with that state, or to cancel
thirteen distinct
treaties entered into with the Indians, despoil
them of their lands, and rob them of their independence.
Jackson’s message says, “It is too late
to inquire whether it was just in the United States
to include them and their territory within bounds
of new states, whose limits they could control.
That step cannot be retracted. A state cannot
be dismembered by Congress, or restrained in the exercise
of her constitutional powers.” Here the
executive government acknowledges that it made promises
to Georgia, which it has been unable to perform—that
it guaranteed to that state the possession of lands
over which it had no legitimate control, on the mere
assumption of being able to make their purchase.
The Cherokees in their petition and memorials to Congress
show, that Great Britain never exercised any sovereignty
over them;—that in peace and in war she
always treated them as a free people, and never assumed
to herself the right of interfering with their internal
government:—that in every treaty made with
them by the United States, their sovereignty and total
independence are clearly acknowledged, and that they
have ever been considered as a distinct nation, exercising
all the privileges and immunities enjoyed by any independent
people. They say, “In addition to that
first of all rights, the right of inheritance and peaceable
possession, we have the faith and pledge of the United
States, over and over again, in treaties made at various
times. By these treaties our rights as a separate
people are distinctly acknowledged, and guarantees
given that they shall be secured and protected.
So we have also understood the treaties. The
conduct of the government towards us, from its organization
until very lately—the talks given to our
beloved men by the Presidents of the United States—and
the speeches of the agents and commissioners—all
concur to show that we are not mistaken in our interpretation.
Some of our beloved men who signed the treaties are
still living, and their testimony tends to the same
conclusion.” * * * * “In what light shall
we view the conduct of the United States and Georgia
in their intercourse with us, in urging us to enter
into treaties and cede lands? If we were but
tenants at will, why was it necessary that our consent
must first be obtained before these governments could
take lawful possession of our lands? The answer
is obvious. These governments perfectly understand
our rights—our right to the country, and
our right to self-government. Our understanding
of the treaties is further supported by the intercourse
law of the United States, which prohibits all encroachment
on our territory.”
Print
Word
PDF
