Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1825-10-07

the Senate ard thus committed to that body before
the inaugurotio OF AIR Adams, who received II al
ter his accession 20 he Presidency for his sigma
| lure, that body hori'ig ratified a."
| These three sentences contain seven--what shall
they be called = small mistakes, First, as TO this
creates, despatch. On Monday, the 18th oil + ebru
airy, the Commissioners attended at the Indian
Springs. On the 18th, Saturday, the treaty was
signed. On the l4th, the additional article was
agreed upon and signed. The direct route TO Wash
ington, from The treaty ground, is through Mil
ledgeve, and the journey may be performed In
eleven days by the stage, viz from the Indian
Springs on horseback TO Milledgcvile, one day;
from thence with the mail 10 Washington, ten days
On Sunday, the 18th of February, one OF the
Commissioners, Col. Campbell, wrote TO the Co
vernon of rgis-(th letter is one of the docu-
men;s published with the Governors Message IN
May;'0 "The original treaty will be conveyed
by our Secretary 10 Washington City, by the stage
leaving UiKes on Thursday nert." The Com
missioners, who were corruptly using the greatest
despatch, sent their messenger out of the direct
route, and lost all the time from Monday the l4th
to Thursday the 18th of the month. Surprising
that no accident occurred, the treaty reached
Washington, by the Secretary of the Commission,
on the Goth OF February. Considering that Con-
gress necessarily adjourned the Sd OF March, the
| Commissioners would have been censurable Tor
this delay if the treaty had not arrived in time TO
be laid before the Senate. 2dly-The western will
lderness of Georgia, tie Indian Springs, are within
a days ride ofthe Seat of the Government, whichis
near the centre oiihe state. Thirdly 1t was lad be
fore the Senate the rery last day of the session.
| Quere. What is the difference between the fast
| and very last day? The last day was the third OF
| March. Mr.. Adams, in proclainins the treaty,
says, "Whereas the Senate, by resolution OF the
second Of March, advised" sc. Fourthly--it
was g transmitted MIR. Calhoun on the 2d OF
March, Sc Mr.. Monroe's message TO the Sc
lnat tr,n tho yeat of n
ry Fifthly--Mr. Calhoun advsedits ratification
Mr.. G. opposed its ratification, and advised the
President no, to submit 1t to the Senate SXthly
l--On the nineteenth day after il was concluded,
it was laid before the Senate. Mr. Monroe's mes
sage being OF the 2sth February, the treaty was
laid before the Senate the 10th day. Seventh
ly-" That body (the Sena,e) having ratified 1t .
This is the first time that the power OF ratification
was exercised by the Senate if, indeed, 1t has
been exercised in this instance; their resolution, as
quoted in the Presidents proclamation, is In the
usual form of consent and advice. The weight oil
evidence is on the side OF the President, as he
quotes the resolution of the Senate, however graf
ing 10 the Reviewer the conclusion Is that this Is
the seventh small error OF his three sentences.
In making this particular enumeration OF these
silly mistakes, no disposition is iet to escape from
the true question presented to the public. The
allegation is, that Mr. Monroe, and the Senate and
MIR. Adams, ratified this treaty because the circum-
stances detailed by the Reviewer concealed
from them by the articles of Georgia, of the
commissioners If the evidences Of the fraud OF
the transaction had been before them, there would
have been no ratification.
These evidences, as detailed by the reviewer,
are, the 1000 dollars to be paid to Mcintosh FOR
his reserved lands; the manner in which the 200, =
600 wa. to be paid; the fact that the treaty was
formed by persons who did not usually sign trea-
tles--was made by Mcintosh and his party only.
The to he maid IN AIcIp,Osh nd
or distributing the 200 coo dollars, were both on
the face of the treaty, and did not escape the no.
tice OF Mir. Monroe or the Senate Immediatei y
after the treaty signed, oil. Crowell wrote 10
the Secretary of War, the 18th of Feb. asserting
that the treaty was signed by Mcintosh and his
adherents alone that, il ratified, it would produce
horrd state of things among The Indians, aud that
with the exception of Mcintosh, and perhaps two
others, the signatures TO the treaty either
chiefs OF low grade, not chiefs at all, and those
were from eight towns only of the So in the ration
-conludng with offer to give, 4" if it wa.
thought necessary, all the particulars pending thi:
! negotiation To be in the way, if called upon
; for these particulars Crowell went post haste to
} Washington arrived before the treaty was deci.
} dedupon, and remained until it ratified. His
letter was deliberately considered by Mr.. Monroe
, submitted By him with the treaty to the Senate
the result is already known. AS has been air nd
stated, motion made in the Senate to alte
TIE treaty lOT MIR. SrOWellS Dement, III The ratl-
cation criminal, the President and Senate
cannot plead delusion to shelter themselves from
the charge of participating in the crime. The
, New York Reviewer, like General Gaines, give.
an affecting picture of the heroic determination oil
the Creeks 10 die upon their beloved lands TO sub
NIT like lambs their throats to the knife of brutal
power. Love of country, even of the soil only
upon which one treads, is too sacred feeling TO
be the subjects OF sport or pleasantly. But if an
luncOnnuerable n the soil
the Creeks, it is of recent origin, if any reliance is
TO be placedu the statements of the Indian A
gent. In 1924, the government had mis- authority
for believing that the Creeks willing 10 treat
for the sale of their lands, and in the letter
just quoted, of the 18Th of February last, he says
" Although the treaty (of the Indian Springs) has
not been made nconiormity wIhthe instructions OF
which have been furnished, yet think it can be,
at distant day, to the entire satisfaction of the
government" a new power has been discovered
to reside in the President Of the United States
The Reviewer thinks either House Of Congress
may declare the treaty void. That either House
may express opinion that the treaty is void there
can be no doubt; but, is il void in consequence oil
such expression of opinion2 OF this he seems not
to be certain. " If there should be any difference
of opinion on the subject between the two Houses
il will remain with the Executive TO say, whether
under existing circumstances, he 1rW carry the
treaty into effect" This doctrine is somewhat
startling, when recommended by an administration
journal If the Senate and House of Representa-
lives cannot agree to make law, has the President
power to make il for them? Or, ifthey cannot agree
TO repeal law, may the President act as if it were
repealed! In the of this treaty, the assertion oil
this doctrine is strange; that il has been received with
appreciation, is appalling The treaty Of the Indian
Springs has been ratified and proclaimed and an
appropriation has been made by law of 250, 900