Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Mass.) 1828-1830, 1829-12-08

and People had. thus refused at home and
abroad, in their own territory and at
Washington-Fhen they had declared in
writing that there was not money enough
IN our National Treasury to purchase an
additional foot Of Cherokee land and
when these declarations were made with
!, a q determination and constancy which left
no nope OF forming treaty, then it was
discovered that the Government of the u.
States possessed no posoer to make trea-
lty.
In my third number observed that il
is OF little importance whether the treaty.
OF Hopewell is in force now, or not and
that Judge White, of Tennessee. suppos-
ed It to abrogated. All the most material
parts OF that treaty are incorporated into
the treaty Of Holston. There is one pro-
vision, however, not thus incorporated.
viz. that the Cherokees NAV send a
Deputy of their choice to Congress. Tho
this treaty Of Hopeweil was made under
the old Confederation, yet, if it is in force,
good faith would require that the Chero-
KEGS should now be allowed privilege
tdntamoast to sending Deputy to Com
gress at the time that treaty was made.
The following reasons which have be-
come apparent in the course of this in.
vestlgation, satisfy me that the treaty of
Hopewell is still in force -
l. In all the subsequent treaties, there
is no intimation, not even the most oh
scure, that this treaty, or any other, had
been abrogated, annuIled, or superseded.
2. In the second treaty of Philadelphia,
1874, the United States give money "to
evlnce their justice" to the Cherokees. for
accomplishments of lands by the treaty of
Hopewell and the treaty of Holston. Here
both treaties are mentioned in precisely
the same manner, which would hardly
have been the case if one had been abro-
gated, while the other was the foundation
of all subsequent treaties.
8. The first article of the third treaty
of Tellico, 1905, is in these words ;-"AiI
former treaties which provide for the
maintenance of peace and preventing of
crime, are, on this occasion, recognised
and continued in force" The treaty of
Hopewell was former treaty, which was
directed almost wholly to the maintenance
Of peace and the preventing of crimes.
4. In the second treaty negotiated by
General Jackson, 1917, it is stipulated,
that :" the treaties heretofore Tmadel be-
tween the Cherokee nation and the United
States are to continue in force" The
phrase "the treaties" means the same as
all treaties.
1t is not probable that all these docu.
ments were before Judge White, when he
arrived at the conclusion above stated.
At any rate, they will probably lead most
readers TO directly opposite conclusion.
Hence, then, we have sixteen treaties
with the Cherokees negotiated from 1855
TO 1919, ratified by five Presidents, all
resting on the same principles, all consist
ent with each other, and all now in force,
except that some parts may have become
obsolete by subsequent stipulations on the
same subjects. The earlier treaties are
repeatedly and solemnly recognized by
tlater ones. An official letter of Mr.. Jel.
ferson is curiousIy wrought into a treaty,
SO as to form connecting band to the
whole system. In the last treaty of all,
negotiated by the present Vice-President
of the United States, law of Congress
is introduced for the permanent defence
of the Cherokees.
If we look into other treaties with In
dams, from the Delaware treaty of ITS,
(from which quotation was made in my
ninth number) to the Greek treaty of 1926,
the same inviolable territory, the same
solemn guaranty, the same proffer oil
friendship and good neighbourhood, will
every where be found. So many treaties
had been formed with Indians previously
to 1910, that Mr.. Justice johnson pro-
nounced them innumerable." In none
of them is it said that Indians have NOT
the power of selfgovernment, or that they
must come under the government Of the
State. In no case have the Indians sign
ed away their inheritance or compromt-
ed their independence. They have never
admitted themselves to be tenants at will,
or tenants for years. Upon the parch-
ment all stands fair, and so far as their
present engagements extend. they are un-
der no more obligation to leave their coun-
try than are the inhabitants Of Switzer-
land to leave their native mountains.
What is the evidence brought against
this mighty mass of treaties ? Nothing
absolutely nothing. The Secretary Of
War merely says, that the Cherokees were
permitted to remain on the lands of Geor-
gia. But where is his authority?
If we turn from treaties to the laws of
the United States, we find the whole sys-
tenn of legislation made in exact accord
ance with the treaties. Nearly all these
compacts required appropriations Of mo-
ney. When the appropriations were made
the treaties came of course under the
view of both Houses of Congress and
every such appropriation was Of course an
assent Of Congress to the treaty.