Litchfield enquirer., 1830-07-29

the operation of state laws. as "a sure and
speedy mode OF extinguishing actual occu-
pancy, if not of title! Has II not This for its
object? For what other purpose can the state
desire to legislate over thena9 Not to draw
revenue from them; not to subject them to
the performance of civil or military duties
MOTTO make them citizens, and amalgamate
them with their white population. The
state can have no such objects in view. Can
any other motive be assigned than Indirectly
to force them to remove, by bringing the ac-
ton of legislation to bear upon them II
such be the. object, il the power existed, why
was,it never before claimed or exercised .
Why was the federal government to extin-
guish the title, TO purchase the right Of occu-
pancy? Can this long acquiescehce, on the
part Of Georgia, 10 the exercise of self gov
eminent by the Cherokecs, beacco,intcd for,
10 any other way, than by It's full belief that
the right 50 to exercise il, belonged to that
tribe s.s .s =. 7. - =. 49, /,
If the power of legislation exists, how are
these Indians to be regarded, as citizens, a
liens, or denizens? Not as. citizess It would
seem,for the law already passed, nearly cut
tdacs them. 1t does not indeed declare them
Incompetent to sue as plaintiffs In their courts;
but it has all the practical consequences of
outtatcry for they are deprived Of the benc-
At Of the only testimony which would gener.
ally exist, to sustain their legal eights. Not
only no Indian can testify Cor another, where
white man not residing in the nation, is the
adverse party; but no descendant Of one, how!
ever remote, is a competent witness. The
rights Of personal security, personal liberty
and private property, 30 Car rs it regards the
Indians, are by this law practically annihildted
it is clear they are not aliens, residing within
the jurisdiction of the states for IL so, sclaose
subjects are they? They are not denizens
for a state cannot make them such.. They
have not been made citizens by naturalization;
for state cannot make them such, in that
manner. IF then, they are subject to NUM-
ciDal regulations of the state, il Is beca.,se
they are, and from the period Of the deciara-
ton Of Independence have been citizens Of the
state. If citizens, they may be prosecuted
for all offences, for which the whites may be
rosecuted-bigamy, SIC. Sc. II citizens,
they are to DO enumerated il the census, and
to form part Of the basis of representation.
IL ta1xd. Now did the trainers Of the con-
stitution ever suppose. that by exercising
the power oftaxaton, the whole Of the lndi-
an tribes within the limits Of the states, could
be represented ON the floor Of Congress p
Would Georgia have right TO send one Of the
chiefs. or headmen Of these tribes,as a repre-
sentative or senator to the national Legislature
The old Congress did not think so, when il
was provided in the treaty Of Hopewcll. that
the Indians should have the right to send
deputy oftheir choice, whenever they should
think fit, to Congress: they never were. at
any time, considered subjects of Georgia but
If they are now. they always have been,
since July 4, t776; and new basis Of rep.
resentatiOn is to Be made after the year 1881, >.
for the states within whose limits Indianfrihes
reside. The law OfMississppi, If valid pOc,
has completely effected this object: forwhile
it abolishes the laws and usages of the Indi-
ans, it eonfers on them the rights Of citizens,
and subjects them to the operation Of all the
laws, statutes. and ordinances Of the state
and the 23d Congress viii perhaps have one
additional representative from Mississippi, by
force Of this legislative enactment. 1853
The power to extend the municipal regula.
tons of the State Of Georgia over the Indians,
lift ever existed, Is taken away by the cog
sttuton, and cannot now. consistently with
the provisions Of that instrument, be exerci-
sed. m
suppose that it will b. admitted, that the
state, by adopting the constitution. 10 bound
in good faith, by its provisions. and cannot
claim to exercise any rights. which by that
instrument are conferred exclusively on The
general government, or prohibited to the
state. A denial Of this principle would Ol
course, be denial ofany paramount authori-
ty Of the constitution. and reduce the gov
eminent to what it was under the articles Of
confederation. e2 ar
BY the constitution. Congress have. power
to "regulate commerce with foreign nations,
and among the several states, and with the
Indian tribes" Whatever the ertent Of this
power may be, SO far as it exists, and may be
lawfully exercised, it is erclusive. It must
necessarily be SO, for il it exists both in the
states and in the federal government, it be-
comes nugatOry in the hands Of either. The
! regulations Ofthe state and Of Congress might
conflict with each other, and which 10 to
yield Neither, ii the power may be exerci-
sed by both. This point has, however, been
settled by the Supreme Court. That tribu-
nal has decided. that tho power given TO Con-
gress, under this clause OF the constitution, is
EXCLUSIVES, and amounts to a prohibition to the
states to exercise 1t. ~sa.
shall not stop to comment upon the sug-
gestion. that it i not said Congress shall have
power to regulate. commerce with the In
dian tribes, UithiR the states for the express
sion is general il Is made t0 extend to- all In
dian tribes, and must include those within, as
well as those without the territorial limits OF a
state. But there were no Indians in the Uni
ted States wh0wcre not at the time OF the a.
doption Of the constitution, within the terri
t0rial limits Of some state. Such has uniform