The Removal of the Indians
Our readers are, no doubt, aware, that this disputed question which had produced a commendable agitation of public feeling, and called forth the manly and independent expression of public sentinent (sic), is at length decided by the Senate, in favor of removing the Indians.
The Yeas were 28, and the Nays 19-majority 9. This majority Mr. Brantly, of the Columbian Star, pronounces 'respectable and decided'- and we feel no disposition to dispute their claim to that application. But we think it due to the talents and conscientious integrity of the gentlemen who opposed the measure, to pronounce the minority as equally respectable and decided. We find it impossible to conceal our astonishment at the insolence which the Editor of the
Star displays in his last paper; while speaking of that numerous and respectable body of his fellow-citizens who dared, during the pending of the above question, to differ from him in their judgement of the case. Their private sentiments and public memorials he denominates 'lugubrious forebodings of self-constituted judges!' and the editorial remarks of such journalists as opposed the claims of Georgia to the territory, he modestly calls 'the formidable denunciations of petulant cotemporaries (sic)!!'
We beg the pardon of our sarcastic and magisterial brother, for calling his conduct on this occasion 'insolent'- but we cannot recall the expression.
The true definition of the word, 'petulant,' is 'saucy, perverse, wanton:-now we ask the good sense of our readers whether it is becoming the character of a Christian, or a gentleman, to heap such railing epithets upon the conductors of twelve or twenty of the most respectable religious, literary, and political journals in the Nation, and we may ask Mr. Brantly, by whose authority did he conduct his side of this controverted question, since all who have expressed a different view of the subject are unceremoniously rebuked as 'self-constituted judges?'
We leave the Editor of the Star and his ungenerous reflections, in the in the (sic) meantime, to the disposal of other 'contemporaries' whom he includes in the charge of petulance-reserving to ourselves the privilege of adverting to this subject in a future number.-N. Y. Bap. Rep.
Page 2 Col. 2b.
Trial of Tuskina.- Yesterday, May 7th- came on the trial of the Indian Chief Tuskina, arraigned before the District Court of the United States, on a charge of stopping and detaining the United States' mail.
It appeared from the testimony, that on the 6th February last, while the mail stage was passing through the Creek Nation, about four or five miles to the east of Line Creek, with the Messrs. Clines and another passenger, Tuskina hailed the driver in broken English, requiring him to stop, and as it afterwards appeared, wished him to take a message to Captain Walker, on the subject of tolls due the nation for passing through their lands. Tuskina was very much intoxicated, and the driver did not understand him, or attend to his wishes. The passengers spoke roughly to him, and he taking advantage of a turn in the road, crossed so as to head the stage, and placed himself before it. He attempted to take hold of the reins and made a pass at the driver with a common Jack knife, though he was not near enough to reach him. The passengers became alarmed and advised the driver to stop. One of the witnesses testifies; that there were a number of Indians insight, and some present, but that they all condemned the conduct of Tuskina. He also declared that the stage was not detained by the prisoner, but by the extraordinary terrors and apprehensions of the passengers. After a detention of about an hour and a half, the stage proceeded on its route without further molestation.
A Bill of indictment was preferred containing two counts, one for feloniously attempting to stop the mail- the other for knowingly and wilfully obstructing its passage. The Grand Jury ignored the first count, and found a true Bill on the second. On this a conviction was had, and the Prisoner was fined by the Court in the sum of one hundred dollars.
Thus has ended an affair, trifling and unimportant in itself, but which, by the ridiculous exaggerations of two or three terrified travellers, and the peculiar aspect of our Indian relations, has thrown the whole Country into commotion, drawn out the troops of the Government, and occasioned a parade and show of authority, that, as times are, would hardly be exceeded were the dissolution of the Union to be attempted.
From the turn the matter had taken it was highly necessary and proper for the sake of example, that the prisoner should be punished, but we confess we could not repress a feeling of mortified pride in reflecting, that a single Indian in a whiskey frolic, should be able to stir up the government to such an exhibition of its power. Had the driver possessed a particle of intrepidity, or had the passengers been governed by the ordinary firmness of men, the stage would have kept on its way, and the public ear would not have been abused by exaggerated tales of Indian interposition. We must not be understood in these remarks, as bestowing censure on the government, or its agents, for their conduct in this unfortunate affair; on the contrary, we are aware that the course they have pursued was rendered necessary by circumstances which they could not control.--Mobile Register.
LITTLE ROCK, (Arkansas,) April 1
Our South Western Frontier.-The frequency with which our citizens, residing in the southwestern district of our Territory, are alarmed by the savage incursions made upon them by the neighboring Indians, and the many citizens who have fallen victims to the tomahawk and scalping-knife, are fearfully impressing them with a dread of yet more direful events. So great is this apprehension, that our citizens in that quarter are driven to the necessity of having spies through the country about them, that timely notice may be given of the approach of any savage foe.
Our Legislature has repeatedly memorialized Congress on the subject of the danger to which our citizens are exposed, and petitioning that an adequate military force may be so located, as to afford protection to our frontier settlements. Those applications for protection have not only been in vain, but they have been worse than in vain. Not only have they been unheeded, but the small military force which for sometime occupied Cantonment Townson, has been withdrawn, and we are left to the mercy of the merciless savages. Our citizens are compelled, by turns, to leave their farms to the care of their wives and children, while they, as scouts, are hovering round the enemy to mark the road they take, in order to prevent more of their numbers from perishing in their own cornfields.
How much longer are we thus to be exposed?
It is confidently expected that the President, who is better acquainted with the merciless savage than any of his predecessors, and who best knows the surest means of defence, will not suffer the present session of Congress to terminate, without strongly recommending such measures as will efficiently protect our citizens.--Advocate.
How will it be when 70,000 more savages are placed in the neighborhood of Arkansas? Ed. Cher. Phoe.
Page 2 Col. 3b.
The Indians- The bill which has passed the Senate providing for the removal of the Indians beyond the Mississippi, appropriated $500,000 for that object, to be used entirely at the discretion of the President, or, to speak more explicitly, to be used for bribing the Chiefs of the Indian Nations, to consent to an exchange of lands. No provision has been made to protect the Indians from the operation of the unjust and arbitrary laws of Georgia and Alabama, which are intended to take effect on the first day of June next. By this act of the Senate, all existing treaties with the Indians have been violated, the national faith broken, and our national honor sacrificed. Those who relied upon the justice of the government, and placed themselves under its protection,a re wantonly abandoned to destruction. Some, however, state that the Indians will finally consent to remove. Perhaps they may consent; our fathers, when placed in a similar situation, consented to remove to the west of the Atlantic, and seek refuge in an inhospitable wilderness, rather than longer endure the iron scourge of European despotism; and why may not the Indians take a similar course?- Oppression can do much to convince any people that they had better remove beyond the reach of its power, but if it should not have the desired effect upon the Indians, perhaps the sum of $500,000 distributed as bribes to their chiefs, may induce those chiefs to sign the contract for their removal.
Respecting this business the Ontario Repository justly remarks: 'And now, will not the people of this nation demand of their rulers an account of their unrighteous stewardship? for this has been done, not only with deliberation, but against the loud and emphatic remonstrances, of every sect and party in the United States.- It is due to the people of this state to know, that their senators, Dudley and ' (sic) Sanford, have voted with the majority on this question. Woodbury of New Hampshire, the only Jackson senator from New England, has also betrayed his trust, and violated the knewn (sic) wishes of his constituents.'
From the Albany Daily Advertiser, of Friday.
Small Pox- We have read the Annual Address delivered before the Medical Society of the State of New York, Feb. 1830, by T. Romeyn Beck, president of the society. To say that it is able, would be superfluous, its author is too well known to require our approbation. The subject of the address is the Small Pox, its history, and the possibility of its extinction.
He says that it is now generally conceded, that this disease was unknown to the ancient Greeks and Romans. The first medical account of it is given by the Arabians. Rhazes, a physician at Bagdad (sic), in the beginning of the tenth century, is one of the oldest writers on the disease, whose works are now extant. He, however, quotes earlier authors, from which it would appear that it was introduced into Egypt by the armies of Omar, the successor of Mahomet.
It is supposed that this disease was brought into Spain about the eight (sic) century by the Saracens, and thus propagated over Europe. It was first brought to this country immediately after its discovery by Columbus. St. Domingo, containing, by computation a million of natives, was in a few years deprived of the whole number, by the combined effects of the sword and this dreadful epidemic. Mexico lost, in a very short time, upwards of three millions of inhabitants; and in several instances, whole tribes of Indians, in both Americas, appear to have been nearly extinguished by its ravages. In 1707, it destroyed, in Iceland, 16,000 persons, being more than one fourth of its inhabitants. In 1733 Greenland was almost depopulated by it.
The practice of inoculation had its origin in eastern countries, and was introduced into Constantinople when it was in general use not only in Asiatic countries, but in Barbary. In 1714, Dr. Timoni, a Greek physisian (sic), educated at Oxford, but residing at Constantinople, first communicated an account of the practice to the Royal Society of London, and from this a knowledge of its advantages came to be spread throughout Europe.
The individual who more particularly attraced (sic) the attention of the British public to it, was Lady Mary Wortley Montague, the wife of the English ambassador at Constantinople. While there, in 1717, she caused her son to be inoculated, and he had the disease mildly. When she returned to England, in 1722, she had her daughter inoculated, and this was the first case in that country: it was successful. Afterwards, six criminals under sentence of death were offered the alternatives, of suffering according to their sentence, or of submitting to inoculation. They embraced the latter were inoculated by Mr. Maitland, (the physician of Lady Montague,) and all passed favorably through the disease.
In America, the practice was first introduced by Dr. Boylston of Boston, on his own child. In six months, he inoculated 244 persons, but of these six died. When the death of an inoculated patient occurred in England, there was much ferment. Inoculation was denounced by the press and from the pulpit. But on investigation it appearing that of those who had the natural small pox, there died one in five or six, and of those who were inoculated, only one in fifty, the ferment subsided and the practice of inoculating was extended. Subsequent improvements in the mode of communicating the infection and of treating the disease, made inoculated small pox fatal only in about one case in two hundred.
The loss of lives in Great Britain and Ireland, from 1770 to 1800, exceeded 35,000 annally (sic).
In 1798 Dr. Jenner made the discovery of the benefits of vaccine matter in checking the influence of the small pox, and Dr. Beck gives some instances of its happy effects. During the twelve years, preceding the practice of vaccination, 5.500 died of the small pox in Copenhagen alone; whereas, since its introduction (1802) down to 1808, the deaths from it, throughout the whole Danish dominions, were only 158.
Formerly 10,000 died annually in the Prusian (sic) dominions, of small pox. In 1817, only 2,940.
In Bavaria, in 11 years, succeeding the promulgation of severe laws requiring vaccination, only five deaths happened from small pox, and 162,000 were vacinated (sic).