Alexandria gazette & advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1822-1824, 1823-10-25

IT.. tribes caanot dispose OF lands In
fs,.,inple TO foreign nations, nor 10 sny
"a in the Union, nor 10 individuals,
s,,,hout the sanction of our general go.
,.rnment Ii claims the sole power Of
rurcbaslng these lands, or, in the GUS
iOmary phraseology, of extinguishing
~ Indian title to them. Bot farther
,S.n this the United States do not 60.
Ry having to the a6osigines an equivs-
is1t for the fee simple, taey confess
,hsir title to be just and valid. The
1nd;an title, in reality, is founded upon
,bs law of primer seisi". Thus, even
!, re.oects their lands, the sovereign
"n,borisy Of the aboriglnes is recognise
I'd. the privilege OF alienation only be-
;O3 confined to single purchaser, from
.ao.,derations connected with national
safety. ,,,-
,hs subject of Indian title. to notice
curious argument employed by Mr'JOhn
Quincy Adams before the Supreme
court of the United States, In the case
of Fletcher versus PECK, which may
.s.ve 10 demonstrate the weakness OF
I,at gentleman's intellect. lie SAID
,h,, such title was not conveyed out ca
tIa-uishsd; that it did not pass by deed
according to municipal law, out oy
treaty, agreeaOly 20 national law Inns
d;,uocti0n Is wholly withou t a d'iier-
once The transfer of vacant land or
territory by a nation is precisely the
some as the transfer of field OF plan
ta,lon by an individual. The form oil
the transfer varies, not because the
same right does not pass by treaty as
by deed, out because nations are aecos'
toned TO convey oy treaty and lnd'V'd'
mails by deed, The name OF the ins'ru.
ment is changed, but not the nature OF
the transfer. In The case Of land trans
ferred by Indian treaty new occupants
are ad nitted to the soil, as 10 the case
of a conveyance from an individual oy
deed a new occupant is admitted TO
house, field, or plantation; ana, IN
both cases, the fee.simPle Is transfer
red to the purchasers, their heirs and
successors, forever.
The Indian nations, from the facts
now set forth, may, OF course, be re.
parded as independent OF the United
States, although within their sovereign
territorial jurisdiction, as distinguish
ed from the sovereign territorial Jurls-
dlcuon of European or other foreign
states.
In no point Of view do the U. States
consider The Indians as their citizens or
subjects. they never assume over them
An exercise Of the right OF the eminent
domain; nor eoforce any paramount
claim of vassslage. The territorial au
thority which our government exereis.
90 10 founded on the law Of nature;
which gives the right to the whole hu-
man race to occupy space on the earth
for the purpose of procuring subsis-
tence. This law of nature, traced to
its origin, will be found to be physical
AnG artIHcial lOTCo.
Agricultural, mechanical, and COM
1nercial, arts, tend to increase the hu.
man species; whilst the Lunter mode OF
life sustains but a small lumber IN pro-
norton to the land which they occupy.
Al men born have natural right to
support from the earth. and hunters
have no fair claim to retain ground for
the pu suit OF game which Is necessary
for the support of individuals who live
in more compact bodies, by means of
civilization, and whose multiplication
requires their extension. The contests
bs;ween the whites and the Indians
NAV, in truth, be said to be conflicts q.
rising out of their different modes OF
subsistence The indians, doubtless,
were they sufficiently powerful, would
ex ermiUate the whites, who are coDti-
nuaIly encroaching on their hunting
grounds, and maintain that kind OF life
with which they have been familiar,
and to which they are remarkably at.
tached: But as the whites are the strong
est as civilization is more potent than
bsrbarism or savage existence, the law
of nature prevails, and force decides
the question.
This is the real state ofthe case; and
ifthe Indians did not sell their lands.
they would undoubtedly be .wrested
from them by conquest.
The United States, however, have
pursued a mixed policy with regard to
the tribes. They have regarded the
situation of the aborigines as an unfor.
tunste one. They have offered them
civilization, protection, compensation
for their lands, in short all the benefits
of society enjoyed by their own citi-
gems; and whore our population has
pressed closely upon than, SO as too
narrowly to curtail their hunting
grounds. our government has trans
nnrSaA ~, - , and rtyen