Left Flank

Between July 15 and August 1816, a battle fought on the Apalachicola River in northwestern Florida at Prospect Bluff eliminated a unique and very real impediment to American expansion westward. The Negro Fort was a stubborn legacy of the Creek War, abandoned in the summer pf 1815 by renegade Red Sticks, Seminoles, and their British allies, but still garrisoned by the remaining Maroons, or Black Seminoles - the offspring of Seminoles and escaped Georgian African-American slaves. A porous border and the example of independent Black Seminole towns and accomplished chiefs and advisers encouraged even more slaves to escape. The Creek War had ended with the Treaty of Fort Jackson on August 9, 1815, but a few British entrepreneurs, backed by marines and local Caribbean governors and their Spanish ally waiting for another chance to pounce on the United States, had kept the American-Florida border hot with Native raids. Major General Andrew Jackson, observing the Negro Fort's strategic importance, saw a way to rid the United States of a few problems all at once.

The Negro Fort was impressive,and the battle to subdue it underhanded. Generals Jackson and Edmund Gaines planned to send American vessels, two schooners and two gunboats, commanded by Sailing Master Jairus Loomis, up the Apalachicola to force the Maroons to fire first, necessitating a honorable response by a detachment of the US Fourth Infantry, commanded by Colonel Duncan Clinch. Inside the Negro Fort, three African-American leaders, Garzon, Cyrus, and Prince, each with military experience leading or assisting Red Stick or Seminole war parties, commanded 250-300 African-Americans, and also 1,600 Seminoles, Choctaws, and Creeks, and a schooner patrolling the river. The eight-sided earthen fort sported 10 guns, including four 24-pounders atop walls 15 feet high and 18 feet thick. Near the Negro Fort lived about a thousand men, women, and children growing crops. The bombardment of the Negro Fort on July 25 went well for the defenders until a freak accident when one American shell, which were now fired «red-hot», was lobbed from Loomis' gunboats and rolled through the door of the magazine. The explosion was terrific, and the slaughter devastating. In addition, Clinch allowed his Creek allies to slaughter survivors. Clinch acquired 2,500 rifles, 50 carbines, 400 pistols, and 500 swords, and destroyed the countryside. Clinch's own recollections were conveniently less barbarous.

«The explosion was awful, and the scene horrible beyond description. You cannot conceive, nor I describe the horrors of the scene. In an instant lifeless bodies were stretched upon the plain, buried in sand and rubbish, or suspended from the tops of the surrounding pines. Here lay an innocent babe, there a helpless mother; on the one side a sturdy warrior, on the other a bleeding squaw. Piles of bodies, large heaps of sand, broken guns, accoutrements, etc, covered the site of the fort. The brave soldier was disarmed of his resentment and checked his victorious career, to drop a tear on the distressing scene.»

Yet, the impressive display did not mollify the Seminoles for long, and the British returned to sow rebellion. In the next year, the First Seminole War commenced. Sean Michael O'Brien, from whose book, In Bitterness and Tears: Andrew Jackson's Destruction of the Creeks and Seminoles, sums up the the political and economic consequences of the Creek War and First Seminole Wars as «the most disastrous conflicts in Native American history.» The Battle of Horseshoe Bend, the decisive end of the Creek War, resulted in more Native deaths than any single other conflict, and the Treaty of Fort Jackson forced the cession of half of the Creek state, opening up the Alabama and Mississippi for white American expansion. The British and Spanish missed an opportunity to block American expansion by creating a Native border state along the Georgia-Alabama-Florida borders.  And, Southern slave owners' fears of a slave insurrection lost one major manifestation. As DKos' gjohnsit argues:

A consistent theme in the history of slavery is the fear - the fear that the people you are doing wrong are going to learn enough to realize the wrongs being done to them and make you pay for it. It's the manifestations of this fear that are interesting.

What I find compelling is the alternative the Negro Fort offers of another America.

Florida has lost its water, which will stay in Lake Lanier up north in Georgia. But, all hope—and future endless pissing contests—isn't lost

The ruling, however, doesn't settle the issue.

The Corps still must write a permanent water plan. And all three states in the water war, including Alabama, are involved in complex lawsuits meant to resolve it.

Calling all ad agencies: how do you make victimized mussels and sturgeon cute? How will Charlie Crist, in his bid to Republican VP take this defeat?

Image by Gregory.Skibinski via Flickr

The southeastern states of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia have had a water problem for two decades. Two river systems, the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) and the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) start in Georgia and flow through Florida into the Gulf of Mexico. Water consumption in Georgia, particularly the ACF watering Atlanta, affects Alabama and Florida downstream. The US Army Corps of Engineers and the three states have fought in Federal court, and so far the Corps is trying to keep an even hand, by ruling in favor of Florida's aquaculture assets against Atlanta city dwellers' need for water. The Bush administration is also mediating the dispute through the Interior Department.

I performed a qualitative analysis of the State of the State addresses of the three disputant states, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, for responses to this situation, or to the other two parties to the water dispute. Is there any indication of future policies on this issue in these three speeches?

Alabama's Governor Bob Riley rhetorically adopted the most combative language. Riley begins by exhorting Alabamians to conserve water. He then calls for a “Statewide assessment” of water resources. Riley mentions “Georgia” or “Georgians” eight times in three paragraphs (and mostly alone, or juxtaposed with “Alabama”, “Federal” three times, “Florida” twice, and “Alabama” or “Alabamians” five times. The following paragraph speaks for itself:

Now there are some in Georgia who believe the water in those federal reservoirs belongs only to Georgians. However, Georgia didn’t build those reservoirs and Georgia didn’t pay for them. No. They were built with federal dollars, which means Alabama helped build them, Alabama helped pay for them, and Alabama has as much right to them as Georgia has ever had or ever will have.

Riley sounds most like someone willing to take strong measures to redress grievances.

Georgia's Governor Sonny Perdue's seven paragraphs on the water issue are as combative as Riley's, only a bit more understated. Generally, Perdue congratulates local and state initiatives to tackle the issue, stressing disagreement with Corps and Federal decisions. “Now, we don’t want the state of Georgia to usurp the rightful role and responsibility of local government to provide for the adequate supply of clean drinking water. But we do want to support them in this endeavor.” Perdue also advocates conservation and responsible business decisions. “But hear me now – we will not allow others outside this state to hamper our progress by limiting our access to the waters that fall on our land. That will not happen on this Governor’s watch.” Perdue skillfully never mentions either state, the Corps, or the Federal government.

Diametrically opposite in tone and substance to both Riley's and Perdue's speeches, Florida's Governor Charlie Crist never mentions the water dispute, either Alabama or Georgia, or the Corps or the Federal government. Crist also exhorts Floridians to conserve resources, and advocates a “gold to green” policy with businesses. Crist sticks to his campaign promise to make Everglades restoration a priority.

All three governors stress conservation efforts. Both Crist and Perdue adopt positive measures to correct the situation. Both Perdue and Riley adopt combative language aimed at each other. Crist sidesteps the issue entirely by sticking to his campaign promises. As an indication of future policy, these speeches characterize a preliminary, preparatory phase.

Now, Florida Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Mike Sole has stepped up, criticizing the US Army Corps of Engineers.

But Soles' letter challenged whether Lanier is low enough to jeopardize the region's supply of drinking water. He said only the part of the lake now accessible by intake pipes has been described as nearly depleted.

«Bottom line, nearly half of Lake Lanier stored water is currently available, but is not being factored in, and therefore is no threat to municipal and industrial demands,» Sole stated.

The Apalachicola Riverkeeper group had yet to review Sole's letter but lashed out with its own criticism of the corps plan.

Georgia officials «intend to get the rights to as much water as they can, and the corps is working to their advantage,» said Dan Tonsmeire of the group.

Is this the Crist administration's style, walk softly, and deploy Mike Soles?