explained) he had no doubt the Indians who had so fired on and attacked them were of the Sac nation.
The second deposition appears to have been made by the beforenamed Baptiste Ticio, and wherein he refers to that of the witness Bissonnette, and corroborates the testimony it contains.
And the third deposition is that of B. Vasques, and wherein he alleges that the articles be- fore described were taken from him and S. Pratt by the Sac Indians, and that the dif ferent sums set opposite thereto, amounting to $1,098, are the just and fair value of the articles in the country where they were taken, and that the damage sustained by the loss of them was fully that amount, if not more.
Gen. Clark has remarked in his report, oppo
site the entry of this claim, that a regular demand was made to the Sacs for the mur- derers, and for the property taken; that two men were delivered over to the civil autho rity of the United States, who were tried
and acquitted; that, of the property, two horses and one mule only were restored, and that these were turned over to the claim. ants.
He claims payment for a horse The horse is stated in the account to have been stolen by the Ioway Indians, on the 18th July, 1815; and in support of the claim, a deposition is produced, made by John Hancock and Ste. Jack- son, before George Jackson, J. P., of Chariton township, on the 31st Jan❜y, 1817, wherein it is declared that the witnesses knew the horse, and thought him worth $80; that he was taken at the same time as the creatures of Hen- ry Ferril and John Hancock; and that it was thought to be the Ioways that stole said horse.
Claims payment for a mare and 3 colts In support of this claim two depositions are adduced, purporting to have been made on the 31st January, 1817, before George Jackson, J. P.; one of them by Stephen Jackson and Robert Han- cock, wherein they have testified that the valuation set upon the property in the account is about the real value thereof; and that it was generally thought in the Boon's lick settlement, that Ioways stole the same; and the
other of them by William Reid, where- in he has testified that, in the fall of 1815, he saw at the village of the Io- ways, on the river Charlatan, and in the possession of the Ioway Indians of that village, a mare of the claimant, which he knew to have been stolen the summer before, with her sucking colt, and a yearling, belonging to the same, and also the property of the claimant. Claims payment for a horse The evidence in this case consists of a de- position of Robert Hancock and James Anderson, made before George Jack- son, J. P., on the 31st January, 1817, in which they declare that they knew the horse; that the witness, Hancock, thought him worth $110, and the wit- ness, Anderson, $100; that it was the belief of both witnesses that the Ioways stole him, and that he was taken at the same time as the three creatures of Henry Ferril.
1,055 $1,405 00 It does not appear by Gen. Clark's
The evidence in support of the claims of the seven persons last named, is contained in three depositions, purporting to have been made on the 20th September, 1825, (more than 10 years after the transactions,) before Thomas McMahan, J. P., of Cooper county; one of them by William Reed, who testifies that after the settlers on the Missouri were notified of peace, and the Ioways and other Indians had gone down to Portage des Sioux, to treat with the commissioners appointed by the United States, David Jones, Stephen Tur- ley, Thomas McMahan, James McMahan, and the witness, who had removed to Coop- er's fort during the war, believing that their property would be the same, [safe,] brought their horses across the river into the bottom below the Arrow rock; that, in a few days. afterwards, a mare of Henry Ferril, worth about $60, and a horse belonging to Braxton Cooper, were stolen from Cooper's fort; that the witness and others examined the trail of the Indians, and were convinced that they had crossed the river; that they were heard
report when or by whom the de- mand was made on the Ioways, nor whether or not any proofs were adduced to them, nor what reply they gave to the demand. Not more than three of the stolen horses are proved to have been scen in their possession; one of these is shown to have been re- gained, and another of them, to wit, the mare of Henry Ferril, seems evidently to be twice claim- ed for; [see the claims numbered 78 and 83.] Unless as to the lat- ter two horses, the alleged offend- ers are not shown to have crossed over any Indian boundary line; the place of the alleged robbery of the others would seem, from the testimony, to have been on the north side of the Missouri river, on land over which the Ioways and the Sac and Fox tribes had claims that were not extinguished till 1824.
Three mares and three colts
Thos. McMahan,jr. Three horses
« PreviousContinue » |