The Exiles of Florida. Giddings Joshua Reed
of Georgia occasion to look to their own protection, and to secure the fidelity of those bondmen who yet remained in the service of their masters.22
Two British sloops of war and some smaller vessels suddenly appeared in Appalachicola Bay, where they landed a body of troops, under Lieut. Colonel Nichols, of the British Army, for the purpose of lending support and protection to the Exiles and their Indian allies. He opened communications with them, furnished them with arms and ammunition, and soon drew around him a considerable force of Indians as well as negroes. His encampment was on the east side of the Appalachicola River, some thirty miles above its mouth. In November, he completed a strong fort on the bank of that stream. Some eight pieces of heavy ordnance were mounted upon its walls, and its magazine was well stored with the material of war.23 It was evidently intended as a defense against the forays of slave-catchers, who were not expected to bring with them heavy artillery. The plan was well conceived. Even the plundering expeditions authorized by the State of Georgia, would have been unable to make any impression on this fortification. But neither Nichols, nor the Exiles, appear to have anticipated the employment of the United States navy in a piratical work, discarded by most Christian nations and people, and allowed to be carried on only upon the African coast.
The British fleet withdrew from the coast of Georgia, and the slaveholders of that State were relieved, for a time, from those apprehensions of slave insurrection which had been excited by the proclamation of Lord Cochrane.
In the meantime the Treaty of Ghent was ratified, and peace restored to the country. In that treaty the interests of Slavery had not been forgotten; and the same stipulations were inserted, in regard to the withdrawal of his Majesty’s troops and navy, “without taking or carrying away any negroes or other property of the citizens,” which characterized the treaty of 1782. The owners of slaves who had fled from service under the proclamation of Lord Cochrane, now determined to obtain compensation for their loss. This general feeling again aroused the cupidity of those whose fathers had once claimed to own those Exiles, who fled from Georgia some thirty or forty years previously.
In the spring of 1815, Colonel Nichols and his troops withdrew from Florida, leaving the fort, with its entire armament and magazine of military stores, in the possession of the Exiles, who resided in the vicinity. Their plantations extended along the river several miles, above and below the fort.24 Many of them possessed large herds of cattle and horses, which roamed in the forests, gathering their food, both in summer and winter, without expense or trouble to their owners.
The Pioneer Exiles from South Carolina had settled here long before the Colony of Georgia existed. Several generations had lived to manhood and died in those forest-homes. To their descendants it had become consecrated by “many an oft told tale” of early adventure, of hardship and suffering; the recollection of which had been retained in tradition, told in story, and sung in their rude lays. Here were the graves of their ancestors, around whose memories were clustered the fondest recollections of the human mind. The climate was genial. They were surrounded by extensive forests, and far removed from the habitations of those enemies of freedom who sought to enslave them; and they regarded themselves as secure in the enjoyment of liberty. Shut out from the cares and strifes of more civilized men, they were happy in their own social solitude. So far from seeking to injure the people of the United States, they were only anxious to be exempt, and entirely free from all contact with our population or Government; while they faithfully maintained their allegiance to the Spanish crown.
Peace with Great Britain, however, had left our army without active employment. A portion of it was stationed along our Southern frontier of Georgia, to maintain peace with the Indians. The authorities and people of Georgia maintained social and friendly relations with the officers and men of the army. By means of Indian spies, the real condition of the Exiles was also ascertained and well understood. What means were used to excite the feelings or prejudices of the military officers against these unoffending Exiles, is not known at this day. Most of the officers commanding in the South were, however, slaveholders, and probably felt a strong sympathy with the people of Georgia in their indignation against them, for obtaining and enjoying liberty without permission of their masters.
General Gaines, commanding on the Southern frontier of Georgia, making Fort Scott his head-quarters, wrote the Secretary of War (May 14), saying, “certain negroes and outlaws have taken possession of a fort on the Appalachicola River, in the Territory of Florida.” He assured the Secretary, that he should keep watch of them. He charged them with no crime, imputed to them no hostile acts. He was conscious that they had taken possession of the fort solely for their own protection; but he styled them negroes, which, in the language of that day among slaveholders, was regarded as an imputation of guilt; and outlaw was supposed to be a proper term with which to characterize those who had fled from bondage and sworn allegiance to another government.25
For more than a year subsequently to the date of this letter, General Gaines made the Exiles a subject of frequent communication to the War Department. In this official correspondence, he at all times spoke of them as “runaways,” “outlaws,” “pirates,” “murderers,” etc.; but in no instance did he charge them with any act hostile to the United States, or to any other people or government.
Of these communications the Exiles were ignorant. They continued in peaceful retirement, cultivating the earth, and gaining a support for themselves and families. In the autumn of 1815, they gathered their crops, provided for the support of the aged and infirm, as well as for their children. They carefully nursed the sick; they buried their dead; they lived in peace, and enjoyed the fruits of their labor. The following spring and summer found them in this enviable condition.
While the Exiles living on the Appalachicola were thus pursuing the even tenor of their ways, plans were ripening among the slaveholders and military officers of our army for their destruction. A correspondence was opened by the Secretary of War with General Jackson, who commanded the Southwestern Military District of the United States, holding his head-quarters at Nashville, Tennessee. Various letters and communications passed between those officers in regard to this “Negro Fort,” as they called it.
Power is never more dangerous than when wielded by military men. They usually feel ambitious to display their own prowess, and that of the troops under their command; and no person can read the communications of General Gaines, in regard to the Exiles who had gathered in and around this fort, without feeling conscious that he greatly desired to give to the people of the United States an example of the science and power by which they could destroy human life.26
At length, on the sixteenth of May, General Jackson wrote General Gaines, saying, “I have little doubt of the fact, that this fort has been established by some villains for the purpose of rapine and plunder, and that it ought to be blown up, regardless of the ground on which it stands; and if your mind shall have formed the same conclusion, destroy it and return the stolen negroes and property to their rightful owners.”27
Without attempting to criticise this order of General Jackson, we must regard a fort thus situated, at least sixty miles from the border of the United States, as a most singular instrument for the purpose of “rapine,” or plundering our citizens. Nor could General Jackson have entertained any apprehensions from those who occupied the fort. The entire correspondence showed them to be refugees, seeking only to avoid our people; indeed, his very order shows this, for he directs General Gaines to return the “stolen negroes to their rightful owners.” The use of opprobrious epithets is not often resorted to by men in high official stations: yet it is difficult to believe, that General Jackson supposed these negroes to have been stolen; for, neither in the official correspondence on this subject, nor in the papers accompanying it, embracing more than a hundred documentary pages, is there a hint that these negroes were “stolen,” or that they had committed violence upon any person, or upon the property of any person whatever. They had sought their own liberty, and the charge of stealing themselves, was used like the other epithets of “outlaws,” “pirates”
Many slaves actually fled from their masters and found an asylum on board British vessels. Some sixty, belonging to a planter named Forbes, who resided in Georgia, left his plantation and took shelter on board the ship commanded by Lord Cochrane. They were transported to Jamaica, where they settled and lived as other free people. After the restoration of peace, Forbes sued his Lordship, before the British courts, for damages sustained by the loss of these slaves. The case elicited much learning in regard to the law of Slavery and, next to that of Sommerset, may be regarded as the most important on that subject ever litigated before an English court.
“Monette,” In his “History of the Valley of the Mississippi,” says Woodbine erected this fort in the summer of 1816; and such were the representations made before the Committee appointed in 1819, to investigate the conduct of General Jackson, in taking possession of Florida. But the reader will notice the Letter of General Gaines, hereafter quoted, which bears date on the 14th May, 1815, and
The parapet of the fort was said to be fifteen feet high and eighteen thick, situated upon a gentle cliff, with a fine stream emptying into the river near its base, and a swamp in the rear, which protected it from the approach of artillery by land. On its walls were mounted one thirty-two pounder, three twenty-four pounders, two nine pounders, two six pounders, and one brass five and a half-inch howitzer. Vide Official Report of Sailing-Master Loomis.
This is the official account of Sailing-Master Loomis, who commanded the naval expedition subsequently sent to reduce this fortress.
“Monette,” in his History of the Valley of the Mississippi, says, “
The reader will at once see, that these people were as much under the protection of Spain, as the fugitive slaves now in Canada are under the protection of British laws. They were as clearly Spanish subjects as the latter are British subjects. By the law of nations, Spain had the same right to permit her black subjects to occupy “Blount’s Fort,” that the Queen of England has to permit Fort Malden to be occupied by her black subjects. The only distinction between the two cases is, Spain was weak and unable to maintain her national honor, and national rights; while England has the power to do both.
Vide the voluminous Correspondence on this subject contained in Ex. Doc. 119, 2d Session, XVth Congress.
Perhaps no portion of our national history exhibits such disregard of International law, as this unprovoked invasion of Florida. For thirty years, the slaves of our Southern States have been in the habit of fleeing to the British Provinces. Here they are admitted to all the rights of citizenship, in the same manner as they were in Florida. They vote and hold office under British laws; and when our Government demanded that the English Ministry should disregard the rights of these people and return them to slavery, the British Minister contemptuously refused even to hold correspondence with our Secretary of State on a subject so abhorrent to every principle of national law and self-respect. Our Government coolly submitted to the scornful arrogance of England; but did not hesitate to invade Florida with an armed force, and to seize the faithful subjects of Spain, and enslave them.