H. OF R.]

Georgia Claims.

[JAN. 16, 1829.

ordinance shall, in all its parts, extend to the territory States. I think I have shown that neither the Articles of contained in the present act of cession-that article only Confederation nor the surrendering of waste lands have excepted which forbids slavery." divested the several States of the sole and exclusive power Thus, it will be observed, that, so late as the year 1802, over the Indian tribes within their respective limits, that it was deemed proper to stipulate, by actual covenant, passed into those States, respectively, from the British that the Government of the United States should extin- Crown, by their successful struggle for independence. guish the whole Indian title of one of the States, at the The next point of examination I propose, is the conactual cost and expense of the General Government; and stitution of the United States. Through the various stages the execution of this condition is secured, by making it of our political existence, the powers of the confederone of the considerations of the surrender of an exten- ated States have undergone various modifications, unsive tract of waste land. Georgia has surrendered the til all the power now vested in the Government of the soil, territory, and jurisdiction, of the States of Mississippi United States is expressed and circumscribed by that inand Alabama, to the General Government. So far, then, strument. Nor need we have looked elsewhere, in the inthis places this portion of country in the precise situation vestigation of this question, unless historic facts had been of the Northwestern territory, as surrendered by Virginia, necessary to explain some of its provisions; and I think that with the single proviso, that one article in the ordinance the subject now before us derives that advantage. I have for the government of that territory shall not be here en- shown that, in the progress of our Government, cerforced, viz: the article prohibiting slavery. Is there any tain powers, for certain specified purposes, were found thing to be deduced from the surrenders, on the part of necessary to be conveyed to, and centered in, one head, to the different States, which I have here thought proper, at wit: the means of defraying the expenses of a common some length, to introduce, favorable to the treaty-making cause, and of raising a revenue for the payment of a debt policy of the General Government with our Indian tribes? created in a common struggle; and, in addition to these, On the contrary, I think it is conclusively shown, that, in for controlling and regulating a national intercourse with every instance, except one, this whole matter is exclusive- foreign Powers, and of regulating all foreign commerce, ly retained in the States making the surrenders. That ex- as well as commerce between the several States. These ception is in the case of Georgia; and the extinguishment were the points that presented difficulties; and it was to of her Indian title is guarantied. Indeed, no one will control these that one common umpire was to be created. contend that, if any thing is granted by the surrenders, it is not proper that the thing granted should actually be expressed in the surrender; nor can any contend that any thing is given up by the surrender that is not embraced in it. Therefore, in every instance, the whole of the terms of the surrender are applied exclusively to the country surrendered. The country, therefore, retained, either in government, soil, or jurisdiction, is in no degree affected.

tions.

In

That umpire is the General Government, and it is created by the constitution of the United States. In the history of the different stages of our political existence, was it found that any thing belonging exclusively to, and confined within the limits of, any of the States, claimed a reference to this general umpire? It is thought not. But, on the other hand, it is considered evident, that any thing that did not concern the whole was not to be matter for the management of the power created by the whole. I think I have shown that, anterior to these several other words, any thing that was purely of State concern surrenders, so far as the Articles of Confederation went, was still to continue so; and a reference to the instrument the power of controlling this subject belonged exclusively itself will clearly sustain this position. The powers of to the several States. If it belonged to the States origi- Congress pertain to subjects of general concern; and so it nally members of the Confederacy, it certainly belonged, is with all other powers of the General Government. But the in the same manner, to the States subsequently admitted point now under review is embraced in the 8th section o into that Confederacy. But it may be said that the States the 1st article: in enumerating the powers of Congress, subsequently admitted were admitted upon certain condi- with others, it is said, "The Congress shall have power This is admitted. But what were those condi- to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the tions? They are precisely those stipulated for in the several States, and with the Indian tribes." Does this terms and conditions of the surrender of the country clause grant the power of making a treaty for the extinction which they now embrace in their limits. The leading of Indian title to lands within any State? Or does the foland prominent conditions, then, are, that their constitu- lowing clause divest the States of the power of purchasing tions shall be democratic; that there shall be no interfer- Indian titles to lands within their respective limits? Secence in the sale of the public lands; that certain navigable tion 10: "No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or streams shall be forever free to the citizens of all the States; confederation, grant letters of marque and reprisal, coin and that, besides these, to be on a perfect footing of money, emit bills of credit, make any thing but gold and equality with the other States. Some doubt the consti- silver coin a tender in payment of debts, pass any bill of tutionality of these conditions, and say that no State can be attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation admitted into the Union without a perfect equality in every of contracts, or grant any title of nobility." Is this intendrespect. This question does not come up. It is enough ed to prevent a State regulating the concerns of her own for the purpose under consideration to show, that, so far people within her own limits? or is it intended to prevent as regulating Indian concerns goes, they are not of the sti- these things, here enumerated, from being done, with pulations: therefore, whatever rights, on this point, pertain others, foreign to her self, so far as the treaty, alliance, or to the old States, unquestionably belong to the new ones. confederation, is concerned? It is conceived that the first Upon the ground that this right ceased by the State surren-clause does not grant the power to the General Govern dering the territory and jurisdiction to the General Government of making treaties with Indians; and the second does ment, it is claimed to have passed into such new State as not prevent the States from exercising any power on this has been formed, so soon as the consent of Congress has subject heretofore belonging to them. But a few remarks been obtained for its admission into the Union. In other will bear me out in this position. Can the Congress, unwords, all the power and jurisdiction over the surrendered der her power of regulating commerce with the Indian territory belonged alone to the General Government, dur- tribes, remove thousands of Indians from one State, and ing its territorial vassalage, and, with the sole exception of plant them in another? Or can Congress, if any State the conditions of admission into the Union, are there any ex- thought proper to interpose, take Indians from such State? ceptions or conditions in favor of the General Government, if Suppose a State should grant her Indian population the even these be such? I do, therefore, claim that, in this re- same rights and privileges that are granted to her citizens, spect, there is no shadow of difference in the rights of the and they partook of, and exercised, such rights and privi

JAN. 16, 1829.]

Georgia Claims.

[H. OF R.

leges, could Congress interpose, and prohibit this policy? humbly conceived that this clause of the ordinance does Suppose they were made competent to civil rule, could not change the character of the policy originally existing they be deprived of this right by any act of Congress? If in relation to Indians. But, before I proceed farther, these questions are answered in the negative, it will at once another clause in the before recited ordinance must be present itself, that, if a State interpose obstacles to, other noticed; some have said that it is conclusive on this questhan purely regulating, commerce with Indian tribes, that tion; it is the third article, and is as follows: "Religion, Congress has not the power to remove them; and, on the morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good governother hand, if a State exercise a power over, and grant a ment and the happiness of mankind, schools, and the means privilege to, the Indians within her limits, Congress can- of education, shall forever be encouraged; the utmost not prohibit it. It must follow, then, that whatever of good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; power is here given, must be over those who are not under their lands and property shall never be taken from them the immediate and paramount authoritity of State jurisdic- without their consent; and in their property, rights, and tion. Otherwise, to what absurd consequences would it liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless lead! Might not the President and Senate, at any time, in just and lawful wars, authorized by Congress; but laws destroy and overrun any one of the States in which there founded in justice and humanity shall, from time to time, are public lands, by removing the Indians from any other be made, for preventing wrongs being done to them, and State to such lands? Might not the whole of Mississippi for preserving peace and friendship with them." be granted to the Choctaws, Illinois to the Pottawatamies The first consideration that presents itself, in relation to or Winnebagoes, and Alabama to the Muscogees or the last recited article, is, how far this is now a principle Creeks? These ideas will be said to be absurd; but these of the National Government, in reference to all the Indian ideas are constitutional if the Indian treaty-making power tribes, or is it a legislative act, municipal in its character, be so. But, in addition to this, where is the power to pre- and exclusively applicable to a region of country in which vent this same treaty-making power from removing Indian soil and jurisdiction were exclusively in the National Gotribes, if you please, and locating them upon the public vernment? This was so: for it is solely applicable to the grounds in this District? Who can prevent the same territory that but three years before this time belonged authority from filling your arsenals, your forts, and other exclusively to Virginia: for, let it be remembered that this national domains or possessions, with this greatly favored ordinance is exclusive in its operation to the lands lately people? But I am answered and told that the States in surrendered by a State, which State, anterior to this surwhich there are public lands can exercise no control, be- render, could have wholly disregarded such ordinance, cause the land on which the Indian lives, when the title is had it then been made. So far, therefore, from this weakextinguished, becomes a part of the public lands, and is ening my positions, it certainly gives them strength, and beyond the jurisdiction of a State Government; and, to is fully developed in the history of the day, as being the sustain this ground, I may be referred to the 4th article of then received opinion, and thenceforth became the adoptthe Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the ed practice of the National Government. What is this hisUnited States Northwest of the river Ohio, which says: tory? It has, in part, been already noticed; it pertained "The said territory, and the States which may be form-to the surrender of the waste lands. ed therein, shall forever remain a part of this Confederacy system of depredation and continual warfare was waged of the United States of America, subject to the Articles of upon the savages, and that too with the sanction of the Confederation, and to such alterations therein as shall be Government that claimed jurisdiction to the land. This constitutionally made, and to all acts and ordinances of system not only endangered but sacrificed the quiet of not the United States in Congress assembled, conformable their Indian wars, so called, but of all the contiguous merely the people of the State, who were sanctioned in thereto. The inhabitants and settlers in said territory States. The surrender being made, we find for which, shall be subject to pay a part of the Federal debts contracted, or to be contracted, and a proportional part of among the other considerations enumerated, "that the necessary and reasonable expenses incurred, &c. in mainthe expenses of Government, to be apportioned on them taining forts and garrisons within, and for the defence, or by Congress, according to the same common rule and man-in acquiring any part, of the territory so ceded or relinner by which apportionments thereof shall be made on the other States; and the taxes for paying their proportion ordinance was therefore adopted for the government of quished, shall be fully reimbursed by the States." This shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the surrendered territory, and over the Indians therein, the Legislatures of the district or districts, or new States, and is evidently the assumption of a policy, as contradis as in the original States, within the time agreed upon by tinguished from the policy that had heretofore characterthe United States in Congress assembled. The Legisla-ized the government which had just now ceased to exist tures of those new States or districts shall never interfere over this same region of country. I look, therefore, upon with the primary disposal of the soil by the United States this as being confirmatory of what I have heretofore conin Congress assembled, nor with any regulations Congress tended for, to wit: that, if the General Government wishes may find necessary for securing the title in such soil to to enforce this policy in relation to Indian tribes, the lands the bona fide purchasers; no tax shall be imposed on lands on which such tribes lived must be excluded from the the property of the United States; and in no case shall limits of any State; and this is farther exemplified by this non-resident proprietors be taxed higher than residents. clause never having been introduced into any act specifyThe navigable waters leading into the Mississippi and St.ing the conditions of admission into the Union of any new Lawrence, and the carrying places between the same, State, not even the States formed of the territory over shall be common highways, and forever free, as well to the which this ordinance was first made operative. inhabitants of the said territory as to the citizens of the United States, and those of any other States that may be admitted into the Confederacy, without any tax, impost, or duty, therefor."

a

Until this surrender,

If the pow

Thus, in relation to this question, I think I have presented the fundamental principles on which, if it exists in the General Government, it must assuredly rest. er to make treaties with Indians residing within the limits Has this clause, directly or indirectly, any grant of pow-of any of the States is now claimed for the General Goer to the Confederacy, or any prohibition to the States, in vernment, it must be derived from some clause or clauses relation to the question under consideration? or is it not of the Articles of Confederation, in the voluntary relinknown that the soil may be in the General Government, quishments made by the States in the conveyance of their and the people living thereon subject to the municipal re- waste lands, or in the constitution of the United States, gulations of the State in which that soil may lie? It is which I have troubled your patience and consumed your

H. OF R.]

Georgia Claims.

[JAN. 16, 1829.

time in bringing into view. For my own part, after this to make this legitimate extinguishment? If the States are thorough examination, I am the more firmly convinced of seised in fee, they have the power to convey; if they have the correctness of the positions I have endeavored to the power to convey, they must have the right to occupy, maintain. or to place the party to whom conveyance is made in pos But I am referred to decisions of the highest judicial tri-session; and it is contended that the case is not altered if bunal of this nation. To look here for authority to inves- the soil is in the General Government, and the jurisdiction tigate questions of sovereign power and right, is conceding in the State. Georgia, therefore, claimed, as a con a point not claimed by some of the ablest expounders of sideration of her surrender, that in her limits the General the principles of our fundamental law; but it is not neces- Government should extinguish the remnant of Indian right. sary for my purpose, though the question is one of sover- Could it have been exacted of the General Government eignty, whether in the States or the General Government without this stipulation? But, to proceed in our exami a certain power be vested; to raise a question, I will, there- nation of the commentators on the principles I have laid fore, look to the decisions of the Supreme Court; and down; and, next in course, I will take up the case, adthough much doubt exists, if it be not positively certain to judicated in the same tribunal, of the State of New Jersey the contrary, whether that court has ever had the point against Wilson. Does this case touch the question, now presented for adjudication. But some think that or does the case of later date, of first 1812, the opinion is given, and for it refer me to the case of Fletcher second, 1816, Preston vs. Browder? Neither of them, it vs. Peck. This case is one of such long standing (being is believed, does. The first involved the principle pronearly eighteen years old) that I will not consume time by hibited in the constitution of the United States, of a State stating it, but proceed directly to the part of the opinion passing a law impairing the obligation of a contract; and of Chief Justice Marshall, which embraces (if any part the second is purely local, declaring the illegality of an endoes) the point under consideration. It is as follows: try on Indian lands, when such entry was previously pro "The counsel for the plaintiff rest their argument on a hibited by an act of the Legislature of North Carolina. single proposition. They contend that the reservation for is in confirmation of the doctrine I contend for, to wit: If, however, any thing is deducible from these cases, it the use of the Indians, contained in the proclamation of that over the Indians, within any one of the States, the 1763, excepts the lands on the Western waters from the colonies within whose bounds they would otherwise have Legislature of such State has the legal and constitutional been, and that they were acquired by the Revolutionary ble judgment it cannot: but some may answer that this is control. Can this conclusion be contested? In my hum war. All acquisitions during the war, it is contended, were made by the joint arms, for the joint benefit of the strange, that such a practice should have obtained and United States, and not for the benefit of any particular State. Government, and passively submitted to by the States. been so long uninterruptedly prosecuted by the General "The court does not understand the proclamation as it The answer to this is, if the principle is not sanctioned by is understood by the counsel for the plaintiff. The reser-the constitution, it was wrong in its adoption; and if wrong vation for the use of the Indians appears to be a tempo- originally, no practice, no custom, can put it right; no cusrary arrangement, suspending for a time the settlement of the country reserved, and the powers of the Royal Go-in this we claim the superior excellence of our form of tom, no matter how venerable, can become law here; and vernor within the territory reserved; but is not conceived Government to all others on earth. The beginning and to amount to an alteration of the boundaries of the colony. end of all the power vested in the General Government If the language of the proclamation be, in itself, doubtful, is in our written constitution. No combination of men or the commissions subsequent thereto which were given to circumstances can ever, therefore, alter the form of our the Governor of Georgia entirely remove the doubt. "The question, whether the vacant lands within the tion of the whole body of the people; and in this consists institutions, without the knowledge and constitutional sancUnited States became a joint property, or belonged to the their strong pledge of independence in themselves, and separate States, was a momentous question, which at one time threatened to shake the American Confederacy to its honesty and virtue in those they may at any time clothe foundation. It is the opinion of the court that the particu-ed under the constitution. I think I may here venture with authority. But the power under discussion is claimlar land stated in the declaration, appears, from this special the assertion, that I have clearly shown that it is not emverdict, to lie within the State of Georgia, and that the braced in the clause that grants the power to regulate State of Georgia had power to grant it. Some difficulty was produced by the language of the covenant, and of the pleadings. It was doubted whether a State can be seised in fee of lands subject to the Indian title, and whether a decision that they were scised in fee might not be construed to amount to a decision that their grantee might maintain an ejectment for them, notwithstanding that title. The majority of the court is of opinion that the nature of the Indian title, which is certainly to be respected by all courts, until legitimately extinguished, is not such as to be absolutely repugnant to seisin in fee on the part of the State. Judgment affirmed with costs.

66

found in the prohibition, contained in that instrument, of any of the States to enter into "treaties," &c. may be conclusive arguments; but as I rely either upon the princiurged. I think that on this point I have already adduced ples expressed in the constitution itself, to know what the principles, rather than upon argument, I shall claim farconstitution is, or upon the able commentators upon those ther indulgence, while I present upon this particular point the full views of Alexander Hamilton, clearly and unequivocally expressed in his No. 75 of the Federalist, and afterwards most deliberately sanctioned and quoted by James Madison, in the first number of his Helvetius: Mr. H. says:

commerce with Indian tribes." But that it is still to be

It was in vain that it was urged that the lands in controversy were not in Georgia, in consequence of the proclamation of 1763, which I have already noticed: it was in Though several writers on the subject of Govern vain that it was urged that the State of Georgia could not ment place that power (of making treaties) in the class of make the grant, because the Indian title was not extin-Executive authorities; yet this is evidently an arbitrary guished. Nothing is admitted by the proclamation adverse disposition: for, if we attend carefully to its opera to the right of Georgia in the soil; and nothing is admitted tion, it will be found to partake more of the Legisto the Indian but the mere right of occupancy; or how is lative than of the Executive character, though it does not it that seisin in fee is sanctioned in the State during the seem strictly to fall within the definition of either of them. Indian occupancy? It is true the court admits that the In-The essence of the legislative authority is to enact laws, dian title should be respected by all courts, until legiti- or, in other words, to prescribe rules for the regulation of mately extinguished. Had not Georgia the power and right society; while the execution of the laws, and the employ

JAN. 16, 1829.]

ment of the common strength, either for this purpose or and they arise from the thorough conviction that the for the common defence, seem to comprise all the func- question of power is settled. I contend that, if the power tions of the Executive Magistrate. The power of making existed, the present system is impolitic-it is not humane. treaties is plainly neither the one nor the other; it relates Millions have been lavished upon our Indians by our Goneither to the execution of the subsisting laws, nor to the vernment; and if money could have raised them to a level enaction of new ones; and still less to an exertion of the with ourselves, they would long since have been so. With an common strength. Its objects are contracts with foreign unstinted hand, thousands were annually appropriated; but nations, which have the force of law, but derive it from the these thousands, so far from benefiting them, only put obligations of good faith. They are not rules prescribed it in their power to minister to their own vices, and make by the sovereign to the subject, but agreements between them the miserable objects of dishonest traffic. This, sovereign and sovereign.' therefore, makes it a matter of serious concern to the Mr. Madison, before introducing the quotation which I States in which they may be: for, if they are to remain, to have read, uses this language: "That I may not ramble debase them is to injure such States: if they are to remain, beyond prescribed limits, I shall content myself with an humanity, as well as the soundest policy, would call on the extract from a work which entered into a systematic ex-authorities of such States to pursue such measures as planation and defence of the constitution; and to which would make them fit for society. Withdraw your annuithere has frequently been ascribed some influence in con- ties; partition their lands; make them the lords of their ciliating the public assent to the Government in the form own soil; give them the pride that results from a separate proposed. Three circumstances conspire in giving weight|independence. But these things are of doubtful practicato this contemporary exposition. It was made at a time bility now. What, then, should Congress do? Congress when no application to persons or measures could bias: has within her constitutional control a large and vast extent the opinion given was not transiently mentioned, but for- of fertile land-of salubrious climate. Designate within this mally and critically elucidated; it related to a point in the region a home for the savage of all tribes; withdraw from constitution which must consequently have been viewed those tribes within any State all control, and withhold all anas of importance in the public mind. The passage relates nuities: say to them, if you will go where we can control and to the power of making treaties," &c. govern you, homes shall be guarantied, and your repose unReflect but a moment on what I have just presented to disturbed. Give them the means of removing, and subsist you, and no one can contend that a treaty is any thing else them aftertheir arrival till they can rear their own provisions. than an "agreement between sovereign and sovereign:" Instead of money, give them to eat and to wear; and, for all its objects are contracts with foreign nations, whose force these, guaranty the faith of your Government, and preis derived from the obligations of good faith; and this was vent future aggressions by the approach of our advenan exposition given without bias, by its application to per- turous white population: set apart a tract of country on sons or to measures, not transiently mentioned, but for- which neither white man nor Indian shall reside; make it a mally and critically elucidated. Did these constitutional neutral territory, and protect it, if necessary, with your expounders dream that any one of our Indian tribes, within arms: adopt for their government, in this new home west the chartered limits of any one of our States, was to bear of the Mississippi, such regulations as your wisdom may the name of sovereign, or was to this Government a foreign dictate, and their wants may call for. Let their happiness, nation, and thereby become a competent party to the and improvement, and prosperity, be the only motive of formation of a contract, the force of which is derived from your action. Plant your schools, your religious instructhe obligations of good faith? Good faith in an unchris-ters there, and there your workshops; and keep from tianised and uninformed savage, whose law was his own them your whiskey venders, called Indian traders, and will, and whose deity was the means of sustaining animal all will be well. To this all the States will assent; those existence; whose home was within the admitted limits of which have the Indians, and those which have none. the very States that gave existence to the Union! this, and the constitution will be inviolate, and future Can this people, then, be sovereign? Can their nations generations will applaud your wisdom and your philanbe foreign nations? Can they be governed by a contract thropy.

Do

whose force is good faith? Nay, more: can there be a I have taken a greater latitude than is perhaps justified; spectacle more supremely ridiculous than the one ex-but how could I say that I regarded not the assent of the hibited in the singularly strange anomaly of a portion of Indian to the execution of the instrument called a treaty, the people within a State being greater than the State unless I showed that such an instrument was not sanctioned itself; possessing a power withheld from the State by the by any authority which gave power to the General Governassent of that State, centered in another power, which ment? I think I have shown this: therefore, I conclude power derived a portion of its very being by such assent. that what is due to Georgia should be paid; and if there In other words, the States constitute the Confederacy; the be a surplus, in pursuance of the liberal principles which States divest themselves of certain powers; a people with- have ever characterized our Government in their interin those States, however, retain this power, and show an course with Indian tribes, I would give it to the Indians, if instance where the part of the whole is stronger than the they called for it; but I would give them a home where whole. I shall pursue this branch of the question no they could convert it to their substantial comfort, and not farther. I think that my position is most fully supported. where they are to use it for the sole purpose of ministerThere are other points, incidental, not connected with ing to their vices. the power, which it may be proper to notice: in doing Mr. GILMER rose, and said that, after the ample diswhich I shall detain the House but a short time. How cussion which the subject before the Committee had reis it that Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and South ceived, he should content himself with stating one or two Carolina, have Indians within their limits who are under no facts connected with it, and adding a few necessary comcontrol of Congress, and with whose head men no treaties ments. The first question [said Mr. G.] which presented are made by the agents of the General Government, and itself for determination was, to whom the unexpended basolemnly ratified by the President, with the advice of the lance of the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars belongSenate? During the last session, a treaty made with the ed, after satisfying the Georgia claimants. He had no Indians of New York was presented to the Senate: it was doubt but that it belonged to the United States. When, not ratified, upon the very principle, I presume, that I however, he admitted this, he wished it to be understood, have contended for--that it was a business of New York that, according to his interpretation of the contract between and not that of the General Government. There are the United States, Georgia, and the Creeks, all parties supother considerations which I feel bound here to present, posed that, when that contract was faithfully executed, VOL. V.-30

H. OF R.]

Georgia Claims.

[JAN. 16, 1829.

remain of the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, after satisfying all the Georgia claimants.

there would, most probably, be no balance whatever. Mr. G. said that this matter would be better understood by a knowledge of the circumstances under which that con- Mr. G. said that he would proceed to show that the tract was entered into. In 1821, commissioners, on the United States' Government had not done justice to the part of the United States, proceeded to make a treaty citizens of Georgia in its adjudication of their demands with the Creek Indians, for the extinguishment of their against the Creek Indians. They had been told that they title to lands in Georgia, in pursuance of an appropriation of should be satisfied, because that adjudication was made by money specially made by Congress for that purpose; that, an arbiter chosen by themselves. The proper answer to according to instructions given to those commissioners by which, [Mr. G. said] was, that that circumstance aggrathe War Department, (and here he wished the Chairman vated the feelings excited by the injustice done them, esof the Committee on Indian Affairs to correct him if he pecially as that arbiter had gained in proportion to their were in error) they were not to exceed ten cents per acre loss. This Government never can compensate the citi in price, for what they should acquire of the Creeks. zens of Georgia for the injuries they received from their That, accordingly, the commissioners had contracted with savage neighbors. Those injuries could not be estimated that tribe that it should cede to the United States, for the be- in money. Mr. G. said that the most rigid rules had been nefit of Georgia, four and a half millions of acres, for which imposed by the Government upon itself, in allowing the they were to receive four hundred and fifty thousand dollars. claims of the citizens of Georgia. He did not intend to That, after these terms had been agreed upon, but before say that the Government intended thereby to do injustice to the treaty had been signed, commissioners on the part of those citizens. He thought that the peculiar circumstanGeorgia presented to the Creek chiefs, claims of the citizens ces under which those claims had originated had never of that State against their tribe, amounting to the sum of been considered by the Government. Had that been done, two hundred and eighty thousand dollars, and required that he believed it would have been convinced that the two they should be adjusted. It was then agreed, between hundred and fifty thousand dollars was a very inadequate the several parties, that the Creeks should receive of the satisfaction of those claims. United States two hundred thousand dollars, in money, Mr. G. then proceeded to say, that, during the Revofor their land, and the remaining two hundred and fifty lutionary war, the inhabitants of Georgia were, at one thousand dollars, which they were to have received, should time, almost entirely driven beyond its limits, by the Creek be paid by the United States to the State of Georgia, for Indians and their allies. At its conclusion, feelings of the benefit of her citizens, who had received injuries from hostility had not ceased to exist. Repeated injuries were the Creeks; subject, however, to the investigation and inflicted upon the frontier inhabitants, which the weakness determination of the President of the United States. In of the State Government rendered it unable to punish. pursuance of which agreement, [Mr. G. observed] the Attempts were frequently made to conciliate the Creeks. commissioners of Georgia gave to the Creek tribe a re- Treaty after treaty was made, from 1783 to 1790. They ceipt in full of all claims, debts, damages, and property, were, however, broken as often as made, without the which the citizens of that State had against that tribe, Government having the power to enforce them. The prior to 1802. And the United States agreed to pay to frontiers were very extensive, and the population so scatthe citizens of Georgia, those claims, debts, damages, and tered that the Indians had an easy access into the country, property, provided the same did not exceed two hundred every where, for the purposes of plunder. The people and fifty thousand dollars. Mr. G. observed that each were compelled to protect themselves by fortifications of of the parties to this contract seemed to have had equal their own making. Block houses were erected by them, reason to be satisfied. The Indians had sold their land and manned by voluntary service, in order to intercept and for a larger consideration than usual, and, with two hun-punish the predatory parties of the Indians. This service dred and fifty thousand dollars of the price, had paid an ac- was extremely burthensome to inhabitants just arrived count which the Georgians had against them of thirty years' from distant parts of the United States, and with scanty standing, most of which they had frequently acknowledg-means of support. Mr. G. continued to say that the loss ed to be just; and amounting to the sum of two hundred of slaves, horses, and cattle, could not then be repaired and eighty thousand dollars. The Georgians were very by the people, as they could at the present time. The much pleased, because, by the construction which the value of such property was far greater then than at preUnited States had put upon the constitution, their own sent. The country was to be cleared of its forests to fit State Government had not the power of compelling the it for cultivation. Labor was not to be hired. There was Creeks to restore their property, or otherwise to do them no supplying the place of a lost horse or stolen cattle, bejustice; by which, previously, it had seemed as if they cause the people, in moving from Virginia and North were to have been deprived entirely of redress for their Carolina, found it difficult to carry with them a sufficient injuries. And the commissioners of the United States supply for their own use. The loss of cattle [Mr. G. were gratified, because they had been enabled not only to said] was particularly felt, because thereby the people perform the purpose for which they had been originally were deprived of their most usual and cheapest means appointed, by procuring a valuable tract of country for of subsistence. One of the principal inducements to the the State of Georgia, but also to render an essential service settlement of the country had been the advantages which to a large class of injured citizens. There was also a pos- its extensive range presented, abounding, as it did, with sibility, that, by assuming the payment of the claims of grass and cane.

the citizens of Georgia, with the power given to the Presi- The exuberance of the natural vegetation of the coundent to adjudicate those claims, the United States might try, instead of proving an advantage to the settlers, had have a less sum to advance than that which it would been frequently the occasion of their greatest losses, by otherwise have been obliged to have paid the Indians. It exposing their horses and stock to the thieving habits of was to be remarked, too, [Mr. G. said] that the United the Indians. But the injuries [Mr. G. said] which the States' commissioners had taken care that this Govern- frontier inhabitants suffered, by having their property ment should not, in any event, pay more than two hun-plundered and destroyed, were accompanied by evils the dred and fifty thousand dollars, and with a farther bene- extent of which could only be known to those who had ficial proviso, that whatever sum should be found due might felt them. He said it was his fortune to have been a nabe paid in five annual instalments, and without interest. tive of the county which bordered both on the Creek and Mr. G. observed that, if the view he had taken of the con- Cherokee hunting grounds. He could yet recollect the tract between all the parties was correct, he thought there horrid views of the Indian scalping knife which were precould be no difficulty as to the disposition of what should sented to him in the dreams of his childhood. From the