Newspaper Page Text
EDITED BY THOMAS IIAVALS.
VOL. V. AO. 25.
of
BY P. L. KOBINSON, State Printer,
And Publisher (by authority) of the Laws of the United States
OFFICE SEAR THE CORNER OF WAYNE AND FRANKLIN STREETS.
ISSUED F.VEin TUESDAY MORNING.
r£T TERMS.—Three Dollars per annum. No subscription taken for leas than a
'year, and no paper discontinued, but at the option of the publisher, until all arrear
ages are paid.
TWENTY-FIFTH CONUBESS....Second Session.
SUPPRESSION OF INDIAN HOSTILITIES.
SPEECH OF MR. TOWNES,
OF GEORGIA,
In the House of Representatives, May 23, 1833 —In Com
mittee of the Whole on the slate of the Union, the subject
under consideration being the bill making appropriations
for preventing and suppressing Indian hostilities.
MR. TOWNS proceeded as follows:
Mr. Chairman: From what has just passed between the;
I>l ■ ■■■-■■■i. ■ i (Mr. Wtscj and from New-
York [Mr. Fillmore] 1 should feel encouraged at the prospect
that the venue will be changed from Georgia to New-York,
and that hereafter the latter will come in for her portion of
whatever infamy there may be in Indian Treaties. Sir, I shall
not object to this. In order to impart interest to the old and
stale story of Indian wrongs and Indian frauds, I doubt not
the contemplated change will be wise and prudent; my State,
sir, has long borne in comparative silence the torrent of ca
lumny that has poured in from the North and East upon her
people and her institutions. She has looked on with feelings
of regret and indignation at the repeated efforts made here and
elsewhere to disparage her in the estimation of her sister States.
But, Mr. Chairman, she has never yet felt, because she bad
never cause to feel, remorse for the past, or alarm for the future. ;
Honest in her principles, just in her pretensions, humane in
her policy, she could but rely with confidence in the judg
ment of a virtuous, and impartial public. From ignorance,
fanaticism, pr malice, she had nothing to hope, nor had she
any thing to fear. Her course has been onward ; and if she
has not stooped to meet all the foul charges that have been level
led at her institutions, it was because her own self-respect and
love of justice would not permit her to mingle in an inglorious
and unworthy contest.
Mr. Chairman, allow me to ask what is the immediate ob
ject of the bill now before the committee ? To furnish means
for prosecuting the Florida war, and to prevent an Indian war
with the Cherokees. To this bill amendments have been of
fered by the honorable gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wise]
and others, proposing important changes in our present rela
tion with the Cherokee people. To each and all of these
amendments lam opposed. I can see in them nothing to au
thorize iny support, but much to requite my opposition. In
the original bill are provided the efficient means of enforcing
your own laws, preserving peace and harmony on the frontier
°f Ge ° r gi*> a,, d enabling the Government, without the shed
ding ot blood, to administer justice with humanity to those
people, whose welfare and happiness have engaged so much
of the time of this Government and the nation. I would have
been glad that a sul ject of so muck importance could have
received the calm consideration of this committee, free from
•11 the irritating topics that have been drawn into the discus
sion. But, sir, since it is otherwise, I feel myself called upon,
by every consideration of duty, to answer some of the argu
ments introduced in this debate.
It is said by the honorable member from Virginia, [Mr.
W ise. j “ that praxuined th* Ssew-Eciioto wox-td
not be executed ; as he could perceive in the late communica
tion of the President on this subject much to encourage the
hope that, in the end, justice would be done to the Cherokees.”
Sir, it is seldom we bear the voice of the honorable member
in support of any measure of the President; and, for one, I
regret that he should have selected this late message as de
serving of praise above all others. For myself, I can say that
no recommendation has ever more astonished me, or excited in
my bosom feelings of deeper regreat —a recommendation as
unnecessary as it is mischievous in its tendencies, creating
hopes on the part of the Indians that can never be realized,
and holding out encouragement to those who have for years
arrayed themselves again-t the rights of Georgia. Sir, had
the Chief Magistrate ot this Union desired to conciliate the
dissatisfied Cherokees, that work should have commenced long
since. It is now too late. We have advanced too far in the
execution of the treaty now to look back and review the
ground we have passed. Our course is onward—we neither can
stop nor recede. If we pause, the man knows but little of the
Indian character who does not perceive that each moment of
delay adds to the chances of bloodshed and massacre. If vou
recede, you violate the supreme law of the land; you do mani
fest and flagrant injustice to the conceded rights of four States
of the Union ; and, with the strong arm of power, wrest from
the citizens of Georgia the possession of their own lands.
Sir, is this to be endured? Can any portion of this House
so far deceive themselves as to supp.se, come what may, that
the people ol Georgia will submit to an invasion of their rights
through the legislation of Congress? No, sir: it never can be.
I he President in his communication of yesterday, exhibits
an ardent desire that this unhappy controversy should be set
tled. I will do the Chief Magistrate the justice to say that, in
my opinion, he was actuated by the kindest and most humane
motives, but, for one, warmly attached as I have been to the
principles of his administration, I will neither pay homage to
his wisdom, nor compliments to his sagacity, for thus thrust
ing upon the House and the nation, at this late hour, a commu
nication that can do no good, and may yet do much mischief.
The honorable gentleman [Mr. Wise] says “that he will
repeat to-day what be said yesterday, that, as a State Rights
man, he would compel the State of Georgia, to respect the
lawsand treaties of the United States.” Sir, what is the at
titude of Georgia, in relation to the treaty? Has Georgia
proposed to violate the treaty, or any law of the United
States ? Does she now stand in defiance of the treaty and the
laws ? No, sir, on the contrary, she is urging the Govern
ment to execute its own laws. Sir, the treaty of New-Echota,
of December, 1835, approved by the President, ratified by the
Senate, and now the law of the land she wishes executed.
This, the supreme law of the land, vesting rights of the most
sacred and delicate character to four States of this Union;
■Georgia demands should be faithfully executed ; and for this
Georgia is to be denounced, and branded with the doctrine of
Nullification. Sir, is it maintaining and enforcing the laws of
the United States that constitute the doctrine which the honor
able gentleman from Virginia, so much dislikes ? If this be
Nullification, then, sir, should I expect the honorable member
to rank first among the list of champions of that doctrine.
But the honorable gentleman and myself entertain very differ
ent notions of the principles of the political creed to which he
lias alluded, and which he charges the State of Georgia of
having repeatedly practiced, without incurring the displeasure
of the federal Government, while the same doctrines met with
such pointed rebuke in a sister State. Sir, this would be a
most unprofitable discussion, and I will not now be drawn into
aievtew ,l ’ f |,rl l ,er fkan to place my own State right before
Ins louse and the nation. Georgia never lias nullified a con
stitutional law of Congress. She has never yet bad occasion
o p ace terself in her highest sovereign attitude ; but when
®vt ‘ r * ,a t necessity shall arise, which God avert! she will not
e tac ward in choosing between oppression on the one hand,
anr resistance on the other. Conscious of asking nothing but
lierjust and constitutional rights she will never be found want
ing in asserting and maintaining, with all the means at her
command, her honor and her liberty. Sir, in the mixed and
perplexing questions that have so long harrassed her, the policy
ot Georgia has been to avoid the issue of Nullification, and
ic very case of 1 assells, so confidently relied on, went off on
a poin/ not involving the powers of this Government. This
,2 l L- ,n * i* le * ar “ v,o ' at,on of the penals laws of Georgia,
making wilful murder punishable with death. 1 repeat, in no
irf
case has Georgia stood in bold defiance of the Constitution of the
United States, or of laws passed in pursuance thereof. But,
sir, it it would be any satisfaction to this committee, I think 1
can safely say that not only Georgia, but the whole South, w ill
be united in asserting their rights, under the Constitution, whe
ther they may be stigmatised by the name of Nulliliers or any
oilier. They will not, they dare not, stop to bandy words and
names, when all they hold sacred and dear is about to be
wrested from them, under false notions of philanthropy and re
ligion. No, sir, no matter what the menace, though it be to
“castigate” a state into submission, we will still be found as
serting and maintaining our rights.
[Mr. Wise was then understood to explain as follows: That
he had made use of that remark in reply to what was regarded
as a threat, from more than one from Georgia, who declared
that unless this treaty was carried into effect, Georgia would
take her own rights into her own hands; and it was in reply to
that threat he had used the term he had.]
I am aware Mr. Chairman, continued Mr. T., of the lan
guage used by my colleagues, and that their remarks had eli
cited a reply from the honorable gentleman. But, sir, 1 must
insist that those r»mnrlr« rfW i;ol authorize the plication of a
' term so offensive to the State of Georgia ; a term which must
excite in the bosom of every true Georgiy, feelings of the
deepest emotion. When, sir, was it ever before said of one ol
the States of this Union, that she was to be “ catastigated into
submission?” Never, sir : no, never. It is a term that you
may apply to the slave or the serf; but when applied to Geor
gia, it falls harmless and disregarded. Georgia has heard,
w ithout quailing, threats from that Government which the ho
norable gentleman is so ready to aid. She never halted, and
now the gentleman must excuse her, if she and her sons are
equally indifferent whether menaces come from him or the
Government. 11 (he one was impotent, why should we feel
alarm at the other ? But, Mr. Chairman, if the honorable
gentleman should harbor the thought that there is a want of
moral courage in the citizens of Georgia, or any portion of
them, no one knows better than himself the mode of satisfying
his curiosity. Offensive words are the common weapons of
weakness and rashness, and, I should think, no one understood
better than the honorable member, that their use in debate
would never alarm a truly brave man, or infuse spirit in the
bosom of a coward.
Mr. Chairman, the honorable member takes the broad
ground, that there is, in point of fact, no treaty. That the
instrument entered into December; 1835, at New Echota, be
tween certain Cherokee chiefs and the commissioners on the
part of the United States, approved by the President, and ra
tified by the Senate, according to all the forms of the Consti
tution, is nevertheless no treaty, because it was made by per
sons on the part ol the Cherokees not authorized to treat, and
because undue and improper influences were brought to bear,
on the Cherokees, which makes the whole negociation fraudu
lent and void.
Sir, I have heard the honorable gentleman repeatedly dis
cuss this subject; and he has never let an opportunity pass, in
which he has failed to denounce Schermerhorn and Curry as
faithless public agents; as destitute of al! the moral and honor
able feelings that give dignity to man, and inspire confidence
in human actions. How far the gentleman has made good
his charges, is a very different question. With the character
of either or both of these individuals, I have nothing to do,
further than relates to their official conduct in the negociation
of the treaty of New Echota; and I feel the most perfect as
surance that their conduct throughout this whole negociation
will not receive from the public scrutiny, that measure of re
proach and censure that honorable gentleman, under the ex
citement of debate, are disposed to bestow upon it. But, Mr.
Chairman, it is not my purpose to be drawn off into the inves
tlgaituii of the ctiaracTer of 3ctiermerimrn and Curry. I have
higher objects to accomplish. It is to vindicate your national
honor, and the suppremacy of your laws. And here, sir, let
me ask the honorable member, [Mr. Wise,] by virtue of what
power under the Constitution, does he now propose to go be- |
hind the treaty to exhibit facts, either as relates to the negocia- !
tion, or, as to the competence of those that did negotiate, '
going to show that this treaty is null and void ? Str, 1 under
take to affirm, that, under the question now presented to the ■
committee by the bill on your table, it never was before grave
ly insisted, that the House of Representatives was competent
to annul a treaty solemnly made, and having received all the
sanctions prescribed under the Constitution.
[Mr. Wise explained, in substance, as we understood, ns
follows: He said, he could tell the gentleman from Georgia,
that the doctrine for which he contended was not new to him,
[Mr. W.] if to the gentleman from Georgia. Upon the cele
brated discussion that arose upon Jay’s treaty, the Democratic
party ofthatday settled the doctrine, which has been acquiesced
in by all parties from that time to this, that it was competent
for this House, when a treaty was made, requiring appropria
tions by Congress for its execution, for the House of Repre
sentatives to look behind the ratification of the treaty, and to
examine the facts connected with its formation, in order to
enable the House to determine whether the money required to
execute the treaty should, or should not, be supplied.]
Mr. Towns continued : Mr. Chairman, the honorable gen
tleman has not relieved himself, for the very case he has cited
is strong authority against him. Sir, let us recur to facts.
How stands the question before us? Not only has a treaty
been made with the Cherokees, approved by the President, ra
j lifted by the Senate, but, during the same session of Congress,
I the five million six hundred thousand dollars stipulated therein
to be paid the Indians lor the cession of their territory were
actually appropriated by Congress, after strong opposition to
the bill by the honorable member himself. Then, sir, this
treaty, in all its forms, in all its possible bearings, according
to the very doctrine of Jay’s treaty, has received its last and
final sanction, and is irrevocably the supreme law of this land.
Now, how is it, that the honorable member proposes to rip up
this treaty, scatter it to the winds, and thereby to deprive four
States and their citizens of their vested rights ? A bill is sent
to us embracing two objects; first, an appropriation of money
for the b lorida war; and secondly, to maintain an armed force
in the Cherokee country, notfor the purpose of waging war on
the Cherokees, but to prevent war, not to spill blood, but
ot prevent the spilling of blood; and the gentleman seizes
tins opportunity to discuss the treaty, to open negociations for
a new one, under the doctrine settled in Jay’s treaty, that the
House of Representatives had the power of withholding ap
propriations for money stipulated by treaties, and thereby as
suming all the responsibility of all the consequences of war that
might ensue. Sir, it is impossible for the honorable gentleman
to find one inch of ground on which to stand, either under the
Constitution, or his own doctrines, as insisted upon under Jay’s
treaty. Suppose you reject this bill, does it touch the treaty ?
Is there one dollar proposed to be appropriated by the present
bill called for by the provisions of the treaty? No, sir, not
one cent. Is there one dollar yet to be appropriated to exe
cute the provisions of the treaty? No, sir, not a farthing.
All the treaty itself stipulated for has been done nearly two
years ago, ami the appropriations now asked for are founded
upon that elevated principle of humanity that would expend
millions to prevent the shedding of human blood, sooner than
hundreds to punish the guilty offender. Yet, sir, an object
which must meet with the approbation of all sides of this
House, and receive the sanction of every man in whose bo
som can be traced one spark of pure humanity, is likely to
be converted by the course of intemperate debate into endless
mischief, for, if this treaty should be disturbed—if its execu
tion should be unnecessarily postponed under the sanction of
Congress—it will bean assumption of power no where author
ized by the Constitution ; subversive ol the vested rights of the
States and the people ; and abrogating all the powers of one of
the co-ordinate branches of this Government. Yes, sir, this
branch of Congress, by its assumption to set aside this treaty,
would riot only nullify, in the most odious and offensive form
of which my imagination can conceive of that doctrine, not
only the treaty-making power, the Judiciary, the private vest
ed rights ol individuals and States, but her own act appro
priating money to execute this treaty. We should then stand,
not as one branch of the co-ordinate department of this Gov-
gioklia. itemiay moraiac;, jui.t io, IS3S.
Our Conscience—Our Country—Our Party.
eminent-, with prescribed powers and duties, but with powers
gieater, and far more dangerous, if danger there be, than in
all the departments of Government combined. 1 hope, sir, that
such is not the object of any.
Mr. Chairman, having shown that this treaty cannot be
touched, I will decline an examination into its history, with
the full persue.tion that I shall be able to show, at least, that it
stands upon the same footing with all other treaties with Indian
tribes. The only ground upon which a candid difference of
opinion can arise in the mind of any one as to the validity of
the the treaty, provided it was now an open question, which I
utterly deny, is the charge that a treaty was made by a minor
ity of the nation. There is some conflicting testimony on the
question as to tite exact number in attendance at the time the
treaty was concluded ; from three to five hundred, as shown
by some of the witnesses, and by others a less number; none,
however, reducing the number below seventy. I believe it
will also be conceded that the‘wealth and intelligence was de
cidedly in favor of the treaty.
Mr. Chairman, ilyt wejl known that, for several years past,
■ a strong inflect.d d p of the flberok(?es have been decided
ly iti favor of ceding their lands to the Government, while, on
the other hand, they have been met by a strong party opposed j
to a cession. John Ross headed the latter ; John Ridge may |
be considered as the leader of the former. As far back as I
19th June, 1834, a treaty was concluded in this city, between
John 11. Eaton, in behalf of the United States, and Andrew
Ross, John West, T. J. Pack, and James Starr, on the part of
the Cherokees. This treaty, by one of its provisions, enabled
the John Ross party to defeat it. John Ross next appears in Wash
ington, and proposes to treat with the Government, asking
some twenty millions in cash. This proposition could not be
entertained by the Government; for it was evidently made in
•bad faith, with no expectation that the Government could treat
upon such a basis. The following letter was thereafter ad
dressed to the Secretary of War :
Washington City, Feb. 27, 1835.
Sir:—Having been informed by Wtn. H. Underwood, Esq., and
others, that the. President considers the termsof our propositions to be too
extravagant, we beg leave to remind him that he has often remarked
that he would grant us as liberal terms as the Senate, or the friends of
the Indians, would be willing to allow. We would, therefore, respect
fully ask that our proposition be submitted to the Senate by the Presi
dent, in order that the scuse of that honorable body be had on them.
We have the honor to be, sir.
Your obedient humble servants,
(Signed,) JOHN HOSS,
R. TAYLOR,
DANIEL M’COY.
SAMUEL GRUNTER,
WILLIAM RODGERS.
To the Ho-. Lewis Cass, Secretary of War.
Well, sir, on the next day the same individuals addressed
the Secretary of War another letter, which is most explicit.
It is worthy of remark, as we pass on, tha’t John Ross at this
early day considered the Senate as the friends of the Indians.
He uses the terms Senate and friends synonymous. But to the
next letter of the Ross party.
Washington, February 28,1835.
Sin:—Having submitted a proposition for a fnal adjustment of our
differances with the Government of the United States, and understand
ing that the President deems it extravagant, wc must beg that the sub
ject be referred to the Senate for its sense on the question. The Presi
dent having often told us that he was disposed to treat us with liberal
justice, and that he would go as far as the Senate wauld allow him in
regard to money matters. We therefore trust he will adopt this course.
Being extremely desirous that this unhappy controversy may be speedily
adjusted, and deeply sensible ofourdependant condition, and confiding in
the. liberal justice of the United States Government, we are prepared,
so fai as we are concerned, to abide the award of the sense of the
American Senate upon our proposition, and to recommend the same for
the final determination of our nation.
We have the honor to be, sir,
Very respectfully,
Your ob’t humble serv’ts,
(Signed,) JOHN ROSS,
R. TAYLOR,
DANIEL M’COY,
SAMUEL M’COY,
WILLIAM RODGERS,
To the Hon. Lewis Cass, Secretary of War.
On the 3d of March, 1835, the following letter was written
by Joint Ross :
Dear Sin :—The delegation have thought proper that a communi
cation should accompany the documents which 1 have placed in your
hands the other day, containing propositions which they made to the
President, and that the same be laid before the Senate, and I take the
liberty to inclose the same to you. Very respectfully,
Your ob’t. humble servant.
JOHN ROSS.
To the lion. Th. Frelinghuysen.
Now, Mr. Chairman, it is manifest that .every doemment,
which John Ross believed would advance his cause, was sub
milted to the Senate. The delagation of which he was the
head and soul, addressed a memorial setting forth in the strong
est terms the claims of the Cherokees upon the liberal justice
of the nation. The Senate was selected by Ross, because of
the know n feeling of that bod y, and he regarded, and so spoke
of it, as the friend of the Indians. Can any man then doubt
but that the utmost liberality and justice were done them in
the award of the Senate? And can or will any gentleman on
this floor contend that Ross and his party, so far as they were
concerned, were not bound by the award of the Senate, and
also as men of honor and truth, to recommend to the nation
the adoption of the Senate’s award ? Sir, if it should appear
that this man Rass and his party, after the award of the Sen
ate was made, wholly disregarded the solemn obligation they
were under to observe it themselves, and instead of recom
mending it, as they were bound to do to their people—used
their influence to prevent its approval, every one who respects
fair dealing, must hold in abhorrance the duplicity and per
fidy of John Ross and his associates, whosoever they may be.
Sir, let us look to the facts.
Mr. Secretary Cass, in his communication of 6th March,
1835, to Ross Taylor and others, says:
“In your letter2Bth Feb. nit. you stated your readiness to to accept
for yourselves, ami recommend to the Cherokee people to accept such
a sum for their claims cast of the Mississippi river, as the Senate might
deem just The Senate have, by a resolution, stated as their opinion,
that a •‘sum not exceeding five millions should be paid to the Cherokee
Indians for all their lands and possessions, east of the Mississippi riv
er.” The President wishes now, as he has always done heretofore, to
treat with you in the spirit of candor as well as liberality. He has
therefore directed me to to communicate to you at once the resolution
of the .Senate, and to state his \villingness to enter into a negociation
with you foi the cession of all your claims east of the Mississippi, upon
condition that the whole amount of consideration Io be given shall not
exceed the above mentioned sura. This you were informed should bo
done, and the pledge will be ledeemed with fidelity.”
This is language on the part of this Government to John
Ross and bis party. The sum of five millions far exceeded any
previous offer made by the Governmet, and was more than
the Cherokee country was worth at public sale: yet, as Ross
and his party had'pledged themselves to be content with a
price fixed by the Senate, the President consented to the
award, though the price was extravagant, and we find that he
instantly proposed to Ross and his party to enter into a nego
ciation for a treaty on the basis of that award ? How, sir.
was this proposition met by those men ? By prevarication,
by a call on the Secretary of War to furnish Ross, with all
the papers and communications submitted to the Senate, de
claring that it was due to himself and this people, that he should
know on what precise ground the Senate acted. lie wished to
know whether it was inteded to pay for removal and subsist
ence, and to enlarge the tract of country for the Cherokees ;
“ they say it is utterly immossible to proceed further until they
understand,” &jc.
No,v here was the first indication on the part of Ross and
his party, that they did not intend to abide by the Senate’s
award. It is contained in a letter to the Secretary of War,
da ed 6th March, 1 735; Did not John Ross know the con
tents of the papers that had been submitted to the Senate ?
Had he not himself, through the Hon. Mr. Frelinghuysen,
communicated all documents and memorials that he desired ?
Was it not notorious that a majority of the Senate were more
inclined to John Ross than to the President? Did not Ross
know full well the motives that influenced the Senate ? Yet
he seeks to open a negociation, before he could proceed to hear
specific propositions for a treaty. The Secretary of War, un-
I der the date of 7th March, 1835, sends the fidlowing answer
to Ross and his party :
Gentlemen:—l have just received your letter of this date. The
sum of five millions, which is offered for your claims east of the Missis
sippi, will, as I have already informed you, be in full of your entire ces
i siou. The application will be as you desire, a just regard being had to
individual rights. Nothing more will be paid for removal, or for any
other purpose or object whatever. In giving you the full value of your
property the United States comply with all the demands of justice on
them.”
The Secretary of War further informs John Ross, in the
the same letter, that be would “ give him any information he
would desire, if he would come to the office for the purpose,”
and that he would enter into “ a candid examination of the j
whole affeir, with a desire to adjust it in a manner satisfactory
to the Indians, and just on the part of the United States.” [
Butthat letter would close the intercourse in writing between i
them. Now, sir, what was die course of John Ross and his
frieuds upon the upon this occasion ? Did they call at the of- i
flee of the Secretary of War, to obtain any real or pretended
information, as preliminary to the settlement of the question ?
No. They did call, however, -iid from a letter addressed to
die Secretary of War, elated 9th March, 1835, they set forth
tlie substance of their interview, from which every one will dis
cover that they had varied the proposition, and were not dis
posed to be bound by their own express agreement. In that
letter they say :
That we, as the duly authorized delegation of the Cherokee nation,
arc prepared, in good faith, to redeem any promises which we have made
to the Department, so far as recommending to our nation the expediency
of closing our unhappy difficulties by a treaty with the United States.”
Was this the extent of Ross’ promise that induced the Pre
sident to submit the whole project to the Senate? Certainly
not. Ross and bis party said in his letter on the subject, “ that
we are prepared, so far as we are concerned, to abide the
award ol the American Senate upon our proposition, and to
recommend the same for the final determination of our na
tion.” This was the promise, the engagement, that induced
tue Executive to refer the point in dispute to the Senate. It
was referred; and when the responce is had, John Ross and
his friends peek to avoid it, by saying that they are ready to
redeem their promise to the Department “by recommending
to the nation the expediency of closing our difficulties by a
treaty with the United States.” He here changes the entire
character ol his obligation. He doesnot fee! himself bound
by the Senate’s award, but will redeem his promise by recom
mending—what ?—that “our difficulties be closed by a trea
ty” with the United Stales, without adhering to the basis as
established by the Senate’s recommendation.
But this is not all. Ross and his friends, in the same letter,
say: “ and to enable us to do so more successfully and satis
factorily before the Ciierokee people, we proposed that the
whole matter should be referred to our nation, and there, in
general council, to deliberate and determine on the subject.”
Was there ever exhibited a more palpable evasion—a more
deliberate and settled purpose to violate any promise made by
any man, than is here exhibited ? He now seeks to refer the
whole subject to his nation, in order, doubtless, that himself
and his associate delegates might release themselves from an
unconditional obligation on their pavt to abide the Senate’s
decision
But, Mr. Chairman, there are other portions of the same let
ter which unfold the secret that, from first to last, has operated
on John Ross. It is a desire to get into his own custody and
management, the whole sum of money that this Government
may, or has paid for the Cherokee cession. Sir, I firmly be
lieve, if a treaty had been proposed, by which the consideration
for the cession was to have been paid to Ross and his party,
that we never should have heard one word of complaint from
him or his friends. Here lies the great secret, after all; not
that John Ross is a patriot, and is waging w*ar against this treaty
to save his people and his nation from ruin, but, sir, it is be
cause the treaty, as it is made, has placed it beyond his pow'er
to pocket the money, and convert it to his own and the use
of his friends. It is, sir, because by the treaty, thefive millions .
and six hundred thousand dollars agreed to be paid by this
Government to the Cherokee people for their lands, are applied
mostly to specific objects, and the balance per capita. This
was a death-blow to all his hopes —to all his ambition ; and,
sooner than Jet the last opportunity pass through his hands to
plunder his people under the sacred name of patriotism, he will
put all upon the hazard of the die, even to the extermination of
his race. And yet, sir, strange to tell, this man, Ross, has
won for himself a reputation in portions of this country, and
can command the support of the first talents in the nation, upon
the ground, that all he has done, and is now doing, is for the
good of his people.
But, Mr. Chairman, to give something more than my as
sertions for the opinions I expressed, I will again ad
vert to further remarks of Ross and the others in the same let
ter. They say:
“ In your letter of the 7th instant, closing all further intercourse in
writing between us, you distinctly informed us that the application of
the five millions which is offered for our lands east of the Mississippi
River will be such as we desire— a just regard being had to individual
rights. Well then, if the nation will consent to and accept of the sum
oll'ered, let its. own wishes in regard to the application be consulted and
adopted—« just regard being had to individual rights. And on the
part of the delegation her?, we again repeat that we are prepared to
comply, in good faith, w ith any promise we have made to the Depart
ment on the subject: Provided, you do the same on your part, and will
not throw any obstacles in our way.”
Such, sir, is the language of that communication addressed
to the Secretary of War in March, 1835 ; after all efforts to
get them to treat had failed in this city.
Now, Mr. Chairman, is there an unprejudiced man here or
elsewhere, that can affect to misunderstand John Ross in thus
violating his pledges ? He had got from the Senate their ut*
most limit they would go. He was bound to accept it for him
self and his colleagues, at least. This he evades ; and, finally,
when the correspondence was closed, be and his friends refus
ing to treat, they then use the insolent language to this Go- '
vernment that they will comply, in good faith, with their pro
mise, “ provided" the Government will throw no obstacles in
thbir way, and the money be applied as they may desire. Sir,
the English of all this is : we will make a treaty if you will
let us have our own way. We will return to our people, and,
instead ol taking the responsibility'' of cheating them here,
w here, it we do so, we may be detected, we will return to our
nation, call our people together, and make them cheat them
selves.
11, Mr. Chairman, there is still any doubt on the mind of any
gentleman as to the motives of John Ross, subsequent events,
as they occurred in the Cherokee nation during the summer and
fall of 1835, will remove them. It is well known to this House
and the country, that the President appointed two Commis
sioners (Mr. Schermerhorn and Governor Carroll) on the part
of this Government to repair to the Cherokee country to con
clude the treaty with the Cherokee people. The correspon
dence that took place between the Commissioners and Ross,
fully sustain the charge that his object was to prevent a treaty
in the nation, by submitting the question directly and fairly to
the sense of the Cherokee people ; but, by various pretexts, be
prevented the United States Commissioners from all opportu
nity of presenting their project, until he had succeeded in pre
paring their minds against a treaty ; but, at the same time, had
secured to himself, and the delegation associated with him, un
limited power over the question of the t,eaty, which power,
under the grant, was made irrevocable.
This was a part of the master policy of this Cherokee diplo
matist ; audit was not until he had secured himself in this
treaty-making power, even beyond the reach of his own peo
ple, making himself, and the delegation appointed to act with
him, whom every body knows to be his creatures, greater than
the Cherokee nation, and beyond its control and reach, that he
ever would recognize Mr. Schermerhorn, as the Government
agent. It is a matter of curious inquiry to see with what re
markable address this man Ross—-at times so plausible, his mo
tives and designs so admirably veiled, that the most scrutiniz
ing eye would pass them undetected—carried on bis schemes
to their final consummation. Sir, he was an overmatch f>r the
balance of his nation, and has baflled for years the public
agentsand the humane policy of this Government. But in his
march, adroit and skilful as it was, he has left traces that ena-
P. L. ROBINSON, PROPRIETOR.
hie us to identify the spirit, the motive, and the object. As far
back as the 7th of July, 1835, Mr. Schermerhorn addressed
John Ross, from which I make the following extract:
“ I hope this, however, will not pievciityon from convening your
principal men at such time and place as you think best, to give me an
opportunity of an interview with them, for the purpose mentioned in
our personal interview.”
1 his letter was followed by another from Mr. Schermerhorn,
on the 9th July, of the most conciliatory character. On the
10th July, Governor Carroll and Scnermerhorn addressed
Mr. Ross, informing him that they much regretted to learn he
had prevented the census from being taken of the Cherokees
east. This letter was answered by John Ross, on the , 12th,
denying his interference. On the 24th July, John Ross ad- '
dressed a letter to Mr. Schermerhorn, declining to meet him and
Governor Carroll, one week from the 29th of that month, fpr
the purpose of holding a conference on the subject of their mis
sion. Ross assigns aS reasons, the trouble and inconvenience
of the measure; and other causes, none of which can be con
sidered valid. On the 29th of July, Governor Carroll and
Schermerhorn addressed Ross, calling upon him distinc-tly
state,if he intended to cotrfpl y with his engagements'to submit
thejquestion of the treaty to the Cherokees. They furthersay that
“ they are altogether ignorant of the course ' pursued by you
and your principal men, after leaving thecouncil ground last
week, and the speeches yon made them, and the advice that
was given not to meet the Commissioners here at this time.” It
will be remembered that this letter bears date at the time and
place the United States Commissioners expected to meet John
Ross, and all the Cherokees, on the subject of the treaty. They
did not meet them, however ; and Ross, in reply to the above
letter, under date 30th July, urged the same reasons he had
done in a former letter. Here, then, it was made manifest that
Ross had certain objects to accomplish with his people, before
he would suffer them to meet in council. Nearly one month
had elapsed, and no advance was yet made by Ross, to convene
his people, and he had actually refused himself to meet them at
the time and’place appointed. This negotiation was suspen
ded from July to 14th October, 1835, when Schermerhorn ad
dressed “ the chiefs, head-men, and warriors of the Ch< rckce
Indians, in general council convened, at Red Clay Council
Ground,” apprising them of his attendance and readiness and
desire of opening the negotiation for a treaty of five million
basis recommended by the Senate. On the 15th October, the
Committee and Council adopted the following resolutions:
Resolved, That they see no reason for departing from the customary
forms of the nation in communications of this nature, and theiefore thev
return the letter of Mr. Schermerhorn to the principal chief, with the
desire that he will (together with the Executive Council) answer the
aforesaid letter in such manner as they may think advisable, and that
the Committee of Council w ill act upon the result.
Mell, sir, the principal chief, John Ross, with Lowry, Wa
ters, and Lewis Ross, straightway answered the letter. John
Ross had now gained all he wished. He was invested with
plenary power, and they, in their letter, express a wish to hear
the proposition, but remind Mr. Schermerhorn that the Senate’s
basis had been rejected, and “ how unnecessary it will lie again
to ask the sentiments of the people upon the treaty you have
already proposed, and to which they have already objected.
If, ho wever, (it goes on to say,) you are fully authorized to of
fer any new terms, they shall be faithfully and promptly attend
ed to.” This last letter was, on the 17th October, answered
by Mr. Schermerhorn, in another, addressed to “ The chiefs,
head-men, and warriors,” reminded them of their interest, the
obligations that Ross and his party were under to submit the
matter to a council of the nation and to recommend its adop
tion to his people. On the 22d of the same month, while tlie
council was yet in session, John Ross addresses “The Com
mittee and Council,” in which he distintly recommends to ap
point a delegation, with power to treat with the United States
al Washington, if, as he believed, was the fact, it should turn out
that there was no person authorised to treat with them on the
ground. On the 24th of October, the Council of Red Clay,
1,076 individuals.
“Resolved, That a delegation, consisting of John Ross, principsl
chief, Richard Taylor. Lewis Ross, James Brown, Jami s Daniel, Tho
mas Foreman, Richard Fields, Sleeping Rabbit, Joseph Vann, John
Burge, Ooteruawa. Elijah Hicks, John Huss, John F. Baldridge, Peter
of Aquohee. Jesse Bushyhead, John Ridge, Elias Boudinot, and Charles
Vann, be endowed with full powers to enter into an arrangement with
the General Government of the United States, for the final adjustment
of the existing difficulties of the Cherokee nation, upon such bases and
terms as may be deemed hy them best fitted to secure the peace and fu
ture security of the Cherokee people.
lii the last resolu.ion adopted at the same time, they re
solve :
“ And that we forbid any negociation through any other persons, and
will not hold ourselves bound by the proceedings of any (other) dele
gation.” &c.
Mr. Chairman, it is under this authority that Ross and his
party now alledge that the treaty is null, because not made by
the competent persons. By whom was the treaty of New-
Echota made ? By John Ridge, Elias Boudinot, members
of tl lis very committee, and eMditeen others influential men,
ol known character among Why was it made in
Cherokee? Because Ross and his friends would not conclude •
a treaty at Washington in the preceding March, alleging that
he must take the sense of their people ; that it must be submit
ted to them. Well, sir, he was then distintly notified that he
need never again return to Washington to effect a treaty ; that
if there should ever be a treaty concluded it must be done in
the nation. Ross was again and hgain reminded of this
by Schermerhorn. Nevertheless, we see him, after having
hitnself and friends invested with power, not by a majority, of
the nation, for the documents show that the Senate basis of
five millions was rejected in open council by only 1076, and
that the same number ratified and confirmed the delegation of
Ross and others, and protested at the same time against any
other delegation disposing of their lands. Succeed first in re
jecting the five millions by less than one-sixth of the whole na
tion, and by less than one-sixth of the whole nation caused
himself and friends to be invested with power to treat then and
through all time. A minority is competent, it seems, to au
thorize Ross and bis party to sell their country, but a majority
is required to make, the sale of Ridge, Boudinot, and others
binding. Yes, sir, the treaty of New-Echota is denounced as
a foul blot on our national character, conceived ia fraud,
consummated by a minority, and therefore a nullity, which the
honesty of the nation should repudiate, and till honest men de
cry. Y et, sir, those who hold this language, whose delicate
sensibility is so aroused at the very name of this treaty of New
Echota, are prepared to enter into a treaty with Ross and his
party, who themselves represent a minority of less than one
sixth. And, sir, I ask if a treaty was now made, or had been
made by Ross and his party, would it not have been liable to
the very same objections now urged to this treaty ? How can
you draw the distinction ? If a minority of the Cherokees
are competent to invest a delegation with treaty making pow
ers, is not the same, or even a greater minority, upon the same
principle, equally competent to make a treaty themselves?
This, sir, brings us to another remarkable incident in this af
fair. The records show that Ross and his friends, here at
Washington, after the news of the treaty reached them, were
enabled, from some time iu the early part of January to the
3d of February, to present to the Senate two protes s against
the ratification of the treaty, one of 3,250 signers, the other
14,910, making 18,160 ; and this shows with what means
Ross and his friends bring every thing to bear. Can any man
believe it possible that in one month’s time, or less, in the
midst of winter, among mountains and snows, eighteen thou
sand one hundred and sixty persons in the Cherokee country
could have been seen, their names got to these protests, am!
transmitted from the Cherokee country to this city? The thing
is impossible. The people were not there to be got ; and, it
they had been there, the time in which the protests were ob
tained absolutely forbids the belief that the names are genuine.
Yet, sir, we see many gentlemen are willing to take eighteen
thousand one hundred and sixty as the number opposed to the
treaty, when there can be’but little doubt that the whole poptt
lation at that time east of the Mississippi did not number as
many. But, Mr. Chairman, all must admit that, if tlie re
solution of the general Council was competent authority for
John Ross and other delegates then appointed to treat with the
WIIOIiK AO. 232.