The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-05-19
THE UNION WASHINGTON WEDNESDAY MORNING. MAY 49, 1852

the control Of regulating the Indian tribes in the
States--a question which settled as early as the
first administration OF Washington.
MIR CASS. That is the very point. When the tue
oil the Indians TO the country was the inter-
course law ceased TO operate there, and the United States
had authority to exercise any power them within
the jurisdiction OF the State. The moment the land
sold, the moment the Indaa title was extngalshed,
the moment the land ceased 10 be Indian country IL came
within the jurisdiction OF the State OF Alabama
Mr. BELL. Then would refer the honorable senator
back to the provisions OF the treaty The senator UNI
derstand contends that by selling their lands these
Indians had lost their tribal character that they were no
longer separate community OF Indians but were under
the jurisdiction OF the State Of Alabama and that there
fore the government OF the United States had lost all
troll over them after the execution OF that treaty I'M
derstand il 10 be his argument that the government lost
all control these Indians from the moment the treaty
was executed aud their title to the land was extn-
guished, except TO those who were permitted or who
chose to take reservations understand him TO maintain
that the Creek indians as nation became extinct ,h On
government therefore, had longer any controlling
power over themto make treaties with them, TO regulate
trade and intercourse with them or 70 extend me com
mon principles of the intercourse law TO them That Is
what now understand TO be the argument OF the honor
able senator. SIS 80 A. 8t~
Mr. CASS Think the honorable senator misunderstands
me- will repeat my position, in order that may not be
misunderstood. Suppose that in the State OF Tennessee
there body of indians owning land over whom the
government by law has full CONTROL and full right TO
make provision under the intercourse law II they cede
their andsif the Indian title is extinguishedhe gov
eminent has longer the full control over the Indians,
but the regulation oil their concerns devolves upon the
State
| Mr.. BELL Then understood the senator Alright.
The inference TO be drawn from his statement is, that
from the moment of the execution OF that treaty. or from
the time ts sipuations fulfilled, and the land was
surveyed, and the white population permitted to flow in
upon them, there was no Creek nation OF Indians OF
which the government could take charge under the
stuton OF the United States and according to- the pn
cpes established by Washington The reason refer to
that is TO call the attention Of the honorable senator again
Tn IN tnfnln trQ1fu
executed there was no stipulation requiring the removal
OF the Indians westward, because they were permitted to
remain reservations. At the same time, provision
made for the appointment of agents TO examine and
superntend the transfers of their reservations refer
TO it to prove that the fundamental policy OF the govern
ment in regard to these Indians was that they were to
be coerced not by but by starvation and the
siiy OF their condition. by their restitution They were
encouraged 10 sell their although there was
no other land provided Tor them unless they went west
ward point to this fact to prove that the government
intended to try these very The experiment turned
out TO be unfortunate. The Indians in resistance
they refused either to sarve to 60, and commenced
/ pnndering the property OF the whites.
wish to place the fact strongly before the Senate that
this claim arises from state OF things which never ex
listed before, and which will probably exist again.
The government by inviting the white population into
this territory, enerel into obligations to indemni-
ty for the losses which should arse and which did arise,
and which think might have been foreseen as almost in
evtabe under the stpulatons OF the treaty The Indians
refused to starve while they had arms in their hands
They determined 10 gel some means OF supporting life
/
both sides became exasperaed they took life The hon.
orable senator says it was state OF war II II was war;
il was war produced by the anomalous and singular
policy OF the government The whites may be said TO
have been entrappe into it, They made the inslru-
of removing these Indians by exposing their lives
and property by going and settling among them It was
most natural and most inevitable thing, considering
the Indian character Theylwere not compelled to remove
by the terms OF the treaty They refused either to sarye
or 60 We know their disposition TO remain in their old
homesteads and their native country There was no stp
ulaon obligng them to remove The consequence Of
this might have been ioreseen by wise government
But still impute no bad motives to The then admins
tIalion. admit the great necessity under which tina
treaty executed But does il therefore follow that
because these political necessities existed-because the
government found itself under the necessity OF making
novel experiment to the mode Of removing tribe Of
Indians from OF the States Of the Unconstitutional
these facts existed in full forcethat the white popua
ton who had right 10 suppose that they would be pro-
tected against any natural probable consequences oil
their going into the territory, should not be UNIDENTIFIED
Admitting these necessities IN The strongest point Of
view--admDg the danger OF a collision between one
of the States OF the Union and the United Sates-does
follow that this government is not under obligation ic
indemnify the instruments IL employed to coerce The re
movs of the Indians! Is the government not 10 indem
nifty the white people who invited 10 go and buy
the public lands and buy the Indian reservations, unde
the implied protection OF the government, and according
to the express terms OF the ireaty ask honorable
aios, does il not follow clearly, necessary logica
deduction from having made such an experiment on III,
white people OF the United States, from having invited
them to go into this country under such circumstances
that when they have lost their property, and many
them their lives. they shall be indemnfed at least fo
their property Those who have lost their lives car
be Unidentified for their loss but think it right Il
indemnify The living Tor the property they have lost
will only repeat, IN conclusion, that as large por
ton OF this claim is for property taken by the Uniet
States troops Of the Senate will not object t
| that
MIR BERRIEN. Mr.. President, have few brief OBJ
servaons 10 make upon this subject; and mpellet
to do by the fact that being OF the representative
of the State of Georgia in this chamber, not author
ized as believe. 10 remain silent when question i
discussed concerning the right OF portion OF my
susnts; and the especially impeled 10 do So
because the issue which has been made between III,
from Tennessee and Michigan, and the spirit il
which that discussion has been conducted, my view
calculated 10 divert the attention OF the Senate from h
real question on which the allowance OF this claim de
ponds.
The honorable senator gave way; and motion, th'
Senate adjourned
|
CANTON MATTISGs.The subscribers respectfully announces
he n Of