When American settler’s worked their lively-hood to meet the needs of their daily lives, they would transport their goods by pack-trains of animals. Typically these trains were powered by oxen, mules, and horses. On the coast, these trains were relied upon for the transport of materials and goods. They relied on shipments from Sacramento; via Shasta, Weaverville, and Trinity trails. This also included the main trails North and South on the coast; via Klamath River, Crescent City, Union (Arcata), Eureka, and Bucksport. In October of 1855, a pack-train of mules were being guided by Mr. Massers, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Hudson. They also had with them a family thought to be re-settling to Klamath. As they were traveling “on the trail to the Klamath, he came upon... signs of a recent conflict... the ground... covered with blood... and other signs of murder.  He turned back.. and was overcome by other men... they came upon the body of a man... articles of women's and children's clothing.”[1] Many experiences by settlers such as this one, would end up becoming cyclical in its vicious circle between the settler’s and local natives.

It was on September 14th of 1858 Mr. Paul Boynton was murdered working on his property about two football fields away from his home. This happened about 10 miles east of Union, or now today’s -- Arcata, being ambushed by a local group of natives. The citizens of Union (Arcata), wrote the editors of the Daily National Democrat and Humboldt Times: “Since the forepart of June we have been called upon to notice,... murders, robberies, and other depredations committed by the Digger Indians in this section of the state.  Within  that time 2 men working on their logging claims east of Eureka, have been shot from an ambush and wounded, one of them quite severely.” The residents of Union (Arcata) were of sound mind to be alert about the native depredations occurring in the area.

Mr. Thorton, was a respectable citizen rancher who ran his business from Mattole to Union. He had been found brutally murdered, with his body “mutilated in a manner which the Diggers only are capable of doing.” The local natives were called “Diggers” in respect to their cultural ways of digging for grubs, roots, and collecting acorns for food. Mr. Ross was a traveler on a public road with a small group of fellow travelers. They were on the route somewhere between Union (Arcata) and Trinity. While on that route they were ambushed by local natives, where he received life ending injuries. Mr. Stephens, who was with the rest of the group, attempted to pursue the attacking natives. His justice was cut short quickly as he himself was shot and killed.

Last but certainly not least, was Mr. Chauncey Miller. He was a merchant and trader who lived and worked off of the Trinity river. Moreover, he was known in his community as being “evenly sounded.” He made mention many different times publicly that he was “finding the trail dangerously infested by Indians.” More specifically he was speaking about the violent hostilities occurring on the trail between Eel River and Union. This was an issue that had become all too common. Up at the entrance of the Klamath River, Mr. Vandal was also murdered by local native tribesmen. He was another resident of Union (Arcata), whose life was cut short “by his treacherous guides, and may also be added to the list of victims heretofore mentioned... in the Bald Hill country, men are shot down within sight of their own houses and their stock driven off before their own eyes.”

The results of these local native depredations were found in the Humboldt Times, as citizens urged the newspaper “…that a continuation of such outrages can only be prevented, wither by placing the Indians on a reservation or by extermination.” In the meantime, it would also be recommended that a volunteer militia should be raised by the citizens of Humboldt County. An interesting note to present was that a private board representing local citizens and business would make a public statement: “The Board of Trustees of Union, Humboldt Bay, had passed resolutions to levy a property tax of not less than 50 cents on the $100 valuation, the proceeds to be appropriated to the payment of the expense of any volunteer company of citizens to proceed against the Indians.”[2]

The Alta California would publish an article a decade later in September of 1863 which spoke specifically of the native uprising against the American settler’s from Weaverville to Humboldt Bay; and how devastating it was towards to local community. The local native tribes forcefully took control of the Trinity River and Trail. In comparison, this is today’s California Highway 299 running from Arcata to Redding, with a couple structural modifications. The U.S. mail had stopped functioning and this loss of control also impacted the transport of goods into neighboring towns. The editorial also went on to mention that this U.S. governments loss of control embarrassingly happened even with Fort Gaston sitting right outside of the Hoopa Reservation. The article would estimate 1,000 to 2,000 tribal warriors from the Redwood, Hoopa, and Klamath tribes who were on a hostile advance against the American settler community.

With less than 500 U.S. Army soldiers to protect the settler’s and their towns; both the U.S. government and its citizens knew they were well unprepared for the immediate hostilities occurring. The local tribes knew this fact as well.[3] The U.S. government back in Washington D.C. began to show their bureaucratic bog down when Congress sidelined legislation regarding native American tribal treaties in the far West. There is speculation as to why these policies were largely ignored. Some would say that it was the government ignoring their obligations to an underprivileged people, however considering the time-line of events, this would not be consistent with the U.S. administrations policy of showing higher priority to more urgent needs; such as the responsibility, and obligation to the citizens of the United States. The well-being of the nation, such as the American Civil War, proved the administrations documented legislative and legal actions.
 

Humbly,

D. L. Smith


Sources:
[1] "Indian War." The Marysville Herald, 16 October 1855, col. page 2, col. 3. Notes: vol. 6, no. 31; via Yreka Union.
[2] "Indian Troubles in Humboldt County." Daily National Democrat, 30 September 1858, col. page 3, col. 1. Notes: vol. 1, no. 41 From Humboldt Times.
[3] "Indian Trouble in Northern Counties." Alta California, 20 September 1863.

A special thanks to Humboldt State University -- Historical Archives.

                                                               Depredations.

                                                   This word is defined as: “to lay waste” and to “plunder or ravage.”[1]

Charles A. Murdock lived in Humboldt Bay in 1855 to 1864. He wrote, “In 1827 a party of adventurers started north from Fort Ross for Oregon, following the coast. One Jedidiah Smith, a trapper, was the leader. It is said that Smith River, near the Oregon line, was named for him. Somewhere on the way all but four were reported killed by the Indians. They are supposed to have been the first white men to enter the Humboldt country.”[2] A couple decades later about 250 miles north of San Francisco in the late spring of 1851,  Mr. Blackburn and his wife were operating a ferry crossing about 12 miles south of Weitchpec (pronounced: witch-i-peck), and 5 miles below the mouth of the Klamath/Trinity River in the majestic towering redwood forests of northern California. From here, a trail had been cut out through to Trinidad for traveling.

The pair worked out of a shanty shack on the river-bank assisting packers and travelers with their difficult travels. On this particular day, Mr. and Mrs. Blackburn were accompanied by James Sloan, Mr. Janalshan, and Mr. Bender. Mrs. Blackburn, during her routines that day, noticed their ammunition supply running dangerously low. She quickly moved to replenish and molded a large amount of bullets as they would need to hunt and defend themselves. The group carried on as usual; eating food and getting their gear prepared for the following day. The packers would end up sleeping on the floor of their tents just outside the shack, with their heads facing outwards closest to the tent wall.

Later that night, a group of local Indians were observing the ferry’s group from the tree line above their shanty, and crept silently into their camp with blades drawn in the middle of the night. One of the Indians quietly pulled the tent flap where the three packers were sleeping. Two of the three packers were tomahawked and killed, and when the third awoke to the brutal scene happening before his eyes – he let out a deafening scream – that immediately fell silent before the Indians blades as he attempted to flee the tent. This last cry of desperation alerted Mr. and Mrs. Blackburn of the horrors being committed only 30-feet away from them. Both immediately rose to their feet, barricaded themselves with their surroundings, and retrieved two rifles and a single pistol.[3]
They mounted a desperate but heroic defense. Mr. Blackburn would keep the Indians suppressed all night and into the early morning by rifle fire, while Mrs. Blackburn quickly reloaded each discharged weapon. Once the sun rose, the Indians fled into the mountains and the husband and wife duo fled south to Trinidad.[4] Mr. Blackburn’s father who came to visit because he had not seen his son for ten years, was found dead by the hands of Indians not 300 yards from Martin’s Ferry.[5]

Although it was the unprincipled behavior of verbally taunting an Indian woman by one young settler boy that instigated the hostile tension, the Indian response was completely unwarranted and an obvious overreaction. Like most natural responses to the Indian attacks, a volunteer militia was raised to find the guilty natives responsible for the murders. The militia would eventually return empty handed, despite the fact that a Trinity Indian had a pistol that would belong to the deceased Mr. Walker. Many unsolicited murders and thefts were attempted or committed by Indians for years. So were other obvious indignations.

For instance, a 14 year-old boy and his 10 year-old sister were riding home on horseback from the town of Yreka to the town of Table Rock. During their journey on a single horse, they were stopped and detained on the road by two local male natives. During the harassment, it was concluded that the natives were intending to buy or trade the girl in some way. At this point in desperation, on guarantee of freedom, the boy promised to bring them back a bottle of whiskey. The natives would not take this offer of alcohol for freedom. The two natives got busy rummaging through the children’s clothing, which they just bought from Yreka. In a sudden attempt to escape the boy slapped the horse, with his sister on its back.

While the horse was galloping away, he yelled for his sister to “hang on tight!” One of the two natives opened fire from a gun one of them was brandishing, but missed. The boy ran away after the weapon discharged, and the two natives fled as well. The citizens of Yreka would end up publishing a statement in the paper, “These evils must be put to an end in some peaceable manner, or the citizens near this city will be prompted to a summary punishment of these inhuman savages.”[6]  Accounts such as these were all too common.

The Klamath River Indians also consisted of the Yurok and Karok tribes. Each had tribal lodge and a communal-political building for the tribal community. A private basket for each man in the tribe was maintained and stored in the lodge house. Inside were the personal records of each man. Most notably, two records in particular stood out: “…the men they have killed by a red mark.” They also featured polygamy by, “…the number of their wives by a black one.”[7] Even more, they marked the number of enemies killed by scars and tattoos on the chest.[8] This type of symbolism shows the aggressive disposition and character of some of the native tribes of Northern California, especially in regard to warfare, tribal principle, and ceremony.

In making cultural adjustments with the local Indian tribes of the Northern California region, the United States government was guided by the principles upon which civilized nations had for a long time based their treatment of uncivilized peoples. They recognized the Indian tribes in order to facilitate which formal treaties were to be made. These principles were restated and reinforced by decisions of the Supreme Court. Finally, they regarded the governments of civilized states as having sovereignty over lands and peoples within their jurisdiction.[9] In the end, the United States must be credited with a fraction of sincerity in its efforts to relieve the hostile native dilemma plaguing the Northern California settlers in the early years of its history.

Tensions rose as the bodies of American settlers were turning up quite often, but to the extreme frustrations of the communities few Indians were found to be responsible for their crimes. More and more reports came in of community members being murdered at the hands of local Indians in town. A couple was at home in the evening outside of Union (Arcata), when Redwood Indians ambushed them inside. Mrs. Weaver was killed with three guns beside her. Her male companion was abducted, and presumed dead.[10] Not too long after, three neighboring pig farmers by the names of Joeseph Bashow, Lewis Cash, and Mr. Mann were ambushed and executed.

The trio were driving their hogs on a trail from Hydesville, when they needed to camp for the night to refresh from their tiring journey. What they didn’t know was they were being tracked by local natives from the time they left their properties. When they crossed the Mad River, unaware, the trio was shot. Cattle drivers would later find the bodies of the farmers killed.[11]Rage inflamed the settling communities and they would demand government intervention. However, demand would not effectively be met. It is because of this seemingly arbitrary response by the U.S. Army, that furthered the decline of any possibility of regional peace.
As a response in keeping to their constitutional rights, they formed volunteer militias to defend themselves and took the law into their own hands. A vicious circle of endless feuding and retaliation became commonplace.

The state of California and the United States government by this point had received the public outcry by the residents of Northern California. “Indians are still committing depredations, killing stock, robbing and shooting at settlers.”[12]  Governor Johnson cooperated with U.S. Army General Wood to enlist the help of volunteers to overwhelm the native hostilities. Klamath county would be the starting off point of native suppression, with the financial backing of $515,000.00 in U.S. taxpayer funds.[13] On January 10, 1856, the citizens of Crescent City located in Klamath County, desired military protection. They petitioned Governor J. Neely Johnson for his assistance and asked for a volunteer company to be supplied with the necessary arms.

The following is the citizen petition:

We the undersigned petitioners, do most respectfully urge upon your Excellency's consideration, the dangerous and alarming position of many of the inhabitants of the northern portion of the State, and more particularly those of the County of Klamath, in the vicinity of Crescent City, And for the benefit and general safety of fellow citizens in that portion of the State from the aggression of the numerous hostile Indians, from whom they have already suffered so much, and who are at the present time at open warfare with our citizens; We therefore respectfully urge upon your Excellency the necessity of giving them some immediate and prompt relief, and for that purpose respectfully petition your Excellency to call out in the service of the State, one volunteer company. Knowing the same to be necessary for the protection of the lives and property of its inhabitants. Hoping your Excellency will give this appeal the prompt and decided action the necessity of the case demands…”[14]

About a week later Governor Johnson rushed the citizen petition to the Senate and Assembly:

“…respectfully call your immediate attention to this subject., that you may take such action herein, as a due regard for the best interests of the State, and the protection of her citizens demand, at the hands of the Government. – I would also inform your Hon. Bodies that my predecessor in office on the 19th Inst. issued an order directing thirty men, to be called into the service of the State for the purposes indicated in the petition herein referred to...”[15]

This problem compounded when the Indians refused despite being given opportunity. They would undermine the United States government and their rights to traditional or treaty-given land rights. George Crook was the commanding officer while at Fort Jones, California, 1853. He mentioned, “Good faith forms no part of the Indian’s nature.” With civilians and cattle being targeted for theft and killing, and private property ravaged for thieving and destruction; this was typical of local opinion at the time. What events could have helped form this man’s statement? The newspaper Alta California published an article stating, “Co. A and E, 1st Dragoons and Co. E, 4th Inf., 155 men and officers under Captain B.R. Alden at Fort Jones. The dragoons are covering the immigrant trail for travelers protection…”[16]

It was obvious that westward bound settlers were having a lot of hostile Indian encounters while traveling. Even further, the Daily Evening Herald would report multiple times, "The citizens of Yreka have recently killed twenty-five out of a band of thirty thieving Indians."[17] The paper would also go on to print, "...The government of the U. S. has bound itself by solemn treaties to protect the Mexican frontier from the invasions of Indians residing in our territory, by whom  it has been so long ravaged... every day’s intelligence brings us information of the repetition of the Indian's depredations."[18] And finally, “From the Alta: "... the Indians continue to trouble the immigrants, and several of the latter have lately been added to the number of victims."[19] The following is a an account of the murders of the Hickock family children at the hands of local natives:

“The killing of the Hickok children was in June, 1862. The Hickok children, two girls and a boy were gathering black berries on Rock Creek about three-quarters of a mile from their home when they were surrounded by a number of Indians. They first shot the oldest girl, she was seventeen years old. When found she was entirely nude. They then shot the younger girl, fifteen years old, but she ran to Rock Creek and fell with her face in the water.

“They did not take her clothing as she was in full dress when found. Just then Tom Allen came upon the scene. He was hauling lumber for a man by the name of Keefer. They immediately attacked Allen. He was found scalped with his throat cut. Seventeen arrows had been shot in him and seven had gone partly through so that they had to be pulled out the opposite side. The little boy of twelve years, they captured and took with them”[20]. That same little boy would end up buried next to his sisters in the Chico cemetery.

The many Indian hostilities that occurred against the settlers of Northern California were represented in many private newspapers.[21] One citizen wrote, “…the Indians had been in the habit of killing cattle, which had led to the killing of some Indians, after which the Indians availed themselves of every opportunity to kill whites.”[22] Citizens would invoke the 2nd Amendment by way of the U.S. Constitution and armed themselves as volunteer militia to protect life and property; over 200 Indians would be recorded as killed by them as a result.

We face two solid facts. First, the humble truth is Native Americans did target civilians for theft and murder; secondly, there was absolutely no pre-existent consensus among whites that all Native Americans deserved such treatment or ill-conduct. Such an example speaks from an article from the Sacramento Union, written to the editor by early California settlers. They mentioned their feelings given due to Indian displacement by settlers. They saw it truly as the responsibility of the U.S. government to assist in a completely peaceful transition for the indigenous because of the endless killing, a full transition did become necessary.[23]

In late May of 1863, messengers from the Klamath tribes contacted Colonel Olney at Fort Gaston requesting a permanent peace. Of course, only provided that the tribe be forgiven all of their depredations against the California settlers and the U.S. Army. As a subtle admission of guilt, the Colonel was having second thoughts of accepting this offer of peace “… and should not even listen to them.”[24] Such forgiveness seemed inappropriate considering so many settler‘s lives were taken. In a court of law in the United States, when an offender to a crime knows they would be found guilty by judge and jury, they typically opt to defer settlement out of court. Usually to avoid further consequences.

In 1864, government commissioners were selected to find reservations for both the Modoc and Klamath tribes. In October of that year, a treaty was signed in agreement by both parties. By 1867 “…the country becoming settled up, and conflicts constantly arising between settlers and Indians, it was deemed best to permanently locate the Indians…”[25] The Klamath tribe in 1869 made the choice to leave their federal reservation, even after signing and having the treaty ratified.[26]  This would again cause hostility and depredations among the natives and settlers. The two parties would continue to have violent conflicts for some time. Finally the local tribes would be relocated by the U.S. government for their own physical protections.

In this report on the condition of affairs in native territory and California, the Indian agent mentioned their true feelings and intentions behind the legalities of conflict between native tribes and settlers. An agent of the Indian Rights Association would write about these issues:

“The theory under which the law should be interpreted and administered is this: The law contemplates the best interest of the Indian, and was intended to protect that interest, rather than to give extraordinary advantages to a white trader for enriching himself. (…) The sooner it is settled that the Indian belongs to the human family, that his needs must be met in the same way and under the same economic laws as in the case of all other human beings, the better it will be for him and for us who are so much perplexed with the difficulties of our problem— difficulties we foolishly create and then by most stupid methods undertake to solve.”[27]

            The issues of Indian hostilities of Northern California would continue sporadically into the late-1800s. At this point, all other U.S. domestic policies concerning native tribes and settlers had essentially failed. The state and federal governments would ultimately move to permanently fix all local tribes onto federal reservations. American settler’s to Northern California would soon feel the relief from war, and freedom from Indian depredation.

Humbly,
​
D. L. Smith



Article Sources:
[1] "Definition of DEPREDATION." Dictionary by Merriam-Webster. Accessed May 23, 2019. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/depredation.
[2] Murdock, Charles A. A Backward Glance at Eighty, Recollections & Comments,. San Francisco, California: Paul Elder & Co., 1921. http://www.loc.gov/resource/calbk.137.
[3] Sedler, K. (1915). History of Humboldt County California - Historic Record Co. Retrieved from http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~cagha/index.htm
[4] Van Dyke, Walter. "Early Days of Klamath." Overland Monthly vol 18, 2nd series, no 104 (1891). pp. 174-181
[5] Bledsoe, Anthony J. Indian Wars of the Northwest: A California Sketch. San Francisco : Bacon & Company, 1885. p. 162.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid. 13, these passages are titled “Driscell” and “Wm. N. Bercaw.”
[8] Ibid. 13.
[9] Ellison, William H. "The Federal Indian Policy in California, 1846-1860." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 9, no. 1 (1922), pp. 37-39. doi:10.2307/1886099.
[10] “Humboldt News.” Alta California, 15 October 1862.
[11] “Humboldt News.” Alta California, 17 August 1863.
[12] “Later From Humboldt.” Alta California, 7 August 1862.
[13] “Appropriations for 1856 for Support of the Government.” Marysville Daily Herald, 25 April 1856 (col. page2, col. 23).
[14] Original on tile State Archives California State Capitol. Photostatic copy on file Adjutant General's Office (1856).
[15] Original California State Archives., State Capitol. Photostatic copy Adjutant General's Office (1856).
[16] "Army Intelligence." Alta California, 21 July 1853, col. page 2, col. 2
[17] Daily Evening Herald, 11 August 1853, col. page 2, col. 3. Notes: vol. 4, no. 4
[18] Daily Evening Herald, 27 August 1853, col. col. 3. Notes: vol. 4, no. 18
[19] Daily Evening Herald, 17 October 1853, col. page 2, col 5. Notes: vol. 4, no. 6
[20] "The Last of the Mill Creeks, and Early Life in Northern California,." The Library of Congress. Accessed April 21, 2019. http://www.loc.gov/resource/calbk.173.
[21] "Indian-white Relationships in Northern California, 1849-1920, in the Congressional Set of United States Public Documents." WorldCat.org. Accessed May 21, 2019. https://www.worldcat.org/title/indian-white-relationships-in-northern-california-1849-1920-in-the-congressional-set-of-united-states-public-documents/oclc/24555343.
[22] CUTRER, THOMAS W. "WE ARE MEN AND BRAVES: INDIAN WARFARE IN THE FAR WEST." In Theater of a Separate War: The Civil War West of the Mississippi River, 1861–1865, 116-32. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2017. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/stable/10.5149/9781469631578_cutrer.12.
[23] The Beacon. "The Digger Indian Reservations, and C." December 15, 1858, pp. 1, col 6., article 1., vol. 2, no. 39.
[24] “A Voice From Hoopa.” Humboldt Times, 23 May 1863.
[25] “An Account of the Modocs.” The Yreka Union, 8 February 1873, col. page 1, col.6.-7.
[26] “An Account of the Modocs.” The Yreka Union, 8 February 1873, col. page 1, col.6.-7.
[27] "The Condition of Affairs in Indian Territory and California. A Report." The Library of Congress. Accessed April 20, 2019. http://www.loc.gov/resource/calbk.052.