網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

H. OF R.]

Removal of the Indians.

[MAY 17, 1830. the law of Georgia, which the gentleman from New York, the Secretary on the invincible champion who has stepped says will have the effect of compelling them to remove, forward in his defence; and from the zeal and spirit which had not even been passed. But the President, appealed has been manifested, the head of the State Department to as he was, in a spirit of the most open frankness, and with a special regard for the welfare of the Indians, addressed them in the most affectionate terms; he told them they knew him, and they knew he would not deceive them; in that peculiar and eloquent language which they so well understood, he told them he spoke with a straight and not with a forged tongue. If you remain where you are, (said he) you cannot escape the operation of the State laws; you are included within the bounds of the States which have this right, and it is in vain to think of resisting; if you choose to remain there, you shall be protected in But to return to the treaty of Holston. Suppose the the possession of your lands; but I will not beguile you guaranty had expressly extended to the protection of the with the hope of the protection of this Government against Indians, and to restrictions upon the rights of the States, State authority. But if you choose to remove, I will pro- which the United States had no power to impose-in vide you a country beyond the Mississippi, where you may other words, suppose the provisions of the treaty to have escape the evils you apprehend-there you shall be pro- been plainly and palpably unconstitutional: now the adtected there you may live and be happy." And this, sir, vocates of the Indians insist that the President has no is the language of a despot? this is the style suited to the right to notice this unconstitutionality-he is bound to court of Henry VIII! this is the power which is so alarm- execute the treaty. From this doctrine, sir, I humbly ing, that the gentleman from New York would prefer a beg leave to dissent. The President, on coming into dictator at once, rather than have a President so self-willed office, took a solemn oath to support the constitution of and tyrannical! Really, sir, so solemn and impressive was the United States-a treaty repugnant to this constitution the gentleman's manner, so awful and terrific the picture has no binding force, and the enforcement of it by the he drew, that my fears were highly excited-I was ready President would, it seems to me, be a direct violation of to conclude that the days of this hapy republic were his oath. But the honorable gentleman from New York numbered, and my imagination sickened at the contem- contends, that if there be any difficulty as to the meaning plation of liberty expiring in convulsive agonies. But, or obligations of a treaty-at least, such as those with the sir, when the alarm had ceased, and I had time for a little Indians-the President should refer the matter to Concalm reflection, I found that the country had, in the view gress-that it is our province to ascertain and determine of the gentleman, been brought to the verge of this aw- the extent of these obligations. I should be very glad to ful catastrophe by a little friendly and parental advice from know where Congress derives this power. In what part the President to these children of the forest, and by a re- of the constitution does the gentleman find it? He will fusal to array this Government against that of the States search for it in vain. No such power exists. Whenever acting within their own sphere. But, in the glow of the execution of a treaty is confided to the President, he all his ardor, and while sounding these terrible alarms, is necessarily clothed with the power of construing it; and indulging in such mild terms as "tyrant," "despot," and so long as the executive chair is filled by our present 'dictator, &c., the gentleman is considerate enough to Chief Magistrate, that power will be exercised. And remind us that his opposition to the conduct of the Presi- whenever you attempt to compel him to adopt a construedent is prompted by no political opposition-" this is no tion of a treaty entrusted to his execution, which he beparty question." Oh no! no party question!" certainly lieves to be unconstitutional, and then require him to act not. Why tell us this? Who could have thought of charg-on that construction, he will tell you: "No, I cannot. If ing the opposition of that gentleman to the influence of you choose to impeach me, do so. Drag me to the bar of political or party motives? I am sure no member of this the Senate, and accuse me before that august tribunal; but committee can be so uncharitable. But, lest there might I will not go to the bar of my God with the damning sin be some ungenerous suspicion of that kind, the gentle- upon my conscience of having openly and knowingly vio man gives us the strongest assurance of his sincerity, in lated that great charter of our Government which I had the anxiety he evinces to throw the responsibility of the Pre- solemnly sworn to support and defend." sident's conduct upon some one else. "It was certainly Not only are the recommendations of our statesmen, not the suggestion of his own mind;" and yet, after ranging and the character of our people, a sufficient guaranty the fields of his imagination, extensive as they are, he is against oppression towards the Indians, but, by a recurunable to whom to attribute this cruel policy. Finally, rence to the past, we can give the strongest assurance however, and without the shadow of pretext, he travels that our courts of justice will afford them ample protecout of his way to make what at first appeared a very in- tion. I stated to the committee, in the outset of my re sidious attack on the Secretary of State. After telling us marks, that it had frequently been my lot to be employed he cannot imagine who could have advised the President as counsel for the Cherokees in our courts; and, as the in this matter, he expressed the most fervent hope that it character of the State in relation to its treatment of these was not the first officer in the cabinet. Really, sir, at people is so deeply concerned, I hope I shall be indulged first I thought this was bitter irony; and that the gen-in stating one or two cases which have come within my tleman's object was to render the policy as odious as possible, and then, by expressing the hope that it was not advised by the Secretary of State, to make directly the opposite impression upon the minds of the committee. But when a gentleman of his standing makes such a solemn averment, we are bound to believe him. From the relations formerly existing between the Prime Minister and the gentleman from New York, it might be a matter of curious inquiry how long this extreme solicitude for the fame and character of the Secretary of State has existed. This is a matter, however, which it would be highly indelicate for me to inquire into. I can only congratulate

may feel perfectly secure from all attacks. If, however, the gentleman's knowledge of the President's character had been equal to his anxiety for the Secretary's reputation, he might easily have quieted all his apprehensions. Our present Chief Magistrate, while he will cheerfully listen to the opinions and suggestions of his constitutional advisers, will not submit to the directions or dictations of any one; and, least of all, will he ever attempt to shelter himself from the responsibilities of his measures, by palming them on his ministers.

personal knowledge. In the treaties of 1817 and 1819, made between the United States and the Cherokees, by which a portion of the territory in the occupancy of the Cherokees was acquired for Georgia, "the United States agree to give to each head of an Indian family six hundred and forty acres of land in the territory ceded," on certain conditions. The Legislature of Georgia, conceiving this was a disposition of the property of the State, which the Federal Government had no right to make, ordered the lands thus secured to the heads of Indian families to be surveyed with the rest of the territory, and granted in like manner. This produced a contest between the State

MAY 17, 1830.]

Removal of the Indians.

[H. of R.

proaches and abuse which have been so unsparingly lavished upon us? But, sir, if the cases to which I have referred, together with other facts known to this committee, are not satisfactory, ask the Cherokees, whose rights and injuries have been the subject of investigation in our courts; even they will bear testimony in our favor-they will tell you that they have ever found ready access to the justice seat, and a listening ear to their complaints. Yes, sir, I feel proud that I can stand up here, and proclaim to the Representatives of the American people that the records of our courts furnish no unjust judgments against our red neighbors-our altars have never been crimsoned with the blood of an innocent Cherokee; and, at this moment, the gloomy cells of our penitentiary can furnish witnesses who will testify that the rights of the Indians are not to be violated with impunity.

grantees and the Cherokee claimants, and a series of lawsuits ensued. When the causes came before the court, the title of the Indian countrymen was defended on the ground that the land which they contended for had never been ceded; that the Indian title had never been extinguished; that, being in possession, their title of occupancy was sufficient to protect them; and that, although in the treaties the words the United States " agree to give," indicated a disposition of the land which they could not make, yet it amounted to nothing more nor less than a reservation by the Cherokees of that much land from the territory ceded. Conflicting claims thus arising, produced, as may well be supposed, much excitement in the counties where these lands were situated; but, after long and solemn investigations, the court sustained the right of the reservees, and determined that the State grantees could not recover the possession of the land until the In- I will now recur to another, and a very striking part of dian claimant abandoned it, or his title was extinguished. the remarks of the gentleman from New York. Towards And this decision was made by a judge, not only of dis the close of his eloquent argument, he took up this book, tinguished ability, but one than whom the State of Geor-[Jefferson's Memoir] and told us that he then held in his gia does not contain a citizen more devoted to her rights hand an authority which could not be resisted; that it had, and interests. But, dear as these were to him, and although probably, never been seen before by any gentleman here; many of our most respectable citizens entertained a differ- and that it must seal the lips of every friend to this bill, ent opinion, yet, when called on to decide this delicate and who had any reverence for those whose opinions he would highly interesting question, he met it with the integrity presently read. Sir, the committee cannot have forgotand firmness which should ever characterize a judge, and ten the gentleman's impressive manner, nor the sarcastic our people acquiesced with that respect which they never tone with which he prefaced his reading with the remark fail to render to the laws of the State, and to the con- that they were the sentiments of "the mind that founded stituted authorities by whom they are administered. The and the mind that reformed our political system." consequence was, that the United States' Government, prompted by a disposition to do justice to all parties, authorized the purchase of the Indian claim to these lands; the reservees finally received from one to four thousand dollars each for their reservations; and the incumbrances on the Georgia title being thus removed, the citizens came into the peaceable and undisturbed possession of the property

But let us examine a little into these conclusive and irresistible authorities, and see whether indeed "our affairs have grown thus desperate." In this [the fourth volume of Mr. Jefferson's Memoir, &c.] we find what appears to be an extract from his journal. It seems that, during the existence of hostilities with the northwestern Indians, in the year 1793, and while preparations were making for a vigorous campaign, General Washington advised with his Another, and a still more serious case. In one of the cabinet as to the propriety of making one more effort to counties where these controversies for land titles had ex- restore peace, and prevent the effusion of blood; and it isted, and where the excitement between the whites and was in answer to certain questions submitted by the PreIndians had been greatest, a Cherokee, charged with the sident, that Mr. Jefferson gave the opinion which was murder of a white man, was arrested, indicted, and put read by the honorable gentleman from New York. What upon his trial. There he appeared friendless and for those questions were, we cannot ascertain; but, from saken. Not one of his tribe came forward to aid in his some of Mr. Jefferson's remarks, it would seem that they defence, or witness his trial-they despaired of his life-related to the boundaries which should be proposed to blood had been shed; and, judging from their own usages and customs, they supposed that blood must answer it During the trial, the prisoner exhibited no fear-not even a murmur escaped him; he looked round upon the scenes and ceremonies of the court as unconscious of danger, or indifferent to his fate. In the course of the investigation, it was proved that a white man was also engaged in the murder, and, indeed, the principal-he fled, while the Indian remained. This circumstance was seized on to establish the guilt of the one, and the innocence of the other. Some other facts were disclosed, inducing some doubts as to the part which the Indian took in the affair, which resulted in the bloody deed. The advantage which this doubt afforded was not overlooked. That humane and long established principle, that where there is doubt there should be an acquittal, was urged in behalf of the accused, and recognised by the court in its charge to the jury. The result of the trial was, a verdict of not guilty; and, his Cherokee was again restored to his tribe, who had abandoned him to what they supposed his inevitable fate. I could refer to many other cases, but it would be imposng too much on the patience of the committee. Is this, hen, sir, the State whose laws and whose courts are so ppressive to the Indians-whose people disregard all the bligations of humanity, and trample on the rights of the weak and defenceless savages? Do we deserve the re:

Judge Clayton.

the Indians to be established between them and the whites. And here let me remind the committee, that, at the time this opinion was expressed, the cessions of the territory northwest of the Ohio had already been made to the United States; it was their property; no part of it was enclosed within the limits of any of the States. Let it also be remembered that, at that time, the nature of the Indian title had not been seriously investigated-the principles on which their claims rest had not been settled. It was un der these circumstances, at that early period, that Mr. Jefferson gave this opinion, which I will again read to the committee:

"I considered our right of pre-emption of the Indian lands not as amounting to any dominion, or jurisdiction, or paramountship whatever, but in the nature of a remainder after the extinguishment of a present right, which gives us no present right whatever, but of preventing other nations from taking possession, and so defeating our expectancy; that the Indians had the full, undivided, and independent sovereignty as long as they chose to keep it, and this might be forever."

Sir, there is no man who has a higher reverence for the opinions of Mr. Jefferson than I have-not even the honorable gentleman from New York; but if he intended to be understood as advancing the opinion that the Indian tribes possess entire and unlimited sovereignty over the contr which they claim, I cannot yield my assent. The decisions of the Supreme Court, the writers on national law, and

H. OF R.]

Removal of the Indians.

[MAY 17, 1830.

almost every distinguished man who has expressed an could not be made so but by vesting in them the paramount opinion on the subject, are opposed to this doctrine. title, but this the United States could not do, because they But, although Mr. Jefferson uses the expression, "full, had no right whatever to the territory in question. Take undivided, and independent sovereignty," I very much either horn of the dilemma, then, and the argument is unquestion whether he intended to go to the extent which availing. If the original title was good, the guaranty was these words import; for, immediately preceding them, he superfluous-if it was not good, the guaranty could not aid says that we have the right of "preventing other nations it. But neither General Washington nor the Senate infrom taking possession of the Indian lands, and defeating tended any thing more by this guaranty than protection to our expectancy." Here he qualifies this sovereignty at the Indians in the possession of their lands-and this Geneonce; for, if the Indians possessed "full sovereignty," ral Jackson has assured the Cherokees they shall have, if they could dispose of the country to any other nation-the they choose to remain where they now are. These, then, denial of the right to do this is a very material and import sir, are the imposing authorities which the honorable gen ant abridgment of their sovereignty. But the opinion tleman has presented in such terrible array against us. It proceeds further: "That as fast as we extend our rights by remains for the committee to say whether he has not overpurchase from them, (the Indians,) so fast we extend the calculated the effect which they were to produce on the limits of our society; and so fast as a new portion became principles asserted and maintained by the State of Georgia. encircled within our line, it became a fixed limit of our so- Notwithstanding, however, the gentleman conceived ciety, that the Executive, with either or both branches of himself so ably sustained, we could but remark the deour Legislature, could not alien any part of our territory; spondency indicated by his closing remarks. The Senate, that, by the law of nations, it was settled that the unity he tells us, have yielded-they have registered the exeand indivisibility of the society was so fundamental, that it cutive edict, and responded the servile "amen" to the could not be dismembered by the constituted authorities, royal mandate-and that here is the last hope of the Che except when all power was delegated to them, (as in the rokee. But fearful that the powers of his eloquence, and case of despotic Governments,) or, second, where it was the pathetic appeals to our sympathies, may all prove unexpressly delegated; that neither of these delegations had availing, he at last attempts to terrify n8. "Pass this bill," been made to our General Government, and therefore that he exclaimed in a most solemn manner, and the Indians it had no right to dismember or alienate any portion of must remove. Yes, sir, they will go; and, from the gloomy territory once ultimately consolidated with us; and that we wilds of the Mississippi, they will send back upon you could no more cede to the Indians, than to the English or their bitter execrations." Sir, the gentleman again draws Spaniards, as it might, according to acknowledged princi- on his imagination: here I have the advantage of him—1 ples, remain as irrevocably and eternally with the one as appeal to facts. Hundreds of the Cherokees have already removed to that country, and we have never heard that they have execrated us for inducing them to go. Others have explored the country, and have brought back a good report, and will remove if the means are provided. In travelling through the nation last spring, I saw an Indian countryman just preparing to emigrate; and his anticipations wore very different from those of the honorable gentleman from New York. He was a man of large family and considerable property; his improvements had been valued, and he was to set out in a few days; he expressed himself perfectly satisfied with the terms on which he was removing, and appeared delighted at the prospect his new home presented. Sir, I do not think this individual had laid up any bitter execrations to send back upon us. No, sir, these execrations come from a different point of the compass.

the other."

Here we have another instance of the devotion of this illustrious statesman to his favorite doctrine of confining the Federal Government to the powers expressly delegated to it. And after a refusal of the convention to give this Government the power of fixing the limits of the States then existing, and with the provision in the constitution, that no new State shall be erected within the bounds of any other State without its consent, I put it to the candor of the gentleman to say whether Mr. Jefferson would have sanctioned the idea, that, by a treaty with an Indian tribe, this Government could have authorized the establishment of an independent, sovereign Government within the limits of one of the States. Sir, it would be doing violence to the first principles of his political creed.

[ocr errors]

The other authority, on which the gentleman so much relied, was the fact of General Washington's asking the But I must hasten to a conclusion. There are other advice of the Senate as to treating with the Cherokees in points on which I intended to have touched, but I have the year 1795, and whether he should propose to guaranty already so far transcended the limits I had prescribed for to them their lands not ceded. Now, here the committee myself, that it would be inexcusable in me longer to abuse will remark, that, at that time, the population of Georgia the patient attention which has been so indulgently exwas sparse, and her frontiers exposed to continual ravages tended to me. Permit me, however, before I close, to ask and murders by the Indians; nearly the whole of the coun- the committee, if they refuse to pass this bill, what course try, from the Oconee and Altamaha to the Mississippi, was this Government will adopt. Will they attempt to inter in the possession of numerous and fierce tribes: and for the fere with the jurisdiction of the State of Georgia, and arpurpose of arresting bloodshed and all the horrors of an rest the operation of her laws over the Indians? Sir, this Indian war, these propositions were submitted. In addition is a most momentous question. We are indeed brought to this, the guaranty had been previously made by the to a crisis-we are upon the very banks of the Rubicontreaty of Holston. Under this existing emergency, then, a very narrow boundary divides you from State jurisdiction the Senate advised that the guaranty be proposed. The constitutional power to give it does not seem to have been agitated; and although, as I think I have clearly shown, the power did not exist-particularly if it extends to_authorize the Cherokees to establish an independent Government-there was some excuse for it in the motive which prompted it.

cross it, and we may not be able to calculate the conse quences-there may, then, indeed, be scenes and subjects abundantly sufficient for the exercise of all the feelings of philanthropy. I tell you, sir, Georgia bas taken her course, and she will not retire from it. Nor has she acted hastily; eighteen months ago she gave notice of her intentions, and at the last session of her Legislature she resolved to carry But does the honorable gentleman from New York per-those intentions into execution. Sir, her laws will be et ceive the difficulty in which he involves himself by insist forced; of this an earnest has already been given. It has ing so strenuously on the effect of this guaranty? For if been recently determined by one of our courts, that the the original title of the Cherokees be valid, wherefore the State's right of jurisdiction does extend over the whole of necessity of a guaranty? This could not strengthen a title the territory within her chartered limits; and the courts already complete. And if their claim was not valid, it will be sustained by the people. I hope I am not misar

MAY 18, 1830.]

Duty on Salt.-Removal of the Indians.

derstood in these remarks; they are not made in the spirit either of threatening or defiance-far from it. On the contrary, our people implore you, by all the ties which bind us together-by the common sufferings, and dangers, and triumphs of our ancestors-by the principles of that constitution by which our rights are secured and protected -not to violate the rights of Georgia as a sovereign member of this Union, nor interfere with the exercise of her legitimate powers. But do not mistake this appealit is not the entreaty of suppliants; it is the sincere and affectionate remonstrance of brothers-of a generous and high-minded people. And will you disregard them? Will you turn a deaf ear to our appeals, and resolve, at all hazards, to prevent the exercise of those rights which the State of Georgia brought with her into this Union-which she has never yielded-which most of her sisters have long exerted without interruption and which have been but now recognised by the President of the Senate! And if you should, is it reasonable to suppose that Georgia will submit to be restrained from the exercise of these rights by the arm of the General Government! No, sir, I assure you she will not her course is determined on, and she will pursue it with a resolution which no threats can intimidate, but with a justice and moderation which will leave no cause for reproach.

[Here the debate closed for this day.]

TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1830.

THE SALT DUTY.

The House resumed the consideration of the resolution of Mr. TALIAFERRO, proposing a gradual repeal of the duty on salt-the motion for the previous question pending -which being announced by the Chair,

Mr. BURGES moved a call of the House.

Mr. CHILTON deprecated any attempt to defeat the proposition by unnecessary motions, which could only produce delay. He hoped gentlemen would not endeavor, by such means, to prolong a tax which grinds the people in the interior of the country to a degree which gentlemen on the seaboard had no idea of. While the latter were wallowing in luxury, the poor people of the interior had often to sell their very clothes to procure salt, without which they could not subsist. The high duty on this necessary of life produced extreme distress amongst hundreds and thousands of the people of the West-be might call them scenes of carnage which the gentleman from Rhode Island could not look upon with composure. He entreated him, therefore, to withdraw his opposition to the resolution, and that other gentlemen would not endeavor to embarrass the proposition by useless motions.

[H. OF R.

introduction with a motion for the previous question, he felt himself justified in embarrassing the resolution by all the means which the forms of the House permitted him to use.

The motion for a call of the House was negatived without a division; and

The House refused to second the call for the previous question, 79 rising for it, and 89 against it. Mr. REED, of Massachusetts, then offered the following substitute for the resolution, viz:

"That the Secretary of the Treasury be instructed to inform this House, at the next session of Congress, 1st. The quantity of salt manufactured at the various salt works in the United States, and at each factory. 2d. The price exacted for salt at each of the manufactories. 3d. The quality of the salt manufactured at each of the manufactories. 4th. The prices of salt in various parts of the country." Mr. REED followed his motion to amend with an argumeut of considerable length, to show the impropriety of hasty action on so important a subject, without full information on it. He combatted, by a train of reasoning, the fallacy, as he conceived it, that the repeal of the duty on salt would render the article cheaper, or conduce to the general interest; stated briefly the reasons why he was opposed to the tariff laws, and his objections, since the system had been adopted, to breaking in upon it to relieve the pressure upon one interest, while others were suffering a greater pressure; and mentioned particularly the navigation of the country, in which every person in the Union was interested, and which was depressed by a heavy tax, and the only direct tax imposed by the Government. He was willing to go into the tariff subject generally, for the purpose of better adjusting and equalizing the system, but was decidedly opposed to picking out one subject of duty alone, and which was, in fact, beneficial to the country. Before he had concluded his remarks, he gave way to

Mr. TALIAFERRO, who said, if it was in order, he would withdraw his resolution; and was proceeding to explain his reasons for so doing, when he was admonished by the Chair, that, if the motion was withdrawn, it would be irregular to make any remarks. Mr. T. acquiesced, and the resolution was withdrawn.

REMOVAL OF THE INDIANS.

The several special orders of the day were then, on motion of Mr. BELL, further postponed, and the House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. WICKLIFFE in the chair, on the bill to provide for an exchange of lands with the Indian tribes, and for their removal beyond the Mississippi.

Mr. BURGES replied, and justified his motion for a call Mr. EVANS said: The object of the bill under considerof the House. His object was not to embarrass the pro-ation has been fully stated by the chairman of the Composition, but to obtain a full House for its decision, and that whatever was done on a subject so important should be done by a majority. As to the duty itself, he was opposed to its repeal, not because he wished to keep a high tax on the people, but to preserve a system by which salt as well as other necessaries would become cheaper, &c.

Mr. HOFFMAN rose to justify his course in the motions which he made on this subject, and was proceeding to make some remarks, when

Mr. McDUFFIE rose to a question of order. He hoped the time of the House would not be consumed by debate which was out of order; and, as it was out of order to debate the resolution on the motion for a call of the House, he trusted the rule would be enforced.

The CHAIR sustained the call to order, and required the member to confine himself to the precise question,

which was on a call of the House

Mr. HOFFMAN said, he intended only to reply to remarks which had been permitted to be made. He avowed that, as the mover of the resolution had followed up its

mittee on Indian Affairs, [Mr. BELL] and by the gentlemen from Georgia, [Messrs. LUMPKIN and FOSTER] who have preceded me in this debate. It proposes, as they have correctly said, an appropriation of money to be expended by the President in effecting the removal of the Indians now residing within the limits of the States and Territories, to a new residence west of the Mississippi. We have been told that this has long been the settled policy of the Government; and gentlemen express much surprise that any opposition should now exist to the accomplishment of an object so often sought, and represented as highly desirable. Sir, if this has been the settled policy of the Government, which I shall not now stop to consider, there has been also another policy and another practice pursued towards the Indian tribes which Providence has cast upon our care, that seems at the present juncture to be wholly forgotten. It is this: in all our relations with them, to respect their rights of soil and of jurisdiction-to treat with them as free and sovereign communities. We have uniformly acknowledged the binding force of our engagements with them, and we

H. or R.]

Removal of the Indians.

[MAY 18, 1830. have promised that we would be faithful and true in the Among these proceedings, I find, also, a letter written by performance of all our stipulations. We have never at the superintendent, under the direction of the Depart tempted to drive them from their ancient possessions, nor ment of War, to a gentleman in Boston, (J. Everts, Esq) to permit others to do so, by withholding our promised upon the same subject-disclosing the views of the Goprotection. We have never endeavored to deceive them vernment, and soliciting his attention to the condition of as to the nature and extent of their rights, nor to intimidate the Indians, and inviting his co-operation in measures calthem into an acquiescence with our wishes. Is such the culated to improve their situation. The gentleman from language now addressed to them? Is such the course now Georgia has alluded to a series of letters with the signsabout to be pursued? Sir, when gentlemen refer us to ture of William Penn, and has denounced the author as an the past policy of the Government, and ask us still to ad- "intermeddler" in matters which do not concern him, here to it, I tell them to take the whole policy together. and "a zealot," intruding his opinions upon this House Hold out as many inducements as you please, to persuade and upon the country. Now, sir, in attributing these letthe Indian tribes to exchange their country for another ters to the gentleman I have already adverted to, (Mr. beyond the Mississippi, but at the same time assure them Everts,) I disclaim all knowledge of the fact that is not that until they freely and voluntarily consent to remove, common to every member of the House. I know him only they shall be protected in the possession and enjoyment of as possessing a reputation for intelligence, philanthropy, all the rights which they have immemorially possessed, and benevolence, and untiring zeal in the promotion of human which we have recognized and solemnly guarantied to them happiness, which any one upon this floor might be proud in subsisting treaties. But the gentlemen bave said, and to possess. Is he an intermeddler Has he obtruded his reiterated, that the bill contemplates only the voluntary opinions upon this subject? Sir, was he not invited and removal of the Indians, and they are astonished that the solicited to its consideration! He was; and he did consider proposition should meet with any opposition. Sir, have and investigate, and has given the result of his researches they yet to learn that there is no opposition to their free, and reflections. What was he to do? Hold his opinions in unconstrained, voluntary removal? Has any man, upon this subserviency to the will of the Government! Do gentlefloor, or in this Congress, opposed it? Do the numerous men forget in what age and in what country we live! memorials which weigh down your table, oppose it? The Are we retrograding, while the spirit of free inquiry and honorable member from Tennessee, [Mr. BELL] to sustain unrestrained opinion is pushing its onward progress even bis assertion that the public mind had been perverted, under monarchies and despotism? Is it in this country deceived, and misled upon this subject, said, that the only to be met with checks and rebukes! Sir, have the uniform language of all the petitions was, that the Indians free citizens of this nation no right to investigate subjects might not be coerced and compelled to remove that the so highly interesting to our national prosperity and charac public faith might be kept and redeemed. Now, sir, is there ter, and to form opinions, except in accordance with the any remonstrance against the voluntary removal of these views of Government? The gentleman regards it perfectly tribes? Is there an objection to it from any quarter, unless proper and correct to form religious associations, and issue it is to be accomplished by coercion, or force, or withhold- pamphlets even in the northern States, when the object is ing from them that protection which we are bound to afford? in aid of his designs. But when a sense of right and jusI know of none; and I tell the gentleman, once for all, that tice and humanity leads to a different conclusion, then the the only opposition is, to a forced, constrained, compulso- gentleman can hardly find terms strong enough to express ry removal. The gentleman from Georgia, who first spoke his abhorrence of intermingling religious considerations upon this subject, [Mr. LUMPKIN] has gone further, and with political movements. Sir, I wish gentlemen would discovered the sources of the opposition, and the motives fairly meet and answer the arguments which have been adfrom which it springs. He has told us that it has its origin dressed to us, and not content themselves with the use of among enthusiasts in the northern States, who, under the harsh epithets, and the imputation of base motives. When pretence of philanthropy and benevolence, have acquired was this complaint about enthusiasm and mixing religion a control over the Indian councils-have sent missionaries with politics first heard of? Missionary establishments had among them who "are well paid for their labors of love," long existed among the Indians, with the approbation and and who are actuated by a sordid desire for "Indian annui- by the aid of Government. Their object was to amelioties." The gentleman has reproached the memorialists who rate the condition and elevate the character of these tribes, have addressed us, as "intermeddlers" and "zealots," and thereby rendering them better neighbors to Georgia, and expresses his strong disapprobation of appealing to religious essentially promoting her interests. Not a syllable of comassociations, or intermingling religious considerations in aid plaint was heard. Georgia was perfectly satisfied, and the of political and public objects. Sir, I am not about to vin- other States were left at full liberty to send their missionadicate the policy which the gentleman has reprobated. The ries, and expend their funds in improving the Indians within occasion does not call for it. But does he know upon whom her borders. But, when a new crisis has arisen, and the his reproaches fall? Does he remember the first pamphlet claims of these Indians to their own lands come in question, which was laid upon our table, in reference to this sub- then, if they are found not to coincide in the schemes of ject? It is entitled "Proceedings of the Indian Board in Georgia and of the administration, it is all "enthusiasm,” the city of New York," and I call the attention of the gen-" fanaticism," "sordid interest," 66 selfishness," " delutleman to it, if he wishes to ascertain who are endeavor- sion," "hypocrisy." I do not know, sir, that it is necesing to enlist religious societies and associations in the con- sary for me, or for any one, to stand here in vindication of cerns of Government. What was the origin of this "In- the motives of those intelligent and estimable men who dian Board!" and of whom is it composed? It originated have devoted time and treasure in the benevolent purpose with the Government. The Superintendent of Indian Af- of converting the Indians to civilization and christianityfairs, acting under the auspices, and by the direction of who have established schools and churches and bave been the Department of War, opened a correspondence with the means of their improvement and advancement in the divines in that city-he invited the formation of the society arts of social life. The country will do justice to their mo for the purpose of aiding the objects of Government-he tives and their actions. It is one thing to make an impeachwas sent on to deliver an address explanatory of the pur-ment, but quite another thing to sustain it. The gentleposes of the administration, and to assist in the establish- man has been liberal in accusations of the most odious ment of the association. It was formed, and is composed complexion-and by what are they sustained By that chiefly of religious men, who have solely in view, I doubt gentleman's opinion, and by nothing else he brings ne not, the benefit and preservation of the Indians, and have facts to corroborate it; and he must pardon me if I decline been made to believe that humanity requires their removal. to adopt his conjectures, or to regulate my action in any

« 上一頁繼續 »