Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-09-11
From The Georgia journal, aug. 90.
RIGHTS OF GEORGIA.

RIGHTS OF GEORGIA.
81.
We have shown in our last paper, that ;hc right of
the State of Georgia to the soil comprised within her
present limits, 10 undcniabc. 1t remains for lis to
establish the facts, |. that previous and after the
adoption of the federal constitutions the state OF Geor
gia, nor any other state OF the Union, never rcn-
quished either b. treaty otherwise, the RIGHT of
soil to lands within its limits, occupied by Indian
tribes @ that in the articles OF considerations aud i'll
the federal constitution, power Is given, either
expressly or by implication, to the federal govern
ment, to exercise sovereign jurisdiction over the
lands occupied by Indians within the limits of any OF
the states; 3. and that in no law treaty, emana-
ting from the federal government, was the power III
question assumed. With regard to the position Ia
ken by the writer's i'll the National Intelligencer and
either papers, that the Indian nations free and in
dependent, shall not offer remark upon it. its
absurdity is sufficient for its refutatiOn.
II.
In the articles ofconfeiera.oni it is declared "The
United States in congress assembled, shall have the
sole and exclusive right and power OF regulating the
trade and managing all affairs with the Indians not
members OF any of Tie states provided that the leg
isatVe right of any state within its own limits be not
infrnged or violated" The congress of the United
states never departed from this provision in the ar
tcles Of confederation. 1t never assumed any right
OF soil and jurisdiction over lands occupied by the In
dams, except after cess.ons were made by some of
c states, !Par Of their territories, for the and
benefit oil the United States. To show the business
OF Our position, shall quote from the proceedings
of congress relative to the Indians, which we shal
add Comment, the reader will he enabled
h;mselfto draw correct conclusions without our as
sistance.
Pennsylvania desiring TO obtain land occupied by
the Indians, within her territory her Legislature ex-
pressed itself thus in q memorial 10 CONGRESS- dat ed
September IL. 1853.
1.-The custom Of Pennsylvania has always been to
purchase the right OF possession from the Indian
tons, being more consonant to Justice, and less eX
pensive than force. This, however, cannot be done
without some convention or conference with the In
dians for that purpose Although this business NAV
be said strictly regard only the internal police of
feRnsylyapia and the conference proposed does not
extend to any description Of men without the limits
Of the United States regard any Of the great oh
Iects of peace war. yet high respect for the
confederation, determines us TO lay open the whole
design of tile state 20 Congress- Sensible likewise,
business must rest with Pennsylvania
On the I'D September, 1888. proclamation was
issued by Congress, prohibiting and forbdding all
persons from making settlements, on lands inhabited
claimed by Indians, reiatom The limits Of u,isdic-
tim ofany particular state" &c.
On the 18th October, 1888, the committee of Con-
gress to whom referred suudry letters and pa
pers relative to Indian Affairs reported that com
Enttee should be appointed with instructions 10 pre-
pare aud report ordinance for regulating the In
nan trade, &c. provided that 'te measures Of Con-
Sress retettoe to Indian G6rs, sha not be construed
10 affect The territorial Claims Of any he St1tes on,
their Legislature rights 'co tier respective limits"
On the 5th August, 1886, an ordinance for the re-
guation of Indian affairs, read third time and
TIE TeaiDOie OF tfllS ordnance, de-
c!ared provided that the legislative right of any
state within It's own limits DE infrngcd or vio-
lated And IN the last clause it is ordained that
III all cases where transactions with any nation or
tribe OF Indians shall become necessary to the pur-
poses Of this ordinance, which canuot be done with
out interfering with the Legislative rights of state
the superintendent in whose district Tho same shall
happen, shall act IN conjunction with the authority Of
such state"
We could proluco more authority, to show how
careful was the Congress Of the United States in all
measures relative to Indian affairs to abstain from
rneddng with the rights Of the states to their soil
inhabited by their white citizens or by Indian
tribes. And VIC could stop hero, having, as VIC con
ceive, sufficiently reiued the arguments advanced bv
the New York American and the writer in tho Ma
tlOnal IntclEgenccr But shall examine the s,ib
oct, very succncty, from the adoption of the federal
constitution, 10 1859.
In the federal constitution it ia also declared, that
Congress shall have power TO regulate CONNER &c
With the Indian tribcs;" and that 1.-THE powers not
delegated to the United States by the constitutions
nor prohibited by IL 70 The states, reserved to the
states respectively, 10 the people,"
As the power to regulate Commerce does not rive
right OF sol, r. would be absurd to imply that the
power to regulate commerce with the Indian tribes
gave to the federal government the sovereignty over
the lands occapcd by the Indians within the naiis of
the states, Ii this construction is correct It results
them that the states possess since 1850 As thew din
before that period, the entire sovereignty over their
territories, defined and acnowedrc red
by them u the states did not delegate the sover-
''rn power and right Of soil over the Indian lands
,iia tlqr tcrrit5rcs they have res.rved hose -.