Indians and Exiles on the Appalachicola River—Other Exiles at Withlaeoochee, St. John’s, Cyprus Swamp, Waboo Swamp—Indians in various parts of Territory—Difficulty of the subject—President’s Message—Committee of Congress—Interrogations—Mr. Penieres’ Answer—General Jackson’s Answer—He relies on Force—United States recognize the Florida Indians as an Independent Band—Willing to treat with them—Difficulties—Instructions to Commissioners1—Treaty of Camp Moultrie—Reservations—Covenants on part of United States—Covenants on part of the Seminoles—Congress makes no objection—Effect of Treaty—Its Objects—Election of the younger Adams—His Policy—Indian Agent, Colonel Humphreys—William P. Duval’s Instructions—Claimants complain of the Agent—Commissioner2 of Indian Affairs reproves him—His Letter—Reply—Difficulty of Agent—Dangers which threaten the Exiles—Colored Man seized and enslaved—Indians Protest—Colonel Brooke’s Advice—United States Judge expresses his Opinion—Effect on Exiles—Mrs. Cook’s Slave—Demand for Negroes—Suggestions of Agent—Practice of Government—Treaty of Payne’s Landing—Its Stipulations—Abram—His Character—Chiefs become Suspicious—Delegations sent West—Executive Designs—Supplemental Treaty—Major Phagan—Petition of the People of Florida—Indorsement thereon—Treaties approved by Senate—Creeks6 remonstrate—Payment of $141,000 to Slave Claimants—Supineness of Northern Statesmen—Creeks demand Exiles or Slaves—Georgians kidnap Exiles—Their Danger—They dissuade7 from Emigration—Their Warriors8—Wiley Thompson’s Statement—General Clinch10’s Interest—Colonel Eaton’s Views—General Cass’s Reply—His Address to Indians—He authorizes11 Slave trade—Effects of such License—Agent and others Remonstrate—He replies—Agent rejoins—Exiles prepare for War.
After the close of the war of 1818, many of the Seminole Indians took possession of the deserted12 plantations13 and villages along the Appalachicola River, whose owners had fallen in the massacre15 of Blount’s Fort, in 1816; and some of the Exiles united in reoccupying the lands which had been reduced to cultivation16 by their murdered brethren. Some six or eight small bands of Indians thus became resident along that river. The fertile bottom lands, near that stream, constituted the most valuable portion of Florida, so far as agriculture was concerned. These towns afforded convenient resting places for fugitive17 slaves, while fleeing from their masters in Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Louisiana, to the interior portions of Florida.
The United States, nor the slaveholders of the States named, could with any propriety18 whatever hold the Creek5 Indians responsible for the many refugees, who were now almost daily increasing the number of fugitives19 located far in the interior of Florida; and the difficulties attending the holding of slaves increased in exact proportion as the slaveholding settlements extended towards these locations; while the greater portion of the Exiles were taking up their residence farther in the interior of the territory, upon the Withlacoochee, the St. John’s, the Big Cypress20 Swamp, the Islands in the Great Wahoo Swamp, and places far retired21 from civilization. The Seminole Indians were scattered22 extensively over different portions of the country; and although the United States now owned the unoccupied lands, it was difficult to determine upon any course of policy by which the difficulties, so long existing, could be terminated.
1822.
The subject was alluded23 to by the President in his Annual Message to Congress (Dec. 3), and a select committee was appointed to take that portion of it into consideration. The committee propounded25 interrogatories to various officers of government, who were supposed capable of giving useful information in regard to the subject.[55]
In answer to these interrogatories, Mr. Penieres, Sub-Agent for the Florida Indians, replied, stating the number of Indians at more than five thousand, while the number of slaves which they held were estimated at only forty. These he declared to be far more intelligent than the slaves resident among the white people, and possessing great influence over their Indian masters. He alluded to the Exiles in the following language: “It will be difficult (says he) to form a prudent26 determination with respect to the ‘maroon negroes,’ (Exiles), who live among the Indians, on the other side of the little mountain of Latchiouc. They fear being again made slaves, under the American Government, and will omit nothing to increase or keep alive mistrust among the Indians, whom they, in fact, govern. If it should become necessary to use force with them, it is to be feared that the Indians will take their part. It will, however, be necessary to remove from the Floridas this group of freebooters, among whom runaway27 negroes will always find a refuge. It will, perhaps, be possible to have them received at St. Domingo, or to furnish them means of withdrawing from the United States!”
This gentleman appears to have had more knowledge of the Exiles, than was possessed28 by the officers of the United States, generally, who supposed that each negro must have a legitimate29 master. He appears, also, to have had sufficient humanity to suggest the plan of their removal, rather than their enslavement.
In answer to the interrogatories of this committee, General Jackson proposed to compel the Seminoles to reünite with the Creeks, by leaving Florida and returning to the Creek country; and closed his recommendation by saying, “this must be done, or the frontier will be much weakened by the Indian settlements, and be a perpetual harbor for our slaves. These runaway slaves, spoken of by Mr. Penieres, MUST BE REMOVED from the Floridas, or scenes of murder and confusion will exist.”[56]
This suggestion of General Jackson for the removal of the Seminoles, both Indians and negroes, bears date September second, 1822, and is the first suggestion, of that precise character, of which we have knowledge. General Jackson was a warrior9, and had more faith in the bayonet than in moral truths. He trusted much to physical power, but had little confidence in kindness, or in justice or moral suasion. He was an officer of great popularity, however, and it is not unlikely that his views had greater weight with those who followed him in official life, than their intrinsic merits entitled them to. It is certain that his policy of removing the Indians and Exiles from Florida, was subsequently adopted by him while President, and has continued to be the cherished object with most of his successors in that office.
The controversy30 between the State of Georgia and the Creeks had been settled at Indian Springs. In the treaty entered into at that place, the United States had held the Creek Nation responsible for the action of the Seminoles, under the plea that they were a part of the Creek Nation. Having obtained two hundred and fifty thousand dollars from the Creeks in this way, to satisfy the slave claimants of Georgia, the Executive now suddenly became satisfied that the Seminoles were a distinct and independent tribe, and he prepared to treat with them as such. Commissioners were appointed for that purpose, and efforts made to collect their chiefs, warriors and principal men, in order to carry out this object.
1828.
Suspicious of the objects which prompted this proposal, the Indians were unwilling31 to meet the commissioners. Runners were sent to the different bands, and eventually some thirty or forty were collected. These were declared by the commissioners to represent a majority of the Seminole tribe, and (Sept. 18) they proceeded to form the treaty of “Camp Moultrie.” The letter of instructions, from the Secretary of War, was specific on one point only. The commissioners were directed to so arrange the treaty, as to constrain32 the Indians to settle within the territory south of Tampa Bay, excluded from the coast on all sides by a strip of country at least fifteen miles in width. This would have taken from them their most fertile lands on the Suwanee River, the Appalachicola River, and in the vicinity of the Mickasukie Lake. Some six chiefs, who had taken possession of the plantations which had been opened and cultivated by the Exiles murdered at “Blount’s Fort,” refused to sign the treaty. They were, however, prevailed upon to agree to the treaty, when it had been so modified as to give them each a reservation of fertile lands, to meet their own necessities.
By agreeing to these stipulations, the commissioners obtained their signatures to the treaty—the United States guaranteeing to the Indians peaceable possession of the country and reservations assigned them. They also covenanted33 to “take the Florida Indians under their care and patronage34, and AFFORD THEM PROTECTION AGAINST ALL PERSONS WHATSOEVER35,” and to “restrain and prevent all white persons from hunting, settling, or otherwise intruding36, upon said lands.” They also agreed to pay the Indians six thousand dollars in cattle and hogs37, furnish them with provisions to support them one year, and pay them five thousand dollars annually38 for twenty years. But one great object of the treaty was embraced in the seventh Article, which was expressed in the following language:
“The chiefs and warriors aforesaid, for themselves and tribes, stipulate39 to be active and vigilant40 in preventing the retreating to, or passing through, the district, or country assigned them, of any absconding41 slave, or fugitives from justice; and they further agree to use all necessary exertions42 to apprehend43 and deliver the same to the agent, who shall receive orders to compensate44 them agreeably to the trouble and expense incurred45.”
It is worthy46 of note, that the commissioners, acting47 under instructions of the Secretary of War, now assured the Seminoles that they had been a separate and independent tribe more than a century; while other commissioners, acting under instructions from the same Secretary, only twenty months previously48, insisted that the Seminoles were, at that time, a part of the Creek tribe; and on that assumed fact, the Creeks were held responsible for the value of such slaves as left their masters during the Revolution and prior to 1802, and took up their residence with the Seminoles. But these contradictory49 positions appeared to be necessary to sustain the slave interest.
It may be remarked that from the signing of this treaty, there was no longer any controversy between our Government and the Creeks in relation to fugitive slaves. That quarrel was transferred to the Seminoles; and now, after thirty-four years have passed away, and many millions of treasure have been expended50, and thousands of human lives sacrificed, at the moment of writing these incidents, our army is actively51 employed in carrying on the contest which arose, and for more than the third of a century has been almost constantly maintained, for the recapture and return of these people; and although our members of Congress from the free States had witnessed the long and expensive contest, and the vast sacrifice of blood and treasure, which had been squandered52 in efforts to regain53 possession of the Exiles; yet we do not find any objection to have been raised or protest uttered against this new treaty, in either branch of our National Legislature. Indeed, so far as we have information on the subject, the appropriations54 for carrying it into effect were cheerfully made, without objection.
This compact drew still more closely the meshes56 of the federal power around the Exiles. The United States now held what is called in slaveholding parlance57 the “legal title” to their bones and sinews, their blood and muscle, while the Creek Indians were vested with the entire beneficial interest in them. But neither the United States nor the Creek Indians had been able to reduce them to possession. The white settlements were, however, gradually extending, and the territory of the Seminoles was diminishing in proportion; and it was easy to foresee the difficulties with which they were soon to be surrounded.
By the treaty, many of their cultivated fields, and most of the villages, which they had recently defended with so much bravery, were given up to the whites, and those who had so long occupied them, were compelled to retire still further into the interior, and commence new improvements. A few Exiles remained with the chiefs who held reservations upon the Appalachicola. Those who remained, however, were persons who had become connected by marriage with the Indians belonging to those small bands, from whom they were unwilling to separate.
To this treaty some writers have traced the causes which produced the recent “Florida War.” They attribute to its stipulations that vast sacrifice of treasure, and of national reputation, which has rendered that territory distinguished58 in history. With that war, our present history is connected only so far as the Exiles were concerned in its prosecution59; but it would appear difficult for any historian to overlook the important fact that obtaining possession of fugitive slaves constituted the moving consideration for this treaty, and the primary cause of both the first and second Seminole wars.
1824.
Most of this year was occupied in removing the Indians to their new territory. They also suffered severely60 for the want of food, and the attention of both Indians and officers of Government appears to have been occupied with these subjects.
1825.
In the autumn, Mr. Adams was elected President. But his policy was in part unfavorable to the Exiles. Removals from office under his administration were limited. If an officer were removed, it was not until after it had been ascertained61 that just cause existed for the removal. This policy continued nearly every man in office who had been connected with the Indian Department under the former Administration. Colonel Gad63 Humphreys had been appointed Agent for the Seminoles as early as 1822. He was a resident of Florida, and a slaveholder, deeply interested in maintaining the institution; but so far as his official acts have come before the public, he appears to have performed his duty with a good degree of humanity. Indeed, such were his efforts in behalf of justice to the oppressed, that he became obnoxious64 to Southern men, and was eventually removed from office on that account. William P. Duval was also continued in the office of Governor, and ex-officio Superintendent65 of Indian Affairs for the Territory of Florida. He was also a slaveholder, and resident of the territory; but even Southern men found little cause to complain of his devotion to liberty or justice. He, and many other officers, appear to have supposed the first important duty imposed on them, consisted in lending an efficient support to those claims for slaves which were constantly pressed upon them by unprincipled white men.
Early as the twenty-fifth of January, Governor Duval, acting Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the Territory, wrote Colonel Humphreys, giving him general directions in regard to the course which he should pursue in all cases where fugitive slaves were claimed. “On the subject (said he) of runaway slaves among the Indians, within the control of your agency, it will be proper in all cases, where you believe the owners can identify the slaves, to have them taken, and delivered over to the Marshal of East Florida, at St. Augustine, so that the Federal Judge may inquire into the claim of the party, and determine the right of property. But in all cases where the same slave is claimed by a white person and an Indian, if you believe the Indian has an equitable66 claim to the slave, you are directed not to surrender the slave, except by the order of the Hon. Joseph L. Smith, Federal Judge residing at St. Augustine; and in that case, you will attend before him, and defend the right of the Indian, if you believe he has right on his side.”
In all these cases, the slave or colored man, whether bond or free, was to be treated in the same manner as a brute67. He was permitted to say nothing upon the subject of his own right to liberty. His voice was silenced amidst the despotism with which he was surrounded. No law was consulted. The belief of a slaveholding Agent decided68 the fate of the person claimed. Those who claimed to own their fellow men, would always find persons to testify to their claims, and it was in vain for an Indian to attempt litigation with a slaveholding white man before a slaveholding Judge.[57]
The Exiles were not the property of the Indians in any sense. The Indians did not claim to own them. Under the rule prescribed, if a white man could get one of the Exiles within his power, he could at any time prove some circumstance that would entitle him to claim some negro; when he proved this, the law of Florida presumed every colored man to be a slave, unless he could prove his freedom. This, no Exile could do; and, when seized, they were uniformly consigned69 to bondage70. The only safety for the Exile was, to entirely71 avoid the whites, who were not permitted to enter the territory except upon the written permit of some officer.
The slave-catchers, therefore, had recourse to the practice of describing certain black persons, in the Indian country, as their slaves, and demanding that the Agent should have them seized and delivered to him. But the Agent, knowing these claims to be merely fictitious72 in some instances, paid no attention to them. The claimants, intent on obtaining wealth by catching73 negroes, and selling them as slaves, complained of the Agent to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, who, on the eighth of February (1827), wrote the Agent, reproving him for his remissness75 in failing to capture and return fugitive slaves, saying: “Frequent complaints have been made to the Department, respecting slaves claimed by the citizens of Florida, which are in possession of the Indians; all which have been acted on here, in issuing such orders to you as it was expected would be promptly76 obeyed; * * * and that these proceedings77 would be followed by the proper reports to the Department. Nothing satisfactory has been received.”
1826.
Thus the Indian Bureau, at Washington, took upon itself the responsibility of deciding particular cases, upon the ex parte testimony78 which the claimants presented; and the commissioner concluded his letter by a peremptory79 order to Colonel Humphreys, directing him to capture and deliver over two slaves, said to be the property of a Mrs. Cook.
To this order the Agent replied in the language of dignified80 rebuke81. After stating that one of the slaves had been captured by the Indians, and given up, he says: “but they will not, I apprehend, consent further to risk their lives in a service which has always been a thankless one, and has recently proved so to one of their most respected chiefs, who was killed in an attempt to arrest a runaway slave.”[58]
The love of liberty is universal. We honor the individual who gives high evidence of his attachment82 to this fundamental right, with which God has endowed all men, and we applaud him who manfully defends his liberty, whether it be a Washington with honors clustering upon his brow, or the more humble83 individual who defends his liberty in Florida, by slaying84 the man who attempts to deprive him of it. But these views were not recognized by the agents of our Government.
1827.
While the Department at Washington supposed the Agent to have neglected his duty, the Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the territory supposed the Agent had been quite too faithful to the slaveholders. On the twentieth of March he wrote Colonel Humphreys, saying, “Many slaves belonging to the Indians ARE NOW IN POSSESSION OF THE WHITE PEOPLE. These slaves cannot be obtained for their Indian owners without a lawsuit;” and he then directed the Agent to submit the claim, in all cases where there was an Indian claimant, to the chiefs for decision.
In these contests between barbarians85 and savages87, concerning the rights which they claimed to the bodies of their fellow men, the Exiles had no voice. They well understood that the rapacity88 of the slave claimants was unbounded and inexorable; they therefore endeavored to avoid all contact with the whites, and to preserve their freedom by affording the piratical slave-catchers no opportunity to lay hands on them.
These demands for negroes alleged89 to be among the Indians, continued to excite the people of Florida and to perplex the officers of Government, threatening the most serious results,[59] and continually enhancing the dangers of the Exiles.
1828.
The troops at Fort King were called on to aid in the arrest of fugitive slaves; but their efforts merely excited the ridicule90 and contempt of both Indiana and negroes. These circumstances becoming known to the slaves of Florida, naturally excited them to discontent; and while their masters were engaged in efforts to arrest negroes to whom they had no claim, their own servants in whom they had reposed92 every confidence, suddenly disappeared and became lost among the Exiles of the interior. The white people became irritated under these vexations. Their indignation against the Indians was unbounded. The Agent, Colonel Humphreys, gave a vivid description of their barbarity, in a letter to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs.[60] But remonstrances93 with the Indian Department appeared to have no effect. Peremptory orders for the arrest and delivery of slaves continued to reach the Agent. These orders he could not carry into effect, as he could command no force adequate to the arrest of the fugitives. Governor Duval began to regard the Agent as remiss74 in his efforts, and so reported him to the War Department. Some of the most wealthy Seminoles had purchased slaves of the white people, and for many years, perhaps we may say for generations, had been slaveholders. They held their slaves in a state between that of servitude and freedom; the slave usually living with his own family and occupying his time as he pleased, paying his master annually a small stipend94 in corn and other vegetables. This class of slaves regarded servitude among the whites with the greatest degree of horror.
The owners of fugitive slaves, or men who pretended to have lost slaves, when able, would seize and hold those belonging to the Indians. The Indians being ignorant of legal proceedings, were unable to obtain compensation from those who thus robbed them of what the slaveholders termed property. This practice became so common that, on the seventeenth of April, many of the chiefs and warriors assembled at the Agency, and made their protest to the Agent, declaring that “many of their negroes, horses, cattle, etc., were in the hands of the white people, for which they were unable to obtain compensation.” Contrary to the treaty of Camp Moultrie, white men were at that time in the Indian country searching for slaves, and the chiefs demanded of the Agent the reason why the white people thus violated the treaty to rob the Indians? The Agent could only reply, that the white men were there by permission given them by the Secretary of War.[61]
So flagrant were these outrages96 upon the Indians and negroes, that Colonel Brooke, of the United States Army, at that time commanding in Florida, took upon himself the responsibility of addressing the Agent, advising him not to deliver negroes to the white men, unless their “claims were made clear and satisfactory.”[62] The District Judge of the United States for the Territory, also wrote Colonel Humphreys, giving his construction of the rules adopted by the Indian Bureau. He thought, in no case, should a negro be delivered up, where the Indians claimed him, until proofs had been made and title established before judicial97 authority.[63]
No law was looked to as the rule by which officers of Government were to be controlled in their official duties. The opinion, the judgment98, of the individual constituted his rule of action. During the nineteenth century, perhaps no despotism has existed among civilized99 nations more unlimited100, or more unscrupulous, than that exercised in Florida, from 1823 to 1843.
This state of affairs determined101 the Exiles not to be arrested by white men. Thus, when Governor Duval ordered a compensation for a slave claimed by Mrs. Cook, to be retained from their annuities102, the chiefs held a talk with the Agent, and assured him that the “man was born among the Seminoles, and had never been out of the nation.”[64]
These demands for negroes increased in number; and the whites became more and more rapacious103, and the Indians more and more indignant, until hostilities104 appeared inevitable105. The Agent, from long association with the Indians and his knowledge of facts, naturally sympathised with them. He assembled a number of the chiefs at the Agency, and suggested to them the absolute necessity of submitting to the white people; and for the purpose of avoiding further difficulties, advised them to emigrate west of the Mississippi, or, rather, to send a delegation4 to examine the country; and, as an inducement, offered to accompany their chiefs and warriors on such a tour. To this proposition a few of them consented, and the Agent notified the Department of the fact.[65]
It was easy to see that, under the existing state of affairs, hostilities could not long be avoided. Up to the period of which we are speaking, the action of our Government had been dictated106 by those who sought to uphold and encourage Slavery; nor could it be expected that this long-established policy would be suddenly changed, unless such change were peremptorily107 demanded by the people.
There was apparently108 but one course to be pursued under this policy—that was the removal of the Indians from Florida. This plan had been recommended by General Jackson ten years previously, and he now being President, had an opportunity of carrying out his proposed policy. To effect this purpose, it would be necessary to negotiate a treaty by which the Indians should consent to abandon Florida and remove west of the Mississippi.
It had long been the policy of those who administered the Government, to select Southern men to act in all offices in which the institution of slavery was likely to be called in question. From the time General Washington sent Colonel Willett to ascertain62 facts in regard to the controversy between the State of Georgia and the Creek Indians, in 1789, to the period of which we are now speaking, no Northern man was appointed to any office which required his personal attention to the situation of the Exiles.[66]
1832.
In accordance with this practice, General Cass, acting as Secretary of War, appointed Colonel James Gadsden, of South Carolina, to negotiate the treaty of Payne’s Landing. By the preamble109 of this treaty, the Seminoles stipulated110 that eight of their principal chiefs should visit the Western country, “accompanied by their faithful interpreter, Abraham,” (an Exile, and a man of great repute among both Exiles and Indians,) and should they be satisfied with the character of the country, and of the favorable disposition111 of the Creeks to reunite with the Seminoles as one people, they would, in such case, agree to the stipulations subsequently contained in said treaty.
The first article merely makes an exchange, by the Seminoles, of lands in Florida for an equal extent of territory, west of the Mississippi, adjoining the Creek Nation.
The second article provides compensation for the improvements, and specifically stipulates112, that Abraham and Cudjoe (two Exiles who acted as interpreters) should receive, each, two hundred dollars.
The third provides for the distribution of blankets and frocks among them.
The fourth article provides for certain annuities, etc.
The fifth merely stipulates the manner in which the personal property of the Seminoles shall be disposed of in Florida, and the same articles supplied them in their new homes at the West.
Negro Abraham.
Negro Abraham.
The sixth is in the following language: “The Seminoles, being anxious to be relieved from the repeated vexatious demands for slaves and other property, alleged to have been stolen and destroyed by them, so that they may remove to their new homes unembarrassed, the United States stipulate to have the same properly investigated, and to liquidate113 such as may be satisfactorily established, provided the amount does not exceed fourteen thousand dollars.”
The seventh article stipulates that a portion of the Indians should remove in 1833, and the remainder in 1834.
Two leading features of this treaty attract the attention of the reader. The first is the removal of the Seminoles; second, their reunion with the Creeks. The Creeks, having paid the slaveholders of Georgia for their loss of Exiles, had permitted the subject to rest in silence, and, so far as we are informed, no formal claim had yet been asserted by the Creeks to seize and hold the Exiles as slaves; but it is evident that the negotiators of this treaty intended to place the Seminoles, when settled in their western homes, within the power, and under the jurisdiction115, of the Creeks. Yet it was well known that, from the time of their separation, in 1750, up to the signing of this treaty, they had disagreed and, at times, had been in open war with each other. General Cass, the Secretary of War, as well as the President, must have known that McIntosh, the principal chief of the Creeks, had accompanied Colonel Clinch, with five hundred warriors, when he invaded Florida for the purpose of massacreing the Exiles at “Blount’s Fort,” in 1816; that the Creeks shared in that massacre, and had publicly tortured and murdered one Indian and one negro, whom they styled chiefs. It is difficult to believe that any man could expect them to live together in peace, with the recollection of those scenes resting on the mind; nor has any explanation yet been given, nor reason assigned, for the anxiety of our officers to place the Seminoles within the power of the Creeks, except a desire to enslave the Exiles.
Abraham, who acted as interpreter, had been born among the Seminoles. His parents had fled from Georgia, and died in their forest-home. He appears to have been a man of unusual influence with his more savage86 friends; and although he insisted on emigrating to the West, in opposition116 to many of his brethren, yet he has to this day maintained a high reputation among his people. Cudjoe was less known, and, subsequently, was less conspicuous117 than Abraham; indeed, we know but little of him. But the experience of Abraham, nor the learning of Cudjoe, could detect that vague use of language which was subsequently seized upon for justifying118 the fraud perpetrated under this treaty.
In the preamble, it was stipulated that the Seminoles were to send six of their confidential119 chiefs to view the western country; and if they were satisfied with the country, etc. The Seminoles supposed the pronoun they had relation to the Tribe; while General Jackson construed120 it to refer to the chiefs sent West. If they were satisfied, he held the Tribe bound to emigrate at all events; and his efforts were, therefore, directed to satisfying the chiefs who went to view the country.
But the leading men of the Seminoles became suspicious of the design of the Creeks to enslave the Exiles, before their delegation left Florida, and publicly expressed their suspicion.[67]
The President appears to have determined on securing the emigration of the Indians at all hazards and at any sacrifice. For that purpose he appointed commissioners to go west and obtain from the Seminole delegation, while yet in the western country, and absent from the tribe, an acknowledgment that the country was suitable for a residence, and that the Creeks were anxious to unite with them as one people. This was to be obtained before the Seminole delegation should return to Florida, or make report to their nation, or give the Tribe an opportunity to judge or act upon the subject.
1833.
His object was accomplished121 (March 28). The commissioners obtained an “additional treaty,” signed by the Seminole delegation sent West, without any authority from their Nation to enter into any stipulation3; nor had the commissioners, on the part of the United States, authority to form any treaty whatever: yet this additional treaty, as it was called, after reciting some of the stipulations contained in that of Payne’s Landing, declares “that the chiefs sent to examine the country are well satisfied with it;” and then stipulates, “that the Seminole Indians shall emigrate to it so soon as the United States shall make the necessary preparations.” There was also another provision in this additional treaty of vast importance to the Exiles; it designated and assigned to the Seminoles a certain tract114 of country, giving its metes122 and bounds, to the “separate use of the Seminoles forever.”
Their agent, Major Phagan, appears to have been willing and capable of performing his part in this diplomatic intrigue123. We have no knowledge of the means used to obtain this additional treaty, nor the bribery124 by which it was secured; but it is known that the chiefs, before they went West, expressed their dislike of reuniting with the Creeks; that when they returned, they denied having agreed to settle under Creek jurisdiction; it is also certain that the additional treaty stipulates that the Seminoles shall have their lands separate from the Creeks.
When they returned, their agent, Major Phagan, represented them as having stipulated for the positive removal of the Seminoles. The chiefs denied it, and insisted they had understood their authority as extending only to an examination of the country, and to report the result to the Nation. They requested that the chiefs, head-men and warriors be assembled to hear their report, and to express their own determination. But the agent refused to call such council, and assured them that their homes and heritage were already sold, and that nothing now remained for them to do but to prepare for removal.
The people of Alachua County, Florida, feeling indignant at the determination of the Seminoles to remain in that Territory, addressed a protest to the President of the United States, declaring that the Seminoles did not capture and return the fugitive slaves who fled to the Indian country, according to their stipulations in the treaty of Camp Moultrie, but rather afforded protection to them. They further stated that while the Seminoles remained in the country no slaveholder could enjoy his property in peace. This protest was signed by ninety of the principal citizens of said county, and forwarded to the President.
This statement aroused the ire of the President, who at once indorsed on the back of the petition an order to the Secretary of War to “inquire into the alleged facts, and if found to be true, to direct the Seminoles to prepare to remove West and join the Creeks.” The order was characteristic of the author. He waited not for the approval or ratification125 of any treaty; with him the whole depended upon the alleged fact of the Seminoles failing to bring in fugitive slaves—not upon treaty, nor upon the ratification of treaties.[68]
1834.
The Senate of the United States was subsequently called on by the President to approve the treaty after the lapse126 of nearly two years from its date. This was done, and the President by his proclamation immediately declared it in force. It was said by public officers, then in Florida, that had the Seminole delegation been permitted to give an unbiased opinion to their people, there would not have been a man in the Nation willing to migrate.[69]
The whole Nation became indignant at this treatment, and such was the feeling against the agent that he deemed it prudent to retire from the agency. General Wiley Thompson was appointed to succeed him. General Clinch was appointed to the command of the troops, and every preparation was made to insure the speedy removal of the Indians and Exiles west of the Mississippi.
In the meantime, the Creeks learning that a tract of country was, by the additional treaty, agreed to be set off to the separate use of the Seminoles, saw clearly the influence which Abraham had exercised in the matter, and, fearing their own designs for obtaining slaves would be defeated through their principal chiefs, addressed a protest to the Hon. Lewis Cass, then Secretary of War, remonstrating128 against the policy of giving the Seminoles a separate country.
These chiefs were sagacious men, who had attained129 distinction with the Creeks by their manifestation130 of superior intelligence. Two of them, Rolley McIntosh and Chilley McIntosh, sons of a Scotch131 trader who lived with the Indians, had been educated, and were regarded as among the able politicians of the day. They, together with “Toshatchee Mieco” and “Lewis,” urged the propriety of uniting the two tribes as one people, without any separate organization. The next day they addressed another letter to Secretary Cass, giving additional reasons and arguments why the Seminoles should not have separate lands.[70]
The President had already adopted the policy of compelling the Seminoles to unite under one government with the Creeks: and this stipulation for separate lands was introduced into the “additional treaty,” by commissioners who were not fully55 informed of the President’s views. This compact, entered into at Fort Gibson, erroneously called an “additional treaty,” was known to be void: neither the Seminole chiefs nor the United States commissioners had authority to negotiate any treaty whatever; and this stipulation, for holding separate lands by the Seminoles, appears to have been totally disregarded by the Executive, as will more fully appear hereafter.
Another circumstance had induced the Creeks to remain silent in regard to the Exiles. By the treaty of Indian Spring, they had placed at the President’s disposal $250,000, out of which the slaveholders of Georgia were to be paid for slaves and property lost prior to 1802. The commissioners appointed to make the examination found but $109,000 due the claimants under this stipulation, leaving in the hands of the President $141,000 belonging to the Creeks. This, however, was claimed by the slaveholders, in addition to the amount allowed by the treaty. To obtain this money the slaveholders sent their petition to Congress. The subject was referred to a committee, of which Mr. Gilmer, of Georgia, was Chairman. The committee made a very elaborate report, setting forth133 that the claimants had an equitable right to this money as an indemnity134 “for the loss of the offspring which the Exiles would have borne to their masters had they remained in bondage,” and it is among the inexplicable135 transactions of that day, that the bill passed, giving the money to those claimants without the uttering of a protest, or the statement of an objection, by any Northern representative or senator.
The Creeks now having paid the full amount stipulated in the treaty, and being robbed of the $141,000, to compensate the slaveholders for children who had never been born, were excited to madness. They believed themselves to hold the beneficial interest in the bodies of the Exiles, and determined to obtain possession of them.[71] They immediately sent a delegation to the Seminoles to demand possession of the Exiles as their slaves.
While the Creeks were thus demanding possession of the refugees, the Executive of the United States and his officers were endeavoring to compel them to go West, where the Creeks could, without opposition, lay hands upon them and enslave them.
The six Seminole chiefs holding reservations upon the Appalachicola River owned some slaves, and with those slaves some of the Exiles had intermarried. Each chief, by the terms of the treaty of Camp Moultrie, was permitted to name the men who were to reside with him, and such chief became responsible for the conduct of the persons thus named; while the United States stipulated to “afford the chiefs and their people protection against all persons whatsoever.”
The white settlements had extended to the vicinity of these reservations, and the Exiles and Seminole slaves living on them were more immediately exposed to the rapacity of the whites than were those in the interior of the territory.
1835.
The mania136 for obtaining slaves by piratical violence, seems to have reached a point almost incredible to the people of the free States. E-con-chattimico was one of the chiefs whose reservation lay on the west side of the river. He had long been highly respected by the whites. He owned some twenty slaves, who were residing with him in a state of partial freedom—paying him an annual stipend of provisions for their time, and holding such property as they could acquire. Connected with these slaves, and with some of the Indians on the Reservation, were about an equal number of Exiles, who had never known slavery, but whose ancestors, in former generations, had toiled138 in bondage. Unwilling to separate from their intimate friends and connexions, they had, as stated in a former chapter, come here to occupy, with E-con-chattimico and his friends, one of the extensive plantations which had been occupied by their brethren who fell at Blount’s Fort, in 1816. The chief had named them as his friends, and a record of the fact had been deposited in the office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs; and for their conduct E-con-chattimico was responsible, under the treaty of “Camp Moultrie;” while, by the same instrument, the faith of the nation had been solemnly pledged “to protect them against all persons whatsoever.”
The piratical slave-dealers of Georgia looked upon these people, both Exiles and slaves, with strong desire to possess them. One of these fiends in human shape, named Milton, residing in Columbus, Georgia, professed139 to have purchased them from a Creek Indian. The claim was presented to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and by him referred to Judge Cameron, of the United States District Court in Florida, for examination.
The chief being a man of influence and respected by the whites, found friends to espouse140 his cause. The claimant began to doubt his success under such circumstances, and proposed to withdraw his claim; but so flagrant was its fraudulent character, that Judge Cameron felt it his duty to report upon it, showing it to be void.[72] This report was duly transmitted to the proper department at Washington, and the Old Chief, with his people, once more reposed in apparent security.
It has been alleged, that men who so far paralyze their own moral sensibilities as to rob their fellow-men of their labor132, their liberty, their manhood, and hold them in degrading bondage, can not entertain any clear conceptions of right and wrong. However this may be, it is certain that men who deal in slaves, are ever regarded, even by slaveholders, as destitute141 of moral sentiment.
In this case, Milton, finding that Judge Cameron had reported the claim to be fraudulent and void, professed to sell his interest in these people to certain other slaveholders, of Columbus. These men provided themselves with chains, and fetters142, and bloodhounds, and all the paraphernalia143 of regular slave-dealers upon the African coast, and descending144 the river in a steamboat, intended to surprise their victims before any notice should be given of their approach. But some friendly white, who had learned the intentions of the pirates, had whispered to the aged91 chief the danger which threatened his people. They were soon armed, and prepared to defend themselves or die in the attempt. The desperadoes landed upon the Reservation; but finding the people armed, and ready to receive them in a becoming manner, they retired into the country and alarmed the settlers, by proclaiming that E-con-chattimico had armed his people and was about to make war upon the whites. The news flew in all directions; troops were mustered145 into service; an army was organized and marched to the Reservation, and the proper officer sent, with a white flag, to demand the object and intentions of the chief, in arming his people. The old man was most indignant that his honor should be impugned146 in such manner. He fully explained the cause which induced his people to convene147, and assume a hostile attitude towards those who had come to rob them of their liberty.
The officers, who sympathized with the pirates, were sustained by military force. They assured the old man that no persons should be allowed to injure him or his people; that the country was alarmed, and the public mind could only be pacified148 by a surrender of his arms and ammunition149. To this proposition he was constrained150 to yield. They took his arms and ammunition, and left him defenseless. They remained undisturbed, however, during the night; but the next morning the slave-hunters returned, fully armed. They seized every negro residing upon the Reservation, including both Exiles and the slaves of E-con-chattimico, and, fastening the manacles upon their limbs, hurried them off to Georgia, where they were sold into interminable bondage.[73][74] They, and their ancestors, had enjoyed a hundred years of freedom; but they were suddenly precipitated152 into all the sufferings and sorrows of slavery, and now toil137 in chains, or have departed to that land where slavery is unknown.
E-con-chattimico petitioned Congress for indemnity, but obtained no redress153. Neither the President, nor the Secretary of War, manifested any interest in maintaining our most solemn treaty obligations with the Indians, or attempted any redress for their violation154. Disheartened and broken down in spirits, E-con-chattimico yielded to General Jackson’s orders, emigrated to the western country, and spent the remainder of his days in poverty and want.
Nor were the piracies155 of the white people confined to the crime of kidnapping Exiles. They robbed the Indians and Exiles of horses, cattle and money.
A chief named Blunt also held a reservation on the river, under the treaty of Camp Moultrie. He had some friends among the Exiles who preferred to occupy, with him, one of the plantations left destitute by the murder of the people at “Blount’s Fort,” in 1816. He too had named his friends and become responsible for their conduct, and relied upon the pledged faith of the nation to protect them.
Some desperadoes, said to have come from Georgia, entered his plantation14, robbed him of a large amount of money, and carried away all the negroes living on the Reserve.
Another chief named Walker, also residing on a reservation, with some slaves and Exiles, discovered that a notorious slave-catcher from Georgia, named Douglass, and some associates, were hanging around his plantation, with the apparent intention of capturing and enslaving the colored people. Warned by the outrage95 committed upon E-con-chattimico and his people, both Indians and negroes collected together, armed themselves, and determined to resist any violence that should be offered them.
When the piratical Georgians approached, they fired upon them. Finding the people armed and determined to resist, the manstealers retreated and disappeared. Feeling they were in danger, Walker wrote the Agent of the Seminoles, calling for protection, according to the stipulations of the treaty of Camp Moultrie. In his letter he says, “Are the free negroes (Exiles), and negroes belonging to this town (slaves), to be stolen away publicly in the face of law and justice—carried off and sold to fill the pockets of those worse than land pirates?”
This appeal was in vain. The Agent paid no attention to it. The kidnappers156 were vigilant and watchful157, and when their victims supposed themselves safe, they stole upon them, seized them, and hurried them off to the interior of Alabama, and sold them into slavery.
The scenes so often witnessed upon the slave coast of Africa became common in Florida; while Georgia, and Alabama, and Florida, afforded a class of men in no respect superior in morals to those outlaws158 and pirates who pursue the foreign slave trade.
The dangers threatening the Exiles now became imminent159. They saw clearly they were to be enslaved, or compelled to resort to arms in defense151 of their liberties. Their entire influence was exercised to prevent emigration, as they feared that would subject them to Creek jurisdiction and enslavement.
These objections were made known to the Department at Washington by the Agent of the Seminoles, Wiley Thompson, who, in plain and unmistakable language, informed the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, that the principal objection to removing West which operated upon the minds of the Seminoles arose from the claim of the Creeks to those people who had fled from Georgia prior to 1802, and extending back to the commencement of the Revolutionary War. He assured the Department, that if the Seminoles were compelled to remove West, these descendants of the Exiles would be enslaved by the Creeks, and if they remained in Florida, they would be enslaved by the whites. He told the Department in plain language, that many of those negroes who had been born and raised among the Indians had been enslaved by the people of Florida and of Georgia, and were then held in bondage.[75]
Among other officers who espoused160 the cause of humanity at that period, so interesting to the Exiles, was the veteran General Clinch. He was a man of great probity161 of character—one of the most gallant162 officers in the service—at the time in actual command of the troops in Florida. He had long been acquainted with the Indians, and no man perhaps better understood the character of the Exiles. He had twenty years before commanded, the troops at the massacre of “Blount’s Fort,” and well understood the persecutions to which the Exiles had been subjected. In strong language, he pointed24 out the wrong about to be perpetrated upon them, as well as upon the Seminoles. He informed the Secretary of War, in direct and positive language, that if the Seminoles and their “negro allies” were sent West, the negroes would be enslaved by the Creeks.[76]
Hon. John H. Eaton, Governor of Florida, a warm personal and political friend of the President, in whom it was believed the Executive reposed great confidence, also wrote the department, delineating the wrongs about to be perpetrated upon these colored people, who for several generations had resided with the Seminoles.
These and other officers of Government united in the opinion, that these “negroes,” as they were generally called, exerted a controlling influence over the Indians, and that it would be in vain to attempt the removal of the Indians under these circumstances.
To these remonstrances, the Hon. Secretary of War, General Cass, replied, with apparent determination to remove the Indians at any expense of blood, of treasure, and of national reputation. The appeals made to the justice of our Government were stigmatized163 “as the promptings of a false philanthropy;” and our agents and officers were directed to inform the Seminoles, in peremptory language, that they must emigrate to the western country.
Laboring164 under the delusion165 that official station would add a controlling influence to his language, General Cass transmitted to the Indian Agent a speech, addressed to the Seminoles and their allies, in which he endeavored to persuade them to emigrate and join the Creeks, and subject themselves to Creek authority. The Seminoles and their friends listened to the speech with that respectful attention which would be expected from men who knew their lives and liberties were in danger.
It was at one of these consultations166, in the presence of their Agent, that “Osceola,” at that time a young warrior, attracted attention by saying, “this is the only treaty I will ever make with the whites,” at the same time drawing his knife and striking it forcibly into the table before him.[77]
It was at this period that abandoned white men conceived the plan of buying negroes from Seminoles while in a state of intoxication167, and selling them to the white people. If they could get an Indian drunk, they could of course obtain from him a bill of sale of any negro they pleased, whether the Indian had any title to him or not. This plan of separating the Seminoles from their colored friends, it was thought would conduce to their removal.
Applications to enter the Indian Territory for the purpose of purchasing slaves were referred by the Secretary of War to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and by the latter officer to the Attorney General Felix Grundy, who gravely reported, that he “saw no good reason why the white people should not be permitted to buy slaves of the Indians;” and the President having considered the matter, ordered permission to be granted for that purpose.
Officers who were in Florida saw at once that this policy would kindle168 the smothered169 indignation of the Indians and Exiles into a flame. The Agent of the Seminoles, refusing to obey the orders thus given, remonstrated170 against the policy in a letter addressed to the head of the Department, in which he says: “The remark in your letter that it is not presumed the condition of these negroes (the Exiles) would be worse than that of others in the same section of country is true; yet you will agree that the same remark would apply to you, to me, or to any other individual of the United States, as we should, if subjected to slavery, be in the precise condition of other slaves.”
So general and so great was the indignation excited by this order for establishing a commerce in human flesh with drunken Seminoles, that it was soon after countermanded171; yet the immediate127 emigration of the Indians was urged with increased earnestness, although the Department of War was informed by nearly every officer in the military and Indian service of Florida, that they could not be induced to emigrate, so long as the Exiles should be regarded as in danger of being subjected to Creek authority.
But the stern decree had gone forth that “the Indians should prepare to emigrate West and join the Creeks;” and the necessary preparations were hurried forward both in the Military and Civil Departments of Government. The Exiles and Seminoles saw clearly the terrible alternative to which they were soon to be driven, and they turned their attention to active preparations for the conflict. Their crops were carefully secured; their cattle driven far into the interior; and their women and children removed from the frontier to places of safety. They omitted no opportunity of securing powder and lead; and while associating with the white people, they manifested a bold contempt and dislike for them, which gave gloomy forebodings of the future.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
commissioners
|
|
| n.专员( commissioner的名词复数 )；长官；委员；政府部门的长官 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
commissioner
|
|
| n.（政府厅、局、处等部门）专员，长官，委员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
stipulation
|
|
| n.契约，规定，条文；条款说明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
delegation
|
|
| n.代表团；派遣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
creek
|
|
| n.小溪，小河，小湾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
creeks
|
|
| n.小湾( creek的名词复数 )；小港；小河；小溪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
dissuade
|
|
| v.劝阻，阻止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
warriors
|
|
| 武士，勇士，战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
clinch
|
|
| v.敲弯，钉牢；确定；扭住对方 [参]clench | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
authorizes
|
|
| 授权，批准，委托( authorize的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
plantations
|
|
| n.种植园，大农场( plantation的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
plantation
|
|
| n.种植园，大农场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
cultivation
|
|
| n.耕作，培养，栽培（法），养成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
fugitive
|
|
| adj.逃亡的，易逝的；n.逃犯，逃亡者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
propriety
|
|
| n.正当行为；正当；适当 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
fugitives
|
|
| n.亡命者，逃命者( fugitive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
cypress
|
|
| n.柏树 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
retired
|
|
| adj.隐退的，退休的，退役的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
alluded
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
propounded
|
|
| v.提出（问题、计划等）供考虑[讨论]，提议( propound的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
prudent
|
|
| adj.谨慎的，有远见的，精打细算的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
runaway
|
|
| n.逃走的人，逃亡，亡命者；adj.逃亡的，逃走的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
constrain
|
|
| vt.限制，约束；克制，抑制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
covenanted
|
|
| v.立约，立誓( covenant的过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
patronage
|
|
| n.赞助，支援，援助；光顾，捧场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
whatsoever
|
|
| adv.（用于否定句中以加强语气）任何；pron.无论什么 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
intruding
|
|
| v.侵入，侵扰，打扰( intrude的现在分词)；把…强加于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
hogs
|
|
| n.（尤指喂肥供食用的）猪( hog的名词复数 )；（供食用的）阉公猪；彻底地做某事；自私的或贪婪的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
annually
|
|
| adv.一年一次，每年 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
stipulate
|
|
| vt.规定，（作为条件）讲定，保证 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
vigilant
|
|
| adj.警觉的，警戒的，警惕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
absconding
|
|
| v.（尤指逃避逮捕）潜逃，逃跑( abscond的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
exertions
|
|
| n.努力( exertion的名词复数 )；费力；（能力、权力等的）运用；行使 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
apprehend
|
|
| vt.理解，领悟，逮捕，拘捕，忧虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
compensate
|
|
| vt.补偿，赔偿；酬报 vi.弥补；补偿；抵消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
incurred
|
|
| [医]招致的，遭受的； incur的过去式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
previously
|
|
| adv.以前，先前（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
expended
|
|
| v.花费( expend的过去式和过去分词 )；使用（钱等）做某事；用光；耗尽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
actively
|
|
| adv.积极地，勤奋地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
squandered
|
|
| v.（指钱，财产等）浪费，乱花( squander的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
regain
|
|
| vt.重新获得，收复，恢复 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
appropriations
|
|
| n.挪用（appropriation的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
meshes
|
|
| 网孔( mesh的名词复数 )； 网状物； 陷阱； 困境 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
parlance
|
|
| n.说法；语调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
prosecution
|
|
| n.起诉，告发，检举，执行，经营 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
severely
|
|
| adv.严格地；严厉地；非常恶劣地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
ascertained
|
|
| v.弄清，确定，查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
ascertain
|
|
| vt.发现，确定，查明，弄清 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
gad
|
|
| n.闲逛；v.闲逛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
obnoxious
|
|
| adj.极恼人的，讨人厌的，可憎的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
superintendent
|
|
| n.监督人，主管，总监；(英国)警务长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
equitable
|
|
| adj.公平的；公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
brute
|
|
| n.野兽，兽性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
consigned
|
|
| v.把…置于（令人不快的境地）( consign的过去式和过去分词 )；把…托付给；把…托人代售；丟弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
bondage
|
|
| n.奴役，束缚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
fictitious
|
|
| adj.虚构的，假设的；空头的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
catching
|
|
| adj.易传染的，有魅力的，迷人的，接住 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
remiss
|
|
| adj.不小心的，马虎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
remissness
|
|
| n.玩忽职守；马虎；怠慢；不小心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
76
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
proceedings
|
|
| n.进程，过程，议程；诉讼(程序)；公报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
peremptory
|
|
| adj.紧急的，专横的，断然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
dignified
|
|
| a.可敬的，高贵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
rebuke
|
|
| v.指责，非难，斥责 [反]praise | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
attachment
|
|
| n.附属物，附件；依恋；依附 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
slaying
|
|
| 杀戮。 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
barbarians
|
|
| n.野蛮人( barbarian的名词复数 )；外国人；粗野的人；无教养的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
rapacity
|
|
| n.贪婪，贪心，劫掠的欲望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
aged
|
|
| adj.年老的，陈年的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
reposed
|
|
| v.将（手臂等）靠在某人（某物）上( repose的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
remonstrances
|
|
| n.抱怨，抗议( remonstrance的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
stipend
|
|
| n.薪贴；奖学金；养老金 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
outrage
|
|
| n.暴行，侮辱，愤怒；vt.凌辱，激怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
outrages
|
|
| 引起…的义愤，激怒( outrage的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
judicial
|
|
| adj.司法的，法庭的，审判的，明断的，公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
unlimited
|
|
| adj.无限的，不受控制的，无条件的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
annuities
|
|
| n.养老金；年金( annuity的名词复数 )；（每年的）养老金；年金保险；年金保险投资 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
rapacious
|
|
| adj.贪婪的，强夺的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
hostilities
|
|
| n.战争；敌意(hostility的复数)；敌对状态；战事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
dictated
|
|
| v.大声讲或读( dictate的过去式和过去分词 )；口授；支配；摆布 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
peremptorily
|
|
| adv.紧急地，不容分说地，专横地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
preamble
|
|
| n.前言；序文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
stipulated
|
|
| vt.& vi.规定；约定adj.[法]合同规定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
stipulates
|
|
| n.（尤指在协议或建议中）规定，约定，讲明（条件等）( stipulate的名词复数 )；规定，明确要求v.（尤指在协议或建议中）规定，约定，讲明（条件等）( stipulate的第三人称单数 )；规定，明确要求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
liquidate
|
|
| v.偿付，清算，扫除；整理，破产 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
tract
|
|
| n.传单，小册子，大片(土地或森林) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
jurisdiction
|
|
| n.司法权，审判权，管辖权，控制权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
conspicuous
|
|
| adj.明眼的，惹人注目的；炫耀的，摆阔气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
justifying
|
|
| 证明…有理( justify的现在分词 )； 为…辩护； 对…作出解释； 为…辩解（或辩护） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
confidential
|
|
| adj.秘（机）密的，表示信任的，担任机密工作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
construed
|
|
| v.解释（陈述、行为等）( construe的过去式和过去分词 )；翻译，作句法分析 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
metes
|
|
| v.（对某人）施以，给予（处罚等）( mete的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
123
intrigue
|
|
| vt.激起兴趣，迷住；vi.耍阴谋；n.阴谋，密谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
bribery
|
|
| n.贿络行为，行贿，受贿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
ratification
|
|
| n.批准，认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
lapse
|
|
| n.过失，流逝，失效，抛弃信仰，间隔；vi.堕落，停止，失效，流逝；vt.使失效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
remonstrating
|
|
| v.抗议( remonstrate的现在分词 )；告诫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
manifestation
|
|
| n.表现形式；表明；现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
scotch
|
|
| n.伤口，刻痕；苏格兰威士忌酒；v.粉碎，消灭，阻止；adj.苏格兰(人)的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
indemnity
|
|
| n.赔偿，赔款，补偿金 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
inexplicable
|
|
| adj.无法解释的，难理解的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
mania
|
|
| n.疯狂；躁狂症，狂热，癖好 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
toil
|
|
| vi.辛劳工作，艰难地行动；n.苦工，难事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
toiled
|
|
| 长时间或辛苦地工作( toil的过去式和过去分词 )； 艰难缓慢地移动，跋涉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
espouse
|
|
| v.支持，赞成，嫁娶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
destitute
|
|
| adj.缺乏的；穷困的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
fetters
|
|
| n.脚镣( fetter的名词复数 )；束缚v.给…上脚镣，束缚( fetter的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
paraphernalia
|
|
| n.装备；随身用品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
descending
|
|
| n. 下行 adj. 下降的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
mustered
|
|
| v.集合，召集，集结（尤指部队）( muster的过去式和过去分词 )；（自他人处）搜集某事物；聚集；激发 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
impugned
|
|
| v.非难，指谪( impugn的过去式和过去分词 )；对…有怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
convene
|
|
| v.集合，召集，召唤，聚集，集合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
pacified
|
|
| 使（某人）安静( pacify的过去式和过去分词 )； 息怒； 抚慰； 在（有战争的地区、国家等）实现和平 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
ammunition
|
|
| n.军火，弹药 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
constrained
|
|
| adj.束缚的,节制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
defense
|
|
| n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
precipitated
|
|
| v.（突如其来地）使发生( precipitate的过去式和过去分词 )；促成；猛然摔下；使沉淀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
redress
|
|
| n.赔偿，救济，矫正；v.纠正，匡正，革除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
violation
|
|
| n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
piracies
|
|
| n.海上抢劫( piracy的名词复数 )；盗版行为，非法复制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
156
kidnappers
|
|
| n.拐子，绑匪( kidnapper的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
watchful
|
|
| adj.注意的，警惕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
outlaws
|
|
| 歹徒，亡命之徒( outlaw的名词复数 )； 逃犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
imminent
|
|
| adj.即将发生的，临近的，逼近的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
espoused
|
|
| v.（决定）支持，拥护（目标、主张等）( espouse的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
probity
|
|
| n.刚直；廉洁，正直 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
gallant
|
|
| adj.英勇的，豪侠的；(向女人)献殷勤的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
stigmatized
|
|
| v.使受耻辱，指责，污辱( stigmatize的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
laboring
|
|
| n.劳动，操劳v.努力争取(for)( labor的现在分词 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
delusion
|
|
| n.谬见，欺骗，幻觉，迷惑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
consultations
|
|
| n.磋商（会议）( consultation的名词复数 )；商讨会；协商会；查找 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
intoxication
|
|
| n.wild excitement;drunkenness；poisoning | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
kindle
|
|
| v.点燃，着火 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
smothered
|
|
| （使）窒息， （使）透不过气( smother的过去式和过去分词 )； 覆盖； 忍住； 抑制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
remonstrated
|
|
| v.抗议( remonstrate的过去式和过去分词 )；告诫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
countermanded
|
|
| v.取消（命令），撤回( countermand的过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |