John Stuart: Superintendent Of Indian Affairs For The Southern District

By the treaty of Paris in 1763, England acquired more than mere territory, the valleys of the St. Lawrence and the Mississippi, for in this territory were powerful Indian tribes which had been directly or indirectly connected with the French. These two factors, the natives and the land with all its virgin wealth, had much to do with bringing about the readjustment of Great Britain's policy toward her American colonies which hastened the revolt of the latter.*

In order to facilitate the management of Indian affairs and control western colonization, the new territory was divided into two districts, a northern and a southern, and a general supertendent appointed for each.¹ Owing to the fact that it included the older and more densely populated provinces and because of the importance of Sir William Johnson, who had long been a prosperous and prominent resident of New York, both the northern district and its superintendent have been given very careful study, the results of which occupy a large place in the books on this period of our history. But in many respects the southern district was of nearly equal importance with the northern district; it early claimed the attention not only of the colonial officials and speculators, but also of the British ministry, and it came into prominence both as a cause of the Revolution and as an important factor in determining the results of it. However, the southern district and its superintendent, John Stuart, have received but little attention from students of history. It is with the hope of stimulating interest in this phase of our colonial history that this sketch of the life and activities of this little known but important official is written.

The first fifty years of Stuart's life are veiled in obscurity. In the ordinary records there appears but little more than the statement that he was born in England about 1700 and came with the early settlers to Georgia in 1733.² It is reasonable to infer, however, that during his first twenty years in America he not only received the training of an ordinary frontiersman, but that he was among the Indians a great deal and learned their ways and needs, because he is characterized, at the end of this period, as "An officer of great sagacity and address and much beloved by the Indians."³

During the Seven Years' War in America, Stuart was on the Southern frontier and among the Southern Indian as a captain of militia. From this time, the correspondence of Stuart and the contemporaneous records furnish ample information as to the activities of this man who had already spent half a lifetime in touch with the Indians, and who gave the closing years of his long existence in faithful service to the Indians and to the British government.

In the early years of the war with France, Stuart was with his company on the Southern frontier, and when Fort Loudon was completed (1756), this veteran frontiersman proceeded with his company to this post within the heart of the Cherokee country and was second in command of the garrison stationed there under Captain Demere. When Fort Loudon was forced to surrender (August 7, 1760), it was Captain Stuart who went to the Indian village near the fort and concluded with the Indians the terms of capitulation. In the treacherous massacre which followed the surrender, Stuart was saved by the intervention of his Indian friend, Chief Little Carpenter, and escorted by him safe to the Virginia border, where he was allowed to join the Virginia forces under Colonel Byrd. When this officer was in the following summer entrusted with the command of a large force composed of companies from Virginia and North Carolina sent against the Upper Cherokees, he made special request that Captain Stuart be permitted to accompany the regiment as one of its officers, because of his knowledge of the Indians and their country.⁴

Though Captain Stuart remained in Virginia during the remainder of this war, he was identified with South Carolina, and his fellow citizens from this colony, in recognition of his services at Fort Loudon, petitioned the British government and obtained for him in 1763 the sum of £1,500 and the appointment to the office of Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the Southern District to succeed Edmund Atkin, appointed as the first superintendent in 1756, and also secured for him a seat in the South Carolina Council.⁵

The first important duty performed by Stuart as Superintendent of Indian Affairs was to arrange for a congress of all the southern tribes at Augusta, Georgia, where the chiefs were met by Governors Fauquier of Virginia, Dobbs of North Carolina, Boone of South Carolina, and Wright of Georgia. After the Treaty of Paris was ratified by England, February 10, 1763, King George directed the governors of the southern provinces with the newly-appointed Indian agent to meet the representatives of all the Southern Indians in order to relieve the Indians of the fear that since the French had been driven out of the Mississippi Valley, their own possession of this territory as homes and hunting grounds might be endangered. Another purpose of the congress was to assure the Indians of the good intentions of the English and to conclude with them a general treaty.

Stuart and the governors of Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina met at Charleston, October 4, 1763, and sent word to Governor Wright of Georgia that they were ready to proceed to Augusta hold the congress, but that it would be impracticable to go so far into the interior; therefore, they asked that the chiefs, already ordered to assemble at Augusta, be directed to come on to Dorchester or to Charlestown for the congress. Governor Wright considered the change unwise and unnecessary; and Stuart, who had now gone to Augusta, reported that the Indians had already come a long journey to reach Augusta and were unwilling to go further. After a month's delay, the governors proceeded to Augusta, and in a congress which lasted from the 5th to the 10th of November, 1763, they concluded a treaty with the chiefs of the Cherokees, Catawbas, Creeks, Chickasaws and Choctaws.

By this treaty Stuart and the governors, on behalf of the English government, promised protection and supplies to the Indians, and agreed to respect the rights of the Indians to their hunting grounds. The Indians promised safety to the English settlers and traders and friendship and loyalty to the British government.

The boundaries for the Catawbas and the Creeks was described as follows: "For the future the Boundary between the English Settlements and our Lands and Hunting Grounds shall be known and settled by a line extending up Savannah River to Little River and back to the Fork of Little River to the ends of the South Branch of Briar Creek and down that Branch to the main Stream of Ogeechee River, and down the main stream of that river just below the path leading from Mount Pleasant, and from thence in a line cross to Santa Savilla on the Matamaha River, and from thence to the southward as far as Georgia extends or may be extended to remain to be regulated agreeable to former Treaties and His Majesty's Royal Instructions."

Likewise the Catawbas agreed that their reservation should consist of a territory fifteen miles square which they were then occupying. The treaty closes with a repetition on the part of the Indians of the fact that all the lands south and east of the above-described line should forever belong to the English. The treaty was signed by Stuart, the four governors and twenty-one chiefs.⁶

Stuart's activities as Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the Southern District fall naturally into two periods: First, the period of organization and development (1763-1774). Second, the period of Revolution (1775-1779). In the first period there were many factors with which he had to deal, and conflicting opinions and interests which made his work peculiarly difficult. These factors were the Indians, to whose interests, from first to last, Stuart seems to have been sincerely devoted; the individual settlers of the frontier, who were always coveting newer and richer lands beyond their borders; traders, both as individuals and representatives of companies, who wished to exploit the Indians; the separate colonies, each jealous for its power, and ever seeking to extend its authority and its borders westward; while last, and not least important, was the unsettled state of British politics, which prevented the formation of any final and permanent policy concerning the Indians and westward expansion.

Since the Indian agents had no control over British politics and could have but little influence in determining what should be the policy adopted as to the development of the West and the management of the Indian trade, the consideration of the various complications and suggested plans does not properly belong in this sketch. ⁷ In the British Ministry there were two main factions, with reference to the Western Colonial policy, which may be designated respectively as imperialists and anti-imperialists. The latter party sought to secure for the existing colonies the authority to control and the right to exploit the Western Territory. The former, which stood for retaining in the Home Government the control of the West and the regulation of Indian affairs, triumphed in the early period when it succeeded in carrying through the measures incorporated in the Proclamation of October 7th, 1763. This Proclamation limited the established provinces to the territory east of the Appalachian divide. The territory acquired by the Treaty of Paris was divided into five parts. Four of these divisions, namely, the territory reserved for the Indians, and Quebec, East Florida and West Florida, were formed from Canada and the Mississippi Valley; the other division, Granada, lay outside the continent and is not directly connected with our subject. The territory reserved to the Indians for their homes and hunting grounds included the territory bounded on the south by the thirty-first parallel, on the east by the Appalachian mountains and Quebec (forty-fifth meridian), on the north by the territory of the Hudson Bay Company, and on the West by the Mississippi River.⁸ The authority to make purchases from the Indians within this reservation was to be entirely in the hands of the home government. Freedom of trade was permitted to those who would obtain license from the governor of the colonies within which they resided. The duty of enforcing these regulations was given to the military commanders and the Superintendents of Indian Affairs.

During the year following the issuance of the Proclamation. Hillsborough, who was then President of the Board of Trade, and was appointed the first Colonial Secretary in January, 1768, outlined an elaborate plan for the use of the Indian Agents. The British territory was divided into two districts, north and south, by the Ohio River. The superintendents of the two districts were to have full power to regulate trade, make treaties, etc., without outside interference. They were to be assisted by three deputies, and at each post a commissary, an interpreter and a smith. The commissary was to have the powers of a Justice to pronounce sentence subject to appeal to the Superintendent.⁹ The regulations concerning the purchase of Indian lands and trading rights had been fixed by the earlier Proclamation.

The Hillsborough, or Grenville-Bedford, plan was never approved by Parliament and was only partially carried out by the superintendents. The superintendent of the Southern District was the first to attempt to inaugurate the new scheme. He received a copy of the plan in 1764 and proceeded to select commissaries¹⁰ for the various Indian tribes. However, he appointed at this time only one deputy, his brother Charles Stuart, who resided in West Florida.¹¹ During the remainder of 1764 and 1765 Stuart was engaged in the task of reducing the chaotic conditions to some kind of order. He sent broadcast among the traders printed copies of instructions, held conferences with the Indians, and secured treaties containing concessions of land and promises from the Indians and gave to them assurances of the favor and good faith of the British government toward them.

Much of Stuart's time, though his headquarters were at Charlestown, was spent in the two Floridas with Governor Grant and Governor Johnstone, assisting them in the organization of the new provinces, making peace with the four neighboring tribes, and ascertaining the boundary lines between the surrounding tribes and these provinces.¹² At Mobile, March 26th to April 4th, 1765, the superintendent and Governor Johnstone held a congress with the Chickasaws and Choctaws, and at the close of the congress a treaty was signed by the superintendent and the chiefs.¹³ A similar congress was held with the Creeks and Catawbas at Pensacola from Sunday, May 26th, to June 4th, 1765; it was concluded with a treaty similar to that of the Mobile congress. These treaties fixed the boundaries between the Floridas and Georgia on the one side and the Indian tribes on the other. They also gave expressions of friendship and loyalty on the part of the Indians and of good will and protection on the part of the superintendent and governors. ¹⁴

While the superintendent was busy treating with the tribes in the South, the Cherokees were becoming more restless because of the influence of the conspiracy among the Northern Indians and because of some other events which occurred about this time. Some discontentment was caused by the fact that Stuart repeatedly declined to grant the frequent requests of certain Cherokees who wished to visit England. A greater cause of trouble is related in a letter of Colonel Lewis to Governor Fauquier which is dated Augusta County, May 9th, 1765. The story narrated in the letter is that a party of Cherokees were going to Winchester to proceed thence to fight with the Indians on the upper Ohio. They had been given passes, but while they were encamped in an out-house on the plantation of John Anderson, near Staunton, they were attacked by twenty or thirty "villainous, bloody-minded wretches," who killed the two chiefs and four others and wounded two more.¹⁵

Writing to John Pownall in August of the same year, Stuart mentions the above incident together with other causes of disaffection among the Indians as follows: "To the Northward the Province of North Carolina granted lands as far back as the Mts. and deprived the Indians of the Lower Cherokee Towns of the most valuable part of their hunting grounds. In May (1765), some Cherokees being among the Settlements of Virginia with friendly intentions were set upon by a party of the inhabitants and five of them were killed and some of those who escaped were wounded, of which they died after the return to their towns." Mr. Cameron and Ensign Price, the commander at Fort Prince George, could hardly keep down a massacre to avenge the wrong. The encroachment on Indian lands is given as a very great cause of trouble. Trade among all the tribes was at this time in confusion because South Carolina and Georgia would not observe the regulations agreed to in West Florida. Importation of rum from South Carolina had been complained of in a communication to Governor Bull. Lastly, Governor Bull had negotiated with the Cherokees concerning the boundary without consulting Stuart.¹⁶

A few months after the murder of the Cherokees in Virginia, and as a result of that crime, Boyd, a Virginia trader, was murdered near the Cherokee towns by some Indians, and his body thrown into a stream.¹⁷ Cameron, who arrived at the Cherokee towns, May 25th, 1766, and assumed his duties as commissary, after an investigation, confirmed the report as to the murder of Boyd and his two companions, Fields and Burk. It was his conclusion that the Cherokees committed the murder, being prompted to do so by the grudge which they bore the Virginians for the murder of their kinsmen. However, the Cherokees denied, to a man, having any hand in it, and Cameron was not able to cause the conviction and punishment of any one for the murder.¹⁸

This first report of Cameron to Stuart throws light on the attitude toward the English and of the relations existing between them and the traders and settlers at this time. For this reason a part of it is given here: "The Little Carpenter's brother brought in a scalp two days ago, another was brought in by a party off the Great Island, and two more to Chuoee above Chilhoee. It is shocking to express the tearing, cheating and horse-stealing that have been committed among the Indians by the traders and pack-horsemen last winter in this Nation. Various and numerous are the complaints made to me against them, but I was too late to redress them; it is no wonder the Cherokees should withdraw their affections from us when we allow such villains to trade or reside amongst them. The Indians seemed extremely satisfied with the appearance of Mr. Ross, who arrived here a few days since from Virginia. He is Factor to the Public Trade to be carried on by that Colony with the Cherokees. He made them a proposal of settling a store fortified with stockade on Long Island on the Holston. They replied that his talk was very good and agreeable to them, but that they would not allow any store to be fixed¹⁹ for the following reasons: that that was their last hunting ground, and that their young fellows might steal some of their horses and kill their cows, and that the white people would be for taking some satisfaction; that the issue of this would be their breaking out in open rupture.

"The Assembly of Virginia has voted £30,000 (South Carolina currency) for the support of this trade, and to continue for seven years. It seems that their views are not to make money, but to supply the Indians on the cheapest terms possible.²⁰ Mr. Ross promises to send ammunition in a couple of moons if the Norwards permit, and intends carrying all his goods by water. He sets off tomorrow for Keowee, thence about to Virginia, as the path this way is very dangerous."²¹

These letters and reports reveal the fact that the Indians more and more were coming to dislike and to distrust their white "brothers" as a result of the treatment they were receiving at the hands of the latter; therefore, the difficulties of Stuart's task increased from week to week as he stood as the mediator between his Indian wards and his own countrymen who sought to debauch and to defraud them. As the reports from the interior came to Stuart's headquarters at Charlestown, the crisis became more evident to him. The Southern Indians had not only refused to take any part in the conspiracy of Pontiac, but in the latter period of the conflict they had given valuable aid, especially by helping the Thirty-fourth Regiment in its ascent, in 1765, up the Mississippi to the Illinois country. The Chickasaws and Choctaws kept hostile tribes from hindering the ascent of the regiment and furnished the troops with buffalo, bear and venison. The Cherokees proceeded north of the Ohio and rendered valuable service by holding the French and Indians in check while the regiment was establishing itself in the Illinois forts. However, the attitude of the Indians during the following year had greatly changed, since through shortsightedness and a policy of economy, the supply of presents had been diminished and since the trade with the Indians was so disorganized and so dishonest. Therefore, Stuart recommended that the British officials encourage the continuance of the strife between the Northern and the Southern Indians, and also advised that the Chickasaws be kept in a state of war with the Creeks as a means of keeping the latter so engaged that they could not make trouble for the English.²²

Earlier in the year Stuart, in a report to the Board of Trade, made the following statements: "The Creeks since the Congress at Pensacola [June 4th, 1765] have been insolent and suspicious. Their Messengers and Emissaries have been through all the great tribes sounding their inclinations to a general rupture. They have been insolent to the new Settlers in West Florida, and one John Kemp was murdered by them near Pensacola. The reasons for this given by the Creeks are:

"(1) Our supplying arms and ammunition and other necessities to the Indians of the new-ceded territory as well as to the Choctaws and other small tribes on the Mississippi.
"(2) That the English had sent arms and ammunition to the Chickasaw, to get them to join with the Choctaws against them (the Creeks).
"(3) Creek chiefs on their way to treat with the Choctaws had been ambushed.
"(4) The English set the Indians to fighting each other.
"(5) That they received a message from Cornelius Doharty, a leader in the Cherokee Nation, with a roll of tobacco and a white wing by a Cherokee warrior, acquainting them that the intent of the English in taking possession of Pensacola and the new-ceded countries was first to lull them into a state of supineness and security and afterwards to destroy them and take their lands; that as a friend he gave them this timely notice and was ready to supply them with arms and ammunition.
"(6) That the prices were not lowered as demanded by them at Pensacola on which last article they greatly insisted." ²³

In a report to Hillsborough written two years later, Stuart gives causes for the bad disposition of the Indians towards the English, and lays the blame on the latter. This report suggested many of the difficulties to be overcome by the superintendent; because of its special significance it is incorporated in this paper: "In my letter which I had the honor of writing your lordship the 15th of September, I mentioned my intention of visiting the boundary line; accordingly after having finished with the Cherokees I set out upon the service accompanied by some Indians and rode along that part of it which divides this province from the lands reserved by the Indians. It is marked at least 50 feet wide, the trees within which space are blazed on both sides. The country near the line is very full of inhabitants, mostly emigrants from the North Colonies. It is remarkable that in going hence to the frontiers I rode at times 30 or 40 mi. without seeing a house or hut, yet near the Boundary that Country is full of Inhabitants which in my memory was considered by the Indians as their best hunting Ground, such is the rage for settling far back. The people inhabiting the Frontiers of this Province carry on a trade with the Indians by bartering rum for Horses, the Chiefs complained of this as the source of many disorders, their young men being thereby encouraged to steal horses from the neighboring Provinces, besides the danger of committing outrages when intoxicated which may involve their Nation in trouble. These back settlements pay little or no head to law or government of which I beg leave to give your Lordship an instance. One Mr. Summerhall who had formerly been in the Commission of the Peace by which means he became obnoxious to the neighbors was about a year ago taken out of his house by some who having stripped and tied him to a tree opposite to his own door, whipped him severely, upon which he commenced a prosecution against them when the Term approached they again seized and chained him to a post. He had been seven days in this position when his wife came and implored my assistance. I applied to a person who chose to attend the Congress with the Cherokees who I understood to be a Captain of Militia and prevailed upon him to go and rescue Mr. Summerhall which he effected. . . .²⁴

"In Georgia I found it still worse. People violently seized the Indian's horses in open daylight. The Magistrates were remiss in doing their doing. I was obliged to send some persons who attended me to recover them by Force altho I had no authority. The Indians detest the back Inhabitants of these Provinces which will account for the reluctance with which they give up any part of their Lands, being anxious to keep such neighbors at a distance. I beg leave further to observe to your Lordship that the Congress being unattended by any of the Militia and there being no Patrols or Guard anywhere in the Country through which such numbers of Indians passed, had such an air of supineness and insecurity as might have encouraged the Indians to execute their bad intentions had they been possessed of any."²⁵

During these years of organizing and mediating and of vain attempts to hold in proper relation and check the various conflicting elements with which he had to deal, Stuart lacked authority and was not given proper respect and consideration by the Provincial authorities, and could not enforce the regulations necessary to his plans for protecting the interests of the Indians and for developing the trade and resources of the western territory. Especially was it true that the Governor of Virginia and the land speculators of that colony were disposed to disregard the authority of Stuart as the Superintendent of Indian Affairs. 26 Much had been accomplished during the first live years that Stuart was superintendent, but the system needed improving, as the following report to Hillsborough makes evident:

"I have the honor of laying before your Lordship the arrangements which I humbly conceive to be necessary for conducting the business of the Department, which His Majesty has been graciously pleased to commit to my care:

Soon after the above plan was submitted to Hillsborough, Stuart made an additional request that the superintendents be given rank corresponding to the dignity and responsibility of their positions. 27 He also petitioned that he be appointed as "extra Member of the several Councils in the District for which he acts," since this would be "very useful and advantageous for his Majesty's Service, for by his Majesty's instructions he is to confer and consult upon many matters with the Governors of the Provinces and their Council which will be much more effectually done when he can attend personally than by letters, as he will thereby have an opportunity of clearing up many occurrences which otherwise might appear dark and intricate, and as he must be supposed to be better acquainted with the Indian affairs from his station, his presence will be very useful in framing any Provincial Law or Regulation respecting the local and immediate" concerns of any particular Province; it wall likewise give the Superintendent a respectable Rank in the Community."²⁸

To this request Hillsborough replied that he was "not without apprehensions that the giving of any particular Rank to the office of Superintendent, more especially in the Military line, will be attended with insurmountable difficulties and objections." However, he promised to present to the Board of Trade that part of the petition which pertained to the appointment as an extra member of the Provincial Councils.²⁹

On January 5th, 1770, the Lord's Commissioners of Trade recommended to the King that he appoint Stuart as an ex officio member of the Councils of the Provinces of his District. The King made the appointment, restraining the Indian Agent, however, from serving as a Judge or as in charge of the government which might otherwise become his privilege as a member of the Councils.³⁰ Stuart took the oath as member of the Georgia Council (October 23, 1772 ),³¹ and it is probable that he also assumed the duties as member of the Councils in other Provinces, but the records do not show that he ever attended the meetings of the Councils of Virginia and North Carolina, and it is not probable that he ever visited the capitals of these Provinces.

In spite of the increased authority and the more complete organization of the system, there existed much disorder in the management of Indian affairs, due to the lack of proper regulations of the commerce among them. Though this was regarded as a source of disorders that could not fail to have the most fatal consequences, the King and Council still "thought best, upon the ground of the Representations of the several Colonies that they were themselves the best judges of what those Regulations should be, to leave this matter entirely to them and to lay aside a plan which the Board of Trade had with unwearied attention prepared for that purpose."³²

This want of regulation among the traders resulted in much harm to the Indians, particularly to the Cherokees who had been permitted to contract great debts. To Hillsborough, Stuart wrote that "At their return from hunting, the traders to whom they are indebted seize their skins and leave them destitute of any supplies but what they may choose to trust them with, under such circumstances they have been for many years past extremely uneasy and have lately proposed to give up a considerable tract of country as satisfaction for their debts, but the land which they have proposed to give up on this account is claimed by the Creeks. The Traders greedily grasped at the offers and went so far as to draw up an instrument of Cession which they got signed by the principal Chiefs, and in consideration all the goods they were possessed of in the Nation. This very irregular and very wrong step was taken without giving me the least intimation."³³ Stuart was instructed to warn every one against attempting to secure Indian lands, and he was specifically not to allow any of his deputies to become involved in such transactions.³⁴ The rumor that Cameron, deputy among the Cherokees, had been guilty of having some part in these questionable transactions had already reached England, but the charges seem not to have been well founded.³⁵

This problem of guarding the interests of the Indians while land companies and individual speculators were endeavoring to secure concessions west of the mountains required all of the time and skill of the superintendent for several years immediately preceding the Revolution. During this period the boundary line between the Provinces and the Indians from Georgia to the Ohio was run, several important treaties were concluded with the Indians, and concessions of territory were secured from them. These were matters of supreme importance both in America and in England³⁶ and Stuart's responsibility and influence in the final settlement were recognized as being important.

Since the boundary lines were determined by treaties, the two may be considered together. Previous to May, 1766, the line had been run from Savannah River to Reedy River at a point then thought to be on the North Carolina line, and the Indians had agreed to wait till the following September for the line between them and North Carolina which they wished to continue straight from Reedy Creek to Chiswell's Mine on New River in Virginia.³⁷ Since the proposed line from Reedy Creek straight to Chiswell's Mines would cut off a part of Rowan and Mecklenburgh Counties, Governor Tryon of North Carolina suggested that the line should be extended due north from Reedy Creek to the mountains, thence straight to Chiswell's.³⁸ At a meeting of the Cherokees held at Fort Prince George, October, 1765, the chiefs had agreed to the line as suggested by Governor Tryon,³⁹ and the following June the North Carolina Council authorized Governor Tryon to issue warrants on the Quit Rents for funds to meet the expense of extending the line.⁴⁰

Having requested Stuart to arrange for a meeting of the Chiefs at Salisbury, Governor Tryon went in person to the appointed place, escorted by fifty of the Militia and a number of surveyors and woodsmen.⁴¹ When the party reached Salisbury, May 16th, 1767, the Governor was greatly disappointed by the fact that neither Stuart nor the Chiefs had arrived. After waiting four days, Governor Tryon led the party south to Reedy Creek. Stuart was not present at the running of this line because at that time he was occupied with affairs among the Creeks. He wrote an explanation to Governor Tryon and arranged for the Indians to assemble at Reedy Creek instead of Salisbury, a distance of 180 miles beyond the place where the line was to be run.⁴² He also wrote to Cameron, instructing him to render all necessary aid in running the line.⁴³ The fact that Tryon was to be met and assisted by the deputy instead of the Principal of the Department was humiliating to the pride of Governor Tryon, who wished to impress the Frontiersmen and Indians with the dignity and greatness of his office and power.

At "Tyger" River, June 1st, 1767, Governor Tryon held a "talk" with the Indians, reminding them that he had come more than 400 miles and had been away from home twenty-six days. Since he did not bring presents with him, and since the supply of meal and flour would last the entire body of whites and Indians present not more than fourteen days, which would not be sufficient time for the survey, the Governor conferred full authority, for running the line, upon three commissioners, John Rutherford, Robert Palmer and John Frohock.⁴⁴ He arranged that the Militia and all the others but the necessary workmen and a few Indian helpers return with him, the Indians, except the guides and those who were to go to Salisbury for the purpose of receiving the presents for the Nation, were to return to their homes.⁴⁵

The line was run from Reedy Creek north to a tree in the mountains at the headwaters of the Packet running into Broad River and of White Oak Creek running into Green River, a distance of fifty-three miles. Since it was very difficult to run the line through the mountains to the mines, it was agreed to consider such a line as the boundary without running it.⁴⁶

By the Treaty of Hard Labor (South Carolina), October 13th, 1768, Stuart and representatives of the Indians gave official endorsement to the line as previously run from Towhouhe on the north bank of the Savannah, thence to Dewisses Corner, thence in the same course to Waughee, or Elm tree, on the south side of Reedy Creek, thence north to a Spanish oak tree (marked, etc.) on the top of a mountain now called Tryon's mountain, thence north and northeast course straight to Chiswell's Mine, on the east bank of the Great Conhaway in Virginia. The treaty also provided that this line should be extended from Chiswell's Mine to the mouth of the said river at the Ohio, this section of the line to be marked by representatives of Indians with the superintendent or his agent, and certain commissioners of Virginia to be appointed for this purpose.⁴⁷

At this point the rights of the Indians and the purposes of Stuart as Superintendent of Indian Affairs came into sharp conflict with Virginia's plans for westward expansion. The Province was jealous of the schemes of the speculators for establishing new colonies in the West which were now being urgently presented to the home government for its endorsement.

The matter was now complicated by the provisions of the treaty of Fort Stanwix, November 5th, 1768, by which the Iroquois ceded to Great Britain all the land south of the Ohio between the Great Kanawha and the Tennessee,⁴⁸ which territory was claimed by the Cherokees, a part of which they had ceded to Great Britain by the treaty of Hard Labor twenty days before the treaty of Stanwix.

Virginia was not satisfied with the line as fixed by Stuart in the treaty of Hard Labor and asked him to call another meeting of the Chiefs for the purpose of changing the line to conform to the terms of the Fort Stanwix treaty.⁴⁹ Colonel Lewis and Dr. Walker who were sent as commissioners from Virginia to confer with Stuart at Charlestown, arranged, through Governor Tryon of North Carolina, for a meeting with the Indian chiefs at Fort Johnson (North Carolina), January 13th, 1769, and there they secured the consent of the Indians to run a new line.⁵⁰

Before a line could be run through the mountains to the Ohio, the House of Burgesses addressed a memorial to Governor Botetourt asking that the southern boundary of Virginia be extended due west to the Ohio instead of north to the mouth of the Kanawha.⁵¹ To this proposal Stuart gave the following objections: This line would not strike the Ohio, but would be very near the towns of the Cherokees and the Chickasaws. It would thus cut off to Virginia the best Indian hunting grounds. This territory would be open to settlement by whites who were hunters and otherwise objectionable to the Indians. For these reasons trouble with the Indians would follow, and even then Northern Tribes and Cherokees were among the Creeks to arrange for a general confederacy to resist the whites. Moreover, it was reported that the head-chief of the Cherokees, Ouconnastotah, had gone with thirty canoes of armed men to reconnoiter the settlements at Holston's River to see how far the Virginia settlers extended beyond the line agreed upon by the treaty of Hard Labor.⁵²

Failing to obtain the superintendent's approval of the plan for the new line, Virginia next asked that the west line extend from a point where the North Carolina line intersected with the Holston River, north to the mouth of the Kanawha.⁵³ On June 21st, 1770, Governor Botetourt presented to Stuart the request of the House of Burgesses; and on July 12th, Stuart replied from Charlestown that he would hold a congress of Cherokee chiefs at Lochabar, October 5th, 1770.⁵⁴

The line fixed by the treaty of Lochabar, October 18th, 1770, is therein described as extending from the termination of the line between North Carolina and the Cherokee hunting grounds "in a west course to a point six miles east of Long Island in Holsten's River, and thence to said river six miles above the said Long Island, thence in a direct course to the confluence of the Great Conhoway and Ohio Rivers. . . . His Majesty's white subjects inhabiting the .Province of Virginia shall not, upon any pretense whatever, settle beyond the said Line." This treaty was signed by Stuart and sixteen chiefs.⁵⁵ The west line of Virginia was surveyed in 1771 by commissioners of Virginia and of the Cherokees who ran it further to the west than agreed upon by the treaty of Lochabar. The explanation for this change was that it was impracticable to run the line as first agreed upon because of the mountains and rivers and "therefore the commissioners at the earnest request of the Cherokees have marked a natural boundary by running the line from the Holston to the Louisa River and down that stream to the Ohio."⁵⁶

Soon after the line was surveyed the claim was made by Western expansionists that the Louisa River described by the surveyors as the boundary line was really the Kentucky River, and this interpretation was accepted both in America and in England. Lord Dartmouth, the successor of Hillsborough as Colonial Secretary, readily agreed to consider the Kentucky River as the boundary line. Stuart was responsible for the origin of the mistake. At the request of Lord Dartmouth for a map showing the whole southern Indian boundary, Stuart prepared the map and sent it to England, February 25th, 1773. Both on the map and the letter accompanying it Stuart identified the Louisa with the Kentucky River. Since his deputy, Alexander Cameron, was with the surveying party, surely the superintendent was well informed as to the events which occurred during the survey. Therefore, he must have been led into making the mistake through his lack of knowledge of the geography of the country, or he was led to make the change purposely to favor the land speculators. Now, it cannot be proven that he was even remotely connected with such schemes, but it is well established that he always opposed any schemes for taking the land of the Indians. The only reasonable conclusion, then, is that he was misled by using as a basis for his map a very imperfect one drawn earlier by John Mitchell. ⁵⁷

Before the new boundary line received the official endorsement of the British Ministry, Wharton and Trent had gone from Philadelphia to England to obtain for the company which they represented a grant of 2,500,000 acres on the upper Ohio. The petition was later changed to 22,000,000 acres in the territory south of the Ohio lately ceded by the Iroquois by the treaty of Fort Stanwix. Many prominent Englishmen and some Americans were members of this company which now included the older "Ohio Company" and was called the Walpole, or the Grand Ohio Company. It was now planned to form a colony separate from the Virginia Province.⁵⁸

Virginia speculators were seeking some of the same territory as that included in the plans of the Ohio Company, hence there arose a clash of interests and delay, but Virginia insisted on the boundary as interpreted by Stuart. Such speculators as Washington, Lee, Henry, Mercer, Walker, Lewis and Preston sought patents to lands in the West, some as far as the Tennessee.⁵⁹

There were other companies formed, such as the Transylvania, represented by Richard Henderson of North Carolina, which in 1775 purchased directly from the Cherokees two large tracts, of which the larger extended from the Kentucky River to the Cumberland, while the other included land lying on the Holston, Clinch, Powell and Upper Cumberland.⁶⁰ Stuart protested to Lord Dartmouth against this purchase.⁶¹

The western settlement which resulted in the most serious trouble with the Indians, and against which the superintendent made the strongest protest, was the Watauga, which was established not by a company, but by individuals from Virginia, North Carolina and other colonies, as early as 1708. Since the Proclamation of 1703 made it illegal to purchase Indian lands, a lease was secured for a period of ten years. Later, in 1775, the Watauga settlers purchased their lands from the Cherokees."⁶²

February 22nd, 1774, Stuart sent to Governor Martin of North Carolina a request concerning the Watauga Settlement, the essential parts of which are here quoted: "I have received a message from the Cherokees expressing the strongest attachment to his Majesty's white subjects. . . . That Nation is still extremely uneasy at the encroachments of the white people on their hunting ground at Watauga River, where a very large settlement is formed upwards of fifty miles beyond the established boundary, and as I am apprehensive that it consists of emigrants from your Province to which it is contiguous, I must beg your Excellency's interposition to endeavor to prevail on them to remove, otherwise the consequences may in a little time prove fatal. I have in the meantime ordered an interpreter with a party of principal Indians to warn them to remove within a certain time, and should they through neglect to move off, I am afraid it will be impossible to restrain the Indians from taking redress themselves by robbing and perhaps murdering some of them. (Signed) William Ogilvie for John Stuart.

"P. S. Mr. Stuart is so excessively ill of the gout that he cannot even sign his name."⁶³

As a result of this protest from Stuart, Governor Martin issued the following proclamation:

The question as to Stuart's responsibility for the Cherokee war of 1776-1777, and as to his schemes for influencing the Indians to attack the provinces, is an important one. The Indian agents disavowed having caused the uprising, while the Colonists maintained that they were guilty of both charges. Ramsey says that "one of the measures adopted (by British officials) to oppress and subjugate the disaffected American colonies was to arm the neighboring tribes and to stimulate them against the feeble settlements on their border. . . . Early in the year 1776 John Stuart, the Superintendent of Southern Indian Affairs, received his instructions from the British War Department and immediately dispatched to his deputies, resident among the different tribes, orders to carry into effect the wishes of the government. Cameron, agent among the Cherokees, called the Chiefs to a Congress and persuaded them by means of presents and promises to join with the British."⁶⁸ On this point Ramsey⁶⁹ quotes from Steadman's "History of the American War":

At the time of the outbreak, Jarrett Williams, who had recently been among the Cherokees, made a statement under oath before a Justice of the Peace to the effect that when he left the Cherokee country, July 8th, 1776, the Indians were preparing supplies and other things for the war which was to begin immediately. According to his statement, Alexander Cameron, deputy under Stuart, was with them and had planned to have them spare all settlers who would take the oath of allegiance to the king and to destroy without mercy all who refused. ⁷¹

This charge that Stuart, as a loyalist, was forming plans for using the Indians in helping to subdue the rebellious colonists, is substantiated by Stuart's letters. Writing to Lord Germain, July 20th, 1776, he said: "I have been told that the Indian Agents appointed by the Continental Congress have had meetings with the Creek and Cherokee Indians, at which a great many of each Nation attended and engaged to remain neuter in the quarrel between Great Britain and her Colonies, notwithstanding which, I do not despair of getting them to act for his Majesty's service when deemed necessary. As I have no instructions from General Howe or General Clinton to employ the Indians, and as no plan for my government has been communicated to me, I shall use my utmost endeavor to keep the Indians in temper and disposed to act when required."⁷² Soon after this, Stuart reported to General Gage that he had received his commands and would do all in his power to forward the interests of the government; that he had sent his brother, Henry, to enlist the help of the Cherokees; and that he planned to collect some Indians at St. Augustine for purposes of defense. He advised against an indiscriminate attack by the Indians, and said that he would hold them for a concerted action. ⁷³ In the autumn of 1776, Stuart received instructions from Lord Germain to prepare the Indians of the South for a concerted attack at the same time when the invasion was to be made from the east coast by the British regulars. ⁷⁴ Also, large quantities of arms, ammunition and supplies were sent to Stuart for the Indians, and he was directed to enlist the Creeks and other tribes to join with the Cherokees in the war they were then waging against the "Rebels."⁷⁵

The facts stated above seem to be conclusive evidence that Stuart was a loyalist true to his Majesty till the last, and, therefore, as a matter of course he used his influence, which was very important at this time, in every possible way to help bring victory to the king's armies. Perhaps, if there had been no other cause for ill-feeling on the part of the Indians, such as the encroachments of the Watauga settlers on their territory, they would not have entered so fiercely into the War. Yet the influence of the Indian agents was no doubt the real cause of the uprising at this particular time. Henry Stuart, who had been sent with ammunition and supplies, was among the Cherokees when they began the war on the settlers, and he has given account of the immediate events which led up to it. According to his report, the Indians denied that they had sold any land to the Watauga settlers. Isaac Thomas was dispatched by H. Stuart and Cameron with a "talk" to the settlers at Watauga and Nollichucky. In ten days Thomas returned with a letter from the settlers signed by John Carter, and another signed by Aaron Pinson. These letters asked that the whites be allowed to remain on the land till the times were more settled and till they could find a place to which to remove. To these letters the Indians replied that they had agreed to allow the whites to occupy the lands only for a certain time which had now expired, therefore, they must move off. The Indians admitted having received goods from the settlers, but claimed that this was for deer which the whites had killed, and for other damages. After many days Thomas returned with an unsatisfactory reply from the settlers, and the Indians, led by Chincanacina, or Dragging Canoe, decided to attack them. The Indian agents, however, secured their promise to respect the innocent, especially women and children, and to cease when they should so order. ⁷⁶

This war, after a fierce struggle of twelve months in which the militia from all the Southern states combined against the Indians, was terminated by two treaties, one made at DeWitts Corner with commissioners from South Carolina and Georgia, the other at Fort Henry near Long Island in the Holston River with commissioners from Virginia and North Carolina, July 20th, 1777. By the second treaty the Watauga settlers were granted the lands (to which a small area was added by the treaty) which they had held since 1772. ⁷⁷

After the Cherokee war was ended, Stuart and his deputies seem to have lost their influence and opportunities with the Indians, and were too much occupied with the progress of the Revolution to continue their ordinary duties among the Indians. In 1775, the Continental Congress had appointed, as Indian Commissioners for the South, George Galphin, Robert Rae, John Walker, Willie Jones and Edward Wilkinson.⁷⁸

In the meantime, Stuart, now old and infirm, was alone, his wife and daughter being kept under guard in South Carolina, ⁷⁹ to which Province he dared not return. The Commissioners of the treasury allowed Mrs. Stuart £100 per month, currency, for her maintenance, the same to be reimbursed out of the profits of Stuart's estate by the committee in charge of it.⁸⁰

The records close with Mrs. Stuart and her daughter still in prison, from which there is relief for only a few minutes at a time (under guard) for exercise and fresh air, which the doctor insisted was necessary for Mrs. Stuart's broken health. Stuart himself, after a long life, forty-six years of which had been spent on the American frontier and among the Indians, for whose interests and protection against the greed of the white man he had labored untiringly during the last sixteen years of his life, returned to England, where he died in 1779;⁸¹ his death, no doubt, being hastened by the strain of the Revolutionary period and by the failure of the plans for the accomplishment of which he had given the best years of his life. George B. Jackson.

Footnotes:
* A paper prepared in a graduate course in American history in Vanderbilt University, as part of the work for the degree of Master of Arts. It will be understood that Mr. Jackson has made use only of printed sources accessible in Nashville. - [Ed.]
1. In 1755 the home government took over the control of Indian affairs and appointed two superintendents for the different tribes. (Alvord, "Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763," in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, XXXVI, 25.)
Sir William Johnson and Edmund Atkin became the first superintendents. After the death of Atkin and after the department of Indian affairs was reorganized in 1763, John Stuart was appointed to succeed Atkin in the southern district.
2. Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography, s. v., Stuart, John. Sabine, Loyalists of the American Revolution, Vol. II., pp. 242-243.
3. Hewit, in Carroll's Historical Collections, Vol. I, p. 461.
4. H. R. McIlwaine (Ed.), Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1758-1761 [Draper MSS. 4ZZ, 31].
5. Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biography.
6. North Carolina Colonial Records (referred to hereafter as N. C. C. R.) Vol. XI, pp. 156-205. [British Public Records Office, S. C, Vol. XX, M. 92.]
7. Those who are interested in studying the subject further will find a full and scholarly treatment in
(1) C. E. Carter, Great Britain and the Illinois Country (1908).
(2) C. W. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics" (1917).
8. (l) Macdonald, Select Charters and Other Documents (1606-1775), pp. 267-272.
(2) Alvord, Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763.
(3) Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. I, ch. 6-7
9. Canadian Archives, Report, 1904, p. 244, cited in Carter, Great Britain and the Illinois Country, pp. 16-17, 80.
10. The commissaries were as follows: John McIntosh for the Chickasaws; Elias Legarden for the Choctaws; Alexander Cameron for the Cherokees; Roderick McIntosh for the Upper Creeks; and Charles Taylor for the Tribes on the Mississippi.-Lansdown MSS., Vol. VII. (Quoted in Alvord's Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. I, footnote 508.)
11. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. I, p. 289.
12. Stuart to Tryon, Feb. 5th, 1766. N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 164-165. (B. P. R 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 269.)
13. Concerning the congresses and his work in the Floridas, Stuart Write: "Our endeavors were crowned with success, having obtained several concessions of land, and in a great measure effaced the bad impression left on the minds of the Savages by the insinuations of the French." (Report of Stuart and Johnstone, Mississippi Provincial Archives, Vol. I, pp. 215-249.)
14. Mississippi Provincial Archives, Vol. I, pp. 211ff.
In this report an account is given of the unsettled state of the Indians when they came among them, but hope is expressed that conditions may be better since the treaties have been made. However, the thought is expressed that it may be necessary to starve or whip the Indians into submission; and if the latter course must be resorted to, all the traders from the different colonies should be withdrawn at the same time, and a concerted attack made against the Indians in order to subdue them as had been done in the case of the Cherokees. The report concludes with the statement that "The greatest Indian leaders whose influence threatens the British are Pondiac of the north; The Mortar, Chief of the Creeks; and Old Alabama Mingo, Chief of the Choctaws. They are endeavoring to get the tribes to unite against the English, their common enemy.
15. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1661-1765), p. 20. (Bancroft Transcripts, Library of Congress.)
16. Stuart to Pownall, Charlestown, Aug. 24, 1765. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 108-112. (B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 269.)
17. Ramsey, Tennessee, p. 143. Ramsey's statement is that Andrew Greer of the Watauga settlement, while trading among the Cherokees, gained a suspicion that some harm was being plotted against him and returned by other than the ordinary trail up the Nollichucky Trace to Watauga. Boyd and Doggett, who had been sent out by Virginia, traveling on the path which Greer had left, were met by the Indians near a creek, were killed by them and their bodies thrown into the water. This creek is said to be in Sevier County, Tennessee, and has ever since been known as Boyd's Creek. A watch with Boyd's name engraved on the case, and other articles were afterwards found in the creek.
18. Ramsey's charge seems unfair to Stuart and Cameron, when he says that "This (murder) was the commencement of the Cherokee hostilities, and was believed to be instigated by agents of the British government" (meaning Cameron and Stuart). (Ramsey, Annals, p. 143.) Though this statement is true when applied, not to those earlier hostilities, but to the greater outbreak of the Indians in 1776-1777.
19. Later the Indians agreed to have Ross's store at Chiswell from which point traders might be sent to them. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, p. 217.)
20. Stuart objected to the Virginia plain of trading with the Indians without profit on the grounds that all the Indians would expect this of the provinces, and those in the South were not able to do this. Stuart suggested that Virginia's reason for making the offer was to appease the wrath of the Indians for the murder of the Cherokees in Augusta County the previous year. (Stuart to the Board of Trade, July 10, 1766. N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 232-240; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 270).
21. Cameron to Stuart, June 1, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 215-216; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 269.)
22. Stuart to the Board of Trade, Dec. 2, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 279-283; B. P. R. O., A. & W. Ind., Vol. 270.)
23. Stuart to Board of Trade, July 10, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 232-240; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 270.)
24. This same spirit of lawlessness and rebellion against the authority of the Indian Agents is indicated by a letter to Stuart written by a back-settler:
25. Horse Creek, Nov. 10, 1768.
Sir, To inform you of ill-disposed people. There is one Laurence Rambo being on Noth Creek has boldly said and published that he should think no more of you than myself for he would have you taken and whipped as soon as any other Man and shackle you had you offered to give out any authority to had them taken for false imprisonment they used me with (.) What are you he says nothing but an old Cherokee Agent and indeed thinks your honor ought to be taken and whipped and your goods taken from you and as you are a giving to the damned Indians to kill the Back Woods People. Pray don't think this ill of my acquainting your Honor of the poor insipid fools but to inform you the ill that is in some people and vulgar discourse without Fear or Wit. So no more at present but wishes your Honor Well and Humble Servant to Command. Jacob Sommerhall."
26. Stuart to Hillsborough Charlestown, Jan. 3, 1769. (N C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 1-3; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 273.) 26Stuart to Fauquier, Nov. 24, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 267-271; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 260.)
26a. Stuart to Hillsborough, Sept. 15, 1768. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 839-840; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 272.)
27. Stuart to Hillsborough, Jan. 3, 1769. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VIII, pp. 2-3; B. P. R. 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 273.) 28. Stuart to Hillsborough, July 30, 1769. (N. C C. R., Vol. VIII, p. 62; B. P. R. 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 273.)
29. Hillsborough to Stuart, March 24, 1769. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VIII, p. 21; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 273.)
30. C. C. R., Vol. XI, pp. 230-231; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 108, p. 139.
31. Georgia C. R., Vol. XII, p. 133. Stuart had been appointed as one of the Commissioners of Justice in the Province of Georgia, May 10, 1764. Colonial Records of Georgia, Vol. VII, p. 179.) October 23, 1772, Stuart was appointed Justice of the Peace in the lands newly ceded by the Creeks and Cherokees. (Colonial Records of Georgia, Vol. XII, p 395.)
32. Hillsborough to Stuart, July 3, 1771. (N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, p. 8; B. P. R. 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 275.)
33. Stuart to Hillsborough, April 27, 1770. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VIII, pp. 553-554; B. P. R. 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 295.)
34. Hillsborough to Stuart, July 3, 1771. (N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, p. 8: B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 275.)
35. The North Carolina Council made an investigation (October 16, 1770) of the charges as to Stuart's and Cameron's conduct toward the Cherokees, and reported that it was their unanimous opinion "that the suggestions set forth are false and frivolous, and that the discontent of the said Indians appears to have been excited by the traders settled amongst them." (N. C. C. R., Vol. VIII, pp. 250-251; Mss. Records in the Office of Secretary of State.)
36. It is beyond the scope of this article to consider the various colonization schemes and companies formed to exploit the natural resources of the Mississippi Valley. The interested reader is referred to Alvord, The Mississippi Valley in British Politics, and Carter, Great Britain and the Illinois Country.
37. Cameron to Stuart, May 10, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 207, 213-215; B. P. R. O.)
38. Tryon to Stuart, June 17, 1766. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 220-221; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 269.)
39. Tryon to Rutherford, Palmer, and Frohock, June 6, 1767. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, p. 468; Tryon's Letter Book.)
40. N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, p. 288. (The time set for running the line in the previous autumn had been changed on account of sickness among the Indians. See N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 267-271; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 260.)
41. N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 460-461; Tryon's Letter Book.
42. Tryon to Lord Shelbourne, July 8, 1767. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, p. 500; Tryon's Letter Book.)
43. Tryon to Cameron, June 6, 1767. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 468-469; Tryon's Letter Book.)
44. Tryon to the Commissioners, June 6, 1767. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, p. 468; Tryon's Letter Book.)
45. Tryon's Talk to the Cherokees, Tyger River, June 1, 1767. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 462-464; Tryon's Letter Book.)
46. Agreement between the North Carolina Commissioners and the Cherokees in regard to the dividing line. June 13, 1767. Signed by Cameron, the three commissioners, and six chiefs. (N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 469-471; MSS. Records.)
47. (a) N. C. C. R., Vol. VII, pp. 851-855. Mss. Records, (b) N. C. C. R., Vol. VIII, pp. 25, 26. Mss. Records, (c) Stuart to John Blair, Hard Labour, South Carolina, October 17, 1768. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1766-1769), pp. XXVI-XXVIII.
48. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, pp. 64ff.
49. Journal of the Virginia House of Burgesses (1766-1769), pp. XXXI-XXXII.
50. Journal of the Virginia House of Burgesses (1766-1769), pp. XXXV-XXXVIII. Lewis and Walker advised the Governor of Virginia to deal directly with the Indians rather than through Stuart, on the grounds that he could make better terms with them.
51. House of Burgesses to Governor Botetourt, December 13, 1769. (Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1770-1772), pp. IX-X.)
52. Stuart to Botetourt, January 13, 1770. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1770-1772), pp. XI-XII.
53. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1770-1772), p. XIII.
54. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1770-1772) , p. XII.
55. Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia (1770-1772), pp. XV-XVI.
56. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, pp. 83-84
57. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, pp. 85-89.
58. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, pp. 104ff.
59. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, pp. 111ff. Lee represented the Mississippi Company which sought to obtain lands on the upper Ohio. Washington purchased the claims of the veterans of 1754 which had been granted them by the Proclamation of 1763.
60. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, p. 206. Ramsey, Annals, p. 191. Report of the Bureau of Ethnology (1883-1884), pp. 148-149. "Stuart to Dartmouth, Januarv 3, 1775. N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, pp. 1106-1107.
61. Stuart to Dartmouth, March 28, 1775, N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, p. 1173. (B. P. R. O., A. & W. L, Vol. 279.)
62. Ramsey, Annals, pp. 134ff. Stuart to Dartmouth, January 3, 1775. (N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, pp. 1106-1107; B. P. R. 0., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 279.)
63. Stuart to Martin, Charlestown, February 22, 1774. (N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, pp. 825; Mss. Records.)
64. N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, p. 982; Mss. Records.
65. Alvord, Mississippi Valley in British Politics, Vol. II, p. 53.
66. American Archives, Fourth Series, Vol. IV, p. 329.
67. Stuart to Dartmouth, St. Augustine, July 21, 1775. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 117-119; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 279.) Also extract from "Cape Fear Mercury," Thursday, August 7, 1775. (N. C. C. R., Vol. IX, pp. 1219-1220; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., No. 222.)
68. Stuart to Lord Germain. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 607-608; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 280.)
69. Ramsey, Annals, pp. 161-162.
70. Steadman, History of the American War, Vol. I, p. 248 (quoted in Ramsey, Annals, pp. 161-162).
71. N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 660-661.
72. Stuart to Lord Germain, Cocks Spur in Georgia, May 20, 1776. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 606-608; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 280.)
73. Stuart to Gage, St. Augustine, September 30, 1775. American Archives, Fourth Series, Vol. IV, p. 316-317.
74. Lord Germain to Stuart, November 6, 1776. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 793-795; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 280.)
75. Germain to Stuart, November 6, 1776. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 893-895.)
76. Report of Henry Stuart, Pensacola, August 25, 1776. (N. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 763-785; B. P. R. O., Am. & W. Ind., Vol. 280.) Stuart states in his report that he and Cameron endeavored to prevent the Indian attack by threatening them with the king's disfavor and with the cutting off of their supplies.
77. Garrett and Goodpasture, History of Tennessee, p. 62.
78. C. C. R., Vol. X, pp. 330-331.
79. American Archives, Fourth Series, Vol. V, p. 574.
80. Ibid, p. 635. (Stuart's estate was confiscated in 1782.)
81. Appleton, Cyclopedia of American Biography

.

 AHGP Tennessee

Source: Tennessee Historical Magazine, Volume 2, Number 4, December 1916.