About Columbus enquirer. (Columbus, Ga.) 1828-1861 | View Entire Issue (April 14, 1832)
be done on process strictly eceerding «o 'be »U»y. present to render itt ilsjodg- law, and by our judieial aeperfiskmof the /meals; detinue asi lira llouseOl record of a Stale Courts most lie «•*- ' *— 1 vinced beyond a doubt, that jnis n»OW bp* - j in quostioainc the King’s lefdjintellibiliiyf difficulty, aid tile word » ; by directing a writ of error to a Court in (tainly to do lemn supervision of State jurisdiction add legislation, bas been begui^ clearly within and on that direct and narrow path pre scribed tor us by tho laws which confer the power. tV'iut then is tho course thos prescribed by la#, aod by what law! That power is tremendous, which sets at nought the peunl laws of u Suite of this Union, It must be clearly given; ita elocution may require more thau the power of ibis Court. It ought to be exercised in a manner strictly according to the authority Confer red, and so, to appear, “ for when confer red, the Court will never, we trust, shrink from its exercise," 5 P. 259* In correc ting tlm errors of iufei tor courts, in con futing them within the supienio law of the land, as expounded by this tribunal, in an nulling or affirming their practice and their judgments, u court, of the lust resort should be oagle-eyed to see that their own proceedings should conform to the direct and nkrrow path, which it coerces others to follow. They commenco by o writ of error, which is defined to be “ a commission, by which the judges of ono court are aothoriaed to examine a record upon, which a judgment was given in an other court, and on such examination, to affirhi er reverse the same according to law. 6 Wh. 409, Cohen vs. Virginia.— The effect of.the writ of error is to bring file record into Court, and submit the judg ment of the inferior tribunal to re-exninin- atinn. It acts only on the record; it re moves it iuto tho supervising tribunal— 410. The citation if simply notice to the opposite party, that the record is transfer red hue another court, where ho utay ap pear Of decline to appear as Ills judgment or inclination may determine. It is not a suit nor has it the effect of process—411. The writ of error is the process which re-I (Ac Judiciary Aft or any lam of Con- which he presides without HO allowance txiptiiali gratia, on a petition of right; (which is the only origin I could over discover for an allowance of a writ of er ror, by a Judge of a Court of error in this country,) they do not recognize the seal of ihe King’s own Court, or lira attesta tion of its Clerk, as prov ng the correct ness of the transcript of his proceedings therein on a writ of error, directing the Judges to return the record. ‘The Chief Justice carries the originai roll, uni) the transcript to the House ef Lords; they are compared, end il found correct, he leaves Ihe transcript and takes back tho original. —4 Cocke, 21. D. Cunt. D. 293. 301. 2. Par. L. 2. The form of the return he makes to the writ of error may be sefn in Sho. Par. Cas. 127, Rex vs. Wolcttlt, n criminal case on writ of error from the House of Lords; so of the Court o( Com mon Pleas, on a writ of error from K. B, Lut 850, 3 Black. Com. pp. 375. So of the K. B. to a writ of error from the Ex chequer Chamber, Lut. 866. This re turn authenticates the record or the trans cript; the name of Ihe Clerk never np- pears in a common law record, and in u Court of Common law inspecting the re cord of no inferior Court, the last thing thought of would bo the ultestation of a Clerk to tho schedule identified by nnd accompanied by the return of the Chief Justice ol the Court to whom it is direct ed. When jho Chief Justice of a Court makes a return to a writ of error, the schedule annuxod is taken for the record or transcript; all which it contains is be fore the Court of Error; so urp all the precedents; the whole record is verity.— The authentication of a tecord by the at- | testation of a Clerk is unknown to the Common law, and is not recognized by and the teatjoT the Court, the rule of the l on ward—not daring to consult any human Court was probably adopted tu meet the'authority as a guide to my judgment, un- ■“ “ ard may syems evi- less the laws of tl» country and tho judg’ moves the record to this Court. It must bear test of the Chief. Justice, be under the seal of the Court and signed by the Clerk thereof,” 1 Story 67, 257,2 DaH. 401. “ Its object is to cite the parlies to this Court, to bring tip the record, nnd it Is tho set of the Court, 8 Wh. 820, IS Wh. 303, 4. S. P. Its form is that which has boeu adopted and used iu Courts of CVlbmon law for centuries, and in the Stales from their organization. Its com mand i* “ >f judgment lie therein given, that thelt under your-teal you distinctly und openly send the record and proceed greis. The mode of authentication, so us to rouke them evidence on trials or to the Court, is not n innitur of more prac tice; it is a question of evidence, to ho settled by the principles of law, which transcends the rules oi'Court. An exem plification of u patent recorded in the of fice of the Secrotnry of Slate of Geor gia, under the seal of the State, was held by this Court le bn as high evidence as the original; though there was a yule of the Circuit Court, that no exemplification should bu received until the original pa tent was proved to have been lost or do ings aforesaid, with ali things concerning .si roved, or the non-production thereof is legally accounted for or explained, on the ground that it was not competent for lire Court to exclndo it by its own rule.—Pnt- tieson vs. Hinn, 5 Pit 233, 43. Tim 22d section requires that an Hiillmiiticuted transcript ol tlm record shall he umioxed to nnd returned with the writ of error.— Tho authority of nny rule of this Court, thou, must yield to this law, (according to the principle of I’attinson vs. llimi, the proviso to tho 17th section of llio Judicia ry act—1 Story 60, and tho common law rules of evidence. It is an universal prin ciple in the construction of statutes, thut where words arc used which Iihvb a fixed, legal, nnd definite meaning, by the rules of law they shall bo deemed to have been used by the legislature with a reference to such well ktiowti ami received accepta tion unless a coutrury intention appeals in the law itself, or by ne,ccssary implication. the same, to tho Supreme Court of the U- nited States, together with thix writ."— The language uf this writ cannot be miataken. ft is directed 10 the Judg- etoflhe Slate Court; the order is to them to send the record under their seal, so that the return mutt be made by th,em. This command qf the writ is its essence, it is tho meant and the process, 3 Wh. 304, by which the appellate jurisdiction of this Chart is directed to be exercised by tho 25th nnd 22d sections of the judiciary act the words of which are, “ upon a writ of errer whereto shat! be annexed and turned therewith, at the day and place therein mentibned, un authenticated Irani cript of the record." 1 Story 60. If the question it atkud, by whum the record tliull bo to annexed and returned, the writ aiiswen, by the Judges: if how, undet their teal distinctly andopotily.: if in what form it thall be so annexed und returned, j Authenticated then means, as irunscripts the answer is to .he found in every return to a writ of error iu the Courts of tho Common L <w and the States, from the Court of King's Bench in the one of the Supreme, and uf Courts of Common Pleas or other Courts to whom a writ of error lies, in the other, nnd in every return lo t certiorari to a Justice of the Peace iu both. And it • doubt can arise whether llm rules and practice, the forms and mode of procoediug thus adopted nnd acted on through all time and in all Courts ucting bn the principles and according to tho cblirte of the common law, it to be con sidered at a rule in the Federal Count, until altered by law, or the Courts in the exercise of their legal authority, the ait- ewer will be found in 1 Story 67, 256; 3 Wh. 221; 4 Wh. 115, 7 Wb. 45, 5 Cr. 222; 10 Wb. 56; 1 Pit 613. The forms of writs havo always been deemed in themselves the very evidence of llie-law, hnd taken by the greatest judg es as safe guides to their judgment.— “The 'writs in the register ure the body and as it "were, the text, of which our books for 400 years oru but exposi tions, the fouudation, 'tlm principles," 8 Cucke, preface—" for U|ioii these ftinda mentals the whole law doth depend."— F. N. B. preface. If'.hey arc of them selves authority, how much is that author- try strengthened by universal adoption, sanction, and usage. The tame marks upply equally to tho forms to the retorns ol writs. They respond to the command of lira wiits, und are signed by those to whom they are direcl od—'he Sheriff or the J udges, as the case Way tie. It would be un useless affecta tion of learning to quote books, Cases, precedents, or forms, in support of these principles. It is enough to utserl, with out the fear of contradiction, that in the whole body of the common law, English or American, there cannot bo found an Mrepjio’n. A writ qf errbr never issued from aoy Court'to a Cierk of an inferior Court, or any one but the Judges thereof; a Court of Error hever adjudicated on a record returned to theta by • Clerk of the Court 'tb whom it was directed, or on a transcript authenticated bv him alone.— The Clerk has the custody but uot the control over the records of the Court; ha dare not remove them, and Ita cannot au thenticate a transcript. High and su preme at is the authority of the King’s Bench, ip which the King is Resumed to bad ever beau and then were, by all Su perior Courts—authenticated by the re* turn and signature, or seal of tho Judges or presiding Judge of the Court, to (cram tho writ of error was directed, nnd “ an nexed und returned therewith," means ut- tuched thereto as a schedule which wus the transcript culled for. It is done by the Judges, who ulotio have the comtol of the record, and could be done in no other way, but by direction of nu Act of Con gress, or (for the sake uf argument,) at loust an explicit and definite rulo of this Court, expressly dispensing with the mode of authentication, which has been in use for ages, and was evidently referred to in tho 22d Section, and subsiiiuting therefor the attestation of the Clerk under tlm seal of the Court. It is unnecessary to exam ine how tar such a rule would come wtili- in die power of this Court, under the 17ih Section, authorising “ all tho Courts of tho United States to make all necessary rules, for tlm elderly conducting llm busi ness of the Courts," as explained iu 7 Cr. 34—10 Wh. 22,56, 64—for no such rule exists. The 11th rule adopted in 1797, is “ that the Clerk of the Court to which nny writ of error shall bo directed, may make return of the same by transmilling a true copy of the record, and of all pro- cucdiugsin tho cate, under hit hand and the seal of theCourt, 1 Pit. prof. V II.— Construing this rule us an act of Congress il would nut be taken to alter tho rules ol the common law, further than Its words or legnl import extended, and would leave them applicuble to tlm return oftlie Judges, and the annexation of tlm transcript to llm writ by them—* a fortiari”—when these rules are so evidently embodied iu llm 22d Section. Taking the 1st Section of the fourth article of the Constitution, the law of 1790, tlm 22d Section oi the Judiciary Act, nnd this lltli rule us laws in pari materia, there is no difficulty. In 1789,. Congress had not executed their constitutional powers to prescribe the mode of proving judicial re cords—hence iu the 22d Section, the word "authenticated" only is used, appli cable to the common law mode of aUlheu- tication, until Congrost should legislate oh the subject, and prospectively after they should have prescribed tbe mode of au thentication. As the law of the suecred- mg Session, 1st Story 63, rebuited file certificate of the presiding fudge to lie suporndded to the attestation of the Clerk - B ,al *uch * a * ‘h**’“‘ten don of the Court, in adopting it. The return of the Judge to the writ of error, amtoxing thereto, and at its bead, a trans cript of the record at a schedule, being considered as tautnmoqni to his,certificate at the foot of the attestation of the Cletk. The rule too, tuperudds to the requisites of tlm common law, thut the seal of the Court should be affixed; thus distinctly re ferring'’ ttf tho law of 1790, and conform ing, sobsiun'iully, to all its provisions. Te impure n different moaning to this rule, would be to make thi» Court declare, that in tho execution of their power,' they would judicially revise, inspect with judicial eyes, and act on u paper purporting to be the-transcript of a record, when llm evi dence of its authenticity was so utterly defective, that none of the Judges would permit il to be'read in evidence in a Cir cuit Court, to shew tlm acts und proceed ing of the tribunal from which it 1 profess ed to emanate. In a civil suit, brought un a judgment of tho Supetior Court of the Comity of Gwinnett in and for the Stale of Georgia, certified precisely us this is, such a paper could not be shown to a Jury, in any Circuit or DistricrCouif Of tlm United States, as even prima facia evidence, that a judgment had been ren dered. Qn n pints of nul till record, any Court not silting in Geotgia, State or Fuderul, would render judgment for the Defendant, on a transciipt so allesleil.— Ye', that tins Court, in the exercise of its highest jurisdiction, will cousider this pa per, when nttosted by the same Cletk, and under the same seal, in a criminal case, as the record of tho sanid Court, ns its judgment on those great «onstitmioual questions which agitate the country, a- lartn tho friends of the Union, and (Ke ad vocates for the supremacy ol its supreme law, as expounded by this high tribunal under its awful responsibility, is a princi ple which I *ani hound to presume has never received the deliberate sanction of this Court; still more strongly so, that never intended to embody and promulgate such a priiiciplo, iii the rule of 1797. In oty humble judgment, it admits of no tuch construction. I canuot inspect it here ju dicially, when there is no appeartiico which can cute irregularity, waive error, or by express or implied consent author ize eio to solemnly consider hero, a piper which I should Jra bound to reject eUe- wliure, directing a trial forgiving judgment on a plea. Wbqu parties appeal, and, by consent, state a case, or consider a re cord as before this Court, Without rnqui- ing into the mode of its removal Or au thentication, it is not the duty of a Judge to look with an eagle eye, to find some a- polftgy for declining tho exeicise of u ju risdiction, to which all parlies have sub mitted. Yet when it appears that its re cord is not legally before them, no Coutt of en or can roviao tlm Judgment of on in ferior Court. No Judge vrrer scat dies a record to find out that the citizenship of the parties is not avorred; but, when ho judicially knows it, his power over the caitso ceases—it is coram ttonjudice. It will ho dismissed, even in this Court, aud oth er causes, in tlm like predicament, will he stricken from tlm docket 9 3 Dull. 382—4. If there wus even a case winch called for the application of this rule it is litis, though the proceeding is ex parte. If we render judgment, it is open to no revision hereuflei ; beyond this tribunal the Consti tution has placed no sentinel or gttaid, to protect lilt rights of pnrties under the su preme law of the laud, from lawless viola tion. Tho process which unnuls even the cx parte Judgments of this tribunal, will lubject the elements of this Goventmetx to a dreadful test. It hero, that the su preme power of the nation Ims placed thy morions casket, which contains that ma gic, mystic hand, and which unites twenty- four sovereign ami independent States, in one harmonious. Union, which, from the wrecks of a disjointed confederacy, writh ing under the agonising nnd convulsiva throes of u mighty revolution, left the peo ple free; but, uot knowing what freed oty was, or how its blessings could be enjoyed —a nominal nation, on whom » kind und beneticieut Providence has bestowed its blessings, iu the fulness of licniguant boun ment'of those who are, and have been their expositors; bet under every' obliga- iid»», not tolake the breath of any man, as the law of the land, whilo sitting here by a power which forbids any tribunal to cor rect llie errors of an honest judgment; I cannot approach a case like this without awe and dread, whether concurring or dis senting, supported by the high authority of my brethren, or compelled to act in o- bcdience to what my poor judgment dic tates to me at one higher. (Toht continued next week. J TREATY WITH TUE CREEK INDIANS. The following Treaty has received the assent of the Senate, aud having previ ously received the approbation of llie President of the United Stales, may be expected to be officially published at an eat ly day. Having meanwhile obtained a copy of it (the injunction ofsecresy u- pon it having been removed) we antici pate that publication.—Nat. Intel. ARTICLES OF A TREATY i blade at the City of Wash ingtim by Lewis Cass, thereto specially author ized by the President of the United States, and the Creek tribe of Indians. Art. 1. The Creek tribe of Indians cede re tbe United Stales all their land east of the Mississippi river. Art. 2. Thu United States engage re survey ihe said land, us soon us the same can be conveniently done, after the ratifi cation of this treaty; and when the same is surveyed, to ullow ninety of the princi pal chiefs of tlio Creek trib?, to select one half section each, which tracts shall be reserved from sale for their use, for the term of five years, unless sooner disposed 1 of by them. A census of such persons shall ho taken under the direction of tho , President, and the selections shall be made so as to include the iinpioveineuts of each person within his section, if the same can be so made, and if not, then all the per sons belonging to the same town, entitled to sections, and whoAtamiot make tho same, so as to include tlieit improve ments, shall take them in one body in a propor form. Aud twenty sections shall be solectod, under the direction of (ho President, for the orphan children of, the Creeks, and divided, and retained or sold for their beuefit, us the President may di- rort. Provided. hqtvever, that no selec tions or locations under this treaty, shall be so made us to include the agency re serve. Art. 3. Tltoso pacts may be conveyed by the persons selecting tbe same, to any person for a fair consideration, in such manner, ss the President may direct.— Art. 11. The following claims shall be paid by the United States: For ferries, bridges qnd causeways, three thousand dollars ; provided that the same shall becume the property of the U. States. < For the payment of certain judgments obtained against (he chiefs, eight thousand five hundred and seventy dollars. For losses for which they suppose the .United States responsible, seven thousand seven hundred and ten dollats. For the payment of improvements un der the treaty of 1826, one thousand dol lars. I The three following annuities shall be paid for life: To Tuske-hcw-haw-Cusetaw,twp hun dred dollars. . To the Blind Unite; King, ono hun dred dollars. To Neah Micco, one hundred dollars. There shall he paid 'tlm sum of fifteen dollars to each person who has emigra ted without expense'to the United Slates, but llie whole sum allowed under this pro vision shall uot exceed fourteen hundred dollars. There shall be divided among the per sons who suffered in consequence of be ing prevented Irani emigrating, three thou sand dollars. The land hereby ceded shull remain as a (und from which all the foregoing pay ments, except those in the ninth and tenth articles, shall be paid. Art. 12. The United States ure desi- ed nnd attic, resulted in the unanitnofta a.lcpiuitf. of the resolutions and preamble reported by the committee. We hope they Will he generally read. At this juncture, ever}’ tiling should be attentive ly considered which will aid in the formation of n correct judgment Of our true situation, our le gal rights, and the meens necessary to secure their preservation. The preamble succinctly and clearly enumerates the reserved and constitution al rights of Georgia, and the principles by which site will bo governed in their enforcement, and in her future intercourse with tho govern.nmt of tho United States. We speak of the views promul- ged in the preamUle as the views of*he State, because open the subject to which theyrelate ; their is fortunately bulone voiee. And while dignity and firmness should characterize 4)* pme*edt*gs of Georgia, it cannot he nmiss to/wtiactly avow the grounds upon which sho nsswnet her present attitude, inasmuch as she deeu* theta satisfacto ry nnd c(inclusive, and its tbry ,n *y sorve to CD- tighten and bring to oar Hid, druse not tranwMrt led by party fetters, or inCnplcirated from forming a correct judgment 1 by the strength of local at tachments, of political ifejudices, or roligiout bigotry. public Meeting; In pursuance of previous notice. Iho citizens-of Tho county of M uscqtee esse milled at the Court House, in the town A Columbus, on Saturday the 7th day of Anri), for the purpose of receive ing anti adopting the Preamble and Resolutions, dratted by tho Committee appointed at a previous meeting. / i Col. Sea Berta Joses then.submitted the fill- lowing preamble and resolutions, which were road— Tho Committee appointed to draw up n preamble nnd resolutions relative to the late decision ofthe Supreme Court of the United States, in the case Of Samuel A. Worcester, would respectful- ■ ly REPORT: That llie occasion which has culled us together is one of no ordinary interest or occurrence.— , . , , _ ,l. is one o no nramury interest or ucusii™™.— rous that the Creeks should remove o the Thi> r ^ lmI „J t convened to contend country west of tlje Mississippi, and join - - ■'*' 1 their countrymen there, nnd, for this pur pose, it is agreed that as fast as the Creolts ure prepared to emigrate, tltoy shall be removed at the expense of tho United States, and shall receive subsistence whilo ufionthe journey, and for ojto year after their arrival at their new homes. Provi ded, however, that this article shall not be construed so as to con.pel any Creek In dian to emigrate, hot they shall he free to go oi slay, uslhey please. Art, 13. There shall also t»e given to each emigrating warrior u rifle, moulds, wiper and ammunition, mid to each family one blanket. Thrcu thousand dollars, to for purtyrights, looking forward to ambitious views personal aggrandisement or political favor. Tho question for oar consideration is one, involving the dearest interest und most sacred rights of free men—an interest, deep und vital, us our exis tence as a Union—Ihe right of self government. In coming to tbe consideration of this .momentous question, we should summon to our aid all our en ergies. lit not distempered passion or excited feeling disturb our deliberations and drive us into intemperate excesses; but let wisdom, modera- titiou nnd firmness animate our counsels and di rect our measures. The late decision of the Su preme-Court relative to the trial and imprisonment of Samuel A. Worcester, for a violation of, and tinder the laws of tho State of Georgia, strikes at the very root of the tree of Liberty: and while we shonld in all cases within the legitimate sphere of its Jurisdiction pay respect to its decisions. ■ . .. and obev its mandates, yet when that Court so he expended as the President may direct, flir forget9 tho rigllt8 of / he Statcs n9 , 0 , rat npln shall be allowed, lor the term ol twenty ! them under li>o<, und attemptato deprive them years, for teaching their children. As 1 of tho power of making laws for their own go* soon as half their people emigrate, one j v f r n».ent, .1 is the right, it is the duly of the peo- placksnii.t. shall he allowed them, and an- ^Se a Jlt" U ” P n<! " ' other when two-thirds emigrate, together with one ton of iron nnd two hundred weight of steel annually for each black smith. These blacksmiths shall be suj)- ported for twenty vdars. Ait. 14.‘The Creek country west of the Mississippi-shall be solemnly guaran tied to the Creek Indians, nor shall any State or Territory ever have a right to The contracts shall be certified by some | pass laws for tbo government of such in person appointed tor the put jiosc by the President, but shall not bu vulid till ihe President approves the same. A title »u-ii t m aiven bv tho United State" «•> the completion of the payment. Art. 4. At the cud of five years, lII the Creeks entitled to these selections, and desirous of remaining, shall receive patents therefor, in fee simple, train the United Slates. Art. }. All intruders upon the country hereby ceded shall be removed therefrom in the same manner as intruders may be re moved by law from other public land, un til the country is surveyed, and the selec tions made; excepting however, from this provision, those, white pet sons who have made improvements utul uot expelled the Creeks from (heirs, such poisons may re main till their crops are gathered. After the country is surveyed and the sections made, this- article sIihII not operate upou that part of it uot included in such sec tions. But intruders shall, in the maimer before described, be removed Irom these sections, fora toim of five years, from the ratification of this treaty or until the same are surveyed to white persons. Art. 6. Twenty-nine sections, iu addi tion to the foregoing, may be located and patents for the same shall then issue, to those persons, being Creeks, to whom the same may be assigned by Ihe Creek tribe. (linns, but they shall be allowed to govern themselves; so fur as may be compatible wiih (he general jurisdiciion which Con gress may think ’ proper re exercise over them. And the United States will also defend them flora tho unjust hostilities of other Indiuns, and will also, as soon as the boundaries of the Crock counrty west ol tho Missixsqipi are ascertained, cause a patent or grant to bo executed re tho Creek tribe, agreeably to tho third section of tho act of Congress of May 2d, 1820, entitled " An act to provide for an ex change of lands with the Indians residing in any ol lira States or Territories, and for their removal west of the Mississippi." Art. 15. This treaty shall ho obligato ry on lira contracting parties, us soon as the sume shall be ratified by the United Slates. in testimony whereof, the said Lewis Cnss, mid the undersigned Chiefs of the said tribe, havo hereunto set their hands, at the City of Washington, this 14lh day March, A'. D. 1832. LEW. CASS, Opothleholv, Tuehebatchcehadgo, lifemntla, Tuchcbatchc Micco, William McGilveri/, lienjamin Marshall. In the presence of Samuel Bell, Wm ted to include them as near us muy he in the centre, Hnd there shall also be granted tv, but would have bestowed them lit vain! by patent, to Benjamin Marshall, one suc- But whenever the grantees of these tracts j R. King, John Tipton, Wm. Wilkins, C. possess improvements, they shall be loca- i C. Clay, J. Speight, Samuel W. Mardis, had not this Government arose, the no* lion ol land to include his improvements blest work ul man,constructed bvu patrio tism us pure as poor mortalily-udmila, and in all lira |ileui'udo ol w isdom aud justice, tliat belongs to finite beings—a Govern ment which unseen and unl'clt, save here where its muchineiy is visible, operates (if the expression can bo applied to the work on the Chattahoochee river, to be bound ed for one mile in a direct lino along said river and to run back for quantity. There shall also bu granted to Joseph Bruner, a colored man, one half section of land for his services ns interpreter. Art. 7. All tho locations authorized by of mini) like a Providence, its existence j this treaty, with the exception of thut to hot'known hy its physical action, but fell j Benjamin Marshall, shall be made in con ns the deepest moral conviction, known!formily with the lines of the surveys; and hailed, only by the blessings it difl'u-! and the Creeks relinquish all claim for sits. Yet lira Government is strong iu all improvements, its movements; directed in any of its de- partmunts; confined to the direct and nar row path, preset ibed bv a supreme law which all must obey. Public confidence lias attended and public good lias flowed without stint. In its foreign action, this lakes no pail; but, in its domes tic movements, in asserting and enforcing the supremacy and majesty of tho law, by its exposition und due administration, this tribunal is lira depository of the con fidence and judicial power of lira nation— the well tested lie, which, whilevor re tained, will preserve it as it began, " E pluribus unum." When I reflect on the extent of the judicial power, lira subjects of its a|iplicatiun, the mode and effects of its operation, and its Vital bcariug on all the most precious institutions of the coun try, 1 tremble nt the awful responsibility of its individual members. Bound uot to transcend the limits of the Constitution aod laws, and equally bound not to falter within them, when judicial duty impels mo mprovemenls. Art. 8. An additional annuity of twelve thousand dollars shull be paid to the Creeks for the term of five years, aud thereafter the said annuity shall be re duced to ten thousand dollars, and shall be paid for the term of fifteen years. All the annuities dun to the Creeks shall be |*aid iu such manner as the tribe may direct. /1rf. 9. For the purpose of paying cer tain debts due by the Creeks, and to re lieve them iu their precent distressed con dition, the sum of one hundred thousand dollars shall be paid to the Creek tribe, ns soon as may be, after the ratification hereof, to be applied to the payment of their just debts, and then to their own re lief, and to be distributed as they may di rect, and which shall be ih full considera tion of all improvements. Art. 1(). The sum of sixteen thousand dollars shall be allowed as a compensation to the delegation sent to this place, aud for the pax ment of their expenses, and of the claims against them. J. C. Isaacks, Ji»o'. Crowell, L A. Benjamin Marshall, ) Thomas Carr, > Interpreters. John II. Brodnax, J COLUMBUS—SATURDAY. APRIL 14. fly* We nre authorized to announce MIRABEAU B. LA MAX, Esq as a candidate for Congress at the eusuing election. Tlte Preamble und Resolutions reported by the 1 committee appointed at a meotiag held in this town on the 28th ult. to express the views of the citizens of the county of Muscogee, rclulire to the derision of tho Supreme Court in ilia case of Worcester, and adopted nt nn adjourned meet ing on the 7tliinst.will be found in this day's En quirer. Ou perusal, it will be perceived thut the coinmitteu do not gu into un esainiutlein of the question; ot the principles on which Georgia founds her right of jurisdiction over the Chero kee Territory j nor. indeed, into u formal refuta tion of the positions advanced in the opinion of the Bapreme Court: but, us was their aim, nnd as was. doubtless, most ptoper for the fceasion. the committee simply promulge the settled axioms which have governed Georgia in doterniiningand adjusting the Complicated und xnomaluus politi cal relations which should subsist between her self and a peculiar people within her durierod limits. A distinct und full recapitulation of these aiiomsof political powsr on which this State ba ses herrights.isembodiedintheprexmbleand reso lutions adopted at the Muscogee meeting, and will, we trust, subserve a heneficiat purpose. Previous to the passage of the resolutions, x discussion arose on tlieir adoption, of adisearsive character embracing in its range, tbe past legislation of the United Steles and Georgia over the Indian lril.es within our limits, the political character of these tribes, the validity anil force of Indian Treaties, and the recent decision of the Supreme Court in tlm ense ofWorcestor. Thi»dis.-ussior, protract- selves before the State to protect nnd defend its sovereignty.—In this most important and respond silile si uution nre wo now plnrod—To this most, awful crisis hove we now arrived—Tliore is no. middle courBi—Wo must either obey the man date of the Court nnd submit to be slives.'or wo must refuse obedience and resolve to defend ta tbo lust extremity, and at tbo most imminent hazard, our determination to be free. Nor arc we alone concerned in the decision of this most important queston. To u*. our fill hers transmit ted the inheritance-of freedom—Our children, will claim it at oar hands—Can wc consent to pai r with its brightest jewel—its most invaluable pri vilege. Shull wc bring shame upon onr mothers and transmit te our posterity, the bndge of sieve.y. for theit inheritance I Never. Bj; llie war °f the Revolution which was senf- ed will, tho blood of our fathers, tho several Stales of tbe confederacy established their liberty -nnd' compelled the haughty Monnrcbof Britain te air knowledge them as free, sovereign nnd indeperf dent. Among them, Georgia bore no dishonora ble part j und with tho rest of the States, she- rose, from ihe bumble condition of a province, tie the rank of u sovereign nnd independent nation. As such sovereign and independent nation, sho signed the constitution end became one of tlte’ United States, in entering into the Union, sjie- parted with none of the rights of sovereignty which ure not included in that compact, nnd re served to bet self ns a sovereign all the rights and neweis not delegated te the United Ptntesor pro hibited to the States. The most valuable among them is the right of Icgislntion over nil the terri tory within her limits, nnd the inhabitants of lira same; and we shull look in vain into that instru ment to find where the States have parted with that right. The Supreme Court has long since acknowledged, thut the State of Georgia has □ tee simple title to the lands in tho Indian Territory. Tout tbe Legisloturc of the-Mute possesses thtptnej er of disposing of the unappropriated lands Wltliiti its own limits, in such manner as its own judg. ment shall dictate, and that tin Indian title is not such as to be absolntelji repugnant to a seisin in fen on thejmrt nf the State.* It cannot be coptrover’s od, that all that purl of thu Cherokee couqtry over which the State of Georgia has claimed and exercised jurisdiction lies within her limits — Possessing then, the power of legislation oxer all territory w ithin her own limits, and the seisin in Ihe to this very country, our mental vision is too obtuse to perceive, how the right of jurisdiction can be denied, or how it can enter into the mind (if any one to conceive that the Cherokee nation is a distinct and sovereign people. A sovereign people, constituting a distinct aud independent na tion. occupying a country lo which another foreign and sovereign nation possesses the fee simple title, presents a paradox which thc talents, legal research and ingiimiti/ of the Supreme Court only, can reconcile and explain, nnd w liiclti* entirely abovo the comprehension of common minda. Nor has the Supreme Court been more forta* nate in its attempt to bring furwnrd. in behalf of the United Slates, a claim lo jurisdiction over this distinct und independent people. To put thin question completely at rest, mid to settle all diffi. cullies on a subject which, at one lime, [brents!** ed to shake the AtoericHBConfe-^racy to its foun dation!, a compromise was mado which is noWpow disturbed,! and tit the tionty of oessioo of ... , ? 6,wcen Georgia and llie United States, the tinted Stales “ceded" to Georgia iehattrrt claim, right or tide they mau have had to jaris* ditiwn or noil, of auu lands lying within the Uni ted Staten, und out oj the propnr boumiarieu of any of the Staten, and situated south of the southern boundaries of Tennessee, North Carolina and Carolina, and east of the boundary line of the territory ceiled by Georgia to the United States,**t These lines include the Cherokee coun try wilbrn the limits of Georgia, of whicJt» Ihe Supreme Couit could not have been ignorant Tho conclusion is therefore irresistibly pressed upon your committee, that the Supreme Court < in making ibe late decision, mmt wholly disre~ gard those great leading principles and the posi tive recognition of tho jurisdiction of Georgia over the Indian country by the United States. Your committed would therefore recommend the adoption of the follow in* resolutions: l«t. Resolved, That the province of Georgia * extending from the Savannah to the Mississippi Kivur ( was vented in full and absolute sovereignty in the King of Great Britain. 2d. Resolved, That by thu war of the Revela tion and the treaty of 1783, the State of Gwtfgm * In decision of Supreme Court, delivered by Chief Justice Marshall in cn*e of Fletcher mn Peck—C C rune he’s reports, pago 128 and 142. tSce samecaHe, page 142. t See treaty of ration Prince's Digest, page 528, article ^ 1 *
