From the Knoxville Republican.

THE CHEROKEES.

The following clause is taken from the 23rd Section, Article 1st, of the Constitution of Georgia:

'And provided, also, The Legislature may give its consent, to the establishment of one or more governments westward thereof; but monopolies of land by individuals being contrary to the spirit of our free government, no sale of territory of this state, or any part thereof, shall take place to individuals or private companies, unless a county or counties shall have been first laid off, including such territory, and the Indian rights shall have been extinguished thereto.'

With such a clause in the Constitution, how can Georgia proceed to sell the lands of the Cherokees? Can she pretend that the title of the Cherokees has been extinguished? With all her effrontery, we believe she has never set that up as an excuse for the illegal and inhuman course she has taken. The constitution says no sale of lands in the State shall take place until, 'counties shall have been first laid off, including such territory, and the INDIAN RIGHTS SHALL HAVE BEEN EXTINGUISHED THERETO.' But it seems Constitutions mean anything or nothing, in the present enlightened day, just as it may suit avarice or ambition. And for this glorious era in jurisprudence, the world may research of the great constitutional lawyer, Andrew Jackson. He that upon the resignation of his Judgeship in the Tennessee, confessed he was not qualified to discharge the duties of his office, and who, when Judge in Florida, procured a lawyer to write decisions in causes (sic) which that lawyer had argued before him.

__________________

It is well known that the Chickasaws agreed by treaty, to sell their lands and remove across the Mississippi, whenever a suitable country could be found for them. A deputation from that tribe made a full examination of the western regions, for the purpose of finding one. They found but one suitable place, not already occupied by other tribes; and that proved to be, not in the United States, but in Texas. On their return, Major Eaton, late Secretary of War, and Gen. Coffee, commissioners on the part of the United States, called a meeting of Chickasaws and Choctaws, for the purpose of making some arrangement by which both might settle on the land to which the Choctaws were then removing. Some in the Choctaws replied that, as the government had promised never to ask them to sell that land, it might have been as well to let them set their feet upon it before violating that promise. The meeting was thinly attended, and nothing done. So much has long been public.

The commissioners thought best to make another trial. They attributed the thin attendance to bad weather, and pronounced it no test of the sentiments of these tribes.- They write down a talk to both tribes, and a separate talk to each of them, recommending the proposed arrangement. They stated, as plainly as words could express it, in their talk to the Chickasaws; as a reason why they should consent to settle in the Choctaw country, and be one people with them; and in their talk to the Choctaws, as a reason why they should receive the Chickasaws; that the United States has no other land; to which the Chickasaws could be removed. This document, we believe, has never appeared in the newspapers printed solely for circulation among the two nations; but someone procured a copy from an Indian agent; to whom they were committed distribution, ' sent it where we saw and read it. Nothing further has been done for the removal of the Chickasaws.

'Here we have it officially announced, that the United States have no land to which the Chickasaws can be removed; and this announcement is confirmed by the subsequent conduct of the government towards the Chickasaws, to what place shall the Cherokees be removed, if they leave their present residence? And fair what ' honorable intentions can our government have in continuing to harass them on this subject?'

Who that has flesh and blood, can avoid the rising of indignation at the recital of such disclosures! We do not wish to speak evil of our rulers, to call in question the honor, or the reputation or the purposes of men in power; but here are facts that must speak for themselves,and we suppose there is no doubt of their truth. Men of sense and candor, that are not too far gone in party politics to be capable of just reflection, must and will draw their own inferences.--Vt. Chronicle.