Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1829-09-07
From the National Lntstigneer.
To THE EDIroRs.
PRESENT CRISIS IN THE CONDITION OF
TIE AMERICAN INDIANS.

Having described the manner in which the fret
Indian treaty, after the organization of our present
form OF GoVeriment, was negotiated by the Cabinc,
OF president Washington, & shown that il was ratified
by Senators not inferior to any of their successors
and who were doubtless peculiarly cautious in the
irst exercise of the treaty making power, und having
uscertalned by a minute comparison, that the i'm
portant articles OF the treaty OF H~oIston, executed
less than a year afterwards, are a mere transcript of
the first treaty, ! proceed now to inquire, UHn. is The
meaning Of Ire Treaty Of Hoisto17
The title and preamble were quoted in nv las,
number. The title begins thus; ~ Treaty Of peace
and friendship" What is n treaty? Iii, a compact
between independent communities, each party acting
through the medium of its Government. No instrlI.
mcnt which does not come within this definition. can
be sent to the Senate of the United States, to be act
ed upon as within the scope of the trcaty-muking
power.
Nthe agents OF the United States purchase lands
Tor a public object, such a purchase is not a treaty.
Ithc state OF Virginia, on the application Of the
United States, cedcs a piece ofland for n Navy Yard,
or a Fort, a compact of this sort is not a treaty. Ii
the State OF Georgia cedcs to the United States all its
claim to territory enough for two large new States,
and the United States agree to make a compensation
therefor, such cession and agreement are not a trea-
ty. Accordingly, such negotiations are carried OH
md completed by virtue of laws Of the National and
State Legislatures. Of course, compacts of this
KIND, are never called treaties; and the idea of sendinp
them TO the Sanate of the United Suites for ratifi,
cation would be preposterous. One OF the confede-
rated States Is not an independent community; nor
can 1t make a treaty, either with the nation at large,
" WIN oDy ioIei8D fOWcT. DIT the Indian tribes
and nations have made treaties with the u. States
during the last forty years, till the whole number of
treaties thus made far exceeds u hundred, every one
IF which was ratified by the Senate before il became
obligatory. Every instance OF this kind implies that
The Indian communities had governments of their
own; that the Indians, thus living in communities,
were not subject to the laws Of the United States;
and that they had rights and interests distinct from
the rights and interests of the People ofthe United
States, and, in the fullest sense, public and national.
al this IS III accordance with facts; und the whole is
implied in the single word trenty.
Again; the parties OIL the banks of the IIolston
signed u treaty '9f peace" II is matter of history
that there had been fighting and bIoodshed. These
acts OF violence were not denoIninated a riot, a se1i-
ton, a rebsHton; they constituted a icnr. Tho set
tieDent Of the difficulty vas not called a pardon, an
cpHesiy, a suppression of a riot, a conoiction, punish
",ent; Il was called a peace. Nor is it said here, as in
the treaty of H~opcwell, that the United Ssates "gire
peace" There ~, m the title and preamble, every in
dication Of perfect equality between the partics.-
In point OF fact, tho whites were, at that momon,
much more desirous OF peace than the CberoEees
were.
This is also a treaty Of afrienda&;p." which i'm
plies that the Cherokecs were not only a substantive
power, capable Of making peace and declaring war,
but thai, after the treaty was executed, they were
expected 10 remain ia ne same SLnfc. II was NOT n
surrcndry OF their national existence, bnt the estab.
lishmcnt OF sInicable relations to rernuin; and so Ear
as this treaty could operate, the amicable relations.
thus Acknowledged to exist, were 10 continue throuc,
all future time.
Who arc the parties to this "tyedfV nj o,oce anil
friendshiP7" The President acts ~ behalf of one of
ihc parties, and "the undersigned chiefs and war.
riors Of the Cherokee Nation Of Indians, on the Dari
and behoD Of Said n%atioH,'' The Cherokees then
arc n nation, and the best definition or n nation TO-
that 1t IS % community HUing under he Dion Iaps.
n nation may be a power Of the first, second. third
or tenth rate. IL may be very feeble, and totally in.
competent 60 defend it's own rights. But 90 lonp "a
10 has distinct rights and interests, ond manages is
own concerns. n ~ a substantive power; and should
be- respected rs such. Any other rule Of iBterpreta
ton would make force the only arbiter. St. Marine.
~ Italy, is described in our best gazetteers rs ga
small but independent republics" and yet it has not
halfsO many people. nor the three hundredth part 80
much land, as the Cherokee nation now has.
1T has been said, indeed, that the Indians, being an
uncivibzed people, arc not 10 be ranked among na.
tons. Bot tbs IS said gratmtously, and without
The least shadow Of proof How many treaties did
tnhus Cesar make with savage tribes, who were
greatly inferior, in every intellectual and moral res.
pact, to the Cherokees Of tho present day? There
IS " little reason rs truth in the objection. Has no,
Ion endowed every community with soma right?