Constitutional Whig. [volume], August 06, 1830, Image 4

About Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832

Image provided by: Library of Virginia; Richmond, VA

                
MgggMgg- 1 Jli. ■■ L——■ ’“'M
SPEECH OF AIK. S'lfoRRS. OF N Y.
(COftTIXftnj )
Tin- Seneca nation still cUnu to hold tlitir lands un
der t.neir original title. But'-'icw York has no inter
est in them, i'ho pre-t mpjive right was conveyed
• to Massachusetts ti'an^ yca|s ago, und is held by in
dividuals under purchases flora that Stute. 1 have
noticed in the Executive Journal, tout, on the 24th of
February, 1827, a conveyance by treaty from tho Be
neca nation for pun of their lands to some ol these
individuals, made m the presence of a Commissioner
of the Um.ed States, was iruu before tin Senate by
Mr. Adams. On ihc29thui February, 1828, a reso
lution to ratify it was negatived, the Senate betng<
equally divided on the question. On the 2ttth March,
the following resolution was submitted by oue of the
Senators from Georgia, (Mr Berneu;)
' Resolved, That oy the refusal of the Senate te
rt» ify tne treaty witti tho Seneca Indians, it is_Jiot in
tended to express auy disapprobation of tho terms ol
the contract entered into by the muividuais who were
jnmien to tnat contract, but merely to disclaim any
poWer over the subject mutter.”
This resolution was modified on the *lth of April,
by omitting the latter words, utiu inserting so tis to
read,-‘to disclaim Uie necessity of an inieilerence by
the Senate witn the subject matter,’ and pasced in
tliat lorai. These proceedings struck tne as some
what novel, aud l tirul that the {Senate departed in this
instance from ns lormer practice uu me same subject
undcT Mr. Jctlbisou’s adinaiistrution The troaueB
between the Beuecas and Unv<.r Phelps, ns won as
the lloiJand Land Coiftpau/, for perfecting tne same
pre emptivu right, wer© laid uelorc the tSe,.ate bv Air.
Jefferson, and formally rallied like other treaties_
There Was but oue disstiiiip^ vote, (Mr. Weight of
Alarylaud.f Neither Mr. Jotierson or the Benate ap
pear to nave then Uiougui n^ii this was an interle
-rencc in any matter bi-youe their power. How soon
afterAurds it has been discovered to be bo, 1 cannot
6ay. it may, perhaps, be interred that this treaty
was considered more in Hie nature of a private con
tract Until a political treaty iu Hiu sense ol the Con
stitution, and I ho conclusion to which tne {Senate
came may admit of tuai explanation. But I think
that tne proceedings loilowcu too close upon tho Geor
gia resolutions to iiu> noi izi us to consider tt as a grave
precedent in its bearing un mo question ol Btate so
veuriguiy.
a ne Cuiumiucu ii&vc rclefieti au to mi expression
found 111 uii tuniiiOn doiveicu in nm Kiupimau C-ourl
ut iView Voi K, Oy inc Cniel Justice, in which tuey1
c'aaio to tne ounci-isipi?, mat me iud.aus vveru to ue
considered us c.u/.ecs m l lie CHd.c, nun capable of ta
king oy descent, i iic^ u? ve copied into meir report
an uxiiact O; uad a cozen words, m wrucu tne Chiet
Jus l' e Said, ii.ai ne Ktii w oi uo nail way doctrine ;
on tins stii/je. t.” i. w ouid'oe »|une cuougu lor ti^w
Yorii iosa>, m auawei m mis cas , luat mis opinion
wus alter tv <u us reversed iu tiie Court oi ijriurs, witu
great uuuu.imty, tt:;u mis ve«y pom. was then funy cx
aiiiuu d by tue Ciiaiicciior. iia. it .vou.d nave uuen 1
mure tuir to have tutmoucil us uerc witu a somewliat
Jargcr extract iroui tne opniiou oi tne cmci Justice
The comexi woum nave down us tnoro clearly the
views wiucb led me court to liio conclusion to which
they Caine- Ain *ays mat me Court **do not meau
to say tuat the condition o» me iudiau indue, at tor
mer aud remote penous, nas been mat oi suujeots or
citizens ol tue bUtc. lucir couuitiou nas ueeu
gradually cuauguig, until tuey nave mat every at
inoute oi ooveieigiity, aud OeCome enuiely duptn
tleut upon, ano ouojc t to oui g .vurutneut i iuiovv
ol no nail-way (lutvriut on .ii.a a..ujeo.. now, sir,
i think mat me tan iinpuitoi tnia e» miner aga.uat
the position .axcu oy me cuimm.tee. vv o uii "admit
tnat there lo no nail way dec.rme ou Lins po.u. JoV
cty caudia man wuiauUiit .00, Uia. a .rme 01 Indians
\\itiun ally ol tne b ates, may so iai dwiuute awuy,
or abandon tueir rigu. to seu-guveruincut, ana so iar
dissolve tueir original ubu.uiiu.,a, tuu. tmy may oe
considered, on tue soundest pi mcipics, to uaveoecouie
merged in our society, aim cxunoi tor all political
purposes iia scjiiiruic uunujLiuuieica It would uo vt;iy
en3y iu rcJer yoc io cuesua ui uioi sort in iHeo
land- Ah', fcituei Justice oa.u emu. too tmjc .-»»q come
Wncn tne Court, ..n tnose principles oniy, ungnt so
coneitler the inuiaus in JSew Jtoia u was not a
question mvoiviug strict pnucip.es 01 municipal raw
merely. The (Jouit considered tuat such vvus ,u iact
their CoiHiiliuu Hji lIiu Case is reversed, and .uo
law ol the Glam is .-emeu to hum day Us the Court ol
Lxrors ieit it. Auo Cruel Justice, However, uo
where denied me ong.uai nauve rigjn. ol tee Inmans
to aoveiieguty i’liuL was expieoly exclaimed. AJe
asserted uo i.gntn ol c-ujaem over them or tueir
land's, ile sa.d iiuLOiug 01 disrogaiuuig Audi u
preieusious to meir lauds, or mat any oi mo cui
onies of Glares nad ever iruiii.aiued that they had
no ngma ol sovereign.y or soil, there iMiiotinng
Oi .bis or any tuiog mu. countenances it iu tne opim
ion 01 the Court. Gach doctrines as me© tyoa.d
have staitied tue morui sense oi tne t>iaLo, and con
tradicted noff tvuoie uisLoiy. And now lar, Gir, al
ter ail, could me committee have piuSseii his opin
ion iiu Uieir service, ii u nau never oeen overrated:1-—
II referred only lo the ceuditiuu uf the indiaus in
York. At neither apeaks uor treats 01 any
omuia, uor does n profess to suggest any principles
winch reach the case before us here. Upon these, it
is si.cut- ii is vc#y osviods bow iic Court wore led
to tue conclusion to which mey carne. Ro ouc cun
read thisopuuou and tod te see that tuey rehed cmei
Jy Oh the eA’ect 01 tne act 01 April 12, 18-.U. The
hi&toiy ol ibis uci 13 Web known lo every lawyer in
tlial Glaie. Soonoiigtze, a Gcueca iudian, had been
indicted for killing an iudian woman within the Gen
ed lauds Gjie uad been put to death under the au
thority of the Geneca Chiefs and Sachems fie olead
cilto the jurisdiction of the Stale tribunal, and the
question came before the Supreme Court, for tiicir
opinion, in 1021. It was fully discussed by tho At
torney General, and the Counsel for Soonon^izf.
(&r. Oakley,)and ihe learning, research, and ability
displayed iu that argument, will be lung remembered
at the bar, and in ihe courts ol New York I recol
lect well ihe general impression at the bar at that
time on the point. The Court held tbo cose under
advisement until the next wimer. They found no
principles on which they maid safely affirm in a judi
cial opinion, the jurisdiction of the Slate Court.—
They reported ihe case to the Governor, and recom
mended that toe question should bo submitted to the
Legislature. Tbo act of tRJ*J was passed. There
was, however, no Indian land 10 acquire. No code
of Indian crimes was enacted, nor were Indians dis
qualified to testify in any case The object and spir
it of it is very manifest in the recital winch precedes
if* it states that the Senecas hud exercised the
power of punishing, even capitaliy, individuals of
their tribe; that the sole und exclusive cognizance »f
crimes belongs to the S a-e; and that to protect the
Indians this jurisdiction ought to be asserted to that
extern. Now, sir. what was the ca.-e before the
Legislature, and on what motives did they act* They
saw that death was inflicted upon the Senecas under
lh/}ir bloody code and summary Indian forms, with
no regard to proof or any security fur the fair inves
tigation of truth. Crimes, too, were of the most
farmful character. Sorcery and witchcraft were
nmongthem. Tho system was, in itself, little less
than murder. There vva some form or mockery of
i' quiry before the Chiefs, but nothing like trial _
The foundation of what we call punishment, had no
reference among them to the protection of their so
ciety. but whs rather the infliction of personal retal
iation or private revenge I believe that the cast of
Hoonongree partook omewhat of that character, but
i do not recollect the circumstances well enough to
ray that I may not b- rniS'aken on that point. Tne
intention of the Legislators was to rescue them fr.-in
this condition—to extend 10 hem, if it could possibly
be done, some security against the inhuman proceed
ings of this Indian code-»-to afford them a fair and
impartial trial—a trial by testimony—the aid of
Counsel and the security of a jury. It was felt that
the State owed it to humanity—to the unfortunate
people cost upoa Jjer proteetior^to opbare^
m
ter, and her responsibility to the opinion of mankind,
to make that effort to arrest this course of violence
and waste ol human life II tho act can be sustain
ed, it is undoubtedly desirable mat u should be. But
this is not the first occasion on whten I have express
ed my own opinion, thut it left the whole mutter ex
actly where it found it It has once been my profes
sional duty to examine tiiai question in us bearing
upon another case. Tho sovereignty ot the Senecas
is yet ummpeached, if it should do found that they
' were nut subject to the jurisdiction of the IState
when this act was passed. That question yet re
mains to be tried. However benevolent the intentions
ot the Legislature may have been, yet if it shoald be
(found tiiai the couscm of ihe SSpneca nation to the
exercise of this power was necessary, the Courts
will pause before they assume jurisdiction under it.—
1 am not aware that mo act has ever been executed.
Ii was, shortly alter its paesage, and in the first caso
which brougiu up the questiou as to tho condition of
the Indiausiu another lorni, that tho Supreme Court,
relying ju the inferences to be drawu from that law,
decided that they were citizens, and subject, like ail
others, to ho Jaws ot tbo State But since the re
versal of this case, the opiutou of Chancellor Kent is
considered to be tno law ol tho Jdtato How-much
aid then, to the doctrines ol tiie Report of the Com
mittee on ludian Affairs, cau be druwn from the
course of judicial decisions in Now York, even sanoe
the passage of tile act of 1U22, 1 leave you to de
termino, nti wdl dismiss mis part of the subject with
tho remark, that if, by the public or conventional
law ol that {State or the Union, whether arising from
treaties, or foanded on any political principles of our
system, ihettenecc Nation held theii sovereignty in
lii&i, that act nas not, and could not ngtufuily take
it away.
1 shall cheerfully concede that we are to look to the
acts of tho Colonies, and especially of the {States and
the Federal Government, to determine the rights of
soil and sovereignty claimed by the Indian nations,
but 1 .shall be compelled to detain you longer man i
should have done had me Committee on Indian Al
tai', s claimed with less confidence, uud given us better
proof that the fundamental principle tiiai the Indians
had no rignt to eituer, uuu never becu abandonee, ci
ther expressly or by implication. Whatever may
nave been the public law belore the Revolution, it
would be quite sufficient to settle this question con
clusively in favor ot the Indian nations by shewing
wuatihe acts of tho old Congress, me {States, und uie
Federal Government, have been, from the Ueclaia
tmn of Independence to the present Uine. . Bul us we
find upon our tables a collection of coion.al laws,
some of winch were passed nearly two centuries ago,
I will trouble you with some reflections that have oc
curred to me on this mute ol disposing ol the ditficul
tuiumi in tuc way ui wv tuu liitsiury OI
later limes. 1 cuitum agree tnat we are lo gu back
quite so tar 10 ascertaui tue public or conventional
law at the Federal Government, or to look beyond
the Revolution for the political law of the Skates.—
Tins collection of laws certainly contains some,
cbi.-fly ot an early date, WHICH may now appear to be
sowiewnai whimsical, und there is no douui mat ma
ny could oe lound winch wotilu show less regard to
Indian rights, and perhaps to ihe common claims oi
immunity, than some of these, there maybe mueh
,to lament in our eany niatory. 1 cannui say ihui 1
have found muca instruction from the extracts laid
before us ot these early laws ol the colonists, ouu 1
certaiuly feel no graliiicatiuu that they have been
rescued from oblivion, aud placed among ue uocu
meuts ot this house i aui sorry- to see them iictc.—
It would uoi, however, he mtficuit to acconnt lor the
origin of them, Without attributing them to a spirit
so uuiuvorahie to tile claims of ihe native inhabitants
ot tins comment as the Committee on Indian Adairs
seeoi to have assumed it would be rather rema, lia
ble 11 tve could show that Indian rights were always
held in high respect, or that Indian treaties were al
ways strictly observed. Wo must make great allow
ances lor me early colonists. They were settled here
at a great distance irorn Europe They were litue
regarded, and altogether unprotected by the mother
coaiury. Their vicinity iu’ these fierce und warlike
nations often produced dangerous collision* with
them. A state of ususper&uon sprang up wtnen md
to merciless wars, and bitter and implacable resent
ments. Tile French were on the other side oi the
Indians, and sometimes excited them even to the ex
tirpation ol the khiglisu colonists. If wo consider
w..at the m»t4» ui society was, and how strongly the
principle ol sell-preservation is implanted in the hu
man cart, we should rather wonder that the Com
mittee on Indian Affinra hud not boon ubie to thin
much more in our eaiiy history to sostain tueir po
sitions. Wus it to be expected that aur Cithers wore
to be more than men, in the critical and afflicting
suuatioua in which we know from history ihey were
often placed? Woaid -oQ look tor culm puilos. ^riy
in men wuose lamiin-s were awakened irom tneir pil
low’s at midnight by the yelioi the war nuop?—when
they lied nuked in the depiu ot winter to the nearest
thicket for reluge from the tomahawk?—wnen they
l-uked back upuu the conflagration winch lighted up
the pathless tores* around them.’'—wnen they letuxn
Bd to tne burning ruins und saw the door-poats ol
their dwellings sprinkled Wnb the blood ol iker chil
dren, aud the remnant cl their families swept into
captivity?—or When they gatnoredfrum the scorching
ashes tnc calcined relics of ail they had hc*d dear on !
earth? It we cannot jusuly iha« extremity of retal i
lation to Which unman nature in such circumstances
could bo tampted, let as be just euough to their
memory, to lorbear to rcproacii the errors ol their
seGiai affections. W hy, air, do Wo not go back
and bring up for oar examples at thus day,
other laws ol oar own, or other countries, more
gravely enacted, and quite us rigorously enforced?
We might perhaps be aole to jastily ihe practice of
making slaves of ihe Indians: or if we should bo in
clined togouack still further, we could justify the
»* ‘v. 4.u uui nail ;
a cemary since the African slave trade was generally i
condemned by tec laws of Christian govermnen g. i
1 should be very sorry to believe ihat the Govern- j
ment was driven to justny me passage of this bill!
huder any examples bite these, or thaf we should be
forced to confess that we and all the world have
made no advance for two centuries in political science
or the morality of the code of public law, by which
enlightened nations are Willing to be governed 1
hope that during that tune our society has ironc for
wards and not backwards. We boast much of our
improvement in other things, and why should we not
he willing to admit it in this? I protest, at least
agotusi going buck to the time when the fires of
Southfield were lighted up, and 1 cannot consent to
take the expulsion of the Frerlcli from Acadiu as a
tii model to iilosuate our ounce to the Cberokees.
We hod better come down to Inter time,—after Chris
tianity hud shed its pure light more clearly upon the
world; aficr the colonial governments had become
belter established—the code of public fuw better
considered, and the duties of nations better under
stood und defined, it Will be quite os Well for us to
see what our own governments have none in 'he last
fifiy yoars, and ask ourselves if we can honorably re
pudiate this portion of our history. We may perhap3
find ourselves so hemmed in on ail sides, that this
question is not to be debated at this day. If it should
turn out to be so, it will profit us very little to know
that in a winter’s search among the nrchives of one
of our Historical Societies, Wo have been able to find
a single treatise written a century aoo to prove that
the Indians never had any rights at all on this conti
nent 1 have looked into that work of the Rev. Jno.
Bulk ley, from which the gentleman from Tennessee
read us an extract, aud it is very true that it makes
out the whole case. The learned author zea'ouslv
maintains that the Indians were in a stale of nature;
that they had no homes and no governments; and
consequently.no more right to the soil or sovereign
ty than the animals which they followed in the chase
This is the substance of hia argument, and he un
doubtedly convinced himself of the truth of his hy
pothesis. But to prove that against ou» treaties is to
prove nothing, unless it be shown that we ore in a
tvu* ofmtq|$ to*. *od th*tt fhert>n ft BtatjQfratrrtg
arc released txoui the moral law of nature. it would
bo much easier to get rid our treaty obligations, by
assuming at once that Christian nations wero not
bound to keep their faith with infidels, and plentiful
casuistry can be found for that too This matter is
not t<» be disposed of in that way, nor will it bo hereaf
ter It is too late for us to deny our claims to be
considered a civilized people; that wo aro willing to
acknowledge the public and social law of the hutuan
family, aud to be bound by that code of universal mo
rality which is confessed by every government which
feels it to be honorable to stand within tho palo of
Christian nations. Itie not a lulling thing for us to
start any principles at this day. on which we !
cluim to absolve ourselves from the obligation of that j
faith which we have pledged in all our Indian trea
ties. The question is too solemnly settled. If it was ,
now an original question and a mere speculative in
quiry. wo might treat it as a theme for tho cxercita
lion of ingenuity with a better grace, and shelter
ourselves from the imputations which may follow,
under some more plausible apology Bui wo cannot
approach our Indian treaties on any side without fin
ding them secured by sanctions which cannot safely
be despised.
I fully admit, that shortly after the discovery <?f
America, the principle became established by Euro
pean nations, that they held their doiuiuious here, as
among themselves, by the right of dtscovcry, and
that this doctrine must be considered as settled at
! this day, let its origin have been what it may. We
should hold a maxim of such long standing in the
greatest respect. Some inconveniences may have
followed from uncertainties in the history of the ear
ly discoverers and the difficulty ol its application to
the claims of nations as the population advanced
into the interior. But from the very nature of the
subject, any rule would probably have led to some
collision. This may have been considered the best,
aud almost any rule was preferable to none. It was
clearly bettor for England, and probably for France
too, to establish this rule,.than to submit the question
ol title to tho decision of the Pope, who claimed all
undiscovered lands as his spiritual patrimony, and
parcelled out his unknown dominions or maps wnicb
furnished him nothing but degrees of longitude to
define tho extent of his earthly dominions. Wc
munt consider therefore that the quesiion of priority
in right is to be settled by priority of discovery. Oc
cupation does not seem to have been at first consider
ed a> strictly essential, though it was generally taken
symbolically. It is probable too that this rule had
no reference originally to any question growing out
of the title of the natives. The morality of such an
application of it would have more seriously merited
the sarcasm of one of our poets, who has said,
“ I’ho rime once was here, lo the world beii known,
“When all a man sail’d by or s$w was his own.”
As iho spirit of discovery advanced, the claims of
| the native occupants who might bo found here pre
sented another question. The voyages of Columbus
had shown it to be probable that evey part of the
uew world Was peopled. It was necessary to find
some semblance of principle to dispose of their title.
In an age which wus overshadowed with superstition
and when the human mind was darkened by bi" try.
it was not found ddficult to silence conscience atid
even eniist/lhu religions feelings of mankind in favor
of the schemes of avarice aud ambition. They were
therefore cloaked under the garb of religion. Oje
da’s proclamation will show us the nature of the
claims of Spain to the soil aud sovereignty of South
America against the natives.
“*1 Alouzo de Ojeda, servant of the most high and
powerful kings of Castile and Leon, the conquerors
ot barbarous na ions, their messenger and captain,
notity to yon und declare ill us ample form as 1 am
cupabie that Gou our Loid who is one anu eternal,
Cicated the heuven anu the eurtn, and one man and
one woman, of whom you aud we and all the men
who have been or snail be in the world are desceu
ded- Hut as it nas come to pass tbruugu ihc number
ot general ions during more than four thousand years
that tuey have ueeudispersed into ditfeicm parts 01 me
world aud are divided into various kiugdums and pro
vinces, because one country was noi able to contain
them, nor cutud.they have found <n one the means of
subsistence and preservation; therefore God our Hard
gave the charge of all those people 10 oue man named
Bt. I’eter, wnom he constituted Cord and head ol all
.the human race, that all men, la wnaicver pJscc moy
are bom ot in Whatever faitu or piace they arc ed
ucated migut yieiu oDediciu e unto hnn. lie hum sub
jected the who.c world to his jurisdiction uud com
manded him to establish ms iesmenee at Kome, us
the most proper piace for me government of
; the world. Ho likewise prouuscu ana gave him
power to establish his auiuori y in every other
pan of the worid, and to judge unu govern all
Christians, Moors, Jews, Gentnes and all other peo
ple of whatever sect or laitn they muy be. To him
is given the name oIPupe, which signifies admirable,
gTeat lather uud guurdian, because ne is the fatner
and governor ot all men, &c.
■•©ne of these Pouiilft, us lord of the world, hath
made a grant oi these islands and ot tuo terra firma
of the ocean sea to the (Jaiiiofic Kings of Cusule,
Bun i’erdiua..d anu Boaaa Isabella, ui glorious mem
ory, and their successors, our sovereigns, with ah
they contain, os is more fully expresscu in certain
deeds passed upon that acea.-iun, wmeu yon may see,
if you desire it, ’ «£.c. iie men requires them to ac
knowledge the Pope auu ifi.. K<ng as me lord ol "these
islands;’ to mbrace their reug.ou, and submit to
his government, aud concludes tuus: - But n you
Will not comply,or maliciously reiuse to obey my in
junctions, then with the help of God, 1 will enter your
country by forcu. i will cariy on war against you
With the utmost violence. 1 Will subject you io the
yoke ot obmience to the .cntircn and me King. 1
will take your wives aud children unu wul uiukc mem
slaves anu soil untl dispose of them according to ins
majesty’s pleasoro- I will seize your gooou and do
you ail the uuschiet in my power us rebellions cub
iects, who wdi uu\ a knowledge or submit to their
lawful sovereign. And 1 protest mat all the blood
shed aud calamities wmch shad follow ace to be im
puted to you auu not to his majesty or to me or to
the gentlemen who servo uuuur me; and us 1 nave
uow made this declaration auu requisition unto you, I
require the notary here present to giant me a certifi
cate of this ubscribi d in proper form. ’ Bo much lor
the So&nish title.
Tne 8tute of teeiing in England was too favorable i
to the sumo code 01 puouc law tor .America. Kymer I
nod given us-at large the commission ot Hcmy Vll
to tnc Cabots, from which 1 have taken an extract.
This King w.is a near family couiicxiou of Ferdinand
| of (Spain. The tenor of tins commission is to sail
willi the Kings vessels, -ad invemiinrn,di3coopcricn
dam, et invesligandum quuscunque insulas, putnas,
regimes site procinvtas Gentilmm el uijidetium, tn
qwicunque purle mundi positus quct Christ tutus omm
Ousunle fiAiec Icinpurejucrnnt tncognitae.” They are
then commanded to take possession of then oiscove
rics. The Latin ia ua barbarous as the doctrine. No
translation could do it lull justice. It isnot imprub
uoie that inis paper was tne work of fimpeon and
Dudicj who were the confidential advisers 01 flcnry
Vll. Their characters are well known to all who
have looked into any nn-turyot tbut period. The king
dom ia said to have uerer been in a more disreputa
ble condition than u w»a at that time. No man was
sate, and this reign id said to have been chiefly dis
tinguished oy ns rapacii* and meanness. The suc
cessor of thid king rewurded the crimes of Etnpnos
and Dudley by a bill of attainder.
Janies 1 made some improvements upon these ex
amples of ln» predeecdsurs. A King who held liis
notions of prerogative at home was not apt to respect
the rights of those abroad very h ghly. He commission
ed Richard Penkevd to sail on a voyage ot discov
ery, and took caie to make “assurance doubly euro’’
to the lands of the natives of America. He prescri
bed m Penkcvci’s commission tne tenure by winch the
lands were to be held belotc the voyage was even
! commenced, declaring that they should be held ‘of
Us. as parcel of our manor of East Greenwich in
Kent in socage and not in copi/e.” It was on a uo
li«n rqrP’efl frfjrrxjgotft<| ^orrprjimort *3r ef Dtat
sort, that the right of Parliament to tax America
was maintained about the time of our revolution, on
on the ground that we were represented in* he Mouse
of Commons as parcel of tho County of Kent. Now,
Sir, it is useless tor gentlemen to puzzle themselves
with learned theses and ingenious disquisitions, to
show that the European nations would have been
justified in expelling tho natives from their lands
on the ground that they were in a state of nature,
and that man iu a stale of nature has no right to any
thing which he holds—not even to his lite. King
Henry, James, Ferdinand and the Pope set up no
such doctrines themselves, I'hey doubtless asserted
the best which they could find and ubght to have the
privilege of being heard fur themselves and justifying
themselves upon their owu principles We may
6earch as closeiy as we may into the history of the
claims they set up, and shall find at laBt that they
were defended solely on the ground that these were
heretic and infidel countries, and that the claims of
heretics and infidels to the earth were entitled to no
regard in preference to Catholic dominion. But us
tho ago of superstition and bigotry passed uwuy—as
prerogative became weakened und -Popish supremacy
fell into disrepute—as the minds of men became en
larged and the public law improved, uetter principles
were established. Before the beginning of the last
century, moral and political science had become too
tar emancipated from the superstition aud intolerance
of the times of Alexander VI. as well as the Tudors
and Stuarts, to sanctify any longer the violences
which had been committed in the name of religion
and prerojjaiive. Grotius had long before given tiie
true foundation of ali original title. “Primus acqui
re ndi modus cst occupatio corum qui rfui/ius stait.”
We have the right to take that wbicti others have not
already appropriated to themselves, but we nave*no
right to take away our ueig bur’s property. This
was the rule laid down by ibat great civilian and
Chris.ian moralist. Then it came to be held by some
that Indian occupation was no occupation for any pur
pose—that it was the state of uatur>- without the se
curity ot natural jaw. {Some were so very liberal us
to admit that the Indians were men, but held that they
roved over the earth as vagrants and outcast 01 the
human family, with no more title even to whai they
actually cultivated than the brutes that tied before
them or the winds which passed over the forest, and
that they were fair subjects lor force or frauu for all
who might find it to be tneir interest to ensnare or
hunt them down There weic John Bulkleys before
1734, who held to this doctrine as stoutly as John
Bulkley of Colchester. But I doubt' it any other
treatise like this can be found in the whole history of
N. England. Why these people were, above all others,
to be excluded from the social law of maukind, was
not as closely inquired into as it might have been —
It was true that tneir Kings ami Sachems nail few or
no prerogatives. They were generally governed by
councils assembled fkoui the whole nutioii. But it
the head men and warriors proved to be sometimes
refractory, the kings uud no power to send to Tower
«•’* ayuuiu. i uey iigmeu up uo nres lor here
tics, and never sent tneir own prophets to the stake.
They roasted their cnem.cs only. They were leio
cious und merciless m wai, but. tuey nad uo St. Bar
tholomew days. They held large tructs ol unculti
vated country, but they hud no Laws ui the Forest.
It was neither death nor transportation tor u siarving
man to lake a deur, anu it is prohaole they never
heard a discussion on the morality ot spriug-guns —
They believed in wuchcrali as well as some others
of their fellow-men—land in tnat they came some
what nearer to u certain King, who sut in ms cius i
With his Treatise on Uemuiioiagy open heture him,
and conveyed away tucir country by parchment
and green wax before he knew wuere it was
to be found. iVo caiinoL dtny that the European
governments origiuuliy held the ngnts ol mo Indian
nations tu very little regaid. There were gieafc
tomptulions to treat them ughliy, auu they were nut
looked upon with tnat deter fuce to the souudei prin
ciples ofjustice, and mat lWmauity which has since
so Highly iinpioveu tne raojul law ol nations. Tim
spirit ui avarice was excite^ anu the thirst ol domin
ion was tempted, uy Lhe ue.eiopemeuts oi the resour
ces of the new world litarns and cnartors lonow
ed, and were otLen dispeuseu ab lewains to favorites.
But, fclir, whatever may have oeeu the trieoues on
WHICH the goveruuw.ni ai Home asserted ns suprema
cy, i ueny <hut our hnignsu ancesioro, who first col
onized these States, ever cuumeuauceu thut disie
gard ol inuiuu ughts, ur carried into practice that
system oi injustice to the native iua*niUult, wuicu
has uecn asserted in the liopuri ol tne Coiucmuee on
iiidiun Affairs. Uu me seuiemeni oi me country ,
one ol two courses was o he pursueu—to deny uuo
gether me clurms oi tne indiau occupunts lor any
purpose,anu to dispossess them by violence, uuuer a
ny plausible or convenient pi eiext, or to treatment
as hold.ng u quantum right m (he Soil, and exiiuguisu
their title honestly ay purenuse We have already
been, in the proclamation or Ojeda, tue system pui
sued by fcipaiu. ine natives were iieaied as ht lor
spoil only, Abe history oi Bpumsn America is tue
most uibgracelui tissue oi injustice, cruelty and per
ndious viiiainy «hicn stains me annuls oi cnriuien•
doro; una fcipaiu has suheren lor ucr crime me ret-i
outive justice ol Troviucuee. But, to tne honor oi
our ancestors, History nas given us' no iNorm Amen
can ainiuis nke these, i uey held the doctrine of
discovery so iar us to pioieci me cuarterett i.gnis oi
tue colonics uguiual me encroachments or oineto,
but tuey never saucUoned uuy system wuicu ten the
fnuiau uaiions unprotected against themselves und
ht subjects lor lawless plunder. Aufcy were men
Who ucted up to tneir ptOlessiuus belore the wo.la.
A ne honorable gentleman iroin x ennesoec, id asking
where wc suouiu looK lor tue monuments o- ** tliiuiu
f uuu, directed us to the noble institutions auu envia
ble piospemy of Fcunsflvamu. Tins is all veivjust \
to tue name ol Teuu, uat it tails snort ot' mu
justico to ms memory, i can tell mm wuere ue1
cau hud another monument to me lame ot j
taut excellent mau. Vauel hus perpetuated his
hame to ull ages uuu in all nations, in <hat work in
which he has commended to ull uiaukiuu, tire invari
able respect in winch W imam A’cnn und the Fuuians
of jNcvv tngiaud hem tne ug.ii ot tne native mhab
uunts of America to their country. It is very true,
that in the colonics, the Crown was considered as
the only legitimate source ot title tor its subiects.
duu ia inobi ui iiieui Uic iuods Were geneially neid\
under patents IruQj me Liown, or ine colonial go
termncUvs. i ms was early e&lubiistieu, unu cumin- ■
ues to be maintained to tins uay. i ho discoveries j
nad Occn maue uuuei commissions iiom ine Crown,
and possesbioii wus iukeu in us uum-. /Vs between ‘
me king uud uis subjects, the lanus were trusted as J
the domain ot ihe Crown, aud luui.vu purenuses were
not admitted against the grams ot tin* king or his ,
title, lie was considered m theory, in ine ngui ol'•
an origuiul I’ocdui proprietor ol the coautry. tt was !
thcrelorc said mm wnai otherwise might nave Deen
called at the but ol the courts, the seism ol tho In- '
dian nations, was nollnng moie against the Crown i
Ilian a naked occupancy. By theongmai tine ol me
colonists, under tbcir euurters, tuey ueid iu fact, uu
der tile King, as tne Loru paramount 01 ihe Realm.
Wo hold this doctines ourseives, so far it applies to
our governments. Hut We claim no suprcmucy over
the Indian right, even in theory, because they aro to i
he treated as in a state ot nature and without gov- '
ernments ol filler own whicK wo have never ac- j
; knowlcdgod, or as heretics and infidels. Instances j
may doubtless be lound in our history, (and the com 1
mittee have been abl^ to collect a few,) in which
there was occasionally collision between some of the
colonists and the Indian nations on the point ol title
It is probable that in some lew Cuses, injustice was
done. Hut t he practice of iho colonies settled down
ot last in fuvor ot the sanctity of iiic Indian titles to
j their lands.
The Committee have suggested that wc should not
give muen weight to “the stately forms which Indian
treaties have assumed, nor 10 tne terms otien employ
ed m them, but that we should rather consider them
as "mere names” and "forms of intercourse.” If
treating these Indian nation as proprietors of a mial
^insd interest in tho eot(—-*» competent to enter into
treaties to contract alliancen-to maim war ***.
peaco—to stipulate on points invol^^T* Wj
qualifying the sovereignty of both partii *
■©seed generally of political attribute,* les» *“•*#»
individuals, and altogether absurd in their nuSTti^
to subjects, is nothing more than "more naEEllo “15
ftrrn,,' li,e„t',h1.longpr.c,Sr?k,“5„^
the Colonies, the States, and the Federal Go.. 0’
indeed proves nothing Word. mw™.
Sny we “,L°8* "e "»« »!«
tney are. But these treaties have been look»a
apon as something quite-substantial, in the Umf
ol them. I huigs os firmly settled an these, areno*
to be easily moved. This most honorable ^ortion of
our history is not to be obliterated by a dash of the
pen. f?roin a period not long anterior to the revnln
non in Bogland, there nre oLewiTadlSZS;
wade by the agents of the Crown, as well aw tbo
Colonies. 1 hese were doubtless made with the full
approbation, and in many instances under instructions
or advice from the Crown officers. They have been
icted upon and acknowledge^, in a way that putaSl
question as to their obligation at rest/ The Crown
!C the Colonies found it to be to their interest to tdke
hat course; the motives which led to it were various
ind are quite obvious, even to a ce «le^ rlder^f
jur history. As long ago as 1684, we find a »mpb
Jam6 made at Albany, between Lord Effing
fh2, G°vernor of Virginia, and Colonel Dou
ian'°f New York, with .he Five nations. One of
.he Chiefs said to them on that occasion, tbat "thin
ireaiy had spread so far in the earth, that it« mots
would reach through the whole land, and if the
L rench should tread upon the soil any where the
ndian nations ‘Ould immediately fe« 1 it" Thet» i
tept this treaty faithfully, and the Colonies owned
heir security. for many years, to i«. Shortly before
jur revolution, the principle may l* considered te
have been so far settled, that these nations might well
claim to be invested with the capacity to contract in
that way, as qualified sovereignties. The doctrines
held in ■ he time of Henry VII and the Stuatts were
dencPsefCOnC!hrgft,.dhbe/0Ie tbe declaration of Inde
aencs. Un the 8th ot April, 1772, General Gaze
^amation^ ftd, Y°rk* b^ °rder of theKing,’’ , p™
^amation fully recognizing the obligations of the
Crown under its treaties with the Inthan nation. I
do no,, mean, air, io be understood to say, thm th^
acknowledgment of qualified sovereignty, would ha,e
been acmitted by the British Government to the full
extent that we nave carried it since. We found it so
lar settled .1 the penod of our independence; th“
we openly adopted it as the public law for ourselves,
we have ever since placed our relations with the In
dians on that footing, and they are not to be disturb- •
' ”u ‘unciim nypotPems. As to their rinht
to the soil, however, that was long before solemnly
settled in practice, and has remained so for a
period too long to be now questioned. New Bne
and is held under fair and ho est purchase from
the natives. A very small part of it was ever
claimed by actual conquest Pennsylvania and
New York were acquired in the same wav. Mr
Jefferson says, in his Notes, speuking for Virginia!
I nat the lands of this country were taken from
-kern by conquest, is not so general a truth as is sup
posed 1 find in our historians and records, repeated
proofs of purchase, which cover a considerable part
at the lower country, and many more would doubt
ess be found on further search. The upper country
we know, has been acquired altogether by purchases
made m the most unexceptionable form.” The^ &
aot a foot of land now held by Georgia, for Which we
cannot produce, from authentic history, her title bv
purchase from the Indian nations. This system, sir,
was conscientious in itself,and founded in good morals.
We may here stand up boldly, like honest men, be
[ore al1 mankind. I am.not wiling to blot out these
fairest pages of our history. I will not consent that
tiese proud monuments of our country’s honor shall
3e defaced I would not darken the living light of
.flat glory which these illustrations of the justice of
jur ancestors have spread over every page of their his
ory, for all the Indian lands that avarice ever dreamt
3t, and all the empire which ambition over coveted,
(Speech to be continued.)
Lines to a Young Lady after her Marriage.
rhey tell me gentle lady, that they deck thee for a bride
at * °id'erealh 18 W0Ven *>a,r» t*1B bridegroom by tby
And 1 think 1 bear thy father’s sigb, thy mothcrsjclamour tone,
Aa they give the to anotner’a afms—their oeautilul, their own
1 never saw a bridal but u^y eyelid hath been wet,
And it always seemed to me as though a joyous crowd veto
met *
1 o see the saddest sight of all, a gay and girlish thing
nay aside her maiden gladness—for a man—and for a ring:
And other cares will claim thy thoughts, ond other hearts tby
love,
And gayer friends may be around, and bluer skies above;
i el thou, when i behold thee next, mayst wear upon thy brow,
Perchance, a mother’s look of cate, for that which decks it now.
And when i think how often 1 have seen thee with thy mild
And lovely look, and step of an, and bearing like a child,
D how mournfully, how mournfully the thought comes o’er my
brain,
When 1 think thou ne’er mayst be that free and girlish thing
again.
1 wouid ili^t as my heart dictates, just such might be «y lay:
And my voice should be a voice of mirth, a music like the May
Kut it may not be!—within my nreast all frozen are the springe,
rhe muriner dies Upon my lip—the musio on the strings.
But a voice is floating round me, and it tells me in my rest
rhat sunshine shall illume thy path, that joy' shall be thy guest,
fbat thy life shall be a ruinmer’a day, whose evening shall go
do»D,
Like the evening in the eastern clime, that never know* a frown.
When thy foot is at the altar, when tbe ring bath pressed thv
hand,
When those thou lovest, and those that love tbe weeping
round thee Etand,
Qh! may the rhyme that friendship weaves, like a spirit of the
air.
Bo o’er thee at that moment—-for a blessing and a prayo!
MY AIN WIFJ7.
I wadna gie my ain Wife ,
For ony wife I see;
1 wadna gie my ain wife
For ony wife 1 see:
A bonnier yet I’ve never SCCii
A better canna be—
I wadna gie my ain wife,
For ony wife I *ee. —
0 ceuthie is my ingle oheCIr,
An’chcerie is my Jean;
1 never sec her angry look,
Nor hear her word on ane.
She's guide wi’ a’ the neebours routl.
- An’ aye gmd wi* me—
1 wadna gie my ain wife
For ony wife I see!
An’ O her looks sae kindle,
They melt my heart outjjglit
When o’re the baby at her breast
She hangwi’ fond delight;
She looks mtill ilsbonnie face,
An’ syne iooks to me—
J wadna gie my ain wife
For onv wife I see!
tJEALED Propoi-als will be received by tne the
Directors of the Manchester Turnpike Compa
ny, for keeping flic said Turnpike Road in the order
required by law, tor twelve months from the first day
of September next—‘the proposals to be deposited at
the Toll-house of the said Company on or beforo tho
15th day of August next
jujy 7— law6tif c
Watch and Clock Maker.
fTfHE subscriber in settled at Buckingham Court
A House, and will attend Cumberland and Prince
Edward Courts tegnlarly, with a good assortment of
tcatches. jewelry. and silver xonre, which he is enabled
to sell very low, as h<‘ receives his supplies direct
from New-York. Watches and clocks repaired,
and all kinds ot jobs in his line, and warranted.
aug 4—2aw2t if c HORACE SULV.
C1 HESS-MEN, chess boards; desk knives, pocket
1 knives; thermometers, tooth brushes; flutes,
flageolette, claronetts; together with many other
articles, received which will be sold almost at tho
purchaser’s own price* «F* 3* NAS3
auij 4