FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89  
90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>   >|  
f the state, fierce and appalling as it has been represented, consisted simply in this: a part of the Sac tribe of Indians, residing within the boundaries of Illinois, at their village on Rock river, where they were born and had lived all their lives, refused to give up their corn-fields to some white men, who had purchased the same, under a sale made by the government of the United States for the purpose of a technical evasion of one of its own treaties. In short, thus far, it was little more than a neighborhood quarrel between the squaws of the "British Band" of Indians, and a few white settlers,--most of whom were there in violation of the laws of the country--about the occupancy of some corn-fields, which, from time immemorial, had been annually cultivated by the Indian women. Black Hawk became excited by these outrages, as he deemed them, upon the rights of his people; but instead of killing every white man in his vicinity, which he could have done in one night, he simply commanded them to leave his village: and threatened in case they did not, to remove them by force. Such is the substance of the "actual invasion" of the state of Illinois, by the British Band of Sac Indians. It is alledged, however, by the defenders of this memorable campaign, that this band of Sacs had, in violation of the treaties of 1804, 1816 and 1825, continued to remain upon and cultivate the land on Rock river, ceded to the United States, after it had been sold by the United States to individual citizens of Illinois and other states--that they had refused positively to remove to the west side of the Mississippi--that they had endeavored to persuade some of the neighboring tribes to unite with them in defending this land against the rightful occupancy of the white purchasers--that they had "threatened to kill" them--"thrown down their fences"--on some occasions "hurt" said settlers--"stole their potatoes" saying they had not sold these lands--otherwise "acted in a most outrageous manner," and finally, in the words of the capitulation on the 30th June, 1831, "assumed the attitude of actual hostility towards the United States, and had the audacity to drive citizens of the state of Illinois, from their homes." Admitting these allegations to be true, what may be said in behalf of the party against which they are made? It may be replied, that under the treaty of 1804, the Indians had an undoubted right to "live and hunt" upon the land ceded by t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89  
90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Illinois

 
Indians
 
States
 

United

 
fields
 
settlers
 
British
 

citizens

 

treaties

 

remove


simply
 

occupancy

 

actual

 

village

 
threatened
 
refused
 

violation

 

Mississippi

 

endeavored

 
persuade

tribes
 

neighboring

 

defending

 

cultivate

 
campaign
 

memorable

 

defenders

 
states
 

positively

 
individual

continued
 

remain

 

Admitting

 

allegations

 

attitude

 
hostility
 

audacity

 

behalf

 

undoubted

 
replied

treaty

 

assumed

 

occasions

 

potatoes

 
fences
 

purchasers

 

thrown

 
alledged
 

capitulation

 

finally