Part 89

The fears of the Province were soon after awakened by a quarrel between two brothers named Cartlidge and an Indian near Conestoga, in which the Indian was killed, with many evidences of cruelty. The known principles of revenge professed by the Indians gave reason to apprehend severe retaliation. Policy and justice required a rigid inquiry and punishment of the murderers.

Governor Keith took prompt measures for their apprehension and the Assembly ordered a coroner’s inquest, though the body had been buried two months, and the arrest of the Cartlidge brothers.

Messengers were dispatched to the Five Nations to deprecate hostilities, and, to prevent further irregularities, the prohibition of sale of spirituous liquors to the Indians was re-enacted, with additional penalties.

The Indians invited Governor Keith and the governors of Virginia, New York, and the New England colonies, to meet with them in council at Albany, where with great magnanimity, the Indians pardoned the offense of the Cartlidges, and requested they might be discharged without further punishment. The address of the Indian sachem is worth repeating:

“The great King of the Five Nations is sorry for the death of the Indian that was killed, for he was of his own flesh and blood; he believes the Governor is also sorry; but, now that it is done, there is no help for it, and he desires that Cartlidge may not be put to death, nor that he should be spared for a time and afterwards executed; one life is enough to be lost; there should not two die. The King’s heart is good to the Governor, and all the English.”

Governor Keith was attended on this journey to Albany by Messrs. Hill, Norris, and Hamilton, of his Council.

A considerable part of the emigration to the colonies was composed of servants, who were of two classes. The first and the larger part, were poor and oppressed in the land of their nativity, sometimes the victims of political changes or religious intolerance, who submitted to temporary servitude, as a price of freedom, plenty and peace. The second, vagrants and felons, the dregs of the British populace, who were cast by the mother country upon her colonies, with the most selfish disregard of the feelings she outraged.

As early as 1682 the Council proposed to prohibit convicts from the province, but as none had entered and this was only prospective, no law was enacted. Now the Council did enact such a law, by placing a duty of five pounds upon every convicted felon brought into the Province, and the importer was also required to give surety for the good behavior of the convict for one year.

In the year 1722 there were commercial embarrassments caused by the deficiency of the circulating medium. Governor Keith proposed to overcome this difficulty by the introduction of paper money. The Assembly moved with caution, for they had full knowledge of the mistakes of the colonies, and issued only £15,000 on favorable terms to keep up their credit. This act was passed March 2, 1723. The emission proved of advantage but was insufficient, so towards the end of the year £30,000 more were emitted on the same terms.

Governor Keith, in espousing this popular cause, pleased the Assembly but incurred the displeasure of the Proprietary party and its leader, James Logan. Complications arose which eventuated in the triumph of Logan and the deposition of Keith, who was decidedly the most successful of the Proprietary Governors.

Franklin said of Keith, that “he differed from the great body of the people whom he governed, in religion and manners, yet he acquired their esteem and confidence. If he sought popularity, he promoted the public happiness; and his courage in resisting the demands of the family may be ascribed to a higher motive than private interest. The conduct of the Assembly toward him was neither honorable nor polite; for his sins against his principles were virtues to the people, with whom he was deservedly a favorite; and the House should have given him substantial marks of their gratitude as would have tempted his successors to walk in his steps. But fear of further offence to the Proprietary family, the influence of Logan, and a quarrel between the Governor and Lloyd, turned their attention from him to his successor.”

After his removal, Sir William Keith resided in the Province, and was elected to the Assembly, but he manifested a most unjustifiable and malicious spirit, and caused dissensions in the administration of his successor. His power and influence rapidly waned.

In 1729 he returned to England, where, it is sad to record, he died in obscurity, in London, November 17, 1749.

“It may be very little known,” says Watson, “that he who moved with so much excitement and as our Governor in 1726, should at last fall into such neglect, as to leave his widow among us unnoticed and almost forgotten! She lived and died in a small wooden house on Third Street, between High and Mulberry. There, much pinched for subsistence, she eked out her existence with an old female, declining all intercourse with society or with her neighbors. The house itself was burnt in 1786.”

Lady Ann Keith died July 31, 1740, aged 65 years, and lies entombed at Christ Church graveyard.

----------

Governor Joseph Hiester, Distinguished Revolutionary Officer and Statesman, Born November 18, 1872

In the early settlement of that part of Pennsylvania which is now included within the limits of Berks County a large portion of the population was drawn from those parts of Germany bordering on or near the River Rhine.

Among these sturdy emigrants were three brothers, John, Joseph and Daniel Hiester.

John, the eldest, emigrated in 1732, and was followed in 1737 by Joseph and Daniel, who sailed in that year in the ship St. Andrew from Rotterdam.

These three brothers were sons of John and Catherine Hiester and their birthplace was the village of Elcoff in the county of Wittgenstein, in the province of Westphalia, Prussia. The father, John Hiester, was born in January, 1708.

The three brothers first settled in Goshenhoppen, then Philadelphia, now Montgomery County. Soon after the arrival of Joseph and Daniel, they purchased of the Proprietary Government a tract of several thousand acres in Bern Township, now Berks County.

Here John and Joseph settled, and the Hiester family in America are their descendants. Here was born a patriot of the Revolution, distinguished citizen and statesman, who afterwards became a governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Joseph Hiester, son of John Hiester, was born in Bern Township, November 18, 1752.

He spent his early days on the farm and in the intervals of the routine from labor, Joseph received the rudiments of an English and German education under the supervision of the pastor of Bern Reformed Church.

In 1771, in his nineteenth year, he married Elizabeth Whitman, daughter of Adam Whitman, of Reading, to which place he soon removed, and went into the mercantile business with his father-in-law.

Joseph Hiester was an ardent Whig in politics and took an aggressive

## part in espousing the cause of the Revolution.

As a representative of that party he was chosen a member of the Pennsylvania Conference, which met in Philadelphia, June 18, 1776, and which in reality assumed the government of the Province, called a convention to frame a new constitution, gave instructions for the guidance of its representatives in Congress, and authorized the calling out of troops for the Continental Army. In all these proceedings he was a warm supporter of the popular cause.

He was then a captain of militia, and no sooner had the conference adjourned, than he hastened home and aroused the young men of Reading and vicinity to the importance of enlisting in the cause of American independence, at that time but feebly supported.

Joseph Hiester called together, by beat of drum, his fellow-townsmen, to take into consideration the alarming state and gloomy prospects of their country. He explained to them the perilous situation of General Washington in New Jersey, and urged them to enlist and march to his support.

He was heard with attention and respect, and his proposition was kindly received. He then laid forty dollars on the drum-head and said: “I will give this sum as a bounty, and the appointment of a sergeant to the first man who will subscribe to the articles of association to form a volunteer company to march forthwith and join the Commander-in-Chief; and I will also pledge myself to furnish the company with blankets and necessary funds for their equipment, and on the march!”

This promise he honorably and faithfully fulfilled.

Matthias Babb stepped forward, signed the article, and took the money from the drumhead. His example, and the further advancement of smaller sums of money, induced twenty men that evening to subscribe to the articles of association. In ten days Captain Joseph Hiester had enrolled a company of eighty men.

The company became a part of the Flying Camp, but soon Captain Hiester was induced to extend his efforts, and a battalion was shortly obtained. He could have been made their colonel but declined to be even a major, so attached was he to his original company.

When his command reached Elizabethtown, N. J., it was learned General Washington had moved to Long Island. Captain Hiester used his best endeavor to induce the men to advance, as they had enlisted only for Pennsylvania service, and following his patriotic lead, they marched to join Washington.

The gallant captain little knew the hard fate that was to be his. In the battle of Long Island he was taken prisoner, with most of his men, and confined in the notorious prison-ship, Jersey, where they were subjected to every indignity which refined cruelty could invent.

After seven months’ imprisonment Captain Hiester was exchanged, and returned in time to take part in the battle of Germantown, where he received a wound in the head.

In the varied fortunes of the patriot army he continued to share until the close of the war.

He was appointed by the Supreme Executive Council one of the commissioners of exchange, April 5, 1779, and on October 21, following, one of the committee to seize the personal effects of traitors.

He was chosen to the General Assembly in 1780, and served almost continuously from that date until 1790.

He was a delegate to the Pennsylvania convention to ratify the Federal Constitution in 1787, and in 1789, he was a member of the convention which framed the State Constitution of 1790. He was chosen a presidential elector in 1792, and again in 1796.

He served in the fifth to eighth Congress, and again in the fifteenth and sixteenth Congresses, and during his last term was elected Governor of Pennsylvania by the Federalists, defeating Governor William Findlay, in a campaign which for personal vituperation has never been equalled in Pennsylvania.

Governor Hiester’s administration was most successful, but he would not allow himself to be nominated for a second term.

Returning to Reading, he retired to private life, and died there June 10, 1832.

----------

President Lincoln Delivered Address at Dedication of the National Cemetery at Gettysburg, November 19, 1863

Abraham Lincoln made many notable speeches, the most prominent of which, probably, were those delivered in his historic debates with Stephen A. Douglas, the “Little Giant.”

On his way from his home in Springfield to Washington for his inauguration he made a number of speeches, the most notable of which was delivered in Philadelphia in Independence Hall. But the most famous of all his addresses as President was delivered November 19, 1863, at the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery on the battlefield of Gettysburg.

President Lincoln left Washington at noon on Wednesday, November 18, 1863. There were four passenger coaches, in which were seated the President, members of his Cabinet, several foreign ministers, the private secretaries of the President, officers of the Army and Navy, a military detail serving as a guard, and newspaper correspondents. This special train pulled into the town of Gettysburg about dark of that day.

Mr. Lincoln passed the evening and night in the home of David Wills, who was the special representative of Governor Andrew G. Curtin and the most

## active agent in the establishment of the Soldiers’ Cemetery.

Arnold, in his “History of Lincoln and the Overthrow of Slavery,” asserts that the President while on his way from the White House to the battlefield was notified that he would be expected to make some remarks, and that asking for some paper a rough sheet of foolscap was handed to him. Retiring to a seat by himself, with a pencil be wrote the address.

Mrs. Andrews in her beautiful story entitled “The Perfect Tribute” says, “The President appealed to Secretary Seward for the brown paper he had just removed from a package of books: ‘May I have this to do a little writing?’ and then with a stump of a pencil labored for hours over his speech.”

Contrary to those statements, General James B. Fry, who was present in the car as one of the escort, says:

“I have no recollection of seeing him writing or even reading his speech during the journey; in fact, there was hardly any opportunity for him to read or write.”

That opinion is shared by no less an authority than Nicolay, the senior of the President’s private secretaries, who in an interesting and highly valuable paper on the Gettysburg address, says:

“There is neither record, evidence, nor well-founded tradition that Mr. Lincoln did any writing or made any notes on the journey between Washington and Gettysburg. The many interruptions incident to the journey, together with the rocking and jolting of the train, made writing virtually impossible.”

Morory in his “History of the United States for Schools,” says: “There is conclusive evidence that the words of the address were not written out until after the presidential party had arrived on the ground”; and in an appendix it is stated:

“The following account of how the address was written was received directly from the lips of ex-Governor Curtin, of Pennsylvania, who was present on the occasion and knew whereof he affirmed. Governor Curtin said that after the arrival of the party from Washington, while the President and his Cabinet, Edward Everett, the orator of the day, Governor Curtin, and others were sitting in the parlor of the hotel, the President remarked that he understood that the committee expected him to say something. He would, therefore, if they would excuse him, retire to the next room and see if he could write out something.”

The Hon. Edward McPherson, of Gettysburg, for many years Clerk of the House of Representatives and father of the present Judge Hon. Donald P. McPherson, of Adams County, said in 1875, that after Lincoln had retired to his room on the night of the 18th he sent for his host and “inquired the order of exercises for the next day and begun to put in writing what he called some stray thoughts to utter on the morrow.” Mr. Wills always believed the address was written in his house and said in 1893, as he had earlier, that the President read “from the same paper on which I had seen him writing it the night before.”

Noah Brooks, a newspaper correspondent at Washington during the war, who was on terms of friendly intimacy, declared that a few days prior to November 19, 1863, Lincoln told him that Mr. Everett had kindly sent him a copy of his oration in order that the same ground might not be gone over by both. The President added, “There is no danger that I shall; my speech is all blocked out—it is very short.”

Ward H. Lamon, a personal friend and chief marshal of the ceremonies at Gettysburg, in his “Recollections of Abraham Lincoln,” states that Mr, Lincoln read to him, a day or two before the dedication, what he claims to have been in substance, if not in exact words, what was afterward printed in his famous Gettysburg speech.

Senator Simon Cameron, also asserted, in a newspaper interview, that he had seen a draft of the address in the White House before the President left Washington.

Such are the divergent testimonies concerning the preparation of the Address. Fortunately there exists documentary evidence to substantiate the statements of Noah Brooks, Ward H. Lamon and Senator Cameron and to establish conclusively that the address was the outcome of deliberation and careful thought.

That is further emphasized in the wording of the formal invitation to the President, which was written on November 2, and specifically stated that “it is the desire that you as Chief Executive of the Nation formally set apart these grounds to their sacred use by a few appropriate remarks.”

The address has been so long and so generously accepted as the highest expression of American oratory, that it is difficult to realize that it ever had less appreciation than now. The testimonies of those who heard the address delivered differ widely as to the reception given and as to the impression it made.

Bates in his “History of the Battle of Gettysburg,” in 1875, says: “Its delivery was more solemn and impressive than is possible to conceive from its perusal.”

Arnold says: “Before the last sentence was completed, a thrill of feeling like an electric spark pervaded the crowd. As he closed, and the tears and sobs and cheers which expressed the emotions of the people subsided, he turned to Everett and, grasping his hand, said, ‘I congratulate you on your success.’ The orator gratefully replied, 'Ah! Mr. President, how gladly would I exchange all my hundred pages to have been the author of your twenty lines’.” Major Nickerson, Robert Miller and many others commented on a similar vein.

The reports of the address, published November 20, 1863, in the Public Ledger, the North American, the Press, and the Bulletin, of Philadelphia, were furnished by the Associated Press, the text is identical in each. But many variations of this address are to be found even today.

Not until the war itself had ended and the great leader had fallen did the Nation realize that this speech had given to Gettysburg another claim to immortality and to American eloquence its highest glory.

----------

The Seneca Chief Hiokatoo, “Most Cruel Human Being,” Died November 20, 1811

The second husband of Mary Jemison, the celebrated Indian captive known as “The White Woman of the Genesee” was Chief Hiokatoo, who she describes as the most cruel human being of whom we have any authentic record.

When Mary Jemison was an old woman she related the thrilling narrative of her long life among the Indians. Nothing told by the venerable captive was more thrilling than the life of Hiokatoo, also known as Gardow.

She says: “He was an old man when I first saw him, but he was by no means enervated. During the nearly fifty years that I lived with him, I received, according to Indian customs, all the kindness and attention that was my due as his wife. Although war was his trade from youth till old age and decrepitude stopped his career, he uniformly treated me with tenderness, and never offered an insult.

“I have frequently heard him repeat the history of his life from his childhood; and when he came to that part which related to his actions, his bravery and his valor in war; when he spoke of the ambush, the combat, the spoiling of his enemies and the sacrifice of the victims, his nerves seemed strung with youthful ardor. The warmth of the able warrior seemed to animate his frame and to produce the heated gestures he had practiced in middle age. He was a man of tender feelings to his friends, ready and willing to assist them in distress. Yet, as a warrior, his cruelties to his enemies perhaps were unparalleled, and will not admit of a word of palliation.

“Hiokatoo was born in one of the tribes of the Six Nations that inhabited the banks of the West Branch of the Susquehanna, in Pennsylvania. He belonged to a tribe of the Seneca nation. He was a cousin to Farmer’s Brother, a chief who has been justly celebrated for his worth. Their mothers were sisters, and it was through the influence of Farmer’s Brother that I became the wife of Hiokatoo.

“In early life Hiokatoo showed signs of thirst for blood by attending only to the art of war, in the use of the tomahawk and scalping knife and in practicing cruelties upon everything that chanced to fall into his hands which was susceptible of pain. In that way he learned to use his implements of war effectually and at the same time blunted all those fine feelings and tender sympathies that are naturally excited by seeing or hearing a fellow being in distress.

“He could inflict the most excruciating tortures upon his enemies and prided himself upon his fortitude in having performed the most barbarous ceremonies and tortures without the least degree of pity or remorse. Thus qualified, when very young he was initiated into scenes of carnage by being engaged in the wars that prevailed among the Indian tribes.”

In 1731 he was appointed a runner and assisted in collecting an army to go against the Catawba, Cherokee and other Southern Indians. In one great battle of this war the Northern Indians ambushed their enemies and in two days massacred 1200 of their Southern enemies.

During the French and Indian War Hiokatoo was in every battle that was fought along the Susquehanna and Ohio Rivers. At Braddock’s defeat he took two white prisoners and burned them alive in a fire of his own kindling.

Mary Jemison says he participated in the battle at Fort Freeland, on Warrior Run, Northumberland County, July 28, 1779. She says:

“Hiokatoo was in command of the 300 Seneca Indians, and that Captain John MacDonald commanded more than one hundred British regulars. Hiokatoo, with the help of a few Indians, tomahawked every wounded American while earnestly begging with uplifted hands for quarter.”

In an expedition against Cherry Valley, N. Y., Hiokatoo was second in command. This force of hundreds of Indians was determined upon the total destruction of the whites.

Besides these instances, he was in a number of parties during the Revolution, where he ever acted a conspicuous part.

When Tory Colonel John Butler and Chief Joe Brant were making their terrible incursions against the settlers in lower New York and Pennsylvania they frequently resided with Chief Hiokatoo and his wife, Mary Jemison, at their home in the German Flats.

During General Sullivan’s expedition against the Indians in the summer of 1779, Hiokatoo was most active in his attempt to frustrate his plans. During this march Lieutenant Thomas Boyd was captured by the Indians in ambush. While Chief Little Beard was in command at Boyd’s cruel execution, Hiokatoo was a close second.

Hiokatoo was one of the leading actors in the diabolical scene following the capture of Colonel William Crawford, July, 1782, when he was put to death after the most inhuman barbarities were inflicted upon him.

The cruel Indian chief was assisted in these fiendish scenes by Simon Girty, the white savage renegade and outlaw Tory. Hiokatoo was the leading chief in the battle which destroyed Colonel Crawford’s command and personally directed the colonel’s execution. He painted Dr. Knight’s face black with his own hands and had him conducted to the place where he was to be executed. Dr. Knight escaped during the night and was able to reach his home and give the horrid details of Crawford’s execution.

Chief Hiokatoo served in seventeen campaigns during the period of the Revolution, until his death, which occurred on November 20, 1811, at the advanced age of 103 years.