By Mike Bowen – Co-author, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site
How trustworthy are the military reports from the hearings that followed Sand Creek?
Most trust that a military report is correct, without any bias.
What if information had been uncovered, showing that the Commission working with Lt. Colonel Sam Tappan, was very biased? Tappan led the hearings and was known as Colonel Chivington’s enemy.
Working with Tappan was B. F. Wade, Chairman of the Commission. He provided a report as part of what he claimed were the Commission’s findings concerning Sand Creek.
Wade contradicts himself in his report.
“All the testimony goes to show that the Indians, under the immediate control of Black Kettle and White Antelope of the Cheyennes, and Left Hand of the Arapahoes, were and had been friendly to the whites, and had not been guilty of any acts of hostility or depredation. The Indian agents, the Indian interpreter and others examined by your committee, all testify to the good character of those Indians. Even Governor Evans and Major Anthony, though evidently willing to convey to your committee a false impression of the character of those Indians, were forced, in spite of their prevarication, to admit that they knew of nothing they had done which rendered them deserving of punishment.
A northern band of the Cheyennes, known as the Dog Soldiers, had been guilty of acts of hostility; but all the testimony goes to prove that they had no connexion with Black Kettle’s band, but acted in despite of his authority and influence. Black Kettle and his band denied all connexion with or responsibility for the Dog Soldiers, and Left Hand and his band of Arapahoes were equally friendly.
Respectfully submitted.
B. F. WADE, Chairman” (Report of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War 1865, Thirty-Eighth Congress, Second Session).
This is all easily debunked. He starts with “all the testimony,” which means 100 percent. This is false. Most testimony that spoke of the Indians being friendly to the whites was from people not at Sand Creek.
These statements were given by the chairman, who made up his mind before hearing any testimony. He also was not at Sand Creek. The purpose of the hearings should have been to gather evidence and then come to a conclusion. They came to a conclusion without gathering any evidence. How could they have their minds made up about an event they did not witness?
Major Anthony and Governor Evans both testified to atrocities committed by the Cheyenne and Arapaho.
“They were sending out their raiding parties. Their men came there on Smoke Hill, and every little while a raiding party would make an attack on some train or some ranch,” Major Anthony stated (Thirty-Eighth Congress, Second Session, Congress of The United States, In The House of Representatives, January 10, 1865).
He commented further about Sand Creek.
“But before the re-enforcements came from district headquarters, Colonel Chivington came to Fort Lyon with his command, and I joined him and went out on that expedition to Sand creek. I never made any offer to the Indians. It was the understanding that I was not in favor of peace with them,” Major Anthony testified (Thirty-Eighth Congress, Second Session, Congress of The United States, In The House of Representatives, January 10, 1865).
Many have claimed that the Indians camped on Sand Creek were under the protection of the United States government.
Two months prior to Sand Creek at Camp Weld, Governor Evans spoke and made it clear that no treaty would be made and that soldiers were preparing for a fight. It was no surprise to the Cheyenne and Arapaho that soldiers were going to fight back. He also pointed out that the Indians rested on the thought that since the whites were at war against each other, they could go on the attack against white settlers in Colorado Territory and nothing would happen to them.
“You have gone into an alliance with the Sioux who were at war with us; you have done a great deal of damage, have stolen stock—your people went away and smoked the ‘war pipe’ with our enemies,” Governor Evans said (Report on the Conduct of the War, 38 Congress, 2nd session, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1865).
“So far as making a treaty now is concerned, we are in no condition to do it; your young men are on the war path, my soldiers are preparing for the fight. The time when you can make war best is in the summer time; the time when I can make war best is in the winter. I have learned that you understand that as the whites are at war among themselves, you think you can now drive the whites from this country, but this reliance is false. The Great Father at Washington has men enough to drive all the Indians off the plains, and whip the rebels at the same time. Now, the war with the whites is nearly through, and the Great Father will not know what to do with all his soldiers, except to send them after the Indians on the plains,” Governor Evans said (Report on the Conduct of the War, 38 Congress, 2nd session, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1865).
Governor Evans asked, “who committed the murder of the Hungate family, on Burning (Running) Creek?”
“The Arapahoes, a party of the northern band who were passing north; it was Medicine Man, or Roman Nose, and three others,” Neva said (Report on the Conduct of the War, 38 Congress, 2nd session, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1865). It is believed some Cheyenne Dog Soldiers were also involved.
During the spring and summer of 1864, months before Sand Creek, Cheyenne Dog Soldiers were raiding along the Platte and other places in Colorado Territory. They killed and scalped white settlers, took captives, stole and/or drove off stock, stole items from white settlers and they had the settlers in Colorado Territory in a state of panic. It was believed a repeat of the Minnesota Massacre would happen to them. Governor Evans testified during the hearings that followed Sand Creek and spoke about these attacks. See our blog here: MinnesotaMassacre.
“…these attacks during the summer,…were of very frequent occurrence. The destruction of property was very great. Our people suffered…in their loss of life. They murdered a family some twenty-odd miles east of Denver. The attacks by hostile Indians…were very numerous along the Platte. There was an attack as I came in, about the month of November. It was in the evening, about sundown, and I passed over the ground in the night in the stage with my family, and a few days afterwards a party of emigrants, returning from Colorado, were murdered near the same ground…near Plum Creek; and for a considerable length of time…the attacks were very numerous and very violent” (Thirty-Eighth Congress, Second Session, Congress of The United States, In The House of Representatives, January 10, 1865).
Governor Evans said the attacks were “very numerous and very violent.” The Cheyenne and Arapaho weren’t letting up on their attacks either. He made pleas for help, and he finally got some help from the 3rd Colorado Cavalry and members of the 1st Colorado Cavalry.
George Bent wrote about raids along the Platte River, which ties together what Governor Evans said.
“We traveled several days before we came across the big trail of Cheyenne village. Followed this trail until we struck the village on forks of Solomon River. Cheyennes had just came in from big raid on Platte River,” George Bent said (Bent to Hyde, 3-20-1913).
Why are the eyewitness accounts from Major Anthony and Governor Evans silenced? Why was Colonel Chivington denied witnesses in the hearings at Denver? Read our blog here: Synopsis. And why are George Bent’s letters silenced as well? They all speak to the truth of Sand Creek, and what they said about it hurts the massacre claim.
Sand Creek was fighting back. It was not a starting point. And it was not a random attack on peaceful Indians.
In fact, white scalps were found in the lodges at Sand Creek. Read our blog here: WhiteScalps.
Chairman Wade lied in his report. He stated that no Indians connected to Black Kettle committed any depredations. Multiple eyewitnesses saw white scalps in the lodges, including a doctor and physician. George Bent wrote about the raids committed by the Dog Soldiers. He was one of them, and they were indeed camped at Sand Creek.
From our book, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site:
Summer 1864
“Bent saw scalp dances in the center of each village he rode past on his way to one of the largest Indian villages of Cheyenne, Sioux, and Arapaho on the Solomon River, (Bent to Hyde 2-28-1906). “Dog Soldiers were in fact outlaws. Their young men were always in mischief,” Bent said, (Bent to Hyde 6-20-1904). They made raids from the South Platte River to the Little Blue River, and the Dog Soldiers were coming in from all directions bringing in lots of plunder, (Bent to Hyde 2-28-1906). Interestingly, Bent used the word mischief to describe the activities of the Dog Soldiers. He also said that tornadoes caused mischief to towns, (Bent to Hyde 7-?-1908). Due to his limited vocabulary, Bent at times used the wrong word or a not strong enough word.”
Tornadoes don’t cause mischief, they cause total destruction. The same was true for the Dog Soldiers.
We know from eyewitnesses including George Bent that the Dog Soldiers were not camped somewhere else but were affiliated with Black Kettle and camped in his village at Sand Creek.
And we know from artifacts that captives were likely in the village. Chuck Bowen found artifacts that came from captives and/or raids including buttons from a woman’s dress and a red signet ring.
Chuck Bowen found this red signet ring at the Lost Sand Creek Site. It likely belonged to a captive at Sand Creek or was taken by the Indians during a raid. Buttons from a woman’s dress, either from a captive at Sand Creek or from a raid on an innocent white settler.
————
“During the night’s march to Sand Creek, the horse of Jim Dubois of company D gave out, and he was left afoot and alone miles in the rear, not by any means a desirable situation… When Jim had led his horse until he would move no further, he stripped him and turned him loose. Then taking all his ammunition, and a little grub, he took the trail and exerted himself to the utmost to overtake the command. In this he entirely failed. At daybreak he was still on the open plain with no one else in sight. Soon after sunrise he heard the boom of the artillery, and firing of guns, and knew the battle had opened…within two or three miles of the battle ground, he saw a large party of Indians a mile or so to the west, and as they approached he was enabled to count them two or three times, and made out seventy-five in number; there being nine horses carrying two Indians each,” Morse Coffin said (Coffin, Morse H., The Battle of Sand Creek, page 30).
From our book, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site:
‘I believe Dubois was near where the soldiers turned off the trail to the northeast when his horse gave out. He looked west and saw Indians fleeing south on the lodgepole trail. They were some of the first to see the soldiers coming and flee the village. Most fled north up the creek, but these seventy-five Indians fled south.
Why did nine horses have two people on them? Perhaps one an Indian and the other a captive but difficult for Dubois to tell that early in the morning. That’s typically how they moved them. Why did these Indians leave to the south? The soldiers were advancing north, so it may have been an attempt to thwart the attack. It would keep the soldiers from knowing they were holding captives.
Black Kettle was known as a peace chief but had no problem holding white women and children captive in his camps. The white captives, Clara Blinn and her two-year-old boy, Willie, were in his camp on the Washita in November of 1868 when they were killed by Indians. ‘Clara was shot through the forehead, her scalp completely removed, and her skull horribly crushed.’ Two-year-old Willie ‘bore numerous marks of violence’ and had his ‘head crushed by a blow against a tree’ (Broome, Jeff, Dog Soldier Justice page 64).
They were taken captive likely near the 9/11 Memorial north of Lamar.
It’s not that Chairman Wade got information wrong, it’s that he lied in an official military report. And unfortunately the reports and documents from the hearings are not reliable. They are filled with testimony from people who were either not at Sand Creek or had a bias against Colonel Chivington. Read more about this in our book, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site. We have information about the hearings following chapter 14 which is a chapter of photos. These photos detail artifacts found at the Lost Sand Creek Site. Our book is mostly about the discovery of the real location of Black Kettle’s village and running battle areas. Our book also dives into how the discovery debunks the massacre claim. The artifacts are a big part of discovery and we share a lot of photos of them in the book. They truly are the piece of evidence that reveals the truth about Sand Creek. Make sure to get a copy of our book so you can learn the truth.
Get our book here: WeFoundTheLostSandCreekSite. You can also click on the Buy The Book tab in the top right of this page.
Give us a follow on Facebook: BowenHistory
Subscribe for free on YouTube: TheLostSandCreek
