Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

CHEROSJD PHCEIIX, ANB INDIANS’ ADVOCATE. PRINTED UNDER THE PATA’ONAGE, AND I'OR 'IHE BliNK,FIT OF THE CHEROKEE NATION, AND DEVOTED TO THE .CAUSE OF INDIANS.•—J., UDUDIINCTT, I DITCIi. — ■ ■. f -■'- --I.. J-=-' __ _ VOL. II. NEW ECHO'S? A, WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 2, 1829. NO. 22. PRINTED WEEKLY BY JOHN F. WHEELER, :,i At $2 50 if paid in advance, $3 in six frionths, or $3 50 if paid at the end of the Icar. subscribers who can real only the Dlisrokee language the price will be $2,0i) n advance, or $2,50 to be paid within the year. Every subscription will be considered as ;ontinued unless subscribers give notice to ;he contrary before the co n ivncenjent of a tew year,and all arrearages paid. Any person procuring six subscribers, ind becoming responsible for the payment, ball receive a seventh gratis. Advertisements will be inserted at se*ven- ty-five cents per square for the first inser tion, anr’ thirty-seven and a half cents lor each continuance; longer ones in propor tion. |C3*All letters addressed to the Editor, post paid, will receive due attention. owy .ad hsuEaea. VO-VCXifSA TAAT 3 H>Y* JIitTBAA b'ioiJl. BS.1E KTA D^P (POIDA r-4X)vt TGFZ TEJUtM* DOJiSoSN'o®.*. TGTZ Vt,P Tc30*A TB DBJ'bjiP'oS.I, KT m-G o=e.iBA i«4ot.i. d?a-5m)F.z tb y .v D0j^S6Iv»®A, 0-yAT D.0P G'OJBA 1-46?.*. Givyz O’&.U .IhOIiAi&y, WP«V* D?-q O’O.IBA I-46e.l V>».IU<r», TCT-Z TEiMOJ’’ DO* .I^SSP-otiA. KTAZ D^P e«y*V* O’S.JB" V.IR DeJ^)o*Iv<»A. AGENTS FOR THE CHEROKEE PHtENIX. The following persons are authorized to receive subscriptions and payments for the Cherokee Phoenix. Messrs. Peirce St Williams, No. 20 Market St. Boston, Mass. George M. Tracy, Agent of the A. B. C. F. M. New York. Rev. A. D. Eddy, Canandaigua, N. Y. Thomas Hastings, Utica, N. Y. Pollard Sc Converse, Richmond, Va. Rev. James Campbell, Beaufort, S. C. William Moultrie Reid, Charleston, S. C. Col. George Smith, Statesville, W. T. William M. Combs, Nashville, Ten. Rev. Bennet Roberts, Powal, Me. Mr. Taos. R. Gold, (an itinerant Gen tleman.) Jeremiah Austil, Mobile, Ala. Rev. Cyrus Kingsbury, Mayhew, Choc taw Nation. Capt. William Robertson, Augusta, Georgia. Col. James Turk, Bellefonte, Ala. INDIANS. From the National Journal. The present Administration and the Indians.—In order that the American people may understand the fundament al change which their Indian relations are to undergo under the “reforming” hands of Gen. Jackson, we publish this morning his “Talk” to the Greeks, and the letter of Mr. Secretary Ea ton to the Cherok.cS Delegation. In contrast with these extraordinary pa pers \ve also publish President Mad ison’s celebrated “Talk” in 1812, to the Indians; a performance whip*;, for beauty of style, and for (he justice "^nd enlightened humanity of its princi ples, is as charactereslic of its au thor as the peculiarities of President Jackson’s “Talk” and his Secretary’s letter af-e suitable to these distinguish ed functionaries. General Jackson, after announcing his elevation to the Presidency, in terms which the phrase of European ltoyalty, “by the Grace of God,” is varied to suit the Indian taste, says to his lied children with military brev ity, “where you now arc, you and my Whito children are too near to each other to live in harmony and peace.” The author of the Talk 6eems to have suspected that this was rather a summary disposition of a question of right, for shortly after, he adds, “where you now are your White brothers have always claimed the land.” This declaration must have surprised the Creeks, as their Father had just assured them that lie always spoke “with a straight and not with a forked tongue,” and they perfectly knew that the United States had nev er claimed that land. On the contra ry, the Indian title to it is recognized by the Constitution of the United States, and by many of their treaties with the Indians, from the treaty at New York, in 1790, to that made at Washington, in 1820. Equally ground less with the declaration just referred to is the pretension of Alabama to “extend their law,-over the Creeks —a people not citizens of the State, a id not amenable to its laws. “IVJy White children in Alabama ha\ r c ex tended their law over your country Nothing can more clearly show the extravagance of the principle, con tended for, than the terms in which it is couched. The country is styled the country of the Creeks—“your country”—aiid yet is made subject to the law of Alabama, and they are threatened with banishment if they decline submitting to it! “If you re main i:i it,” (i. e. in your own coun- try,) “you must be subject to that law. If you remove across the Mis sissippi you will be subject to your own laws, and the care of your Fath er the President.” The letter of the Secretary of War to the Cherokee Delegation, is an ex position oftlie principles avowed in the President’s Talk. Mr. Eaton contends that during the Ilevoliition ary war the Cherokees were the friends and allies of Great Britain; that Great Biitain claimed entire sovereignty within the limits of the thirteen United States; that by the Declaration of Independence,. and subsequent)', by the treaty of 1783. all the rights of sovereignty pertaining to Great Britain, became vested re spectively in the original States oftlie Union, including North Carolina and Georgia, within whose territorial lim its, as defined and known, the Chero- Uees were then situated; that their subsequent residence on their lands, with “the right of soil and the privi lege to hunt,” was only permissive; that the treaty of Hopewell, conclud ed in 1785, allotted and defined their limits and hunting grounds, secured them “in the privilege of pursuing the same, and from encroachments by thb Whites;” that it conceded a possessory right only to the Cherokccs, leaving the sovereignty, where it was before, in those States within whose limits they were situated; that a durable peace was not entered into with them till 1791, when the United States gave a guaranty, “favorable to the occupancy and possession of the coun try,” but that they neither made nor had the power to make a guaranty ad verse to the sovereignty of Georgia that in 1802, Georgia ceded 1/; the United Slates all her We'kiin terri tory on a condition wh’»ch was accept ed, “llial the U»Vited States shall at their own expense, extinguish for the use of Georgia, as early as the same °ui\ be obtained on reasonable terms, the Indian titles to all the lands with in the State of Georgia.” The Sec retary then states that the establish ment by the Cherokees of an indepen dent substan’ive government, within the limits of Georgia, against her will, had induced her, through virtue of her sovereignty, to extend her law o- ver their country; on the hypothesis that Georgia cannot rightfully exer cise such a power, he w arns the Che rokees that “the arms of this country can never he employed to stay any State of (his Union from the exercise of those legitimate powers which at tach and belong to their sovereign character;”—and he concludes by urging on the Cherokees, as the Pres ident had done on the Creeks, a re moval beyond the Mississippi, as the only assurance to them of protection ami peace. No paper, we venture to aver, ev er emanated from the War Depart ment, so abundant in mistakes of fact and reasoning, ns this letter of Mr. Secretary Eaton. The fallacy, which is the subtratum of the u'hole argument, (if argument it can be call ed,) is that any tille to lands in this coun try exist, besides that derived down from compacts with the aborig in a proprietors, and the less unequivocal title founded in European occupancy. Great Britain, says Mr. Eaton, claim ed, during the Revolutionary War, “entire soveicignty within the limits of what constituted the thirteen Uni ted States.” The only right ever pretended by Great Britain, to lands in North America, were in the case of inhabited territory, the right creat ed by treaties and other agreements with the natives, and in the case of vacant territory, that of first occupa tion; the latter description of right belonging, according to the European principle, to discoverers, and in many instances being expressly confirmed by Royal charters. The sovereignty thence arising was mrnifestly only operative against the pretensions of other foreign nations, and neither con flicted, or affected to conflict with the distinct national character of the aborigines. It was sovereignty, thus explained, that by the Declaration of Independence was assumed, and by the treaty of 1783 devolved on the li nked States; or as the Secretary, in the superabundance of liis Constitu tional learning affirms, on “the origin al States of the Union, including North Carolina and Georgia.” But at no stage of (lie history oftlie sove reignty, was the national Indian char nel er ever considered to lie merged in State membership, or any claim set up to appropriate, without their consent, the soil remaining in posses sion of the Indians, and which they had not bargained away. Indeed re peated instances of a disavowal, ex pressed or implied, of such pretensions, are contained in treaties made by the United States with the Indians, to say nothing of the Const itut ion of the for mer. In the treaty of Iiopfewell, made in 1785, (to the preamble and one section of which the Secretary refers in a tone of triumph, but little justified by other parts of it,) the in dependence of the Cherokccs oh any State is recognized by a provision en titling them lo send to Congress a deputy of their own choice. !t is al so recognised by an article in the same which it has suited Mr. Eaton to pass over slightly, as securing them “from encroachments by the whiles,’ 5 but which expressly commit to Ih&ir own jurisdiction any citizen td Die United States, or other porsOii not being on Indian, who shoo’d attempt to settle on, or refuse to remove from, their hunting, grounds. In the treaty of Ho’stein, made in 1791. “the United Struts solemnly guaranlie lo the Che rokee nation, all their lands hot heie- by ceded,” but, says Mr. Eaton, they “forboie to offer a guaranlie ad verse to the sovereignty of Georgia.” What estimate the United States formed of the sovereignty of Georgia as adverse to the Indian title, is man ifested by the new Constitution which they had formed about two years be fore, and which vested in the Presi dent and Senate, and withheld from the States, the power of making trea ties, and omitted the provision con tained in the 9th article oftlie Con federation, “that the legislative right of tiny State, within its own limits, be not infringed or violated” by the exercise of the power therein given to Congress, of “regulating the trade and managing all their affairs with the Indians—not members ef any Slates.” It is observable that after the war, and during the operation of the Con federation, Georgia had made various abortive efforts to propitiate Congress to her aggressions on the Indian title. The provisions, in this same treaty, turning over to the Cherokee jurisdic tion citizens oftlie U. States, or other persons, not being Indians, who should settle on the Cherokee lands, is not noticed by the Secretary. Ho is p- qually forgetful of the article in the treaty of Tellico, made in 1798, in which the United States stipulate with the Cherokoes, “to continue the guaranty of the remainder of their country forever, as made and contain ed in former treaties/* and of similar stipulations made in subsequent trea ties. lie seems to consider all these solemn facts as annulled by the agree ment made in 18U2, between the (j- nited Stales and Georgia, in which it was proposed by Georgia, and assent ed to by the United States, “that the United Slates shall, at their own ex pense, extinguish lor the use of Geor gia, as early as the same can he peace ably obtained on reasonable terms, tile Indian title to all the lands within the State of Georgia.” This agree ment manifestly admits an existing Indian title; supposes that such title can be extinguished only by the con sent of the Indians themselves; defines no time for its extinguishment; asserts no power or right in Georgia to at tempt to extinguish it, in the contin gency of a failure on the part of the U. Stales lodo so, “peaceably” & “on reasonable terms,” and above all is an agreement lo which the Indians were not parlies. How such a compact can be sup posed by any mind, and especially by that of a licensed lawyer, to be a in vocation of existing treaties between the United Stales and Georgia, would greatly surprise us, had we not previ ous reasons for suspecting that the Honorable Secretary was far more distinguished for the inshness than for the perspicuity ol his intellectual ef forts. We aie, to speak candidly, a little afraid that liis notions of law arid logic arc sometimes sadly undigested, in (his very letter, while arguing that the Indians have only a possessory and hunting right, ho concedes to them expressly the right of soil, the very thing they are contending for; and in reasoning on the hypothesis that Geor gia has no right to extend her law o- ver the Cherokees, stales that should she, how ever, do so, without rigid, lho United Slates will suffer her to pro ceed, because they will not obstruct her in the exercise of her legitimate power. The high handed mandate, scarce- ( ly shrouded under the will of advice , that the Indians should remove to olh- j er lands provided by their “Great ■ Father,” is enforced by an alleged in- ; compatibility between their new insti- I lotions and the claims of Georgia.— It is unnecessary now to discuss the j question of right, disregarded by this ; assumption; for the Committee on In- : dian affairs in Congress lust session, ! emphatically say that > they “do not : perceive that tho regulations adopted by the Cherokees under the forms of a j constitution and laws, change in any manner their relations to the United States.” But the facts, which fully ; sustain this opinion of the Committee, seem to be the chief cause ol the State despotism; if treaties aie to be violated that lotteries may thrived then indeed this may well be called the era of Revolution, but who can' say that it is the era of Reform? Indian If conge.—We are rathe? surprised to see the religious papers so nearly silent as to the policy of the present administration, m reference lo Indian aflaiis. The plan of virtually compelling the Creeks to migrate lo the Rocky mountains for fartherly pro tection, will be to establish a prece dent which may soon be extended to the Cherokees, and for ought we see to every tribe whose land happens to be coveted by avaricious speculators among the whiles. One would think that the guill of African slavery was enough for the nation to bear, without the additional crime of injustice to the aborigine. And what if this policy should be pursued? What would be come of Indian improvement? Will the w ilderness ol the Rocky mountain: be a good place to acquire a know! edge of agriculture, the arts ancr sciences of civilization, attj the doc ; . trines and duties cf chiistiahit)/? such tiling. It is all hollow pictchce’ —sheer selfishness! The Georgia" speculators may say what they please/ and (he new administration may lie- come their abettors; but the Iranian tions now on foot, unless we have tb- tally mistaken the Subject, will be foul blot on oar nation's character. ff'estern Rec. From the New York ■Observer. The Indians.—A w riter who (if we have rightly guessed the malt) is ad mirably qualified for the task, lias sent to the editors of the National In telligencer a series of Essays on the | pending and ripening controlersy Lc- i tween the United States and (he In- | dians. The editors have promised to | insert them, and we may expect the | first number in the course of a few days. Meanwhile, we may leant something of what is coining from the following note lo the editors accompa nying the Essays. 1. This is a subject which must be abundantly discussed in our country. 2. It will be among the most im portant, and probably the most con tested business of the twenty-first Congress. Some able members ci Congress, to my certain knowledge, wish to have the matter discussed. 3. I expect lo make it appear, by a particular examination of treaties, that the United Slates are bound to secure to tbe Cherokees the integrity and inviolability of their territory, till' acrimony w ith which the State cf J they voluntarily surrender it. Georgia has of late years pushed her | /j, j,, i| iC course of this mvest'ga- pretensions. 1 he progress of fhe j ^j on I shall not agree with the jire S ent Cherokees in civilization, under the i Executive of the United States, in auspices of former administrations, : j] ie construction which he gives to has awakened murmurs in Georgia | twenties, but shall be sustained by the which must surprise and distress eve- ■ uniform tenor of our negociations with ry liberal mind. A Committee ol the j (|, e Indians, and legislation for them, Legislature complained in December ' f roni iho origin of our government to 1827, that the United States had con- j t ] 1c present day. 5. My discussions will not assume 1 rived “so to add to the comforts of the Cherokees, and so to instruct them in the business of husbandry, as to at tach them so firmly to their country and their homes, as almost to destroy the last ray of hope that they will ever consent to part with the Georgia lands.” These “contrivance*” on the part of the United States are the ap plication of a beneficent system, w hich the American Government, at its in ception, solemnly agreed with tho In dians to put in practice; of which the success was a favorite object with Washington and his successors; and which is recbmntcnded to zealous ob servance by every consideration of philanthropy, sound policy, and na tional faith. Such is the system that the present Executive, in aid of sel fish passions, now threatens to subvert. If the policy, uniform from the colo- niai to the present times, is to he sud denly changed; if Federal protection of the Indians is to he substituted by a parly character at all; and when ever 1 speak of the President, or the Secretary of War, it shall alw ays be by their official designation, and in a respectful manner. Though I think that the President has greatly mistak en his powers and his duty in regard to the Indians, I have no wish concern ing him, but that he may be a wise and judicious ruler of our growing re public. The country is “ripe for the discus sion and impatient for it.” We had ourselves been gathering materials for a series of articles on this subject, but are glad that the matter has (ali en into better hands. We burn when we think of the wrongs which have bedn heaped upon the poor Indians.—•' We hope that they will not attempt' to avenge themselves, but there is One who will surely lie their aveng er.