MAY 19, 1830.]

Removal of the Indians.

[H. of R.

has referred to the treaty held with the tribes of that State of the conditions of the compact, titles have been extinin the year 1785. I should have been spared the trouble guished for other States (where there was no such obligaof continuing the examination of subsequent treaties of tion) to Cherokee lands, equal, if not greater than that that State, had not the treaty of 1794, bearing a striking claimed by Georgia. It is a maxim which the law enforces resemblance to the treaty of Holston, held with the Che-between individuals, that they must be just before they can rokees, and which, he contends, affects the right of Geor-be generous. It is equally correct in its application to comgia, escaped his vigilant research. By the provisions of munities or Governments; and had the United States acted the treaty of 1794, the United States recognised the various in conformity to this principle, Georgia would have had no tribes in that State to be independent communities, by just grounds of complaint.

treating with them as such; acknowledged the lands with- But a different course has been pursued, and the consein their certain boundaries to be the property of the Sene-quences are, that that State has an Indian population of ca and other tribes of Indians; that they had the right to five thousand souls, quartered upon five mill on two hunthe use and enjoyment of the same; and that they and their dred and sixty-nine thousand one hundred and sixty acres posterity had the right of disposing of it--not to the people of land within her limits, if we include in the estimate the of New York, or to that State only, but to the people of disputed territory; nor is this all: not content with the the United States. Thus, the law of that State, which for- rights of occupancy, they have erected within her bosem bade them selling to any one else, and the treaty held with an independent Government, and claim the right of enthem by this Government, differ. forcing upon her citizens their bloody code. Under these In 1826, when a resolution was moved in this House, circumstances, the alternative was presented, either to acproposing an inquiry into the expediency of making an quiesce, and tacitly admit the lawfulness of their pretenappropriation for holding a treaty with the Indians west of sions to an independent Government, or, by an exertion of the Genesee river, in that State, the argument was then her sovereign authority, to prostrate all hopes to it. She advanced, that the Seneca tribe, and those west of the Ge- chose the latter course; and there is sufficient moral firmnesee river, held under their original title, and stood in ness in that State to execute her lawful purposes, to disthe same relation to the United States as other tribes. No regard unjust censure, the cant of hypocrisy, or the change has taken place in their political condition since. movement of a political party, however masked under the The laws of that State were then, and are now, operating imposing garb of philanthropy. But from this unpleasant upon them. When my colleague [Mr. THOMPSON] some situation it is desirable to be relieved; and is it not due to time since introduced to our consideration a resolution, her, that the United States should act with becoming libewith a view to ascertain the moral and political condition rality, not with the view only of their transmigration beof Indian tribes, we were then informed by the same gen-yond the Mississippi, but to fulfil her engagements with tleman, [Mr. STORRS] who advocated opposite doctrines in Georgia, and meet the expectations which her citizens 1826, that all the Indians of that State should be exempted reposed in the justice and integrity of this Government? from the proposed inquiry, as they stood in a different There is no real or imaginary evil in voting for an approrelation to the United States to that of the Indians of other States, as, by mutual understanding, they had become the voluntary dependents of that State. Sir, in this I join issue with the gentleman, and defy the production of any written testimony which proves that the Seneca and other tribes in that State ever consented to the extension of the jurisdiction of that State over them. Yet it was done by her laws in 1822, and they have had no voice of pity raised in their behalf; no eye to see, or heart to feel for them. Distance lends enchantment to the view" of those secking objects on which feigned humanity is to operate.

priation, however large; no force is to be employed, no coercion contemplated. They will be left to their own judgment, and the adoption of their own course, uncontrolled by the restraints or exactions of this Government. If, in the full exercise of this discretion, they should prefer to emigrate, sooner than to remain subject to the authority of the States, affording the means to them to do so is only a compliance, so far as the Cherokees are concerned, with the obligations of the United States to Georgia. Should they decline an exchange of situation, no difficulty can occur. It will not be one of those fatal delusions Sir, it is unnecessary to further scan the course of po- where the error of misguided policy shall have comprolicy pursued by other States. Georgia would disdain to mitted the interest of the Government beyond the hope of exercise the authority if derived from precedents only. avoidance or escape. For, should the attempt be abortive, Let us proceed to inquire into the expediency of this Go- the appropriation, to the extent it shall not have accomvernment extending its aid in the exertion of all honorable plished its purpose, will remain unexpended. If successand necessary means to the effectuation of their removal ful, the United States will be reimbursed in the sale of and colonization. It is due to Georgia as a right, it is the lands occupied by the Creeks, Choctaws, and that necessary to preserve unimpaired the plighted faith of the portion of the lands occupied by the Cherokees in the United States, and will meliorate the condition of the In-State of Alabama. Sir, if gentlemen are sincere in their dians themselves. The State of Georgia and the United regard for the future condition and welfare of the Indians; States, since 1802, have occupied the attitude of creditor if feelings of disinterested benevolence are indulged for and debtor, without the benefit of an appeal to any tribu- them; let past experience be the guide to direct, and the nal or umpire to enforce the obligation, or to determine remnants of other tribes serve as beacons to admonish whether or not the debtor has acted in good faith. This against the causes of their extermination: whether they perplexing and unpleasant situation, as might have been have been of a moral, physical, or political character, it expected, has been the fruitful source of controversy between the State and the Federal Governments. It should be desirable to all to remove the cause, and, by so doing, put a termination to their well founded complaints. By the compact, the United States, so soon as it could be done "peaceably, and on reasonable terms," were bound to extinguish, for the use of Georgia, the possessory right of the Indians to all the lands within the limits of that State. Twenty-seven years have clapsed since the fulfilment of this promise was assumed. Two new and flourishing States, rising with Georgia in population and wealth, have been erected out of the territory she parted with, as the consideration of this undertaking; and, in apparent disregard

matters not. Should they remain where they are, as certain as a like cause produces the same effect, they will inevitably experience the same fate. It is admitted that they, in common with the human family, indulge their local attachments; and, unless inducements are offered, or there is a hope of bettering their condition, that they will reluctantly abandon their present habitation. But it cannot be denied but that there are countervailing considerations to induce a removal. Their game is destroyed. They are unfavorably situated to advance one grade above the wandering savage, to the life of herdsmen, which is the natural progress of society. A sudden transition from the former to the husbandman, is too great to be voluntarily

H. of R.]

Duty on Salt.

[MAY 20, 1830. adopted. It will not be until every other expedient is ex- odious. It was hoped by the southern gentlemen who hausted, and necessity forces it on them. It is incompati-voted it in, that the bill would be thus drugged by too ble with their inclinations and habits of indolence. The heavy a dose to go down. In that they were disappointed, country to which they are invited is favorable in this point and he was glad to see a disposition, which had been exof view. Their relations and friends who have gone be-pressed on a late occasion, by one of those who was in the fore them, have experienced the advantages of this change. vote, to undo what had in this respect failed to answer Instead (as has been stated in debate) of their sending the object intended. Mr. I. felt more solicitude on this back their curses on us, they are soliciting their tribes to subject, at the present time, from having recently examined follow their example. Pass the bill on your table, and with care the report from the Treasury Department in there is no doubt but that a part will go at once, and ulti- regard to the commerce and navigation of the country for mately the balance could not be restrained--go they will. the year past. He found in that document that our trade Sir, we have had the most favorable representation given with Cuba, the island from whence our greatest importa of the increasing improvement and comforts of the south- tions come, had declined nearly a million of dollars during ern Indians, and that urged as an objection to their re- the past year from what it had usually been. The cause moval. It may be the case with a few chiefs and half of this decline was principally to be attributed, as he learnt breeds; but those best acquainted with the mass of their from a most intelligent resident in that island, to the fact population, deny that it is so with them. Whoever has that, under our present heavy duty upon molasses, taken in witnessed the progress of civilization, cannot be insensible connexion with the expense of freights and casks, the of the great disparity which it produces in their situation. islanders could not make sales of the article to us to any Its advancement is slow, and confined to a few. It ele- extent; and they now actually spread over their land, and vates their standing, and acquires for them a controlling use as manure, immense quantities of molasses, which they influence, which is directed to the advancement of their would gladly exchange for the lumber and breadstuffs of our own interest, and that of their immediate connexions. country, if we would but let the trade go on. Are gentleThe notions of separate property, which it begets, engen-men aware [said Mr. I.] that the trade with Cuba is one of der feelings of avarice, and their intellectual superiority the most valuable branches of our foreign commerce? It enables them to gratify this propensity. The consequence stands on the list next to England and France in amount; is, that the property of the nation is concentrated in the and strike out the articles of cotton and tobacco which go hands of few, while nine-tenths of them are proportionably to these countries, and it will exceed our trade with both miserably poos, abject, servile, and degraded. I care not to nations. Nay, sir, as a market for our breadstuffs, it is which tribe your attention may be directed, to the Creeks more valuable to us than all Europe. It is, too, a trade in or the Cherokees; the rapacity of the chiefs has reduced which every section of this country is deeply interestedthem to this state of poverty and degradation. Sir, I am it has no sectional bearing. It takes, in large quantities, admonished, that, unless I conclude my remarks, I shall not preserve my pledge to this House. I have, as briefly as I could, presented my views on the most prominent points introduced into this discussion. If the success of the bill has not been advanced by it, I have the consolation of knowing that I have discharged my duty.

the rice of the South, the lumber of North Carolina, the grain and beef of the West which descend the Mississippi, and find there almost their only foreign market--the flour of the middle States, the corn meal, lumber, and live stock of New England. Besides this, immense quantities of our manufactured articles find an outlet there; not those After negativing, during the evening, motions both for manufactures which were noxious to some parts of this the previous question and for adjournment, about a quar-country, but those which are produced in the workshops ter past ten o'clock a motion to adjourn prevailed; and, of our mechanics in every State of the Union--such as after a session of twelve hours,

The House adjourned.

THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1830.

DUTY ON SALT.

The bill reported yesterday, for reducing the duty on salt, being read a second time,

Mr. KING, of New York, moved that the bill be com

mitted to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. McDUFFIE opposed this course, as merely going to produce delay and a defeat of the bill, which, if there was a majority favorable to the object, should be acted on immediately to effect its passage this session.

Mr. INGERSOLL moved that the Committee of the Whole be instructed to amend the bill, by adding there to the following section:

will

hats, leather, carriages, shoes, harnesses, soap, candles, and cabinet furniture. A trade like this [said Mr. I.] i one of the last that should be shackled. We impose beavy duties on European goods, because we cannot barter away our breadstuffs or agricultural products for them: but here is a market which offers to take every thing that you send-it invites to it every interest that can be named. Why then cripple it by an ungenerous regulation of your own; and why visit your heaviest tax upon the humblest article which goes into the consumption of the poorest people of the country?

Mr. I. said, he would say a few words as to the proposed reduction of the duty on salt, as he might not have another opportunity to give his reasons for the votes he had given, or should give, on that question. The salt trade of this country had not been correctly represented. We have heard much of the salt tax, as bearing severely and pecu "From and after the 30th September, 1830, the duty on liarly on the poor: and so far as that was the case, he could molasses shall be five cents per gallon, and no more; and go as far as any man in extending relief. But there never from and after that time, a drawback be allowed on all spirits was a time, even when salt was duty free, that it could be distilled in this country from foreign molasses, on the ex- had cheaper than it now can, even on the seaboard; and portation thereof to any foreign country, the same as was allowed before the tariff of 19th of May, 1828."

Mr. I. said, if there was one article on which the tariff of 1828 operated unjustly, it was that which he now sought to relieve. The injustice of the double duty imposed on molasses, in 1828, would be very generally acknowledged, and by none more frankly than those by whose votes the increase was effected. No man now would deny, indeed, it had already been distinctly admitted on this floor, that molasses was loaded with a heavy duty, at the period to which he alluded, for the purpose of rendering the tariff

never so cheap in the interior, near the extensive salt works which have grown up under the operation of the existing duty. The bulk of our importation of salt, and on which most of the duty operates, is not the coarse West India salt used to pack provisions, and which is con sumed principally by the poorer citizens; but the refined, or blown salt, as it is called, which we import from Liverpool, or other ports of Great Britain. The value of foreign salt imported during the last year, as appears by the tren sury returns, amounted to seven hundred and fourteen thousand six hundred and eighteen dollars, of which four

MAY 21, 22, 1830.]

District Affairs.-Molasses and Rum.--Culture of Silk.

[H. of R.

The motion was negatived: yeas, 59--nays, 117. The bill was then ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1830.

MOLASSES AND RUM.

hundred and sixty-seven thousand two hundred and other session, and asked for the yeas and nays; which thirteen dollars was imported, not from Turk's Island, or being ordered, from any West India port, but from England and Ireland. This kind is imported principally in its refined and manufactured state, for the tables of the rich, and is as fair a subject for revenue as any one that can be named. He should be opposed to reducing the duty on this refined article; but would cheerfully reduce the duty on the coarse and strong West India or Turk's Island salt, because that was used by the poor, and goes largely into the agricul tural operations of the country. He would reduce this, and leave the other untouched, for the same reason that he would reduce the duty on molasses and leave sugar untouched; in other words, he would lighten the tax from those who are least able to pay, and let the burden rest on those who use the most expensive, or what are generally deemed the most luxurious articles. Should the amendment which he now offered prevail, he pledged himself to follow it up by another, making a discrimination on salt, that he thought would be acceptable to every part of the

House.

Mr. TUCKER, for the purpose of bringing on a discussion upon the bill by itself, moved the previous question; which motion being seconded by a majority, and the previous question being sustained by a vote, by yeas and nays, of 98 to 88,

The main question was then put, viz. "Shall the bill be engrossed, and read a third time?" and was decided in the affirmative by the following vote: yeas, 103-nays, 88. DISTRICT AFFAIRS.

This being the day set apart by the rules of the House for the transaction of business relating to the District of Columbia,

Mr. BELL moved to suspend the rule, for the purpose of resuming the consideration of the bill for the removal of the Indians.

Mr. McDUFFIE, from the Committee of Ways and Means, reported the following bill:

"Be it enacted, &c. That, from and after the 30th day of September, 1830, the duty on molasses shall be five cents per gallon, and no more; and from and after that time, there shall be allowed a drawback of four cents upon every gallon of spirits distilled in the United States, or the territories thereof, from foreign molasses, on the exportation thereof to any foreign port or place, other than the dominions of any foreign State immediately ad joining the United States, in the same manner, and on the same conditions, as before the tariff of May the 19th, 1828." The bill being read the first and second time,

Mr. McDUFFIE moved that the bill be engrossed for a third reading.

A call of the House was moved, and ordered, but suspended before the Clerk had got through the roll. Mr. WICKLIFFE moved to lay the bill on the table, and asked for the yeas and nays on the motion; which be ing ordered,

The question was taken, and the motion decided in the negative: yeas, 55-nays, 120; and

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, by a large majority.

CULTURE OF SILK.

The House resumed the consideration of the resolution reported by Mr. SPENCER, of New York, a week or two ago, for printing ten thousand copies of Mr. Rush's report on the culture of silk.

Mr. POWERS and Mr. TAYLOR opposed the motion, on the ground of the necessity for acting now on the bill for the punishment of crimes within the District, as further]: Mr. SPENCER replied to the objections which had delay would prevent its passage at all this session. As to been urged, on a former occasion, to this proposition, the provisions respecting slaves, the latter gentleman, al- contending for the established value of the information though he was opposed in principle to the discrimination contained in the report--the great importance of diffuswhich had been contended for by the southern gentlemen, ing it through the country, in as much as silk might be he did not believe, as regarded the practical effect, that successfully cultivated in every part of the Union--the it was of much importance, and was willing to take the question without a word of debate, and would be content, howsoever the House might decide it; he thought the compromise which had been agreed on, ought to satisfy its opponents; but the bill in some shape was indispensable. Mr. ALEXANDER asserted that the people of the District would rather the bill should lie over till the next session, than have it passed in the shape it was; and, after a few remarks from Mr. MERCER and Mr. BAILEY,

The question was taken, and the House refused to suspend the rule.

Mr. ALEXANDER then handed to the Chair a letter from sundry citizens of Alexandria, containing their rea sons against extending the provisions of the bill to slaves; and Mr. A. followed some remarks on the subject with a motion to postpone the bill till the first Monday in December next, with a view of collecting, in the mean time, through the commissioners, the sense of the people on it. Mr. TAYLOR and Mr. POWERS opposed the motion, and Mr. J. S. BARBOUR advocated it.

The question being taken, the motion to postpone was negatived, by yeas and nays: yeas, 77—nays, 100.

Mr. ALEXANDER then moved a proviso to the bill: "that the act should not be construed to extend to slaves;" and on a division of the House, without debate, the proviso was agreed to: yeas, 81-nays, 77.

Mr. PEARCE then moved that the bill be laid on the table, with a view not to call it up this session, or any VOL. VI--141

great value to the country of that culture, and the importance of encouraging it by the distribution of instruction in the various processes of the art; to show all which, he adduced various facts and arguments, and a number of respectable authorities. Mr. S. concluded by offering a modification of the resolution, by order of the Committee on Agriculture, proposing to print thousand copies of the report.

Mr. HAYNES, of Georgia, moved that the resolution and the amendment be laid on the table; and the question being put, the motion was negatived: yeas, 71--nays, 92. Mr. POLK then rose to speak on the subject, but the expiration of the hour cut off further debate.

SATURDAY, MAY 22, 1830.

CULTURE OF SILK. The House resumed the resolution modified yesterday by Mr. SPENCER, to read as follows:

Resolved, That six thousand copies of the report of the Committee on Agriculture, made to this House on the 13th of March last, with the communication accompanying the same, on the culture and manufacture of silk, and the like number of copies of essays on American silk, by Messrs. Peter S. Duponceau and John D'Homergue, recently published, be printed for the use of the House.

Mr. POLK opposed the resolution, on the ground that there was ne more propriety in printing, and paying for,

H. of R.]

Culture of Silk.-Removal of the Indians.

[MAY 24, 1830

out of the contingent fund of the House, instructions in Mr. STORRS replied, and contended that no treaty in the art and mystery of cultivating silk, than in printing existence contained the provision which his amendment and distributing the American Farmer, Taylor's Arator, proposed, and that it was therefore necessary and expea work on Farriery, or any other treatise on any branch of dient.

rural economy, &c.

Mr. WAYNE denied what the amendment assumed, Mr. CHILTON also opposed what he considered tax-namely, that the Cherokees were a nation independent of ing the community some two or three thousand dollars, to the State of Georgia. He expressed a determination to print books for the use of the members, and to distribute take an opportunity of going to the foundation of this amongst their friends; and argued generally against the question of Indian rights, and that whatever credit genpractice of voting money out of the treasury for the pur-tlemen might obtain for a fanciful eloquence, they should chase of books for private use. He had no doubt when not have the benefit of the argument. the people recovered their senses-recovered from that convulsion, that apoplexy, in which they had been thrown by political demagogues, they would rectify this sort of retrenchment and reform. He concluded a number of remarks of the like trains, by moving to lay the resolution on the table, but withdrew it at the request of

Mr. WILDE called for the reading of the eighth article of the treaty with the Cherokee Indians west of the Mis sissippi, of May 26, 1828, as a reply to the resolution of Mr. STORRS.

Mr. VINTON argued that as that treaty was made by the Cherokees west of the Mississippi, it had no binding efMr. SPENCER, who argued to show that the works fect on the Cherokees remaining on the east of the Missiswhich it was proposed to distribute, were not accessible sippi. He commented on that treaty as a direct and gross to the people generally; that they were on a subject of violation of all justice, and expressed the indignation he immense importance to the country, and one which ought had always felt at such an attempt to violate the rights of to be encouraged by the House; that the cost of the pub-third persons. lication was insignificant, compared with the value which Mr. BURGES contended that the treaty of 1828 was it would be to the whole Union, &c. When Mr. S. con- practically a fraud, a deep and lasting disgrace to the last cluded, administration, and that this bill contained, by implication, a confirmation of that fraud, now attempted to be palmed upon this nation; to sustain which opinions, he adverted to the history of the treaty, and the circumstances growing out of it.

Mr. CONNER moved to lay the resolution on the table; on which motion the yeas and nays were ordered, at the call of Mr. BAYLOR; and, being taken,

The motion was negatived: yeas, 76--nays, 97. Mr. CHILTON then renewed his opposition to the resolution, and spoke until the expiration of the hour.

MONDAY, MAY 24, 1830.

CULTURE OF SILK.

The House resumed the consideration of the resolution, reported by the Committee on Agriculture, to print six thousand copies of certain tracts on the culture of silk, &c. Mr. CHILTON, to get rid of further debate on the sub ject, moved the previous question; which being seconded, and the main question ordered,

Mr. JENNINGS made a few remarks.

Mr. LEWIS opposed the amendment, and argued to show that the treaty which had been denounced, was just and proper, and cited the treaty with the Indians east of the Mississippi, to show that the bill before the House was He read the Journal, to show that many gentlemen who in conformity to the settled policy of the Government. opposed this bill, supported precisely the same provisions inferred from that, that the opposition to it was a party in 1826, when recommended by a different President; opposition to the administration, and to the South: that as this bill was known to be the leading measure of the preMr. MARTÍN required a division of the question; and The question being accordingly put on the first member the opposition to defeat it; and therefore called on those sent President, it was an object of great solicitude with of the resolution, viz. "That six thousand copies of the report of the Committee on Agriculture, made to this who avowed themselves the supporters of the administraHouse on the 12th of March, 1828, with the communication, to sustain this measure; that, if they did not, they tion accompanying the same, [Mr. Rush's report] on the culture of silk," be printed, it was decided in the affirma tive by yeas and nays: yeas, 109-nays, 68.

would be faithless, and traitors to their party. Mr. L. then proceeded at some length to vindicate the policy of the bill, and in reply to Messrs. STORRS and EVERETT. When he concluded,

The second member of the resolution, viz. "And the Mr. STORRS rose, and said, that, as a gentleman from like number of copies of essays on American silk, by Messrs. Peter S. Duponceau and John D'Homergue, re-amendment to the bill, of a more extensive effect, and Pennsylvania [Mr. HEMPHILL] was about to offer an cently published, be printed for the use of the House," which would supersede the amendment now before the was then also agreed to by yeas and nays--100 to 80. So the whole of the resolution was agreed to. House, he would withdraw it until the question could be taken, or that which he [Mr. H.] was about to propose. Mr. EVERETT, of Massachusetts, replied briefly to The House then proceeded to the unfinished business Mr. LEWIS's reference to himself, in which, among other of Wednesday last, being the bill providing for the re-remarks, he observed, that, if the provisions of the present moval of the Indians beyond the river Mississippi-the bill were precisely the same as those which he had supportquestion pending being on a motion for the previous ques-ed in 1826, it was singular that the gentlemen who now tion. advocate this should have voted against that, as was the

REMOVAL OF THE INDIANS.

On trying the sense of the House on seconding the mo-case with the members from Georgia itself; and he vindition for the previous question, only seventy-eight rose,cated himself from the imputation of being influenced in and the motion was therefore not seconded by a majority his course on this subject by party considerations. of the House. Mr. THOMPSON said that he did not rise to enter into The question then recurred on the amendment. a general discussion, at that time, of the subject then beMr.BELL opposed the amendments, and argued briefly fore the House--that although he had purposely abstained that the bill itself proposed an appropriation only to carry from a participation in the discussion of any of the various into effect existing contracts and treaties with the Indian subjects which had engaged the attention of the House tribes, according to their construction by the Government, during the present session, with a special view to secure to and introduced no new policy, as was contended by the himself the privilege of discussing this subject at some opposition to it. Therefore, the amendment was unneces-length, yet considerations of an important character had disposed him to abstain from the discussion; nor would he

sary.

MAY 24, 1830.]

Removal of the Indians.

[H. of R.

seems to me, [said Mr. T.] such as ought to have induced every honest and correct man, who had any knowledge of constitutional principles and provisions, to vote in opposition to such a daring violation of constitutional principles, such a monstrous stretch of executive power, as was committed by Mr. Adams on that occasion.

now trouble the House with any remarks upon the subject, Chief Magistrate of the Union, and the white population for he thought the cause of principle and humanity could may be driven into the Atlantic by a retrocession of the be better served by voting than by talking; but the gentle-whole territory to the aboriginal inhabitants of this contiman from Massachusetts [Mr. EVERETT] had, on two oc- nent. Any or all the States of this Union might be sold casions, alluded to the vote which the delegation from by him to a foreign power. These [said Mr. T.] were Georgia gave on the call of the late President of the United the views which influenced the delegation from Georgia States [Mr. ADAMS] for an appropriation to carry what is to give their vote against the treaty made by Mr. Adams commonly called the new treaty into effect. Mr. T. said with the Creek Indians, as well as against the appropriathat he felt that it was due to Georgia--to the gentlemen tion to carry it into effect. And the principles upon which who composed that delegation--to correct principles--to the delegation from Georgia acted on that occasion, are, it the House, and to the American people, to state concisely the principles which influenced the Georgia delegation on that occasion. In February, 1825, [said Mr. T.] commissioners appointed on the part of the United States for the purpose, entered into compact with the Creek Indians, at the Indian Springs, by which they relinquished their claim to all territory within the limits of Georgia. This compact was transmitted to the seat of the General Government, and, with objections to its validity, was presented to the President, who laid that instrument, with the objections to it, before a cabinet council; and under the advice of the council, the treaty, with the objections, was presented to Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, moved a call of the House. the Senate for ratification. That body, by a very large ma- Mr. LAMAR, of Georgia, demanded the yeas and nays jority, gave their sanction to it. But before the ratification on this motion; which being taken, the call was ordered received executive sanction, the Presidential chair changed by a vote of 128 to 29. incumbents. Mr. Adams, who was a member of the coun- The roll was then called, when it appeared there were cil who advised Mr. Monroe to lay the subject before the seven members absent, two of whom soon after entered Senate, succeeded to the executive chair, and finally gave the Hall; and, after some time,

Mr. VINTON then took the floor, and addressed the House two hours against the bill. When he concluded, seven or eight members rose; but

Mr. DESHA, having obtained the floor, moved the previous question.

the executive sanction to that ratification. Thus [said Mr. BROWN moved a suspension of further proceedMr. T.] that treaty, having received final constitutional ings, which motion was decided by yeas and nays in the sanction, became a supreme law of the land, and of course affirmative.

was by the constitution placed on the same dignified The motion for the previous question recurring, the ground with the constitution itself, for that instrument says House divided, and, tellers being appointed by the Chair, that "this constitution, and laws of the United States they reported ninety-three for putting the previous queswhich shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties tion, and ninety-nine against it. made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the Mr. WAYNE said, this question should be discussed United States, shall be the supreme law of the land." with a deep sense of what is due to the reputation of our Now, sir, [said Mr. T.] the treaty of the Indian Springs country. Great moral principles are involved-the conhaving thus received constitutional sanctions, all the terri- struction of treaties is implicated--the characters of States tory within the limits of Georgia, embraced by its provi- are at stake--the weak are supposed to be oppressed by sions, became a part of the sovereign State-for as Geor- the powerful--and a large portion of the most active begia, by the issue of the American revolution, acquired the nevolence of our country is alert, to applaud or condemn, right to exclusive sovereignty within her limits, and as the to exult or to grieve, at the termination of our legislation. United States, by the compact with Georgia, in 1802, It is true this benevolence is, in a degree, embittered by bound themselves to extinguish the Indian title to all terri-party spirit; and there are those here who would pervert tory within Georgia, for the use of that State, the instant it to that mischievous end. Fanaticism has given to it a that those Indians thus relinquished their title, a full, per- coloring unfavorable to dispassionate judgment, and its fect, and complete title to the territory embraced by the purity is alloyed by selfishness. But it cannot be denied, provisions of that treaty within the limits of Georgia, vested for the memorials on your table show it, that among those in that State, which could not be divested without her who are opposed to the policy intended to be accomplishconsent. Sir, [said Mr. T.] Mr. Adams, in his opening ed by the bill, there are many who are actuated by a spirit message addressed to Congress at the commencement of of disinterestedness, and a sincere sympathy for the Indian, the session which immediately ensued his installation into excited by the misapprehension that he is about to be driven the executive office, repudiated the treaty of the Indian from the forests of his fathers, and to be made the victim Springs, (1825,) by suggesting that it was founded in fraud, of tyranny. Sir, the opposition, however, to this bill, but said he would make it the subject-matter of a separate neither in this House nor out of it, has been of a commend. and special message. This promise was not redeemed; able kind; and when its provisions shall be calmly examinbut Mr. Adams assumed the right to enter into treaty with ed, and its policy shall have been realized in the condena delegation from that part of the Creek tribe of Indians sation of an Indian population of sixty thousand souls in which was known as hostile to the United States during the region to which they are invited--living under the prothe late war, by which he re-ceded to that tribe a part of tection of this powerful nation--lifted up from the degrathe territory, a complete title to which had, by the ratifi- dation of their savage habits into a state of society in all cation of the treaty of 1825, vested in Georgia, and this respects like our own, and running a parallel career of without the privity or consent of that State; thus virtu- comfort, independence, and political connexion with ourally ceding to an Indian tribe a part of a sovereign State. selves-the sagacity of the historian will be at no loss to Now, [said Mr. T.] if it was competent for Mr. Adams discover the causes of the opposition the plan has had to thus to re-cede to the Creek Indians a portion of territory encounter, and he will be forced to write, at least, a rewhich had thus become a part of a sovereign State, was it flection upon the short-sightedness and perverseness of not competent for him to re-cede to those Indians, as well that hostility which so perseveringly seeks to defeat a as to the Cherokees, all the territory obtained from them scheme so full of national disinterestedness and of moral by previous purchases? And if so, what point of limita- grandeur, for the alleviation of human misery. But, sir, tion could have stayed his wasting hand in a backward the present generation anticipates the condemnation of course of reckless policy? Concede this power to the

posterity in our successful repulse of this opposition; and