by an individual, not by the concurrence of the nation, though they afterward became involved in the general war. In that statement, I believe, I am sustained by the history of the times.
I have already stated that occasions occur where outlaws among the Indians commit acts of aggression on the whites, and the whites immediately retaliate on the Indian nations, and these nations, in self-defense, become involved in war; but I never knew a case where a treaty, which was made and carried out in good faith, was violated by the Indians. In Florida the Indians complained that they had been deceived in the treaty, and that the boundaries assigned were not as they understood them; and they killed their own chiefs. It was charged that some of the agents were involved in speculations to a great extent dependent on the treaty. I recollect it was so stated at the time.
I think, sir, the Senator's speech was of a remarkable character in relation to politics and other matters, which I am sorry that he has introduced. He has undertaken to admonish me, and for this admonition I am much obliged to him. His experience, his superior opportunities, may entitle him. in the opinion of others, to the right of admonishing me; and I am perfectly willing, on that point, to yield my own opinion to what may be the general impression of the body. I did not provoke his remark by any allusion to any one, predicated upon my own disposition to arraign the conduct of others; nor have I asserted anything in regard to the officers of the army, but what are matters of fact, taken from the official documents. When I made suggestions of a speculative character, I gave them as such.
But, Mr. President, the Senator from Iowa has said that he would not have been astonished if the rankest abolitionist had made such a speech, and had avowed such sentiments as I did. He says that, if a man in Western New York had presented such vievs, he would not have been surprised. Now, I wish to know what connection my remarks had with abolition.? What connection they had with any one in Western New York? In what respect have I catered to any prejudice or morbid sensibility? I have stood here alone in this body, against a powerful array of talent and influence, contending for what I conceived to be a great principle, and which must obtain, or the Indian race be exterminated.
In regard to that principle, I have the concurrence of the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Bell], who was once Secretary of War, and, as such, had control of the Indian Department, and who has, since that period, been a prominent member of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate. I believe that my opinions are also concurred in by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Sebastian], who is the head of the Committee on Indian Affairs. I can inform the Senator from Iowa that I will sustain him to the extent of my humble abilities in any measure he may introduce in favor of the Indians, and for the establishment of a policy which will ultimately benefit them, and reflect credit upon the Government of the United States.
I have not been regardless of what I considered the honor of the United States, and the interest of the Indians. In no instance have I been remiss in these particulars. I could not cater to any passion or prejudice on this subject, because I know of no societies in the North, or in the South, or in any section of this Union, for the advancement of the civilization of the Indians. If such societies exist, I am not in correspondence with them, nor am I aware of the
