Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1825-09-06

are their interests, and how are those interests "a
be affected by he acts of each o,her? WLa. course
has been pursued by the governments of Georgia
and OF the Union, in relation TO this treaty and he
indians! d. What has been tie conduct oil the
lives have they acted?
These points open a wide range ofdscussion, and
must, necessarily, give rise to some difference OF
opinion respecting ihem We shall take them up
Seftdfui, and pursue them it'll candour and impair
TALLY On some of them se shall agree even with
The violent partizan writers who have shown the
most precipita.e zeal in their Recommendations, and
win whom we differ the other points. We
must repeat tina, all the facts necessary to thorough
investigation OF the hole subject yet before
the public. Some facts are -'rongly controvcr,ed
while others rest upon doubtful evidence. But il
II be asked, why, under these circumstance, we
engaeein discussion where the weapons of argu-
meat are so defective, reply, that we have been
cfiven tot by an impeachment OF the motives for
what we have already sadby the fact that upon re-
presentations. entirely par,zan, the public press of
The country. exercising its constitutional freedom,
mas heedessly embarked in the ridcule and denun-
ci"ion o! subject deserving the most deliberate
consideration, and the most unbiased discussion.
The argument that public opinion is against us,
has been already used; and we have been charged
'e'nning public opinion ia country where il is
aeservedly the basis of all law and gov ernneni.--
Dut TINS charge is scracey worthy of notice, con-
shierlng that IT comes from those whose purposes
have been equal well sui'cd on other occasions by
charging us with imdy feeling the public pul,e,
and fioa;ing securely in the wake of public sent-
meat;
]. Wadf are Ne rights, po,cers end duties Of
ne STATE and Fe!ey0i Governments cpty- The
Il.
limits of the States?
Under dis head of the subject, question pre-
sents ITSELF which until now, has never been ser-
ously contested. The power and authoriy exercised
over the Indians in The territories of the u. States
are not intended to be questioned. Bat, putting
tie territories aside, and e, e. those states which,
since tie adoption of the Federal Constitutions have
been admitted mo the Union, and how stands tie
matter! The condition of The Colonies a; tie COM
Increment md at the termination of the Struggle
Tor Independence the history of the old articles of
confederation and of the formation of the present
constitution, too well known TO require any ex-
piana,ion.
The powers OF the government over he Indians
and their lands, have been ably expo1nded in the
Washington News, e. Georgia raper.) The ar
ticle will be found OIL 4,li page, and contains
the ideas we intended TO throw out for considera-
ton, under this branch of the subject. We are
-" u W III Dc ar ans.
the constitutional power of the federal govern
ment has never been urged before, and that he GO
vernment, under every administration, has been in
the quiet exercise oft. But does such an exercise
make IT legitimate power? To what an extreme
would such an admission carry us, amid the usur-
pations which are constantly taking place? The
powers OF the states over persons and property
within their limits, remain they were before their
union, except in the cases particularly provided for
II he federal government has nothing TO do with
the Indians in the old states, but 90 to regulate
commerce with then," ,hequestion is at once SET
tied.
Ii may he proper to look to the practice OF the
states both before and since the Revolution. Be
lore that event. the states Gered them as COM
maniies, holding the waste lands of the crown by
the right of possession, and by the courtesy of the
colonial governments. Since then they have been
so considered in several OF the states In Virginia
this has been the case, will be seen by refer
ence to the many laws our statute book con-
corning the Indians; providing FOR their protection
for the appointment OF agents TO manage their af-
fairs; and for the amclioraiiou of their condition
BY reference TO the laws of Massachusetts, will
be found that she has legislated the subec; both
OF the persons and lands of the Indians. In 3aine
the Agents among the Penobscot and Passama-
quoddy tribes POINTED, and Indian affairs are
managed by Tie state. In n. y this is also the case
That state has frequently treated with the indians,
il solemn form. As late March last the Governor
was authorised ito treat with the Stockbridge
indians for the purchase of lands belonging to the
Naton,' &c. Tie appointment of an Agent was
provided Tor under the contemplated treaty, to act
Under the instructions OF the Gov ernor 10 carry the
indians TO Green Bay, and manage their affairs for
them Since the projection of the Scheme OF the
Grand Canal, n. York has been soliciious TO
extingush the indian titles, and remove ;bem--and
1t she has not fully succeeded in these Objects she
has made considerable progress towards it, But
1t Us unnecessary &c go through the whole of the old
IL States to show The conduct of each towards the
indians within their borders Whoever heard that
this exercise ofjursdicion, excep; upon commercial
subjects, was an infringement upon the powers of
the General Government, and particularly upon the
tTeaty-msking power? N. York was so determined
upon retaining jurisdiction over indian lands that
she incorporated clause in her Constitution
declaring that sale ofthose lands should be valid
without the express consent of the State Yet in
the face OF the provision in the federal constitutions
and iii these measures OF the State Governments
the writers for the National Journal have the hardi-
hood 10 contend, that the application of Gov. T.
tor leayeto mark the trees through The Creek lands
was illegal and improper, because in the nature of
a treaty, and in violation of the treaty-naking
power OF The L. S. Government Ii the consent
given him by the indians had not have been rerohed
under this view Of the subject, there could have
been no doubt OF his right to make the surveys; aud
the order from the President forbidding them,
would have been not only illegal, but an unneces-
sary and unus;ihable interference on his part over
subject with which he had nothing to do But
these are considerations which fail under another
division Of the subject
We shall not be unmindfu Of The propriety of
enqurng into the rights and obligations of the in
dians, under the proper head. But these indian
rights and obligations in the territories and neto
states will be found, in some respects, different
from what they are within the territorial limits
of The old states. The policy of the Federal
Government towards the Indians in all parts of
the Union, has been founded upon The most en-