Indians killed Purifoy's children. 1838, April 1, Sunday

---

The North-Carolina Standard. April 18, 1838

---

From the Savannah Georgian of April 11.

We yesterday received by the steamer J. Stone, Capt. Mendal, the Darien Telegraph of yesterday, in advance of the mail. From it we extract the following:

“MORE INDIAN MURDERS NEAR TALLAHASSEE.—A gentleman just arrived from Tallahassee, informs us that on the night of the 1st inst., a family of the name of Purify were murdered within 20 miles of Tallahassee. The Indians burned the dwelling and two white children in it; two negro women were also killed; and Mrs. Purify received two shots through her body and was stabbed by the Indians. She crawled, however, into a thicket where she concealed herself. Dr. Taylor, of Monticello, stated to our informant, that she could not possibly survive.”

---

Edgefield Advertiser. April 19, 1838 | The Florida Watchman. April 21, 1838

---

From the Charleston Mercury.
MORE INDIAN MURDERS.

A gentleman, just arrived from Tallahassee, says the Darien Telegraph, of the 6th inst. informs us that on the night of the 1st inst. a family of the name of Purifoy, were murdered within 20 miles of Tallahassee. The Indians burned the dwelling and two white children in it; two negro women were also killed; and Mrs. Purifoy received two shots through her body and was stabbed by the Indians. She crawled, however, into a thicket, where she concealed herself. Dr. Taylor, of Monticello, stated to our informant, that she could not possibly survive.

The Jacksonville Courier of the 5th inst. says:—By a letter to our excellent Mayor, Col. Dell, from his brother in Alachua county, dated April 1, [and] from the bearer of the letter, Mr. Brooks, our worst apprehensions of farther—indeed of continued Indian murders, are confirmed. “They killed two Irishmen, on the place that Brush cleared on the Micanopy pond.” Signs near Camp Fanning are spoken of. “God only knows what we are to do; but still hope Jesup will be able to relieve us.” Hope deferred; and still farther to be deferred as may be seen by the General's own showing.

Mr. Brooks gives the further information that two volunteers were fired upon at Suwannee, Old Town—and severely wounded; that Indians have been seen at the Echetokamy[/Echetokany] Springs, and signs about Fort White, and near Newnansville.

——

FURTHER PARTICULARS.—On Saturday evening last, about dark, a party of Indians, supposed to number 30 or 40, residing in the vicinity of the previous depredations, murdered two children and three negroes, plundered and set fire to the buildings, and made their escape—the children were burned in the dwelling. Mrs. Purifoy, although severely wounded, miraculously made her escape from the savages. When the attack was made there were none but females about the premises, a fact supposed to have been known to the Indians. Mrs. P. was lying in bed with her two children, heard a noise in her room and on looking up found it filled with Indians, who commenced discharging their rifles, several of them aimed at herself and children. The children it is supposed were killed at once. Mrs. P. received a ball in her shoulder, which passed out at her breast. The savages next commenced hacking and stabbing her with their knives, and inflicted a number of severe wounds on her head and several parts of her body. Their attention was a moment directed from her to a noise made by the servants in an adjoining room, when Mrs. P. taking advantage of this circumstance escaped to the yard, where she was again shot down, but succeeded in gaining the woods, intending to reach her father's residence, Capt. Daniel Bird, about two miles distant. Faint from the loss of blood and the severity of her wounds, she was unable to proceed more than half a mile, where she was found next morning. Mrs. P. received, we understand, ten distinct wounds, several very severe, but her physician entertains strong hopes of her recovery. To heighten the catastrophe, Mr. Purifoy, whose children and slaves were slain, was absent from home, fulfilling his ministerial duties.

As soon as the attack was discovered, the troops at Camp Carter, under Capt. Shehee, were sent for, but the Indians has dispersed in three parties and fled. Maj. Taylor with Capt. Newsam's company joined Capt. S. on Monday morning, and have followed the several trails, but with what success we have not understood.

The house attacked is several miles within the frontier settlements—the houses of most of which are picketed in. We trust the occurrence will awaken the United States authorities to do something more for the protection of our frontier.—Tallahassee Floridian.

---

Edgefield Advertiser. April 19, 1838

---

The news which we give this week from Florida is of the most painful interest. The murder which we have recorded, is associated in our minds with all that is dark, and cruel and terrible in savage warfare. Mrs. Purifoy was born in this District, and removed but a few years ago, from this Village, with her highly esteemed father, to Florida. We knew her well; and we speak but the language of her numerous acquaintance when we say, that she displayed in her life a lamb-like meekness, a purity and excellence of character, which are seldom seen. Who would have thought, said a respected Lady to us on hearing the melancholy occurrence, that the mild and innocent, the amiable and youthful Louisa was doomed to fall beneath the deadly rifle and butcher-knife of the savage!

The people of this section have not been indifferent to suffering Florida, but this fresh instance of Indian barbarity has awakened anew their warmest sympathies. How long are these scenes to continue! When will cease to flow the blood of innocent women and children?

When we penned the above, we had heard from another source than the newspaper account, that Mrs. Purifoy was dead. By later intelligence we learn now that strong hopes are entertained of her recovery.

---

A Guide to the Correspondence of the Breckinridge, Gamble and Watts Families

---

Other topics in the letters from Mary Watts Gamble include ...

... an attack by the Seminoles upon the home, family, and slaves of Mrs. Purifoy, wife of a Methodist minister and daughter of Captain Byrd, and her severe wounds and loss of her children just four miles away from Welaunee (April 13, 1838); ...

---

Vermont Telegraph. April 4, 1838

---

THE FLORIDA WAR.—There are now ten thousand troops employed in the relentless crusade against a remnant band of miserable Seminole Indians! So far, disaster and dishonor are the only fruits of this most iniquitous war. It has cost millions of dollars and thousands of lives. It has, also, fixed a stain upon our national character which nothing can efface. And what has been accomplished? A few Indians have voluntarily surrendered. Others, who came in under the protection of a white flag, were treacherously captured! But the great object for which the war was waged is as far from being accomplished as it was when it commenced. The Indians have retreated into their swamps and everglades, pursued by General Jesup with an army ten thousand strong!

It is, we believe, more than a year since the Indians have committed any act of aggression or hostility. Though hunted like wild beasts, they abstain from acts of violence. The white men encroach & plunder—the Indians retire and submit. The Indians are, and have been, ready to lay down their arms. Their voices are uniformly for peace. They ask for nothing but to live and die upon their own soil. This is denied. The government will not allow them to enjoy their own! They are required to leave their native fields and their broad hunting grounds; to abandon their homes and emigrate to lands unknown. These are the hard conditions upon which CHRISTIANS will make peace with SAVAGES!

“William Miller … utterly failed...” 1838, March

---

Vermont Telegraph. March 28, 1838

---

BRANDON....SATURDAY, MARCH 24, 1838.

---

For the Vermont Telegraph.
SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.

Brother Angier: In answer to your letter, published January 31, 1838, I would say: you admit that God has revealed time, and that these times are figurative. So far, I am pleased to agree with you, as it respects those passages which are quoted at the commencement of your letter. Then if I can show a Bible rule for understanding these figures, I have by your own concession proved my premises. This I think has been done in a former letter. I agree that God has in many cases revealed himself by literal as well as figurative language. Time, in all its several denominations, is used in the scriptures to convey unto us the duration of important epochs or events; and when the time is specified by any number prefixed or added thereto, as three and a half, or seven, &c., it becomes definite, and then comes under the rule of years, days, &c., as in Rev. xii, 6 and 14. It then makes good sense, and harmonized with all parts of the Bible. It is true that God has revealed himself in a great many places in his word, and in ages past, in literal years, days, &c., and in every case which I have examined they have been literally accomplished in the given time, except the case of Jonah. From this fact I get strong faith that God will accomplish all definite periods, although they may be revealed unto us in figures. Why God has revealed himself in figures, I cannot tell, neither is it for me to enquire? To be submissive to his will, and to try to understand his word, is my anxious desire. And whether I do, or do not understand it, I leave for the public to judge, and time will determine.

...

...

... In your letter published Dec. 20, 1837, second column, beginning of the second paragraph, you say, “there were a number of decrees concerning the restoration of the Jews, and rebuilding of Jerusalem.” I did not pretend to quote your words. Yet the words are the same sense; for all must acknowledge “the restoration of the Jews,” at that time, was “restoring the captivity.” So I understood you, at the time, and so I understand that sentence to mean yet.

This then must close my remarks to you. For I am fully convinced, no good can come of an altercation of this kind. God will take care of his own cause, and of me. A few days will disclose the truth. I remain, dear brother, yours, &c.,

WM. MILLER.

---

Vermont Telegraph. March 28, 1838, Page 106

---

SECOND COMING OF CHRIST.—William Miller's rejoinder on this subject, closes with the present number. I cannot doubt that this announcement will be good tidings to the readers of the Telegraph generally. At least, it is an event which gives me great relief. The good or evil that may result from the discussion, I am not prepared to undertake to estimate. My reasons for admitting it into the Telegraph, were made known at the commencement. Whatever the result may be, there remains to me the consciousness of having aimed to do right. At different times during the discussion, I have been urged by friends and patrons to shut down the gate and stop the waters of bitterness. But this could not be done consistently with my views of the plainest and most obvious principles of free discussion, at any point short of the present. The discussion will now stop, unless brother Angier feels more than I do the importance of noticing such performances as have been exhibiting in the shape of rejoinders addressed to him—and he must also make me feel more than I now do the importance of his taking any further notice of the matter at present. If he feels called upon to repel the reiterated insinuation that he has only acted the part of an amanuensis, in his review, I will, for him, with the facts that are in my possession, venture to take the responsibility to pronounce the charge, or insinuation, a gross calumny. It is to be hoped that brother Angier will say the least that he possibly can; and if he will pass over the whole in “dignified silence,” all the better.

My own opinion, in the case at issue, has not been withheld to the present time, because I have had no opinion—but from a desire and design to do justly and fairly between the parties. That opinion, although of but little importance, it is now my duty, no less than my privilege, to give. It will may be indicated by the citation of a single passage from the mouth of the Great Teacher: “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but the Father only.” With this passage in particular, and with Scripture-teaching in general, before me, it looks like extraordinary presumption for any mortal to undertake to fix on the time of the Savior's second advent. After all William Miller has written, I am under the necessity of telling him that he has utterly failed of convincing my understanding. I cannot discover that he has made a single mark towards proof. It is true that after assuming certain premises, he has hence drawn remarkably strong conclusions. But his assumptions are yet to be sustained, as well in regard to his peculiar theory as to his charge of copying another's writings, brought against brother Angier. The latter is of one piece with the former, and just about equally tenable. These assumptions abound throughout his writings. If there be need of specifying a single instance in the innumerable mass,—take his exposition in regard to the two olive trees. What could be more perfectly arbitrary? What mind that ever asks for a reason, did not feel insulted at being required to receive implicitly such assumptions? It does not become rational beings to take upon trust, from men, what they cannot comprehend. Whatever comes from God, whether we can comprehend it or not, is not to be questioned; but our fellow-mortals have no claim to our trust, unless they address and reach our understandings; and he does violence to his reason, and debases and disgraces his intellectual nature, who receives and adopts as his own the opinions of any human teacher, without being able to render a good and sufficient reason for so doing. There is no infidelity—no scepticism in this. The author of the theory now under consideration does not, I believe, pretend to come to us with a revelation, requiring the exercise of faith; but with facts and figures, undertaking to make out an arithmetical calculation. The important question, then, is, as to his authority for his data. In fixing on these, he has, it appears to me, jumbled and blended together in confusion literal and figurative language, just as suited his purpose. There is no need of stopping to specify. All who have had the patience to follow him, must have discovered his begging of the question all the way. His presumption and rashness in venturing upon the credulity of his readers, is only equalled by his comporting practices in his oral teachings. Of the latter, as of the former, a single instance may suffice: He told the people in Orwell, some months ago, that they had enjoyed their last revival—that there would be no more ingathering of souls there, before the final appearance of the Savior and destruction of the wicked. Now if some of his positions in his writings have been taken with more consideration, or with more respect to the common sense and common intellectual endowments of his readers, I have greatly misapprehended. It may be a relief to some to know that a good work is now in progress in Orwell—some twenty or more already having been hopefully born into the kingdom. What are such predictions but rank imposture? And yet they discover less of temerity and rashness than a large portion of his handling of the Word of God.

I did contemplate remarking to some extent, but from unforeseen and unavoidable hindrances, have commenced at so late an hour, and have been broken in upon so frequently, that I find the present paper about full, while I have but just begun. But it may be just as well, and perhaps better, to stop here. Unless I greatly misjudge, he has abundantly overthrown himself. The spirit which he manifests throughout is totally unbecoming any follower of Christ—more especially of one who professes to be instantly waiting for his coming. His personal attacks on the motives and christian character of his opponent, are such as ought not to be indulged in, under such circumstances, by any Christian—I will say, by any civilized man. His occasional vulgarity is below criticism. His work is without centre or circumference, beginning, middle or end.

Is this saying too much? Be assured it is not said wantonly, or from any ill feeling; but because it is owed to the reputation of the Telegraph for common decency, to speak frankly my opinion of such performances. They cannot, and must not, be suffered to go unrebuked.

P. S.—Since the former part of the foregoing was written, a communication has been received from brother Angier, addressed to the public, which shall appear next week.

---

Vermont Telegraph. April 11, 1838, Page 115

---

From Google+

WILLIAM MILLER has published a work on the Second coming of Christ, the reading of which has left quite an impression on many minds. We very much regret that a controversy which has been carried on in the Vermont Telegraph between him and brother Angier, could not have appeared as an appendix to the same work, that its readers might have had an opportunity to learn something of the feelings, and perhaps character, of their author. He has certainly, in this controversy, manifested a spirit, if not a character, unbecoming a disciple of Jesus Christ.— N.H. Baptist Register.

MEMORIAL OF THE CHEROKEE NATION. 1838

---

The New-Yorker. March 31, 1838

---

From the National Gazette.

THE INDIANS.

We have received, from a private source, a manuscript copy of a memorial which has already been or will be presented to Congress in the course of the week, from the Cherokee Nation of Indians. It is so powerful a paper, and so finely[/feelingly] depicts the crying injustice and flagrant hardship of the case in question, that we hasten to publish it for the information of our readers. The memorial is signed by fifteen thousand six hundred and sixty-five persons, comprising the entire population of the Cherokee Nation. If better evidence can be required of the perfidy of the government agents, in calling the instrument of New Echota a treaty, we are at a loss to conceive what kind of testimony would be deemed satisfactory. It will be recollected that immediately after the concoction of that instrument, the Cherokee Nation, both individually and through its authorized representatives, protested against its ratification. The protest alleged that it was not the act of the Cherokee community, and that they had not been consulted; but that it was the work of a very few (about sixty or seventy) unauthorized persons of bad character, who were assembled to partake of a feast which had been provided by Mr. Schermerhorn, the United States' Commissioner. In the face of this protest, which was signed by nearly fourteen thousand persons, (nearly the whole nation,) the Senate, without inquiry, established the paper, by a formal vote, to be a valid contract—a binding treaty.

General Wool, who afterwards visited the nation on behalf of the United States, returned to Washington with a most perfect conviction, the expression of which he did not suppress, that the New Echota treaty had always been without and against the consent of the Cherokees. At the present session of Congress, an effort was made to institute an inquiry into the facts connected with the execution of the New Echota instrument, but inquiry was stifled by an indefinite postponement of the whole question. The paper, therefore, to all legal purposes, subsists as a treaty, under the provisions of which the Cherokees will be driven, in June next, from a cultivated and comfortable home, to a sickly wilderness, in the midst of savage tribes. In their memorial, they make a last appeal for protection, still trusting that faith, justice and magnanimity are virtues not utterly extinguished in the American Councils. Ought not this appeal to be seconded by a memorial from Philadelphia, expressing the sorrow, humiliation and shame which persistence in so unjust and unrighteous a policy cannot fail to inflict and awaken? As the inheritors of the principles of William Penn, Philadelphia cannot be silent in an emergency involving all that is precious and honorable in the national character.

——

MEMORIAL OF THE CHEROKEE NATION.

To the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, in Congress assembled, most humbly and respectfully showeth:

That whereas, we, the undersigned, citizens of the Cherokee nation, have always regarded the instrument purporting to be a treaty, made in December, 1835, at New Echota, by the Rev. John F. Schermerhorn and certain unauthorized individual Cherokees, to be a violation of the fundamental principles of justice, and an outrage on the primary rules of national intercourse, as well as the known laws and usages of the Cherokee nation, and therefore to be destitute of any binding force on us;

And, whereas, at a general council of the nation, held at Red Clay, in September, 1836, our sentiments were set forth and our solemn protest entered against it;

And whereas, at a subsequent general council of the nation, held at Red Clay, in August, 1837, a communication from the President of the United States, on the subject of said instrument, was delivered in full council by Col. John Mason, special agent of the United States.

And whereas, after mature deliberation on the said communication, the resolutions of the preceding council, in reference to that compact, were re-affirmed, together with the memorial which accompanied the same.

And whereas, we entertained the belief that, through the medium of the special agent's report, the President would become correctly informed of the state of the matter, and of the real sentiments of the Cherokee people.

We therefore cherished the confident hope that he would deem it right to abrogate that fraudulent instrument, and at once enter into arrangements with us for the adjustment of all difficulties.

With these views, we then appointed a delegation to represent us before the government of the United States, and vested them with full powers to make final arrangements of all matters in controversy; and we were animated with the prospect of a speedy termination of our distresses; but the cup of hope is dashed from our lips—our prospects are dark with horror, and our hearts are filled with bitterness. Agonized with these emotions, language fails; our tongues falter as we approach the bar of your august assemblies, before whom we again beg leave humbly to present our grievances.

With the full details of our troubles, we forbear to trespass on your indulgence. They are extensively known, and our delegation at Washington will be found ready to furnish any information which may be needed.

We therefore respectfully present the following, which will show the appalling circumstances in which we are placed, by the operation of that perfidious compact.

A communication has recently issued from the U. States agency, addressed to the Chiefs, head men and people of the Cherokee nation, in which we are told that “the Executive has formally declined” all intercourse or correspondence with Mr. Ross in relation to the treaty, “and” that “an end has been put to all negotiation upon the subject—that it is the unalterable determination of the President to execute the treaty—the time cannot possibly be prolonged—another day, beyond the time named, cannot and will not be allowed you.” The writers say: “We will not attempt to describe the evils that may fall upon you if you are still obstinate and refuse to conform to the requirements of the treaty—we will not paint the horrors that may ensue in such an event.”

It will be readily conceived that declarations like these, emanating from such a source—our country already filled with troops—cannot fail to fill our minds with consternation and surprise. What have we done to merit such severe treatment? What is our crime? Have we invaded any one's rights? Have we violated any article of our numerous treaties? Have we in any manner acted in bad faith? We are not even charged with any such thing. But we are accused of “laboring under a dangerous error,” and of being “duped and deluded by those in whom we have placed implicit confidence.” “Your pretended friends,” say they, “have proved themselves to be your worst enemies.” But what is our “dangerous error”? What is our “delusion”? Is it delusion to be sensible of the wrongs we suffer? Is it a dangerous error to believe that the great nation, whose representatives we now approach, will never knowingly sanction a transaction originated in treachery, and to be executed only by violence and oppression? It cannot be. Is it a “delusion” to assert that the makers of this ill-omened compact were destitute of authority? This fact we are prepared to prove by incontestible evidence.

Indeed, it is virtually admitted by the parties themselves; and the very fact that an armed force should be put in requisition to defend their persons and to compel our submission, argues, not obscurely, a defect of confidence in the validity of the compact. Is it obstinacy to refuse our assent to an act which is a flagrant violation of the first principles of free government, and which sets foot on the neck of our liberties and our dearest rights? Are we to be thus frowned into silence for attempting to utter our complaints in the ear of our lawful and covenanted protector? Is it a crime to confide in our chiefs—the men of our choice—whom we have tried and found faithful? We would humbly ask in whom should we confide? Surely not in those who have, in the face of our solemn injunctions, and in opposition to the reiterated expression of our sentiments, conspired the ruin of our country—usurped the powers of the nation—framed the spurious compact—and by artifice and fraud, palmed it on the authorities of the United States, and procured for it the recognition of those high functionaries!

And now, in the presence of your august assemblies, and in the presence of the Supreme Judge of the Universe, most solemnly and most humbly do we ask—are we, for these causes, to be subjected to the indescribable evils which are designed to be inflicted on us? Is our country to be made the scene of the “horrors” which the Commissioners “will not paint”? For adhering to the principles on which your great empire is founded, and which have advanced it to its present elevation and glory, are we to be despoiled of all we hold dear on earth? Are we to be hunted through the mountains like wild beasts, and our women, our children, our aged, our sick, to be dragged from their homes, like culprits, and packed on board loathsome boats, for transportation to a sickly clime?

Already are we thronged with armed men; forts, camps, and military posts of every grade, already occupy our whole country. With us, it is a season of alarm and apprehension. We acknowledge the power of the United States; we acknowledge our own feebleness. Our only fortress is, the justice of our cause. Our only appeal on earth is to your tribunal. To you, then, we look. Before your honorable bodies—in view of the appalling circumstances with which we are surrounded—relying on the righteousness of our cause, and the justice and magnanimity of the tribunal to which we appeal—we do solemnly and earnestly protest against that spurious instrument; and we do hereby, also, respectfully re-affirm, as a part of this our memorial, the resolutions and accompanying memorials of the two last general councils of the nation, held at Red Clay. Our minds remain unaltered. We can never assent to that compact; nor can we believe that the United States are bound, in honor or in justice, to execute on us its degrading and ruinous provisions.

It is true, we are a feeble people; and as regards our physical power, we are in the hands of the United States. But we have not forfeited our rights; and if we fail to transmit to our sons the freedom we have derived from our fathers, it must not be by an act of suicide—it must not be by our own consent.

With trembling solicitude and anxiety, we most humbly and most respectfully ask, will you hear us? Will you extend to us your powerful protection? Will you shield us from the “HORRORS” of the threatened storm? Will you sustain hopes we have rested on the public faith, the honor, the justice of your mighty empire? We commit our cause to your favor and protection.

And your memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray.

Cherokee Nation, February 22, 1838.

[Signed by fifteen thousand six hundred and sixty-five of the Cherokee people, as will appear by referring to the original submitted to the Senate by the Cherokee Delegation.]

---

Vermont Telegraph. April 4, 1838

---

THE INDIANS.—The Seminole campaign, it appears, is to end about the time the Cherokee war will begin. It is very much doubted whether the Cherokees will agree to suffer the treaty of New-Echota to be enforced, obtained as they say it was, by fraud, and attended with hardship and oppression. A remonstrance signed by fourteen thousand of the Cherokees against the treaty has lately, it is said, come in. The treaty was ratified by the Senate, by a majority of one vote. No relief can be afforded, except by means of a new treaty. The Cherokees will agree to the emigration beyond the Mississippi, on certain conditions,—one of which is that they shall manage their own removal. The practice has generally been to remove them, by contract, and the contractors, looking only to their gains, are very careless of the comfort and health of the Indians. They blow them up in steamboats; keep them in a state of starvation; drive them, without shoes or blankets, during inclement seasons, through long marches in the wilderness; and abandon the feeble, the aged, the young, the weary, and the sick, to perish by the way side. The Cherokees know all this, and, if they consent to the execution of the treaty, they know that scarcely half of them will reach their destination beyond the Mississippi.

The Seminoles are aware of the same thing, after the proofs they have had of the degree of confidence to be reposed in American faith, and even in the faith of our general officers. They have, they say, lost only forty men, in battle, since the war commenced; and their places have been filled by warriors who have since grown up. But, in emigration, they would lose half their nation.

THE CHEROKEES.—A pretended treaty has been made with these civilized sons of the forest, by which they are to give up their lands, and to remove west of the Mississippi. This treaty has been from the first opposed by the great body of the nation, as in opposition to their wishes, and never having been authorized by them. Their principal objection is, that the treaty provides for their removal by the whites; and their wish is, if they move at all, to do it themselves, and not be exposed to the tortures and even death from those who would make the most money out of the expedition, as was lately the case of 200 who were sunk in a steamboat. Their wishes should be yielded in this respect, as they are as civilized as their neighbors of Georgia, and as well able to superintend their own removal. It appears from the following paragraph, that the government is determined to make them submit to their arbitrary requirements. Such treatment can no more be justified by the laws of God and humanity, than the aggressive wars of Alexander and Bonaparte. The motto is, “Might makes right.” The Raleigh Register says—N. E. Spectator.

“We entertain serious fears that much difficulty is about to be experienced, in carrying into execution the treaty with the Cherokee Indians, which provides for their removal beyond the Mississippi. We have a considerable body of them, it is known, in the South-western part of North-Carolina, and so alarming are the indications of hostility among them, that the general government has made a requisition upon the executive of the State, for a force of volunteer infantry. The adjutant general has, accordingly, by direction of Gov. Dudley, issued orders to the proper commanding officers, to call out their respective regiments, with a view to the immediate organization, if practicable, of one or more volunteer companies, in each.”