Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1829-08-19

gated by subsequent war, aud its no, Nv
expressly recognized in any subseouen, ,,g
Whether the conclusion Of Judge W.
correct, or not, has little bearing on the ,"' S
If he treaty be no. now IN p' r
II was IN force once; and its meaning n ."'T
worth considering. ::
This is the frst treaty made by the H..
States with either Of the Sou,h wes,er, ~
or nations. The STATE Of Georgia had . "'1
Vlously to the Revolutionary war, entered T ~.
compact with the CHI rokees, of which ~.
tice will be aiken a, the proper time .c''
lhr peace Of 1888. and before the ador,i ',s &,
the Federal Constitution, The Congress, u,S.
rreatles with he indians, in precisely the s,~.
manner as with European nations. lfhe non
er 20 do this was dou5.ed, or denied. The 49,,
OF denial has never come to my knowIedc,
The rraiy OF Hopeweil was rccocis,G ).
Commissioners, oil Of whom, if ms,,k. ~
resided 1T The South; and | have never b...t
that aay rer,onstrance was offred by tilbs, ~
the States in The ueighborhood of he Cb..
ker,, on the ground thai the Old Congress h.!
no po,Ctr TO agree upon line Of demart,r,.
win ne indians. A line was fixed in the A..
article, securing TO the indians the und,,,,I
ed possession of a territory, which ann,,,.,
on he map 10 be part Of Vireinia, The 10,
Ciroiinas and Georgia; the States Of Kennel,
and Tennessee not having been then ro,n,i
If this treaty now Stood alone; aud The r.l',
lions Of The parties had not hanged By sub,..
quent events, no white man could have 'c.
tempted "a settle on any Of h. Ia, DIS within II.
Cher see boundary even down to the pr,se,,
day, however he might have. been sn,taie5 !,
the attemp, by the constituted authorize, n
any or all Of me States situated in the tsio1.
borhood of the Cherokees. Agans, such 4,
attempt, the Indians would have been pro,s,.
ted by the faith OF the Conledrraled Reput,,
This remark Is made simply for the sake If
drawing the attention Of the reader to the in.
volatility OF he Indiar territory, as srofg,
implied in the ff h article.
From ths pTaseology adopted in two Q,
three passages Of the treaty, the eonchsa,
seems TO be drawn by the present Secr,ur
Of War, tina, treaties with the Cherokees N
not binding upon the Whites; a, least 10 70
the extent OF heir literal and proper meapia,
The argument stands in this form The Ch..
rokees fought on lhr side OF the British, in III.
war Of independence. The British were Bra.
en-; and therefore he Cherokees were a ,Or.
qurred people. To conqu red people m
United States gaze peace: aud therefore III.
United States are not bound by the very lHI
oles which they dictate. They allotted bgz.
dairy TO the Cberokres; and therefore me
STATES are not under obligations to rspc
the boundary, which they themselves allottt
To reiu'e such conclusions, established by Nak
a process Of reasoning, is unnecessary. lh
very statement OF the argument is enough
IL is true, that the commissioners Of tRl
States, in several Treaties made about X
same time express themselves rather haugNaiE
when they declare that they gius peace 10 IA
Indians. The fact is well known, hovas
that the whites were much more desiroUiI
peace than the Cherokees were. The in5as
itants Of our frontier settlements were in CO.
S, am dread of incursIons from the NATIVES
the forest. impoverished as our coun'V'a
by a seven years war, i, would have beed H.
possible TO have secured the vas, witcra
from the settled country 10 the Mississippi
Any force which then could have btea 81
would have Jared worse than the arms dN
Clair did, in far less dangerous hrtf:
years Afterwards The Cherokees cIui ~
have set up for nice, verbal critics of rh' BIZ
as they did mot undsTs'N'
word Of it. 1t is questionable whehT o.
Indian interpreter in ten would make s'y OIL
ference between giUe peace and make ptcH
ngree 10 a peace. The Cherokees ddg',@
that the United States WEI as
rous tina, there should be an end Of tsh4
but it is incredible that they shouh h!'
thought there was lurking, under the PhnS
Of giuing peace, any such mys'eriousimpile'b
Of superiority on the part Of he "h
should ultimately exonerate the superior W.
all obligations to keep faith with his ln''nH-
Least Of all could they have supposed n
there was latent power in this phra'r, WIZ
should destroy The VALIDITY Of all future %
pac,s between The same parties, in mol o"
which the insIdious phrase is to be found
The phrase 10 gire peace was q favounN
with the Romans, and was doubtless CO.."
rom them. think Bonapartc used d"
some occasions BIZ; neither the RoIn'hH
Bunaparte, so far as know, ever soo'IV ~
ended that a trea'y was to be interpreted
" ise than according TO the obvious anu pT
r. meaning Of The words, merely becaO'
81 the parties assumed rather haug"9
10 some few instances Of the phraseo!og
AS the word oHot it is said TO have D'en',