MAY 19, 1830.]

Removal of the Indians.

[H. or R.

He reminds them that the Secretary of War has told them they deserve the severest censure; that, after the ratification of the treaty, resistance to its fair execution can be considered little short of hostility; that threats offered to those who choose to emigrate, or take reservations, cannot be allowed; that such measures are in open violation of the treaty, and will in their final event avail them nothing; that the United States will not permit the treaty to be defeated by such means.

He tells them it is vain for the Cherokees to hold the high tone which they do about their independence as a nation: for daily proof is exhibited, that their existence is preserved by the protecting arm of the United States.

Jnited States to hold a conference with the Cherokees t Turkey Town, on Coosa river, for the purpose of ex nguishing part or all the Cherokee claim of land, but did sot, at that time, get his ends accomplished. Some time fter this, Governor McMinn was appointed commissioner conclude said treaty at Hiwassee, when we fully unerstood our country was to be given up as a part of aid cession; but, finally, they did not treat with Governor IcMinn, and appointed a delegation altogether from the pper part of the nation, giving us no chance to be heard all. These went on to the federal city, and made a eaty to please themselves, which made them and their iends all rich, by getting money and reservations of six undred and forty acres of the best lands in all the couny; in the mean time, getting rights in fee simple for all eir relations, (a great part boys and women,) that never ad been of any service to their country, and leaving men ut who have been of essential service to the United States, ich as Captain John Thompson, for one, whom you were ell acquainted with during the war. True it is, some of 3 did enrol our names as Arkansas emigrants, not knowg but our lands were sold at the same time; and finding, ortly after, they were not, we sat still on our farms that e had made, thinking no one had a better right than we ho made them. Nevertheless, we plainly see there is no eace for us on this side the Mississippi. Therefore, we ave sent our long tried friend, Captain James Reed, to In another, he expresses his astonishment at their conou, for the purpose of getting you to use your influence duct, and traces it to their having been taught to believe, ith the General Government, and your State members in as their council expressed themselves at Oostonally, "we ongress, for us, the Creek Path people, to have privi- consider ourselves as a free and distinct nation, and that ge to sell our own part of the country, at a reasonable the United States have no police over us, further than a rice, to the United States, and for us to reap the benefit friendly intercourse in trade."

He tells them the United States cannot protect them in their present condition, and concludes by saying: "Your people, as well as others, must become industrious from necessity, for none ever will be so from choice; and the greater space they have to occupy, the greater will be their inducements to idleness."

In a subsequent communication, he calls on them to disavow, in suitable terms, the improper interference of their officers in opposing the execution of the treaty, and to decree in future that it shall be criminal in their officers and citizens to use violence or threats against the property or persons of those who had removed, or wish to remove beyond the Mis-issippi.

f the proceeds of the sales, to enable us to move away in The Indians, in their concluding letter, decline making eace, well knowing the United States is not bound to fur-provisions for taking the census, and refuse to enact the ish us with any thing, without an equivalent, to defray | laws proposed for the protection of the emigrants.

e expense in removing away. We are not able to move It appears, in the course of that correspondence, that ithout we can have that privilege. The upper chiefs are every obstacle was thrown in the way of the execution of the ow in council, as we understand, for the purpose of sell-treaty of 1817, by the Indians. One of the plans laid for g all the Cherokee lands in the chartered limits of the this purpose, was "that the Cherokee light-horse should tate of Georgia. The next will be ours, if they can. wrest the property from the emigrants, which should be ur request is a reasonable one. We only want from the given to them by the United States, and apply it to debts outh of Short creek down, which is only eight miles contracted by them in the year past.” bove Deposite, on Tennessee river; then to Coffee's bluff; en, with the crooked line that General Coffee run, for he express purpose of favoring the Creek Path people, herwise it would have been Government land before this

JAMES SPENCER,
YOUNG WOLF,

JOHN THOMPSON, Interpreter.” Some idea may be formed of the proceedings of part of he tribe to defeat or evade the execution of the treaty of 817, by a reference to the official documents of that day. or the purpose of showing these, and the threats held ut against such of the Indians as should emigrate, or atempt to emigrate, Mr. W. begged leave to read an abtract of Governor McMinn's correspondence, as United States' commissioner, with the Cherokees, in 1818.

He tells them, the treaty of 1817 had its foundation in their own application to President Jefferson, in 1809, for eave to exchange their own country, in which game was xhausted, for a country west of the Mississippi.

He submits to them the choice, under the treaty, of removing west of the Mississippi, or remaining on reservaions, and becoming citizens of the United States.

The commissioner's firmness defeated this scheme. He threatened to consider it as an act of hostility against the United States, and punish it accordingly.

Mr. W. next read an extract from Governor McMinn's correspondence in 1818, 7th July: letter to Secretary of War.

The council, in answer to me, say, they disavow the right of reservations being made, except on, the lands ceded at the treaty; but, to their countrymen, they openly denounce the penalty to be death; the literal fulfilment of which many of them believe in with as much certainty as the christian in his God. Were it not for these declarations, I should be able to enrol for emigration nearly the whole nation."

To obviate these restraints, he told them, the United States stand pledged to protect the emigrants to Arkansas: "yet so completely are they under the control of Hicks and others, that those who have given me assurances of their going to the West, dare not even look at me, or speak to me, unless after night; and then they would keep themselves concealed in the grass and bushes, as if in the lands of their enemies."

Mr. W. quoted an abstract from the correspondence of Messrs. Campbell and Meriwether, United States' commissioners, with the Cherokees, in 1823. They tell them, that "If they cherish the idea of independence and selfgovernment (within the States,) thre sooner it is corrected, the better. The United States will not permit it. While they are within the limits of the States, the State sovereignty must prevail, and they must become merged in the white population, and take the standing of individual citizens.

H. of R.]

Removal of the Indians.

(MAY 19, 183

The Secretary of War, J. C. Calhoun, in his letter, 80th | not till then, does he come under that obligation. The January, 1824, tells the Cherokees:

You must be sensible that it will be impossible for you to remain for any length of time in your present situation, as a distinct society or nation, within the limits of Georgia or any other State. Such a community is incompatible with our system, and must yield to it. Surrounded as you are by the people of the several States, you must either cease to be a distinct community, and become, at no distant period, a part of the State within whose limits you are, or remove beyond the limits of any State."

"The Cherokees reply that they will cede no more land." "They recommend the United States to indemnify Georgia, by ceding Florida to her;"" and that they cannot recognise the sovereignty of any State within the limits of their territory."

"In the letter of the Georgia delegation in Congress to the President of the United States, dated March 10, 1824, they ask, "how has it happened that the Cherokees of the upper towns, most of whom were without the limits of Georgia, and who desired to be permanently fixed on the lands upon which they then lived, were induced in 1819 to abandon their designs, and many of them to become in habitants of the region beyond the Mississippi; while the Cherokees of the lower towns, most of them within the State of Georgia, anxiously desiring to remove in 1817, were in 1819 tempted to remain, and were filled with the desire of a permanent establishment there?" Mr. W. continued:

and not till then, has he invoked the vengeance of his f
ties upon the guilt of perjury. Sir, can you perform the
ceremonies in a court of justice? Can such a man bem
a witness there?

But it is said that these Indians are christians: a few s very few of them may be so; and there was, in his mi, no doubt that the just point of discrimination would spe dily be seized by the Legislature of the State of Georga But as to the christianity of the mass of the Cherokeese asked leave to quote the testimony of a witness who wed be allowed competent, even by the gentleman from Ma sachusetts, [Mr. EVERETT] and the gentlemen from Ca necticut: [Messrs. ELLSWORTH and HUNTINGTON] he spot of the reverend Mr. Evarts; and the passage he shoul quote was to be found in the appendix to the reverend It Morse's report.

"Notwithstanding these encouraging appearances, bo ever, it is not to be disguised that many things still re maining among the Cherokees are greatly to be deplen Much poverty and wretchedness, several gross vices, pa ticularly drunkenness, and an almost total ignorance God, his law, and the plan of salvation."

These are the men, all of whom are worthy to be vi nesses, and this is the witness who has been called to test fy in their favor!

Mr. W. said he would offer a few reflections on the sub ject of State legislation over the Indians.

The strong necessity there exists of providing for ther

The character of the legislation of Georgia has been ob-government, is proved by the universal practice. Every jected to. Sir, no State in the Union has exhibited more regard for the lives, liberty, and property of the Indians, than Georgia.

As early as 1774, the murder of an Indian was made as penal as the murder of a white man. Rescuing a prisoner committed for such a crime, is made felony.

one of the old States, except Georgia, subjected the s vages to their laws, as soon as they could do it with safety Georgia has been the last, because the conduct of the Go vernment of the United States fastened, for a longer time a greater number of Indians on her territory. In contr mation of this, he referred to pages 5, 8, and 9 of Mr In 1783, when the land office was opened, surveys made Bell's report, and the compilation of State and colonial on Indian lands were declared to be void. Twenty shil-laws relative to the Indians, published by order of the lings an acre penalty was imposed for making such surveys: upon an average, about three times as much as the value of the land.

The act of 1785 contained similar provisions. By the act of 1787, persons making such surveys were subjected to corporal punishment, not less than one hundred nor more than five hundred lashes for the first offence, and the second was made felony. So the law stands to this day. All the land acts contain provisions securing the Indian hunting grounds.

House. He did not advert to those laws at present for any other purpose than to prove the fact of legislati How-in what spirit-for what purpose was a matter is. those who passed them, not for him. The fact unde edly was, that, while the Indians were strong, the surd gave the law: when they became weak, the law assumed the sword. No state, no colony, no christian community had ever recognised their perfect and entire sovereig They have always been held dependent on the christ nation which claimed the country they inhabit. They ar not allowed to treat with foreign nations. They do n coin money. They cannot be said to send ambassadors They have no freedom of commerce. They cannot be said to have a regular form of Government or system of law. The punishment of crimes is generally left to private ve geance. The practice of acquiring or extinguishing ther

The act extending the laws of Georgia, so much complained of, contains no disabilities, imposes no hardships. They are put upon the footing of citizens; they are not taxed. The proposal to tax was rejected, lest it should be supposed that there was a determination to sell their lands upon the non-payment of the tax. Georgia forbore to include them in her census, and thereby swell her re-occupancy of the soil, was established and continued as a presentative population, which she might have done agreeably to the constitution, simply because, by including them as "Indians taxed," she might be accused of using taxation as an instrument of oppression,

The provision, with respect to Indian evidence, had been well explained by his eloquent friend and colleague, [Mr. FORSYTH] in another body; certain he was, that any gentleman who had the pleasure of hearing that explanation, must be perfectly satisfied. That provision of the act was, in truth, a relaxation of the common law rule of evidence. By what form of adjuration will you bind the conscience of an Indian? Will you swear him on the Old or the New Testament, on the Koran or the Shaster? Sir, he believes in none of these. Under what circumstances does he conceive himself under an obligation to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth? After his conjurors have performed their superstitious rites, and he has drank the black drink, and assembled at the council fire, then, and

matter of convenience and expediency, not of right. Ere the right of making war, which seems to have been left them as a relic of incurable barbarism, which could not he restrained without punishing them for murder, was one proposed to be taken from them, by such benevolent and pious individuals as those who now rely upon the possession of that very power as a proof of Indian independence.

In the fifth annual report of the United Foreign sionary Society, the war then raging between the Osag and the Cherokees of Arkansas is adverted to, and the ure of a bill reported in Congress, empowering the Prest dent to suppress Indian wars by military force, lamented

The subject States of the Roman empire, to which Vat tel denies the character of nations, were much better etitled to assert it than the Indians. What does he c sider as the indicia of sovereignty Property in the s incident to permanent occupancy, division and cultiv tion; the right to make peace and war, contract alliance.

White citizens, and their descendants. Can those men shake off their allegiance, by entering the Cherokee hunt-river, to the old line, was ceded by the Creek nation of ing grounds?

revisal be postponed until the next meeting of the Legislature."

[May 19, 1830.

ment, is usually the first to lose his temper; and, if so, the gentleman was clearly in the wrong. The gentleman was very lavish in his censures contrary to all maxims ef political economy, as he feared it would procure no ade quate return. The gentleman was very much shocked at what Georgia had done. Mr. W. would tell him what Georgia had not done. She had never offered a premium for Indian scalps. She had never given a bounty for rais ing dogs to hunt the Indians. She had never declared that an Indian tribe, by their hostilities, had committed treason, and forfeited their lands.

In the compact of 1802, what do the United States admit? They say, sir, in the fourth clause of the first article: "That the United States shall, at their own expense, extinguish, for the use of Georgia, as early as the same can be peaceably obtained, on reasonable terms, the In dian title to the county of Tallassee, to the lands left out by the line drawn with the Creeks, in the year 1798, which had been previously granted by the State of Georgia; both of which tracts had formerly been yielded by the Indians," &c. If such things had been done, the gentleman from Ma Now, sir, how was it with respect to the treaties of Gal-sachusetts could perhaps tell who did them. Had it really phinton and Shoulderbone, made by the savages with escaped the penetration of the gentleman, that the comGeorgia in 1783 and 1786 The Indians complained of plaint of Georgia against the intercourse act was, that it those treaties. Commissioners were appointed by the violated the constitutional rights of the State, and was a United States to investigate the complaints of the Indians usurpation of authority on the part of the Federal Goand the fairness of the treaties made by Georgia. These vernment? Whether well or ill founded, this was the subcommissioners were among the most distinguished men of ject of remonstrance. their day they were Gen. Benjamin Lincoln, Col. David Humphreys, and Cyrus Griffin, formerly President of Congress. What did they report?

Mr. W. said he did not intend to follow the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. EVERETT] who preceded him, through the course of his argument, but hoped The commissioners beg leave further to report, that, he might be indulged whith one or two observations. The after the most accurate investigation in their power to gentleman was willing to vote millions, without number, make, after consulting the best documents, and having re- to effect the object of removing the Indians peaceably, course to credible depositions, they are unable to discover and with their own consent, and complying with the adbut that the treaty of Augusta, in 1783, the treaty of Gal-mitted obligations of the United States to Georgia, if it phinton, 1785, and the treaty of Shoulderbone, 1786, were could be done without a violation of national faith, and a all of them conducted with as full and authorized re- due regard to humanity. And yet the gentleman entered presentations, with as much substantial form and good faith, into a minute, and, as Mr. W. thought, an exaggerated as Indian treaties have usually been conducted, or perhaps calculation of the expense, as if to terrify gentlemen can be, when one of the contracting parties is destitute of who might be less liberal than himself. He complained the benefit of enlightened society; that the lands in ques- that it was proposed to remove the Indians "not in cartion did, of right, belong to. the lower Creeks as their riages, nor on horseback, but on foot." Did the gentleman hunting grounds; have been ceded by them to the State really imagine he could get one Indian in ten to enter s of Georgia for a valuable consideration, and were possessed carriage? If the gentleman desired they should be furand cultivated some years without any claim-or molesta nished with post-coaches, that, too, would have been a tion by any part of the Creek nation." fair item in his estimate of expenditure.

Such, sir, is a specimen of the unreasonableness of the complaints of Georgia.

Then came the compact of 1802. The mode in which that contract has been attempted to be executed or evaded, on the part of the United States, has been examined; and I ask any honest, candid, dispassionate man, after looking at these facts, to answer me, upon his honor, this question: Has Georgia no reason to complain?

The arrangements of Mr. Jefferson with the Cherokees, in 1807 and 1809, and the treaty of 1817, held out to us the delusive hope that the just expectations of Georgia were at last to be fulfilled. The Cherokees within our limits were willing to go; they had applied to be allowed to go. Six thousand had gone. When, suddenly, without any just, reasonable, or assignable cause, they are made to stay, the treaty of 1817 is abandoned, and that of 1819 substituted. Sir, had not the delegation from Georgia a right to ask, "How has it happened?"

Sir, that question has not yet been answered. It never will be answered. The people of Georgia indeed have their own conjectures how it happened. But I am not going into that matter now.

Sir, the gentleman from Massachusetts wished to find himself under a moral necessity to vote for this measure. He has not been able to find that necessity now, though be found it some years since, in 1826, when he voted for the appropriations to assist certain Indian tribes to emigrate west of the Mississippi, according to the provisions of the Creek treaty. [Here Mr. EVERETT asked Mr. W., in s low tone, "And who voted against that bill?"] Mr. W. said he would tell the gentleman from Massachusetts, since he had asked the question. Nearly all the Georgia dele gation. And why, sir? Georgia affirmed the validity of the treaty of the Indian Springs, and denied that of the treaty of Washington; and the then Executive of the United States had intimated the necessity of using the mili tary power of the United States to coerce Georgia to submission. Sir, this roused the feelings of the people of Georgia to a state of which I presume the gentleman from Massachusetts has no idea; but he may perhaps form some, when I tell him I have seen the mother teaching to ber child, as the first prattle of infancy, the then watchword of the State rights party, Troup and the treaty !

in the vote of the then delegation of Georgia, any other motives than those I have mentioned, he has discovered more than was ever known to them or their constituents.

Sir, I beg pardon for being moved a moment from my Tho gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. BATES] had philosophy, by the question of the gentleman from Masenumerated, among the complaints of the people of Geor-sachusetts. That controversy is decided. The people gia, in the memorial against the intercourse act of 1797, have passed upon it. I do not desire to revive it now. that it restrained them from killing an Indian when they and here. But if the gentleman has been able to find, pleased. The gentleman seemed to suppose, or wished others to suppose, it was one of the customary amusements of the country. Was not the gentleman apprised that, as early as 1774, Georgia, by her laws, had made the mur Sir, [said Mr. W.] we have heard the most contradic der of an Indian as penal as the murder of a white man tory arguments on this subject, in the course, sometimes, But the character and temper of that gentleman's remarks of the same speech. At one moment we are shocked seemed to have one object-exasperation. So far as he wtih the intelligence that we are going to send the poor [Mr. W.] was concerned, they would not produce any Indians into a sterile and inhospitable wilderness, or rather Buch effect. The party who has the worst of an argu-desert, to perish; the next, we are about to concentrate

formidable bands of furious and savage warriors, to desolate our frontiers, and become allies of Great Britain and Mexico. Now, we hear that the country is without wood or water, and utterly uninhabitable; and, anon, that this is a plan to check the progress of our western settlements, and to prevent the springing up of new States and flourishing cities west of the Mississippi. Sir, all these arguments cannot be sound for they destroy each other.

[H. of R.

Mr. TEST, of Indiana, rose, and said, that, after so protracted a debate, he was not at all inclined to detain the House by the discussion of topies which had before been presented to its consideration; and though the subject is of the highest importance to the country, not only in relation to its financial concerns, but to its honor, its justice, and national character, yet I should, [said he] under any other circumstances but those in which I find myself placed, have But the race of Indians will perish! Yes, sir! The In- been contented with giving a silent vote. But, sir, my dians of this continent, like all other men, savage or civil-situation is peculiar; the bill under consideration has passized, must perish. They must perish, whether they re-ed the Senate, and both the Senators from the State which main upon this, or remove to the other side of the Missis- I have the honor in part to represent, have found it their sippi. Would gentlemen have them immortal upon earth? Upon what people-upon what individual has heaven, in its wrath, pronounced so cruel a malediction? What is history but the obituary of nations? Where is Carthage? and Tyre? and Sidon? and Ninevili? and Babylon? Where are the aboriginals who were driven out or massacred by the forefathers of these Indians? Where are those countless empires whose names are lost, or whose existence and destruction are only proved by ruins of their works, or fragments of their records or their language? Gone, sir! Falling or fallen, into that abyss which awaits man and all his marvels. Aye! and the moral of their story, though told by Tasso and by Byron, is better told by one word, and that word, oblivion.

duty to give it their support. Both my colleagues, too, I understand, have expressed opinions favorable to it, and, besides this, the Legislature of my State has recommended the removal of the Indians, upon just and liberal principles. Under those embarrassing circumstances do I find myself, while I feel that I am, at the same time, bound in conscience, in honor, and in justice, to raise my voice against it.

In relation to the recommendation of the Legislature of the State, I know they would never recommend to me to do a thing that was not entirely consistent with the interest, the honor, and dignity of the country; and I feel assured, that if this question were presented to them in the same form it is to me, they would decide upon it as I have done. Whose fate do we lament? The present generation of Sir, I have looked at the wrong side of this question, I Indians They will perish like the present generation of have been led to distrust my own judgment, labored to see white men. Is it distant generations? Sir, if the race if I could not bring my mind to a different conclusion from perishes, those distant generations will never be born. that to which it has arrived, but all in vain. I cannot reAnd if it were possible to perpetuate the race of Indians, concile it with my duty to sustain the bill, notwithstanding what would be the consequence? Why, that a hundred the many powerful motives to do so, and my duty I cannot or a thousand fold the number of white men would not be postpone for any consideration under heaven. Sir, I can born, because the Indians would roam over and possess, see no benefit which is to result to the country from the without enjoying, the land which must afford the future passage of this bill, while I cannot avoid seeing the irrewhites subsistence. And, if our far-sighted, prospective | trievable ruin into which it plunges that unhappy race who' humanity must weep over distant contingent generations, are the subjects of its operations. And here, sir, I beg is it not as fair a subject of grief to lament the millions of leave to remark, once for all, that I cannot help thinking whites who never will exist, in the one case, as the thou- my colleagues are laboring under the impression that this sands of Indians who will not receive life, in the other? bill is calculated to serve the purpose of extinguishing the But, before we indulge our tears at the extinction of the Indian title to lands in our own State: it is not so; it does Indian race, let us inquire what it is we lament. Let us, if not answer us at all. The bill only authorizes the Presiwe can, analyze our own ideas. dent to exchange lands beyond the Mississippi, for lands on this side: it does not authorize him to extinguish the Indian title in any other way than by an exchange of lands with them; and the truth is, the Indians within our own State, I understand, do not desire an exchange of lands; they have lauds beyond the Mississippi: a part of them have already gone there, and those remaining desire to dispose of their claims for money, and property such as may be suitable for them, in order that they may go and join their brothers in that country. All they ask is a fair price for their possessions, and they are not only willing but anxious to go. This measure is calculated more particularly to affect the southern Indians in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. I have thought it proper to say this much of the peculiar attitude in which I stand in relation to the question now under consideration. I have, therefore, thought it my duty to render the reasons which govern me in this case, notwithstanding the value of the time of the House. I could, it is true, have given them in the domestic forum: but the immense interests involved, and the vast consequences to result from the measure, not only to the present generation of the aborigines, but perhaps to millions yet unborn, have induced me to offer them here, although I can scarcely hope to change a single vote. There fore, without further introduction, I will endeavor to present to the House my views of the subject, according to the order in which I have considered it.

When gentlemen talk of preserving the Indians, what is it that they mean to preserve? Is it their mode of life? No. You intend to convert them from hunters to agriculturists or herdsmen. Is it their barbarous laws and customs No. You propose to furni-h them with a code, and prevail upon them to adopt habits like your own. Their language? No. You intend to supersede their imperfect jargou, by teaching them your own rich, copious, energetic tongue. Their religion? No. You intend to convert them from their miserable and horrible superstitions to the mild and cheering doctrines of christianity.

What is it, then, that constitutes Indian individualitythe identity of that race which gentlemen are so anxious to preserve? Is it the mere copper color of the skin, which marks them-according to our prejudices, at least an inferior-a conquered-a degraded race?

Sir, I use the ideas of one who has seen and written well and much on this subject: I would use his language, if it were at band.

But, alas! the Indians melt away before the white man, like snow before the sun! Well, sir! Would you keep the snow and lose the sun!

It is the order of nature we exclaim against. Jacob will forever obtain the inheritance of Esau. We cannot alter the laws of Providence, as we read them in the experience

of ages.

The earth was given for labor, and to labor it belongs. The gift was not to the red, or to the white, but to the human race and the inscription was, to the wisest―the bravest to virtue-and to industry !

The first thing that strikes the mind in the case, is, its novelty. The Government, ever since its establishment, has viewed those Indians in the light of sovereign communities, and treated with them as such. In all our intercourse