Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why the Cherokee Nation Allied Themselves With the Confederate States of America in 1861
Lew Rockwell.com ^ | January 7, 2004 | Leonard M. Scruggs

Posted on 01/07/2004 7:12:30 AM PST by Aurelius

Many have no doubt heard of the valor of the Cherokee warriors under the command of Brigadier General Stand Watie in the West and of Thomas’ famous North Carolina Legion in the East during the War for Southern Independence from 1861 to 1865. But why did the Cherokees and their brethren, the Creeks, Seminoles, Choctaws, and Chickasaws determine to make common cause with the Confederate South against the Northern Union? To know their reasons is very instructive as to the issues underlying that tragic war. Most Americans have been propagandized rather than educated in the causes of the war, all this to justify the perpetrators and victors. Considering the Cherokee view uncovers much truth buried by decades of politically correct propaganda and allows a broader and truer perspective.

On August 21, 1861, the Cherokee Nation by a General Convention at Tahlequah (in Oklahoma) declared its common cause with the Confederate States against the Northern Union. A treaty was concluded on October 7th between the Confederate States and the Cherokee Nation, and on October 9th, John Ross, the Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation called into session the Cherokee National Committee and National Council to approve and implement that treaty and a future course of action.

The Cherokees had at first considerable consternation over the growing conflict and desired to remain neutral. They had much common economy and contact with their Confederate neighbors, but their treaties were with the government of the United States.

The Northern conduct of the war against their neighbors, strong repression of Northern political dissent, and the roughshod trampling of the U. S Constitution under the new regime and political powers in Washington soon changed their thinking.

The Cherokee were perhaps the best educated and literate of the American Indian Tribes. They were also among the most Christian. Learning and wisdom were highly esteemed. They revered the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution as particularly important guarantors of their rights and freedoms. It is not surprising then that on October 28, 1861, the National Council issued a Declaration by the People of the Cherokee Nation of the Causes Which Have Impelled them to Unite Their Fortunes With Those of the Confederate States of America.

The introductory words of this declaration strongly resembled the 1776 Declaration of Independence:

"When circumstances beyond their control compel one people to sever the ties which have long existed between them and another state or confederacy, and to contract new alliances and establish new relations for the security of their rights and liberties, it is fit that they should publicly declare the reasons by which their action is justified."

In the next paragraphs of their declaration the Cherokee Council noted their faithful adherence to their treaties with the United States in the past and how they had faithfully attempted neutrality until the present. But the seventh paragraph begins to delineate their alarm with Northern aggression and sympathy with the South:

"But Providence rules the destinies of nations, and events, by inexorable necessity, overrule human resolutions."

Comparing the relatively limited objectives and defensive nature of the Southern cause in contrast to the aggressive actions of the North they remarked of the Confederate States:

"Disclaiming any intention to invade the Northern States, they sought only to repel the invaders from their own soil and to secure the right of governing themselves. They claimed only the privilege asserted in the Declaration of American Independence, and on which the right of Northern States themselves to self-government is formed, and altering their form of government when it became no longer tolerable and establishing new forms for the security of their liberties."

The next paragraph noted the orderly and democratic process by which each of the Confederate States seceded. This was without violence or coercion and nowhere were liberties abridged or civilian courts and authorities made subordinate to the military. Also noted was the growing unity and success of the South against Northern aggression. The following or ninth paragraph contrasts this with ruthless and totalitarian trends in the North:

"But in the Northern States the Cherokee people saw with alarm a violated constitution, all civil liberty put in peril, and all rules of civilized warfare and the dictates of common humanity and decency unhesitatingly disregarded. In the states which still adhered to the Union a military despotism had displaced civilian power and the laws became silent with arms. Free speech and almost free thought became a crime. The right of habeas corpus, guaranteed by the constitution, disappeared at the nod of a Secretary of State or a general of the lowest grade. The mandate of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was at naught by the military power and this outrage on common right approved by a President sworn to support the constitution. War on the largest scale was waged, and the immense bodies of troops called into the field in the absence of any warranting it under the pretense of suppressing unlawful combination of men."

The tenth paragraph continues the indictment of the Northern political party in power and the conduct of the Union Armies:

"The humanities of war, which even barbarians respect, were no longer thought worthy to be observed. Foreign mercenaries and the scum of the cities and the inmates of prisons were enlisted and organized into brigades and sent into Southern States to aid in subjugating a people struggling for freedom, to burn, to plunder, and to commit the basest of outrages on the women; while the heels of armed tyranny trod upon the necks of Maryland and Missouri, and men of the highest character and position were incarcerated upon suspicion without process of law, in jails, forts, and prison ships, and even women were imprisoned by the arbitrary order of a President and Cabinet Ministers; while the press ceased to be free, and the publication of newspapers was suspended and their issues seized and destroyed; the officers and men taken prisoners in the battles were allowed to remain in captivity by the refusal of the Government to consent to an exchange of prisoners; as they had left their dead on more than one field of battle that had witnessed their defeat, to be buried and their wounded to be cared for by southern hands."

The eleventh paragraph of the Cherokee declaration is a fairly concise summary of their grievances against the political powers now presiding over a new U. S. Government:

"Whatever causes the Cherokee people may have had in the past to complain of some of the southern states, they cannot but feel that their interests and destiny are inseparably connected to those of the south. The war now waging is a war of Northern cupidity and fanaticism against the institution of African servitude; against the commercial freedom of the south, and against the political freedom of the states, and its objects are to annihilate the sovereignty of those states and utterly change the nature of the general government."

The Cherokees felt they had been faithful and loyal to their treaties with the United States, but now perceived that the relationship was not reciprocal and that their very existence as a people was threatened. They had also witnessed the recent exploitation of the properties and rights of Indian tribes in Kansas, Nebraska, and Oregon, and feared that they, too, might soon become victims of Northern rapacity. Therefore, they were compelled to abrogate those treaties in defense of their people, lands, and rights. They felt the Union had already made war on them by their actions.

Finally, appealing to their inalienable right to self-defense and self-determination as a free people, they concluded their declaration with the following words:

"Obeying the dictates of prudence and providing for the general safety and welfare, confident of the rectitude of their intentions and true to their obligations to duty and honor, they accept the issue thus forced upon them, unite their fortunes now and forever with the Confederate States, and take up arms for the common cause, and with entire confidence of the justice of that cause and with a firm reliance upon Divine Providence, will resolutely abide the consequences.

The Cherokees were true to their words. The last shot fired in the war east of the Mississippi was May 6, 1865. This was in an engagement at White Sulphur Springs, near Waynesville, North Carolina, of part of Thomas’ Legion against Kirk’s infamous Union raiders that had wreaked a murderous terrorism and destruction on the civilian population of Western North Carolina. Col. William H. Thomas’ Legion was originally predominantly Cherokee, but had also accrued a large number of North Carolina mountain men. On June 23, 1865, in what was the last land battle of the war, Confederate Brigadier General and Cherokee Chief, Stand Watie, finally surrendered his predominantly Cherokee, Oklahoma Indian force to the Union.

The issues as the Cherokees saw them were 1) self-defense against Northern aggression, both for themselves and their fellow Confederates, 2) the right of self-determination by a free people, 3) protection of their heritage, 4) preservation of their political rights under a constitutional government of law 5) a strong desire to retain the principles of limited government and decentralized power guaranteed by the Constitution, 6) protection of their economic rights and welfare, 7) dismay at the despotism of the party and leaders now in command of the U. S. Government, 8) dismay at the ruthless disregard of commonly accepted rules of warfare by the Union, especially their treatment of civilians and non-combatants, 9) a fear of economic exploitation by corrupt politicians and their supporters based on observed past experience, and 10) alarm at the self-righteous and extreme, punitive, and vengeful pronouncements on the slavery issue voiced by the radical abolitionists and supported by many Northern politicians, journalists, social, and religious (mostly Unitarian) leaders. It should be noted here that some of the Cherokees owned slaves, but the practice was not extensive.

The Cherokee Declaration of October 1861 uncovers a far more complex set of "Civil War" issues than most Americans have been taught. Rediscovered truth is not always welcome. Indeed some of the issues here are so distressing that the general academic, media, and public reaction is to rebury them or shout them down as politically incorrect.

The notion that slavery was the only real or even principal cause of the war is very politically correct and widely held, but historically ignorant. It has served, however, as a convenient ex post facto justification for the war and its conduct. Slavery was an issue, and it was related to many other issues, but it was by no means the only issue, or even the most important underlying issue. It was not even an issue in the way most people think of it. Only about 25% of Southern households owned slaves. For most people, North and South, the slavery issue was not so much whether to keep it or not, but how to phase it out without causing economic and social disruption and disaster. Unfortunately the Southern and Cherokee fear of the radical abolitionists turned out to be well founded.

After the Reconstruction Act was passed in 1867 the radical abolitionists and radical Republicans were able to issue in a shameful era of politically punitive and economically exploitive oppression in the South, the results of which lasted many years, and even today are not yet completely erased.

The Cherokee were and are a remarkable people who have impacted the American heritage far beyond their numbers. We can be especially grateful that they made a well thought out and articulate declaration for supporting and joining the Confederate cause in 1861.

PRINCIPAL REFERENCES:

Emmett Starr, History of the Cherokee Indians, published by the Warden Company, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 1921. Reprinted by Kraus Reprint Company, Millwood, New York, 1977.

Hattie Caldwell Davis, Civil War Letters and Memories from the Great Smoky Mountains, Second Edition published by the author, Maggie Valley, NC, 1999.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: americanindians; dixie; dixielist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-357 next last

1 posted on 01/07/2004 7:12:31 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac; shuckmaster; Tauzero; JoeGar; stainlessbanner; Intimidator; ThJ1800; SelfGov; Triple; ..
BUMP
2 posted on 01/07/2004 7:16:53 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
ping to you.
3 posted on 01/07/2004 7:16:57 AM PST by Jonah Hex (If repetition wasn't a good thing, why would people get married?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
IIRC, Some of these Indian tribes owned slaves.
4 posted on 01/07/2004 7:17:00 AM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
ping
5 posted on 01/07/2004 7:17:32 AM PST by RebelBanker (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *dixie_list; CurlyBill; w_over_w; BSunday; PeaRidge; RebelBanker; PistolPaknMama; SC partisan; ...
Cherokee bump
6 posted on 01/07/2004 7:19:03 AM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
For most people, North and South, the slavery issue was not so much whether to keep it or not, but how to phase it out without causing economic and social disruption and disaster.

I suppose that's why the South was so warm for the extension of slavery to the territories--phasing it out, and all that.

7 posted on 01/07/2004 7:20:08 AM PST by Agnes Heep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Peeshwank bump-for-later
8 posted on 01/07/2004 7:20:40 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agnes Heep
Aaaaaah, nothing like a good old fashoined FR civil war thread. Especially one prompted by a spew rockwell article! Oh, to be young again, posting large paragraphs of content that no one reads, but rather just answers back with their own paragraph of content, ad infinitum!
9 posted on 01/07/2004 7:23:12 AM PST by Huck (This space available--monthly rates---great exposure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
You can visit the FReeper Foxhole Daily threads and read the History.

It's an education in history, everyday. Stop in and see our mission statement.

Here is a very recent thread related to this topic.

The FReeper Foxhole Profiles General Stand Hope Watie - Jan. 5th, 2004

Click Here to see our thread list or click on the Foxhole button on FR's homepage.

10 posted on 01/07/2004 7:23:23 AM PST by snippy_about_it (Fall in --> The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Took a lot of federal scalps.

I hear that Charles Frazier (Cold Mountain author) is now writing about Cherokees during Civil War times.

Haven't seen that movie yet--can't get past the fact that it was filmed in Romania.

Even a cursory look at Cherokee history ought to remind readers that the tribe was rather like an Indian Roman Empire--it conquered and absorbed many other minor tribes, Creek and Catawba, Lumbee and even some Seminole and many others. They generally just enforced a tribal "assimilation" on their conquests, but the unassimilated would not survive.

Called "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" if whites do it.

Goes to show that a human being is always a human being, no matter what romance is attached to the ethnicity.

Most of the intensely southern, rural mountainous decendents are strongly Cherokee in blood--the ones with the rebel flags on pickup trucks.

11 posted on 01/07/2004 7:24:18 AM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius; SAMWolf; Valin; snippy_about_it
More Reading
Cherokee Nation Declaration of Causes -or- Cherokee Declaration of Causes

The FReeper Foxhole Profiles General Stand Hope Watie - Jan. 5th, 2004


12 posted on 01/07/2004 7:24:19 AM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck
*snicker*

Just proved you wrong.

13 posted on 01/07/2004 7:25:39 AM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
"Disclaiming any intention to invade the Northern States, they sought only to repel the invaders from their own soil and to secure the right of governing themselves."

My great grandmother and grandfather came across the Trail of Tears from North Carolina into Oklahoma Territory.

My great grandfather then took the life of a white Union soldier who was harrassing his family and fled into the hills to keep from being hanged.

When Registration was ordered, my great grandfather (Parker) did not go into the reservation to register.

Had he done so, none of his descendents would be here now to tell the story.

14 posted on 01/07/2004 7:26:30 AM PST by Happy2BMe (2004 - Who WILL the TERRORISTS vote for? - - Not George W. Bush, THAT'S for sure!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agnes Heep
"After the war Robert E. Lee also wrote, "The best men in the South have long desired to do away with the institution [of slavery], and were quite willing to see it abolished. But with them in relation to this subject is a serious question today. Unless some humane course, based on wisdom and Christian principles, is adopted, you do them great injustice in setting them free."

(Thomas Nelson Page, Robert E. Lee: Man and Soldier [New York, 1911], page 38.) Lee did not own slaves (he freed his in the 1850s), nor did a number of his most trusted lieutenants, including generals A. P. Hill, Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, J. E. Johnston, and J. E. B. Stuart. "
15 posted on 01/07/2004 7:28:53 AM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Agnes Heep
I suppose that's why the South was so warm for the extension of slavery to the territories--phasing it out, and all that.

That was a political necessity - necessitated by the obvious intent of the northern industrial states to use their majority to dominate and exploit the south.

16 posted on 01/07/2004 7:29:21 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Welcome, lamebrain. I'll be looking forward to your inane comments.
17 posted on 01/07/2004 7:31:56 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
Thanks stainlessbanner. We had the same thoughts it would seem.

We really need more people to know our history. So many of us know so little about our country from schooling and need to learn on our own to understand things better.

Good morning to you.

Southern BUMP!
18 posted on 01/07/2004 7:33:50 AM PST by snippy_about_it (Fall in --> The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Huck
lol
Don't go getting too grumpy now Huck.
19 posted on 01/07/2004 7:35:31 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Huck
lol
Don't go getting too grumpy now Huck.
20 posted on 01/07/2004 7:37:07 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: snippy_about_it
Thanks Snippy - I love the Foxhole - there is always something to learn and ya'll do a great job. Even though I'm silent on most of them, I read all the Foxhole threads (even the non-WBTS ones)

Great minds and all!

21 posted on 01/07/2004 7:37:56 AM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
My great grandmother and grandfather came across the Trail of Tears from North Carolina into Oklahoma Territory.

Was the Trail of Tears "payback" for the Cherokee Nation in supporting the Confederates?

22 posted on 01/07/2004 7:39:53 AM PST by 2banana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
So through the referencing of a whopping two published items (two whole works! The research must have taken minutes, if not even a few hours!), the author concludes that there is some sort of evil conspiracy which can only be exposed if we harp on the fact that Indian nations were anti-Union? That's remarkable work! How nice it must be for Mr. Scruggs to feel only he can enlighten us to the inner workings of the Cherokee mind. And of course, the Cherokee dislike and distrust of the Feds had nothing to do with the fact the Feds marched them from Carolina to Oklahoma. It was all because the Cherokee were true Libertarians and just didn't like Republicans.

It IS nice, however, to know that should I ever suffer a debilitating brain injury, I can still either play bass in a country band or submit articles to Lew Rockwell. Look for the Rockwellians to secede from the Web any day now.

23 posted on 01/07/2004 7:41:23 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
"Whatever causes the Cherokee people may have had in the past to complain of some of the southern states, they cannot but feel that their interests and destiny are inseparably connected to those of the south. The war now waging is a war of Northern cupidity and fanaticism against the institution of African servitude; against the commercial freedom of the south, and against the political freedom of the states, and its objects are to annihilate the sovereignty of those states and utterly change the nature of the general government."

Cherokee/Creek bump.

24 posted on 01/07/2004 7:44:16 AM PST by 4CJ (Dialing 911 doesn't stop a crime - a .45 does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
Thanks! I just read an excellent book about the War in North Carolina, "Bushwhackers!" by William R. Trotter. His main source on the Cherokees' participation was "Storm in the Mountains," by Vernon H. Crow (reference-only in my library system, unfortunately!).

Trotter suggests that the Eastern Band participated on the Confederate side almost entirely because it was the policy of their Chief, "Little Will" Thomas, who was, oddly enough, white. Until things got personal with the guerilla fighting and atrocities in Western NC, the Cherokees seem to have fought largely because it was the only fight available!

It's an interesting situation, very different from that of the tribes resettled in Oklahoma, and a reminder that generalizing about "Indians" is just as historically worthless as generalizing about "whites" or "blacks."
25 posted on 01/07/2004 7:44:33 AM PST by Tax-chick (I reserve the right to disclaim all January 2004 posts after the BABY is born!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
Trail of Tears, 1830's. Civil War, 1860's.
26 posted on 01/07/2004 7:45:58 AM PST by Tax-chick (I reserve the right to disclaim all January 2004 posts after the BABY is born!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
The Trail of Tears occurred before the Civil War. Around and about 1838/39.
27 posted on 01/07/2004 7:46:49 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
Was the Trail of Tears "payback" for the Cherokee Nation in supporting the Confederates?

If so, it was a payment considerably in advance.

28 posted on 01/07/2004 7:48:40 AM PST by thulldud (It's bad luck to be superstitious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
The Seminoles decended from Creeks and were continually pushed into the swamps of Florida. Anyone who is familiar with the Sem-Indian Wars in FLA will know why there is a distrust of Feds by the natives.

I recall how Col. Jesup of the Federal Army met with Osceola under a white flag of truce and then captured him, a move that discredited Jesup, worsened relations, and ultimately led to Osceola' imprisionment at St. Aug and later his death.

29 posted on 01/07/2004 7:48:53 AM PST by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
I'm not quite sure how to take your statement, however I am of Southern Cherokee descent and I do support the Confederate flag so perhaps you're right.
30 posted on 01/07/2004 7:48:54 AM PST by HELLRAISER II (Give us another tax break Mr. President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
Payback?

I recall going to a fire dance in 1964 somewhere around Drumright, OK.

I remember seeing the Cherokee warriors dancing around the fires with their long hair gong all the way down their backs in their deerkins.

I can still recall the loud chanting and beating of drums and seeing the bright colors painted on their faces and the feathered head oranments they wore.

I was introduced to Jim Thorpe, a national hero at that time for his Olympic Gold Medal.

I asked my grandmother to interpret for me what the men were saying as they danced.

Here is what she said:

"Son. This is something you must always remember about the Cherokee. Until we learned to speak the white man's language, our language was pure and we did not curse each other with our tongues."

31 posted on 01/07/2004 7:52:09 AM PST by Happy2BMe (2004 - Who WILL the TERRORISTS vote for? - - Not George W. Bush, THAT'S for sure!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma
...should I ever suffer a debilitating brain injury,...

You haven't already?

32 posted on 01/07/2004 7:58:04 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HELLRAISER II
I think it boils down to -- human beings are just all the same. There's some intent to attach a romance to the American Indian--and this is nice enough as far as it goes. Hollywood has in recent years made lovable pacifists of Indians (Little Big Man) and what I consider more realistic portrayals-- Last of the Mohicans. Except for that club that Chingachook carried--it is a tool for crushing hickory nuts and walnuts. It was a hoot to see it hurled with this sticker on it as a weapon...

When I host liberals in my area, and they make their derision of the rebel flag display known, I always remeind them that those they sneer at are the descendents of a politically-protected ethnic group that relished the taking of federal scalps in the Civil War.

And, they don't know how to take that statement.

33 posted on 01/07/2004 7:58:28 AM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma
Based on your #23, I take it there are factual errors in the article, please point them out.

TIA

34 posted on 01/07/2004 8:04:15 AM PST by Triple (All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Aurelius
...should I ever suffer a debilitating brain injury,...

You haven't already?

Nah, not yet. My bass gathers dust in the corner, and I haven't yet had the urge to submit anything to Rockwell, so I know I'm okay. I am, however, currently reading two Curious George books, and am extrapolating that into an article proving that monkeys are Libertarians who were right to tear down the Statue Of Liberty and why one, named Cornelious, would have supported the Confederacy. I'll be sure to cite the books extensively. I'll let you know when it's published.

35 posted on 01/07/2004 8:07:25 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Triple
Your inference is incorrect. The article, as posted, is likely quite factual, since it simply posts one document from the Cherokee with the author's opinions wrapped around it. My contention is that using two sources and then leaping to the conclusions that he does (notably number 7 on his list, "dismay at the despotism of the party and leaders now in command of the U. S. Government") is a tad on the "not exactly scholarly" side. I've no doubt the dosument is accurately copied and pasted. It's what is done with it that strikes me as goofy.
36 posted on 01/07/2004 8:15:49 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma; Aurelius; Triple
It never ceases to amaze me how people can totally ignore the plain language of a historical document. The Cherokee declaration quoted is very plain. True enough, there may have been other underlying motives, but how can you absolutely discount the official declaration of a nation of people?

Oh, I'm sorry, Jokelahoma - perhaps you are a Supreme Court Justice or a Democratic Congressman/Senator. Now I understand.

Stop letting your pre-determined attitude towards the Civil War keep you from honest dialogue.
37 posted on 01/07/2004 8:17:59 AM PST by HeadOn (It's me, it's me, it's Ernest T. !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HeadOn
True enough, there may have been other underlying motives...

And therein is my point. The author disregards any other motivation that may have existed for the Cherokee (or any other Indian nation at the time) to have a beef with the Federal government in order to attempt to strengthen his argument that the Cherokee supported the Confederacy. Was it truly a case of support for the Confederacy, or a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? Were that the case, the argument against the federal government mad ein the article would lose any "oomph" it has, so it is ignored.

Oh, I'm sorry, Jokelahoma - perhaps you are a Supreme Court Justice or a Democratic Congressman/Senator. Now I understand.

Nice. It's a shame, however, that snarky comments don't do much to bolster arguments. Now, what are my pre-determined attitudes, exactly? And what is the point I'm missing? That Indians didn't like the Feds?

38 posted on 01/07/2004 8:26:36 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma
Looking forward to it.
39 posted on 01/07/2004 8:26:47 AM PST by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Agnes Heep
At that time, much of the POLITICAL leadership of the South consisted of slave owners. Most of the PEOPLE did not own slaves. Couldn't afford them and didn't want them.

The idea of expanding slavery into the new territories was not directly addressed in the Constitution and slavery was not abolished in the U.S. until December of 1865.

40 posted on 01/07/2004 8:32:12 AM PST by dixierat22 (keeping my powder dry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
Bump for later.
41 posted on 01/07/2004 8:33:04 AM PST by Valin (We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Well?...I read your comments...and most of the large paragraphs of content... :)
42 posted on 01/07/2004 8:33:36 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
Most of the intensely southern, rural mountainous decendents are strongly Cherokee in blood--the ones with the rebel flags on pickup trucks.

Also the Southern and Midwest accents are heavily influenced by the indian tribes in their regions. The plains indians spoke in an almost monotone voice the accent seen in movies, the Cherokee and Eastern tribes accent were almost musical.

43 posted on 01/07/2004 8:45:25 AM PST by ItsTheMediaStupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ItsTheMediaStupid
re: Cherokees in South...accents

Lately, the Cherokees of long history and pedigree find themselves being spoken to in Spanish by the recent illegals flowing in...

They do not appreciate the mistake.

44 posted on 01/07/2004 8:47:50 AM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
"After the war Robert E. Lee also wrote, "The best men in the South have long desired to do away with the institution [of slavery], and were quite willing to see it abolished. But with them in relation to this subject is a serious question today. Unless some humane course, based on wisdom and Christian principles, is adopted, you do them great injustice in setting them free."

This was a bit of a cop out. While I believe the South was evolving in such a way that would eventually be rid of slavery, the above was an excuse borne of fear of economic disaster. They felt they could not afford to get rid of slavery so the next best solution was to treat them as well as possible and to free a few slaves as a reward when the owner can afford to do so.

45 posted on 01/07/2004 8:50:08 AM PST by ItsTheMediaStupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
Was the Trail of Tears "payback" for the Cherokee Nation in supporting the Confederates?

No it was long before that. I think they came from Alabama, Georgia, Tennasee, South Carolina and maybe Virgina as well as North Carolina. I think people are confusing this because the present Cherokee reservation is in North Carolina. A cousin of mine did a genological study of our family and he sent me a book of the family history. An old map of Alabama and Georgia had much of the eastern part of Alabama and western part of Georgia as Cherokee and Creek indian country.

46 posted on 01/07/2004 8:58:37 AM PST by ItsTheMediaStupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ItsTheMediaStupid
What about the slaves in the Union, who were excluded for the Emancipation Proclamation of Lincoln?

That ommission was by design. Lincoln freed no slaves under Union control.

47 posted on 01/07/2004 8:59:20 AM PST by Triple (All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
Lately, the Cherokees of long history and pedigree find themselves being spoken to in Spanish by the recent illegals flowing in...

They do not appreciate the mistake.

Some almost hate indians who speek Spanish. Don't care much for the ones who speak English and don't bother with their native language. Most of the Mexicans illegals are indian or largely so.

48 posted on 01/07/2004 9:02:25 AM PST by ItsTheMediaStupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Triple
That ommission was by design. Lincoln freed no slaves under Union control.

Yes. More much more than a cop out. An obvious effort for political gain.

49 posted on 01/07/2004 9:04:34 AM PST by ItsTheMediaStupid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dixierat22
At that time, much of the POLITICAL leadership of the South consisted of slave owners. Most of the PEOPLE did not own slaves. Couldn't afford them and didn't want them.

I don't own any factory equipment, but if someone were trying to abolish factory equipment where I live, I think I might have an interest in other people's keeping it.

50 posted on 01/07/2004 9:04:48 AM PST by Agnes Heep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-357 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson