|
The Responsibility of the
Indian War.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
INDIAN WAR.
_____
We hope the Journal will not think itself slighted by reason of our delay in replying to its article of the 24th ult. Our columns have been crowded so that we could not notice it sooner.
We have but little hope of changing the Journal's opinions. The difference between it and the NEWS is radical, and no evidence that we might present would change its opinion; or at least cause its acknowledgment of the fact if that was done. So far as the editor of that paper is concerned, our labor is thrown away, for,
""Convince a man against his will,
And he's of the same opinion still.
We do desire, however, to undecieve [sic] the public so far as it is possible to do so.
The Journal set out to think the Indians right. It is ever ready to excuse, justify or apologize for their acts. It prefers to believe their reports, (unreadable) their stories repeated from mouth to mouth, through half-breeds, Indian traders and sympathisers like itself, are far more reliable by the time they reach Black Hawk, than can be the statements of a respectaable white man, or the official report of a sworn officer. There is the difference. Our sympathies are upon the side of the white man, and between the two stories we incline to believe his. The Journal is exactly forninst us. It favors the Indians, excuses the Indians, justifies the Indians, believes the Indians, and its editor probably expects to go to Black Kettle when he dies.
The Journal charges us with a great deal of untruth in our assertion that the Indians began hostilities. It broadly asserts that all our statements are lies. Doubtless its Editor felt easy when he had thus settled the question. The only point upon which we can discover an error in our former article was that the Hungate family was murdered before Major Downing's battle with the Indians at Cedar Canon. The contrary was the case by about one week.
We now propose to give the exact history of the beginning of the hostilities last Spring. On the 7th of April the Indians drove off about one hundred and seventy-five head of cattle, belonging to Irwin & Jackman, which were being herded on the head of Big Sandy. Irwin & Jackman were government contractors, engaged in transporting army stores to the military posts in New Mexico, Colorado and other portions of the plains. Thus this blow was directly at the Government and it was the first outbreak or serious depredation. The information of it reached this city on the 9th of April, by Mr. Routh, who was in the employ of Messrs. I. & J.
A day or two later a descent was made upon the herd of Mr. Ripley, living on Bijou Creek, and thirty-five head of horses and mules driven off. A good deal of other stock was taken from the same neighborhood at the same time. On the 11th of April Mr. Ripley reached Camp Sanborn and reported the loss of his stock; also that the Indians were taking all the stock, and the settlers were all fleeing for their lives from the Bijou valley. Capt. Sanborn, in command of the camp named, at once ordered Lieut. Dunn, with forty men, in pursuit of the Indians to recover the stock. The command started on the 12th, accompanied by Mr. Ripley. To increase the chances for success the little force was divided into two or three squads. About five o'clock in the evening, Lieut. D, with fifteen men, came up with the Indians. They were driving a large herd of stock and in it Mr. Ripley recognized his stolen animals.
Lieut. Dunn demanded the restoration of the stock, but the Indians only laughed in his face. He urged his demand and they replied that they would fight first. To impress them with his pacific intentions, he dismounted and advanced on foot and alone toward the Indians. When within ten steps, or less, they fired upon him, which was the signal for a general fight. In the mean time the Indians had been hurrying the stock to the bluffs and succeeded in getting it away. This was the first collision and the first bloodshed. The Indians were the first to fire and upon a single dismounted man. They had before stolen hundreds of cattle, horses and mules; certainly sufficient provocation to justify a demand for the restoration of a few animals at least. The fight resulted in the wounding of four of Lieut. Dunn's men, two of whom died. The Indians numbered forty-five or fifty and several were killed and wounded.
Capt. Dunn returned to Camp Sanborn the same night, and the next day again started in pursuit of the savages, with fresh horses, but a severe snow storm coming on obliterated the trail and he returned without effecting anything. The facts were all reported to Col. Chivington, and on the 18th of April, he dispatched Major Downing, with companies C and H, of the Colorado First, with instructions to "appropriately chastise the Indians for their acts of lawlessness." He overtook them at Cedar Canon and had a severe battle, which resulted in loss to both sides. This was almost a month after their first depredations were committed, and long subsequent many other outrages by the Indians along the Platte and upon other frontier settlements. This shows who began the Indian war, but perhaps the Journal thinks our people should have borne in silence the encroachments of the red devils upon our settlements.
The Journal makes an extract from the NEWS of Sept. 28th, to prove that we then favored the formation of a treaty, as urged by Major Wynkoop, but it very judiciously substitutes a line of stars for that part of the article which referred to the authority--Major Wynkoop--upon which we published it. It was his views, and the Journal well knows that subsequent information showed that he stood in a peculiar relation to the Indians. It did not suit the Journal to reprint our article entire. It is one of its old tricks to cut and garble extracts from the NEWS.
The Journal says "Black Kettle was at Fort Lyon endeavoring to make a treaty with Wynkoop, who had been authorized to treat with him by the Governor and Colonel, according the NEWS."
Major Wynkoop was never authorized to make a treaty, as above intimated, nor did the NEWS ever state that he was. The terms he offered to the Indians were that they should surrender as prisoners of war, give up their arms and remain under surveillance of the troops at Fort Lyon. In this he doubtless went to the limits of his instructions, specific or implied. The Indians utterly failed to comply with any of his requirements. They sought to reap the benefits of a truce from our side, but refused to make any concessions upon their part in return.
One word about Major Downing's retirement from the service and we are done. He was mustered out by mustering officer, Capt. Jno. C. Anderson, under an order issued by Col. Moonlight, Jan. 6, 1865, by authority of Maj. Gen. Curtis, and not by his own (Maj. Downing's) request at all, but in the reduction of the First Regiment.
As corroborative evidence of what we have stated in the first part of this article, we publish the following telegrams from Gen. Curtis. There are hosts of others in the same tone, following up the same chain, and extending till late last fall. Whenever deemed necessary we shall give them to the public:
FT. LEAVENWORTH, April 8, 1864.
COL. J. M. CHIVINGTON:--I hear that Indians have committed depredations on or near Platte river. Do not let District lines prevent pursuing and punishing them. Give Col. Collins and Gen. Mitchell your full co-operation, and all the information you can.
[Signed,] S. R. CURTIS,
Major General.
FT. LEAVENWORTH, May 20, 1864.
COL. CHIVINGTON:--Some four hundred Cheyennes attacked Lieut. Eayres on Smoky Hill, and after several hours fight the Indians fled, leaving twenty-eight killed. Our loss, four killed and three wounded. Look out for Cheyennes everywhere; especially, so instruct the troops on the upper Arkansas.
[Signed,] S. R. CURTIS,
Major General.
Source:
Unknown, "The Responsibility of the Indian War," Daily Rocky Mountain News, Denver, Colorado, Thursday, 2 March, 1860, page 2.
|
