The Columbian informer, or, Cheshire journal — Keene, N.H., 1794-12-30 00:00:00, page 1

Philadelphia, iyb Nov. 1794.
SIR,
INxonforraity to the assurance contain
ed in my letter to you of the 3d cf
September, I tock an early op.
_ portunity es transmitting yours of
the firft of that month, to Lieuten
ant Governor Simcoe; from whom 1
have received a letter,M&py of which I
esteem it not akogetheruteMp 3c improper
1 to communicate to you ; as it tends to
throw considerable light upon transitions
in Canada, to which you have at different
periods adverted, as it evinces the anxiety
of Lieutenant Governor Simcoe, to re
move by the exposition of the motives of
hi, conduit, the mifreprehenfions to which
you. Sir, and the citizens of the United
States in general, may have been exposed
be the mifreprefentatious ofin:crelted in
dividuals.
Y V\AS lad n,bt, honored with
% yourexce'lenc- A di^eh. enclof
fQ :he <%/wfr.:;&^^u^Ain Kir.,
Rando', rt,&etary of Snte, da:ed the
firft O.&ptember, and your answer, which
wr^te^ the intention of transiting it
L ! hr by iedrd opportunity.
it appears upon the perusal of M r . Ran
dolph's letter, that 1 am called opor^ by
"Nfoe rasped due to his official fixation,
,chicly, to state, the misrepresentations
Jf that gentleman ; and on this confedera
tion, not to pass them over in that silence
whicb would otherwise belt become the
language and manner which the Secreta
ry of State permits himfelf to make use of,
in hit anim^lverfions on my condud.
My having executed the orders ofhir
Majesty's commander in Chief in North
America, Lord Dorchetter, in re occupy
ing a Pest upon the Miami River within
the limits of those maintained by the Bri
tifli forces, at the peacein the year 1783,
upon the principles offelf defence again#
the approaches &f an army,which menaced
the King's possessions, is what 1 prefeme
Mr. Secretary Randolph terms <' Gov.
Simcoe's Invalid."
The motives which led to this re-oc
cupation furnifh the true grounds for dis.
cufion, but the eftablilhment of a military
post, from its own nature, must have been
, so unquestionable, as not to have required
t from you, Sir, on the part of Mr. Ran
dolph an avowal or a denial ; nor does it
appear to me, that he has introduced so
public an event as a matter of doubt in
itfelf, but solely as a ground work for
ulhering into the world " opinions,"-#
transmitted to the executive government
of the United States which, however, re
pedable are but " opinions" that " Brit
ish officers " and British Soldiers, aided
an " attack made by the Indians at
" Fort Recovery," Such an insinuation,
Sir, introduced as subsidiary evidence of
2 fad which required no proof, wi 1 un
doubtedly, on the undifeerning impress a
belief, that the British troops, instead of
adhering to that principle of felf defence,
fat which a pott at the Miamis was re-ef
ilblifhed, were united in arms with the In
dians in an attack upon a post, held by the
United States.
Asif to promote such a belief, Mi.
Randolph proceeds to comment on the
Mr. Hammond to Mr. Randolph.
1 have the honour to be, with great
reipelt. Sir, your most obedient humble
servant,
[No. 40. ofVoL. ll.]
t^faQ^% v§ra v,n€%%%s&% 1
Upper Canada, Navy Hail, Oil iotl>,
^794- '
,ffColumbian -Informer ;
GEO. HAMMOND.
The Secretary of State.
State Papers.
Sir,
INTERESTING
Or, C HESHIRE JOURNAL.
PRINTED and PUBLISHED by HENRr BLAKE, & CO. in KEENE, New-Hampshire.
I The general lan,na,e a n d eondud of
'' "'"ir^'°"' varGcu arly in the gro-_
^•.'FL^^,ffilh - the Sodas, havel
:; late, maoiftded a dfpefition so incom
patible with these views of conciliation,
which are the true interests of Great Bri
tain and the United States, that it became;
proper to fele& such a person as Mr.|
Sheaffe for this duty,being a gentleman of!
great diferetion, incapable of any intem
perate or uncivil conduff, and certainly
not d (qualified by being a Lt. in his Ma
jesty's fervicc.
Such, Sir, are the circamftances of this
transaction, which Mr. Randolph is pleas
ed to term my “ hoflile views."
The following paragraphs do not seem
to require illudration—lt can escape no
per son, that whit in the beginning of
Mr. Randolph's letter to you he han tta
ted as refpe&able “ opinions" transmit
ted to the executive government, is no
longer confined to “ opinions," but the
Secretary of State asserts as matter of fad
" that the Governor of upper Canada as
fociated British with Indian force to assault
our Fort."
In refpea to Mr. Randolph's assertion
and his appeal to you, Sir, that " it is
" grown into a maxim that the affairs
" of the Indians within the bounda
" ries of any nation exclusively belong to
" that nation." I cannot admit so ge
neral and so novel a principle, as appli
cable either to the territory or boundary
under confederation—l do not recognize
its birth, nor any state of its cxiftence.—
It will be difficult for the Secretary of
State to prove, that it has governed the
conduct of the United States ; it is not to
he found in the express provisions cf the
Treaty of Utrecht ; it was never assumed
by the British nation prior to that corn
pad ; it is incompatible with the natural
rights ; & injurious to the ackdowledged
independency of the Indian Americans.
The British Government has not invol
ved itfelf into disputes with the Indians by
ading in fa vague and indeterminate a
manner. It has ever dene justice to their
natural rights; nor has it violated the
Itipulations purposely made for their sup
port and definition ; in conference pf
such an uniform condu&. Sir, the Indians
are constantly felicitous for the presence of.
feme of the Kings Officers, or fubjeds,
Mr. Randolph seems peculiarly anxious
to confider every tranfa&ion of the 3 King's
government, in its mode, as well as in its
substance, as hostility, otherwise he could
net but have seen, in the protest delivered
by Lieutenant Shc&ffc to Mr. Wiiliamfon,
not a tone of hostility 'but a Spirit of conci
liation, explanatory of the just principle,
on which the settlement in qieftion is ter
med an aggreflion ; the inexe-ution of the
Treaty on the part of the United States—
Nor is it possible to conceive thrt let's of
fenfive language could he made uie of,
confident with the formality, necessary to
substantiate a protest requiring the fuf
panfion of the exercise of a controverted
ckim.
Had Mr. Secretary Randolph, made
du? enquiry, he would have found that the
military escort, c ^filled of an officer, ex
pressly sent to accompany Lt. Shcaffe, &
7 perlons to row the boat, soldiers most
certainly, but unarmed, without military
habiliments, and in the dtefi they wear
for the purposes of fatigue It also might
be presumed from Lt. Sheaffe's letter,
that he was pe;fo<.ally req ringed with
Capt. WTliam:on, and in truth this cir
cumfaice was of iome weight in the ap
pointment.
protest delivered to Mr. Williamson at
the harbor of the Great Sodus ; he terms
.his protest, which 1 transmitted in obe
dience to Lord Dorchertcr's orders,
" a mandate borne by Lieut. Sheeffe,
" under a mli ary escort, and in its
" tone, correfpondir.g with the form of
“ a military and hostile nature."
TUESDAY, December go, 1794.
%vff)ifo^favffi%%%% on vgfavs\ waft^
The diferetion, good condud and mag
nanimity of Major Campbell, the Com
mander of that garrison, prevented the
commencement of War, and all its dread
ful consequences.
Upon the comparison of circumflances,
the march of General Wayne, the date of
Mr. Randolph's letter, its immediate
publication, and the manner of it, 1 can
not but conjedure that it was written not
to remonstrate against " my excesses" but
to prepare the minds of men for whatever
confcquencei might have arisen from the
movement of General Wayne's army ; and
could the temperate forbearance of Major
Campbell and the event cf the enterprize
have been fcrefeen (if I may be permitted
to revert to the objed of this letter) I
cannot believe that I should have been
spared the necessity of taking notice of
Mr. Secretary Randolph's publication,
or of controverting the assumptions of a
gentleman, for whom I have always en
tertained the most profound refpe&.
To a'l, Sir, who know my private sen
timents —to yourfelf, fir, who are ac
quainted with my public conded, to his
Molly's Ministers, and the officer chief
in command, who have approved of my
ibid adherence to their orders, and the
confeqwknt impartiality which I have
maintained between the United States and
the Indian Americans, any jollification or
exposition of my sentiments, is unnecessa
ry ; even Mr. Secretary Randolph has of
ficially in his peffeffion fufficient proofs of
my good will to the government and the
people of the United States.—They
ought to have sheltered me from the im
putations to which I have been exposed.
I have ever fliewn the utmost inclination
to cultivate the most perfe& harmony be
tween his Mejefty's fubjeds and those of
the United States, and have looked for
ward to an honorable termination of ex
iting differences with the most anxious
solicitude.
(Signed
" L. G. SIMCOE.
His Exc&tac, George Ham
rcc£d, ^c. U< &c.
l at thr : r public meetings, and I have the
imolt full persuasion, that tad the United
j States concurred with the confederacy
! in tl:etr request, that the King would cx
,; tend his good offices to the mediating be
htween them in the present war, and that
in cu „qucnce hi. M^jeftyLTl graciously
permitted me, as rcqueileJ, or with more
obvio* propriety ycurfelf, to have been
present at the lute Treaty, in such a case,
1 I am confident that peace would have
I been iftabluhed on this continent, to the
fstisfaaicn cf the United States and the
comfort of the Indian Nations; and
Scarce v in a lefcr degree to the benefit
of his M^jefty's fabjelts in this province,
who are materially interested that their
neighbours fhjuld on all Sides flourish in
wealth, peace and prosperity.
At the close of the Secretary of
Stated letter seems intended, through
you. Sir, 6< to apprize me of the
confeqaences of fclf defence, Ihould I not
be retrained by remoulirances," the date
of it cannot possibly escape my notice ; it
bears that or the firft day of September,
and either zzd of Augutt, Gen. Wayne
advanced to the post of the Miamis, laid
walk me possessions of the King's fubjeds
underbid proteaiou, and summoned it to
furrenCer. It may here be proper to ob
serve that so ill informed was that Officer
of the very principles on which he made
his in&afion or “ fclf-defence," that in
his fu mons he requires " the garrison
" toWmove to the nearest Post occupied
" by fas Britannic Majefty,in 1783." Had
this reftaifition been complied with, the
!garrh-% mud have advanced up the Mia
-4° toft
ond the 1' 11, whose evacuation had been!
deemed as a i^i .^rekion.
" re-occtyhg of a pest upon the V + _,.„
' river, within the limits cf those main
" tained by the British forces, at the
" peace, io the year 1783 ;" I should
urge an explicit declaration whether Bri
tish officers and British Soldiers did or did
not aid the attack, made by the Indians
on Fort Recovery ; and should at the
fame time detail the evidence, upon which
we have beer, induced to believe it. I
should beg leave to be informed, how the
nature and spirit of the mandate, borne
by two British officers, and seven British
Soldiers were in fad, or in principle,
transformed into a garb of peace, by die
absence of arms, and " military habili
ments," the dress of fatigue or the friend
(hip of Lieutenant Sheaffe for Mr. Wit
liamfon. I should wish to know, whether
Governor Simcoe derives from his inflec
tions, or any other warrant of his Britan
nic Majeft,,an authority to deny that it id
inadmissible for one nation to intermeddle
with the Indians within the territories of
another. I should oppose the conclusion,
that what may not be found in the treaty
of Utrecht, does not exist, under the {auc
tion of the law of nations, and especially
in regard to the usages of America. But,
for reasons which may be easily conceiv
ed, I would not, without the most clear
necessity, recur to the ciicumftances,
which prevented a treaty with the north
ern tribes cf Indians, in the last year.
Nor should I waste a moment in refuting
the suspicion, that my letter of the firft
of September, was " written to prepare
<s the minds of men for whatever confe
<c quences might have arisen from the
" movement of General Wayne's army ;"
because on the 20th of May I complain
ed + cf the ereaion of the Fort, and you
were then informed, that the army of the
United States in their march against the
enemy, would not be able to distinguish
between them, and any other people as
sociated in the war.
f The letter containing the complaint, mws
addre^d to Mr. Hammond, %vbo on the „*
of May fays, in his reply, that be fecuid im
mediately transmit a copy of that letter to th
Governor of Upper Canada ; and there cai
be no doubt of this having been done.
the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Ca
nacia. y The Minister of his Britannic Ma
jesty is the proper correlpondent for the
Secretary of State, upon fubjeds aftaing
their two nations; and his communica
tions will be always received with the at
tention due to his character, and with a
temper, flowing from a love cf truth and
harmony.
But before I could enter, Sir, even
with yourfelf, into any examination of the
dopted, as the sense of your government ?
This preliminary er quiry would be rer.-
deredabfolutely neccffary ; hnce on the
former occasion you difavewed a responsi
bility for the conduct of the Britilh gov
ernment in Canada ; and in your letter
of the 27th inst. enclosing that of the Lt.
Governor, you leave it too uncertain how
far you approve its doctrines, its aversions,
and its statements.
If it is to be underflood, that to all these
ycur affect it given,and were it expedient
now to revive our former centroverfy ; I
Ihould request you to define precisely ^' it
is meant by the apology for the F
thought proper to address to you on the
zoth ultimo, I Ihould take the liberty of
asking) whether it has been tranfinitted
to me, as a paper, which I am free to eih
mate according to its merits by waving
a reply, without violating my reject
for your functions; or whether it is a-
^.^ fl.|_ # ~~--«rc*rafyQs Q^i
tain, I Ihould decline a difeuflion with
letter, which the Lieutenant Governor
Under any afpeft of the affairs of the
United States in relation to Great-Bii-
[Whole No. 92.]
^wfro^nQfc&gfaV&%
Philadelphia, Nov. 30, 1794.
SIR,