas, and the desire of Assaryquoa to apologize and atone for the wrong done. He also presented the invitation of Virginia for a council, in the near future, with that colony and Maryland to settle the great land dispute. The presents were distri- buted, and after mature deliberation by the sachems, Tocanontie, the Black Prince responded for the Iroquois, acknowledging the removal of the hatchet, and the healing of the wounds and accepting the invitation to the conference.3
The great Lancaster treaty of 1744 was the result of Weiser's remov- ing the hatchet, and was the high spot of Indian-Colonial relations. How- ever, before the chiefs arrived, there occurred the murder of Jack Armstrong, which tragic affair, the governor feared, might interfere with the conference.
Armstrong, an Indian trader had obtained, by fraud, a horse from Mussemeelin, a Delaware Indian, who demanded its return, which was refused. Armstrong and his two servants were on their way to the Ohio region, when overtaken by Mussemeelin and two young Delawares. In the narrows of the Juniata, at a place since called "Jack's Narrows," Musse- meelin killed the servants, Smith and Arnold. Compelling the two terrified Indians to go with him down the trail, Mussemeelin found Armstrong sit- ting on a log and demanded the return of his horse. On their way back to the campfire, where Smith and Arnold had been killed, Mussemeelin murdered Armstrong. Having partly buried his body, the Indians secreted most of the trader's goods and divided the rest between them.
21
Suspicion was aroused, and a searching party, accompanied by some Indians sent by Allummapees from Shamokin, found the shoulder of Armstrong ; and guided by the vultures which were devouring the bodies, came upon the corpses of Smith and Arnold, which they buried. Allumm- apees and Shikellimy apprehended Mussemeelin and his two accomplices and sent them to the Lancaster jail, but on the way, one was allowed to escape. Later, the three Indians were tried at Philadelphia and convicted. The affair seems not to have affected the conference at Lancaster, the Iroquois recognizing the right of Pennsylvania to try, convict and execute the murderers.
England was drawn into the War of the Austrian Succession, and on March 29, 1744, declared war against France. This embroilment enhanced the importance of the Lancaster Treaty, the prime necessity, then, being a reaffirmance of the Iroquois allegiance.
June 22nd, the deputies of the Six Nations, escorted by Conrad Weiser and with the imposing figure of Canassatego at their head, marched into the little town of Lancaster. There were two hundred fifty two of them painted in striking shades and picturesquely bedecked with feathers and blankets of many colors. It was a representative delegation, of the sachems and great men of the gallant little confederacy, charged with por- tentous power. A power that could weigh the scales for either French or English future dominance. By adhesion to England, they would restrain their many subject tribes and guarantee the peace of the frontier ; and by the exercise of their mighty strength make an impenetrable barrier to French aggression. It was the determination of the Iroquois attitude, which makes the Lancaster Treaty of such great significance in moulding the destiny of North America.
The colonies thoroughly appreciated the gravity of the situation and hastened Virginia and Maryland to an adjustment of the troublesome land claims of the United Nations. Both the social activities and business trans- actions of the conference have been adequately told by contemporary records.4 The dominating men, there, were Conrad Weiser, interpreter for Pennsylvania, Virginia and Maryland and Canassatego, speaker and negotiator for the Iroquois.
The Indians were quartered in a vacant field on the outskirts of the town, and erected their shelters, with boughs and lumber provided for them. Their campfires were visited nightly by curious crowds, who watched their dancing, listened to their songs and revelled in the picturesqueness and glamour of the scene. Cautioned by Conrad Weiser, the crowds avoided friction with the Indians and a friendly spirit prevailed. A great banquet was given, by the three colonies, to the Indians and gentlemen of the town. The Indian chiefs were seated at two large tables presided over by Canassa- tego, but the white dignitaries sat apart from them. Weiser was master of ceremonies, and Prothonotary Cookson and secretaries Peters, Marsh and Black carved the meat and served the Indians with the food and drink. Mutual healths were drunk to the King, Onas, Assaryquoa, the
22
governor of Maryland, and the Great Council at Onondaga, and great hilarity prevailed.
There were present at the Treaty, Governor Thomas of Pennsylvania, Hon. Thomas Lee and Colonel William Beverly, commissioners of Vir- ginia, and Hon. Edmund Jennings and Philip Thomas Esq. commissioners of Maryland, together with many prominent men from the three colonies. The most famous Indians, there, were Shikellimy, Canassatego, Tocanontie, Chacadowa and Madame Montour. Weiser was official interpreter for Pennsylvania, Virginia and Maryland and general manager, guiding its deliberations, with great tact and tolerance, and teaching the haughty aristocrats of Virginia and Maryland, the niceties of Indian propriety.
In the crowded court room, where they met, seated behind the judge's bench, in the center was Governor Thomas, on his right the Virginia commissioners, and on the left the Maryland commissioners. The Indian chiefs squatted on the steps leading to the bench and on the floor in front. Back of them, at a table were the secretaries, William Peters of Pennsyl- vania, William Black of Virginia and Witham Marshe of Maryland. Gov- ernor Thomas opened the proceedings, in a kindly address of welcome, suggesting a reaffirmance of the alliance. Canassatego replied, stating the differences with Virginia and Maryland must be first adjusted, "and then we shall proceed to confirm the friendship between us, which will meet with no obstruction after these matters are settled."
Maryland, having invited the conference, was the first to state its case ; and its speaker resented the implied Iroquois threat, made two years before, to use force unless their claims were adjusted; denied the validity of the Iroquois claims, because the Susquehannocks had sold the Susquehanna lands, as had the Six Nations, also, by the Dongan deed; and stated Mary- land had occupied these lands for over a hundred years, but notwithstand- ing, the complete title, the wise men of Maryland had determined to make a liberal present to the Indians.
Canassatego answered in a great speech, adroitly undermining Mary- land's position. He apologized for the threat, but sarcastically observed, that while his people intended no rashness, it had the desired effect of bringing the wise men of Maryland to terms. He denied the validity of the Dongan deed, and cited the honesty of Onas, who when he learned the Indians had been defrauded, liberally paid them and obtained subsequent grants of the same lands. He, then, triumphantly completed the emascula- tion of Maryland's argument, freely admitting the grants of the Susque- hannocks were good, because made before their conquest; but it was not that land which was now claimed. It was the territory along the Potomac river, which had never been granted.
Virginia claimed possession under old treaties, requested the names of the tribes conquered by the Iroquois, and asserted that in answer to inquiry made in 1743, the Iroquois had said, "they had no demand on the governor of Virginia." Tacanontie replied, denying the inquiry, enumerating the tribes conquered and citing a treaty made at Albany, twenty years before, establishing the middle of the great hill, as the line of division
23
and providing, that if any Indians came east of it, Virginia could hang them, and if Virginians settled west of it, the Iroquois could do likewise. Notwithstanding, he said, the Virginians came like flocks of birds and sat down on both sides of it. He insisted, a road must be established before any grant of lands, and if the Virginians stayed where they had trespassed, "our warriors marching through shall go shares with them in what they plant."
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.