Production Note
Cornell University Library produced this volume to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. It was scanned using Xerox software and equipment at 600 dots per inch resolution and compressed prior to storage using CCITT Group 4 compression. The digital data were used to create Cornell's replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1984. The production of this volume was supported in part by the New York State Program for the Conservation and Preservation of Library Research Materials and the Xerox Corporation. Digital file copyright by Cornell University Library 1994.

[Blank Page]

[Page 1 - Title Page]

Cayuga Notes
BY
GRACE ELEIS TAFT
1913
Antiquarian Publishing Company
Benton Harbor, Michigan

[Page 2 - Dedication]
This Book is dedicated to CHARLES ELLIS TAFT, MY FATHER, and
MARY HALL TAFT, MY MOTHER,
Who made possible my study of even a portion of the science Anthropology, and assisted in research in regard to the Cayuga Indians.

[Page 3]
Cayuga Notes.
By GRACE E. TAFT.

AKHENYONK was the reputed name of the Cayuga chieftain who united with Hiawatha the Onondaga, Odatshehte the Oneida, Dekanawida the Mohawk, and a Seneca leader, to consider the formation of the League of Five Nations or Adoneseah. About the year 1570, this League included the “Three Elder Brothers”—Mohawk, Onondaga, and Seneca,—and the “Younger Branches”—Oneida and Cayuga.
Cayuga almost became synomymous with Iroquois in history. Although reported younger, the clan phratries of the Cayuga are said to have been the pattern for Hiawatha’s plan of government. Their representation by ten delegates in the League is more numerous than that of its other members except the Onondaga. As a nation, the Cayuga are regarded as offshoots of either the Mohawk or Seneca. Their name in the League was “So-ne-na-we-too-na” or “Great Pipe”, as this object was their emblem. The name Iroquois is also said to come from “Ierokwa” or “Those who smoke”. Therefore, the Cayuga may be the tribe oldest in derivation from the parent stock of 1535 on the St. Lawrence River, or the western one from which that also descended. Kept alive in prehistoric— as in historic—time, by intermarriage after each decimating conflict, they survived in tradition as descendants from either the Mohawk or Seneca, with whom they repeatedly mixed.
Mingo is a name applied to Iroquois outside their own hunting-ground. It is also the name for the Conestoga, a mixed tribe of Munsee, Seneca and Shawnee. The application of this name to Chief Logan and others proves the constant intermarriage of tribes after the Revolution. The Conestoga in 1614 almost destroyed the Mohawk, and again in 1650, when the Mohawk of Caughnawaga moved northward. Some Cayuga may have joined them, for later a band of Caughnawaga were with the Cayuga and other tribes on the Sandusky River, Ohio. Some descendants of the Canadian Caughnawaga

[Page 4]
followed the fur trade to Oregon, and going down the Columbia River united with the utterly dissimilar tribe of the Salish. The Cayuga, also, in 1670 fled from the Conestoga, and founded the settlement at Quinte Bay, Ontario, where they joined some of the Mohawk. A Sulpitian mission later discovered here their three towns,—Kente, Ganerasake, and Gandatsiagon.

The Conestoga were driven south in 1675 by the combined Iroquoian forces. Repulsed by Indians of the Potomac Valley, they returned to the Susquehanna only to become captives of the Oneida who had taken their territory, and in 1763 the remnant were massacred by white settlers. They were not the only tribe to disappear. The Cayuga, although not entirely erased from American history, later became another of the “lost tribes.,, Fratracidal war was carried on by the Cayuga with their nearby kindred the Huron, for nearly a century. By intermarriage with the Mohawk, the so-called “Youngest Branch” continued to exist. In 1650 a concerted movement finally and forever overthrew the Huron, and carried the whole nation into captivity. Besides permitting the Tuscarora to join their 'councils in 1715, the League of the Iroquois by 1753 held captive five nations,—the Conestoga, the Huron, the Neutrals, and the Tutelo and the Saponi from Virginia who had a village among the Cayuga.

Approached by a French missionary who had converted the Conestoga, the Cayuga horrified Father de Carheil by offering as human sacrifice in 1668 a Conestoga slave woman who had just been baptized. Soon, however, the Cayuga also became converted, with their chief Saonchiogwa. Twenty years later, under the sachemship of Sarennoa, they reverted to their heathen ways. With the French Jesuits came French soldiers. By 1654, repeated defeat had induced the Cayuga, with others of the League, to send delegates to a council at the French town of Quebec. In 1687, Denonville defeated the Seneca, and started a campaign against the Cayuga. The united Iroquois repulsed him; but in 1757, the French war with English colonies laid waste Indian territory. Sir William Penn, by his treaty of 1682 at Shackamaxon, had ingratiated himself with Indians further south. However, the Cayuga chief, Orehaoue, friend of the French, refused to allow Penn to purchase lands in 1684 on the Susquehanna. That same year the English

[Page 5]
called together an Indian council at Albany, where the Cayuga were represented. Togahoue is another Cayuga chief mentioned in the seventeenth century.
There had been three unstockaded Cayuga villages known in 1670 to the whites,—first, Goiogonen, whose chief group of buildings was later known as Cayuga Castle; second, Tiohero, which housed most of their war captives; and third, Onnon-tare. All of these were near the shore of Cayuga Lake, and in them Jesuit missions were founded. The remains of a Cayuga fortress near Owasco Lake, called “Fort Osco”, were visited by James Macauley in 1820. By counting the rings of growth on two decaying tree-stumps in the moat of this fortress, he estimated them to be as old as the time of Columbus’ discovery and the Spanish Conquest. The present writer visited the site of this fortress in 1887. Two other groups of earthworks were formerly in the vicinity of “Fort Osco”.

By the middle of the 18th century, the Cayuga had so prospered that their fertile valley land between Cayuga and Owasco lakes contained many more villages and attracted the envious eyes of colonists to its orchards and farms. Gaya-gaanha, or Cayuga Castle, situated near the present Union Springs, was the most important as here the great road of travel from Agnie, the valley of the Mohawk River, to Oyon-wayea, or Niagara Falls, met the other forest-trodden path leading southwards to the Susquehanna River by which canoes went to Chesapeake Bay. Other well-known, villages were Chonodote, of the “peach-trees,” holding 1,500 people^Tiear the site of the present town of Cayuga; Oneniote, now Oneida, half a Mohawk village; Ganogeh, now Canoga; Gewauga,, where is now Union Springs; Neodakheat, now Ithaca; Owego, near Tioga Point, an important meeting place of the Indians near the Susquehanna River; and there were also the distant villages, belonging still to the Cayuga in the Ontario settlements of Kente and Gandaseteigon.

Among their chiefs, Orehaoue,-—who had visited France about 1688, and thereafter followed Count Frontenac, for whom the island in Ow&sto Lake is named,—had prejudiced the Cayuga against the English. Shikellimy, although just to English interests, was reputed to be a Frenchman, Oneida by adoption; but he called himself a Cayuga. He faithfully guarded the Iroquois borderland of the Susquehanna for

[Page 6]
twenty years before his death in 1748. The wife of Shikellimy was probably a Cayuga, thus giving his sons that nationality. Their oldest son, John Shikellimy, or Thachnechtoris, was appointed guardian, in 1754, of the hunting grounds in the Wyoming Valley near the Juanita River. Tahgahjute, or Logan, another son of Shikellimy, is variously called a Mingo, the Oneida, a Susquehanna chief, and a Cayuga. He married a Shawnee woman. Born in 1725, he became trader, hunter and chieftain, celebrated on the Ohio River in the days of Daniel Boone. After the brutal murder of most of Logan’s relatives, the chief revenged himself by fire and bloodshed upon white settlers. Peace was restored, but Logan died soon after, in 1780.

Although the chief Onechsagerat went to Canada in 1756 for Sir William Johnson, the Cayuga as a tribe did not help the English until after the fearful battle of Oriskany, August 5,
1777,	when their whole frontier became a battlefield. Many of the tribe in the following year joined the Iroquois of Grand River, Ontario, and the settlers at Quinté Bay. But a number of Cayuga and Seneca joined the British forces that in July,
1778,	were responsible for the needless massacre in the valley of Wyoming, Pa.; and through the vengeance of the colonists, all the smiling domain near Cayuga Lake was in return devastated by the terrible inland march of General Sullivan’s army in 1779, destroying forty villages, and sweeping the whole Cayuga territory.

At the end of the Revolution, after years of privation and war, the Cayuga were obliged to sell their ancestral lands, and by the treaty of 1789 retained only one hundred square miles on Cayuga Lake as their reservation forever. Before the passage of twenty years, the pressure of colonization deprived them even of this. The 1789 treaty allowed them $500 annually, and that of 1795 gave them $1,800 additional every year. However, they had only four square miles left, and in 1807 by the payment of a stated sum, the Cayuga ceded all their territory save one square mile which was reserved for the home of their chief “Fish Carrier.”
The tribal interests of the Cayuga were by this time entirely with the United States. Chiefs of the Six Nations visited the President in 1792 at Philadelphia. Many of the New York Cayuga fought in the war of 1812, and some took part in the

[Page 7]
battle where the Shawnee Tecumseh fell. After this service of 1818, General Harrison obtained them a further grant of land on the Sandusky. The beautiful Ohio valley had opened a way of escape for over a hundred years. By 1800, these “Seneca of the Sandusky” included many Cayuga, and more settled there in 1831, when the Mingo and Seneca of the Sandusky emigrated to the Neosho River, Kansas, and later to Indian Territory; but there is still quite a colony in Ohio. Some of the Cayuga followed the Mohawk Joseph Brandt to Grand River, Ontario; but their share of the annuity was not paid after 1812, as they had become British subjects. Councils were called by Sagoyewatha, or Red Jacket, a Seneca chief, the first meeting being at Grand River, and the second at Niagara. This powwow of the New York and Canadian Iroquois failed, however, to obtain the annuity. The Vermont Assembly, on October 27, 1812, gave $200 to the Caughnawaga Indians of Canada, but refused to grant their claims for annuity or land.

Since 1807, the Cayuga have had no separate reservations, but those of the tribe living in New York State settled with the Onondaga and Seneca at Cattaraugus, Tonawanda, Onondaga and Allegany. By treaties in 1829 and 1831, complaints about the payment of annuity were settled by the removal of the Sandusky Cayuga to Kansas and Indian Territory. About 100 were left in New York at that time. The latter treaty was signed by Chief William King, who in 1839 resigned the chieftainship to Dr. Peter Wilson, or Wa-o-wa-na-onk, a Cayuga of Cattaraugus.

Dr. Wilson petitioned the New York Legislature in regard to this annuity, and the reports of both houses in 1848 and 1849 give an interesting account of the troubles of the Cayuga tribe. As $1,700 of the $2,300 annuity was to be paid to Ohio Cayuga, it made them a prey to deception, and more than half of this portion of the tribe left the Ohio to go to Osage agency with Dr. Abraham Hogeboom in 1846. Of the Cayuga left in Ohio, 35 in number, the annuity was paid to a Shawnee, as their last chief died in 1846. Rumors now reached the east, of ill-treatment to those Indians who had accompanied Dr. Hogoboom. Of the 550 who went to Osage agency, 492 died by 1847. Through the efforts of Dr. Wilson, or Chief Wa-o-wa-na-onk, the New York Legislature requested

[Page 8]
the President to restore the Cayuga to their former home. Permission granted, Dr. Wilson raised the two thousand necessary dollars, and visited Neosho and Osage agencies, whence he returned with 25 Cayuga, three remaining in Indian Territory from choice. Dr. Wilson’s address before the New York Historical Society in 1847 gave widespread hearing to the wrongs of his tribe. Again in 1853, he petitioned the Assembly of New York, in regard to the payment of annuity, which it appeared had been made over to a western agent, but was unpaid for several years owing to conflicting reports on the number of living Cayuga.

As stated by Wa-o-wa-na-onk, the Cayuga territory once stretched from the eastern shore of Lake Seneca to the creek running through the village of Skaneatelas, and from the head of that lake north to the Clyde River. The people of Auburn, the capital of Cayuga County, were greatly interested in the cause of the vagrant Cayuga tribe. My grandfather, Judge Benjamin F. Hall, one of the first Vice-Presidents of the Cayuga County Historical Society, was a leader in the effort to have a reservation given them at Fort Hill, Auburn, on the site of the old “Fort Osco”. But the effort to restore to Wa-o-wa-na-onk’s people any territorial rights was unsuccessful, even though seconded by the oratory of the son of Sagoyewatha. Fort Hill became a cemetery for white people. A monument of rough stones was erected there,—an obelisk bearing the words of the idealized Tahgahjute,—“Who is there to mourn for Logan ?” Living in humble, disconnected homes in New York, Wisconsin, Canada and Oklahoma, the Cayuga have now no tribal organization and no reservation of their own. A final mention of Dr. Peter Wilson is in 1857, when Mr. Gifford of the Historical Society is mentioned as collecting data for a biographical sketch which apparently never was published. During the past fifty years, the history of the Cayuga has been that of the reservations, and there are to-day fewer than 200 individuals in the U. S.

[Page 9]
Chapter II
In the first article on the Cayuga a misstatement was made concerning the number of the Cayuga* returning with Dr. Peter Wilson. Five hundred Indians went to Osage Agency in 1831, and 215 went later, in 1846, from New York with Dr. Abraham Hoge-boom. Of these, all seem to have died from privations, except the seventy-three that returned about 1847 with Dr. Wilson ( of whom 25 were Cayuga), three Cayuga who remained in the west and some thirty members of other tribes, a total of 106. About this time many white men were interested in their welfare, and the great question of the division of the annuity kept public interest alive. Dr. Wilson’s Memorial of March 9, 1849, to the New York State Senate,* tells pathetically of his going to Indian Territory two years before, and refers to his Seneca grandfather Young King, and tells of Silversmith’s description of the councils called by Red Jacket, the Seneca, with other tribes of the Six Nations, at Grand River and Niagara in 1829. Dr. Wilson’s speech before the New York legislature, after his return from the west, about 1849, is given in full in a later document.** It is in reference to the claim of the Canadian Cayuga to a share of the annuity since the War of 1812, and during his discourse he says, “Gentlemen, the Cayuga within your state

*In the preceding- article on the Cayuga, an accidental misstatement was made, owing to conflicting notes, as to the number of Cayuga going to the Far West, and those who returned. New York State Senate Document No. 58, 1890, states, on page 506, that Cayuga to the number of 550 went to the Osage reservation, in 1831 and 1846, and of their descendants Dr. Wilson found only 58. Thirty-three Cayuga preferred to remain in the west, 30 of the migration of 1831, and 3 of 1846; while of the 73 returning with Wilson, 25 were of the Cayuga tribe and the remainder other Indians.

In Senate Document No. 64 for 1849, had it been said that 500 Cayuga went out in 1831, and 44 in 1846 with Dr. Hogeboom. This makes a slight discrepancy, but the number returning with Dr. Wilson is the same.

**Senate Dec. 64, 1849.

[Page 10]
are now trembling from fear that a foreign people will be permitted to take away the last vestige of hope left them by their forefathers, by which they can be rendered comfortable and happy.” It is curious that he should refer to the Canadian Cayuga as “foreign people,” for there had been almost constant communication by travelling Indians between the United States and British reservations; but the New York State band might well be “trembling” at a request, which, if allowed, would reduce their yearly income to one-fourth its usual amount, as well as possibly involving the raising of a sum equivalent to a like share of past annuities.

There are several long and detailed publications of evidence taken in the various phases of this controversy;[footnote 1] for with all the bewildering claims, and various contradictory pieces of evidence, the case has not even yet been settled. An amused comment is made in the New York Assembly Committee Report, [footnote 2] March 25, 1864, on the delay of the Indians in presenting their claims, saying that the Committee had “not transacted any business owing to the absence of the Onondagas, Oneidas, Cayugas, Senecas and Mohawks from the lobby, it being understood that 'Lo, the poor Indian' of the 'untutored mind' is not familiar with the methods of legislation as practiced by whites whose minds are better tutored in obtaining 'relief' through the Committees of the Assembly.”
After many references, [footnote 3] we come across a report of the Committee on Indian Affairs, March 12, 1865, on the “Petition of Daniel Bread and Others.”[footnote 4] This petition asks relief for the Oneida nation, and refers on the second page to the “Cayuga nation pressing a similar claim,” for the purpose of adjusting which they “passed a resolution to ask the Governor to appoint an investigating Committee.” In a report “In relation to petitions of the St. Regis and Onondaga tribes of Indians as to their annuities and leases,”[footnote 5] reference is made to the Cayuga having the right to locate on Seneca land at Allegany, Cattaraugus and Tonawanda, as well as the Onondaga and Oneida. At that time there were thirty Cayuga at • Allegany. [footnote 6] The speech of Taren-Wago

*General references:	Senate Doc., 70, March 24, 1847, petition of M.
B. Pierce. Assem. Doc. 55, 1848, petition of P. Wilson, ana Doc. 61, report on Conog-a reserve; Assem. Doc. 164, 1850, Peter Wilson, memorials Sen. Doc. 56, 1853, P. Wilson; and report theeron, Sen. Doc. 81, 1853. 

**Sen. Doc. 58, 1890, ppt 237-250.

[Page 11]
tells of the Cayuga origin;[footnote 7] Logan is mentioned as being a Seneca; [footnote 8] and an interesting account of the Tammany Indians is given, with the rise of the “Tammany Society.” However, the item of greatest interest is the claim of the Canadian Cayuga to annuity. Senate Documents for 1889, 1890 and 1899, and Assembly Documents for 1889 and 1900 giving many interesting facts in regard to both the New York and Canadian divisions of the Cayuga, with a few references to the band in the Indian Territory (Oklahoma).

A general examination of the state of affairs among the New York Indians was given in 1889, and is detailed in the “Report of a Special Committee appointed by the Assembly of 1888 to investigate the ‘Indian Problem’ of the State.” [footnote 1] This deals especially with the claims of the Ogden Land Company [footnote 2] in relation to the rights of the Seneca nation to parcel off land already ceded to the United States Government. In an earlier document, reference was made to this Ogden Land Company, report being given on the ejectment by them of Messrs. Barnhart and Baxter from islands in the St. Lawrence River in 1823, said island having been leased to the two men by the St. Regis Indians. [footnote 3] In the 1889 paper, copies are given of all treaties with the various tribes, those of the Cayuga being, those of 1789,[footnote 4] 1790, [footnote 5] 1793, [footnote 6] 1795, [footnote 7] and 1829, [footnote 8] with the provisions made for the same tribe in the Buffalo treaty of 1838, [footnote 9] and their schedule. [footnote 10] There were 160 Cayuga with the Seneca and Tonawanda, or, as reported in July, 1887, three or four at Allegany, 155 at Cattaraugus and 21 at Tonawanda. Reference [footnote 11] is made to the “Cayuga Indian question,” which was settled by the statement that legally only the Seneca could share lands on Cattaraugus, Allegany and Oil Spring, a statement in seeming contradiction of the decision of 1870 given above. It is further stated [footnote 12] that at that time the Iroquois organization gave the Grand Sachemship to the Onondaga, the other nations being represented by subordinate sachems. The annuity is referred to, [footnote 13] the status of the Indians in general, [footnote 14] their claims, [footnote 15] and the division of land. [footnote 16] The Seneca’s republican form of government is also mentioned. [footnote 17]
But three individual Cayuga are mentioned in this Document, one being a party to a peculiar legal case, in which an Onondaga minister and his Cayuga wife were denied, by the

[Page 12]
Seileca, the right to settle on Cattaraugus reservation. [footnote 18] Mrs. Parker, a Cayuga full-blood, is referred to as a teacher at Cattaraugus. [footnote 19] Dr. Peter Wilson was given power of attorney by the New York Cayuga, who sent him to Washington in 1864, but the President declined to see him, as the Oneida, Onondaga and St. Regis denied Wilson’s authority; these tribes signed other papers, and the Cayuga in 1868 did so by another attorney. [footnote 20] Dr. Wilson was a graduate of Hamilton College, [footnote 21] and in working for the Indians helped to draft a law of inheritance. [footnote 22] His name and that of N. T. Strong are frequently connected as headmen of the Cayuga and Seneca, in settling legal disputes. [footnote 23]

William Henry, a Cayuga chief, also called Ojaghetti, [footnote 1] gives his testimony in 1889. He is then resident at Tuscarora, Canada, and through his maternal grandmother, who was the niece of Ojaghetti or “Fish Carrier”, the famous chieftain of the War of 1812 who went to Canada, he inherited the same title. But as William Henry’s wife was a Mohawk, it is to be supposed that the claim to this title of Ojaghetti, or War Chief, would pass to his sisters by the Cayuga law of maternal inheritance, their husbands or sons being the real leaders. The original Ojaghetti had died about 1824, or 75 years previously. In the same way the title of Genandaugua, or Civil Chief, had descended to Joseph Montour and his brother George, from the Genandaugua who had received the medal and copy of the Treaty of 1795 from Ojaghetti during the War of 1812. [footnote 2]  This preservation of medal and treaty are frequently mentioned in the Senate Document of 1890. William Henry refers to Dr. Wilson, William Wedge, Jacob Silversmith, and John Hot or Tascoma, as Cayuga chiefs.

“Testimony taken before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs under Resolution of May 15, 1889, [footnote 3] refers to the Cayuga tribe and its triple history. William King, a western Cayuga chief, testifies to taking annuities, and speaks of the tribal division into three parts by 1800. Hajiwondaweho, another chief, also went to Canada. In connection with the western troubles of the Cayuga before related, Peter Wilson in 1846 visited the Land Office, and in 1850 prepared a speech which was not delivered. King also refers to the New York Cayuga chiefs, Alexander John and A. M. Stafford, and Chief Winney of Indian Territory, and Wilson’s grandfather, Young

[Page 13]
King. As before mentioned, Dr. Wilson, who died in 1872, was of mixed Cayuga and Seneca descent, and his son is the half-breed Rush Wilson, representative of the New York State Indians in 1889.”

Canadian Cayuga were also called to testify. The wife of George “Monture”4 was the daughter of Hayadowah or John Jacobs of Indiana, near Dunville, Toronto, and she testified to the manner of preservation of the 1795 treaty. She, born 1808, and Betsy Tom, born 1805, testified in their old age concerning chiefs Hawandas, Tawnawtawan, De-ka-ca-yon, and especially of Ojaghetti, the war chief who led Cayuga to Grand River in 1810, and of visits paid by the Canadian Iroquois to Cattaraugus to consult the Seneca, Nathaniel T. Strong. Dr. Wilson also visited Canada, during the discussion of the Cayuga treaty, [footnote 1] and that of the United States with Great Britain, Dec. 24, 1814, [footnote 2] by which property was supposed to be restored, including the Cayuga annuity.

In this document, the civil chief is called “Jin-an-ta-ti-que,” [footnote 3] a different spelling from Genandaugua, [footnote 4] but the same office is intended, the title of which descended to Wilson Fish and the “Montures.” Cayuga chiefs mentioned are Daylight Davis, George Jamison, Jack Armstrong, John Logan and the half-breed J. A. Winne. Other Canadian Cayuga chiefs were Teyotowego or Jacob Silversmith, of Grand River; Highflier, Tek-a-on-yon, who went to New York to sign the treaty; O-gongh-saniyonda; Kayentaterhon and Sayoyghwatha, whose name seems identical with the Seneca Sagoyewatha. A memorial from the Cayuga living at Seneca Nation, Indian Territory, mentions the “head man” Soyuweres who brought westward the silver pipe now in their possession. [footnote 5] Dr. Abraham Hogeboom and his pilgrimage to the west with the Cayuga and other Indians, are mentioned in scathing terms in Dr. Wilson’s speech and in the testimony. [footnote 6]

The main question in dispute, the division of the Cayuga annuity with those of the tribe dwelling in Canada, turned particularly upon the assertion by Dr. Peter Wilson [footnote 7] that a council of the combined Cayuga was held in 1840, where the Canadians agreed to give up forever their claims to the annuity in favor of the United States members of the tribe. But there was no corroborative testimony for this statement, and James C. Strong, counsel for the Canadian Cayuga, declared

[Page 14]
that Wilson's whole story of the 1840 council was “a fabrication originating in his and his associate’s brain.” The “associate” seems to be Nathaniel T. Strong, the Seneca, with whom Dr. Wilson had drawn up the inheritance law. There were, in 1890, the number of 276 Cayuga in New York, out of a total tribal census of 1,100, which would make the Canadian proportion of the annuity, if paid to them legally, something like three-fourths of $2,300. The opposition of the New York Cayuga to this disposition is easily to be understood. The decision seems to have been that, without considering this story of a council agreement, the allegiance of the Canadian Cayuga to the British flag in 1812 prevented their receiving annuity further from the United States Government.

Recently, however, the case was reopened and in Governor Roosevelt’s message8 of January 17, 1899, it is stated that a request had been transmitted from the Cayuga Indians of Canada, in July, 1898, again making this claim. Governor Roosevelt denied that their rights had been restored by treaty. The income cut off since 1810 was, in consequence, not their due. Correspondence in regard to this is printed January 10, 1900, [footnote 1] giving Lord Pauncefoot’s note and the discussion of testimony, which appears in detail in a Senate Document. [footnote 2]

This Document of 1899 refers to “Oyaghetto” [footnote 3] as chief in Canada, still possessing the silver medal and treaty of 1795, given by the President to the head chief at the close of the Revolutionary War, and says that this present chief resides on Grand River, Brant County, Toronto, with three-fourths of the nation. Reference is made again to Dr. Peter Wilson’s intended speech [footnote 4] of 1850 before the Land Board, which body decided against the Canadians. Dr. Wilson had also stated that the Cayuga council was held at the beginning of the War of 1812, at which the New York members of the tribe had decided to remain neutral; but the Canadian members refused to be neutral also, although so requested by Red Jacket, the Mohawk. [footnote 5] Dr. Wilson’s statement as to the 1840 council is still the only evidence of it Canadian Cayuga insisted that his story was not true, and that their rights were restored by the peace treaty. It seems that Governor Van Buren and the New York Cayuga agreed to a division of the annuity with the Ohio Cayuga, but the Canadian Cayuga did not. [footnote 6]

In this same 1899 Document a quotation is made from 

[Page 15]
Article 9 of the Ghent Treaty of 1814, viz: “The United States of America engage to put an end, immediately after ratification of the present treaty, to hostilities with all tribes or nations of Indians with whom they may be at war at the time of such ratification ; and forthwith to restore to such tribes or nations respectively all the business rights and privileges which they may have enjoyed or been entitled to in one thousand eight hundred and eleven, previous to such hostilities.” [footnote 7] Under this agreement, the Canadian Cayuga had claimed their rights in 1882; before the Land Office, and again in 1865 before the Board of Claims and the Land Office, and a Commission was appointed in 1888 which led to the investigations reported in the State Document in 1889, above given. [footnote 8]. But the denial of the claim by Governor Roosevelt seems to have settled the case adversely to the Canadians, and probably for all time, since the sum of money is so petty that it is hard to believe it would mean much to those for whom the Canadian Government provides.

This settled the “Cayuga Question” but a few other Documents are reported during the past decade, [footnote 1] which seem, however, to refer to the Iroquois nation as a whole, although the name “Cayuga” is used. It appears that, in 1847, the Seneca gave up their tribal form of government, and had a charter or constitution, which was revised in 1898.
With regard to the Canadian division of the Cayuga tribe, much may be learned from The Toronto Education Department, in its “Annual Archaeological Report,” once conducted by David Boyle. An Onondaga dance-mask, figured opposite page 62 of the Report for 1896-7, is similar to those in use by the Cayuga in connection with the False Face Society. A Longhouse of the Southern Cayuga is figured on Plate VII, of the Report for 1898. In this same Report it is stated that Ye-sahn, the last full-blood Tutelo, who died in 1870, went to Canada with the Six Nations, and Gostango, the last to speak the Tutelo language, died in 1898. [footnote 3] It is said that a dance and a game of lacrosse were given by the Upper Cayuga for an invalid suffering with lung trouble. [footnote 4] The Cayuga After-seeding or Spring Sun dance, on May 8th, is described, [footnote 5] and a picture is given showing William Henry, the Cayuga chief mentioned in 1889, together with his house. [footnote 6] His Indian name is Dyonwadon. The clans are still those of the Bear,

[Page 16]
Wolf, Turtle, Beaver, Deer, Hawk, Snipe, and Eel. The Cayuga chiefs in 1898 were:—Dekachyon,—Abram Charles and James Sky; Jinondawehon,—Robert David and Franklin David; Kadagwaseh,— David General; Soyonehs,— Austin Bill and Samuel Kick; Hayadroneh,—Jacob Jameson; Dyo-yongo,—Joseph Jacobs and William Hill; Deyodowakon,— Joseph Henry and Philip Miller; Dyonwadon,—William Henry; Hadondaheha,— John Henry; Daskahe,— Benjamin Carpenter; and Hadwenoneh,— William Wage. [footnote 7] This last one may be the '‘William Wedge” mentioned in the testimony of 1889. The statement is made that one-fifth of the Grand River Reservation is made up of Indians practising pagan rites and ceremonies. [footnote 8] More is said about this in a later article. [footnote 9] In the Report for 1899, the Big Corn Feast, held in September by the Lower Cayuga, is described, together with the ceremonies at the name-giving of a child, and the Peach Stone Game. [footnote 10] It is also said that the pagan Iroquois,—Seneca, Onondaga and Cayuga,—use the old style drum and rattles, instead of those of brass used by the civilized tribes. [footnote 11] In an article on "Rainmaking,” reference is made to "Red Cloud” or "Captain Bill,” half Onondaga and half Cayuga, who lives on the Tuscarora Reserve. [footnote 12] It is the Cayuga who, with the Tuscarora and Oneida, uphold the opposition of an argument in council. [footnote 13].

1	Assem. Doc. 165, 1849, in favor of paying- the Canadian Cayuga; Assem. Doc. 83, 1851, petition of Cuyaga Indians of Canada West; Assem. Doc. 26, 1853, report on annuity.
2	Assem. Doc. 153, 1864.
3	Senate Journal, Jan. 15, 1865, an Act in reference to Cayuga; Assem. Journ., 1865, p. 56, petition for relief; Assem. Doc. 128, 1865, in which Peter Wilson testifies in regard to certain signatures attached to a paper.
4	Assem. Doc., 198, 1865.
5	Assem, Doc., 202, 1870, p. 4. 
6	Ditto, p. 5.
7 	Ditto, pp. 6, 8.
8	Ditto, p. 15.
9 Ditto, pp. 16-19.

1	Assem. Doc. 51, 1889.
2	Ditto, 197, 1846., ditto, 51, 1889, pp. 1155, 1199-1203, 1212.
3	Ditto, 34, 1856.
4	Ditto, 51, 1889, pp. 40, 216. 
5	Ditto, p. 220.
6 	Ditto, p. 195.
7	Ditto, pp. 223, 229.
8	Ditto, pp. 230
9	Ditto, pp. 155-6.
10	Ditto, p 159.
11	Ditto, p. 393.
12	Ditto, p. 607.
13 	Ditto, pp. 701 and 1201.
14 	Ditto, p. 1047.
15 	Ditto, pp. 1078-9, 1118.
16 	Ditto, p. 1068.
17 	Ditto, p. 724.
18 	Ditto, p. 791.
19 	Ditto, p. 975.
20 	Ditto, pp. 517-8.
21 	Ditto, p. 968.
22 	Ditto, p. 793.

23 	Assem. Doc. 128, 1865.

1	Sen. Doc., 35, 1889, pp. 5, 10. 
2 	Ditto, pp. 12, 24.
3	Sen. Doc., 58, 1890.
4 	Ditto, pp. 73-4,

[Page 17]

1	Sen. Doc., 58, 1890, p. 129.
2	
Ditto, p. 148.
3	Ditto, p. 228-303.
4	Sen. Doc., 35, 1889, p. 18. 
5	Sen. Doc., 58, 1890, p. 317
6	Ditto, 505-6 and Sen. Doc., 64, 1849, p. 7.

7	Sen. Doc., 58, 1890, p. 249.
8 	Governors’ Messages, 1899.

1	Assem. Doc., 13, 199.	Ditto, p. 117. 
2	Sen. Doc., 20, 1899.
3	Ditto, pp. 5, 12.
4	Ditto, p. 13, and Sen Doc., 64, 1849, p. 3.
5	Sen. Doc., 20, 1899, pp. 14-15.	
6	Ditto, pp. 12-3.	
7	Ditto, p. 5.	
8	Ditto, p. 15.	
	
1	Sen. Journ., 1905, p. 405; Assem.	Journ., 1906, pp. 2287, 2639, 2651,	3178; Sen. Journ., 1906, pp. 1150, 1490, 1515, 1667; Assem. Doc. 40, 1906; Assem. Journ., 1907, pp. 253, 399, 461, 487, 525, 556, 3612; Sen. Journ., 1907„ p. 336, 1735, 2003.
3	Ann. Arctic Rept.,	1898, p. 54.	
4	Ditto,	p. 85.
5	Ditto,	p. 117.	
6	Ditto,	Plate XVII.
7	Ditto,	p. 178.	
8	Ditto,	p. 191.
9	Ditto, 1901, p. 125, “On the Paganism of the Iroquois of Ontario,”-by David Boyle.
10	Ditto,	1899, p.	34.	
11	Ditto,	1899, p.	166.
12	Ditto, 1902.
13	J. B. Mackenzie’s “Six Nations Indians of Canada,” Toronto, 1896*


[Page 18]
Cayuga Correspondence
AFTER the publication of my first article in the “American Antiquarian/' I had the pleasure of an acquaintance by correspondence with the Rev. William M. Beauchamp, S. T. D., of Syracuse, New York, the noted writer on the aborigines of this state. His first letter in reply to some inquiries of mine, is as follows:

“Syracuse, N. Y., May 18, 1912.
“My Dear Miss Taft:
“I fear I can add little to your knowledge of Dr. Peter Wilson, or Wau-wah-wa-na-onk, sometimes called De-jih-non-da-weh-hoh, or the Peacemaker. A Cayuga woman—Mrs. Lucy Pierce, daughter of Seneca chief Daniel Two Guns by a Cayuga mother—on the Onondaga reservation, could probably tell me a good deal, but I may not see her for some time. Just now I can tell you nothing of his family. I am inclined to think his father a Seneca, for the only Cayuga Wilson of whom I know is Rush S. Wilson, a chief in 1890. Among the Senecas was John Wilson in 1890, and 'Wilson's mother' joined the mission church at Buffalo Creek in 1834. She might have been a Cayuga, as many were there. Dr. Wilson lived at Buffalo in 1838. L. H. Morgan quotes from his address before the N. Y. Hist. Soc., May, 1847. I think the notes with the address had nothing about his family A. B. Street, in his poem on Frontenac, had most of his information from him and spoke of his personal appearance. Frontenac was published in 1849, and the notes must have come earlier.

“You understand that So-ne-na-we-too-na was only the council name of the Cayugas, not their ordinary appellation. Shikellimy (Unq-qua-te-rugh-i-at-he) did not call himself a Cayuga, but an Oneida. He was called Swatane and Swatana at Philadelphia in 1732 and '42. The quotation from Bartram gives an erroneous impression. Logan said of his father, 'He

[Page 19]
was of the six nations, or rather a Frenchman, born at Montreal, and adopted by the Oneidas after being taken prisoner/ The meaning is that he was born in a French Iroquois village at Montreal. As for the children, ‘his son told me he was of the Cayuga nation, that of his mother/ B. Mayer erred in the name of Logan. He quoted from a letter from Lyman C. Draper:	‘The aged Seneca, Captain Decker, told me that
Logan's Indian name was Tah-gah-jute, or Short Dress, and added that he was a very bad Indian.' He mistook the name of Togahaju, 1766, a principal Cayuga chief, for Logan's. The latter was Sojechtowa. In Pennsylvania records the j is usually y. I feel sure that Red Jacket's father was a Cayuga. He was born at the Cayuga village of Canoga, and his name, Sa-go-ye-wat-ha, was frequent among the Cayugas and scarcely known among the Senecas. By the way, in early days Osco or Ashko was at the lake, not at Auburn. Charle-vioux's map, 1745, gives it as Lac Asco. Cammerhoff, 1750, said, ‘We reached a lake named Achsgo.' At this time there was no floating bridge on the outlet of the lake, and they had to wade. Obviously, from the rapid current, there could not have been one at Auburn. Morgan's trail is recent. In 1750 and '79 the trail left Cayuga Lake at several points, all leading to the foot of Owasco Lake, then to Skaneateles, then by trolley route to 9 Mile Creek, then over two ridges to Onondaga, just north of Darwin's Spring. The early trails were not deep, Morgan and Wilson to the contrary,—were often changed and soon obliterated. The later ones, traversed by horses and booted traders, were deeply worn. No remaining traces of a trail antedating the white man can be shown. In fact a few years' disuse made it impossible to find any.
“Yours truly,
“W. M. BEAUCHAMP.

“Sorry I cannot tell all you wish to know, but even a white man's genealogy is often hard to trace. Lucy Pierce is the best resource, but I have not time to see her now. I think the wife of our Onon. Res. missionary, Rev. Wm. D Man-ross, would interview her, as they are very near neighbors. * * * *"
It was from the Rev. Mr. Manross that the accompanying pictures of the Cayuga Ulysses Pierce and his wife and daughter,

[Page 20]
were obtained, as well as another letter containing some facts about Dr. Peter Wilson which were incorporated in his sketch.
The second letter from Rev. Mr. Beauchamp is as follows :

“Syracuse, N. Y., May 24, 1912.
“My Dear Miss Taft:
“Yesterday I happened to see something about Judge Hall’s notes. I have often been on Fort Hill, where Logan's monument stands. Schoolcraft also published a plan. The banks are carefully preserved. I may not go to the reservation for a fortnight, but will try to see Lucy Pierce. Though a great-grandmother, she is very jolly. Since you are interested in the Shickalamy family I send you some further notes, not very well arranged. They appear both as Oneidas and Cayugas.

“Unquaterughiathe or Swatane, Oneida of the Wolf clan, had the Delaware name of Shikellimy, variously spelled. He became viceroy in Pa. in 1728 and died in '49. He married a Cayuga woman and in 1750, at Cayuga, Cammerhoff said that an Oneida woman, married to a Cayuga chief, asked about 'the relatives of Shikellimi, of whom David Zeisberger could give her tidings, for which she was very glad, and told us that she was Shikellimi's sister. She looked very much like his family. Next day Z. told an old Cayuga chief, who had lived on the Susquehanna, about 'Shikellimi’s relatives, with whom he was acquainted and in whom he was much interested.' Sh. had d. Dec. 6, 1748.

“ 'Unhappy Jake,' killed by the Virginians in going against the Catawbas in 1743, is called both son and cousin, probably the latter. John Shickalamy, his oldest son, was Taghneghtoris, Spreading Oak, is sometimes called an Oneida, and perhaps may have had an Oneida mother—probably not. He succeeded his father and was long a prominent man. He also has been called Tah-gah-jute, apparently an error, James Logan, Sojechtowa of Moravians, was Shayetowah in 1756, Soyeghtowa in 1762. He is sometimes called the lame son of S., and may have been called Tocaniadarogon in 1745. John Petty was another son, called Sagogeghyata in 1762, (Sago-yewatha) and also prominent. All three were in Phil, in 1742. Besides these his son Andrew is mentioned as going

[Page 21]
with his father and Spangenberg to Onondaga in 1745. I think this an error. Andrew Sattelihu (Montour) was in the party, and I think his name was accidentally given to the son, who otherwise is only spoken of as S.’s son. S. and one son, were with Bartram and Wilson at Onondaga in 1743. I would hardly think Logan went on these trips, being lame, but then they used horses. In one case Logan signed as Capt. John Logan. In 1745 S. had a married daughter and a granddaughter, aged 15, living with him. John Petty was the youngest of the sons, and I think there were but three. In 1756 John Shickalamy spoke of his two brothers: ‘The lame one, whom you all know very well, could not perform the journey; the younger one went on/ At that time John S. had a sister living among the Conestoga Indians. The three brothers were mentioned in the Indian troubles of ’55. Tachnectoras or John Sicalamy, was captain, and John Petty Sicalamy and James Logan Sicalamy were officers in an Indian company then formed at Shamokin. There is an item of interest (1754) in a letter from Geo. Morris to Sir Wm. Johnson. ‘The Six Nations declared that in Council they had thought proper to appoint John Shickealamy, an Indian Chief of the Oneida Nation living in an Indian Town on those Lands, as their Agent and Representative.’ In this case I think it was Morris who thought him an Oneida. A mention of S.’s ‘Son Jack’ occurs in 1744, certainly one of the Johns. Jake was killed in winter of 1742-3. The Penna. Archives and Records have a good deal about the Cayugas. I am often on Cayuga Lake, where their villages for, the most part were. They had some on or near Seneca Lake. Cammerhoff and Zeisberger were at Cayuga several times.
“I hope these notes will interest you, if of no further use.
“Yours truly,
“W. M. BEAUCHAMP.”

[Page 22]
Bibliography
Annual Archaeological Reports, Toronto Education Dept., 1898, pp. 54, 85, 117, 174, 178, 191; pi. XVII; 1899, pp'. 34, 166; 1901, 142 167, 168, 125; 1902; 1903; 1905, 146.
Ancient Monuments of the U. S., p. 473, Harper’s Magazine, May, 1880. Andrews, Judge Charles. The Vreeland Bill, pp. 84, 87, L. M. Confer., 1902.
Beauchamp, Rev. Wm. M. Aboriginal Occupation.
Antiquities of Onondaga.
History of the New York Iroquois, Bull. 78, N. Y. Museum. Iroquois Migration, 1894.
Iroquois Trail.
Blanchard, Rufus. Iroquois Confederacy, 1902.
Buffalo Historical Society. Trans., vols. Ill, IV.
Cayuga County Historical Society, repts., 1879, 1881, 1882.
Colden, C. History of the Five Indian Nations.
Colonial New York. Voi. I, pp. 307, 325-8; Voi. IX, pp. 464, 524. Converse, Harriet M. Myths and Legends of the N. Y. State Iroquois. Charlevoix, Shea’s. Voi. IV, p. 84.
Documents, New York State. Assembly Documents: 1846, No. 197; 1848, 55, 61; 1849, 165; 1850, 164; 1851, 83; 1853, 26; 1856, 34; 1864, 153; 1865, 128, 198; 1870, 202; 1889, 51; 1900, 13; 1906, 40. Assembly Journal: 1906, pp. 2287, 2639, 2651, 3178; 1907, 253, 399, 461, 487, 525, 556, 3612. Governors’ Messages, voi. 6, 1899. Senate Documents: 1847, 70; 1849, 64; 1853, 56, 81; 1889, 35; 1890, 58; 1899, 20. Senate Journal: 1905, p. 405; 1906, 1150, 1490, 1515, 1667. Documentary History of State of New York, voi. I, pp. 12, 23, 27.
Hall, Judge Benjamin F. Early History of North Western States, pp. 30, 62-64, 68, 73.
Handbook of American Indians. Bull. B., Am. Eth., Washington. Halsey, Francis W. Old N. Y. Frontier, p. 18. (1902.)
Hawley, Rev. Chas. Address, 1881, Cay Co. Hist. Socy., Early Chapters of Cayuga History, 1879.
Huntington, Bishop F. D. The Permanent Principles of Reform, pp. 61-64, L. M. Conf., 1902.
Kappler, C. J. Indian Affairs, 2 vols., 1904, doc. 452, U. S. Census, Washington.
Lake Mohonk Conference of Friends of the Indian: 1902, pp. 57-105;

[Page 23]
1910, 28-36; 1911, 10, 89.
Macauley, James. History. New York, 1829.
Mayer, Brantz, Tah-gah-jute, p. 42.
Morgan, Lewis H. Laws of Descent of Iroquois.
Ancient Society.
O’Callaghan, E. B. History of New Netherland.
Oneida Historical Society, 1887-9. Origin and Early Life of the Iroquois, p'. 117.
Royce, C. C. Indian Land Cessions. 18th An. Rept. Bur. of Am. Eth. Ruttenber, W. W. History of Indian Tribes of the Hudson, pp. 313-5, and note, p. 257.
Squier, E. G. Antiquities of the State of New York (1851), pp. 48-9,. 51-2.
Taft, Grace Ellis. Cayuga Notes, American Antiquarian, etc., Jan.-Feb., 1912.
Cayuga and Seneca as Proprietaries in the Annals of New York^ paper, Cong. Americanists.
More Cayuga Notes, Am. Antiq.
Neresta, an Iroquois Princess, Red Man, Oct., 1912.
The Cayuga Chief, Dr. Peter Wilson, Records of the Past, Nov.-Dee., 1912.
Question of Veracity.
U. S. Census, 1890: Indians, pp. 465-6, 493.
Ditto. 11th Census. Extra Bulletin, 1892. Indians: Six Nations of New York.
Van Voorhis, Charles. Claim of New York Cayugas against the State of New York, p. 451, Red Man, June, 1912.
Vreeland, Hon. Edward B. New York Indians and the Vreeland Bill,, pp. 57-61, L. M. Conf., 1902.
Weise, Arthur James. History of the City of Albany, N. Y.
Watson, John F. Annals of New York.
Beauchamp, W. M. Aboriginal Occupation (1900), pp. 12, 35, 37, etc.
Iroquois Trail (1892), pp. 12, 57, 68, 144.
Colden, C. History, etc. (1866.)
Documentary History of N. Y., p. 1106.
Macauley, James. (1829) New York, pp. 43, 111, 112, 184, 185.
Morgan, L. H. Laws of Descent of Iroquois (1858), pp. 135.
Ancient Society.
League of the Iroquois (1851), pp. 51, 65, 395.
Ruttenber, W. W. History of Ind. Tribes, pp. 35, 98, 273, 315, note 257.. Smith, Hon. Wm. History of the Late Province of New York (1829)r Vol. I, p1. 73.
Schuyler, G. W. Colonial New York (1885).
Watson, J. F. Annals of N. Y. (1846), pp. 88, 117, 120.
23