[Footnote 897: Maxey to Anderson, January 12, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 856-858.]
[Footnote 898: To this list might be added the proper fitting out of the troops, which was one of the first things that Maxey called to Smith's attention [Ibid., vol. xxii, part ii, 1112-1113].]
[Footnote 899: This idea met with Smith's full approval [Ibid., vol. xxxiv, part ii, 918].]
[Footnote 900: This is given upon the authority of Maxey [_Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 857]. It seems slightly at variance with Smith's own official statements. Smith would appear to have entertained a deep distrust of Cooper, whose promotion he did not regard as either "wise or necessary" [Ibid., vol. xxii, part ii, 1102].]
[Footnote 901: Cooper to T.M. Scott, January, 1864 [Ibid., vol. xxxiv, part ii, 859-862].]
[Footnote 902: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 917.]
[Footnote 903: Boudinot to Davis, January 4, 1864 [Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 920-921]. Boudinot also suggested other things, some good, some bad. He suggested, for instance, that Indian Territory be attached to Missouri and Price put in command. Seddon doubted if Price would care for the place [Ibid., 921].]
[Footnote 904:--Ibid., vol. xxxiv, part ii, 858.]
[Footnote 905: Maxey to Smith, January 15, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 875.]
[Footnote 906:--Ibid., vol. xxii, part ii, 1101-1102.]
[Footnote 907:--Ibid., vol. xxxiv, part ii, 845, 848.]
[Footnote 908: So Smith explained [Ibid., 845], when Steele objected to staying in the Indian Territory in a subordinate capacity [Ibid., vol. xxii, part ii, 1108]. Steele was transferred to the District of Texas [Ibid., vol. xxxiv, part ii, 961]. The withdrawal of Steele left Cooper the ranking officer and the person on whom such a command, if created, would fall [Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 968-969].]
[Footnote 909: Boudinot to Davis, February 11, 1864, Ibid., 968.]
[Footnote 910: Seddon to Davis, February 22, 1864, Ibid., 968-969.]
[Footnote 911: Richardson, _Messages and Papers of the Confederacy_, vol. i, 477-479; _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part iii, 824-825. Davis addressed the chiefs and not the delegation that had brought the resolutions [Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 1030-1031]. John Jumper, Seminole principal chief, was a member of the delegation.]
[Footnote 912: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 848; Special Orders of the Adjutant and Inspector General's Office, 1864, _Confederate Records_, no. 7, p. 15.]
[Footnote 913: Cooper to Davis, February 29, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 1007.]
[Footnote 914:--Ibid., 1008.]
[Footnote 915: S.A. Roberts to Maxey, February 1, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 936-937.]
[Footnote 916: Seddon to Scott, January 6, 1864, Ibid., 828-829.]
[Footnote 917: Moty Kanard, late principal chief of the Creek Nation, spoke of it as a _noble_ address and begged for a copy [Ibid., 960].]
[Footnote 918: Vore to Maxey, January 29, 1864, Ibid., 928; Maxey to Anderson, February 9, 1864, Ibid., 958; same to same, February 7, 1864, Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 963-966.]
[Footnote 919: Inasmuch as the alliance with the Indians of the Plains was never fully consummated and inasmuch as these Indians harassed and devastated the frontier states for reasons quite foreign to the causes of the Civil War, the subject of their depredations and outrages is not considered as within the scope of the present volume.]
[Footnote 920: Cooper to Maxey, February, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 959. The report reached Phillips that the Choctaws wanted a confederacy quite independent of the southern [Ibid., part i, 107].]
[Footnote 921: Although Davis's address of February 22 could well, in point of chronology, have been an answer to the applications and recommendations of the second session of the general council, it has been dealt with in connection with those of the first session, notwithstanding that Boudinot made his appeal less than a fortnight before Davis wrote. In his address, Davis specifically mentioned the work of the first session and made no reference whatsoever to that of the second.]
[Footnote 922: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 10.]
[Footnote 923: Ewing wanted the command of Indian Territory, Ibid., 89.]
[Footnote 924: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 167, 187.]
[Footnote 925:--Ibid., 188.]
[Footnote 926: Lane, Wilder, and Dole, requested that Blunt be summoned to Washington [Ibid., 52].]
[Footnote 927: See Phillips's address to his soldiers, January 30, 1864, Ibid., 190.]
[Footnote 928: Phillips to Curtis, February 16, 1864, Ibid., part i, 106-108.]
[Footnote 929: Richardson, _Messages and Papers of the Presidents_, vol. vi, 213-215.]
[Footnote 930: To Governor Colbert of the Chickasaw Nation [_Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part i, 109-110], to the Council of the Choctaw Nation [Ibid., 110], to John Jumper of the Seminole Nation [Ibid., 111], to McIntosh, possibly D.N. [Ibid., part ii, 997]. For Maxey's comments upon Phillips and his letters, see Maxey to Smith, February 26, 1864, Ibid., 994-997.]
[Footnote 931: Phillips to Curtis, February 24, 1864, Ibid., part i, 108-109.]
[Footnote 932: For the itinerary of the course, see Ibid., 111-112.]
[Footnote 933: F. Steele to S. Breck, March 27, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 751.]
[Footnote 934: T.M. Scott to Maxey, April 12, 1864, Ibid., part iii, 762.]
[Footnote 935: This matter is very much generalized here for the reason that it properly belongs in the volume on reconstruction that is yet to come.]
[Footnote 936: February 23, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 408.]
[Footnote 937: John M. Thayer to Charles A. Dana, March 15, 1864, Ibid., 617.]
[Footnote 938: Thayer to Grant, March 11, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 566.]
[Footnote 939:--Ibid., part iii, 192, 196.]
[Footnote 940:--Ibid., part ii, 651. Blunt would have preferred Scullyville [Ibid., part iii, 13].]
[Footnote 941: Blunt to Curtis, March 30, 1864, Ibid., part ii, 791.]
[Footnote 942: Blunt to Phillips, April 3, 1864, Ibid., part iii, 32; Phillips to Curtis, April 5, 1864, Ibid., 52-53.]
[Footnote 943: Curtis had ordered the completion of the fortifications which might be taken to imply that he too was not favoring a forward policy.]
[Footnote 944: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part ii, 1034, 1036.]
[Footnote 945: Maxey to Smith, April 3, 1864, Ibid., part iii, 728-729.]
[Footnote 946: For Steele's opposition to Adair's predatory movements, see _Confederate Records_, chap. 2, nos. 267, 268.]
[Footnote 947: Williamson to Maxey, April 28, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part i, 845.]
[Footnote 948: It had not been Smith's intention that he should go out of his own district, where his services were indispensable, until Price's need should be found to be really urgent [Boggs to Maxey, April 12, 1864, Ibid., part iii, 760-761].]
[Footnote 949: --Ibid., part i, 1011-1013; part iv, 686-687.]
[Footnote 950: _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part iv, 694.]
[Footnote 951: --Ibid., 695.]
[Footnote 952: Stand Watie to Cooper, June 27, 1864, Ibid., part i, 1013.]
[Footnote 953: _Official Records_, vol. xli, part ii, 1013.]
[Footnote 954: --Ibid., 1046-1047. The general council of the confederated tribes had recommended an increase in the armed force of Indian Territory and that it was felt could best be obtained, in these days of wavering faith, only by conscription. The general council was expected to meet again, July 20, at Chouteau's Trading House [Ibid., 1047]. In October, the Chickasaws resorted to conscription. For the text of the conscription act, see Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 1024-1025.]
[Footnote 955:--Ibid., vol. xli, part ii, 1078. For additional facts concerning the progress of reorganization, see Portlock to Marston, August 5, 1864, _Confederate Records_, chap. 2, no. 259, p. 37; Portlock to Captain E. Walworth, August 27, 1864, Ibid., pp. 42-43.]
[Footnote 956: The most significant of Maxey's rulings was that on official precedence. His position was that no race or color line should be drawn in determining the relative rank of officers [Maxey to Cooper, June 29, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part iv, 698-699] and he held that Confederate law recognized no distinction between Indian and white officers of the same rank. Charles de Morse, a Texan, with whom General Steele had had several differences, took great exception to Maxey's decision. Race prejudice was strong in him. Had there been many like him, the Indians, with any sense of dignity, could never have continued long identified with the Confederate cause. For De Morse's letter of protest, see Ibid., 699-700.]
[Footnote 957: Maxey to Boggs, May 11, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xxxiv, part iii, 820.]
[Footnote 958: For progress reached in reorganization by October, see orders issued by direction of Maxey, Ibid., vol. liii, supplement, 1023.]
[Footnote 959: Cooper to T.M. Scott, October 1, 1864, _Official Records_, vol. xli, part i, 783; Watie to T.B. Heiston, October 3, 1864, Ibid., 785.]
[Footnote 960:--Ibid., 793, 794. Cooper described it "as brilliant as any one of the war" [Ibid., 783] and Maxey confessed that he had long thought that movements of the raiding kind were the most valuable for his district [Ibid., 777].]
[Footnote 961: Maxey to Boggs, October 9, 1864, Ibid., part iii, 990.]
[Footnote 962: Cooper to Bell, October 6, 1864, Ibid., 982-984.]
[Footnote 963: Curtis Johnson to W.H. Morris, September 20, 1864 [Ibid., part i, 774].]
[Footnote 964: _Official Records_, vol. xli, part iii, 301. Wattles was not at Fort Gibson a month before he was told to be prepared to move even his Indian Brigade to Fort Smith [Ibid., part iv, 130]. The necessity for executing the order never arose, although all the winter there was talk off and on of abandoning Fort Gibson entirely, sometimes also there was talk of abandoning Fort Smith. So weak had the two places been for a long time that Cooper insisted there was no good reason why the Confederates should not attempt to seize them. It is interesting that Thayer notified Wattles to be prepared to move just when there was the greatest prospect of a Confederate Indian raid into Kansas.]
[Footnote 965: _Official Records_, vol. xli, part iv, 1035-1037; vol. liii, supplement, 1027.]
[Footnote 966: In July, 1864, orders issued from Richmond for the retirement of Maxey and the elevation of Cooper [Ibid., part ii, 1019]; but Smith held them in abeyance [Ibid., part iii, 971]; for he believed that Maxey's "removal, besides being an injustice to him, would be a misfortune to the department." The suppression of the orders failed to meet the approval of the authorities at Richmond and some time subsequent to the first of October Smith was informed that the orders were "imperative and must be carried into effect" [Ibid.,].]
[Footnote 967: _Official Records_, vol. xlviii, part i, 1382.]
[Footnote 968:--Ibid., 1403.]
[Footnote 969:--Ibid., 1408.]
[Footnote 970:--Ibid.]
[Footnote 971: The evidence for this is chiefly in Cooper's own letter book. One published letter is especially valuable in this connection. It is from Cooper confidentially to Anderson, May 15, 1865. _Official Records_, vol. xlviii, part ii, 1306.]
[Footnote 972: For Phillips's own account of his reinstallment, see his letter to Herron, January 16, 1865, Ibid., part i, 542-543.]
[Footnote 973: Smith to Pike, April 8, 1864, Ibid., part ii, 1266-1269. It was necessary to have someone else beside Throckmorton, who was a Texan, serve; because the Indians of the Plains had a deep distrust of Texas and of all Texans [Smith to Cooper, April 8, 1864, Ibid., 1270-1271; and Smith to Throckmorton, April 8, 1864, Ibid., 1271-1272].]
[Footnote 974: Smith issued him a commission however. See Ibid., 1266.]
[Footnote 975:--Ibid., 604-606.]