AND INDIANS' ADVOCATE
Wednesday, May 27, 1829
Vol. II, no. 8
Page 1 col. 3b.
GENTLEMEN- The literary Cadet and Statesman, published in Providence, Rhode Island, has the following article:
"The Georgians, not content with the grip which they have put upon the land of the exiled Creeks, are now about seizing the possessions of the Cherokees. Georgia now claims all lands south of the line drawn from Suawana Old Town to Six's, on the High-tower, and down that River to the chartered line of Georgia and Alabama, under the pretence that it was once the boundary between the Cherokees and Creeks, and that the new boundary has never been acknowledged by the United States. On the other hand, the Cherokees allege that the line claimed by Georgia, was never agreed upon or acknowledged by the two nations of Indians. The Creeks at one time claimed to that line, but the Cherokees also claimed to a line far south of it; and the only boundary ever agreed upon between them was fixed, in a spirit of compromise, half way between the two claims."
"It would be policy in the Georgians to rest contented with what they have. Justice may not be further outraged with impunity, even in the case of the poor Indian, and they who have trampled upon Indians rights and Indian hospitality, may at last find an end to their encroachments."
Now all the material allegations in the above extract, are nothing more or less than downright misrepresentations and false assertions. The line never has been in dispute between the Creeks and Cherokees within the memory of the older inhabitants of the country, white or red, nor has there ever been a compromise. But the line has always been known to run as Georgia now contends, from the Suawana Old Town, on the Chattahoochee, by the Hightower trail, to Six's, until the Creek Chief McIntosh, having married a Cherokee wife, influenced his tribe to permit the Cherokees to run a line further south. And such is the notoriety of these facts, that even the Cherokees do not pretend to deny them; and so sensible are they of the right of Georgia, that they have not the faintest hope of holding the land in question, and are quietly moving off them. Indeed I do not believe even the officious intermeddling of our eastern step brothers can inspire them to a contention. But such is the spirit of jealousy with which the mass of the New England people look on any prospect of our acquiring strength, and such the unblushing effrontery with which they disseminate misrepresentations, that they never lose an opportunity of reviling us, and detracting from our just claims, without regarding whether they effect their object through the medium of fact or fiction.
One word for their warning. We know our rights, and we will protect them: and should Rhode Island be so foolishly quixotic as to volunteer herself in resisting them, we will make her feel her own intrusion in matters which concern her not. She may know we give as little heed to her threat as we know she should receive credence for the slanders.
"Now all the material allegations" of HENRY, "are nothing more or less than downright misrepresentations and false assertions." The line has been in dispute between the Cherokees and Creeks, within the memory of hundreds of the inhabitants of this country. This fact is known not only by the Cherokees, but by many whites.- The arrangement was made precisely as we stated in a former number. Is it not surprising that no honest and liberal man can speak in favour [sic] of oppressed Indians, without arousing the war-like spirit of Georgia? without being charged with misrepresentations and falsehood? If an editor of a newspaper undertakes to defend the rights of Indians, "he is ignorant of the nature of Indians," is the cry, as though it was their nature to be scandalized, misrepresented, and abused. Is it agreeable to their nature to have their rights trampled upon by a horde of robbers and vagabonds, (we mean our intruders) and to have every avenue of justice closed against them? We can give HENRY a very satisfactory answer why some of the Cherokees have moved from the frontier into the interior of the nation- it is because they wish to avoid personal collisions with their neighbours [sic], and to save what little property they possess.- It is a notorious fact, that many, who, previous to the settlement of Carrol County, were in decent circumstances, have lately moved in with shattered possessions. One of these, we will mention his name, Richard Scott, declares that he has lost not less than 130 head of cattle, which were forcibly taken away by some of the citizens of the aforesaid county. He was unable to recover them on personal application. This is not a solitary instance.
Queries-Why have the politicians and writers in Georgia, of late become (we will not say "foolishly") "Quixetic?" [sic] Have they ever evinced themselves a brave people? How did Georgia distinguish herself in the late war, particularly in the Creek War? Is it becoming for a great, magnanimous, and brave state to evince such a war-like spirit as is manifested by Georgia?