Camas Prairie in the News 1871

Ed. Statesman - I noticed in the Herald of the 17th "a card" signed by I. Montgomery and others, in which I am represented to have caused the publication of "a notorious, willful and malicious falsehood," in regard to the killing of hogs by Indians on Camas Prairie, and in regard to the disposition of the Indians who were in there last Summer.

In answer to the allegations in said card, I have to say that my statement was made in the first place upon declaration of one of the signers of the card in question, Mr. J. Montgomery, who declared, in presence of myself, Mr. Chas. Thews, E.H. Deitzman, and E.T. Lafferty that the Indians then in Camas Prairie were peaceably disposed; that their dogs had killed about half a dozen of their hogs, and maybe as many as thirty, in the whole valley, and that when they told the Indians about their dogs worrying the hogs, it was stopped.

In the second place, neither myself nor any of my employees, who were surveying in every part of Camas Prairie valley during the times referred to, ever saw any evidences of the destruction of hogs by the Indians by riding them down with horses, in the shape of dead hogs or otherwise, nor did we ever see any evidence of hostile disposition on the part of the Indians while we were there.

As to the statements of the other signers of the card in question, beside Mr. Montgomery, I am not prepared to say that they do not speak the truth. I only know that neither myself nor my party saw any evidence of what they allege, and the Mr. Montgomery certainly told a different story. The affidavit of four witnesses is ready to prove the truth of this statement.

Finally, there is an imputation in said card that I have some interested motives in having a different impression go abroad from that conveyed by the authors of the accounts of the prospects of Indian troubles. To show the shallow nature of such imputation, I will state that I surveyed my contract in Camas Prairie, was paid for the same, and that my connection and interest terminated therewith. There is not any more surveying to be done there, and I could have no other interest in the matter than that settlers should not be kept out of there by exaggerated accounts of Indian hostilities. Can the signers of the card say as much? Can they say that they would not like to preserve their hog range?

A.M. Thompson