Emily: Native Americans have always had strong relationships to land and many of these relationships have been shown throughout history. In 1794, Timothy Pickering wrote to United States secretory of war Henry Knox after months of trying to negotiate with the Native people, he wrote he had finally found a way to win control of the Ohio country. “Pickering secured a permanent peace with the Six Nations Iroquois and, equally important, he had received a cession of their claims to the Ohio Valley. In exchange, Pickering had returned to the Senecas most of the land they had lost under the 1784 Treaty of Fort Stanwix. The agreement Pickering and the Six Nations had reached, in the form of the Treaty of Canandaigua, ended a turbulent period of enmity
…show more content…
The other two of the parties to the treaty were treated differently, this was because they joined the Americans in their struggle with the Crown. This included the Tuscaroras and Oneidas, and no one tried to claim their lands. In 1785, the federal commissioners held a conference at Fort McIntosh regarding the tribes in the Ohio Valley. “The Fort Stanwix and Fort McIntosh treaties were sources of considerable agitation and discontent among the Indians.(13) Those Iroquois who had participated in the Fort Stanwix treaty and had signed away most of the Seneca lands met with an angry reception upon their return to their villages.(14) In addition, by dealing with the Iroquois tribes individually rather than as a political alliance, the United States had dismissed their assertions of a confederacy operating independently from that of the Ohio Valley Indians.” (15) The Continental Congress called a treaty council at Fort Harmar, where the Fort Stanwix and Fort McIntosh treaties were reasserted again. “In a report to the president in May 1789, Knox laid out the shift in federal policy toward Indians that had led to Fort Harmar. He wrote: "the Indians are especially tenacious of their lands, and generally do not relinquish their right, excepting on the principle of a specific consideration, expressly given for the purchase of the same."(19)
Narrator: Knox explained the Treaty of Fort Harmar was held “for the purpose of knowing the causes of uneasiness among the said tribes, and hearing their complaints, of regulating trade, and amicably settling all affairs concerning lands and boundaries, between them and the United States.”
The other two of the parties to the treaty were treated differently, this was because they joined the Americans in their struggle with the Crown. This included the Tuscaroras and Oneidas, and no one tried to claim their lands. In 1785, the federal commissioners held a conference at Fort McIntosh regarding the tribes in the Ohio Valley. “The Fort Stanwix and Fort McIntosh treaties were sources of considerable agitation and discontent among the Indians.(13) Those Iroquois who had participated in the Fort Stanwix treaty and had signed away most of the Seneca lands met with an angry reception upon their return to their villages.(14) In addition, by dealing with the Iroquois tribes individually rather than as a political alliance, the United States had dismissed their assertions of a confederacy operating independently from that of the Ohio Valley Indians.” (15) The Continental Congress called a treaty council at Fort Harmar, where the Fort Stanwix and Fort McIntosh treaties were reasserted again. “In a report to the president in May 1789, Knox laid out the shift in federal policy toward Indians that had led to Fort Harmar. He wrote: "the Indians are especially tenacious of their lands, and generally do not relinquish their right, excepting on the principle of a specific consideration, expressly given for the purchase of the same."(19)
Narrator: Knox explained the Treaty of Fort Harmar was held “for the purpose of knowing the causes of uneasiness among the said tribes, and hearing their complaints, of regulating trade, and amicably settling all affairs concerning lands and boundaries, between them and the United States.”