Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-07-27

e,
assuming the right of Judging i'll his own
Cause, to decide in his own favor and that
no appeal could be made from his decision ?
Such would have been precisely the situa-
ton OF the government, had it pursued the
course recommended by the writers in the
Tennessee papers.
In the year 1906, the Cherokees coded
to the United States, all their lands lying
IN the bend OF Tennessee, west of the cas-
tern boundary OF Madison county, with the
exception OF two reservations. The consi-
Iteration stipulated by the United States
tor this grant, was first, to obtain, the re-
linquishment of the Chickasaw title to tine
reservations, and, second, to endeavor to
obtain from the Chickasaws, the acknow-
ledge ment of Caney Greek, and the Flat
Rock as the boundary between the two
tribes. In the year 1914, when neither of
these stipulations had been complied with
by the United States, the Greek cession is
made, which it is commended by those wri-
tiers, comprehends the lands, 10 dispute be
tween the Cherokees and Chickasaws, and
which dispute. the United States, for va
liable consideration, had bound itself to
endeavor TO have settled bv the scknow-
ledgmrnt OF the Cherokee title. If the go
vernment had thought it consistent with
the principles of justice, or compatible
with its honor, to decide their own Cause.
without regarding the claims of the Che
rokees, the weakness of that tribe would
nave secured their submission to the deci
sion. a different course has been pursued,
and we are persuaded. that every we'll in
formed and unprejudlced mind will approve
OF the motives in which it originated
knowing then, as we do, by authentic
evidence. that the Cherokee lands extend
as tar south as the Appalachee, and that 1t
crossed the Coosau little below the ten
islands, and considering the little reliance
which is to be placed upon the interested
evidence produced by the parties. upon the
spur OF the occasion, and the vague nature
OF all traditional evidence in relation to the
boundaries OF unsettled lands, we do not
see what the government could have done
better, than to agree to run from the Ten
Islands on the Coosau, to the Flat rock on
Bear creek, leaving the question Of title
between the Chickasaws and Cherokees
unsettled. The invariable policy, of the
government has been to purchase the title
from all the tribes who claim lands which
have been ceded by another tribe ostensi-
bly, possessing it. In the case of the Che
rokee cesson of 1906, the lands have not
been settled, because the Chickasaws claim
it also. In cases Of this nature, the con-
troversy must be adjusted by mutual con
SESSIONS. or one party must purchase the
claim of the other, or they must remain un-
settled. Where an equitable adjustment
cannot be obtained, it might be good policy
to postpone the discussion, the rights of
both parties remaining unimpaired.
Such has been the policy of the govern
ment, in relation to that cesson. But
where the government have obtained lands,
which it is important to have settled, but
which cannot be done without an adjust
ment of boundary, as in the late Greek
cession, it is highly important, that the
boundary shdlld be settled with as little
delay as practicable. BY that cession
large tract of country was obtained, but
being underlined on the north the govern
ment could not proceed to survey and offer
for sale, the lands in the northern section
of that cession, before the line was defined
and marked.
From this view of the subject, the in
ducement to an early adjustment of the
controversy of boundary which had arisen,
appears to have been strong. It may be
proper to remark, that the treaty cedcs
nothing in form, or in fact that it is
treaty made for the adjustment Of bounda-
~, and not for the cession of territory.
L.