Chequamegon History

By Leo

[Author’s note: This post first appeared in May 2023. I’m reposting it as it is timely once again. The actions (or inactions) of Congress Washington can have far-reaching, unanticipated consequences.]

A minority in congress, feeling threatened by a rapidly changing society, seeks to cling to power and preserve white supremacy. To do this, they abuse institutional rules, make a mockery of the democratic process, and bring the Federal Government to a grinding halt. The consequences prove dire. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

The year is 1850. The United States is growing rapidly: settling the Oregon boundary dispute, annexing Texas, and taking New Mexico and California from Mexico. In the north, Irish immigrants are flooding into the urban centers and building railroads that will carry German and Scandinavian farmers to the prairies of the West. This leads to Wisconsin’s statehood in 1848, and Minnesota and Oregon don’t seem far behind. The United States seems to be fulfilling its supposed “Manifest Destiny.”

The Ojibwe of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan are largely out of the way of this “progress.” However, they live on lands already ceded by treaty. Despite promises received upon signing that they could stay on this ceded territory, two things are working against that possibility. The most powerful trading interests have relocated from Lake Superior to the Mississippi They want to bring the Ojibwe bands, and the annuity money and government contracts that accompany them, to Minnesota. Secondly, the Office of Indian Affairs in Washington, is riddled with corruption, cronyism, and general incompetence, and still has Indian Removal as the default policy. All things being equal, in the Government’s eyes, the sooner Indians can get out of the way and be replaced with white settlers, the better.

But not all is sunshine and roses with this unparalleled American expansion. After all, Manifest Destiny is not the only white supremacist force in American society. There is also the complicating factor of the South’s “peculiar institution:” slavery.

For the first half of the 19th century, the slave states and their representatives in Congress were mostly left alone. Systemic protections in the Constitution, and a series of compromises to maintain a “balance of power,” alleviated southern paranoia despite the growing population of the industrial north. Abolitionists were still seen as a radical minority, and most northerners didn’t care one way or the other about slavery.

The Mexican War, however, shook up this uneasy union. One could argue that it had been a war for the expansion of slavery, but when the dust settled, only Texas appeared to be reliable ground for the forces of allowing human beings to own one another. Oregon would be free. The Mormon colony at Salt Lake would be free. And scariest, of all, California might be free.

To make matters worse, a faction of “Free-Soilers” was emerging in Congress. While not full-on abolitionists, these northern representatives, like David Wilmot of Pennsylvania and Abraham Lincoln of Illinois, were bold enough to suggest that owning people should be banned entirely in the newly-acquired territories. In response, the southern presses began to talk openly of dissolving the Union, and the forces for enslavement in Washington dug in.

So, on February 6, 1850, when President Zachary Taylor issued the order to remove the Lake Superior Ojibwe to the Mississippi, few in Washington cared. They were preoccupied by another issue. That same month, California adopted a constitution and applied to enter the Union as a free state.

In theory, it shouldn’t have mattered. Beyond pork projects and nepotistic appointments, Congress and the President rarely took any direct interest in Indian matters, leaving that to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. The Commissioner, in turn, generally delegated responsibility to his superintendents and agents on the frontier. That was how a corrupt territorial governor named Alexander Ramsey and a barely-literate, sycophantic Indian sub-agent named John S. Watrous ended up in charge of the removal.

Ramsey and Watrous are often portrayed as the primary villains of the failed treaty payment that would become known as the Sandy Lake Tragedy. Hundreds Ojibwe people died of disease, starvation, and exposure in the winter of 1850-51. The governor and sub agent deserve plenty of the blame, for sure, but it should be stated that they stood to gain no benefit from death, misery, or failure. Furthermore, they anticipated the catastrophe and tried to warn Washington of the consequences of inadequate food out or if the money were to somehow not arrive.

That September, Watrous would call on the Ojibwe to skip their fall hunts and assemble at Sandy Lake, while he went to St. Louis to pick up the money for the treaty payments. Why did he not get back until late November, and why did he have no money with him? Slavery.

Every year, Congress had to pass appropriation bills in order for the executive branch to perform its constitutionally required duties. This included the obligations of the United States to fulfill its treaty obligations to Indian nations. This was largely a formality before 1850. Every spring, Congress would pass whatever budget the Indian Department proposed, generally without a lot of debate or delay.

1850 was different. As spring turned to summer preparations for removal were underway at La Pointe, but nothing was happening in Washington. The United States Government was absolutely paralyzed by the California Question. Pro-slavery senators and representatives, feeling their power slipping away, resorted to dirty tricks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hartford Courant

4 June 1850.  Pg. 2

SOUTHERN PLANS.

The Washington correspondent of the New York Commercial Advertiser places the plans and plots of the Southern Members of Congress in the following light.

“The primary object of the arrangements is reported to be the rejection of the claims of California to admission upon any terms whatever, and the defeat of all schemes for the organization of governments for the territories which do not contain an express recognition of slavery.

The leading spirits of this movement in the Senate are reported to be Davis of Miss., Mason of Va. Yulee of Fla., Turney of Tenn.  In the House, Clingman of N. C., Inge of Ala., Toombs and Stephens of Ga., and Meade of Va., control and direct the organization.– Seventy-four members of the lower House are claimed as friendly to the proposed course of proceeding, and have, as is alleged, signed a formal agreement to stand by one another in anything necessary to give effect to their designs.

A prominent part of the plan is to prevent the passage of the annual appropriation bills, and if the Northern majority cannot be otherwise overcome, to force an early adjournment.  The appropriations for the current year of course expire at the end of June next.– Some few appropriations, such perhaps as the interest on the public debt, and the instalments annually payable in Mexico, are continued from year to year by permanent enactments, but with these exceptions all the expenditures of Government depend upon appropriations annually renewable.

After the 30th of June, no officer of Government from the President down to the lowest messenger, can receive one dollar in payment of his services, until the disbursement be ordered by Congress.  The case is the same with expenditures for the support of the judiciary, the army, navy and civil list.  They are all dependent for support upon the action of the legislature, under the clause of the Constitution which makes it the duty of Congress to grant supplies and of the executive officers only to make disbursements upon such authorities.”

It is very evident that the ultra slavery leaders came into Congress, this session, with these plans.  There has been, ever since the session commenced, an evident determination, as they were the minority, to hinder the transaction of business, and if they cannot defeat the Proviso and the friends of non-extension, in any other way, to do it by procrastination.  Such was the design of the ultra Southern Whigs, in their refusal to support Mr. Winthrop.  It was believed that months could be spent in delay, but the vote for a plurality choice broke up this plan, and flung the Speakership upon the very man they wished.  Such was the design of the ultra Southern Democrats in their refusal to support Mr. Forney for Clerk.

Business has, in this way, been hindered; nothing has been accomplished; a few trifling bills only have been passed; and the whole subject of slavery in the territories as far from being settled as ever.  It is very probable, likewise, that when the naked question of the admission of California is brought before the House, if it should ever be reached, the scenes of February 18th would be acted over and with success.  In the mean time, one of the latest numbers of the National Intelligencer shows, by its extracts, that uneasiness and agitation has commenced again at the South, and the experienced and shrewd editors of that paper see signs of another storm.  Would that the North were now united; that the opponents of slavery in Congress had no foolish party cliques to please, no mere party aggrandizement to plan, but would all march up to the breach in the walls of liberty, shoulder to shoulder, and accomplish their great object.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

With the end of the fiscal year approaching on June 30th, failure to pass the appropriations bills was tantamount to both a government shutdown and a debt default. Still, the southern hardliners held on to their open obstructionism, trying to prevent California from entering the Union as a free state:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hayneville (AL) Chronicle

29 June 1850, Pg. 2

The following article from the Mobile Register breathes the right spirit.  The rights of the minority must be protected in some way; and if the North, who have the majority in the unequal contest now raging between herself and the South, will not do us justice, let the Representatives of the South stop the wheels of government, by resorting to their rights under the rules, and withholding the appropriation bill.  Let this be done, and another effort will have been made to save the rights and honor of the South, without resorting to that “last extremity”–disunion, and he who then charges a disunion spirit upon the South, will charge a falsehood, with the facts of its refutation staring him in the face.

Aside from all this, we think such a course would be apt to result in bringing the North to her right senses.  The great mass of the funds appropriated by the government is expended and disbursed through the Northern States, and seldom a dollar, comparatively speaking ever reaches the South.  It is in fact the great prop of the Northern manufacturers and capitalists, who feed upon the hard-earned substance of the South, and, at the same time, are found vilifying her institutions.  ‘Fo show the shallow hypocrisy of these people, whenever they hear the subject broached before Congress: whenever they hear it hinted that the South will resort to this mode of settling the question, by withholding the appropriation bill, their high wrought philanthropy immediately sinks into non-entity.  The agitation for a time ceases, and the cry is heard going up from every town and village of the North, to their representatives, “Settle the question, settle the question.”

But, again, on the other hand, we of the South would lose nothing by the appropriation bill being withheld.  We gain nothing by it; and therefore are as well off without it as with it.  The South lives, emphatically by herself, and upon her own resources; and in no wise dependent upon a disbursement of the public funds.  Upon the question of benefit to the South arising from a disbursement of these funds, Mr. Clingman, of North Carolina, whose speech upon this subject was one of the most powerful and convincing among the many able speeches of the present session, and a man too who speaks without investigation, holds the following language:

 “The manner of disbursement is also adverse to our interests.  Of the forty odd millions which the Government purposes to disburse this year, I do not believe that five millions will in any way be expended in all the slaveholding States.  North Carolina, for example, is burdened to the extent of not less than four millions, and yet does not get back one hundred thousand dollars in any way from the Government.  The clear loss, in a pecuniary point of view, on account action of the Government, may be set down as not less than three millions annually.–The southern States generally are in the same situation.”

Why should the South hesitate then, to adopt this mode of self-defence, when she loses nothing by it, and when, at the same time, it may be the means of bringing the North to a sense of her duty under the Constitution?  But as remarked by the Register, in the discharge of this duty, beset by so many trials and embarrassments, our members will look for support at home.  This we know they will receive.  Let this mode of baffling the designs of these miserable pseudo-philanthropists, be carried out by the southern members, and they will be greeted by one common should of applause from one end of the southern States to the other:    

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The North had its own hardliners, willing to force California’s statehood at all costs. Though the Free Soilers’ motivations are more understandable to us today, we should acknowledge they were also willing to play games with the process at the expense of keeping the government operating:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

New York Daily Herald

30 June 1850, Pg.4

WASHINGTON, June 28, 1850.

Compromise Caucus in the House

Pursuant to a call published in this morning’s Union, the members of the House, to the extent of some forty odd in number, friendly to the admission of California into the Union, promptly, and disconnected with all other subjects, met in the Hall of the House this evening at eight o’clock.

Mr. Booth (free soiler) of Connecticut, was called to the chair, and Mr. Amos Tuck, N. H., elected secretary.

The chairman briefly stated the object of the meeting to secure by a co-operation of the friends of California, the prompt action of the House to the admission of California into the Union.

Mr. Preston King (free soiler) with a few remarks, introduced a resolution pledging the caucus to support the admission of California to the precedence of all other subjects whatsoever.

Mr. Hugh White, N. Y., was opposed to pledging the caucus to such a course; and contended that in any event the annual appropriations for the support of the government ought not to be entirely set aside, and that it might become necessary to pass them, even of the admission of California.

Mr. Otis, of N. H. took the same view of the subject.

Mr. Giddings felt confident that by the concerted action of the friends of California, and with a determination to push it through, she could be admitted, as far as the House was concerned, in three days; and all that was required was the determination to stick to it, and sit it out.

Mr. Briggs, of New York, concurred in the object of the meeting.  He was in favor of the early admission of California, and though he had been a silent member during the present session, he had paid the most earnest attention to the debates, and was not indifferent by any means to the importance of immediate action.  He was in favor of the admission of California as a separate measure.  Nothing had occurred to change this opinion.  He was in favor of California, free and distinct from any other matter whatsoever.  He had listened to the discussions of the last four or five months attentively, but his mind had undergone no particular change.  It was time that something should be done.  Seven months of the session had been expended, and they had not done more business than should have occupied 30 days.  But there were obstacles still in the way.  He believed that it was the settled determination of the enemies of California, in the House, to arrest any action upon the bill while another bill was pending before the Senate; and as it might be a useless waste of time to contend against such opposition, he thought rather than do nothing in the meantime, it might be as well to act upon the annual appropriations.  Still, he was ready to co-operate with the friends of California, if the bill should be taken up, for her admission, in preference to all other questions.  For the present, he suggested that any decision be postponed till Monday, with a view to a more united expression from a fuller attendance of the the friends of California.

Mr. Campbell, of Ohio, (free soiler,) was in favor of California, even to the superseding the appropriation bills.  He could not concur with Mr. Briggs in acting upon the appropriations first.  There was no danger on that score.  Whether they were or were not delayed two or three weeks did not make much difference.  Let them go over, for the safest way to secure California is to entertain no other subject till she is admitted.

Mr. Putnam, of New York, offered a resolution, declaring the necessity of the immediate admission of California distinct from all other subjects, and in precedence of all other measures, excepting the annual appropriation bills.  He briefly spoke in support of the resolution, in view of the necessity which might arise to pass the appropriations in advance of action upon California.

Mr. Wilmot of Pa., (free soiler) earnestly urged action upon California as the paramount object.  He was opposed to considering any other subject till that was disposed of; and charged the friends of California with being derelict in their duty, in allowing other matters to supersede that great measure.

Mr. Otis asked in what instance the friends of California had fallen short of their duty.

Mr. Wilmot did not intend to impugn the motives of any man, but referred to the decision of the House on Monday last as a case in point, when they refused to take up the California bill; but went into committee on the bill of land bounties to the soldiers of the last war.

Mr. Otis was satisfied.  He was a young member, and had asked for information, being not as well versed in the rules as the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Wilmot maintained that California should take the precedence of the appropriations.  There was no danger of it not passing, however long they might be delayed.  He advised the friends of California to call for the meeting of the House at ten in the morning on the first day in taking up the bill, and that they sit till six P. M., that on the second day they sit till 12 at night, and that on the third day, if the question be not taken, that they continue in session all night, if necessary, and keep at it till it is taken.  Give him the control of the majority of the House, and he could overcome the minority, notwithstanding the rules admit of so many obstructions.

Mr. Howe, of Pennsylvania, supported the views of Mr. Wilmot.  He was in favor, if necessary, of camping in the House till California is admitted into the Union.

Mr. King withdrew his resolution, and Mr. Putnam so modified his as to declare substantially, that the friends of California would urge her admission as a distinct measure, to the exclusion of all other measures whatsoever.

Mr. Amos Tuck warmly opposing the resolution, denied that the friends of California had been remiss in their duty.  They had done every thing they possibly could do under the rules of the House, crippling their actions in every movement.

Mr. Allen, of Mass. (free soil.) was in favor of California in advance of the appropriations, or after them, if necessary as the caucus might decide.

Mr. Putnam’s resolution, declaring that the friends of California, of the caucus, would contend for her admission till acted upon, in preference to all other measures was finally adopted, with but two or three dissenting voices.

And on motion of Mr. Doty, the caucus adjourned to meet again on Monday next, at 8 P. M.

There were present from the New York delegation this evening, Messrs. Briggs, Hugh White, Putnam, Halloway, Burrows, Schoolcraft, Spalding and Gould, and probably one or two others.

(Your reporter has to say, that he did not hear the caucus was open till too late in the evening to make a full and connected report.  He believes, however, that he has the gist of the proceedings.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Further brinksmanship, and President Taylor’s unexpected death, meant it took nearly a month after going over the fiscal cliff before serious debate even started on the appropriations bills. By this point, Watrous and Ramsey had already chosen their new agency site (Sandy Lake), entered into contracts for furnishing provisions and transporting annuity goods, and had notified the Lake Superior Ojibwe bands not to plant gardens because the order to remove to the Mississippi would come any day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Baltimore Sun

26 Jul 1850, Pg. 4

[Reported for the Baltimore Sun]

THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS-1st Session

WASHINGTON, July 25, 1850.

…

Mr. Bayly, in answer to the inquiry upon the subject, stated that he proposed that the appropriation bills should be taken up in the following order, after the Military Academy bill was disposed of, viz:  1st, The Revolutionary pension bill; 2d, the Navy pension bill; 3d, the Indian appropriation bill; 4th, the Fortification bill; 5th, the bill for the support of the Post-office Department; 6th, the civil and diplomatic bill; 7th, the Navy bill; 8th, the Army bill.

Mr. Harris, of Illinois, inquired whether if California should be admitted, would it not become necessary to pass an additional appropriation bill, should these bills be passed before her admission

Mr. Bayly –If California should come in as a State, a very small modification of the appropriation bills would be necessary; but if a territorial government merely was provided for California, a new appropriation bill would be necessary.

Mr. Harris –Then it would be better to dispose of the California question first.

Mr. Bayly expressed the hope that gentlemen would not open up a general debate on the appropriation bills which he proposed to take up before the civil and diplomatic bill.  If so, these appropriation bills could be got through in several days.

Mr. Stanton, of Tennessee, was disposed to take the advice of the chairman of the committee on ways and means, in regard to suppressing general debated on certain of the appropriation bills, but in doing so he would like to know something in regard to the time of adjournment.  For the whole debate might be restricted by an order for adjournment, to a day or two, and thus would debate be suppressed entirely.  Our course should be shaped in regard to a general debate upon the probability of an adjournment.

Mr. Bayly said it was not his intention to make any proposition for an adjournment.  As the fiscal year had already commenced, it was important that these bills should be passed without delay.

Mr. Stanton,  What time would it be before the House could adjourn.

Mr. Bayly –So far as the appropriation bills are concerned, we will be in a condition to adjourn on the day on which they shall have passed.  He supposed those bills might be disposed of in two weeks.

Mr. Bissell –If we pass those bills and adjourn, what will become of California?  I am opposed to passing those bills, and thus putting it in the power of Congress to adjourn, until California is disposed of…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Washington [DC] Union

14 Aug 1850, Pg. 3

IN CONGRESS OF THE U. STATES.

_____________________________

Thirty-First Congress–First Session.

_____________________________

…

FRIDAY, AUGUST 2, 1850.

______

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

…

Mr. BAYLY moved to lay aside the subject-matter, and to take up the Indian appropriation bill; and on this motion tellers were called and ordered, when it was agreed to–ayes 98, noes 45.

The Indian appropriation bill being before the committee,

Mr. KAUFMAN moved the rising of the committee to enable him to offer the usual resolution to fix the period for the end of this debate:  not agreed to

Mr. SIBLEY next spoke for an hour, principally in explanation of the condition of Indian affairs in Minnesota, and arguing that it was high time to entirely remodel the whole Indian system of the government.

Mr. MASON addressed the House in reply to Mr. SIBLEY, arguing that no efforts of this government could elevate the red man to the condition of the white.  He held that the negro was also incapable of being educated so as to give him, as a race, the character and qualities of the white man, and criticised with force and severity the efforts of those who labored to force anti-slavery and negro equality on the South.   

After a few remarks from Mr. GIDDINGS in reply to Mr. MASON, the committee rose to enable the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means to offer the usual resolution for closing the debate on the Indian appropriation bill.

Mr. BAYLY then offered a resolution to close that debate in five minutes after the House should again go into committee on the bill:  agreed to.

An ineffectual motion to adjourn over until Monday, when the House should adjourn, was then made.

After which, on motion, the House again went into a Committee of the Whole on the state of Union, and, taking up the annual Indian appropriation bill, amendments thereto were proposed and advocated in five-minute’s speeches by Messrs BAYLY, JOHNSON of Arkansas, CARTTER, EVANS of Maryland, HOUSTON, DUNHAM, FITCH, BISSELL, TOOMBS, CROWELL, THOMPSON of Mississippi, and BROWN of Indian.

The committee next rose, and, after an ineffectual motion to adjourn over until Monday next, the House adjourned.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Henry Hastings Sibley, Territorial Delegate to Congress for Minnesota, advocated here for a more humane (i.e. assimilationist) Indian Policy for the United States. He had a long career with the American Fur Company, its successor, the Chouteau Fur Co., and in Minnesota politics. For his own Dakota daughter’s sake, he would have felt compelled to defend the humanity of Native people, but his general record on Native issues was not good. He was no fan of Indian cultures, a believer in Manifest Destiny, and above all, a ruthless businessmen. He was one of the primary architects of the Ojibwe removal, and had to have known that blood would be on his hands if the annuity funds for the Ojibwe, Ho-Chunk, and Dakota failed to materialize.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alexandria [VA] Gazette

5 Aug 1850, Pg. 2

Indian Appropriation Bill.

In the House of Representatives, on Friday, on motion of Mr. BAYLY, the House resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; and the California bill having been laid aside–ayes 98.  noes 49– the committee took up the bill making appropriations for the current and contingent expenses of the Indian department, and for fulfilling treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes for the year ending June 30, 1851.

Mr. SIBLEY, the delegate from Minnesota, after speaking of the privileges of delegates, proceeded to address the committee on the subject of the Indians and the policy which should be pursued with regard to them.  It was very important, he insisted, that there should always be good commissioners to negotiate treaties:  and the savages should not be left to find out how they have been betrayed and cheated.  Not one treaty in ten has been carried out in good faith.  The evil of this is not confined to the tribes who have been wronged, but is communicated to others, who are kept in check by the superior power of the Government.  The Seminole war, it would be recollected, cost thirty or forty millions of dollars.  A principle should be adopted more in accordance with principles of justice and morality.  The efforts of the Christian missionaries who go among the Indians to civilize them are in effect obstructed by the conduct of the Government.  The Indians doubt the sincerity of its agents.  It is a fallacy that the diminution of the Indians is owing altogether to strong drink.  This is true to a small extent:  but the main reason is, the Indian, having disposed of his land, is cast out as a vagabond.  Some stimulus to industry must be placed before him, and he must have confidence in the faith of the Government.  The first step to be taken for the improvement of the Indians is to extend over them the laws of the United States.  At an early period of the session he proposed to give them those of Minnesota and Oregon, in which he had the concurrence of the delegate from the last named Territory.  He could say, with sincerity, that unless this bill be passed all other plans must fail.  It was the substratum on which all other measures for the amelioration and improvement of the Indians must rest.  If any thing is to be done for them, it must be done now.

Mr. MASON said that as to making the white, red, and black man perfectly equal, he totally despaired.  Nature’s God made the black man, and when it is undertaken to make him equal with the white, by law, an impossibility is attempted.  Our friends in the free States have manifested as great a desire to elevate the position of the African race–the black man–as his friend from Minnesota had to elevate the condition of the red man.  Legislation, in this respect, would have as much effect as the passage of a law to make every variety of birds the same color.

Mr. SIBLEY inquired whether some of the first families of Virginia had not boasted that they had Indian blood in their veins?  John Randolph did, as being a descendant of Pocahontas.

Mr. MASON admitted all that, and that there were most able, eloquent, and patriotic men who descended, in part, from the Indian race:  but would the gentleman say that this is common, or only an exception to the rule?  And then there was a sprinkle of the white man in the exception.  Eloquent, able men may be found among the Indians, but the mass is not of that character.  The gentleman spoke of manual labor schools, for the purpose of educating them.  Now, it is known that they are not formed for labor.  They have no natural disposition to labor, and he did not know whether the white man has.  [Laughter.]

Mr. SIBLEY remarked that the gentleman was much mistaken when he said that the Indians do not labor.  They, as a general thing, labor as much as the white man.  The life of the hunter requires more endurance than the ordinary labor of the white man.

Mr. MASON.  That is a life above all others, suited to the Indians, and it is a labor and endurance of certain character.  Generally, they are averse to labor, and every effort to make them labor, as a mass, is to destroy them.  He then proceeded to contrast the happy condition of the negroes of our own country with those of Africa.  As to putting them on an equality with the white man, the attempt might as well be made to fly without wings.  In the conclusion of his remarks, he spoke of the subjects which now agitate the country, and of the necessity of settling them on a fair and just basis to all parts of the Confederacy.

Mr. GIDDINGS said that the time when Congress ordinarily adjourns had arrived, and he asked gentlemen whether it was not due to themselves and the country that they should now act.  This was all he desired to submit.

Mr. STANLY remarked that if the gentleman and his friends would not discuss the Wilmot proviso, in three weeks the California, Territorial, and other bills could be passed, and all go home.

Mr. GIDDINGS said that, if the questions should come up, he would treat them fairly, would not detain the committee one moment beyond what it was his duty to do, and vote with all possible alacrity.

Mr. BAYLY said that there was not a contested item in the bill.  All the appropriations were to carry out existing treaties.  This being the case, and as two speeches have been made, he moved that the committee rise.

The motion was agreed to:  when Mr. Bayly submitted a resolution, that all debate on the bill shall cease in five minutes after the House shall go again into committee.

Mr. STANTON, of Tennessee, said he did not know how long they were to stay here–perhaps during the fall.  It was necessary they should have rest:  and he proposed that when the House adjourn, it adjourn to meet on Monday next.

The question was then taken, and decided in the negative.

The House again went into committee; and the consideration of the bill making appropriations to defray the expenses of the Indian department, &c., was resumed.

Five minute speeches were made on amendments; and the committee rose without coming to a conclusion, when.

Mr. POTTER moved that when the House adjourn, it adjourn until Monday.  The motion was disagreed to–ayes 41, noes 61.  And

The House adjourned until next day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Delay of Congress.

Congress has been in session eight months, and yet it has not passed a single bill of any consequence.  The neglect to pass the usual appropriation bills, which extend only to the first of July, is perhaps the most shameful evidence of its disregard of public duty.  Many persons having claims upon the government, are now waiting from day to day to have them satisfied, with scarcely any nearer prospect of its being done than there was seven or eight months ago.  This is particularly the case with the wives of seamen in service abroad, whose half pay constitutes, with their own toil, all the dependence of themselves and families.–The scenes at the office of the Navy Agent, are painful to contemplate.  The appropriation has run out, and there is no money to give these poor women, whose husbands so hardly earn the poor pittance they receive.  They have been kept already one month in suspense, causing no doubt an infinite amount of distress and suffering among them.  Of course there is no help for these sufferers.  The members at Washington, who are receiving their eight dollars per day for eight months of worse than idle talk, for much of it is positively mischievous, care very little for others, as long as their own wants are supplied.  But if anything could add to the disgraceful state of things at Washington, it is this robbing of the poor, by withholding from them so long their just earnings.—Phil. Ledger.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As July turned to August, and the government shutdown and debt default entered its second month, the logjam in Washington began to break. This came about with the failure of the centrist “Omnibus Bill” which would have admitted California as a free state, banned the slave trade in Washington D.C., and forced northerners to assist in returning fugitives to their enslavers. The omnibus proved unacceptable to enough northern Free Soilers, and enough southern hardline Democrats, to have no chance. Breaking it into pieces allowed for majorities on each individual measure, but arguably hastened the march toward civil war.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Washington D.C.] Southern Press

5 August 1850, Pg. 2

THE COMPROMISE BILL.–From all the indication derived from Washington, this famous measure has shared a merited fate, and is ere this consigned to the tomb of the Capulets.  It has been one of the veriest humbugs of the day.  While its friends professed to herald it forth as the harbinger of peace and tranquility, it contained within itself the very elements of discord and seeds of disunion.  The most extraordinary efforts were used to gild the nauseous pill and make it palatable to the public taste.  But they were mere quack nostrums and fortunately unsuccessful.  The South asked for bread, and out politicians were disposed to give them a stone–for a fish, and they offered them a serpent.  The scheme is now dead, dead as a mackerel, and there is no power to galvanize it into life and being.  The probability is that the bill to admit California into the Union will likewise fail.  We hope the true friends to the South will resist it “at every hazard and to the last extremity.”  All that is required, is that our own people should be united, and they can dictate their own terms to a sordid and reckless majority.—Southern Argus, Va.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Indian Appropriation Bill had to not only meet the United States’ existing treaty obligations, it also set the agenda and budget for further treaties and removals. It was also a prime target for riders and amendments for congressmen looking to give political patronage. It took several weeks to hammer out the details. It would ultimately include a removal fund for the Lake Superior Chippewa, on top of the regular annuity fund.

Meanwhile, back in Minnesota Territory, sub-agent Watrous finalized details for food to be placed along the removal path and approved licenses for La Pointe-based traders to start trading on the upper Mississippi. All that was waiting was final word from the governor to notify the bands to remove. Ramsey, however, was stuck in limbo. With the government shut down, employees couldn’t be paid, contracts couldn’t be honored, and the annuity funds could not be released. Washington had put him in full command of the removal, but he still wrote them confused if he should proceed. He did not get a clear answer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

New York Tribune

12 August 1850, Pg. 6

Our Indian Relations– President Fillmore’s Position.

Correspondence of the Tribune

WASHINGTON, Friday, Aug. 9.

The Indian Appropriation bill ought to have been passed long ago, as annuities past due are still unpaid.  This bill is a more important on than is generally supposed, as it contains provisions for extinguishing Indian titles to land in the new Territories.  In the bill just passed, appropriations are made for negotiating treaties with the Indians on the borders of Mexico, in Texas, and in Minnesota.  The rush of emigration to Minnesota requires that the Government get possession of lands as speedily as possible.  It contains over 160,000 square miles, of which only about 15,000 are available.  This is but a small portion of a Territory that must be settled with unparalleled rapidity.  Gov. RAMSEY and HUGH TYLER, Esq. of Penn. are to be the Commissioners for making the treaties in Minnesota, by whom this high trust will be executed with promptness and fidelity.

It is hoped that in future no treaties will be made with stipulations for annuities in tobacco and the worthless baubles which are give to the Indians, at large cost to the Government, as presents.  Such gifts are positively injurious to the Indians, and afford too great opportunity for official harpies to get rich on the appropriations for such purposes.  It is derogatory to the character of the nation, and should be corrected.  If one half the money paid to Indians had been expended for their education and the arts of civilized life, the condition of the red man would have nearly equalled that of the whites, but as long as treaties are made which bequeath all the vices with none of the blessings of civilization, there can be but little hope of elevating them to the industrious and useful pursuits of life.  On this subject, it is believed, The Tribune will not keep silent, as there is but little in the history of our national legislation for the Indians which commends itself to the approval of good men.

If treaties are made hereafter stipulate the payment of tobacco, trinkets and other worthless articles, they should not be ratified; nor should merchandise form any portion of the annuities.  It would be far better not to appropriate money to the Indians than to expend it in a manner that encourages rascality among agents, and vicious tastes and habits among those who should be benefited thereby.  I go for a “proviso” in regard to the mode of expending money for the Indians.

The flames excited in the breasts of the extreme factionists of the South by the timely and judicious message of President FILLMORE are subsiding, as they find it so direct in its reasonings and so national in tone as to render opposition extremely ridiculous.  The President will be sustained with firmness in the position he has wisely taken, and it is generally believed his message will lead to a speedy and satisfactory adjustment of these boundary difficulties, which, after all, constitute the great bone of contention on the questions relating to Slavery.  If this be done promptly, Congress will probably adjourn about the first of October; if not, there will be an interim of a few days only, by which mileage will be paid to the members.

Yours, ARGUS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~  

Indian Appropriations.

The Bill now before the House of Representatives, making appropriations for the current and contingent expenses of the Indian Department, and for fulfilling Treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes, for the year ending June 30, 1851, contains the following items:

PAY OF OFFICERS, &C.

Superintendent Indian Affairs at St. Louis–with the Indian Agents $18,000

Sub-Agents, Interpreters and Clerks 23,150

Buildings at Agencies 2,000

Presents to Indians 5,000

Contingencies 56,500

____________

TO THE TRIBES.

Christian Indians $400

Chippewas of Saginaw 5,800

Chippewas, Menamonies, Winnebagoes and New Call Indians 1,500

Chippewas of Lake Superior and Mississippi 70,800

Chickasaws 3,000

[31 lines omitted from transcription]

Weas 3,000

Chippewas of Lake Superior and Mississippi 4,600

Pottowatamies 32,150

Creeks 1,275

Iowas 1,500

Ottawas and Chippewas 2,412

Wyandots 1,029

Cherokees 1,500

Choctaws 87,200

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Summer dragged on, and the shutdown entered its third month. Tensions in congress stayed high. It was now past time when the session should have adjourned. Individual members wanted to go home, and with eight months of gridlock and the grueling procedural processes necessary to move legislation, the opportunities to press personal grievances proved too tempting.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[New York] Evening Post

2 September 1850, Pg. 1

CHIVALRY

There were rather characteristic illustrations of chivalry in the House this morning and yesterday.  Mr. Bayly has been desirous of having the Indian Appropriation bill passed.  Yesterday he called it up, a motion which required unanimous consent.  Mr. Sweetser, of Ohio, who sits about three seats removed from Bayly, rose and objected, and of course the motion could not be entertained.  Mr. Bayly hereupon rose from his seat, leaned over towards Mr. Sweetzer, shook his finger at him in a very menacing manner, and said, as I understand, “You are a spiteful little cur,” with some additional epithets not necessary to repeat.

This morning the Chairman of the Ways and Means renewed his motion, and again Mr. Sweetzer rose and objected, and sat down.  Mr. Bayly again rose, precisely as before, shook his finger in the face of Mr. Sweetzer, and said, among other things, “If you ever object to another motion of mine in this House, I will wring your nose, G-d d–n you.”–These words were spoken so loud as to be distinctly heard across the hall, though, of course, they were not intended to go into the debates.  Mr. Sweetzer made a motion with his hand as if he would have thrown an inkstand into the face of his insulter, but Mr. Thompson, of Miss., interposed, and no violence occurred in the House.  Mr. Sweetzer soon after left the House; as he was doing so a friend asked him what he was about to do, to which he replied that he would arm himself, and would then determine.  It was the opinion of every member whom I heard allude to the affair, that the insult on the part of Bayly was so gross, wanton, and intolerable, that, had Mr. Sweetzer had the means to do it, he would have been warranted in summarily taking his life. X.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back at Sandy Lake, Watrous began to panic. He wrote Ramsey warning that he had only purchased enough food to cover the bands’ journey to Sandy Lake and for the normal duration of a payment. Furthermore, high water had wiped out most of the rice crop. The sub-agent openly expressed his concern that starvation would ensue if the removal funds or the payment were delayed. Still, the two men were mostly concerned with preserving their own reputations for fiscal responsibility. With no word from Washington on when the funds would be available for pickup, and the Ojibwe ready to split off into small groups for fall hunts, Ramsey and Watrous, decided to force the removal through anyway. Watrous sent word to the bands to assemble at Sandy Lake in early October, where they would be fed and receive the money obligated to them by treaty.

Congress, meanwhile, was working through its backlog of legislation. They passed the various parts of the discarded omnibus bill, separately, in what has gone down in American history as the infamous “Compromise of 1850.” California entered the Union, but the accompanying Fugitive Slave Law would force the north to confront the evils of slavery directly. On September 30th, after three months of default, President Fillmore was finally able to sign the appropriation bills.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Vicksburg Whig

9 Oct 1850, Pg.2

BY TELEGRAPH

To the N. O. Picayune:

…

BALTIMORE, Monday, Sept. 30.

Congressional,–The Fortification, the Bounty Land, the Navy and Army Appropriation, the Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation, the Indian appropriation, and the Light House bills, have been slightly amended, passed and signed by the President.

…

[BY THE WESTERN LINE.]

THE FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW.–LOUISVILLE, October 3.–Mixed meetings of whites and blacks have been held in the city of New York, and in Springfield and Worcester, Mass., denouncing the Fugitive Slave law.  At Springfield, where many runaway negroes have gathered, resolutions have passed to resist the execution of the law at all hazards.

…
FUGITIVE SLAVE BILL.–The bill for the more easy reclamation of fugitive slaves was signed by President Fillmore on the 18th of August, and is now the law of the land.  We shall shortly publish it.  What a queer was President Fillmore has of displaying “abolitionism!”  He signs territorial bills without the proviso; he keeps appointing Southern men to vacant seats in his cabinet, so as to give the South a majority; and finally he approves of the most stringent fugitive slave bill that the wit of Southern Senators can devise.  “By their works ye shall know them.”  –Natchez Courier.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 6th, with some members of the removal bands already arriving at Sandy Lake, Watrous left for St. Louis. If he hesitated any longer the food would surely run out, and the Mississippi might ice over. In 1850, however, there were no wire transfers or debit cards. Treaty payments were made in coin, and it took time to box up and transport coin. The sub-agent found no funds at St. Louis and returned emptyhanded to Sandy Lake in November–a full month later than the scheduled payment. By that time, the food was gone, and disease had broken out in the crowded camps occupied by thousands of Ojibwe people. The Sandy Lake Tragedy had begun and would still get worse. Estimates vary, but up to four hundred would die senselessly before winter was over.

Historians like to speak of proximate versus ultimate causes. Did World War I begin because a Serbian nationalist assassinated an archduke in Sarajevo, or was it the result of unchecked competition among imperial powers in Europe? The answer is both. The assassination was the proximate, or direct, cause, but the ultimate causes went deeper.

It isn’t difficult to find ultimate causes for why hundreds of Ojibwe people died at Sandy Lake in the winter of 1850-51. One can point to deceptive treaties, a corrupt Indian Department, greedy special interests, and a systematic failure to listen to Ojibwe leadership. However, pinning down the proximate cause has proven harder. We feel compelled to find individual villains who through greed, cowardice, or incompetence committed sins of both omission and commission. Among these are Ramsey, Watrous, Rice, Sibley, Hall, Warren, Oakes, Borup, and others. However, all of those men wanted the annuity money to arrive Sandy Lake, as promised, and stood lose something if it didn’t. So, why didn’t the money materialize? Who is to blame for that?

America’s rapid expansion into a world superpower, spanning from sea to shining sea, was built, in part, on two white-supremacist myths. The first held that white people were destined to inevitably own the lands of North America. Just as inevitably, the Indian nations of those lands must disappear: Manifest Destiny. The second myth held that the statement “all men are created equal” did could not apply to people of African descent, and that somehow one human being could own another in this “new nation, conceived in liberty:” Slavery. It is very obvious that the first myth fits into story of the Sandy Lake Tragedy. The deeper you look, the more obvious it becomes that the second does too.

Paap, Howard D. Red Cliff, Wisconsin a History of an Ojibwe Community ; Volume 1 The Earliest Years: the Origin to 1854. North Star Press of St. Cloud, Inc., 1854.

Satz, Ronald N. Chippewa Treaty Rights: the Reserved Rights of Wisconsin’s Chippewa Indians in Historical Perspective. University of Wisconsin Press, 1997.

Schenck, Theresa M. William W. Warren: The Life, Letters, and times of an Ojibwe Leader. Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 2007. Print.

White, Bruce. "The Regional Context of the Removal Order of 1850," in McClurken, James M. et al., Fish in the Lakes, Wild Rice, and Game in Abundance: Testimony on Behalf of Mille Lacs Ojibwe Hunting and Fishing Rights, James M. McClurken, Compiler. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 2000.