The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1829-09-09

iousiy to the revolutionary war, entered into
compact with the Cherokees, of which motto,
WIN be taken at the proper time. After the
peace OF 1888, and before the adoption of the
eoeral Constitution, the Congress made trea
mes win the Indians, in precisely the same
nauner as with European nations. Ifthe power
!: 10 TINS was doubted, or denied, the doubt, or
aenidi' mas never come to my knowledge. The
treaty OF Hopewell was negotiated bv commits
aoners, all OF whom, if | mistake not. resided
aI the south and have never heard that anv
Iemonstrance was offered by either of the
states IN the neighborhood of the Cherokees.
on the ground that the old Congress had no
P0aosT to agree upon line of demarkation with
the Indians A line was fixed, in the 4th arti-
cie' securing to the Indians the undisturbed
possession OF territory, which appeared on
,he map TO De part of Virginia, the two Caro-
mas, and Georgia; the States of Kentucky
ana ennessee not having then been formed
( II TINS treaty now stood alone, and the relations
Oh the parties had not been changed bv subse.
quent events, no white man could have at.
tempted to settle on any the lands within the
Gherokee boundary, even down to the present
day, however he might have been sustained in
MS attempts by the constituted authorities of
any or all of the States situated in the neigh
borhood of the Cherokees. Against such an
attempt, the Indians would have been protected
! by the faith OF the Confederal Republic This
remark is made simply for the sake of drawing
the attention of the reader to the inviolability
OF the Indian territory, as strongly implied in
the fifth article.
From the phraseology adopted in two or
three passages OF the treaty, the conclusion
seems TO be drawn by the present Secretary of
war, that treaties with the Cherokees are not
binding upon the whites at least not to the
extent OF their literal and proper meaning
The argument stands in this form The Cher
okees fought on the side of the Brisish in the
war OF independence. The British were beat
ell and therefore the Cherokees were a con-
qusred people, To conquered people the
United States gaze peace and therefore the
United States are not bound Dy the very arti-
cles which they dictated. They allotted
boundary to the Cherokces; and therefore the
United States are not under obligation to re-
spect the boundary, which they themselves al
lotted. To refute such conclusions, established
by such process of reasoning, is unnecessary
! The very statement ofthe argument is enough
1t is true, that the Commissioners of the
United States, in several treaties made about
the same time, express themselves rather
haughtiiy, when they declare that they gice
peace to the Indians. The fact is well known,
however, that the whites were much more de-
slrous OF peace than the Cherokees were. The
inhabitants OF our frontier settlements were in
constant dread of incursons from the natives
OF the forest. Impoverished as our country
was by seven years war, it would have been
impossible to have secured the vast wilderness
from the settled country to the Mississippi
Any force which could then have been sent,
would have Jared worse than the army of St.
Clair did, in a far less dangerous field, nine
years afterwards. The Cherokees could not
have set up for nice verbal critics of the Eng
lish language, as they did not understand
word OF 1t. 1t is questionable whether one In
dian interpreter IN ten would make any differ
ence between glre peace, and make peace, or
agree to a peace. The Cherokees doubtless
understood, that the United States were de-
slrous that there should be an end of fghttnG :;
but it is incredible that they should think there
was lurking, under the phrase of giving peace,
any such mysterious implication of superiority
on the part OF the whites, as should ultimately
exonerate the superior from all obligation TO
keep faith with his inferior. Least of all could
they have supposed, that there was a latent
power in this phrase, which should destroy the
validity of all future compacts between the
same parties, in not one of which the insidious
phrase is to be found.
The phrase to gire peGce was favorte one
with the Romans, and was doubtless copied
from them. | think Bonaparte used it also on
some occasions. But neither the Romans nor
Bonaparte, SO far as l know, ever soberly con-
tended that treaty was to be interpreted,
otherwise than according to the obvious and
proper meaning of the words, merely because
one of the parties assumed rather a naughty
air, in some few instances of the phEaseology.
As to the word GltOt, it is said to have been
commonly used in the Southern States as sy-
nonymous with fir, or establish. To say that
boundary was allotted to the Cherokees, was
no moro than TO say that boundary was eStab-
ttshed, or agreed upOHj for the boundary is
not said 10 have been allotted 6y the United
States. 1t may have been, indeed it must
have been, as the whole scope of the treaty
shows, allotted by the consent Of both parties.
WILLIAM Penn.
No. w.
Ii our statesmen are about to interpret trea-
ties, on the principle of favoring the party
which assumed superiority, they must talo
care lest there should be some very unexpect-
ed consequences,
In treaty formed between the United States
and the Chickasaws, in the year 1901, and rat
flied by President Jefferson and the Senate, the
first article commences thus "The Mingo,
principal men, and warriors of the Chickasaw
nation of Indians giue ieare and permission to
the President of the United States of America,
to lay out, open, and make, convenient wagon
road through their land" After stating that
the road shall be a highway for the citizens of