Elizabeth-Town gazette., 1819-02-16


ii had moi been our practice TO destroy
comba.snts. He knew of but one devia-
ton from the code which regulated the
warfare between civilized communities,
and that was the destruction OF Indian
towns, which was supposed to be author
ised upon the ground that We could not
bring the war TO termination but by de-
stroy ing the means which nourished it.
With this single exception, the other prin-
ciples Of the laws Of civilized nations are
extended to them, aud are thus made Law
in regard TO them. When did this hu-
name custom, by which, IN consideration
of their ignorance, and Of eur eniighten-
ed condition, the rigours of war were
mitigated, begin at time when we
were weak, and they were comparatively
strong-when they were the lords Of the
soil, and We were seeking, from The vices,
from the corruptions, from the religious
intolerance, and from the expressions OF
Europe, to gain All ASYLUM among them.
And, when is it proposed TO change this
custom, to substitute for it the bloody
maxims of barbarous ages, and TO inter-
polate the Indian public law with revolt
ing cruelties? At time when the situa-
tion of The two parties is totally changed
when We are powerful and they are weak
at time when, to use a figure drawn
from their own sublime eloquence, the
poor children of the forest have been
driven by the great wave which has flow
ed in from the Atlantic ocean to almost
the base Of the Rocky Mountains, and
overwhelming them in its terrible pro-
gress, has left no other remains of hun
dreds of tribes, now extinct, than those
which Indicate the remote existence Of
their former companion, the Mammoth
of the new world Yes, sir, ii is at this
suspicious period of our country, when
we hold proud and lofty station, among
the first nations of the world, that we
are called upon to sanction departure
from the established laws and ussges
which have regulated our Indian hostili-
ties. And does the honorable gentleman
from Massachusetts expect, in this au-
gust body, this enlightened assembly Of
Christians and Americans, by glowing
appeals to our passions, to make us forget
our principles, our religion, our clemeDcy,
and our humanity (?
Why was ii, Mr.. C. asked, that we
had not practised towards the Indian
tribes the right of retaliation, now for
the first time asserted in regard to them {?
1t was because it is principle, proclaim
ed by reason, aud enforced by every re-
spectacle writer on the law Of nations,
that retaliation is only justifable as calcu-
lated to produce effect in the war. Ven
geance was a new motive for resorting to
it. If retaliation viii produce no effect
on the enemy, we are bound to abstain
from it, by every consideration of hu-
manity and Of justice. VIII it, then,
produce effect Cd the Indian tribes No;
they care not about the execution of those
of their. warriors who are taken captive.
They are considered as disgraced by the
very circumstance of their captivity, and
it is often mercy TO the unhappy captive,
to deprive him of his existence. The
poet evinced profound knowledge ofthe
Indian character, when he put into the
mouth of the son Of a distinguished chief,
about TO be led to the stake and tortured
by his victorious enemy, the words
Begin We tormentors! Your threats are in vain /:
The son of Alknomok will never complain.
Retaliation of Indian excesses, not pre-
ducing then any effect in preventing their
repetition, was condemned by both rea-
son and the principles upon which alone,
10 any case, it can be justified. On this
branch Of the subject much more might
be said; but, as he should possibly again
allude to it, he would pass from it, for the
present, TO another topic.
1t was not necessary, Mr.. G. said, for
the purpose of his argument in regard to
the trial and execution of Arbuthnot and
Ambrister, to insist on the innocency Of
either of them. He wouid yield, for the
sake Of the argument, without enquiry,
that both of them we're guilty that both
bad instieated the war; and that one of
them had led the enemy TO battle. 1t was
possible, indeed, that critical examina-
lion Of the evidence would shew, particu-
ularly in the case Of Arbuthnot, that the
whole amount of his crime consisted in
his trading, without the limits Of the Unit
ed States, with the Seminole Indians, in
the accustomed commodities which form
the subject of Indian trade and that he
sought to ingratiate himself with his Gus
toners. by espousing their interests, in
regard TO the provision of the treaty Of
Ghent, which he may have honestly be-
lieved entitled them to the restoration Of
their lands. And il, indeed, the treaty
of Fort Jackson, for the reasons already
l. he