the many controversies we have had, she has been misjudged in the commencement, the State has never claimed a political or territorial right which has not been conceded; and time has uniformly given to her the vantage ground of vindication in the contention. [H. of R live? that they have the right to form a Government, which shall act not only upon themselves, but upon citizens of the United States who may transgres its laws; and that they have the ability to establi-h such relations between themselves and the United States, in future, as their inteWhere proofs of this jurisdiction in the States are so rest or convenience may dictate. This independence is plain and numerous, as weil historical as political, it be-based upon treaties with the United States; and those of comes necessary for those who sustain it, to notice the Hopewell and Holston are principally relied upon in supgrounds upon which it is denied. I shall state them fully, port of it; the seventh article in the latter being a guaranty so far as they have been urged in this debate, and by those to the Cherokee nation of all their lands not ceded. The out of this House, who have distinguished themselves in object which I now have in view is, to prove, without any exciting public opinion against the policy proposed by the reference to the authority which Georgia may exert over bill on your table. It is said, in behalf of Indian indepeu- them, that the Cherokees, by their own concessions in the dence generally, that, as early as 1763, the King issued a treaties mentioned, are debarred from establishing such a proclamation, forbidding settlements to be made upon any Government as now exists among them; and, of conse lands whatever, which, not having been ceded or pur-quence, that they are not an independent people, and can chased, were reserved to the Indiaus." And, in support have no attribute of a nation. The sixth article of the treaof Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Creek nationality ty of Hopewell deprives the Cherokees of the power of and separate existence from the States and the United punishing Indians, or persons residing among them, or who States, certain treaties between those tribes and the United shall take refuge in their nation, for robbery, murder, or States are cited as evidence. Now, sir, it unfortunately other capital crime, on any citizen of the United States; happens, for those who have such faith in the royal ordi- and binds them to deliver the offender, to be punished nance of 1763, that it asserts dominion over the Indians in according to her laws. And, by the seventh article, they terms, and merely reserves to them the unmolested occu- have not the privilege to punish a citizen of the United pancy of their "hunting grounds." Whereas it is just States, who shall commit either of the offences just named and reasonable, and essential to our interest and the secu- upon an Indian. By the ninth article, the United States rity of our colonies, that the several nations or tribes of have the exclusive right of regulating the trade with the Indians with whom we are connected, and who live under Indians, and of managing all their affairs in such mauner our protection, should not be molested or disturbed in the as they think proper. The same power is in the United possession of such parts of our dominions and territories States by the sixth article of the treaty of Holston; and by as, not having been ceded to or purchased by us, are re- the tenth and eleventh articles of the same treaty, the served to them, or any of them, as their hunting grounds," Cherokees are bound to deliver up criminals, refugees as is the language of the proclamation. Here is the assertion well as Indians; and the United States reserves the right of jurisdiction, and it is followed by a command to one to punish its own citizens who shall commit crimes on class of subjects not to disturb another. If, at that day, Cherokee land. It must be kept in mind that, by the first any one of his Majesty's liege subjects in the colonies had and third treaties of Tellico, the treaties before existing used this proclamation as the basis of Indian independence, between the parties are declared to be in force, together to the exclusion of England's sovereignty and jurisdiction with the construction and usage under their respective over them, and had promulgated his doctrine, his career articles, and so to continue; and the sixth article of the would soon have been stopped by a visit from the King's first treaty of Tellico is a repetition of the guaranty to the attorney, in the form of an information, to answer for sedi- Cherokees of the remainder of their country forever. Is it tion-if he had not, in the loyalty of the provinces, been consistent, then, with such powers as are conceded by the made to share, in a more summary manuer, the fate of treaties of Hopewell and Holston to the United States, that Roger Williams. Bauishment, sir, would have been a ten- the Cherokees shall form a Government, virtually excludder mercy for such political heresy. In the succeeding ing the operation of any action of the United States upon paragraph of the "royal ordinance" to that which has Cherokee concerns -a Government which legislates for just been cited, forbidding settlements upon Indian hunt- the punishment, by their own courts of the refugees and ing grounds, the King declares it "to be our royal will and criminals whom, by treaty, they are bound to surrender, pleasure, for the present, to reserve under our sovereign to be punished according to the laws of the United States, protection and dominion, for the use of the said Indians, all the only instance in which they are permitted to punish a the lands and territories not included within the limits of citizen being where persons intrude upon their lands withour said three new Governments." Such, sir, is the sup-out their consent: a Government which taxes the licensed port given to Indian independence by the proclamation of trader, and forces a revenue from the vendor of merchan1763; and, with this plain assertion of sovereignty by the dise, when the sole and exclusive right to regulate their King, I am warranted in supposing that gentlemen could trade is in the United States; which inflicts the scourge never have arrayed it in support of their cause, if, in their upon the backs of your people, regardless of their cries haste to defeat the bill under consideration, they had not that they are American citizens, and of the remonstrances overlooked the contents of this "royal ordinance" aud cor- of your agent, who, by treaty, lives among them to proner-stone of Indian independence. But the strong ground tect them from abuse, and our own people from that upon which Indian independence, and that of the Chero cruelty which, in the face of our institutions, permits pokees particularly, is placed, are the treaties existing be- lygamy as a fit indulgence for their chiefs and rulers, and tween the United States and those tribes, entered into be- twists a halter around the neck of every Indian who dares fore and since the adoption of the present constitution. I to enrol his name as an emigrant, or who attempts to pershall take up the gauntlet which has been thrown down suade others to become so. by the opposition in behalf of Cherokee independence, and am willing to make the treaty stipulations between that tribe and the United States the test of the jurisdiction of the States over Indians living in their limits. If the Cherokees have a right to establish an independent Government, they are disunited from the United States as well as the States, and can enter into alliances with foreign nations, except so far as they may be restrainThe assumption in behalf of the Cherokees is, that they ed by their treaties with the United States. But even are an independent people, having a political sovereignty this badge of sovereignty, and without which a people over, and title in fee to, the lands which they claim; that cannot exist as a nation, was surrendered by the second they are neither subordinate to the United States, nor sub-article of the treaty of Holston. Sir, it would have been ject to the jurisdiction of any of the States in which they well for gentlemen, before they had chanted their strains VOL. VL-142. H. OF R.] Removal of the Indians. [MAY 24, 1830. of Cherokee virtue, happiness, simplicity, and indepen-States. The readiest mode of exercising these powers 4 dence, to have acquainted themselves with the true posi- was by treaty; and it not being then well understood what tion of that tribe, as fixed by treaties, and with their moral trioes, from their scattered condition, were within the condition as a people. And it is not amiss for me now to States, the United States negotiated with them, without a inquire if their violations of the treaties, by the establish- particular reference to this limitation of their powers, and ment of a Government which puts aside their concessions without a certain knowledge of the location of the tribes; to the United States, have not released the latter from all the exigencies of the States in the war with Great Britain, a obligation to maintain the guaranty of their territory. I making it essential that their friendship and partiality have no disposition to conceal the fact, that, in the treaties should be secured. But after the war, the common danwith this tribe, there are expressions which seem to coun-ger no longer menacing the existence of the States, no tenance the assumption that they are an independent peo- sooner did the United States make a treaty with any tribe ple. But when interpreted in connexion with their con- of Indians, than the States began to look into its provisions cessions, their geographical position to the United States to see if they were consistent with the grant of power to and the State of Georgia, and to Spain, before Louisiana "regulate the trade and manage all affairs with the Inand the Floridas were acquired by us, those expressions dians not members of any of the States." The treaty of indicate no more than the caution which our Government Hopewell, with the Cherokees, was at once protested used to prevent depredations upon our frontiers by a horde against by North Carolina and Georgia, for its invasion of of savages, and an admission that they should continue to their legislative rights. A protest, in such a case, was all live upon their hunting grounds unmolested, and in the that was necessary, especially as the United States did darkness of their own superstitious and savage laws, until, not, by legislation, attempt to enforce those clauses of the by the force of our example and aid, they could throw off treaty which were noxious to the rights of the protesttheir bondage. ing States. It must be kept in mind that, up to this peWe have heard it relied upon, too, that, in these trea- riod, the United States had made no guaranty to the ties, the tribes are called nations; and the use of the word, Cherokees of their lands. Thus matters stood between from its ordinary acceptation, is suited, as the opposition the United States, the States, and the Indians, until after know, to mislead persons in general as to what was the our present constitution had been ratified by the States. political character of the tribes in the apprehension of the In 1791, the United States made with the Cherokees the United States, when they were treated with. At first, it treaty of Holston, and, by virtue of a clause in the constiwould imply the concession of a separate and national ex tution, to "regulate commerce with the Indian tribes," istence. But it does not do so; and that it may not do so, they assume the right "solemnly to guaranty to the CheI invoke the aid of Robertson, the historian, to put down rokee nation all their lands not hereby ceded;" and from the interpretation given to the word by William Penn" this guaranty it is argued the Cherokees are indepenand his coadjutors in this House-and the historian's au- dent, having a right of self-government, and free from the thority will at least be considered entitled to an equality of civil jurisdiction of the States. That is, the right of the weight with those who may have the temerity to set them- United States "to regulate commerce with foreign nations, selves up against him. In his fourth book, under the head and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes,"" of the Indians being divided into small communities, he is so expansive a power, that, because commerce may be says: "In America, the word uation is not of the same im-regulated by treaty, the United States are empowered to port as in other parts of the globe. It is applied to small dissolve, by treaty, all the political relations between the societies, not exceeding, perhaps, two or three hundred States and Indians living in their limits; to make them an persons, but occupying provinces greater than some king-independent people, with an ability to form a Government doms in Europe." The succeeding part of the paragraph, and State within the acknowledged limits of other States, in which the philosophie historian denies the ownership of lands in the Indians, is also recommended to the perusal of such as assert it; and they will take kindly, I trust, my intimation that the whole chapter, having some connexion with this subject, will interest them. though, by the third section of the fourth artiele of the constitution, it is declared, "no new State shall be formed or erected within the juridiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures But this question of Cherokee independence and right of the States concerned, as well as of the Congress." Sir, of self-government, of entire freedom from State jurisdic-so monstrous a concatenation of construction it is only hution, may be resisted by stronger arguments than inferen- mane to strangle in its birth; and I trust it lies dead in all ces from treaties with the United States, which, upon a its deformity. full examination of the constitutional efficacy of treaties, If, when the constitution was presented to North Caroand the powers given to the United States to make them, lina and Georgia for ratification, it could have been forewill be found can neither give nor take away any right seen than a direct power to regulate commerce with the of an Indiau. This confederacy consisted, originally, of Indians would have been interpreted to mean the destrucStates deriving their political existence from their joint tion of their jurisdiction over their territories, and involved declaration of independence, and the subsequent acknow- a power in the General Government, by treaty stipulations ledgment, by the definitive treaty of peace, that they were with Indian tribes, to disarm those States of the power of free, sovereign, and independent States; and England, in legislating for them whenever they should be in a condithese remarkable words in the treaty, relinquishes to tion to enforce their laws, does any one believe that, with them, as individual States," all claims to the Government, all the advantages of union in prospect, those States would propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every have become parties to a compact which destroyed the part thereof." Their boundaries were declared in their integrity of their boundaries? No, sir: something else charters, or grants; and in the collective declaration in the would have been heard than the protest against the treaty treaty of peace of the boundaries of the United States, of Hopewell; and the jurisdiction of those States over Inthose which each State claimed for itself are comprehend-dian within their limits, would have been admitted in ed. Within the boundaries of these States, Indian tribes terms in the constitution. But fortunately for the cause lived, having hunting grounds reserved for their use, and of the State of Georgia, her jurisdiction over the Indian of which they could not be deprived but by their own hunting grounds within her limits has been acknowledged consent, and for a price. in practice by the United States, and is the foundation of all the rights claimed and exercised by the United States in Alabama and Mississippi. In the articles of agreement and cession between the United States and the State of By the articles of confederation, the right to regulate the trade and to manage all affairs with the Indians not members of any of the States, was given to the United MAY 24, 1830.] Removal of the Indians. [H. of R. Georgia, the State of Georgia cedes, and the United States besides a price which forbids the hope of reimbursement accept, all the right, title, and claim, "which the said by sale, annuities are demanded, and must be given. In State has to the jurisdiction and soil of the lands, which proportion as they have less land, and are told the value were the subject of negotiation;" and the United States the white man places upon his possessions, their demands cede to the State of Georgia whatever claim, right, or increase, and every year presents an increasing difficulty title they may have to the jurisdiction or soil of any lands," in the way of negotiating with them. Does it require as set forth in the second article of the convention; and much sagacity to see that, in a few years, this system must which, upon examination, will be found to comprehend be brought to a close, by its own pressure upon our finanthe Cherokee hunting grounds in the State of Georgia. ces; and that then the Indian, crowded upon by the white And, by this same convention, the right and jurisdiction of population, will be abandoned to his fate-to be annihilated the State over Indian lands within her limits, which had as have been the Mohicans, Oneidas, and Mohawks? Is not been ceded to the State or the United States by the not the colonization of the Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Indians, is admitted, by the confirmation of every actual and Cherokees, better than such a result? And I call upon survey or settlement, made under the act of the State of the benevolent feelings of the opposition to vindicate Georgia, entitled “An act for laying out a district of land, their course to this nation, by telling it what plans they situate on the Mississippi, and within the bounds of the have in view to prevent so certain a calamity to the obState, into a county, to be called Bourbon, passed the 7th jects of their mistaken kindness. day of February, 1785." I could multiply similar congessions of jurisdiction of the States over Indian lands by the United States, by reference to the cessions of Virginia, of the Northwest Territory, and of North Carolina or Tennessee; but it is sufficient merely to mention them. Gentlemen, in speaking of the expense which will attend the removal of the Indians, have kept out of view the actual annual expenditure of the Government at this time, for superintendents, agents, sub-agents, and inter preters, amounting to at least seventy thousand dollars, and which will be lessened and entirely got rid of if the southern tribes shall be colonized. The contingencies for the Indian Department were, in the year 1829, one hundred and three thousand five hundred and eighty-six dollars; for annuities, two hundred and two thousand five hundred and ninety-one dollars; and for the removal of Indians, and to carry treaties into effect, three hundred and twenty-nine thousand eight hundred and fifteen dollars were drawn from your treasury. It is time that some system had been adopted to lessen the expense of our Indian relations, or at all events, to prevent an increase. The plan of colonization proposed will do much towards checking the evil. As matters now stand, we are menaced with its increase; for the Indian augments yearly the price for relinquishing his hunting grounds, and the incidents of holding treaties with them, for partial cessions of land, are daily becoming more expensive. But let them become convinced that their colonization to the west of the Mississippi is the established policy of the Government; that they will be treated with only upon the footing of acre for acre; and that land shall be the principal considertion in the exchange-and this nation will be relieved from future disbursements of greater magnitude than the cost of their removal. Sir, I invite gentlemen in the opposition to look at our expenditure, year after year, for holding treaties with Indians for cessions of laud, under our present system, and they will be startled at the sums paid to commissioners, secretaries, interpreters, messengers, bakers, and butchers; for the erection of buildings, council houses, mess houses, kitchens, and cabins; for corn, beef, pork, and salt-not alone for the subsistence of the Indians and their families while the treaty is in progress, but for their support on their return home. And then come those hundreds of contingencies of horses for expresses and their riders, stationery, pipes, tobacco, paint, and ammunition, and medical attendance, with a swarm of et cæteras, the cost of which is never known until a demand is made for payment-and the reserve of all these abuses is a heavy item of goods for distribution to the Indians. Sir, if gentlemen will but look into the particulars of the system now existing, they will see cogent reasons to forward the policy of colonization. But a more forcible appeal is made to our humanity in behalf of the Indian. Formerly, goods and clothing were accepted by them for the largest cessions of lands; or, if money was given, the sum was trifling. Now, There is one other topic upon which, as an American, I feel bound to say a few words. In this discussion, it has been more than once said that the Indians have been an oppressed, aggrieved people; that, from the beginning of their contact with the white man, they have suffered wrong; and that even their moral condition is in part the fruit of our oppression; and I have heard no one raise his voice to vindicate the chronicles of our country from such scandal. Where is the proof of it? In what history is it to be found? Or what tradition of their own tells it to the world? In what State in this Union was more done than was just enough to guard our people from massacre, and their settlements from desolation? From the coming of the pilgrims to the landing of Oglethorpe, every settlement, except Virginia, was preceded by purchase, or negotiations for peace; and as often as the war cry was raised by the savages, our fathers' hearts turned in kindness to them, before the blood on the tomahawk was dry, and whilst the scalps of the infant and mother were green. Is our unkindness to them to be found in the early efforts of a Mayhew and an Elliott, to give to them the blessings of christianity? or in the millions expended by the nation to familiarize them to the comforts of civilized life? Sir, I assert, without the fear of contradiction, that our military aunals are free from any excesses against the Indians, and that we never turned war into desolation, until the barbarities of the savage admonished us that there was no medium between peace and destruction. Mr. SPENCER, of New York, next took the floor, and occupied an hour and a half in a review of the topics introduced into the debate, and in stating his objections to the bill. He concluded at eight o'clock, when the call for the question was loud and general; and no other gentleman rising to address the House, The question was put on the amendment reported by the Conimittee of the Whole to the bill, viz. that, in executing the provisions of the bill, the faith of treaties with the Indians shall not be violated-and concurred in: yeas, 141-nays, 54. Mr. McDUFFIE then rose, and said he was satisfied it was the solemn duty of the House to come to a decision on this subject. He was not going into the argument, but he wished to say this was a practical question. Whatever we may think here, [said he] the State of Georgia has assumed an attitude from which she will not shrink; and if we refuse to exercise the power which we may constitutionally assume on this question, the guilt of blood may rest upon us. I demand the previous question. Tellers were appointed to count the members, who reported ninety-seven for the previous question, and ninetyeight against it; so it was not seconded, Mr. HEMPHILL then rose to propose a substitute for the bill, which was (as nearly as its substance could be gathered from the reading of it by the Clerk) to provide for the appointment of three commissioners by the Presi dent and Senate, not to be residents of any of the States H. OF R.] effect. immediately interested, who should go through the Indian | condition and probable number of the Indians who now tribes east of the Mississippi, and ascertain their disposi occupy any part of it. If it is a hunting country, we are tion to emigrate-then to explore the country west of the to presume that much of it is inhabited by the western Mississippi, and ascertain the quality and extent of the Indians. We have some partial account, it is true, from country which could be offered to the Indians in exchange agents, but the evidence in relation to the character of the for their lands east of the river, and on what terms they country, and the numbers and condition of the Indians. would make the exchange, dispose of their improvements, there, is equally defective. The original bill confines the &c., and remove, and report the whole to the President, Indians to be removed, to that part of any territory to to be laid before Congress at its next session; and appro which the Indian title is extinguished, (if there is any expriates thirty thousand dollars to carry the provisions into tinguished.) The amendment allows of a larger scope. There may be land adjoining, better adapted to Indian pursuits, and which may be purchased. The Cherokees who have removed, have a good country, it is said, but there is no room for any more Indians there. The Creeks wish no more to come among them, and the Choctaws have their own boundaries. We are almost entirely ignorant of the country required for from seventy to a hundred thousand Indians, who are contemplated to be removed. We do not know what western tribes may be a there, or whether they may be willing to leave their hunting ground peaceably. We do not know what force may be necessary to protect the removed Indians, for, whether the numbers be great or small at first, the force to protect them must be the same. The army must be able to meet the numbers and hostile dispositions of the western Mr. H, said that. at this late period of the debate, he would not trespass long on the patience of the committee, but would abridge what he had intended to say. Sir, [said he] it is endeavored to place this iniportant question on party grounds, but it is too important; it deeply involves both the political and moral character of the country. The President has recommended the measure generally; and the amendment I have offered treats that recommendation with the highest possible respect. It proceeds with caution, and in the most respectful manner, to obtain the necessary information. The President has not more sincere friends in the United States than those of his party who prefer this amendment to the original bill; and I predict that they will be discovered to have been his most discreet friends on this occasion. By the original bill, this measure is to be accomplished with the consent of the Indians. Still we have an important task to perform, and that is, to convince the world that it is not done under circumstances which leave them no choice. Indians. By the third section of the original bill, the President is solemnly to assure the tribe or nation with which the exchange is made, that the United States will forever secure and guaranty to them, and to their heirs and successors, the country so exchanged. What is the meaning of this section as connected with the sixth, which says, that it shall be lawful for the President to cause such tribe or na It appears to me that the people of this country are not prepared for this question; they have not as yet had an opportunity to reflect upon it. We all know that no petition to be protected at their new residence against all iutions have been presented to us in favor of the measure. We know, too, that remonstrances against it from many parts of the country are numerous. The honorable gentleman from Georgia [Mr. WILDE] made, as I thought, an unsuccessful attempt to weaken this state of the case. He said, if I rightly understood him, that the excitement was partial, and that the silent speculators ought to be considered as acquiescing in the proposed measure. This is not the practice of the people of this country. An excitement on one side always rouses the other, (if there be any other.) The silence, therefore, which is claimed as an acquiescence on this occasion, rather to be considered as a solemn warning that we ought to act with the greatest caution and circumspection. How does the amendment which I have had the honor to propose, treat this truly important question? Not, I will say, with common care, but with the highest possible respect than can be paid to it. Its object is to obtain information before we act. It has been intimated that some of us do not understand the subject as well as those in the neighborhood of the Indians. This may be very true, but we have a great desire to understand it thoroughly. There are important points which ought to be fully and fairly known. The President. as I observed, has recommended this measure generally, but, in this recommendation, he has not indicated the mode and manner of carrying it into effect. The substitute attempts: terruptions or disturbance from any other tribe or nation, It proposes to send three disinterested commissioners, to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, who are to obtain all the information deemed necessary. They are to ascertain, in the The substitute which I have offered is designed to obtain first place, whether the Indians, in their national capacity, information only, and leaves the removal bill to be drawn as heretofore considered by the United States, are willing up hereafter. I think it will be judicious to have but one to remove to the west of the Mississippi. If they are set of commissioners, as they will be enabled to judge of willing to exchange lands for this purpose, the commis the relative state of things on each side of the river. sioners are next to compare the country which they leave, as they are only to take a general reconnoissance, their reto the country to which they are to be sent. A knowledge port may be prepared by the next session. A year's deof a few points is extremely important. The first is a lay cannot be an object in a case so interesting. The description of the country west of the Mississippi, and the commissioners are to inquire into the probable expense And MAY 25, 1830.] The Marine Corps. [H. of R. which will be incurred on both sides of the Mississippi, previous to the removals. It would be inhuman to expose them to the forests or the prairies; a third or fourth part of their number would be apt to perish. Those who are not in the habit of hunting must have some lands clear-negatived: yeas, 84-nays, 112. ded, and implements of husbandry must be taken. absent from indisposition, who could not vote to-night on the bill, and to give him an opportunity to-morrow, moved an adjournment, and called for the yeas and nays, which were ordered; and the question being put, the motion was ta So the main question was at last put, "Shall the bill be read a third time?" and was decided in the affirmative by the following vote: The previous question was then put, "Shall the main Before we appropriate five hundred thousand dollars, question be now put!" and the votes being ninety-nine to and embark in this boundless and expensive project, the ninety-nine, the SPEAKER voted with the yeas, and deinformation required by the substitute is well worth obcided the question in the affirmative. taining. To adopt this course will be pursuing the recommendation of the President in the most wise and dignified manner. It will relieve him from too high a responsibility. Under the provisions of the original bill, the expenditure of so large a sum could scarcely be made to the satisfaction of the country. It must of necessity be placed in the hands of agents who may use their influence to obtain the consent of individuals, and, by so doing, fo. ment divisions among the tribes, and destroy their peace and happiness. After information obtained, Congress should take the responsibility on themselves, and lay down in detail the mode and manner of the removals, and let the President carry the law into execution. This mode will be most satisfactory to the people, and give them time for reflection. It will besides appear in a more amiable light than the original bill, to the foreign nations whose attention will be attracted by this movement. It will conform best with the practice and principles of Penn, whose memory my native State delights to honor. YEAS-Messrs. Alexander, Allen, Alston, Anderson, Angel, Archer, John S. Barbour, P. P. Barbour, Barnwell, Baylor, Bell, James Blair, John Blair, Bockee, Boon, Borst, Bouldin, Brodhead, Brown, Cambreleng, Campbell, Carson, Chandler, Claiborne, Clay, Coke, Coleman, Conner, Hector Craig, Robert Craig, Crawford, Crocheron, Daniel, Davenport, Warren R. Davis, Desha,__DeWitt, Drayton, Dwight, Earll, Findlay, Ford, Foster, Fry, Gaither, Gilmore, Gordon, Hall, Hammons, Harvey, Haynes, Hinds, Hoffman, Howard, Hubbard, Isacks, Jennings, R. M. Johnson, Cave Johnson, Perkins King, Lamar, Lea, Lecompte, Loyall, Lewis, Lumpkin, Lyon, Magee, Martin, Thomas Maxwell, McCoy, McDuffie, McIntire, Mitchell, Mouell, Nuckolls, Overton, Pettis, Polk, Potter, Powers, Ramsey, Rencher, Roane, Scott, Wm. B. Shepard, Shields, Speight, Richard Spencer, Sprigg, Standifer, Sterigere, Wiley Thompson, Trezvant, Tucker, Verplanck, Wayne, Weeks, C. P. White, Wickliffe, Wild, Yancey.102. Sir, these are my views of the comparative merits of the original bill and the substitute. The state of ancient and modern Indians is too large a field for me at present. NAYS-Messrs. Armstrong, Arnold, Bailey, Noyes This must be an affair of history. I feel a consciousness Barber, Barringer, Bartley, Bates, Beekman, Burges, of my incapacity to give any glowing description of In- Butman, Cahoon, Childs, Chilton, Clark, Condiet, Coodian wrongs. Against the aborigines who once possessed per, Cowles, Crane, Crockett, Creighton, Crowinshield, this fair country, what complaint have we to make? In John Davis, Deberry, Denny, Dickinson, Doddridge, what degree are their scalping kuives and tomahawks to Dorsey, Dudley, Duncan, Ellsworth, George Evans, be compared to our instruments of death by which we have overthrown their powerful kingdoms, and reduced the whole fabric of their societies, with their kings and queens, to their present miserable condition? How little did they expect, three hundred years ago, that a race of human beings would come from beyond the great waters to destroy them. Their fate, we all know, is now irrevocably sealed. Their extermination is certain. Still, as a generous nation, we ought to act towards them with the strictest fairness, and attend to their glimmering existence with more than ordinary humanity. The honorable gentlemen in favor of the original bill, doubtless entertain the opinion that it is best calculated to promote the happiness of the Indians; I, however, think differently. This is a matter of opinion; but such are my convictions and feelings, that I can never vote for the original bill. The substitute has another decided advantage. It is most suitable to the present state of the treasury, and may leave something for other objects of importance. Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, said he had forborne to take up the time of the House in delivering his views at large on the bill, and he was therefore privileged, he thought, in again demanding the previous question, [which would of course put by the amendment.] Accordingly, Tellers were appointed to count the House, who reported ninety-eight in favor of, and ninety-eight against the previous question. The SPEAKER voted in the affirmative: so the motion for the previous question was seconded. Mr. MILLER, of Pennsylvania, said he could not permit the main question to be taken without one more effort to arrest this measure. He therefore moved to lay the bill on the table, and called for the yeas and nays, which were ordered; and, being taken, the motion was negatived: yeas, 94-nays 103. Mr. BATES then observed that there was a gentleman Joshua Evans, Edward Everett, Horace Everett, Finch, [The only variation between the last vote and the preceding votes on the previous question, &c. was, that, just before the final vote, Mr. DICKINSON (who had been previously absent from indisposition) came in, and voted against the third reading-and Messrs. DWIGHT, FORD, RAMSEY, and SCOTT, who voted against the previous question, because, as was understood, it superseded Mr. HEMPHILL'S amendment, voted for the third reading, after that amendment was set aside by the previous question.] TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1830. THE MARINE CORPS. The joint resolution reported by Mr. CARSON, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, some days ago, proposing to continue the pay of the officers of the marine corps, as it was prior to March, 1829, until the end of the next session of Congress, was taken up the question being on its third reading. At the suggestion of Mr. DRAYTON, the word subsistence was inserted after "pay," and the word allowances after "emoluments." |