The Arkansas banner., 1850-09-17

or which amount oue-t third is to be allowed to tn, Western Cherokees for their interest in the Chcro 1 kee country east, being the sum of $523.7S2 Is | for which the committee recommend an appropra- 1 ton.
 There remain yet to be considered two questions under the treaty of lS46, about which the parties cou d not agree. They were referred to tho Sen ate umpire, and it's decision will be final, and be- come part of the treaty. The first Of these is whether the amount expended for tine one years su ubsisence of the eastern Cherokees, after their arrival in the west, should be borne by the United | States by the Cherokee funds; and if by the latter then, whether subsistence shall be charged 1 at greater rate than SS3 33is per head. In the consideration of this question the committee have 1 found great difficulty in coming to just conclu 1 sion. The inartiicial manner in which the treaty of 1885 was drawn, its ambiguity of terms, the va l rety of construction placed upon il, have led to great embarrassment in arriving at the real inten- ton of the parties. Nor such additional light be found in the interpretations which it has since received. Upon the whole, the committee are oi opinion that the charge should be borne by the United S1ates. The committee entertain no doubt but that by the strict construction of the treaty Of 1895, the expense of years su ubsstence ol the Indians after their removal west was proper charge upon the treaty fund. It was so understood by the govefn- ment at the time, and such was enumerated
 
 in the 18th article of the treaty. In tho original projet of a treaty which was furnished to the com missioner empowered 10 treat with the Indians, this item was enumerated among the expenditurts, investments. and payments 10 be provided for in it's several articles, and which made up the aggregate sum of S5,0G0,0BU to be paid for the Cherokee country. The Secretary Of War, in letter ad- dress ei to John Ross and others, dated ------ 1886, says that the United States having allowed the full consideration for their country, nothing further would be allowed for expenses of removal and subsistence. This wds before the ratification of the treaty, while memorial was submitted by John Ross and the other delegates against the rai, acaiion of the treaty, accompanied by copy Of original prcjet of the treaty expressly including this charge among those to be borne by the fund. In general, the treaty expressly desgnates those subjects which constitute were made inde- pendent charges upon the United States. The whole history of the negotiation of this treaty shows that the $5,000.000 was the maximum sum which the Uated States were willing to pay, and that this was not so much a consideration for the lands and possessions of the Indians indemnity to cover the necessary sacrifices and losses in the surrender of one country and their removal 10 l another. It Is understood that this construction formed one of the objections urged by it's opponents against the adoption of the treaty by tho Cherokee people. On the other hand, among inc circum- stances establishing the propriety of acontrary con l struction, may Dc mentioned the language in the Sth article of the treaty The United States also agree and sipuate 10 the CheTOkees 10 their new homes, and to subsist them one year after their arrival there" This imports pecuniary re- sponsbiity rather than a simple disbursement of \ trust fund. In the talk which was sent by Presi' dent Jackson to the Indians to explain ihe advaa- tages of the proposed treaty, he mentions that the slipuaons offered provide for the removal al the expense of the United States of your whole people, and for their subsistence year after their arrival ! k. Aula that such has been the almost invarable policy ol this government. The expense of removal and ubsistence the ordinary sacrifices which sim pie remuneration for the price of homes does mol compensate The neighboring tribes of the Chicka- saws, ChOctaws, Greeks, ana seninoles, were re- moved and subssted at the expense Of ihe govern ment It is not, therefore, source of wonder thai a conflicting interpretation of this treaty, pursued | through a series of years. should have produced embarrasssnunts. partially relieved by the treaty ol
 lS46, while this, the most obstinate Of a has been left to the final arbitrameni of the Senate.
 l The committee, however base their opinion upon 1 grounds independent of the treaty of 1885. Thli treaty, with it's supplementary article, was hnaiy ratified on the 23d of May. 1886. and by its provis' 1 ions the CheIokees were required 10 remove with
 in two ys.ss. The time elapsed 2sd May, ls3s.-- It had been concluded, in drfance of the protest o l large majority, with small minority of the na
 ton, who saw no other escape from threatened ruin
 Within that period tEose who had favored the treaty had mostly emigfated to the vest under its ptovis ! ions. The large majority of the nation, adoptln.
 the counseis of John Rosa man represented a
 of unlimited influence among them--had obstinate
 ly withsiooi all the efforts of the government o th
 Untsd States. to induce them to adopt the treaty emigtate under its provisions. Ross and his part
 had constantly repadiaied its obligation. and de noeneed ii as fraud upon the naiion. in the aea time, the United States had arpointed it's agent
 under the treaty, and collected large military fore
 to enforce the execution of the treaty. The Stai
 of Georgia had adopted system of hostile iegisl'