The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-05-11

recolected the details ofthese Conversations prob
ably, as well as !, who was SO deeply interested
IN the subject. wanted the treaties rejected
either by the President or the Senate, and the con-
tracts investigated; and also the acts of the agents,
who might have been unjustly assaed. The Sec
retary and Commissioner are incapable of dong
\ me injustice, as know am incapable Of msrep-
! resentlng their acts opinions.
Mr.. PEARcE. How is it possible that drafts
drawnin pursuance of treaty stipuatons are 10 be
pad unless the treaties are ratified; Do you in
tend 10 comply with the stipuaons of treaty,
and reject the treaty lselfi 1t would require a
great deal Reconsideration, before the Senate would
enter on a course like that There would be great
incongruity in it.
! But there is another consideration why the Pres
dent should withhold these treaties, for the pres
ent, at all events. The Senator from California,
! think, is mistaken IN saying, that by withhold
ing them for the present, the policy recommended
] by them will become the fixed policy Of the coun-
! try. | suppose il will become the fixed policy of
the country, if they are ratfed; but how can the
so If we do not latify them, and if they are sus-
! pended from the consideration of the Senate,
Certainly no authority is given to the treaties, no
authority is given to any acts Of the commissions
ers IN relation to them, unless the Senate ratfy
them. Ia nihiio, aihR.f You cannot make the
treaties valid but by their ratification. There are
very good reasons ytlley should not be sent to
the Senate for confirmation now. ! find at this
very tme-at least at the date Of the last advices
| from CalilOrnia-that the stipulaiions of these
treaties are under discussion in The Legislature of
that State. They seem to know very well there,
what are their provisions, and there is some differ
ence of opinion as to whether they should be rati
| fled rejected. | have seen a majority and u
minority report in the Legislature of California;
the former recommending the rejection Of the
treaties, and that the power of the State Of Cali
forna should he employed to secure their rejection;
and the latter very guardedly advising against this
course. There IS also resolution pending in the
Legislature, from the majority Of the committee,
| of rather extraordinary character They recon-
mend that the State shall insist upon tho obsery-
ance Of what they say is the policy which has
prevailed in every other State that is, the entire
exclusion Of the Indians Of California from that
State. They insist that those people, said to be
100 900 in number, shall be driven out Of the limits
of the State, and shall not be allowed a solitary
reservation They complain Of the reservations
which, 1t is said, the commissioners have guaran-
tied to them by the treaties which they have made.
They say that the Indians must not be allowed to
hold any Of the public lands in the State, but must
beremoved beyond its jurisdiction; that the Indian
shall not be allowed to have an acre Of that hertz
age which God gave him, and which was his before
the white man first landed on the shores Of Amer
| lea.
| What is to become of these lndans Where
are they 10 gos How are we TO remove them
/
onet, purchase their territory, from time to time,
al theeXpense of untold millions' Will you send
| them beyond the confines Of the United States,
into the possessions of our weak neghbor, Mex
leo You cannot do that; because it would vio-
late your treaty stipulatons. Will you send them
up 10 the great valley of the Salt Lake. and con-
sign them TO the tender mercies of the Mormons;
Will you send them TO the Territory of Oregon,
where the same system Of exclusion is to be re.
| peated; Will you turn them into the great deserts
beyond the Sierra Nevada there to meet n fate
more dreadful than almost any Of which the i'm
agination can conceive' Ii you compel them to
such an existence ms that, theirs would be worse
than the wanderings of the tribes Of Israel for
| forty years in the desert. There would be no pill
lar of fire by night, cloud by day, to guide
| them. There would be no refreshing mama in
the wilderness for them. They must all faint,
despair, and die in the deserts, to which your sell
| fish violence would drive them; and rather than
do that, it would be humanity for you 10 collect
them IN groups, and treat them according 10 the
example Of the French Revolution, with noyades
and fusiades. drowning them by hundreds, and
shooting them down by squadrons! Sir, this In
dian policy requires more consideration. While
| it is very desirable, admit, 10 remove them from
the neishborhood of the white man, there is a
! limit to that, and that limit YOU have reached
East Of the Rocky Mountains, you have removed
many Indian tribes beyond the white settlements;
and, since 1899, have eNtinguished their title TO
| 10000 600 acres, at an expense u is said, of
So, 900, 900! You have congregated on the bor-
ders Of Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas, vast
hordes of savage Indians. Between the priires
east Of the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific, vast
deserts extend-deserts furnishing very little sub
sistence and the scantiest support 10 the nomadic
tribes who roam over them, who live more upon
the plumber OF our Mexican neighbors, of the
white settlements Of the frontier, and Of the bands
Of emiganis TO the western coast, than by any
product Of industry, or even by the chase. Now,
what are we to do with them; This is the great
question
| do not undertake to say what the policy Of
the Government should be; bu, say this, that
they who advocate the exclusion OF so formidable
and numerous band Of Indians as those in Cali
fornia, must provide some other place for ihem
must he prepared with some expedient which
1 shall not shock humanity. This grave question
now agitates the Legislature Of California, and is
n subject for the President consideration nj this
moment. lie must determine for himself TO give
some recommendation 10 us in regard TO the sub
ecs, before he sends those treaties 10 the Senate
of the United States. Where is the liability 10
blame, then, which can he Justly thrown upon the
President for taking time 10 consider question so
vast and momentous MS ihis--because he waits 10
know public sentiment in Cafornia--the action
Of the Legislature and the further information
which both the Senator and myself desire.
The Senator complains, however. that these
Indian commemorative not been removed. He
says they ouehtto have been removed promptly.
Mr. GWlN. ! said that if the President dis
approved their acts. he should remove them.
Mr. PEARCE. The President cannot, and
am sure, does not doubt That to make treaty slip
ulnions, aud then assume the power which does
not belong to any officer Of the Government, not
even to The President himself, of undertaking to
execute those stipulatous before they are approved
by him, and ratified by the Senate. is a palpable
wrong II is a clear usurpotion. have not con-
versed with the President on the subject, but am
surc that he cannot do otherwise Than condemn
their conduct as violation of their duty. The
Crfnmi ssioner of Indian fairs long SINCE did so.
Whether the prcsdentnnd the Senate, when they
come 10 consider ;he circumstances shall suppose
that the emergency WAS so extraordinary as 10
excuse these commissioners, I cannot undertake
to say; nor do consider il ct further to discuss
matter which properly belongs to the Executive
sessions Of tho Senate.
But the Senator complains that they have not
been dismissed. Now, let IA look at the facts.
There we're three Indian agents and one sub.ngent
appointed Tor California. One ofthe Indian agents,
MIR Mckee, protests that he had nothing to do with
the beef contracts and says that he always advised
to the contrary. IN his report To the Department,