Newspaper Page Text
ATHENS, GEO. SATURDAY, AUGUST 4, 1888,
VOE. VII
was John Ross, urged upon the. Executive of nnd unquestionable presumption that they
the United State* to submit tho valuation of would Tarry out that award by the necessary
erouatTCG.
SPEECH OF MR. HAYNES,
Of Georgia,
Jn the House of Representatives, May 23 and
29, 1833—In Committee of the Whole on
the bill making appropriations for prevent,
ing and suppressing Indian hostilities (or
the year 1833, and for arrearages for the
yoar 1837.
Mr. HAYNES addressed the Committee
os follows:
Mr. Chaihman: When I first came into
this House, in 1825, it was in the midst of an
Indian controversy between the then Execu
tive of the United States and the Stite of
Georgia ; and no one can regret more than I
do, that, after having occupied a seat here,
first and last, for more than twelve years, and
when the period of my public service is draw,
ing to a close, I should find myself under the
necessity of once more entering into the ais-
cussion of such a subject. It is with the
deepest regret, and alone under the strongest
sense of duly to my constituents and myself,
that 1 could be induced to take any part in
t|,is discussion. Hut, sir, I should be rccre-
ont to the trust reposed in me by an intwlli-
luws of the several colonies and States now
composing this Union, but it could not be ne.
cessury tc inflict such labor upon myself, nor
so far to tax the patience of this committee.
As this principle of jurisdiction over Indians
was at first established upon the settlement
of the colonies, so did our fathers find it at
the commencement of the Revolution. Well,
sir, Georgia steed upon the same footing,
both as a colony and a State, with her sisters
on this subject. After the establishment of
American independence, when the articles of
confederation were found to be insufficient to
promote the public welfare, and to secure the
blessings which the union of the Slates was
intended to establish and perpetuate, when
the delegates met in convention in 1737, for
the purpose of revising our form of Govern,
ment, we find in the Federal Constitution,
that great and glorious result of their labors,
but a single particular which touches at all
upon the jurisdiction of the several States over
the Indian tribes within their limits. In fact,
the word “ Indian” occurs but twice through-
out the whole instrument—once in the clause
which confers the commercial power upon the
General Government, and once in relation to
the persons entitled to be enumerated for rep-
the
gent and confiding people—I should be false resentation in the Congress of the United
Slates. Nor does the Federal Constitution
to the honor which belongs to my character
ns their representative—if I could sit by and
hear the denunciations which have been hur
led against the Slate of which l am one of the
representatives, without endeavoring to repel
them. The wide range of discussion which
has been opened before this committee, ren*
ders it indispensable that I should indulge n
scope of remark entirely beyond what proper
ly belongs to the bill now under consideration.
To enable me to do justice to Georgia, unin.
tcresting us it may be, 1 am compelled to re-
cur, briefly, to the European colonization of
the American continent. It must be well
known to this committee, that the various na-
tions descended from European stock, now
settled on this continent, emigrated to the por
tions colonized by them upon one great and
general principle. 1 may assert, without fear
of contradiction, that from the time the stan
dard of Ferdinand and Isabella was planted
on the shores of the new world by the great
Win who it, the European colonics
were settled in this country' upon the princi
ple that discovery gave a pened r:”ht to soil
«uid jurisdiction over every person and thing Irom any part of that instrument
confer any power upon this Government, over
Indians, except the single and simple power
to “ regulate commerce with the Indian
tribes.” We know very well that for a long
series of years, attempts have been mudo so
to torture and misinterpret that clause of the
Constitution, as to authorize the extension of
jurisdiction over them by the FeJcral Govern
ment in all cases whatsoever; but, sir, it is
the idlest and nbsurdest of all deductions that
could be drawn from any one clause in that
instrument. Every one knows that the whole
commercial power of the General Govern
ment in relation to foreign nations, the seve-
ral States, and the Indian tribes, is embraced
in one single little clause of the Constitution.
But if the power to regulate commerce with
the Indian tribes, confers exclusive jurisdic
tion upon this Government over them, it con
fers a like jurisdiction over the several States,
and annihilates their respective Governments
1798, Georgia made a formal proposal to
Congress to cede a large portion of her wes
tern territory to the United States; which,
instead of being rejected because the lands
were already the property of the Union, was
declined on the ground that the Federal Gov-
eminent was not then in a condition to meet
the payment demanded for it by Georgia,
and for other considerations not necessary to
mention. Notwithstanding Georgia was en
titled to nil the land embraced within her
charter, about forty years ago, the then Pres-
ident of the United States, and a Congress
subservient to bis views, established a Terri-
torinl Government within her limits, although
within the preceding four years, in negotia-
ting the treaty of San Lorenzo El Real touch-
ing the southern boundary of tli* United
States, Spain had been vanquished upon the
title of Georgia. Thai circumstance, togeth
er with others of a local nature, occasioned
the assembling of a convention in 1799, for
the purpose of revising her constitution ; which
convention inserted a provision in the revised
constitution authorizing the cession of a large
portion of her territory U* the United States,
defining the boundary beyond which such ces-
sion should be made.
On (he 21th day of April, 1302, twenty-
five days after the passage of the law to reg
ulate trade and intercourse with the Indian
tribes, and which virtually repealed that law
as to Georgia, a compact was entered into
between the United Slates and Georgia, for a
cession of this territory to the United States,
by which Georgia conveyed to tho United
States about one hundred thousand square
miles of her most valuable lands, upon the
condition of receiving, at a period uncertain
and remote, tho pitiful sum of §1,250,000,
and the removal of the Indians from the lim-
its reserved by her. The language of that
compact deserves particular consideration
I do not, however, place the right of Georgia
to jurisdiction over the soil and people, and
every thing else upon her territory, upon the
compact of 1802. I place it upon the high
and original ground of European colonization,
referred to at the opening of my remarks, ns
confirmed and settled by the Declaration of
Independence, the treaty ofpeuce with Great
at n single blow. I repeat, that such an inter- I Britain, and the Federal Constitution which
pretation of the Constitution is the idlest and j now binds these States together. But if
nbsurdest inference which could be drawn doubt could exist in any human mtr.d whatev-
wbatsoever. 1 could not better lay down the
doctrine, in its application to the aboriginal
inhabitants, as it has been carried out and
dieted upon by every nation which has cstab-
lished colonics here, than by a reference to
remarks tnado by a distinguished citizen of
-Massachusetts [Mr. John Quincy Adams,]
in an anniversary orntion delivered by him in
commemoration of the larding of the Pilgrims
at Plymouth in that State, in December, 1802.
“The Indian right of possession itsolf stands,”
lays Mr. Adams, “ with regard to tho groatest part
of the country, Upon a questionable foundation—
Their cultivated fields; their constructed habita.
tiom; a spaco of ample sufficiency for their subsis.
tenco, ar-' whatever they had annexed to themselves
by personal labor, was undoubtedly by the laws of
nature theirs. But what is the right of a huntsman
to the forest of a thousand miles, over which he has
accidentally ranged inquest of prey ? Shall the lib.
eral bounties of Providence to the race of man bo mo
nopolized by ono of a thousand for whom they wore
created 7 Shall tho exuberant bosom of tho com.
inon mother, nmply adequate to tho nourishment of
millions, bo claimed exclusively by a fow hundreds of
her offspring 7 Shall the lordly savage not only dis
dain tho virtues and enjoyments of civilization him
self, but shall lie control tho civilization of the world 7
Shall he forbid tho wilderness to blossom liko the
roso 7 Shall he forbid tho oaks of the forest to fall
before the axe of industry, and rise again, transform,
ed into the habitations of ease and elegance 7 Shall
he doom an immense region of tho globe to perpet
ual desolation, and to hoar the howling of the tiger
and tho wolf eilenco forever the voice of human glad,
nets! Shall the hills and tho valleys, which a be.
ncficcnt God has formed to teem with tho life of in.
numerablo multitudes, be contemned to everlasting
barrennosa 7 Shall tho mighty rivers, poured out by
tho hand of nature, as channels of communication
between numerous nations, roll their waters in sullen
silence and eternal solitudo to tho deep 7 Have bun.
drods of commodious harbors, a thousand leagues of
coast, and o boundless ocean, hocn spread in front of
this land, and shall every purposo of utility to which
they could apply be prohibited by tho tenant of the
wood*? No, generous philanthropists. Ileaven has
not been thus inconsistent in tho work of its hands!
Heaven has not thus placed nt irreconcilable strife,
its moral laws with its physical creation!”
Tho doctrine contained in this extract is
not only conformable to the system of English
•colonization on this continent, but that of ev-
«ry other European nation which established
townies upon it. From eepjmncnt of the
•oldest of the Angie American colonies, fr. A, n
the settlement of Virginia in 1606, to tual of
Georgia, tho youngest in 1733, there is,
among the original thirteen Stutes, but a sin.
glo exception, in which entire jurisdiction has
not been exercised by them, cither us colo
nics or States, over the Indians within their
respective limits, ns will be found on refer,
dice to tfieir statute books. Of all the oid
thirteen Slates, Delaware alone has abstained
from the exercise of such jurisdiction; and if
1 am not very much mistaken, alone for the
reason that thero was not a single Indian
tribe within her limits. A small portion of
the Nanticokes were there, but the body of
the tribe was in Maryland, and subjected to
her jurisdiction. The terms of the statutes
of the different colonies and States are va-
rious, but the principle of absolute sovereign,
ty over the aboriginal inhabitants, with the sin.
gle exception of Delaware, is found in them
all. It would be easy to sustain the asser.
tion, that entire sovereignty and jurisdiction
over the Indians was the principle of Anglo
American colonization, by reference to the
I am very j
well aware that this may be considered a stale j
and unprofitable train of argument on my j
part; but it is impossible to do justice to Geor-!
gia, without adverting to it. Sir, in the
whole history of the legislation of that State,
she has never, in a single instance, overstep
ped the principles set forth in the extract just
read from the Flymouth speech of the hono
rable gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr.
Adams,] nor strained her jurisdiction one inch
beyond whnt all the other original States
have exercised, except Delaware, with re
spect to the Indians. In exercising this ju
risdiction, winch was alike exercised by the
various colonics, or States, it was based upon
the principle of entire sovereignty over the
whole soil, and over the whole population
within their limits as colonies or States.
It is now too late to inquire into the ques
tion of abstract right to such jurisdiction ; it
is enough for my argument to have shown its
universal application to nlf the European col
onies planted on this continent. Il the time
shall come when it will be necessary for me
to inquire whether the sum of human happi-
ness has been increased by the settlement of
European colonics in America, giving full al-
lownnce for its effect upon the aboriginal in
habitants, 1 shall be prepared to sustain the af-
firmative. It is well known that the British
colonics on this continent were settled under
the authority of charters from the Crown, and
that the limits of the original States have been
settled by them where no conflicting claim has
been shown to exist. Georgia, like her sis
ter colonies, was settled under a charter, by
which her original limits were so clearly do-,
lined, that no contest is believed ever to have
arisen between her and another colony or
State, except that which involved a small strip
of territory claimed by South Carolina, and
which was amicably adjusted between them
at the convention of Beaufort io 1787.
By the commission to Governor Wright,
and the royal proclamation in 1763 or 4, her
limits were defined to extend from the Savaa-
nah to the St. Mary’s, and inland from the
31st to the 35th degree of north latitude, and
from the Atlantic ocean to tho Mississippi,—
Thus stood the extent of her territory at the
treaty of peace with Great Britain in 1783;
and it continued to stand until^riie ceded
a large portion of her territory—about one
hundred thousand square miles—to the Uni-
ted Stutes, in 1802.
Mr. Chairman, we have heard much about
the common right of the Union to the waste
or unappropriated lands within the several
States. Often ns that question was brought
before the Revolutionary Congress, and much
ns it retarded the ratification of the articles
of Confederation, some two or threo of the
States insisting upon the establishment of the
principle before they would ratify them, the
ratification of all was finally accorded with-
out it. So far, indeed, from the affirmation
of the principle, it was distinctly disaffirmed
as ofier. as i; was brought before the Con-
gress of the Confederation. The utmost
length to which that body ever consented to
go was earnestly to recommen d liberal ces.
sjons by the States owning large bodies of
Unappropriated lands.
At the close of 1787, or early in the year
er, as to her rights, that question would be
clearly settled by the ci ..ipact of 1802 ; for,
by it, in express terms, Georgia ceded to the
United States “ all claim to soil and jurisdic
tion” beyond a certain limit; and the United
States ceded to Georgia “ all claim to soil
and jurisdiction” within thnt limit, as reser
ved by Georgia to herself. The United
States entered at once fully into the enjoy
ment of “ soil and jurisdiction” as ceded to
them by Georgia; and who will dare to say
that Georgia had not the same right to enter
upon and enjoy the “ soil and jurisdiction”
ceded to her by the United States?
By no known rule of construction can one
branch of these mutual stipulations be enfor
ced, and the other not. Is it not, then, sur
prising that, after the United States should
have entered at once and fully into the pos
session and enjoyment of what was ceded to
them by Georgia, we should find at this late
day, in defiance of the cession to her of “ soil
and jurisdiction” by the United States, the
doctrine set up that an Indian tribe may bold
a position ns an independent-political cominu-
nity upon the soil of Georgia? I have said
that all the colonies, nnd original States of
this Union, exercised perfect and entire juris
diction over the Indians within their limits;
and, I will now add, that the very last of all
the old States, as she was the last one plant-
ed on this continent, to extend her jurisdic
tion over the Indians, was Georgia. Various
acts of legislation, it is true, were adopted bv
her sumo forty or fifty years ago, in relation
to the Indians; but she deferred the whole
nnd entiro exercise of her sovereignty over
them until within the last ten years.
The occasion was this: In the summer of
1827 a council of delegates of tho Cherokee
nation, assembled, and adopted, and promul-
gated, a formal Constitution, setting up a per
manent, independent, sovereignty, embracing
some four or five millions of acres of territo-
ry, within the limits of Georgia. Notwith
standing the proceedings of this convention
were known to the Governor and Legislature
of Georgia, at its meeting in November, 1827,
even then, Georgia forbore to interfere with
this pretended Cherokee sovereignty.
In January’, 1828, the distinguished indi
vidual who now presides over the Department
of State, [Mr. Forsyth,] being then Governor
of Georgia, communicated a copy of the Cher
okee constitution to the President of the Uni
ted States. That President, with whom Geor
gia had just triumphantly closed the mcinorn-
blc controversy which grew out of the Creek
treaty made at the Indian Spring, in Februa-
ry, 1825, being willing, so far as might be
practicable, to carry to fulfilment the obliga-
lions of the United States to remove the Indi.
mis from within the limits of Georgia, entered
into a treaty with the Clicrokccs of the West
in May, 1828, looking, among other things,
to the emigration of the Eastern portion of
the tiihe to tho west of the Mississippi. I
speak from a knowledge of the fact, that such
was one of the important motives which led
to the conclusion of that treaty, being, at the
time it was made^ a member of the Georgia
delegation, who were consulted on the sub*
ject. It was understood that a portion of the
Western Cherokees, who made that, treaty,
returned through the Eastern portion of the
tribe, in the summer of 1828, for the purpose
of inducing their friends and kindred to enii-
grate to the West, and that, so far from finding
a friendly reception, were abused and mal
treated for it. But the opposition of the au-
tliorities of tho tribe did not stop there.
At the meeting of the Cherokee council in
October, 1828, an act was passed, disfranchi-
sing any Cherokee who might enrol for end-
grution to the West, and authorizing any oth
er Cherokee to enter into the possession of
bouses and lands then occupied by him. It
was not until after the passage of that act that
the Legislature of Georgia extended tho juris-
diction of the Stale over tho Cherokees, at
the annual session in November, 1828. In
spite of the attempt to enforce the Cherokee
law of 1828 against emigration, the spirit was
not checked sufficiently for the authorities of
the tribe; and in November, 1829, another
act was passed by the council, or, ns would
appear from a printed copy of the Cherokeo
laws, solely by John Ross, as principal chief,
inflicting a fine of one thousand dollars, and
tho punishment of one hundred lashes, upon
any and every Cherokee Indian who should
dare to enrol for emigration to the West. As
the law of Georgia, of November, 1828, was
made to meet the Cherokee law against emi
gration which preceded it, so in November,
1829, the Legislature of Georgia passed an-
other act to countervail the Cherokee law
which preceded it. In both instances, it
will be perceived that Georgia legislation fol
lowed that of the Cherokees, and was occa
sioned by it. It tvoold not be difficult to show
that Georgia has proceeded progressively in
the sumo course, busing her legislation upon
tile previous action of the Cherokees. It is
worthy of remembrance that the Creeks,
Chickasaws and Choctaws have been remo-
ved from the lands ceded to the United States
by the compact of 1802; while the Chero
kees, after the lapse of thirty-five years, and
the establishment of two flourishing States up
on the ceded territory, ure still permitted to
encumber the soil of Georgia.
If the expense of removing the Indians from
Georgia is alleged to her prejudice, my an-
swer is, that the United States have received
not less than sixty millions of acres of land as
an equivalent for doing it. Surely, upon an
examination of the uccount current, no one
can complain that the United States have
made a hard bargain. Would the people of
this country be willing to cancel it, and re
store the ceded territory to Georgia upon be-
ing reimbursed what has beer, expended in
removing the Indians 7 I think not. The
difficulties growing out of the conflicting leg.
islation of Georgia and the Cherokees wore
heightened by the depredations mutually com
mitted by bad men of either race upon the
people of the other, or both. During the pc.
riod under review, nud that which followed
it, the question was not as to the mode in
which Georgia should exercise, or had exer-
cised, jurisdiction over the Cherokees, but
involved the naked, vital principle or her-
right of jurisdiction. By what right could
any community, either before or since tho
adoption of the Federal Constitution, cstab-
lish an independent Government within the
limits of any one of the Stales of this Union,
I leave to the adversaries or Georgia, and dc-
fy them to answer. Let moralists say what
they will, it does not become the people of
this country, especially those of the older
States, to arraign the course of Georgia on
this subject. Well might she say to them,
“Let him who ts without sin first cast a stone
at me.” In 1828 and 1829, the extent to
which Georgia carried her authority over the
Cherokees, was to protect such of that peo
ple as might desire to emigrate from the bar-
barous inflictions of.tbe laws of the tribe
In 1830, a Cherokee by tho name of Tassels
commuted muidcr upon one of his own coun-
trymen, for which he was arraigned before
the superior court of Hall county fur trial,
and upon solemn inquest was found guilty of
murder. I might here show that it was far
better, on the ground of humanity, fur an In
dian to be tried by the white man’s law than
by the law of the Indian ; by the Anglo .Sax*
on institutions than the bloody code of his
own countrymen ; by that law which not on-
ly requires proof of the fact of killing, but
which requires to bo brought home to the cul-
prit malice aforethought, express or implied.
But Georgia was not permitted to proceed
quietly in the exercise of her jurisdiction over
tliis Indian murderer. A hue-and-cry was
raised ugainst her throughout the whole
length and breadth of the land, and the pow
er of the Supreme Court of the United States
was invoked to arrest his execution, and to
take him away from her authority. A cita.
tion was served upon the Governor of Geor.
gia, and upon the judge before whom the mur
derer had been tried and convicted; and be
cause the authorities of the State went on to
execute Tassels in conformity with his sen
tence, Georgia was accused of braving and
defying the authority of the United States.—
I may say here, before I proceed further with
the narrative of tho contest between Georgia
and the Cherokees, 'that in tho case of Tas
sels there was no haste to execute the sen-
tence of the law. .On the contrary, the day
of execution was made so distant as to enuble
the unfortunate convict and his friends toJn-
voko Executive clemency for a respite, nnd
to metnoralize the Legislature for a pardon.
No mitigating ciicumstances being shown,
the pardon wasrefused, and he "was. execu
ted., • But even according to the doctrine
contended for, that the Supreme Court had
■ appellate jurisdiction over the case, under
whut obligations did Georgia stand to obey
the citation of that tribunal ? How she bra
ved the authority of the Supreme Court, will
be seen by referring to the decision of the
late Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of
Cohens against the State of Virginia. In
considering what a citation is, Judge Mar.
shall says:
“ And what is a citation? It i» simply notice to
tho opposite party that the record is transferred to an.
other court, vvhero ho may appear, or decline to ap
pear, as his judgment or inclination may determine.
As the party who has obtained the judgment is out
of court, and may therefore not know that his cause
is removed, common justice requires that nolico of
tho fact should be given to Kim. Rut this notice is
not a suit, nor has it the effect of process. If the
party does not choose to appear, he cannot be brought
into court; nor is his failure to appear considered as
a default.’*
Sir, if n citation is neither suit nor process
against an individual, I should like to know
how it can be so against a State? Such an
idea would be preposterous in the extreme, j
To show, still further, that it wns the ques
tion of jurisdiction alone which was in con
troversy, and not the mode of its exercise, it
is only necessary to refer to tho celebrated
Cherokee chancery bill against the State of
Georgia, which wns argued before, and de
termined by, tho. Supreme Court, at its ses
sion in 1631. That bill denied entirely the
jurisdiction of Georgia over the Cherokees,
and prayed the Court to enjoin thnt State
against the future exercise of such jurisdic-
tion. And what wa3 the decision of the
Court, as delivered in March, 1831 ? We
shall learn from the following extract from its
decision delivered, by Chief Justice Marshall
himself.
In delivering the opinion of the Court, Chief Jus-
lice Marshall observes: “ The Court has bestowed
its best attention on this question, and, after mature
deliberation, tho majority is of opinion that an Indi
an tribe or nation within the United States, is not a
foreign State in the sense of the Constitution, and
cannot tnainUin an action ia the courts of the Uni-
ted States.”
* * “ A serious additional objection exists
to the jurisdiction of the Court. Is the matter of tho
bill the proper subject for inquiry nnd decision ? It
seeks to restrain a State from the forcible exercise of
legislative power over a neighboring pe.ople asserting
their independence; their right to which the Stale
denios. On tho several matters alleged in the bill,
(for example, on the laws making it criminal to exer
cise tho usual powers of self-government in their
own country by the Cherokee nation,) this Court
cannot interpose, at least in the form in which these
matters arc presented." :
In reference to tho jurisdiction of Georgia over
the possession of lands by the Chcrokess, Chief Jus-
ticc Marshall says: “ The mere question of right
might, perhaps, bo decided by tliis Court in a proper
case, with proper parties; but the Court is asked to
do more than to decide on tho title. The bill re
quires us to control the legislation of Georgia, and to
restrain the exercise of its physical forco. Tho pro.
priety of such an interposition by the Court may bo
well questioned. It savors too much of the exercise
of political power to be within the proper province
of tho judicial department.”
In the closing paragraph of tho opinion of the
Court it is observed : “ If it bo truu that tho Chero
kee nation have rights, this is not tho tribunal in
which these rights are to bo asserted. If it ho true
that wrongs havo been inflicted, and that still greater
arc to be apprehended, this is not tho tribunal which
can redress tho past or prevent tho future.”
“ The motion for an injunction is denied.”
It is very remarkable that, after pronoun-
cing such an opinion ns this, disclaiming ju-
risdiefon, nnd that too for the reason that its
exercise would savor too much of the exer-
cisc of political power, in one short year, the
Supreme Court of the United States should
have attempted to arrest the jurisdiction of
Georgia over one of her own citizens, resi-
ding in the country occupied by tho Chero
kees ; and still more so that the Court should
have sought to justify it, by assuming the in
dividual to bo the citizen of a State some
eight or ten hundred miles off, when he had
a permanent residence within the limits of
Georgia.
If ever there was an attempt by a judicial
tribunal in this country to usurp power not
belonging to the Government of which it was
a member, that attempt was made by the Su
preme Court in tho case of Worcester and
Butler against the Stole of Georgia; an at-
tempt which, I venture to predict, will never
be renewed by that Court against any mem.
her of this Union.
The Stato of Georgia, in the progress of
her legislation for the purpose of extending
her jurisdiction over the Cherokees, organ
ized counties, and established her civil and
other authorities within them. In 1831 the
Legislature of tho Stato went the whole ex.
tent of the doctrine contained in the ext ract
from the Plymouth speech which was read at
the commencement of my remarks, by sur
veying nnd apportioning tho waste lauds in
tho Cherokee country among her own people,
securing the Indians in the possession of such
portions its were occupied and improved by
them.
There is, in connection with tho legislation
of Georgia, and the course of the principal
chief of the Cherokees, one important circum
stance which has not yet been brought to the
notice of the committee. I have said, the
Legislature of Georgia had determined to
take possession ofthc country, subject to the
principle of Indian occupancy, to which I
have already adverted; and. I will now say,
that, up to the 25th of May, 1838, the Chero-
kees were protected in the possession of the
improvements occupied by them to the extent
of from one hundred and twenty to one bun-
dred and sixty acres, to each head of an oc r
cupant family. This was the state of the
case between Georgia nnd the Cherokees,
when the delegation,.at the head ofcjvhich
all the lands occupied by them east of the
Mississippi, to tho decision of the Senate, as
has been shown by more than one gentleman
who lias already addressed the committee,
and most particularly by the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. Graham.]
In February, 1835, that delegation, clothed,
as I believe, with the whole power of theirtribo,
being essentially its Government—for I con
sider John Ross as the impersonation and
embodiment of Cherokee power and Cherokee
will—through tho Secretary of War,.proposed
to submit the question of the valuation of their
land to the Senate of the United States, pledg
ing tlx mselves to use their efforts to induce
their people to accept the award. That award
was made ; and the committee have already
been told, that when the delegation was urged
to enter into stipulations on the basis of five
millions of dollars awarded by the Senate,
their own especial umpire, they then for the
first time discovered that they had no power
to enter into such stipulations. They could
could not treat at Washington, but must treat
in the Cherokee nation. Pending the trans
action, after the question had been submitted
to the Senate of the United States ; after that
body had awarded five millions of dollars aa
an ample indemnity to the Eastern Cherokeftl
as the price of their removal to the West, a
very short lime before the proposed meeting
of the commissioners of the United States
with Russ and bis people in their country, for
the purpose of there consummating the award
of Hits Senate, while the Cherokees were still
under the protection of the laws of Georgia
for an indefinite time; John Ross and his
counc.l transmitted to the Governor of Geor
gia a communication a copy of which I will
ask the Clerk to read.
Tho Clkrk read the following:
Council Ground of the Cherokee Nation,
Red Clay, October 26, 1835.
Sir : The undersigned, the principal Chief, tho
assistant principal Chiof, tho Committee and Coun.
cil of Ihc Cherokee nation, trust you will appreciate
the purity of their motives for thus addressing you.
re aware of the distressing situation in which
You
our country stands. We are tho earlier possessors
of the sod, which wo yot retain, but where events,
which we have had no share whatever in producing,
surround us with ail tho anxieties and privations of
war, ailliough in a perfect state of peace.
Various attempts have been made to arrange our
difficulties, and upon conditions which may satisfy
tho people. Wo have been misrepresented, we Havo
been slandered. Tho General Government of tho
who do cot ontcr inlo n tSo ?eorfngs of our nationTaintl
who adopt a course in reference to it which has
made the nation d strustful. Tho Cherokees will
only put faith in those whoso devotedness to them
has keen tried. They havo appointed a delegation
to settle their difficulties. To accomplish this, they
have invested that delegation with the fullest powers.
If sources of irritation are now avoided, we doubt not
all will bo accomplished which can be desired on th*
close of tho present session of Congress, should wa
not greaily misapprehend tlio feelings of the General
Government.
Under these circumstances, we have thought it dun
to ourselves, to you, to the United States, to tho
interest of humanity, to make this representation,
and to ask that you will submit it the Legislators,
of which you aro tho head; and, in submitting it|
that you will entreat tho Legislature, whateverlhey
may have had tho purpose of doing regarding those
portions of our nation which border on their posses,
sions, to abstain, at any rate, until this negotiation
shall bo completed, from passing any law, of sane,
lioning any proceedings, which may furthor harrass
a people ao deeply galled that a renewal of irritating
measures, at a moment so critical, might entirely
defeat the objects of those who havo nothing at heart
but the peace and happiness of their own countrymen,
and a permanent friendship with yours,
Wo have tho honor to be, sir,
Y<>ur Excellency’s most ob’t servants,
(Signed) JOHN ROSS, Principal Chief,
GEO. LOWRY, Ass. Prin. Chief,
IiJCH’D TAYLOR, Pres'nt If. C.
James Daniel Choonoluskbk
Jas. 1). Wopfard Joint Hinson
Old Fields Samuel Gunter
Hair Conrad George Still
John Fox Baldridge George Hicks
James Hawkins Richard Fields ;
Nauucolaii
Wm. Rogers, Clerk Nat. Committee.
his
Goino x Snake, <S. N. C.
mark,
Archv Campbell Taiiguoii.
Bark Jhon R. Daniel r
Money Crier White Path -■>'
Sleeping Rabbit James Foster
Young Glass John Otter Lines
Chune Kee Charles
O. Olenowa Chualokee
Bean Stick John Wayne
Walking Stick Situwakeb
John Watts Sweet Water
James SrEARS Peter
Edmund Duncan
Moses Daniel .Clerk Nat. Council.
To his Excellency the Governor of the State of
Georgia.
I stated, Mr. Chairman, that at the time this
communication was made to the Governor of
Georgia, the Cherokee Indians were secured,
for an indefinite period, in the possession of
thoir improvements in Georgia, to the extent
of one hundred and twenty to one hundred
and sixty acres of land for each family.-—
Therefore, there could have been no motive
on the part of tbo Stale of Georgia to have
changed her legislation on the subject, unless
it was to bring this matter to a close. But,
acting on this pledge from John Ross, the
Legislature, in November thereafter, passqd[
an act securing Indian occupant* in their pos~
sessions until November or December, 1830^
reserving to the Stats the power still further
to extend their right of occupancy. John
Ross and his Council to the Governor of Geor
gia, that, relying, on the disposition of the Ex
ecutive of tire United. States, not starting any
difficulty in relnion-to the award of their own
tirnpire.'the. Scimte of the,United States, but
leaving Georgia to act on the clear, distinct,