Elias Boudinot’s Editorials in The Cherokee Phoenix[i]
Introduction:
The
Cherokees’ national newspaper, the Cherokee Phoenix, was a
source of national pride and an important tool in their resistance to removal.
In 1826, the National Council appropriated funds for the construction of a
printing office in the Nation’s capital, New Echota, the purchase of a press,
and the casting of types in English and the Cherokee syllabary. The inaugural
issue appeared in February 1828 with Elias Boudinot, a Cherokee educated in
mission schools, as editor. Subscribers included not only Cherokees but also
citizens of the United
States and even
Europeans. The newspaper kept its readers informed about national and
international events, and it published biblical passages and human interest
stories. Laws passed by the Cherokee National Council, advertisements, and
notices also appeared in its columns. Most important, the Cherokee Phoenix conveyed
information to the Nation’s citizens about the crisis confronting the
Cherokees.
As an
official organ of the Cherokee Nation, the Cherokee Phoenix presented
the Nation’s case against removal. The editor printed correspondence from the
president and secretary of war, messages from Principal Chief John Ross, and
editorials that explained the Cherokee position on removal. As a result, the
newspaper became an important factor iii uniting the Cherokee people against
removal and in promoting sympathy among non-Cherokee readers. When Elias
Boudinot began to change his views on removal in 1832, he wanted to open the
columns of the Phoenix to a debate on the issue. The Council and the principal chief
refused to permit open discussion, however, and Boudinot resigned. The paper
continued publication under new editorship until 1834, when the federal government
refused to pay annuities (annual payments for previously ceded land) into the
Cherokee national treasury, and financial problems forced what the Cherokees
hoped would be only a temporary suspension of publication. The members of the
emerging pro-removal party and the state of Georgia understood the importance of the newspaper in maintaining
Cherokee unity: in 1835, the Georgia Guard, accompanied by Boudinot’s brother,
seized the printing press.
During the
years Boudinot served as editor, he wrote a number of impassioned editorials in
support of the Cherokee cause. The Cherokees faced pressure from both the United States and the states, particularly Georgia. The Cherokee capital, many mission schools, and most of the
large plantations were on lands claimed by Georgia, and John Ridge, Elias Boudinot, John Ross, and other prominent leaders lived
there as well. President Jackson and Secretary of War John Eaton made it very
clear in letters printed in the June 17, 1829, issue of the Phoenix that the
states had ultimate title to the land and that if Indians wanted to live on
land claimed by the states, they must obey state, rather than Indian, law. The
editorial from the June 17, 1829, Phoenix, reprinted
here commented on a memorial by
Chief Ross protesting the extension of Georgia law over the Cherokees and on letters from Jackson and Eaton. What
irony did Boudinot see in the timing of efforts to remove the Cherokees?
On January 8, 1831, Boudinot wrote an editorial complaining about Georgia’s disregard of both Cherokee rights and federal judicial
proceedings, in reference specifically to Cherokee Nation v. Georgia. Because Georgia refused to cooperate with federal court proceedings, Boudinot
compared Georgia to South
Carolina, which was
involved in a controversy with the United States over high tariffs. South Carolina claimed the right to nullify acts of Congress that were
detrimental to the state and violence seemed likely until a compromise was
reached. Is there anything in this editorial, particularly in Boudinot’s
analysis of the nullification crisis that strikes you as prophetic?
The Georgia law that required white men to take oaths of allegiance to the
state, Boudinot believed, imperiled Cherokee “civilization.” What impact did
the law have on the Phoenix (February 19, 1831, editorial)? Why did Boudinot not merely
hire a white man who had taken the oath? The plight of the missionaries was
particularly painful to Boudinot. He lived near Samuel Austin Worcester, and
they were working together on the translation of the Bible into Cherokee. At
the same time, he also was sensitive to charges that Worcester was his ghost writer, and, in editorials not reprinted here,
he strongly defended his own ability and the paper’s integrity. Georgia viewed
the missionaries, particularly Worcester, as interlopers who garnered support
for the Cherokees outside the Nation and strengthened their resolve to resist
removal. How did Boudinot view them (November 12, 1831, editorial)? What kinds
of activities in the Nation were likely to end if the missionaries left?
Boudinot
defended the progress of “civilization” in his editorials, and the one he
published on November 12, 1831, was
particularly eloquent. To whom did he attribute the introduction of
“civilization”? How did “the first Chief magistrate of the United States” explain differences between Native peoples and Europeans? How
had attitudes towards Indians changed by the 1830s? What evidence did Boudinot
cite to contradict the view that “an Indian will still be an Indian”?
ELIAS BOUDINOT
Editorials in the Cherokee Phoenix
1829, 1831
June 17,
1829
From the documents which we this day lay before our
readers, there is not a doubt of the kind of policy, which the present
administration of the General Government intends to pursue relative to the
Indians. President Jackson has, as a neighboring editor remarks, “recognized
the doctrine contended for by Georgia in its full extent.” It is
to be regretted that we were not undeceived long ago, while we were hunters and
in our savage state. It appears now from the communication of the Secretary of
War to the Cherokee Delegation, that the illustrious Washington, Jefferson,
Madison and Monroe were only tantalizing us, when they encouraged us in the
pursuit of agriculture and Government, and when they afforded us the protection
of the United States, by which we have been preserved to this present time as a
nation. Why were we not told long ago, that we could not be permitted to
establish a government within the limits of any state? Then we could have borne
disappointment much easier than now. The pretext for Georgia to extend her jurisdiction
over the Cherokees has always existed. The Cherokees have always had a
government of their own. Nothing, however, was said when we were governed by
savage laws, when the abominable law of retaliation carried death in our midst,
when it was a lawful act to shed the blood of a person charged with witchcraft,
when a brother could kill a brother with impunity, or an innocent man suffer
for an offending relative. At that time it might have been a matter of charity
to have extended over us the mantle of Christian laws & regulations. But
how happens it now, after being fostered by the U. States, and advised by great
and good men to establish a government of regular law; when the aid and
protection of the General Government have been pledged to us; when we, as
dutiful “children” of the President, have followed his instructions and advice,
and have established for our selves a government of regular law; when everything
looks so promising around us, that a storm is raised by the extension of
tyrannical and unchristian laws, which threatens to blast all our rising hopes
and expectations?
There is, as would naturally be supposed, a great
rejoicing in Georgia.
It is a time of “important news”—”gratifying
intelligence”—”The Cherokee lands are to be obtained speedily.” It is even
reported that the Cherokees have come to the conclusion to sell, and move off
to the west of the Mississippi—not so fast. We are yet at
our homes, at our peaceful firesides, (except those contiguous to Sandtown,
Carroll, &c.) attending to our farms and useful occupations.
We had concluded to give our readers fully our
thoughts on the subject, which we, in the above remarks, have merely
introduced, but upon reflection & remembering our promise, that we will be
moderate, we have suppressed ourselves, and have withheld what we had intended
should occupy our editorial column. We do not wish, by any means, unnecessarily
to excite the minds of the Cherokees. To our home readers we submit the subject
without any special comment. They will judge for themselves. To our distant
readers, who may wish to know how we feel under present circumstances, we
recommend the memorial, the leading article in our present number. We believe
it justly contains the views of the nation.
January 8,
1831
The Georgians have again made another warlike
irruption into the nation, of which the following particulars may be relied
upon as substantially correct.
A company of twenty five armed men from Carrol County, under the command of one
Major Bogus, came into the neighborhood of Hightower, about two weeks since,
for the purpose of arresting a number of Cherokees. On their way to Beanstick’s
they came across two lads, utterly unknown to them. On seeing such an armed
force making towards them, the lads fled towards the river, and plunged into
the water. Some of the Company pursued them to the bank of the river, and fired
at them as they were swimming, and, it is said, came very near shooting one of
them. They then went to Beanstick’s and arrested his son Joseph. Here they
wheeled about, and after parading about the neighborhood with characteristic
bravery, marched towards Georgia. They soon discovered that
they had mistaken their prisoner Joseph, for one Moses Beanstick, for whom it
seems they had a warrant. But it made not a cent’s difference with them, for
they took him on into Carrol. He had not returned on last Monday.
Our feelings are not in a proper state to allow us
to make comments upon such proceedings. Will the Congress of the United States permit its citizens to
invade us in a warlike manner in time of peace?
[January 8, 1831 – Second Editorial]
During last summer, a Cherokee, by the name of
George Tassel, was arrested within the limits of this nation by the Sheriff of
Hall County, for murder committed upon the body of another Cherokee, likewise
within the limits of the nation. Tassel was taken over the line, and committed
to jail. At the last term of Superior Court of Hall County, he was brought out for
trial, but the Judge postponed the trial until a convention of Judges at
Milledgeville should pronounce upon the constitutionality of the act ex tending
the jurisdiction of the State over the Cherokees. As was to be expected, the convention
decided in favor of the jurisdiction of the State. Judge Clayton therefore
called a court for the purpose of trying Tassel, who was accordingly tried on
the 22d of November, and found guilty. It appears that Judge Clayton refused to
grant an appeal by a writ of error, to the Supreme Court of the United States, and even refused to
certify that Tassel was tried. Tassel was therefore sentenced to be hung on the
24th of last month, on which day he was executed, in defiance of a writ of
error sanctioned by the Chief Justice of the United States, and served upon Governor
Gilmer, on the 22d, two days previous to the execution. We invite the readers’
attention to the following interesting information which we copy from the
Milledgeville Recorder. The conduct of the Georgia Legislature is indeed
surprising—one day they discountenance the proceedings of the nullifiers of
South Carolina—at another, they even out-do the people of South Carolina, and
authorize their Governor to hoist the flag of rebellion against the United
States! If such proceedings are sanctioned by the majority of the people of the
U. States, the Union is but a tottering fabric, which will soon fall
and crumble into atoms.
February 19, 1831
This week we present to our readers but half a
sheet—the reason is, one of our printers has left us; and we expect another
(who is a white man) to quit us very soon, either to be dragged to the Georgia
penitentiary for a term not less than four years, or for his personal safety,
to leave the nation, and us to shift for ourselves as well as we can. And, our
friends will please to remember, we cannot invite another white printer to our
assistance without subjecting him to the same punishment; and to have in our
employ one who has taken the oath to support the laws of Georgia which now oppress the
Cherokees, is utterly out of the question. Thus is the liberty of the press
guarantied by the Constitution of Georgia.
But we will not give up the ship while it is
afloat. We have intelligent youths in the nation, and we hope before long to
make up our loss. In the mean time our patrons will bear with us & have
patience—let them bear in mind that we are in the woods, and, as it is said by
some, in a savage country, where printers are not plenty, and a substitute not
easily obtained when one of our hands leave us or become indisposed—our paper
is therefore easily deranged. Our readers will please not expect to receive the
Phoenix very regularly for a
while. We shall do the best we can.
We have already noticed the late law of Georgia,
making a high misdemeanor, punishable with four years imprisonment at hard
labour in the penitentiary for any white man to reside, after the 1st of March,
within the limits of the Cherokee nation, (so the copy of the laws we received
reads—let the people of Alabama, Tennessee and North Carolina look out—the
Georgia legislature is carrying its sovereignty too far,) unless he takes the
oath of allegiance, and obtains from the Governor’s agent a permit to continue
his residence until further orders. We cannot help alluding again to that law
as being extremely unjust, without saying any thing of its oppressive tendency,
both to the whites and Cherokees. It is certainly oppressive on the whites,
even admitting that the state of Georgia has an undoubted
jurisdiction over the Cherokee territory. Why is it that it is required of them
to take the oath, when by the extension of that jurisdiction, they were
admitted as citizens of the state? Is such requirement made of other citizens?
Do the constitution and the laws recognize such a distinction? But what becomes
of the liberty of conscience in this case? —Here a white man cannot enjoy that
liberty without going to the penitentiary.
What are the effects of this law on the Cherokees?
Disastrous. Just such effects as were intended the law should produce. The
design appears to be to bring them back to their old station—carry them back
twenty years hence. Deprive them of all their means of improvement, and remove
all the whites, and it is thought by some, the great obstacle is taken out of
the way, and there will be no difficulty to bring the Cherokees to terms. If
this is not the design it may possibly be the tendency of the law. Now let the
reader just consider. If we introduce a minister of the Gospel to preach to us
the way of life and salvation, here is a law of Georgia, a Christian law too it
is said, ready to seize him and send him to the Penitentiary, in violation of
the constitution of the state itself. [See Constitution of Georgia, Art. 4—Sec. 10,] If we bring in a white man to teach our
children, he is also arrested and suffers a similar punishment. If we wish a
decent house built, and invite a carpenter into the nation to do the work, here
is a law which forces him from our employ and soon numbers him with culprits.
If we introduce a Blacksmith, or any other mechanic, it is the same. Is it not
natural to suppose that the tendency of such a law on the Cherokees would be
disastrous? It forces from them the very means of their improvement in religion
and morals, and in the arts of civilized life.
November
12, 1831
It has been customary to charge the failure of
attempts heretofore made to civilize and christianize the aborigines to the
Indians themselves. Whence originated the common saying, “An Indian will still
be an Indian.”—Do what you will, he cannot be civilized—you cannot reclaim him
from his wild habits— you may as well expect to change the spots of the Leopard
as to effect any substantial renovation in his character—he is as the wild
Turkey, which at “night-fall seeks the tallest forest tree for his roosting
place.” Such assertions, although inconsistent with the general course of
providence and the history of nations, have nevertheless been believed and
acted upon by many well meaning persons. Such persons do not sufficiently
consider that causes, altogether different from those they have been in the
habit of assigning, may have operated to frustrate the benevolent efforts made
to reclaim the Indian. They do not, perhaps, think that as God has, of one
blood, created all the nations of the earth, their circumstances, in a state of
nature, must be somewhat the same, and therefore, in the history of mankind, we
have no example upon which we can build the assertion, that it is impossible to
civilize and christianize the Indian. On the contrary we have instances of
nations, originally as ignorant and barbarous as the American natives, having
risen from their degraded state to a high pitch of refinement—from the worst
kind of paganism to the knowledge of the true God.
We have on more than one occasion remarked upon the
difficulties which lie in the way of civilizing the Indians. Those difficulties
have been fully developed in the history of the Cherokees within the last two
years. They are such as no one can now mistake—their nature is fully revealed,
and the source from whence they rise can no longer be a matter of doubt. They
are not to be found in the “nature” of the Indians, which a man in high
authority once said was as difficult to change as the Leopard his spots. It is
not because they are, of all others, the most degraded and ignorant that they
have not been brought to enjoy the blessings of a civilized life. —But it is
because they have to contend with obstacles as numerous as they are peculiar.
With a commendable zeal the first Chief magistrate
of the United States undertook to bring the
Cherokees into the pale of civilization, by establishing friendly relations
with them by treaties, and introducing the mechanic arts among them. He was
indeed a “father” to them—They regarded him as such—They placed confidence in
what he said, and well they might, for he was true to his promises. Of course
the foundation for the improvement which the Cherokees have since made was laid
under the patronage of that illustrious man. His successors followed his
example and treated their “red children” as human beings, capable of
improvement, and possessing rights derived from the source of all good, and
guarantied by compacts as solemn as a great Republic could make. The attempts
of those good men were attended with success, because they believed those
attempts were feasible and acted accordingly.
Upon the same principle have acted those benevolent
associations who have taken such a deep interest in the welfare of the Indians,
and who may have expended so much time and money in extending the benign
influence of religion. Those associations went hand in hand with the
Government— it was a work of co-operation. God blessed their efforts. The
Cherokees have been reclaimed from their wild habits—Instead of hunters they
have become the cultivators of the soil—Instead of wild and ferocious savages,
thirsting for blood, they have become the mild “citizens,” the friends and
brothers of the white man—Instead of the superstitious heathens, many of them
have become the worshippers of the true God. Well would it have been if the
cheering fruits of those labors had been fostered and encouraged by an
enlightened community! But alas! no sooner was it made manifest that the
Cherokees were becoming strongly attached to the ways and usages of civilized
life, than was aroused the opposition of those from whom better things ought to
have been expected. No sooner was it known that they had learned the proper use
of the earth, and that they were now less likely to dispose of their lands for
a mess of pottage, than they came in conflict with the cupidity and
self-interest of those who ought to have been their benefactors—Then commenced
a series of obstacles hard to over come, and difficulties intended as a
stumbling block, and unthought of before. The “Great Father” of the “red man”
has lent his influence to encourage those difficulties. The guardian has
deprived his wards of their rights—The sacred obligations of treaties and laws
have been disregarded—The promises of Washington and Jefferson have not been
fulfilled. The policy of the United States on Indian affairs has taken a different
direction, for no other reason than that the Cherokees have so far become
civilized as to appreciate a regular form of Government. They are now deprived
of rights they once enjoyed—A neighboring power is now permitted to extend its
withering hand over them—Their own laws, intended to regulate their society, to
encourage virtue and to suppress vice, must now be abolished, and civilized
acts, passed for the purpose of expelling them, must be substituted. —Their
intelligent citizens who have been instructed through the means employed by
former administrations, and through the efforts of benevolent societies, must
be abused and insulted, represented as avaricious, feeding upon the poverty of
the common Indians—the hostility of all those who want the Indian lands must be
directed against them. That the Cherokees may be kept in ignorance, teachers
who had settled among them by the approbation of the Government, for the best
of all purposes, have been compelled to leave them by reason of laws unbecoming
any civilized nation—Ministers of the Gospel, who might have, at this day of
trial, administered to them the consolations of Religion, have been arrested,
chained, dragged away before their eyes, tried as felons, and finally immured
in prison with thieves and robbers.
Is not here an array of difficulties? —The truth
is, while a portion of the community have been, in the most laudable manner,
engaged in using efforts to civilize and christianize the Indian, another
portion of the same community have been busy in counteracting those efforts.
Cupidity and self-interest are at the bottom of all these difficulties —a
desire to possess the Indian land is paramount to a desire to see him
established on the soil as a civilized man.