SKETCHES OF INDIAN CHARACTER.

The history of nations fully establishes the fact, that the character of man results from the operation of circumstances on his organism. This great and important truth is written in such broad and legible characters on the face of human annals, as may easily be distinguished and can scarcely be mistaken. Among rude and savage tribes we discern features of character, which are distinctly referable to the influence of causes peculiar to the savage state; and among the members of civilized communities, we behold the manifestation of virtues, vices, and talents, which are also traceable to the operation of circumstances differing from those which determine the character of barbarous nations. There is a marked dissimilarity between the barbarian of Labrador and the native of London or Paris; yet this difference is more the child of accident than of nature, and would probably disappear in course of time were the parties to be subjected to the influence of similar institutions.

Among no people do we find more striking confirmations of the truth of the above doctrine than among the Aborigines of the North American Continent. In the character of that unhappy, but noble, race of men, we find many striking peculiarities which can be ascribed only to the influence of those circumstances in which the Indian tribes are placed, and which mark them out as objects of peculiar interest to the philosophic historian.

The European is polished, sagacious, and cunning; the Asiatic vainly proud and ostentatiously voluptuous; the African, patient, servile and debased; and the North American Indian, haughty, warlike and independent. Undoubtedly there are causes for all these varied peculiarities of national character, the developement of which, in relation to the Indians of America, shall form the subject of the present treatise.

In endeavouring to prove that man is the creature of circumstances by rapidly surveying the condition of the North American Indians, there are two methods which present themselves to our attention. The first and most obvious, consists in selecting the principal features of Indian character, and tracing them to the operation of causes peculiar to the Indian tribes. The second method consists in taking a view of the efforts made by white men for the civilization of the Americans, and the good or ill success which has attended their exertions. In discussing the subject, therefore, we shall adopt both these methods as far as our space and ability will allow.

The Indian character may be said to be a compound of the virtues and vices of savage life. Brave, generous, haughty and cruel, the North American savage moves with a firmness of step and a dignity of bearing, which distinguish him as the monarch of the wilderness. The African submits to slavery; the North American Indian prefers banishment, and even death to it. We pity and oppress the former, because his patient endurance of labour renders him of importance, while we endeavour by cruel encroachments to exterminate the latter, because his lands are serviceable, and he scorns to become our servant. Such has ever been the policy of professed Christians, and such the efforts of European civilization with respect to this unhappy race of men.

The Red Indian is fast disappearing from his native forests. The Prairie which once echoed with his shrill warwhoop now resounds with the roar of the Western rifle. His hunting grounds have become the prey of the pale faces; the big knife has prevailed over the tomahawk; and the grave of a freeman already yawns to receive the savage of the wilds.

When Las Casas appeared before the Emperor Charles V. to dispute with Quevedo, Bishop of Darien, on the capacity of the South American Indians for social improvement, “he rejected,” says Robertson, “with indignation, the idea that any race of men was born for servitude; and contended that the faculties of the Americans were not despicable but unimproved; that they were capable of receiving instruction in the principles of religion, as well as of acquiring the industry and arts which would qualify them for the various offices of social life; and that the mildness and timidity of their nature rendered them so docile and submissive that they might be led and formed with a gentle hand.” On the contrary, the Bishop of Darien contended “that they were a race of men marked out by the inferiority of their talents for servitude; and whom it would be impossible to instruct or improve, unless they were kept under the continual inspection of a master.”[1] To the disgrace of the Spanish name, the sentiments of Quevedo obtained more general credence than the truths uttered by the impassioned, and eloquent Las Casas. The Indians were still kept in a state of servitude, by the discoverers and tyrants of the West; and under pretext of reclaiming them from idolatry, and instructing them in the principles of the Christian faith they were obliged to endure the most galling servitude, and compelled to perform a variety of unwholesome labours which soon terminated their existence, and left scarcely a remnant of their devoted race to tell the story of their oppression and their sufferings!

Such has ever been the policy of those who, spurred on by an exorbitant and all grasping selfishness, desire to tyrannize over their fellow beings, and trample on their rights, their liberties and their lives. Nor is this policy wanting on the part of those who either are, or desire to be, the oppressors of the North American Indians. The whites have, with few exceptions, denounced the savages of America as a cruel, blood-thirsty, and treacherous race of men—incapable of improvement, and therefore unworthy of that attention which has been devoted to the civilization of other barbarians. That this is a mere pretext under colour of which the most horrid crimes might be perpetrated,—an opiate for a guilty and accusing conscience,—must be evident to all who have made the Indian character the subject of their peculiar study. But because Europeans, blessed with all the lights of civilization, and all the influence of a religion purporting to be from heaven, have not only endeavoured, but are continually endeavouring, to encroach on the hunting territories of the Indians, some excuse must of course be invented to palliate their enormities, and screen their conduct from that general reprobation which it deserves. The Aborigines of America are therefore represented as false, cruel and blood-thirsty, as well as incapable of emerging from their present state of ignorance and barbarism.

Before the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, the opponents of that measure were accustomed to represent the inhabitants of Ireland, as factious, discontented, and rebellious. Admitting, for the sake of argument, the truth of these allegations, we ask why did the inhabitants of Ireland evince these national characteristics? Simply because they had been galled and oppressed for a long course of time, by the enactments of an illiberal government. And if we admit that the Indians of America are still in a state of barbarism, and that they exhibit most, if not all, the vices incident to the savage state, may we not enquire the reason why they continue in this condition? The answer we think is obvious. The whites have seldom attempted to raise them from their state of original wildness; for almost all the measures they have adopted, in relation to the Indians, have been better adapted to oppress than to reclaim, to destroy than to regenerate.

In attempting to lay before the reader a rough delineation of Indian character, it is necessary that we should attend to all the elements which enter into its composition. We shall therefore treat in the first place—

Of the bodily constitution of the North American Indians, and of the measure of their intellectual faculties.

Robertson, in his graphic representations of Indian character, affirms or rather insinuates, that the constitution of the American Indian labours under some physical defect. But that this defect is an accident arising from the influence of peculiar institutions, and the mode of training prevalent among the Indian tribes, is evidenced by the facts which that historian himself relates. The American Indian may be indolent during a season of peace. Extreme lassitude and an apparent want of physical energy may form the more prominent traits in his character. But when war demands his exertions in the field, or when pressed by the necessities of nature to go in quest of food, he displays a courage, an address, and an amount of bodily energy which prove him to be possessed of physical strength equal to that which the natives of more polished and civilized climes exhibit. It is during a season of hunting or of war that the most strenuous exertions of courage, force, and activity are called forth. The savage of America, at such a time, appears to shake off the native indolence of his disposition. He becomes patient, active, courageous and indefatigable. All the powers of his mind and of his body are roused into exertion; and he performs feats of agility and of strength, and exhibits a degree of perseverance, which prove him to be in these respects equal to the natives of Europe.

It is true the exhibition of perseverance and strength, on the part of the American savage, is not constant but casual. It is only when fierce passions stimulate him to exertion, that he puts forth all his powers. Nevertheless the casual exhibition of this strength and perseverance proves, that the opposite qualities are not essential to his nature; and seemingly warrants the conclusion that the indolence and want of energy which mark his character, are the results of that peculiar system of training to which he has been subjected.

Of the persevering speed of the Americans many instances are on record. Adair mentions a Chikkasah warrior who ran through woods and over mountains, three hundred computed miles in a day and a half and two nights. “I have known the Indians,” he observes in another place, “to go a thousand miles for the purpose of revenge, in pathless woods, over hills and mountains, through huge cane swamps, exposed to the extremities of heat and cold, the vicissitudes of seasons, to hunger and thirst. Such is their over-boiling revengeful temper, that they utterly contemn all these things as imaginary trifles, if they are so happy as to get the scalp of the murderer or enemy to satisfy the craving ghosts of their deceased relations.” Robertson, in the notes to his History of America, states that “M. Godin le Jeune, who resided fifteen years among the Indians of Puru and Quito, and twenty years in the French Colony of Cayenne, in which there is a constant intercourse with the Galibis, and other tribes on the Orinoco, observes, that the vigour of constitution among the Americans is exactly in proportion to their habits of labour. The Indians, in warm climates, such as those on the coasts of the South Sea, on the river of Amazons, and the river Orinoco, are not to be compared for strength with those in cold countries; and yet, says he, boats daily set out from Para, a Portugese settlement on the river of Amazons, to ascend that river against the rapidity of the stream; and with the same crew they proceed to San Pablo, which is eight hundred leagues distant. No crew of white people or even of negroes, would be found equal to a task of such persevering fatigue as the Portugese have experienced; and yet the Indians, being accustomed to this labour from their infancy, perform it.”[2]

These facts prove, that whatever may be the accidental indolence of the Indian tribes, they do not labour under any physical defect essential to them as men, and not peculiar to the natives of other climes. The fine gentleman of Europe, who has been nursed in the lap of luxury and refinement, would, if compelled to labour, exhibit as great a want of physical strength as the Indian of America. The difference in this respect between the Aborigines of the Western world, and the inhabitants of more civilized regions, is purely accidental. Reared within the pale of a civilized community, and surrounded with innumerable objects adapted to awaken thought, stimulate curiosity, and call his mental and bodily powers into exertion, the European feels a variety of wants, and is subject to a variety of influences to which the savage is a stranger. Experience gives him foresight and wisdom, and induces him to act with a view to remote advantage, as well as to present gratification. The numerous casualties and reverses of fortune which happen to individuals in civilised society, teach him to be provident for the future. The simple necessities of nature, as well as the more numerous class of wants which follow in the train of civilization, stimulate him to engage in long courses of action by which his mental faculties are enlarged, his bodily strength disciplined, and his power of persevering increased. But with the Indian of America the case is in many respects reversed. His food and drink are in most cases obtained with little trouble, and his natural wants, which are few, are easily satisfied. The flesh of the wild animals he ensnares or kills in the chase, the roots of native plants and vegetables, and a small proportion of maize or Indian corn, along with fruits and other things obtained with as little art, serve him for food; the skins of beasts for clothing; and a week-wam, constructed with a small amount of skill and labour, affords him shelter from the inclemency of the weather. Surrounded with abundance of hunting territory, wherein the (to him) staple commodities of life are plentiful, he is satisfied, and lives in a state of comparative independence. Believing that his own lot is the happiest, and accustomed to roam the forest from his infancy, he feels not the force of those powerful motives which affect the bosoms of other men. The love of gain is in his case modified by the extent of his information respecting it; and as the commodities, which to him are articles of wealth, are easily procured, he consequently becomes indolent when surrounded by abundance.

We do not attempt to insinuate that the North American Indian is equal to the European in address, wisdom, or even physical ability, at the present time. We only contend that the lack of physical energy, which some authors say the Aborigines of America exhibit, proceeds not from any constitutional defect peculiar to them as a race, but from accidental causes over which they have but little control. Let these causes be removed—let the Indians be subjected to a different mode of treatment—let them be placed under those influences which affect the inhabitants of civilized communities, and we have reason to opine that they would exhibit a character as vigorous as that of Europeans.

The following general description of the physiological part of Indian character we quote from a modern writer:—“the natives of this part of the world are in general of a robust frame, and a well proportioned figure. Their complexion is of bronze, or reddish copper hue—rusty coloured, as it were, and not unlike cinnamon. Their hair is black, long, coarse, and shining, but not thickly set on the head. Their beard is thin and grows in tufts. Their forehead is low, and their eyes are lengthened out, with the outer angles turned up towards the temples; the eyebrows high, the cheekbone prominent; the nose a little flattened but well marked; the lips extended, and the teeth closely set and pointed. In their mouth there is an expression of sweetness, which forms a contrast with the harsh character of their countenance. Their head is of a square shape, and their face is broad, without being flat, and tapers towards the chin. Their features viewed in profile, are prominent and deeply sculptured. They have a high chest, massy thighs, and arched legs: their feet are generally large, though some have been noticed to have small feet and hands; and their whole body is squat and thick-set. Though the shape of the forehead and of the vertex frequently depends on artificial means, yet independently of the custom which prevails among them of disfiguring the heads of infants, there is no other people in the world in whom the frontal bone is so much flattened above; and generally speaking, the skull is light. Such are said to be the general characteristics of all the natives of America, with the exception, perhaps, of those who occupy the two extremities. The Northern Esquimaux, for instance, are below the middle stature; the Abipones, it is said, and still more the Patagonians, exceed the ordinary height. This muscular constitution, with a tall figure, is in some degree met with among the natives of Chili, as well as the Caribbeans, on the banks of the Caroni, a tributary of the Orinoco, and amongst the Arkansas, who are esteemed the handsomest natives of this continent.

“The copper or bronze hue of the skin is, with some slight exceptions, common to all the natives of America, upon which the climate, the situation, or the mode of living appear not to exercise the slightest influence. Some of the tribes in Guiana are described as nearly black, though easily distinguished from the negro. The colour of the natives of Brazil and of California is deep, although the latter inhabit the temperate zone, and the former live near the tropic. The natives of New Spain are darker than the Indians of Quito and New Granada, who inhabit a precisely analogous climate. The nations dispersed to the North of the Rio Gola are darker than those that border on the kingdom of Guatemala. The Indians who, in the torrid zone, inhabit the most elevated table land of the Cordilleras of the Andes, have a complexion as much copper coloured as those who cultivate the Banana under a burning sun in the narrowest and deepest valleys of the equinoctial regions. The Indians who inhabit the mountains are clothed, and were so long before the conquest; while the Aborigines that wander on the plains of South America, are perfectly or nearly naked, and consequently are always exposed to the sun. These facts show that the colour of the American depends very little on the local situation which he actually occupies; and never, in the same individual, are those parts of the body that are constantly covered, of a fairer colour than those in contact with the air; the infants, moreover, are never white when they are born.

“It was formerly supposed that the Americans were without beards, and certainly there are many among them who have neither beard nor hair on any part of their person except the head. But the Indians who inhabit the torrid zone and South America, have generally a small beard which becomes longer by shaving; and among the Patagonians there are many who have beards. A late traveller (Temple) asserts that the Chiriguano Indians of the province of Tarija are beardless, without stating any opinion as to this being natural or the effect of plucking out the hair. Almost all the Indians near Mexico, and some on the North West coast, wear moustachios. An inference has been drawn that the Indians have a larger quantity of beard in proportion to their distance from the equator. The deficiency of beard does not exclusively belong to the Americans, nor is it by any means a certain sign of degeneracy; for some beardless races, such as the negroes of Congo, are very robust and of colossal size.”[3]

Another description of Indian character we borrow from Adair’s “History of the Aborigines of North America.” We quote it with great pleasure, as fully bearing out our own argument with respect to the physical capacity of the North American Indians, and as being the testimony of a man who resided long among them.

“As the American Indians,” he observes, “are of a reddish or copper colour, so, in general, they are strong, well proportioned in body and limbs, surprisingly active and nimble, and hardy in their own way of living.

“They are ingenious, witty, cunning and deceitful; very faithful indeed to their own tribes, but privately dishonourable and mischievous to the Europeans and Christians. Their being honest and harmless to each other, may be through fear of resentment and reprisal, which is unavoidable in case of any injury. They are very close and retentive of their secrets; never forget injuries; and are revengeful of blood to a degree of distraction. They are timorous and consequently cautious; very jealous of encroachments from their Christian neighbours; and likewise content with freedom in every turn of fortune. They are possessed of a strong comprehensive judgement, can form surprisingly crafty schemes, and conduct them with equal caution, silence, and address; they admit none but distinguished warriors and old beloved men, into their councils. They are slow, but very persevering, in their undertakings; commonly temperate in their eating, but excessively immoderate in drinking. They often transform themselves by liquor, into the likeness of mad foaming bears. The women, in general, are of a mild, amiable, and soft disposition; exceedingly modest in their behaviour, and very seldom noisy in the single or married state.

“The men are expert in the use of fire arms—in shooting the bow and throwing the feathered dart into the flying enemy. They resemble the lynx with their sharp penetrating black eye, and are exceedingly swift of foot, especially in a long chase. They will stretch away through the rough woods, by the bare track, for two or three hundred miles, in pursuit of a flying enemy, with the continued speed and eagerness of a staunch pack of bloodhounds, till they shed blood. When they have allayed this burning thirst, they return home at their leisure, unless they chance to be pursued, as is sometimes the case; whence the traders say, ‘that an Indian is never in a hurry, but when the Devil is at his heels.’

“It is remarkable that there are no deformed Indians; however, they are generally weaker and smaller bodied, between the tropics, than in higher latitudes; but not in an equal proportion: for though the Chikkasah and Choktah countries have not been long divided from each other, as appears by the similarity of their language, as well as other things; yet the Chikkasah are exceedingly taller and stronger bodied than the latter, though their country is only two degrees farther north. Such a small difference of latitude, in so healthy a region, could not make so wide a difference in the constitution of their bodies. The former are a comely, pleasant looking people; their faces are tolerably round, contrary to the visage of the others, which inclines much to flatness, as is the case with most of the other Indian Americans. The lips of the Indians, in general, are thin.

“Their eyes are small, sharp, and black; and their hair is lank, coarse, and darkish. I never saw any with curled hair, but one, in the Choktah country, where was also another with red hair; probably, they were a mixture of the French and Indians. Both sexes pluck all the hair off their bodies with a kind of tweezers, made formerly of shells, now of middle-sized wire, in the shape of a gunworm; which being twisted round a small stick, and the ends thereof fastened therein, after being properly tempered, keeps its form: holding this Indian razor between their forefinger and thumb, they deplume themselves after the manner of the Jewish novitiate priests and proselytes.

“Their chief dress is very simple, like that of the patriarchal age; of choice, many of their old head men wear a long wide frock, made of the skins of wild beasts. They seem quite easy and indifferent in every various scene of life, as if they were utterly divested of passions and of the sense of feeling. Martial virtue and not riches is their invariable standard for preferment; for they neither esteem nor despise any of their people one jot more or less on account of riches or dress. They compare both these to paint on a warrior’s face; because it incites others to a spirit of martial benevolence for their country, and pleases his own fancy, and the eyes of spectators for a little time, but is sweated off, while he is performing his war dances, or is defaced by the change of weather.

“They formerly wore shirts made of dressed deer-skins for their summer visiting dress; but their winter hunting clothes were long and shaggy, made of the skins of panthers, bucks, bears, beavers, and otters; the fleshly side outwards, sometimes doubled, and always softened like velvet cloth, though they retained their fur and hair. The needles and thread they used formerly, (and now at times) were fish bones, or the horns and bones of deer, rubbed sharp, and deer’s sinews, and a sort of hemp that grows among them spontaneously, in rich open lands. The women’s dress consists only in a broad softened skin, or several small skins sewed together, which they wrap and tie round their waist, reaching a little below their knees: in cold weather they wrap themselves in the softened skins of buffalo calves, with the wintery shagged wool inward, never forgetting to anoint and tie up their hair except in their time of mourning. The men wear for ornament and for the convenience of hunting, thin deer skin boots well smoked, that reach so high up their thighs, as with their jackets to secure them from the brambles and braky thickets. They sew them about five inches from the edges, which are formed into tassels, to which they fasten fawn’s trotters and small pieces of tinkling metal, or wild turkey cock’s spurs. The Braves used to fasten the like to their warpipes, with the addition of a piece of an enemy’s scalp, with a tuft of long hair hanging down from the middle of the stem, each of them painted red: and they still observe that old custom, only they choose bell buttons to give a greater sound.

“The young Indian men and women, through a fondness of their ancient dress, wrap a piece of cloth round them, that has a near resemblance to the Roman toga, or prætexta. It is about a fathom square, bordered seven or eight quarters deep, to make a shining cavalier of the Beau Monde, and to keep out both heat and cold. With this frantic apparel the red heroes swaddle themselves, when they are waddling whooping and prancing it away around the reputed holy fire. In a sweating condition they will thus incommode themselves frequently for a whole night, actuated by the same principle of pride which actuates the Spaniard to wear his winter cloak in summer.…

“They make their shoes for common use, out of the skins of the bear and elk, well dressed and smoked to prevent hardening; and those for ornament, out of deer-skins, done in the like manner: but they chiefly go bare-footed, and always bare-headed. The men fasten several different sorts off beautiful feathers, frequently in tufts, or the wing of a red bird, or the skin of a small hawk, to a lock of hair on the crown of their heads. And every different nation when at war, trim their hair after a different manner, through contempt of each other; thus they can distinguish an enemy in the woods so far off as they can see him.

“The Indians flatten their heads in divers forms; but it is chiefly the crown of the head they depress, in order to beautify themselves, as their wild fancy terms it; for they call us long heads by way of contempt. The Choktah Indians flatten their foreheads from the top of the head to the eyebrows with a small bag of sand; which gives them a hideous appearance; as the forehead naturally shoots upwards according as it is flattened: thus the rising of the nose instead of being equidistant from the beginning of the chin to that of the hair, is, by their wild mechanism, placed a great deal nearer to the one and further from the other. The Indian nations round South Carolina, and all the way to New Mexico, to effect this, fix the tender infant on a kind of cradle, where his feet are tilted, above a foot higher than a horizontal position, his head bends back into a hole, made on purpose to receive it; where he bears the chief part of his weight on the crown of the head, upon a small bag of sand without being in the least able to move himself. The skull, resembling a fine cartilaginous substance, in its infant state, is capable of taking any impression. By this pressure, and their thus flattening the crown of the head, they consequently make their heads thick and their faces broad. May we not to this custom and as a necessary effect of this cause attribute their fickle, wild, and cruel tempers? Especially when we connect therewith, both a false education and great exercise to agitate their animal spirits. When the brain, in cooler people, is disturbed, it neither reasons nor determines with proper judgment. The Indians thus look on every thing around them through their own false medium; and vilify our heads because they have given a wrong turn to their own.”

The preceding description of Indian character is more deserving of attention on account of its simplicity, correctness, and the information it affords, than on account of the beauty of its style. Adair is indeed a harsh writer; yet he narrates facts and occurrences which fell beneath his own observation; and therefore his testimony is of considerable value. His history of the American Indians, whatever value we may attach to his theory respecting their origin affords many striking confirmations of the position we have assumed, namely, that the American Indians are not naturally and essentially inferior in physical capacity to any other race of men. Nor is Adair the only author who either adopts this opinion, or furnishes the facts from which it may be inferred. These facts may be found in the narratives of missionaries, traders, and almost all writers who have visited the Indian tribes.

James Buchanan, formerly his Britannic Majesty’s Consul for the State of New York, has some excellent observations on the evidences of general capacity among the Indians, in the first volume of his Sketches of their History and Customs. After describing the hospitable and polite reception which he met with from the children of the celebrated Mohawk Indian Chief, Captain Brandt, he observes:—“My thus becoming acquainted with this young lady and her brother, fully establishes in my mind all I was anxious to prove by the education of a young Indian: and many such instances might be adduced which would evince that wisdom, science, and exaltation of character, are not the exclusive property of any colour, tribe, or nation. The bravery, political sagacity, and knowledge of government, manifested by the negroes who now govern in St. Domingo, (not to mention other well known instances,) are calculated to allay the doubts which used to prevail as to the capacity of the African. But between the Indian of North America, and the African, there is a remarkable difference. The former never can be bowed to become the slave of man, to pay tribute, or to submit, by any hope of reward to live in vassalage. Free, like the son of Ishmael, he will die rather than yield his liberty; and he is, therefore, hunted down by the people who boast of civilisation and christianity, and who, while they value their own freedom, do not hesitate to extend their lands and property by the merciless destruction of the unoffending proprietor. But let not those who still claim the British name, nor the citizens of the United States deceive themselves in the belief that because the poor Indians, whose lands they possess, and whose rivers they navigate, have no powerful voice to blazon their wrongs, and hold them up to the abhorence of mankind, they will always rest unavenged; or that the civilization, which is pompously carried on, but which is in fact a slow consuming system of extinction, will avert the retributive justice which God will assuredly render. The poor Indians confess that for their crimes they are now placed by the Great Spirit under the feet of the white men, and in the midst of their sufferings, they pathetically warn their cruel oppressors that the time may come when the Lord will have pity on them, and in turn punish the Europeans. Truly the ways of the Almighty are wonderful! The apparent prosperity of the wicked are among the most unaccountable features of the will of our creator, and would be utterly without a solution had we not the Bible to guide us into a right understanding of his designs. However the Deist may scoff, or the philosopher doubt, yet therein we see that, though the wrath of God may be long delayed, the punishment of iniquity will assuredly come to pass. The reaction of crime and punishment is to be seen in the history of all nations. Let the European oppressors of the Indian savage, as he is called, look to it in time; and while the diffusion of the true principles of Christianity throughout the British Empire, is followed by clemency and mercy to the African, it is to be hoped the same benevolent spirit will extend itself to the noble-minded Aborigines of North America; and that instead of supplying arms, ammunition, blankets and rum, we may lead them to the arts and blessings of peace, and to the improvement of their admirable native talent.”[4]

Mr. Buchanan displays in this passage more of the piety of the saint, than of the wisdom of the philosopher. In our opinion, the Lord has but little to do with the oppression and gradual extirpation of the Indian tribes. These are the natural results of that peculiar system of policy pursued by the white people towards the Aborigines of America. As the tide of white population rolls on and extends itself inwards, the native tribes must disappear before it by retiring into the inaccessible forests and waste territories of the transatlantic world. Nor can they hope to successfully assert their rights until they become more highly civilized and more skillfully warlike than their oppressors. Then indeed, the Lord, aided by the puissant arms of thousands of Indian warriors, might inflict that retributive justice on Europeans, which Mr. Buchanan speaks of. The ample possession of the munitions of war, the diffusion of intelligence, and the union of all the Indian tribes, would more effectually curb the rapacity of white Christians than all the aid which the Lord affords.

Nor is it to be expected, that religion, as it is found in the Old and New Testaments, will effect the melioration of their condition. The chosen people of the Lord made slaves of some of the nations they conquered; and those they did not enslave they destroyed with a cruelty as relentless as it was atrocious. What more natural than for those who believe in the same God and draw their religion from the same source, to act in the same manner? The examples of murder, pillage, bloodshed, profligacy, and abominations of all kinds to be found in the Old Testament, would rather tend to deteriorate the character of the Indians than improve it, were the contents of that book made known to them. Bad as the Indians are, they have some nobility of mind among them. They do not betray the person with whom they have smoked the calumet, or pipe of peace, or the man to whom they have plighted their friendship. But in the Old Testament we find this done, as in the case of Jael and Sisera, and the action attributed to divine prompting. What good end can be answered by teaching the North American Indians a religion which has ever been followed by destruction, pillage, rapacity and bloodshed, persecution for opinion, and a long catalogue of evils? and which, however good it may be in some of its precepts, is nevertheless utterly unable to restrain the avarice and cruelty of its followers.

The celebrated French Essayist, Montaigne, between two or three hundred years ago, wrote as follows:—

“I find that there is nothing barbarous and savage in this nation, by anything I can gather, excepting that every one gives the title of barbarity to every thing that is not in use in his own country: as indeed we have no other level of truth and reason than the example and idea of the opinions and customs of the place wherein we live. There is always the true religion; there the perfect government, and the most exact and accomplished usance of things. They (the Indians) are savages at the same rate that we say fruits are wild which nature produces of herself and by her own ordinary progress; whereas, in truth, we ought rather to call those wild whose natures we have changed by our artifice and diverted from the common order.… These nations, then, seem to me to be so far barbarous, as having received but very little form and fashion from art and human invention, and consequently not much remote from their original simplicity. The laws of nature, however, govern them still, not, as yet, much vitiated with any mixture of ours; but in such purity that I am sometimes troubled we were no sooner acquainted with these people, and that they were not discovered in those better times, when there were men much more able to judge of them than we are. I am sorry that Lycurgus and Plato had no knowledge of them; for to my apprehension, what we now see in those natives, does not only surpass all the images with which the poets have adorned the golden age, and all their inventions in feigning a happy estate of man; but moreover the fancy and even the wish of philosophy itself. So native and so pure a simplicity, as we, by experience, see to be in them, could never enter into the imagination of the ancient philosophers, nor could they ever believe that human society could have been maintained with so little artifice. Should I tell Plato that it is a nation wherein there is no manner of traffic, no knowledge of letters, no science of numbers, no name of magistrate nor political superiority, no use of service, no riches or poverty, no contracts, no successions, no dividends, no proprieties, no employments but those of leisure, no respect of kindred but of common, no clothing, no agriculture, no metal, no use of corn or wine, and where so much as the very words which signify lying, treachery, dissimulation, avarice, destruction, and pardon were never heard of,—how much would he find his imaginary Republic short of this perfection.”[5]

This description is too highly coloured, and is in many respects incorrect. The savages of America are not in such a blissful state as Montaigne would leave the reader to infer; neither can it be said with truth that they are free from deceit, treachery, and avarice. It is true they exhibit many noble traits of character which might be copied with profit by their more civilized brethren; but these traits are generally associated with the vices peculiar to the savage state. In conducting our researches respecting them, therefore, we should carefully ascertain what amount of credibility is due to the statements of those writers who affirm their condition to be almost paradisiacal. Extremes ought to be avoided in most cases, especially with regard to the American Indians. Some authors have represented them as the vilest of men; cruel, blood-thirsty, and rapacious, and incapable of being civilized; while others have depicted them as a noble, high-minded, virtuous race, with scarcely a single vice in their character, or evil in their physical condition. If we adopt the mean of these extremes, we shall not be far from the truth.

Before we close this section of our treatise, a few remarks upon the oratory of the Indians may not be deemed inappropriate or unimportant. Even the thunders of Demosthenes, and the eloquent harangues of the sweet-lipped and silver-tongued Cicero did not produce more wonderful effects on Athenian or Roman audiences, than are occasionally produced by the bold and pathetic discourses of an American warrior on the minds of his hearers. Governor De Witt Clinton, in his discourse to the New York Society, speaking of the Iroquois, or Five Nations, informs us that “their exterior relations, general interests, and national affairs were conducted and superintended by a great council, assembled annually in Onondaga, the central canton, composed of the chiefs of each Republic; and eighty Sachems were frequently convened at this national assembly. It took cognizance of the great questions of war and peace; of the affairs of the tributary nations, and of their negociations with the French and English colonies. All their proceedings were conducted with great deliberation, and were distinguished for order, decorum, and solemnity. In eloquence, in dignity, and in all the characteristics of a profound policy, they surpassed an assembly of feudal barons, and were perhaps not far inferior to the great Amphyctionic Council of Greece.”[6] In another place he speaks of the sublime display of intellectual power in the address of Garangula, an Onondaga chief, to M. Delabarre, a French general, who in 1683, marched with an army against the Iroquois. This rhetorical talent, however, is declared by the same authority to be peculiar to the Five Nations. “The most remarkable difference,” he states, “existed between the confederates and the other Indian nations, with respect to eloquence. You may search in vain in the records and writings of the past, or in events of the present times, for a single model of eloquence among the Algonkins, the Abenaquis, the Delawares, the Shawanese, or any other nation of Indians except the Iroquois.”[7] On the other hand, the Rev. Mr. Heckewelder, who has spent the greater portion of a long life among the Lenni Lenapé, or Delawares, has affirmed, in his historical account of the Indian nations, (of which the Lenni Lenapé and the Iroquois form the two great divisions), that the Delawares are also conspicuous for oratorical ability. He quotes a speech of Captain Pipe, a chief of that nation, and has made use of the following words, in commenting on it. “Here we see boldness, frankness, dignity, and humanity happily blended together, and most eloquently displayed. I am much mistaken if the component parts of this discourse are not put together much according to the rules of oratory which are taught in the schools, and which were certainly unknown to this savage. The peroration is short, but truly pathetic, and I would say, sublime; and then the admirable way in which it is prepared! I wish I could convey to the reader’s mind only a small part of the impression which this speech made on me and on all present when it was delivered.”[8] The assertion of Governor Clinton, seems to have resulted from his knowing more of the Five Nations than of any other tribe of Indians. The Shawanese no less than the Delawares, are among the list of exceptions; and yet, we find, in the book published by Mr. Hunter, a most splendid example of eloquence in a speech of Te-cum-seh, a Shawanee warrior.[9] The effect it had upon his hearers, one of whom was Mr. Hunter himself, was electrical; and we will quote his account of it, in order to show that the high opinion of Indian oratory is not derived from any one authority which might be exaggerated, or through the medium of professed translators, who might be disposed to manufacture these harangues, after a given model, into the European tongues; but that it operates upon all alike, and shines with the same character through every variety and accident of interpretation. The Indian orations have been rendered by illiterate persons sent among them to conciliate their favour; by prisoners male and female, who learnt the language during their captivity; by learned missionaries; by traders, who will not perhaps be suspected of romantic enthusiasm; by Dutchmen, Frenchmen, Englishmen, and Americans; and the result, in all cases, has been very similar. The doubts, therefore, which have been, and still continue to be, entertained as to Indian eloquence, are, to say the least of them, inconsiderate. The probability is, that they are injured rather than improved, by transmission into European languages. “I wish it was in my power,” says Mr. Hunter, speaking of Te-cum-seh, “to do justice to the eloquence of this distinguished man; but it is utterly impossible. The richest colours, shaded with a master’s pencil, would fall infinitely short of the glowing finish of the original. The occasion and subject were peculiarly adapted to call into action all the powers of genuine patriotism; and such language, such gestures, such feelings, and fulness of soul contending for utterance, were exhibited by this untutored, native of the forest in the central wilds of America, as no audience, I am persuaded, either in ancient or modern times, ever before witnessed. His discourse made an impression on my mind, which I think, will last as long as I live.”[10]

The occasion on which this oration was delivered, was as follows; it appears from Mr. Hunter’s account, that “some of the white people among the Osages were traders, and others were reputed to be runners from their great Father beyond the waters, to invite the Indians to take up the tomahawk against the settlers. They made many long talks, and distributed many valuable presents; but without being able to shake the resolution which the Osages had formed, to preserve peace with their Great Father, the president. Their determinations were, however, to undergo a more severe trial: Te-cum-seh now made his appearance among them.

“He addressed them in long, eloquent, and pathetic strains; and an assembly more numerous than had ever been witnessed on any former occasion, listened to him with an intensely agitated, though profoundly respectful, interest and attention. In fact so great was the effect produced by Te-cum-seh’s eloquence, that the chief adjourned the council shortly after he had closed his harangue, nor did they finally come to a decision on the great question in debate for several days afterwards.[11] His proposals were, however, in the end rejected.”

THE ORATION OF TE-CUM-SEH.

“Brothers,—We all belong to one family; we are all children of the Great Spirit; we walk in the same path; slake our thirst at the same spring; and now affairs of the greatest concern leads us to smoke the pipe around the same council fire!

“Brothers,—We are friends; we must assist each other to bear our burdens. The blood of many of our fathers and brothers has run like water on the ground, to satisfy the avarice of the white men. We, ourselves, are threatened with a great evil; nothing will pacify them but the destruction of all the red men.

“Brothers,—When the white men first set foot on our grounds, they were hungry; they had no place on which to spread their blankets, or to kindle their fires. They were feeble; they could do nothing for themselves. Our fathers commiserated their distress, and shared freely with them whatever the Great Spirit had given his red children. They gave them food when hungry, medicine when sick, spread skins for them to sleep on, and gave them grounds, that they might hunt and raise corn. Brothers, the white men are like poisonous serpents; when chilled, they are feeble and harmless; but invigorate them with warmth, and they sting their benefactors to death.

“The white people came among us feeble; and now we have made them strong they wish to kill us, or drive us back, as they would wolves and panthers.

“Brothers,—The white men are not friends to the Indians; at first, they only asked for land sufficient for a wigwam, now nothing will satisfy them but the whole of our hunting grounds, from the rising to the setting sun.

“Brothers,—The white men want more than our hunting grounds; they wish to kill our warriors; they would even kill our old men, women, and little ones.

“Brothers,—Many winters ago, there was no land; the sun did not rise and set: all was darkness. The Great Spirit made all things. He gave the white men a home beyond the great waters. He supplied these grounds with game, and gave them to his red children; he gave them strength and courage to defend them.

“Brothers,—My people wish for peace; the red men all wish for peace; but where the white people are, there is no peace for them, except it is on the bosom of our mother.

“Brothers,—The white men despise and cheat the Indians; they abuse and insult them; they do not think the red men sufficiently good to live.

“The red men have borne many and great injuries; they ought to suffer them no longer. My people will not; they are determined on vengeance; they have taken up the tomahawk; they will make it fat with blood; they will drink the blood of the white people.

“Brothers,—My people are brave and numerous; but the white people are too strong for them alone. I wish you to take up the tomahawk with them. If we all unite, we will cause the rivers to stain the great waters with their blood.

“Brothers,—If you do not unite with us, they will first destroy us, and then you will fall an easy prey to them. They have destroyed many nations of red men because they were not friends to each other.

“Brothers,—The white people send runners among us; they wish to make us enemies, that they may sweep over and desolate our hunting grounds, like devastating winds, or rushing waters.

“Brothers,—Our Great Father, over the great waters, is angry with the white people, our enemies. He will send his brave warriors against them: he will send us rifles, and whatever else we want—he is our friend, and we are his children.

“Brothers,—Who are the white people that we should fear them? They cannot run fast and are good marks to shoot at; they are only men; our fathers have killed many of them; we are not squaws, and we will stain the earth red with their blood.

“Brothers,—The Great Spirit is angry with our enemies; he speaks in thunder, and the earth swallows up villages, and drinks up the Mississippi. The great waters will cover the lowlands; their corn cannot grow; and the Great Spirit will sweep those who escape to the hills from the earth with his breath.

“Brothers,—We must be united, we must smoke the same pipe; we must fight each others’ battles; and more than all, we must love the Great Spirit; he is for us; he will destroy our enemies, and make all his red children happy.”

In Jefferson’s notes on the state of Virginia, we find a speech reported to have been made by Logan, a Mingo chief to Lord Dunmore when governor of the State of Virginia. The circumstances under which it was made were the following:—

“In the spring of the year 1774, a robbery was committed by some Indians on certain land adventurers on the river Ohio. The whites in that quarter, according to their custom, undertook to punish this outrage in a summary way. Captain Michael Cresap, and a certain Daniel Greathouse, leading on these parties, surprised at different times travelling and hunting parties of the Indians having their women and children with them, and murdered many. Among these were, unfortunately, the family of Logan; a chief celebrated in peace and war, and long distinguished as the friend of the whites. This unworthy return provoked his vengeance. He accordingly signalised himself in the war which ensued. In the autumn of the same year a decisive battle was fought at the mouth of the great Kanhaway, between the collected forces of the Shawanese, Mingoes, and Delawares, and a detachment of the Virginia militia. The Indians were defeated, and sued for peace.

“Logan, however, disdained to be seen among the suppliants. But lest the sincerity of a treaty should be disturbed, from which so distinguished a chief absented himself, he sent the following speech to be delivered to Lord Dunmore.

“‘I appeal to any white man to say, if ever he entered Logan’s cabin hungry, and he gave him not meat; if ever he came cold and naked, and he clothed him not. During the course of the last long and bloody war, Logan remained idle in his cabin, an advocate for peace. Such was my love for the whites, that my countrymen pointed as they passed and said, ‘Logan is the friend of the white men.’ I had even thought to have lived with you but for the injuries of one man. Colonel Cresap, the last spring, in cold blood and unprovoked murdered all the relations of Logan, not even sparing my women and children. There runs not a drop of my blood in the veins of any living creature.

“‘This called on me for revenge, I have sought it; I have killed many. I have glutted my vengeance: for my country I rejoice at the beams of peace.

“‘But do not harbour a thought that mine is the joy of fear; Logan never felt fear. He will not turn on his heel to save his life. Who is there to mourn for Logan? Not one.’”

Who can blame Logan the Mingo warrior for his deeds when the provocation he received is taken into consideration? “Not one!”

Of the Political state and Institutions of the American Indians.

Among savage nations there is generally a degree of individual independence which is highly unfavourable to the establishment and consolidation of regular government. Men accustomed to victory and the use of arms, and inured to danger and fatigue, are not likely to submit to those restraints of law and jurisprudence which exist in civilized communities. The will of the savage is, in most cases, the only law which he acknowledges or submits to. It is only when the tribe to which he belongs is menaced by some foreign foe that he submits to follow a leader to the field and to be controuled by his mandates. Even then, his actions are not constrained, but voluntary. His natural ardour, and warlike disposition, hurry him on to battle more than any compulsory edict issued by the council of his nation. But in a season of peace he is his own master. Scarcely any rule except that of custom does he deign to follow; hence his actions spring spontaneously from the impulses of his own mind.

In considering the political institutions of any people, our first enquiry should relate to their mode of subsistence. “According as that varies,” to use the language of Robertson, “their laws and policy must be different. The institutions suited to the ideas and exigencies of tribes which subsist chiefly by fishing or hunting, and which have as yet acquired but an imperfect conception of any species of property, will be much more simple than those which must take place when the earth is cultivated with regular industry, and a right of property, not only in its productions but in the soil itself, is completely ascertained.”

The American nations live chiefly by hunting, fishing, and the spontaneous products of their bountiful soil. Agriculture is but little practised amongst them. A large tract of territory, therefore, is requisite for the support of a tribe. “The chase,” observes Robertson, “even where prey is abundant, and the dexterity of the hunter much improved, affords but an uncertain maintenance; and at some seasons it must be suspended altogether. If a savage trusts to his bow alone for food, he and his family will be often reduced to extreme distress. Hardly any region of the earth furnishes man spontaneously with what his wants require. In the mildest climates and most fertile soils, his own industry and foresight must be exerted in some degree to secure a regular supply of food. Their experience of this surmounts the abhorence of labour natural to savage nations, and compels them to have recourse to culture as subsidiary to hunting. In particular situations, some small tribes may subsist by fishing, independent of any production of the earth raised by their own industry. But throughout all America we scarcely meet with any nation of hunters which does not practice some species of cultivation.”

This is the condition of most of the American tribes at the present time. Their agriculture, however, is neither extensive nor laborious. Among some tribes as the Oneidas and Senecas, agriculture prevails more than among others. This is to be attributed to the benevolent efforts of the Quakers, which shall be described in a subsequent part of this work. The Indians in the interior of America, who are less exposed to the influence of the whites, subsist chiefly by hunting and fishing. Agriculture is only accounted subsidiary to these. It is adopted as a resource against famine, and to supply the deficiency of game. It is not pursued as the chief mode of obtaining subsistence, and as a consequence has not risen to that state of perfection among the Indians, as among civilized nations. Hunting and fishing may be said to be the staple business of life among the more primitive tribes in North America. The character, therefore, of their political institutions, may be deduced from their peculiar mode of obtaining subsistence.

Robertson, in treating this subject has expressed himself with such clearness, and reasoned upon facts with such accuracy, that it would be impossible for us to do better than to quote his remarks.

He observes, “They were divided into small independent communities. While hunting is the chief source of subsistence, a vast extent of territory is requisite for supporting a small number of people. In proportion as men multiply and unite, the wild animals, on which they depend for food, diminish, or fly at a greater distance from the haunts of their enemy. The increase of a society in this state is limited by its own nature, and the members of it must either disperse, like the game which they pursue, or fall upon some better method of procuring food, than by hunting. Beasts of prey are by nature solitary and unsocial; they go not forth to the chase in herds, but delight in those recesses of the forest where they can roam and destroy undisturbed. A nation of hunters resembles them both in occupation and in genius. They cannot form into large communities, because it would be impossible to find subsistence; and they must drive to a distance every rival who may encroach on those domains which they consider as their own. This was the state of all the American tribes: the numbers in each were inconsiderable, though scattered over countries of great extent; they were far removed from one another, and engaged in perpetual hostilities or rivalship. In America, the word nation is not of the same import as in other parts of the globe. It is applied to small societies, not exceeding perhaps, two or three hundred persons, but occupying provinces greater than some kingdoms in Europe. The country of Guiana, though of larger extent than the kingdom of France, and divided among a greater number of nations, did not contain above twenty-five thousand inhabitants.[12] In the provinces which border on the Orinoco, one may travel several hundred miles in different directions, without finding a single hut, or observing the foot steps of a human creature.[13] In North America, where the climate is more vigorous, and the soil less fertile, the desolation is still greater. There, journeys of some hundred leagues have been made through uninhabited plains and forests.[14] As long as hunting continues to be the chief employment of man to which he trusts for subsistence, he can hardly be said to have occupied the earth.

“Nations which depend upon hunting are, in a great measure, strangers to the idea of property. As the animals on which the hunter feeds are not bred under his inspection, nor nourished by his care, he can claim no right to them, while they run wild in the forest. Where game is so plentiful that it may be catched”—[caught] “with little trouble, men never dream of appropriating what is of small value, or of easy acquisition. Where it is so rare, that the labour or danger of the chase requires the united efforts of a tribe, or village, what is killed is a common stock, belonging equally to all, who, by their skill or their courage, have contributed to the success of the excursion. The forest, or hunting grounds are deemed the property of the tribe, from which it has a title to exclude every rival nation. But no individual arrogates a right to any district of these, in preference to his fellow-citizens. They belong alike to all; and thither, as to a general and undivided store, all repair in quest of sustenance. The same principle by which they regulate their chief occupation, extends to that which is subordinate. Even agriculture has not introduced among them a complete idea of property. As the men hunt, the women labour together; and after they have shared the toils of the seed time, they enjoy the harvest in common.[15] Among some tribes, the increase of their cultivated lands is deposited in a public granary, and divided among them at stated times, according to their wants.[16] Among others, though they lay up separate stores, they do not acquire such an exclusive right of property, that they can enjoy superfluity, while those around them suffer want.[17] Thus the distinctions arising from the inequality of possessions are unknown. The term rich or poor enter not into their language; and being strangers to property, they are unacquainted with what is the great object of laws and policy, as well as the chief motive which induced mankind to establish the various arrangements of regular government.[18]

“People in this state retain a high sense of equality and independence. Wherever the idea of property is not established, there can be no distinction among men, but what arises from personal qualities. These can be conspicuous only on such occasions as call them forth into exertion. In times of danger, or in affairs of intricacy, the wisdom and experience of age, are consulted, and prescribe the measure which ought to be pursued. When a tribe of savages takes the field against the enemies of their country, the warrior of most approved courage leads the youth to the combat.[19] If they go forth in a body to the chase, the most expert and adventurous hunter is foremost, and directs their motions. But during seasons of tranquility and inaction, when there is no occasion to display those talents, all pre-eminence ceases. Every circumstance indicates that all the members of the community are on a level. They feed on the same plain fare. Their houses and furniture are exactly similar. No distinction can arise from the inequality of possessions. Whatever forms dependence on one part, or constitutes superiority on the other, is unknown. All are freemen; all feel themselves to be such, and assert with firmness the rights which belong to that condition.[20] This sentiment of independence is imprinted so deeply in their nature, that no change of condition can eradicate it, and bend their minds to servitude. Accustomed to be absolute masters of their own conduct, they disdain to execute the orders of another; and having never known control, they will not submit to correction. Many of the Americans, when they found that they were treated as slaves by the Spaniards, died of grief; many destroyed themselves in despair.[21]

“Among people in this state, government can assume little authority, and the sense of civil subordination must remain very imperfect. While the idea of property is unknown or incompletely conceived; while the spontaneous productions of the earth, as well as the fruits of industry, are considered as belonging to the public stock, there can hardly be any such subject of difference or discussion among the members of the same community, as will require the hand of authority to interpose, in order to adjust it. Where the right of separate and exclusive possession is not introduced, the great object of law and jurisdiction does not exist. When the members of a tribe are called into the field, either to invade the territories of their enemies, or to repel their attacks; when they are engaged together in the toil and dangers of the chase, they then perceive that they are a political body. They are conscious of their own connexion with the companions in conjunction with whom they act; and they follow and reverence such as excel in conduct and valour. But, during the intervals between such common efforts, they seem scarcely to feel the ties of political union.[22] No visible form of government is established. The names of magistrate and subject are not in use. Every one seems to enjoy his natural independence almost entire. If a scheme of public utility be proposed, the members of the community are left at liberty to choose whether they will or will not assist in carrying it into execution. No statute imposes any service as a duty, no compulsory laws oblige them to perform it. All their resolutions are voluntary, and flow from the impulse of their own minds.[23] The first step towards establishing a public jurisdiction has not been taken in these rude societies. The right of revenge is left in private hands.[24] If violence is committed, or blood is shed, the community does not assume the power either of inflicting or of moderating the punishment. It belongs to the family or friends of the person injured or slain to avenge the wrong, or to accept of the reparation offered by the aggressor. If the elders interpose, it is to advise, not to decide, and it is seldom their councils are listened to; for as it is deemed pusillanimous to suffer an offender to escape with impunity, resentment is implacable and everlasting.[25] The object of government is rather foreign than domestic. They do not aim at maintaining interior order and police by public regulation, or the exertions of any permanent authority; but labour to preserve such union among the members of their tribe, that they may watch the motions of enemies, and act against them with concert and vigour.

“Such was the form of political order established among the greater part of the American tribes. In this State were almost all the tribes spread over the provinces extending eastward of the Mississippi, from the mouth of the St. Lawrence to the confines of Florida. In a similar condition were the people of Brazil, the inhabitants of Chili, several tribes in Paraguay and Guiana, and in the countries which stretch from the mouth of the Orinoco to the Peninsula of Yucatan. Among such an infinite number of petty associations, there may be peculiarities which constitute a distinction, and mark the various degrees of their civilization and improvement. But an attempt to trace and ennumerate these would be in vain, as they have not been observed by persons capable of discerning the minute and delicate circumstances, which serve to discriminate nations resembling one another in their general character and features. The description which I have given of the political institutions that took place among those rude tribes in America, concerning which we have received most complete information, will apply, with little variation, to every people, both in its Northern and Southern division, who have advanced no farther in civilization than to add some slender degree of agriculture to fishing and hunting.[26]

“But these political institutions, however defective, did not exist among all the American tribes. The system of government adopted by some of them approximated more closely the system which prevails in civilized communities. Thus, “among the Natchez, a powerful tribe, (now extinct,) formerly situated on the banks of the Mississippi, a difference of rank took place with which the Northern tribes were altogether unacquainted. Some families were reputed noble, and enjoyed hereditary dignity. The body of the people was considered as vile, and formed only for subjection. This distinction was marked by appellations which intimated the high elevation of the one state, and the ignominious depression of the other. The former were called respectable; the latter the stinkards. The great chief, in whom the supreme authority was vested, was reputed to be a being of a superior nature—the brother of the sun, the sole object of their worship. They approached this great chief with religious veneration, and honoured him as the representative of their deity. His will was law, to which all submitted with implicit obedience. The lives of his subjects were so absolutely at his disposal, that if any one had incurred his displeasure, the offender came with profound humility and offered him his head. Nor did the dominion of the Chiefs end with their lives: their principal officers, their favourite wives, together with many domestics of inferior rank, were sacrificed at their tombs, that they might be attended in the next world by the same persons who served them in this; and such was the reverence in which they were held, that those victims welcomed death with exultation, deeming it a recompence of their fidelity and a mark of distinction, to be selected to accompany their deceased master. Thus a perfect despotism, with its full train of superstition arrogance and cruelty, was established among the Natchez; and by a singular fatality, that people tasted of the worst calamities incident to polished nations, though they themselves were not far advanced beyond the tribes around them in civility and improvement.”[27]