To George Washington from James McHenry, 3 August 1796
From James McHenry
Private.
War office 3 August 1796.
Sir.
It strikes me, as among the first measures arising out of the proceedings of the Creek commissioners,1 that of a letter to the Governor of Georgia, somewhat in the stile of the inclosed.2 It would prove a considerable saving to the U.S. could the defence of the frontiers be carried on by regular troops without the aid of militia. It would give more consistency to military operations there, and more certainty to their effects. It would besides lessen that thirst for Indian land & plunder which is kept up by militia incursions into their country.
I have thought also, that it might be proper to take off the edge from Mr Jacksons representations, by a letter that would hold up the prospect of obtaining through the means which he censures, the object which his party has seemingly at heart:3 whilst, in another point of view, it is right, that militia which were expresly called into service on the ground that the frontiers were in danger should be dismissed when that danger is over.4
If you should approve of the draught with such amendments as may occur, you will be pleased, as I have no copy of it, to return it by next mail.5 With the greatest and most sincere respect and attachment, I have the honour to be Sir your most ob. st
James McHenry
ALS, DLC:GW; ADf, MiU-C: James McHenry Papers.
1. McHenry had communicated the proceedings of the commissioners assigned to negotiate with the Creek Indians when he wrote GW on 25 July.
2. The enclosed draft has not been identified, but it presumably was an early version of the letter McHenry sent Georgia governor Jared Irwin on 23 Aug.: “The Agents appointed by the State of Georgia, to attend the meeting of the Representatives of the Creek Nation at Coleraine, have no doubt informed you of their refusal to sell any part of their lands.
“I am directed by the President to express on the occasion, his sincere regret, that a conference which he had flattered himself would have obtained the object for which it was principally projected, has failed of success.
“As he felt in this manner, he could not but receive with surprize, the protest of the Agents against the proceedings of the Commissioners of the United States, and lament that regulations calculated to inspire the Indians with confidence in the fairness of the intended negociation, should have worn to these Gentlemen a different aspect. …
“The Creeks … have among other things agreed, that Military and Trading posts may be erected within their boundary line, and that all animosities for past aggressions, shall henceforth cease, with an exception to the violaters of the Treaty of New York, now under arrest, who are to abide the decision of the law.
“These circumstances which evidence the sincerity of the Indians, and their disposition to peace, offer as you must perceive, the fairest opportunity of leading them by degrees to grant whatever is reasonable, and does not involve their ruin. It is therefore to be presumed, that the Citizens of Georgia will patiently wait their operation, and avoid whatever might disturb the tranquillity thus re-established. You no doubt in particular will duly appreciate the blessings of peace, and heartily co-operate with the President in every measure calculated to perpetuate its continuance.
“With this view, the President has directed such an arrangement, and use of the Troops of the United States, as ought to satisfy the Indians that their rights will be protected, and the Inhabitants of the frontiers, that they have nothing to apprehend from the Indians.
“These arrangements rendering it unnecessary to keep up the Militia Corps of Infantry and Cavalry; the Agent of the Department of War in Georgia, will be directed to settle their Muster and pay rolls up to the 15th September ensuing, after which time they will be considered as discharged” (GU-HR: Telamon Cuyler Collection; see also n.5 below).
3. McHenry was referring to James Jackson, one of the commissioners from Georgia that had protested the conduct of the U.S. commissioners sent to negotiate with the Creeks. Jackson’s representations have not been identified.
4. For the authorization to use militia in Georgia’s frontier defense, see Cabinet Opinion on Georgia and the Creek Indians, 29 May 1793, and n.1 to that document.
5. GW replied to McHenry from Mount Vernon on 8 Aug.: “Private … Your private letter of the 3d instant, accompanying the official one of the same date, came to hand by the last Post. The draught of the letter to the Governor of Georgia is approved. I have added a word or two to the last paragraph but one—by way of hint, where we shall look for the cause, if Peace is not preserved on the frontier of that State.
“I request that you would begin to note the occurrences that have happened in the War Department (since the Adjournment of Congress) which will require to be communicated to that body in the Speech, or by messages, at the next Session. It is from the materials furnished by each Department, and the Memorandums taken by myself, that the first is framed; and it will be an omission, not to commit these to writing in the moment they occur; it being much easier to select, than to collect matter, for these purposes, when the hour arrives for digesting them into form. If other things (although they may be extraneous to your department) should occur, let them be noted also. It is better to have them in all than to escape all the Memorandums I shall be furnished with” (ALS, NhD; copy, DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW). McHenry acknowledged this letter when he wrote GW on 11–12 August. For McHenry’s revised letter to the Georgia governor, see n.2 above.