Newspaper Page Text
them—my jealously of those who be
long to the opposite party —my system
—’my favorite, opinions—‘my iuihionce,
8tc. ike. ? To all these egotisms let
Us constantly oppose these awlul words
of our Lird, except a man deny himself,
ho cannot be my disciple. Till »c
cordially oppose our inordinate attach
ment to our own interest, wc sacrifice
to our own net in our public duties;
and even when we preach Christ, it is
to be feared, that we d i it more out ot
contention, than out of a real concern
for lib interest.
What Ur. Watts writes on this sub
ject is striking. “Have we never ob
served what a mighty prevalence the
applause of a party, and-the advance ot
self interest, have over the hearts and
tongues of men-, and inti nine them viih
malice against thefir neighbors? Ihor
assault every di He rent opinion with rage
and clamour: They rail at t!ic persons
of all other parties, to ingratiate them
selves with their own. »Vlieu they
put to death [or bitterly reproach] the
ministers of the g ispel, they boast like
Jehu vdien lie slew the priests ot Baal,
C . n" and see tny /.cal for the Lord:
A id as he designed hereby to establish
the kingdom in his own hands, so they
to maintain the reputation they have
acquired among their own sect. But
all! How little d they think of the
wounds that Jesus the Lord receives by
every bitter reproach they cast on his
followers.
V Let us be afraid of needless sin
gularity. The love of it is very comm >n.
and loads some men to the widest ex
tremes. The same spirit which in
clines one to wear a but cocked in the
height of the fashion, and induenees
a 1 uher to wear one in full contrariety
t < the m »de; may put one man upon
m o f irr >nly the first g ispel-axi un,
a d the blood of Christ, vlii!- ; t another
man fancies that i! !>ec unes him to
ispel aximi,
('h ist finis, out of
’c ner insists upon iaitn
1 i!ter recommends no-
a id works May we
which makes men do
: Ojjpnsiti 11 to
n iv we constantly
•> ii se
:ise till
mini only the secmd
and the la v »f
singularity, th<
alone, and the
thing morality
detest a te in *r wh
light in an nonce
each other! And
follow the example of Bt. Paul,
charitable maxim was, t-> -* 1 *-
nt a to their edi icn'i m! So shall our
ti ideation be known to all men; nor
dull we absurdly break the balance of
he various truths, which compost* the
,;ospel system.
VI Let us never, blame our brotli
fe n but with relucta u:e. »A:ul when
love to truth, and tlie interest of reli
gion, constrain us t > shew the absurd
ir dangerous consequence of their mis-
akc-t; let u-,rather u:iWd ) tbao >>ver-
11. Let us never bang unnecessary, or
’also consequences up m their princi-
jiules: And when >ve prove that their
ioct incs necessarily draws absurd and
:ni- • lievous consequences after it, let
as d . them the justice to believe, that
die / 11 not see the necessary connex
ion .f such consequences with their
principles. And let us candidly hope
that they detest those consequences.
i.vDi.iivM.'
OPINION
On the boundary between IhCherokees
and Creelb in Georgia, bn iVii.ua :u
Wirt, Esq.
CASE.
Xnrc Cherokee and Creek Indians
were coterminous tribes in the south,
and a na>t of their respective ter buries
lav within tli" chartered limits of Geor
gia. Some d hi it (laving been thrown
over -.me of their cuinni m boundaries,
bv the fact of their having !> th made
cessions to the United S ales, including
a slip of the same lands, agreed, in the
year 13 2 J, t» mark this line, which was
acooringly d me. .The line thus mark
ed is a right lino from the Ten Islands
on the i'iver C iosa, eastward to the
Buzzard Roost oq the Chattuh >ochy,
thp Cherokees owning the land to the
north to that line, and the Creeks to the
south. This line lias been recognized
by the United States as the boundary
between these two tribes: and the re
cognition is contained in the treaty
between the United States and the
Creek nation in 1320. The line is
called fir in the second article of that
treaty, and the cessioq is bounded by it
for thirty milts’, but the Creeks being
disposed to cede all their lands• within
the chartered limits of Georgia, a~sup-
pleiiteut is added to the treaty for this
purpose, by which this additional ces
sion is bounded for forty five irnles by
the line thus marked between the
Creeks and the Cherokees in 1321.—
This cession by the Creeks is for avow
ed purpose of ceding all the lands which
they possessed in the State of Geor
gia: thus it is admitted by the Creeks
and by the United States that the
Creeks owned no lands in Georgia to
the north of this line, uud that, conse
quently, that line is the true- boundary
between the Creeks and the Cliero-
kfles.
The State of Gerogia, however, to
whose benefit this cession enures,
danics that thjs is the boundary, and
she lias of her own authority, run anoth
er lino which she calls true boundary,
and which lies sixtv miles to the south
of the lino established by the Creeks
and the Cherokees. By this process
she takes from the Cherokees a ter
ritory sixty miles in breadth on the
Chattahoochy. am! wtretehiugf from thut
river to the Coosa, with different de
grees of width
As the Cherokees refused to submit
to this amendment on their territory,
the subject came before the President
of the United States, who Inis caused
a third line to be run, diii’crent from
both the former, and not corresponding
with any treaty which has heretofore
been made, but which he has declared
oiliciully, shell be the line between the
j lands ceded by the Creeks to the United
| States and the Cherokees, in 1826.—
i The line thus established by the Presi
' dent’s orders, leaves the Clnittahoocli
'at the shallow ford, about thirty miles
1 to the north of tin* Buzzard Roost, tin
i point agreed upon by the Cherokees
and Creeks, as one of the termini >•.
their line, and runs between thi.-i line
and that which is claimed by tie >;gia
Thus the President’s ifie take.-; thirty
miles of their terrii irv from the < in re
becs at that point, if the line between
them and Creeks in 1821 was a line au
thorized by law,
QUESTIONS.
1 Had these coterminous tribes of
Indians a right to mark the- boundary
between themselves, by their own con
sent. a.id is not the boundary so mark
ed the I rue boundary between them?.
‘2 it'd, required the sanction of the
United States to make that boundary
viii d, oas not this sanction sufficiently
given by the treaty of ;82G?
•l i las the President of the United
States any coustituti mal and legal pow
er t > run and establish the line which
he has declared to on tiie line between
the Creeks and the Cherokees?
A xSWEiiS.
1 The right of coterminous tribes
to settle their own disputed boundaries,
by their own consent, was admitted by
i the executive >d‘the United States, at
: a lime when the highest office of tliis
' nation .vax tilled by one of the m >st
i eminent lawyers and statesmen that
! our country lias ever known—1 mean
! Mr Jefferson In thetreity of 1606
j between the United States and the
! Clio.oaee nation of Indians, i find the
. f/tlor, i'ig article:
“Art 3 it is, agreed, on the part of
the United States, that the Govern
ment, thereof, will useits influence 2y best
! endeavours to prevail on the Ciuclean tie
I nation of 1 i.ltuaa to agree to the following
: boundary between (hat nation and the
j Cherokees, to the southward of the
Tennessee river viz: hegirmiug at the
mouth of Cauey Creek, near the lower
part if the Muscle Shoals, and to run
up the said G eek to its head, uud in a
direct line from thence to the Flat stone
or Rock, the old corner boundary*/'
“But it is understood by the con
tracting parties, that the United States
do n d engage, to hove the aforesaid
line or boundary established, but only
tt>.endeavour to prevail on lhe Chicka
saw nation to consent to sack a line as ihe
boundary between lac two nations."
It is needless to dilate on this arli-
ficle. It is perfectly clear that .Mr.
Jefferson considered the Indians us the
•ally competent authority to settle their
iivii disputed boundaries, that it was to
be done \,y their consent alone, and that
the United States had no right to iuter-
ferc in the matter, except in the char
acter of mediators.
Wh >, indeed, can be so well quali-
'ifid to settle such a question as the
parties themselves ? it depends on
facts and traditions of which they are
the beat and the peculiar icpositories,
and the love of interest natural to all
men, civilized or savage, will make
them vigilant and astute to lake advan
tage of every circumstance that oper
ates in their favor: so that when a
boundary is once fixed by them by con
sent, it may well be considered as near
the truth as liiiinau sagacity sharpend by
interest, can approach.
With regard to tiicir right to do thru:
the possessory right of the la nds is in
them exclusively, ana it is a perpetual
right of possession, in them and their
heirs forever. It would be singular if
they had not the right to settle the
boundary of their respective possession,
amicably, between themselves. I {they
cannot do it, who enn? The United
States, wc have seen, disclaimed the
power in 1306: and under the constitu
tion laws and treaties of the Uuited
States the several States have no right
to interferer with them.
It is objected that this settlement of
boundaries may involve a cesbio o'
lands by the one to the other,, and that
they Have no right to make any cession
except to the United States Among
the multitude of answers, to which this
object too is - x .< sod 1 >• ill merely
suggest the follow ing without dilatine on
them: promising that, even if the ob
jection weie^falid in other respects,
before tlie boundary could be question
ed it must be shown, judicially, not
that it may, but that it does involve a
cession. 1. No enlightened tribunal
would ever consider an amicable and
.bone fide settlement oftlieir boundaries,
among the Indian tribes, for the sake of
| peace among themslevcs, as a cession of
1 (heir lands, within the meaning ot tne
: principle to which the objection al
| ludos.
i ‘2. The settlement of their boundary
i having been prior to a cession, by eith-
! er, of any of t'no lands affected by that
boundary, and it being perfectly un
certain which of the tribes would make
the first cession, it must lie a matter of
indifference to the holder of the ulti
mate domain where the boundary would
run.
3. The State of Georgia claims the
possession of ihe e lands itndi r a cession
•'"/ the Creek Nation. She can take
only what was ceded: and the cession
stopped at this boundary for * which it
■ailed, cxpresslj ; and upon which it ran
i ir forty five miles .Vo more land was
•.laid for under this cession than what is
ised in'this boundary.
' Suppose the settlnient of this
■ i inula v t * he subject to the objection
j that beenu- e the C.celts and Cherokees
o ld only the tight of occupancy, they
I cannot make a cession except under tlie
j authority of the United States.—This
i brings us to consider the next ques
tion.
! 11. I .cannot imagine any more high
^ and solemn xa otUn to this boundary
remaining land now owned or claimed
by tlie Creek nation, not heretofore
ceded, and which on uctual survey may
he found to lie within the chartered
limits of the State of Georgia.”
1 do not perceive that there is any
thing in this treaty to change the tore-
going opinion. It does not propose to
affect the boundary marked between
the Creeks and the Cherokees. It
jjiujioses only such on extention of the
lines defined by the treaty of 1326 as to
enhance the Creek lands. But tlrut
treaty defines no line, to the north of
tlie line marked by tlie Creeks and the
Cherokees: ull the new lines defined
by it lie "below the marked line, and
the north boundary co-incides with it
I consider the treaty of 1827, construed
a- it should be, altogether, rather as a
rc-afiirmance of the marked boundary.
It is true it cedes all the Creek lands
in Georgia; but that cession is, in ex
press terms, to !x efleeted by an exit nlion
of ihe lines defin’d in the treaty of 1826 —
and the only lines defined i:i that treaty,
are the line from the Chattuhoochic to
the marked boundary, then along the
marked boundary 6 the Buzzard Roost,
and down the Chattahoocliie to the be
ginning: and these are in my opinion
the Hoes which the President i« author
ized to run under the 20th section of
the intercourse law* of 1802.
\VM. WIRT.
Correspondence of the V, Y. D. Advertiser.
Extract of a letter, dated
VVashixgto --, Dec. 81, 1833.
I send to you the copy of a letter
fr'*in General Jackson, to Win Gru-
thu’i that wuich is given to it bv the | ham, then acting Secretary oj War,
treaty of 1826, made by the President j for two purposes:—1st 1 o prove, to the
and - itified by th Snate of the Undent i world that Gen. Jackson has not been
Sales, it is very clea> that Mr. JeiTcr- ! ns obstinate as his enemies contend he
son would have considered such albas been; and this letter will show
boimday as firmly e-taldished, when * conclusively he has on one question,
made /V tiie tribes, themselves, under ! to w it, the rights of the Indians, chang-
the me.Nation ot Hie President: blit here j ed his opiai n. 2d To- show the pro
fit a.solemn treaty, made by the 1 i esi- 1 furiditv of Dr Jackson’s legal research-
dent and ’"'(■mite -ff the United States, J es, and to sustain the Camoridge Uni-
a^eoptnig a cession f ont the Creeks ] versity in coniering on this distiuguish-
based on (his. and acknowledging that ed jurist the degree of Doctor of L-awa.
it may be necessary to advert to the
ocea n >n that caused the Doctor to
wnu the letter. Mr. Crawford, while
acting as Secretary of War, wrote to
it cnap■ lacc! ali tlie lands which the
Creeks p ssessed in Georgia.
HI. Oil this question i can only say
•bat, I ain not informed of anv tiling in
the cons'itiiti >n, laws nr treaties of the! Gen. Jackson on the 27lli of January,
United States which confers the power ! 1816, that i ! tiie Marshal of the district
which lias been exercised. It is cer- j or territory should request his assist-
taiuly m>t among the specific powers 1 ance to remove intruders, that ho sh >uld
enumerated in the constitution, 'i he “cause to lie rern >ved, by military
treaty of 1826 directs that the line w hich force, till person; v. ho should be found
it do-ignates : hall be mu under the upon the public lands within bis com-
supeiinti ndenco of commissioners to be uiand, and destroy their habitations and.
appointed by the Cherokees. :The2Jtli j improvements.”
section of the intercourse act of 1802 1 Mr Crawford, in this order, says
authorizes the President to run and “ Intrusion upon the lands of the friend-
mark the Imundary lines, which have 1 ly Indian tribes is riot only a violation
been established by treaty. But it is } of the laws, but a direct opposition to
said that tlie line run and marked in this : tlie. policy oft! <> Government, towards
case does not follow the designation of its savage neighbors.” Under this or
any treaty ; certainly not of that of 1826.
The act cl me seems to me to he with
out authority—and, therefore, v> id.
WM. WIRT.
Baltimore, June 21, 1830.
Bai.ti-.touf,, June 23th, 1830.
Sixci the above opinion was writ
ten my attention has been called to the
treaty of the loth November !327 be
tween the Creeks and tho United states.
It appears by the supplementary article
to the treaty ofTo23, that the impression
of the parties was that a line setting out
front the Chattuhoocliie id’ty miles lie-
1-vv the Buzzard lloost, and so run as
to strike the line marked by the Creeks
and Cherokees forty five miles nest of
tlie Buzzard Roost, thence ul >ng the
line so marked to the Bu/za d Roost,
and thence down the Cliattali «icliie t
der from the War Department to Gen.
Jackson to remove intruders; he issued
no order to Captain if ustiu, t > take
the cattle of the settlers, and deliv er
them over to the Marshal to be s- 1 J.
Capt Iloustin seized upon fifty one
head of cattle, and a horse beast, under
this order, and delivered them over to
tho Marshal, who put thorn up at ven
due, and sold them for $350 62 1-2.
1’iie Maishal donbted the propriety of
the course pursued, and ho wrote to
the Secretary of War, stating that a
considerable number of other cattle
would be delivered to him under Gen.
Jackson’s order, and he wished to know
whether he should receive them. The
Secretary of War wrote to the Marsh
all on tlie 6th of Juno, 1817, and in
formed him that “the order to General
Jackson to remove intruders on Indian
the place of beginning would embrace ' lands, did not extend to a confiscation
all the land of the Creeks in Georgia, | oftlieir moveable property.”
west of the Chattuhoocliie, which it was
declared to be tiie intention of tiie
Creeks to ccdo by that supplementary
article. It was uncertain whether the
line between Alabama and Georgia did
not cross that marked boundary at a
distance all-lit ot forty five miles from
tlie Buzzard Roost—in which case the
first line designated by the supplement
ary article would have run into Ala
bama which was not the intention of
the parties. That first line, therefore,
was directed to stop at the .point at
which the line of Alabama might cross
the marked boundary, if it should cross
it within the forty five miles It was
afterwards ascertained, however, that
point of intersection lay still father
west, and that it would require nuex-
lenlion of ihe lines designated by the treaty
of 1*26, comprehend all the lands of
tin- Creeks in Georgia, west of Chatta-
hoochio. These facts are recited in
the preamble to the treaty of 1827; and
then it is added in the preamble that
‘ the President of the United States
having urged the Crei k nation further
A copy of the letter was sent to Gen.
Jackson, which called forth the fol
lowing very important letter:
Head quarters. Division of the South,
Nashville, 22d July, 1817.
Sir—On my return from Hiwassee
to this place, I had the honor to receive
your note of the 6th of June, enclosing
a copy of a letter of the same date, to
the Maivhal for the District of West
Tennessee. From the various treaties
.and acts of Congress regulating inter
course with the Indians, 1 clearly un
deistand, that the United States have
stipulated to prevent intrusions by its
citizens, o> trespasses by driving their
stock on their lands.. Experience has
proven, that it is useless to remove
themselves or stock therefrom, without
prosecution, for the infraction of the
law. The experiment made last fall,
showed the inutility of the bare de
struction of improvements, and removal
of stocks. The intruders returned with
in a few days after the stddicrs had re
tired, drove hack their stock, and re-
to extend, the limits as defined in the treaty ; -commenced their plan of robbery
aforesaid (that of 1026) and the chief's j From the tenor of the treaties and acts
and head men of the Creek nation be- | of Congress, I have always believed
ing desirous of complying with the wish j that, whore cattle were found tresrmss-
oftke President of tlie United Slates, ing on Indian Innds, and this trespass
these our thev, the chiefs and head by tlie owner driving his stock thereon,
men aforesaid, agjeo to ccdo, and they the cattle were liable, and ought to be
do hereby cede to the U. States all the j seized, (damage feasnn,) delivered to
the civil authority, and made am
blc for llie damage. It is flfi* 0 „
to put an end to the villanics pr
within the Indian boundaries
tliese impressions, l ordered v .
Houstin.to seize and deliver all
ders over _t-» tlie civil authorit
tbeir stocks into the hands of the J
al, and if he refused to receive
to note it before evidence, am] ]
go. Tlie Marshal, in one in,
received, and being perishable i]
ty, s-ld thorn at public sale.
legal principles, I ha .e no doub
be justified; but with his duty
nothing to do. My orders are
take all persons and stocks fhun
passing on the Indian territory, a
liver them over to the civil au
for prosecution. If tho military
aided by the civil authority, in e
ing the laws and treaties, it
useless to harrass the former in
of trespassers and their stocks.
11oops on the military peace ext
incut, (without horsemen) c.«u,
carry into effect the treaties nil
Cherokees and prevent iutriisii
The laic procedure lias had more
fieial effects than all other me a
that bad been previously ad« ;. tod]
1 am convinced none else.will ha
dc.-i ed effect On this subject,
expect your full instructions, am
1 receive them, shall continue t
sue the m 'de previously, (adopte
i am, Sir, verv res ertfully, &.
ANDREW JACKS.
Major Ge.
Comd’g Diy. of the SoutlJ
Geo. G ahum, Esq. f
.Department of War ” ^
Wh ever is ouri us enough,
amine the correspondence further,
find :his and ther letters in the S|
d cuments of the 2d session, 18th
gress.
Mr. Clay and Mr Mardls,
Alabama delegation in Contrresl
letters published to correct an cif
relation to other points, both inti
their belief, that the sales ofthe d
I nnds, which, we presume, are]
going on, and which have elicited!
unbounded abuse of the President!
redound more to the advantage
settlers than otherwise. These
ncers of the forest should have the.
fier.renee, and having a knowledj
1 the tracts which they wish to pure)
I have the advantage ofthe mere s[
| lator. Besides, the ea !v :-ale of|
lands will enable thoip, who d|
purchase the tracts on which 1hey|
reside, to make flier provisions ii
year’s crop. Some dixsntisfaetii
been oxjnessod and the short ;
which flies? sales have been ndvl
ed: but if would seem from 31c
Clay’s and Mardis’ letters,
sales have been »]i ected early i:|
vear with one of (he objects nbovT
pit ted, and that they belie--,> spcl
tors > ill be defeated in their deJ
of running to « high piice the imp!
moots ot the poor settler. The tiJ
too, forbids the longer dela- of]
matter. 'Ihe President had alrl
delayed it one year, at the requol
the dclegati-m, and many of the in
if ants of the ceded territory. Bu
short time_ of advertising will not
vent speculations to a great extei
this had anv tiling to do with it.
Montgomery Advertiser states
Montgomery is full of speculators,
iu.nnticing Seaborn Jones' re marl
Lewis' motion, asserts, a great pr<
tion of them are his strikers.
speculation, and that too of the b
kind, has luid much to do in fomei
the difficulties which have gro\«i
of this subject few will he dispns
doubt; and we understand one ft
in this Stale has control of nearlj
• nil ds ot the valuable tracts in the v
Creek territory. 'Ihe wisdom o
I resident’s precautions to preven
ignorant Indian from being cln
ut of Ins all, will be more mm
than is at present.
We perceive that the Globe as:
another reason for the early eii
these lauds —A groat portion of
Creeks are in great distress and
to remove as soon as they can sell
located reservations.. But it will
quire 1,500,000 d«llars to effect
removal, and support them one y
furnishing what the treaty require
II oni the sales of these lauds, this
whs expected to be raised, and the I
are so pledged on the treaty: ’
“The Creek census shows 22
Indians. I liese Creeks are consl
able further from tlie country to w
they are to be removed than the C
taws, and it is estimated by Gcr
Gibson, Commissary General of I
sis! ance, who aupei intends this t'msin
that their removal will cost J-18 o
The whole sum for removal wil
$100,752.
These Indians are entitled to
year’s subsistence after they ar
west ofthe Mississippi. The ratio
estimated at 7 3-4 cents.
I lie year’s subsitfanco will there
cost $628,702.
'flic
lion
pel
ctii
{The
find
h
lily
is is
[The
Inse
0,01
lich
idefi
V
|UlH
Ira.
d I
tuts
stre
|Thc
lilie