west. In 1825 a second treaty was made with the Creeks which provided for their removal west of the Mississippi River, but only a few Cherokees actually left, as the rest clung to their old homes. There civilization encroached more and more closely upon them, and wrongs were committed, doubtless, on both sides, but the Indian was always the chief sufferer. A few of the confederated tribes joined the Seminoles in Florida, and a refuge was also found there by negro fugitives and runaway slaves, to the number of nearly 1,000, thus increasing the population of the Seminoles.

About the year 1835 there was considerable white emigration into Florida, and the whites, who were the aggressors, began as usual to complain of the Indians. A treaty was forced upon them by which they too were to exchange their homes for unknown territory in the west, but this treaty was signed only by a few friendly chiefs and their followers, being opposed by the leading chief, Micanopy, reinforced by the great war-chief, Osceola. In fact, Osceola was the backbone of the opposition. Their agent, General Thompson, who had spared no means to coerce them into signing, quarreled with Osceola and caused him to be imprisoned, after which he finally signed. But it appeared that this was merely a ruse to cover his purpose of revenge.

In this treaty it was provided that the Indians' homes should be abandoned and their stock sold. They were given a limited time in which to effect this; the time had now expired and the agent ordered them to bring in their stock to be sold at public auction. This they declined to do, and he soon found that they did not consider the treaty binding and did not intend to carry it into effect.

Meanwhile Osceola had collected an army and

advanced upon the settlers. Major Dade was sent to an outpost and there attacked and his command destroyed to a man. Several serious battles followed, in which both sides suffered, but the end was inevitable. The Seminoles finally submitted and were removed.

Soon after this the Creeks again broke out and were subdued and removed to the Indian Territory. In their new home the same tribes formed their confederacy anew, including the Seminoles, and they have since been known as the Five Civilized Nations. They have advanced remarkably in civilization, building schools and colleges and forming a government of their own after the pattern of the government of the United States, which remained in force until the admission into the Union of the new state of Oklahoma. (See, also, the article on THE INDIAN PROBLEM IN THE SOUTH, in Volume IV.).

BIBLIOGRAPHY.-Bruce: Indians in the South and Economic History of Virginia in the 17th Century; Bullock: Virginia; Drake: Indian Wars; Howe: Historical Collections of Virginia; Howison, R. R.: History of Virginia; Irving: Conquest of Florida; Jackson, H. H.: A Century of Dishonor; McCall: History of Georgia; McCardy: South Carolina Under the Royal Government; Ramsey: History of South Carolina; Wheeler: History of North Carolina; Williams: History of Florida; Wood, N. B.: Lives of Famous Indian Chiefs; Works of Captain John Smith; Hand-Book of American Indians, and other Reports of the Ethnological Bureau, Washington, D. C.

CHARLES ALEXANDER EASTMAN (Ohiyesa),

Author Indian Boyhood, Old Indian Days, etc.

CHAPTER VII.

THE NEGRO IN THE SOUTH.

American Negro Origins.

ROBABLY less is known of the life history of the negro than of any other element in our population. As a governmental activity American ethnology has largely confined itself to the Indian, and private research has only touched the surface of negro ethnology. The United States contains the largest body of negroes which has ever lived within historic times outside the African continent, yet the museums of England and Germany contain collections illustrative of native negro life which are incomparably superior to anything we have in this country. Popularly speaking, so little is known by our people of the have come to think of

negro's native life that we ncestral history, and

them as a people without an

have has

such knowledge as the mass of Auence in

been so distorted as to be worth but little. It is based upon study which until very recent times has been largely confined to a search for evidence in support of one side or the other of the ancient and bootless controversy over the question of the relative positions in the human scale of the Caucasian and the Negro.

There is a great deal of truth in Sir Harry Johnston's remark that "The negro, more than any other human type, has been marked out by his mental and physical characteristics as the servant of other races." He adds that there are exceptions to the rule, and that the least divergence from the negro

stock in an upward direction, as in the case of the Gallas and Somalis, is characterized by greater hostility to the slavery relation. This matter of divergence from the true negro type touches the root of the study of American negro tribal stocks. The "true negro" was found in a rather limited area, extending along the west coast for about fifteen degrees north from the equator. But this territory could not have supplied the trade after it began to assume the character and proportions of a legitimate international traffic. That traffic tended at

once both to destroy and to disperse the coast population. But it did more. It went out into the interior and extended its ramifications south of the equator and across the continent, almost, if not quite, to the eastern coast. Brazil drew her main supply from Portuguese West Africa, developing a trade which extended as far below the equator as that of North America extended above it. In addition to these sources of the traffic, other trading routes drew also on the East coast and on Madagascar.

The common conception which regards all negroes as of a common African ancestry is, therefore, wholly erroneous. It is probable, on the contrary, that the so-called American negro represents a blended type which contains a greater intermixture of different stocks than any other element of our population. Sierra Leone owed its inception as a colony for liberated slaves to the removal there of a number of negroes from England, who were emancipated by Lord Mansfield's decision in the Somersett case in 1772. There were at the time between 12,000 and 20,000 negro slaves in England. The colony developed into a place of refuge for all the negroes set free from captured slavers after the

traffic became illegal. It thus became an assembling ground for negroes from all parts of Africa which supplied slaves to the markets of the world, and its population afforded the best possible field for illustrating the number and diversity of these tribal types. In the middle of the past century the labors of an English missionary in Sierra Leone, the Rev. S. W. Koelle, showed that the population of the colony embraced negroes speaking two hundred different dialects, and differing in tribal habits, customs and practices. We have studied the different characteristics of different American Indian tribes, and no one would put in the same class the warlike Sioux and the degraded "Digger." Yet we ignore differences equally as pronounced among negroes.

There is, of course, to be considered the argument that the intermixing of negro stocks has progressed so far in this country that we now have a blended product in which original differences have become indistinguishable. The value of a knowledge of the component elements of this stock does not wholly depend upon the degree to which such original elements have or have not fused in the mass. The contradictory and puzzling features which a study of the American negro presents are not founded upon the condition and characteristics of the masses of the race. They arise, rather, from the numerous instances of individuals who differ from the masses, and who in themselves seem to invalidate conclusions based upon observation of the race as a whole. It is only when we know the composition of the mass, and realize that in it, or upon its outskirts, are many individuals who though commonly identified with the race are really not negroes in racial heritage, that we can properly appraise these exceptional cases in their relation to the larger group. Such