Consequently the gruesome “Cayuse War” began, and n 1847 the Oregon Territorial Militia was called in response to execute the situation. With the arrival of the volunteer militia came fast deterioration of the Cayuse population including those who had no association with the killing of the Whitman family (Coozens 163). During the war Reverend and Commander Gilliam made several threats to the Cayuse people regardless of their peace treaty. In response to the massacre, the volunteer militia was organized under Reverend Gilliam, a prominent preacher (Wordpress 2). Gilliam professed that all Indians should be exterminated under all circumstances. By 1849, the Cayuses, Walla Walla’s, and Nez Perce which were the Cayuses neighboring tribes, became …show more content…
subject to harassment by the militia for over a year(Cozzens 500). The tribe as a whole had been affected by infectious diseases such as the measles introduced by the whites. It is said that “An estimated half of the tribe died during a measles epidemic” (Lane 1849). After the washing of the Cayuse population there were no more than 850 Cayuse left amongst the many volunteer militia men. The territorial peace commission tried to meet and steer Reverend Gilliam away from war but it was nearly impossible. Gilliam however was not looking for peace but revenge and bloodshed. Although Gilliam seeked revenge the government wanted to bribe the tribe instead of fight.
The pressure on the Cayuses increased with the arrival of troops later that year.The militia that traveled to persuade the Native Americans to forfeit consisting of about 400 armed men(The Century History Company Volume II, p. 345-361). The government troops gave Lane "leverage to persuade the Cayuses to deliver the murderers considerably more than he had enjoyed in the spring" (Ruby and Brown 155). Lane along with the government had strong support from the Hudson Bay Company, which had also sympathized for the Native people in the past because of their mutual relationship between one another. The Hudson’s encouraged the government and the ambush on the Cayuses because of commercial reasons for future ports on Walla Walla and Cayuse land. It is said that Mr.McBean, the chief of the Hudson Bay, gave Lane the names of five tribal members who he believed were responsible for the murders, along with seven other men(The North Pacific Publishing Society …show more content…
32). The Territorial Militia commander arranged a meeting with the tribal leaders offering peace. In return for peace the government would have to obtain five guilty members, two of which had been named by Mr.McBean, who were involved in the murders. If they did not receive the five men, he promised a war "which would lead to their total destruction" (Lane 1849). The tribe still held out for another year in hopes to defeat the newcomers. The Cayuses however failed to succeed. In 1850 Tawatoe, an elder chief, arranged for the tribe to coincide with the bribe made and surrender five men for trial. The five prisoners Tiloukailt, Tomahas, Ishishkaiskais, Clokamas, and Kiamasumpkin were brought to Oregon City on trial for murder(Tate 3). It is not known how to tribe went about choosing the five men. However, at the time rumors were, that the Cayuse simply took five volunteers in order to please the whites and end the harassment. As for the legislators and militia leader seemed unconcerned about who was being executed as long as they were from the Cayuse tribe. On May 21 the five men were brought before judge Orville Pratt ,who was at the time the only Oregon Territory judge. They were brought to court in chains and remained chained throughout the entire court appearance to hear their rights and the witnesses claims. There were four witnesses called to speak all of them being survivors of the attack. Only two of the four eye witnesses testified to having seen any of the five men being trialed engage in violence or wrongdoing, not even this would change the defenses testimony. The next day the five men were said to be proven guilty and sentenced to death (Grand Jury indictment No. 11).Before their hanging a Jesuit baptized them and asked why they chose themselves to bring forth to the Americans, The man replied, “Did not you missionaries tell us that Christ died to save his people? So die we, to save our people...”(Navajo 4). The bodies of the five men were never returned to their tribe but instead hung for several days. The Americans sent a clear message to all Native tribes who may consider entering a dispute against them in the future. After the trial and death the U.S. government in 1871 went on a land acquisition mission once again. Both the Cayuse and the Walla Walla tribes were near extinction with only 126 to 130 tribal members left. Although some colonists at the time stated that there were more natives than there had been accounted for, reinforcements argued that their lands should be turned over to whites due to their small population. The land that was set aside and promised to the three local tribes including the Cayuses, had been put onto the Umatilla reservation. The representatives from each tribe met with the U.S. official to proclaim their opposition for any further loss of land, however due to their rough relations with the white settlers their voices were not heard. The pressure on the Native people increased once again when in 1853, Stevens was appointed governor of Indian Affairs. Stevens who was formerly a military officer organized a series of councils to deprive the Indians of their ancestral land and titles. Shortly after the Act of Congress Aug. 5th was passed and provided 640 acres of Umatilla Reservation land to be sold. Later that year a land allotment was set into place and an additional ninety thousand acres of reservation land was available to White settlers. This allotment however did give Indians their individual rights to the land but the land they were promised was either sold or leased to white settlers. Towards the end in 1854, the three tribes made a second agreement to cede 4,012,800 acres of land in return for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, the 512,000-acre reservation, gifts, and the ability to hunt and fish their traditional ways. The treaty was not ratified until 1859. When the government finally selected the boundaries, only two hundred and forty five thousand acres were included which was significantly less than promised in the treaty.The reservation shrank even more year by year. In 1874, the federal government terminated the reservation and removed the tribes because they believed the land could be used for more productive things. The land was used by the tribes to hunt, fish, and ranch. The Daws Act was passed a decade later by Congress. This act divided reservations into allotments for and opened the land for sale to non-Indians. By 1930 the Natives only owned about 160,00 acres of the remaining land. As time passed from the event of the Whitman Massacre, many still believed indians to be very harsh and brutal toward all settlers.
The Whitman Massacre, a slaughtering of ten missionary people, was what could be called a misunderstanding, and led to a series of wars and harassment between many native people and settler militias. With the defeat of the Cayuse Indians, their population decreased, their land was taken away, and they were forced into reservations with the Umatilla and Walla Walla peoples (Legends’ 3)The war had negative long term effects for their tribe but the Cayuse people continued to fight with the white settlers for their land and rights. The war not only caused the Cayuse territories to be taken over by white settlers but also caused several gruesome wars between native people and new
settlers. Works Cited Addis, Cameron. "Project MUSE - The Whitman Massacre: Religion and Manifest Destiny on the Columbia Plateau, 1809-1858." Project MUSE - The Whitman Massacre: Religion and Manifest Destiny on the Columbia Plateau, 1809-1858. Journal of the Early Republic, July-Aug. 2005. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. Addis, Cameron. "The Whitman Massacre." Journal of the Early Republic : 1-2. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. Lansing, Ronald B. "The Whitman Massacre Trial: 1850 - The Sentence Is Death." Law Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2015. Lansing, Ronald B. "Juggernaut: Whitman Massacre Trial 1850."Www.oregonencyclopedia.org. Oregon Encyclopedia, Mar. 1993. Web. 23 Mar. 2015. Morris, Keiko. "Uncomfortable History: The `Whitman Massacre'" Seattle Time : 16 Nov. 1996. Web. 23 Mar. 2015 Purvis, Thomas L. A Dictionary Of American History. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1997. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 23 Mar. 2015. Ruby, Robert H. “Tragedy At Waiilatpu: A New Look At Old History.” Columbia: The Magazine of Northwest History 23.1 (2009): 2-5 Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. Schaubs, Michael. "The Whitman Massacre." Mountain Men and Life in the Rocky Mountain West. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2015. “Territorial Timeline." Secretary of state. n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. “Today in History." The Library of Congress . n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2015.
The Great Pueblo revolt of 1680 all started with the droughts of 1660 when the Southwest had severe drought that brought famine and disease. During this, hungry Apaches who couldn’t find food on plains attacked the pueblos. This angered the people on the pueblos, but there new leader Pope’, a mysterious medicine doctor, tried to keep the Indian beliefs around and resisted the Christian religion. The Spaniards hated this, so they captured his older brother. This enraged Pope’ against the Spaniards so he held meetings to tell everybody that the Spaniards must leave. The Spaniards found out about this and arrested Pope, publicly flogged him and released him back to the pueblos. When he was captured, the pueblo people set fires in the Indian villages in New Mexico. To take care of the fires, the Spaniards sent troops to halt the ritual of setting the fires by pueblo people, and they arrested all of the medicine doctors, killing several of them. The people believed that the doctors protected them from evil, so all of the pueblo towns wanted to unite against the Spaniards. The group from the pueblos went to the governor of Santa Fe and told him that if the doctors that were imprisoned weren’t released by sundown, all of the Spaniards in New Mexico would be killed. They released the prisoners because the Indians outnumber the Spaniards by a huge amount.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines massacre as “the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty” or “a cruel or wanton murder” (m-w.com). Essentially a massacre results in either the death of many people or death by cruel means. The Boston Massacre occurred on March 5, 1770, in Boston, Massachusetts and involved American colonists and British troops. The colonists, upset by recent laws enacted by the British, taunted a smaller group of British soldiers by throwing snowballs at them (Boston Massacre Historical Society). In response, the soldiers fired upon the unarmed colonists leaving five people dead and six wounded (Phelan, 131). Even though the event in Boston on March 5, 1770, in which blood was shed, and called the Boston Massacre, the actions which took place on that day did not constitute a massacre. Since only five people were killed and six wounded and there was no evidence of cruelty, the name Boston Massacre was likely a propaganda ploy by Samuel Adams to rally the colonists against the British instead of a true massacre.
The Battle of Tippecanoe in 1811 is another example of when America treated Native Americans poorly. This battle was one of the most bloody battles in the U.S. history. It was fought at Prophetstown, Indiana. The Battle of Tippecanoe happened because Harrison wanted to destroy the alliance that was being encouraged by his
So when, “Francis West and thirty-six man (sailed) up the Chesapeake Bay to try to trade for corn with the Patawomeke Indians..” he was looking for food to trade to last through the winter. Document D also says, “”some harshe and crewell dealinge by cutting of towe (two) of the savages heads and other extremetyes.” Now from where I come from, we don’t chop up our business partners. This shows extreme mistrust and greed, which caused them to act crazy and ruin a good opportunity at partnership. They needed the indians and their knowledge of the land, crops, and enemies. But they put a wall up in between them and sparked anger and possibly war. Document D supports the fact that they died because of mistrust. (Doc
The Pequot tribe inhabited most of Southeastern Connecticut when the colonists arrived to the new world. The Pequot were among the most feared tribes in Southern New England in relation to the colonists. Actually, the name “Pequot” is of Algonquian descent and translates to mean “destroyers”. As the Pequot were migrating westward continuous altercations with the colonists arose. One incident in particular led to the murder of an English man believed to be a traitor by the Pequot. John Endicott, of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, organized an attack against the Pequot in retaliation for the murder of the alleged traitor, John Oldham. On May 26, 1637 the Pequot were attacked by some colonists as well as the Pequot former tribesmen the Mohegan and Uncas. Nearly all the Pequot villages were burned and nearly all of the Pequot were killed. Some small groups did escape but most were found and either murdered or sold into slavery to other Indian nations as well as residents of the West Indies. After the “Pequot War”, the Pequot name was all but eliminated giving way to the Mohegan. The pride of the Pequot people and their immense hatred of the Mohegan tribe were very prevalent t...
“Following the departures of Pio Pico and Jose Castro, the United States naval forces entered Los Angeles without opposition and raised the stars and stripes on August 31, Stockton appointed Captain Archibald Gillespie military commandant of the town, with instruction to be vigilant, firm and strict, and by no means permit anyone to escape” (Johns 3). California natives soon grew angry with Gillespie’s demands and lodged an attack on him; the Americans won the small battle. And, four days later California won another attack at Chino Rancho of Isaac Williams. “Encouraged by their success, the local inhabitants then gathered a large force which surrounded the detachment in the pueblo and forced Gillespie to evacuate his post on Sept, 30” (Johns 5).
One of the main forms of violence in the Old West was murder; the rising tension between the American soldiers and the Native Americans was a main contributor to this violence. An example of this strain is the Sand Creek Massacre. American soldiers attacked unaware Native Americans of the Cheyenne and Arapahoe ethnic groups. All men, women, and children were killed and/or tortured. There were no survivors. “Two soldiers drew their pistols and shot her [a little girl]”, portraying that these sort of crimes came about regularly in the West (Document G). Another example of this is the Battle of Beecher Island. The Battle of Beecher Island, also known as the Battle of Arikaree Fork, was the armed disagreement between soldiers of the U.S. Army and a few Native American tribes. According to Document H, there were “at least 50 [men dead]; perhaps as many as 200 [men] were wounded” (Document H). Adding on to the uneasiness between the Native Americans and the white soldiers, many killings were encountered by foolishness, not battle. The Native Americans and the soldiers wanted to prove that their race is more macho and better than the other. Even though Document L states that “113 [people] recorded no trouble with the Indians”, Document M detects many problems with the Native Americans resulting in “919” troops killed (Document L, Document M). The white soldiers in the Old West would have loved to kill the Native American’s buffalo popu...
One of the darkest times in American history was the conflict with the natives. A “war” fought with lies and brute force, the eviction and genocide of Native Americans still remains one of the most controversial topics when the subject of morality comes up. Perhaps one of the most egregious events to come of this atrocity was the Sand Creek Massacre. On the morning of November 29th, 1864, under the command of Colonel John Chivington, 700 members of the Colorado Volunteer Cavalry raped, looted, and killed the members of a Cheyenne tribe (Brown 86-94). Hearing the story of Sand Creek, one of the most horrific acts in American History, begs the question: Who were the savages?
The events of March 5, 1770 should and have been remembered as momentous and predictable. Perhaps not the night or city specifically, but the state of affairs in Boston, if not throughout The English Colonies, had declined to the point that British troops found themselves frequently assaulted with stones, dirt, and human feces. The opinions and sentiments of either side were certainly not clandestine. Even though two spectators express clear culpability for the opposing side, they do so only in alteration of detail. The particulars of the event unfold the same nonetheless. The happening at the Custom House off King Street was a catastrophic inevitability. Documents from the Boston Massacre trial, which aid us in observing from totally different perceptions. The depositions of witnesses of the event prove to be useful; an English officer Captain Preston and a colonial Robert Goddard give relatively dissimilar details. In spite of these differences, they still both describe the same state of affairs.
On the 29th o April, 1977 Captain Cook, commander of a British fleet, landed on the eastern shore of Australia, in an attempt to claim the land under the name of Britain. The land was to be claimed by Britain as a land where the British government could send convicts; in an attempt to ease the struggle in the over flowing prisons. Upon Cooks arrival, he was ordered to follow three rules of claiming a foreign land. They were;
The removal of Indian tribes was one of the tragic times in America’s history. Native Americans endured hard times when immigrants came to the New World. Their land was stolen, people were treated poorly, tricked, harassed, bullied, and much more. The mistreatment was caused mostly by the white settlers, who wanted the Indians land. The Indians removal was pushed to benefit the settlers, which in turn, caused the Indians to be treated as less than a person and pushed off of their lands. MOREEE
The whites took the Native American children with the purpose to assimilate the children to the white culture. They would force all the native children to choose white names, cut their hair like a white man or woman, and gave them a strict schedule to follow along, they were also not allowed to speak their native language or else they would be punished heavily. Even though this action was for a good purpose, the white people ended up killing many of the Native children, which broke the promise they had made to the children’s parents back at the reservation. These events had occurred because the whites had the power to control the children to do, and follow the ways of the whites.
With buffalo numbers decreasing fast, Native American tribes faced starvation and desperation. There were many different actions the Americans did to destroy the land of the Native Americans. Western expansion caused a shift in the lives of Native Americans because many tribes, including women and kids, were being murdered by the new settlers. S.G. Colley, a U.S. Indian Agent, writes in a Report for the Committee on the Conduct of War, “That notwithstanding his knowledge of the facts as above set forth, he is informed that Colonel Chivington did, on the morning of the 29th of November last, surprise and attack said camp of friendly Indians and massacre a large number of them, (mostly women and children,) and did allow the troops of his command to mangle and mutilate them in the most horrible manner” (Colley, 1865). This quote shows the Americans were exterminating innocent American Indians for no justifiable reason.
The Boston Massacre was a fundamental event at the beginning of the American Revolution. The massacre became part of anti-British propaganda for Boston activists and fed American fears of the English military in both the North and South. The Boston Massacre was the first “battle” in the Revolutionary War. Although it wasn’t until five years after the Boston Massacre that the Revolutionary War officially began, the Boston Massacre was a forecast of the violent storm to come.
Upon reaching the Malheur, French had found the perfect place for creating an empire of cattle. “The basis of this paradise was the natural wealth offered by the wetlands and riparian areas of the northern Great Basin, a geography of basin and range where the rivers flowed not into the sea but into briny lakes.” (Langston, pgs. 17-18) Here French had found the perfect landscape for his empire, a land full of opportunity, and as he thought, no one to fight for it. The Homesteaders and the cattle barons got on quite well together, sharing both interests and work ethic, but most of all a hatred for the native Paiute tribe. “To lay claim to the basin for themselves, they believed they had to deny the Paiute’s claim to a home and physically expel them.” (Langston, pg. 28) The rancher and the settlers decided they needed to rid the Malheur of the Paiutes, leading to the Paiute rebellion of 1878. “The uprising was brief, yet the retaliation against the Paiute was brutal and swift.” (Langston, pg. 33) Any remaining Paiute were forced to make the journey to the Yakima