17 |
Parke thought this suggestion of Little Eyes a sound one, since the Indians
profess to believe their [annuity] goods might have been forwarded [before this time]- They do not, or will not comprehend the explanations frequently given, as to the cause of there delay- British agents or Traders or disaffected Indians have repeatedly informd them, that the U. States would keep their land, but that they would pay them nothing for it- That they need not expect their annuities- and that the President would deceive them.17
The Secretary of War appointed Agent Parke and Fidelio C. Sharp, a member of
the Kentucky State Senate,18 as commissioners to settle the dispute
that had arisen. The two commissioners were allowed $5000 to distribute among
the Indians, above the annuities due the latter, in order to conciliate
the various tribes from
whom the purchase was originally Made,
and such other tribes as may be present, who lay any species of
claim to these lands.19
The Secretary's instructions were that no question was to be allowed concerning the validity of the previous treaties of cession, and that the tribes present at the Council
17. Idem.
18. Sharp was, apparently, unable to attend the Treaty. Only Benjamin Parke's name appears on the Treaty as commissioner, nor is Sharp's name among those listed as witnesses to the Treaty.
19. Carter, Territorial Papers, vol. 8, p. 419; Dft. Ex. 69.
18 |
should make a formal acknowledgment of their earlier cessions of the lands.20
Apparently when the "Grand Council" met at Fort Harrison at the end of May, 1816, the annuities, further explanations, and the extra $5000 were sufficient to settle the dispute.21 The Weas and Kickapoos became parties to a Treaty signed on June 4, 1816 (7 Stat. 145) which acknowledged the validity of the different treaties these two groups had made with the United States since the Treaty of Greenville of August 3, 1795, and signified their willingness to observe past treaties. In Article 3 of the Treaty of June 4, 1816 the Weas and Kickapoos attested that with respect to the
boundary line, surveyed and marked by the United States, of the land on the Wabash and White rivers, ceded in the year eighteen hundred and nine, the said tribes do hereby explicitly recognise and confirm, as having been executed conformably to the several treaties they have made with the United States. (7 Stat. 145:146)
The Kickapoos' re-affirmation of their cession of Royce Area 74, which had been
made in the Treaty of December 9, 1809 between the United States and the
Kickapoos, is contained in Article 4 of the Treaty of June 4, 1816. In this
Article "The chiefs and warriors of the said tribe of the Kickapoos"
specifically acknowledged "that they have ceded to the United States"
Royce Area 74, "according to the terms
20. Ibid., pp.
419-420; Dft. Ex. 69.
21. Neither a journal of the council proceedings, nor a less formal report on the arguments used to convince the Indians, is available.
19 |
and conditions of the treaty they made with the United States" on December 9, 1809.
The list of signers of the Treaty of June 4, 1816 contains the names of eleven "Kickapoos;" the "Weas" list contains the names of seven Weas and two Miamis.22 The two Miamis were "Owl, (a Miami)" and "Mahchekeleatah, or Big Man, (a Miami)" (7 Stat. 145:146). Both were well known- Owl especially. The latter had, in about 1789, removed from Indiana to the country west of the Mississippi,23 but by 1803 was back in Indiana Territory.24 In 1805 Owl was one of five Miami signers of the Treaty of Grouseland (7 Stat. 91:92); in 1809 he spoke frequently for the Miamis at the negotiations of the Treaty of Fort Wayne25 and was one of the six Miami signers of that Treaty (7 Stat. 113:115) and of the Separate Article (7 Stat. 115:116). In 1814 both Owl and Big Man were among the Miami signers of a Treaty of Peace and Friendship (7 Stat. 118:119); the next year Owl signed another peace treaty held at Spring Wells on September 8, 1815 (7 Stat. 131:132).
23. See p. 57-58, this Report.
24. See pp. 215-217, this Report.
25. See Journal of the Proceedings, Indian Treaty, Fort Wayne, pp. 10, 13, 17-18; Dft. Ex. 131.
20 |
Conclusions. The dispute over the boundary line and cession of Royce Areas 73 and 74 which led to the negotiation of the Treaty of June 4, 1816 sheds a certain amount of light on the status of various Wabash River Indians and their claims, as viewed by Government officials other than William Henry Harrison.
Clearly, Indian Agent Benjamin Parke, who negotiated the Treaty of June 4, 1816, regarded the Weas as a group separate and distinct from the Miamis. The Treaty he made with the Weas and the Kickapoos on June 4, 1816 violated the agreement made in Article 4 of the Treaty of Grouseland of August 21, 1805 whereby the United States engaged to consider the Miamis, Eel Rivers and Weas as joint owners of all the country on the Wabash and its waters above the Vincennes Tract. But the foundation for this violation had already been laid by Harrison in the Treaty of Fort Wayne of September 30, 1809; in the Treaty with the Weas of October 26, 1809, and in the Treaty with the Kickapoos of December 30, 1809.
While two of the "Weas" signers of Parke's Treaty of June 4, 1816 were noticed as Miamis and were Miamis, the greater number of "Weas" signers (seven) were Weas. No Eel River Indians appear as signers of the Treaty. All this indicates to us that Parke was emphasizing the Wea Treaty of October 26, 1809, rather than the Miami-Eel River-Delaware-Potawatomi Treaty of September 30, 1809, as far as gaining re-affirmation of the cession of Royce Area 73 by the proper parties was concerned. The other group Parke was obligated to
21 |
have re-affirm the cession of Royce Area 73 was of course the Kickapoos; this was necessary in view of the Kickapoo Treaty of December 30, 1809, and here Parke had no choice.
The Miamis' claim to ownership of Royce Areas 73 and 74, which was voiced by the Miamis to the commandant of Fort Harrison two months prior to the Treaty of June 4, 1816, was given scant credit by that officer, who could "scarcely believe" that the Miamis would persist in such a claim. The role that Agent Parke expected to have the Miamis and other groups assume at his "Grand Council" which preceded the Treaty of June 4, 1816, was that of persuasive arbiters, not of active participants, according to Parke's own statement.
The specific reaffirmation, by the Kickapoos only, of their December 30, 1809 cession of Royce Area 74 affords additional evidence as to which group Parke considered had a serious claim to Area 74. Although there were Miamis present at the Treaty of June 4, 1816, Parke did not obtain a Miami "sanction" of the Kickapoo cession, as had been called for in the original Kickapoo cession of Area 74, which in 1816 was being reaffirmed. Parke may have considered this "sanction" none of his affair; or there may have been only a few Miamis present at Parke's Treaty of June 4, 1816; or Parke may have considered such a sanction unnecessary- we do not know.
Our conclusions can be summarized briefly. The Treaty of June 4, 1816 and the events leading up to it serve to further illustrate the falsity of the general and well-publicized Miami claim to all the country on the Wabash and
22 |
its waters. In 1816, government officials serving in the lower Wabash region gave little or no credence to any Miami claim to the lands in this region.
Go to
List of Def. Ex. Used in Report
Go to
Bibliography
Return
to Anth. Rep. Docket 317 Volume II Table of Contents
Go
to Anth. Rep. Docket 317 Volume I Table of Contents
Return to Ohio Valley -
Great Lakes Ethnohistory Archive Menu
Return to Glenn A. Black
Laboratory of Archaeology List of Publications
Return to Glenn A. Black
Laboratory of Archaeology Home
Last updated: 11
September 2000
Comments: gbl@indiana.edu
Copyright 1997, Glen Black Laboratory of Archaeology and The Trustees of Indiana University.