Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1838-02-09
VOL. XI--No. $50

and throughout that whole instrument their
d stnc,ive character as a separate political
community is kept up and clearly scknow-
lodged Tho treaty Of Holsteln, 1891.
recognises them as nation, aud guarantees
the Cherokccs all their lands not thereby
coded. All subsequen! treaties recognise
and acknowledge the operative force OF
these ireo,ies Judge Green's Opinion,
8 vol. Req. 344.
Is it necessary for language to be strong
err Where can you find rights more
clearly defined or more solemnly guaran-
tied Lands are coded, boundaries are
expressly delegated, guaranty for those
roalncd, and an assurance Of protection
| from the intrusions Of the whites. Are
then these treaties, and have they tho
operative force Of such on instrument, ~
known to the Constitution? II has never
been doubted. They have been approved
by the President, ratified by tho Senate.
! published to the world as such, and recog.
Missed in the highest judicial tribunals as
! the supreme law Of the land.
Was the United States competent to
enter into sipulations of this kind. ana IS
it able to perform them Or did this mag.
unanimous Government desienedy bind it
self to terms which it could not enforce.
with handful Of rude, uncttered savages,
while it compelled performance on their
pert and, when they demanded fulfil
ment of the conditions, coldly to inform
them we cannot comply, you must rely
upon the Justice of the States and the ten-
der merclcs Of the bordering white men?
Was it ever contemplated by the indiana,
Il 1. - ,ola
Of the United States Of protection from all
intrusion of the whites, that they were TO
become subject to body of laws imposed
on them by the the States, the language
(which they did not even understand, and
so entirely dssimiIar to all their habits aud
customs ? In the languag Of the Supreme
Court of the United States, " it is increc-
lble." 1t would be- a perversion OF Lam
gunge 10 suppose SO, and fraud upon the
Indians to give it that operation. Or, DID
this Government, IN the formation OF these
treaties, condescend to ''pal,er in double
sense, to keep the word of promise to the
ear, and break it to the hopc'" | trust
that such Punc faith will never stain ouy
national character.
In Worcester rs. the State Of Georgia,
6 Peters Reports SCI, the Supreme Court
of tho United States held that 1.-The Chero
kco, are distinct community, occupying
it's own territory, with boundaries accu-
ra,ely described, in which the laws Of
North Carolina could have no force, and
which the citizens of North Carolina had
no right to enter. but with the assent OF
the Cherokees themselves" This, per-
haps, is the last case, involving this ques"
ton, which has been before the Supreme
Court of the United States the only trbu-
nal recognised in the Constitution for the
decision of such questions The opinion
was pronounced by that pure hearted man
and eminent iurist, Chlet Justice Marshall
whose expostlons Of the Constitution will
be revered while tina, instrument itself en-
dures. The lime and circumstances give
to this decision unusual solemnity and inn
portance. The court will remember that
the Union was agated from one extreme
to the other, and threatened no less than
an overthrow of the Constitution. At
such time. how calm would have been
the deliberations of Marshall! how earnest
his convictions!
The Constitution of the United States
, a lso prescribes that Congress shall have
the power of regulating commerce with
foreign nations, among the several States.
and with the Indian tribes.
1t has been dec ided that personal inter-
course was commerce in The sense OF The
Constitution. The laws Of Alabama are,
therefore, void. as being rePngnant to tho
provisions ofthe Act of Congress Of March
so, 1882, commonly called the Intercourse
; Act. And it would seem that the Con-
, gress Of the United States was Of tho
opinion that the Act Of 1902 was still in
force al late as the year 1884, at which
time an act was passed regulating trade
and intercourse with the Indian tribes west
of The Mississippi, and in which the Act Of
1902 was declared not repealed. as 10 the
; tribes east. See the Act of 1884, Act Of
1907
Upon what argument, then, rest tho
rights of the States to extend their laws
over these people We are told that tho
Indian tribes are within The chartered linz
lts of the States, and that the States arc
sovereign within those limits, and cannst
be restrained. But are they not parties
TO the formation ofthese treaties' Where
were the Senators Of these States at the
time of their ratification Does their
solemn protest stand upon the records OF
the Senate against this usurpa,ion Of the
Gen. Government They were present,
and themselves parties to the act.
But the State Of Alabama became
member of the Union with this tribe OF In
dams then in her borders, with most ofthese
treaties existing in full force pIedg'ng the
protection the United States, guaranty
y INC to them The undlsturbed possession OF
their country, and the enjoyment of their
, usages and customs; prohibiting the in-
D truslons OF he whites upon their soil, and
laws enacted to carry out the provisions,