The Disaffected Party

New York Indian Removal, Part VIII: The Disaffected Party

In an 1869 sermon, Rev. L. P. Norcross said it started with the theft of a cow. James Oberly, author of A Nation of Statesmen portrays the conflict as largely about where different Indians wanted to live. But Roger Nichols (in his unpublished thesis) appears to have understood the rise of the Disaffected party the best.
********************

In the 1830's, conditions were in place to push more Indians out of New York State. (Posts III and IV of the New York Indian Removal series provide some explanation and recommendations for further reading.) At the same time, present day Wisconsin was becoming a popular destination for white settlers, becoming a territory by itself in 1836. The government's goal was now to remove all "New York Indians," whether in New York State or Wisconsin Territory to a new reservation in what is now Kansas. As I understand it, it was at this point that the Brothertown Indians chose to give up their relationship with the federal government and become U.S. citizens. However, I will focus on the Stockbridge Mohicans in this post.


Rev. John Schermerhorn was the Indian Agent who made the treaty which ultimately sent the Cherokee Nation packing for their infamous Trail of Tears. Unfortunately, Schermerhorn also got involved in the further removal of the New York Indians. In September of 1836, Schermerhorn met with the Stockbridge Mohicans and succeeded in getting the tribal leaders (including John Metoxen, John W. Quinney, Austin E. Quinney, and Jacob Chicks) to sign a treaty that would bring about one more removal.

Schermerhorn arrived only weeks after the debacle of crime and punishment which I related in my previous post. When the two murderers managed to escape, some Stockbridges expressed doubt that their nation of roughly 320 people was big enough to govern itself effectively. If not, wouldn't it be to their advantage to combine with the other New York Indians on one large reservation? Furthermore, although it wasn't that long ago that some had said the Green Bay area would be reserved exclusively for Indians, it wasn't necessarily naive for some to hope that moving to an all-Indian territory would eliminate alcohol-related murders and other problems associated with white-encroachment.


Five of the established tribal leaders went with John Schermerhorn to look at the new land to the southwest offered in the treaty, but they found it unfavorable on account of the hardness of the water and scarcity of wood among other things (Marsh to Green, December, 13, 1837). The established tribal leaders and those who supported them became known as the "Wiskonsin Party" because they wanted to stay put.

The party that opposed them was led by Thomas Hendricks and Robert Konkapot. They were know as the "Emigrant party," the "Missouri party," and Cutting Marsh also referred to them as the "Disaffected party." There were a number of possible reasons why they might have been disaffected. Maybe cattle ownership and the pros and cons of relocating again were part of the conflict. And, as James Oberly pointed out, a key aspect of Schermerhorn's strategy was to stir up conflict between tribal factions. But Cutting Marsh and John Metoxen felt that the murder that summer and its aftermath is what led the Stockbridge Mohicans down the wrong path. Roger Nichols put more weight on their opinion and so do I.

Crime and Punishment

The event that Deacon John Metoxen would later describe as what set the Stockbridge Mohicans down the wrong path (Marsh to Green, May 28, 1838 in the ABCFM Papers) occurred either on July 3rd or July 4th of 1836. A Brothertown Indian was brutally murdered by two intoxicated Stockbridges. Rev. Cutting Marsh, having audited some medical classes back east, was the closest thing to a doctor in the area and was called on the scene immediately. (I will spare you his graphic description of the murder itself, I only include it in Algonkian Church History because of the events that followed it.)

Not long after the crime was committed, the father of one of the murderers approached missionary Cutting Marsh and brought up the story of the adulterous woman from the Gospel of John, in which Jesus declared: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her"(King James Version). The man's point, of course, was that the tribe should also forgive the two murderers. But Marsh, a strict, stern Presbyterian (see post about Roger Nichols thesis) was unmoved by the Biblical proof.

James Oberly's research shows that the Brothertown and Stockbridge Indians went to white authorities but none of them felt it their responsibility to try the two accused Stockbridges. Instead the tribal governments attended to the issue.

The two nations met in Council.... The councils were characterized by a spirit of harmony, coolness, and deliberation which reflected the highest honor upon them.... [the accused] were there declared guilty by every voter, which were about forty, except two and in the same manner declared worthy of death by a very large majority and sentenced to be executed upon the gallows... (Cutting Marsh in a letter to David Green, 8/18/1836 in the ABCFM Papers).

Here's something that illustrates the lack of separation between church and state at Stockbridge, Wisconsin: Marsh also reported to the ABCFM that the two assailants were brought into his church in chains and shackles to hear him preach a sermon on "crime and punishment."

Both Rev. Marsh and Chauncey Hall (the schoolteacher to the Stockbridge Mohicans), wrote to the ABCFM saying they were disappointed that the white man who sold whiskey to the murderers was not brought to justice as an accomplice in the crime. According to Hall, at least one of the murderers "would never have raised his hand to shed his brother's blood had not a white man furnished [them with] whiskey" (letter to Green, 9/8/1836, ABCFM Papers).

The murder would have lasting political ramifications for the Stockbridge Mohicans as Robert Konkapot and Thomas Hendricks emerged as leaders of a faction that rallied to get both prisoners released. The regular tribal officials, of course, wouldn't hear of it.

Somehow both prisoners escaped.

Sergeant's Ordination

We've already seen

1. The Housatonics Accept a Mission

2. Sergeant Meets the Indians

and

3. The Mission is Approved by the Mohicans


What Comes Next?


Massachusetts Governor Jonathan Belcher was the leader of the Commissioners of Indian Affairs in Boston and it was he who first suggested the idea of an integrated mission town in 1730 (see Frazier, 39). Since Governor Belcher was planning to meet with some Roman Catholic Mohawks at Deerfield in August of 1735, that would also be a good opportunity to "announce the dedication of an English missionary's life to the service of Indians"(as Frazier put it on pages 31-32). So the Housatonic Mohicans, forty-three in all, headed for Deerfield. Umpachenee, however, chose not to make the trip. It is likely this was a passive protest against the mission or against the English in general.

We do know that Umpachenee never was a big supporter of the Calvinist mission. Konkapot, however, was, and he thanked Governor Belcher in a formal speech (see Frazier, page 33) for sending John Sergeant and the schoolteacher, Timothy Woodbridge.

Sergeant's ordination ceremony must have been a huge event. High civil and military officers of the colony of Massachusetts, clergy, gentlemen and many Indians were present. After Nathaniel Appleton's sermon (see illustration at left) and the ceremonial laying on of hands, Rev. Stephen Williams turned to the Housatonic Mohicans who were sitting together in a place of honor and, through an interpreter, asked them to indicate if they would receive Sergeant as their missionary. All forty-three of them rose to their feet to show their approval.

Indian Missions: A Critical Bibliography

The big problem with James Ronda and James Axtell's Indian Missions: A Critical Bibliography (published by Indiana University Press) is that it came out in 1978. If you can get past the fact that the book misses everything that historians have done in the last 30 years, you're sure to get something out of it.

On pages 40-47, the authors outline the various responses American Indians have had to missions. They are:

1. Conversion. This category includes both genuine converts and "loaves and fishes" Christian Indians.

2. Theological criticism. The authors say this was often expressed as "You have your religion, I have mine."

3. Syncretism: "Faced with the physical and political demands of an increasingly Euro-American world, substantial numbers of Indians mixed indigenous theologies and Christian symbols to create the religious experience anthroplogists call syncretism"(page 45).

4. Revitalization: On the surface, this one is similar to syncretism. As old ways were dying out and Christianity and other white ways were introduced, revitalization religions emerged. They were attempts to preserve Native religion, but usually contained Christian elements. Handsome Lake (a Seneca) was one charismatic prophet who "combined traditional Iroquois values with those learned from Quaker mission workers to compose an ethical code" that brought about "a renaissance of nineteenth-century Iroquois culture"(page 46).

and

5. Armed Resistance. In extreme cases, the Indians felt threatened by missionaries. For an example of this, the authors recommend Henry Warner Bowden's "Spanish Missions, Cultural Conflict and the Pueblo Revolt of 1680," in Church History (volume 44, 1975, pages 217-228).

Although Algonkian Church History is mainly about genuine Christian converts and their Christian descendants, in upcoming posts we'll see examples of other categories. Also, I'll illustrate one category not outlined in Ronda and Axtell's book. By the 1800's the Stockbridge Mohicans knew the Bible very well and would sometimes quote Bible passages to support arguments they had with their missionary. This new category might be called "Theological resistance from a Christian perspective."

Marsh's Opinion of Sergeant's Ministry

Right: A modern road map of east-central Wisconsin. The Stockbridge Mohicans lived at modern-day Kaukauna (known then as Statesburg or Grand Kawkawlin) in the 1820's and at Stockbridge in the 1830's and 1840's. Note that Brothertown is south of Stockbridge.



In my February 8 post, I shared with you a long quote from a letter by John Sergeant [Jr.] in which he promoted the preservation of Native languages. Sergeant felt that bi-lingual literacy and the use of "white" agricultural technology was best for the Indians' welfare. He doesn't come across as a stubborn or pushy type, his belief that Indians would choose the appropriate level of "civilization" was based on his own experience, almost his entire life was lived among the Stockbridge Indians.

Things were different with Rev. Cutting Marsh. His life experience was different and his thinking was different. His efforts to push "civilization" amongst Indians who had already adopted as many white ways as they wanted, caused him some frustration. He discussed this issue with John Metoxen and later shared the conversation with the ABCFM in a letter to David Greene (10/19/1842).

...He [Metoxen] furthermore said that 'Mr. Sergeant was with them 50 years and never got discouraged in all of that time.' ....from all I have learnt of the result of his labors and of all the instruction in schools during that half century, no advances whatever were made in the Nation in knowledge and civilization, all remained precisely in status quo. But I put this question to the old man. If, the Lord when he gives the gospel to a people and expects and requires improvement, is it wrong for his servants [missionaries] to expect the same?

....Metoxen has often made [the] foolish expression that 'speaking the English language is what has made so many of the Brothertown people infidels.' Some, I know not how many, have never been pleased with me because I have not learnt their language so as to speak it. But this I have done from principle. This was one thing on account of which they liked Mr. Sergeant so well.

The Mission is Approved by the Mohicans

A map of Massachusetts. Berkshire County is in red.

Here's what we've covered so far in regards to the establishment of a mission in what would become Stockbridge, Massachusetts:
1. The Housatonics Accept a Mission
and
2. Sergeant Meets the Indians

And our story continues:


The local council of July, 1734 wouldn't be the final word on Christianity for the Mohican nation. Being regional leaders, Umpachenee and Konkapot understood the mission should be approved by the national leaders, including Mtohksin, who was Chief Sachem at the time. Umpachenee hosted a council in February, 1735 that was attended by nearly 200 Mohicans and featured a sermon by Stephen Williams. Following the sermon, the national leaders discussed many of the same pros and cons of accepting the mission as the Housatonics had in their council. The verdict, as Samuel Hopkins (34-35, quoted in Frazier, 29) understood it, was that the Mohicans would "as a nation submit to instruction." However, another account of what was decided at the council was more nuanced. This account was passed along orally and eventually written down by Captain Hendrick Aupaumut and published in the Massachusetts Historical Society Collections in 1804. According to Aupaumut's account, the Christian gospel should "be preached in one certain village and let every man and woman go to hear it and embrace it; if they think best."

The "one certain village," of course, eventually became known as Stockbridge. Its success or failure in the short run, depended on how receptive individuals would be to what was preached there. For that reason, I don't believe that the Stockbridge Mohicans - as we know them - would exist today, if not for Rev. John Sergeant [Sr.]

If They Lose Their Language

<---The Natick Bible, the first book printed in the United States, an Algonquian-language translation by John Eliot (he must certainly have had lots of help from Native ministers/translators).

Not long after John Eliot's Natick Bible came out, missionaries gave up on translating the Bible and instead put more of their efforts behind teaching English. Learning a second language isn't a bad thing. The bad thing was that it reflected a common prejudice that the Indians' languages were "barbaric."

In the Appendix of his Report to the Secretary of War, Rev. Jedidiah Morse includes copies of a number of letters, one written by John Sergeant [Jr.] in which he reveals to Morse (and to us) his "ideas...concerning Missionary Establishments among the Natives of America"(Appendix, 113).

1. With regard to the Missionary: he ought to be a man of good abilities and extensive learning; a man of prudence, and with all, of common sense.
2. He ought to be instructed to learn the language of the natives. It is not so barren, but that every doctrine of the gospel can be communicated to them in their own language.
3. Some books ought to be printed in their language, and children ought to read them. This plan is now in operation among the Oneidas.
4. My people, I find, can read their own language very fluently, when they pronounce English very indifferently. This will always be the case, so long as they speak their own language in their families.
5. If they lose their own langugae, they will lose with it their national pride and respectability. This is the case with the Brothertown Indians. They have lost their language; and are now, perhaps, more corrupt than any Indians in the country.
6. Their reservations ought to be large, and at least twenty miles from white or black inhabitants.
7. Civilization and religion must go hand in hand, as I have read, with regard to Africa. "The plough and the Bible go together." As soon as they can feel and taste the sweets of a civilized life, their disposition to hunt and wander will cease. (pages 113-114 in Morse's Appendix)

Some people seem to think that missionaries could not have been in favor of both "civilization" and a healthy amount of what we might call "cultural preservation," but the impression I get of John Sergeant [Jr.] is that he was tolerant and probably ahead of his time.

Metoxen Takes Center Stage

New York Indian Removal, Part VII:

Metoxen Takes Center Stage

Although New York removal and Wisconsin settlement isn't exactly the same thing, this post about the New York Indians' first years in what is now Wisconsin will give you a better idea of the ins-and-outs of the removal.

Metoxen's grave. Stockbridge, Wisconsin.

Several bands of New York Indians migrated to present-day Wisconsin over a period of years. In March of 1823 President James Monroe recognized the New York Indians' right to occupy two million acres that had formerly belonged to Wisconsin Natives, mostly to the Algonkian-speaking Menominees, some to the Souixan-speaking Winnebagoes or Ho-Chunk. Unlike James Monroe, the Menominee and Ho-Chunk leaders viewed the treaties of 1821 and 1822 as fraudulent, they claimed that their true leaders were not present for the negotiations. There were other problems with the treaties; suffice it to say that they were open to misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

In 1827 John Quincy Adams' administration negotiated the Treaty of Little Butte des Morts with the Ho-Chunk and Chief Oshkosh of the Menominees. With this new treaty, the United States purchased some of the land from the Menominees that the New York Indians believed they had purchased from them a few years earlier. In an effort to resolve the confusion, an eight-day council was held in the summer of 1830, not long after Andrew Jackson became president.

While new administrations in Washington D.C. might be blamed for a lack of consistency in Indian policy, it can also be said that the old "divide and conquer" strategy was in place, this time pitting the "civilized" Stockbridges, Oneidas and other New York Indians against the Menominees and Ho-Chunk. But John Metoxen, Deacon of the the Stockbridge Mohican's tribal church, and their Chief Sachem (see Mohican News, 2/1/2005), didn't take the bait. Although the Wisconsin Indians refused to budge in the eight-day council, he made a concluding speech that made it clear that he knew the score and hoped the Wisconsin Natives would recognize his people as brothers and sisters. An observer from the east, Rev. Calvin Colton, managed to transcribe Metoxen's speech.

Negotiations and Arrivals

New York Indian Removal, Part VI:
Negotiations and Arrivals

When it comes to negotiations, dates of arrival, and similar details related to the New York Indians in Wisconsin, it is very easy to go down the wrong path. So bear with me: Since good historians have already gotten this stuff wrong, I'm going to tell you where I'm getting my data.

I have Annie Heloise Abel to thank for including a copy of a July 28, 1820 Detroit Gazette article in her book. The Gazette reported that Eleazar Williams and some of the Oneida men arrived "last Saturday" in the steamboat Walk-in-the-water, intending to "visit the Indians in this Territory" to promote Christianity and "to find a suitable tract of country within the Territory" which, at that time, included all of what is now Wisconsin.

Some kind of agreement was made in Green Bay in the summer of 1820, but various parties made various objections to it and President Monroe never submitted it to Congress. Nevertheless, a June 9, 1821 letter from the Stockbridge Mohicans (signed by Hendrick Aupaumut, Jacob Konkapot, Abner Hendricks, and Solomon U. Hendricks) to the Episcopal Bishop Hobart makes it clear that the Stockbridges wanted to be part of that agreement.

Solomon U. Hendricks led a delegation of four Stockbridge Mohicans, the first Stockbridges to set foot on Wisconsin soil, in August of 1821 (Lion Miles, e-mail to Jeff Siemers, 5/10/2006). Once again, according to a Detroit Gazette article (7/13/1821, quoted in Ellis, p.423) they cruised the Great Lakes on the Walk-in-the-water. Albert Ellis in his "Recollections of Rev. Eleazar Williams" (in Wisconsin Historical Collections, Vol.VIII, p.333) characterized the larger New York Indian delegation of 1821:

"Excepting those of the first Christian party of the Oneidas, and the Stockbridges, all these delegates, to wit: one from Onondaga, one from Tuscarora, one from the Senecas, and one, Mr. Williams himself, from St. Regis [Mohawk] went on their own private responsibility, without any authority from their tribes."

A letter from John C. Calhoun to Territorial Governor Lewis Cass adds: "The Munsees also sent a delegate, who, by the special permission of the Government, was included in the Stockbridge contingent." This, I believe, is the first official recognition of Stockbridge-Munsee partnership.

To make a long story shorter, treaties were made between Wisconsin Natives and the New York Indians in 1821 and 1822. The first permanent settlement of New York Indians in Wisconsin occurred in 1822, "when fifty Christianized Stockbridges" located themselves on the north side of the Fox River at Grand Kaukaulin, which is now the city of Kaukauna (WI Historical Collections, vol.XIV, p.423). These first settlers included John Metoxen's Band (the Indians that had left New York in 1818 and never turned back), plus twenty more that came directly from New Stockbridge, New York (e-mail from Lion Miles, 5/10/2006).

Blog Receives Rave Reviews

John Warren, creator of the New York History blog, has recommended my series on the New York Indian removal to his readers.


A special WELCOME to readers of the New York History blog!

For those of you who haven't seen it, much of John's post today is devoted to my personal story - how I got interested in Algonkian church history.

Jedidiah Morse

New York Indian Removal, Part V: Jedidiah Morse
As I write this, the Wikipedia article for Jedidiah Morse is relatively short, but it is on-target in portraying him as a clergyman, geographer, and scientist, as well as the father of Samuel F. B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph. I am not aware of Morse doing any direct mission work among American Indians, but rather, he held some kind of administrative post in the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM).

As I've said before, for many years there wasn't much separation between church and state when it came to Indian missions. So it shouldn't be too surprising that Rev. Morse also worked as a consultant or advisor to the United States Secretary of War. In 1820, Morse made a tour of many tribes and filed a 496-page report which was printed in 1822 and recently made available online. One of the notable events of Morse's 1820 tour was a sermon preached at Fort Howard (located near the modern city of Green Bay, WI). That sermon has been recognized as the first protestant sermon preached in what is now Wisconsin and it helped pave the way for the New York Indians, many of whom were protestant Christians.

According to Google Images, this map is probably Morse's own work, and he is known as the "father of American Geography." The map is taken from his Report to the Secretary of War.

Morse's report promotes the "civilizing" of American Indians. While you may remember that I once wrote that the "civilizing" process was harmful to Native cultures, I still think that Rev. Morse deserves a certain amount of recognition as an advocate for Indians. Why? Well, it doesn't seem like there was much diversity sensitivity back then. By advocating for "civilizing" the Indians, Morse was way ahead of other white Americans who wanted to exterminate them.

Some, I will hope...that the number is small, have...said, 'Indians are not worth saving. They are perishing - let them perish. The sooner they are gone the better.' ....A sufficient answer to such of these objections.... will be found, I conceive, in the facts collected in the Appendix of this work. It is too late to say that Indians cannot be civilized (page 81).

and he continues on page 82:

Indians are of the same nature and original, and of one blood, with ourselves [white people]; of intellectual powers as strong, and capable of cultivation, as ours. they as well as ourselves, are made to be immortal. To look down upon them, therefore as an inferior race, as untameable, and to profit by their ignorance and weakness; to take their property from them for a small part of its real value, and in other ways to oppress them; is undoubtedly wrong, and highly displeasing to our common Creator, Lawgiver and final Judge.

There were some whose urging of the New York Indians to remove west came across as self-serving, but Morse really had nothing to gain by their leaving. Morse and others - quite possibly this includes many of the Stockbridge and Brothertown Indians - felt that Indians would have a better chance to prosper if they were segregated from whites, particularly from the kind who would sell them alcohol.

Conspiracy of Interests

New York Indian Removal, Part IV: Conspiracy of Interests

This series of posts on the removal of the New York Indians is not close to being over yet. Lots of material is out there on the subject, and the vast majority of it is about the Iroquois Six Nations. Some of this Iroquois-focused material can be helpful for us in understanding Algonkian church history.
***********************

Industrial projects like the Erie Canal and powerful organizations like the Ogden Land Company were major forces that pushed the New York Natives westward. But of course, those projects and organizations didn't do it by themselves, they were aided by corrupt federal and state officials. If you want to know just how it happened, I recommend that you read Laurence Hauptman's book, Conspiracy of Interests: Iroquois Dispossession and the Rise of New York State (1999, Syracuse University Press). As the title suggests, Hauptman has little to say about the Stockbridges and the Brothertowners, but I don't mind that. He gave me just enough to tell you about in this post.

On page 72, Hauptman says John Sergeant [Jr.] was a good advocate not only for the Stockbridge Mohicans, but for their neighbors too. He reports that Sergeant questioned the motives of state officials, warned people about the dangers facing the the New York Indians, and insisted that "state and federal negotiations with the Oneidas violated federal laws." The thing that surprised me, however, was that at one point, Sergeant dared to criticize Samuel Kirkland, one of his counterparts among the Oneidas.

On page 176, Hauptman describes the Treaty of Buffalo Creek of 1838, as a "fraudulent treaty consummated as a result of bribery, forgery, the use of alcohol, and other nefarious methods." Hauptman noted that the 1838 treaty required not only the Iroquois, but also the Stockbridge and Munsee Indians to remove to a roughly 1.8 million-acre reservation in what is now Kansas. I look forward to explaining how the Stockbridge and some of the Munsee Indians (and, of course, the Brothertowners) managed to remain in what is now Wisconsin, despite the Treaty of Buffalo Creek.