Cherokee Phoenix


Published February, 12, 1831

Page 2 Column 2a-Page 3 Column 5a


NEW ECHOTA FEB. 12, 1831

The indisposition of the Editor and one of the Printers prevented our issuing a paper last week.



On Wednesday evening a friend sent us the following note:

'The kind, `peaceable, and reasonable terms ' upon which the Cherokee lands were to be obtained, have at last made their appearance. One hour by sun this evening the Georgia Militia made their awful and martial appearance in the Town [Coosewaytee.] I presume they intend nullifying one of the treaties of the Cherokee Nation with the United States, by chopping down the toll gates on the Federal road. The Company consists of about thirty-five or forty men, well equipped.'

We understand from further information since received, that the Militia spoken of above were a portion of the standing army of the State of Georgia, created during the last legislature, for the purpose of guarding the gold mines, and executing the laws. They are called in Georgia, the guard, and are commanded by one Nelson, the same, who, a few days since, was taking a tour through the nation, circulating the late acts, in his military costume, with his sword hanging to his side. After they passed our friend (who is a Cherokee) they proceeded to the residence of Mr. John Martin, one of the proprietors of the turnpike, and put up for the night. It soon appeared that one of their objects was to break down the gates. Mr. Martin, having no other alternative, sent word to the gate keepers to open them forthwith. This band of military lodged in his premises, and on the next morning, we understand, he was arrested by them, who took him on to their headquarters, the accommodations of which, be it said to the shame of the General Government, have been prepared by the Executive of the United States.

We have not heard under what charge Mr. Martin has been arrested, or whether a process of any kind was served upon him-but that makes no difference-there are charges plenty alleged, and to be alleged against the Cherokees, and process or no process, they must be arrested: But 'a question to be asked,'--why do they come in such military array, with muskets, pistols, swords, and all the implements of warfare, even to a drum dangling at the side of one of their number, to chop down a toll gate, or to make prisoner of a single individual, who was unconscious of any crime committed against a human being, or who had never intimated his intention to resist? One man with his hatchet might have executed the former with ease, and another, with a piece of `black and white', might have performed his purpose without the shedding of blood. These are fearful times indeed, if an honest citizen, attending to his business in his own premises, and in time of peace, may be invaded by an army! What will these events come to? On the head of our false and faithless Father be the consequences of all this vexatious persecution.

Is it intended by the Executive of the United States and the state of Georgia, the former in permitting, the latter in executing such acts against the poor Cherokees, to force them from their lands by dint of oppression? We can say to those who hold the reins of those Governments,-no, gentlemen, you cannot succeed-our patience ' forbearance are not exhausted-you will not drive us into compliance by mere oppression; if you therefore, must have these lands, the deep shame ' indelible infamy of taking them by open force is reserved for you!



Extract of a letter from Col. Charles H. Nelson to a gentleman in this place dated

GAINESVILLE, Jan. 18th 1831

DEAR SIR- In haste, I inform you, that on yesterday we had warm work at Leather's Ford. A detachment [of the State Guard] under my command was conducting eleven prisoners, when we were attacked by about sixty men, who used everything but guns. We charged on them and dispersed every one of them, without damage to my men. One of the assailants received three severe bayonet wounds, from which his recovery is considered doubtful.' - Washington News 22d ult.

We had heard quite a different story of the transactions related by Col. Nelson in the above official communication. According to the information we received, there was no attack, but in arresting the eleven men, who we understood were Tennesseans, one of them was stabbed three times with a bayonet. We were told that there was no likelihood of his recovery. Our informant further stated that the prisoners were arrested at Leather's Ford, on the Georgia side.- [Ed. Cher. Phoe.]


We have been favored with the following authentic account of the treatment of a Cherokee youth, whose arrest, we noticed sometime since in our statement of a warlike irruption into Hightower of a band of Militia from Carrol County. It adds another item to the long list of the tender mercies of Georgia to the poor Indians.


February 4th, 1831


Sir--In the Phoenix of the 8th of last month I saw the notice you have taken of the capture of Joseph Beanstick by a band of armed militia from Carrol County, Georgia. For a more correct understanding of this grievous irruption I will state the particulars which led to it as has been reported to me.

It appears that whilst the United States Troops were stationed in this nation, Lieut. Fowler, then commanding a detachment of Federal Troops at the Six's Gold mines, issued a written order to the Cherokees of Etowah, as a more effectual way of accomplishing his duty, to arrest every white man who may come among them to disturb their persons or property, and to deliver such persons over to him. A short time after this, there came three whitemen late in the evening to the house of Ootolanestee who lives some distance from the public road, and so far as the Cherokees could ascertain from their conversation and actions, they indicated a disposition to arrest a young Cherokee man and to take some Cherokee horses. The Cherokees left the house and gave information to others in the vicinity, who determined on executing the order of Lieut. Fowler; and after several persons were collected, they repaired to the house of Ootolanestee and there found the white men; one of them, Thos. York, was recognized and known to the Cherokees to be a conspicuous character in the Pony Club,- the other two were strangers and not known-but being in company with York, together with the indication of their previous conduct induced the Cherokees to form an unfavorable opinion of their intentions, consequently they arrested and bound the three men, took them to Mr. Wm. Thompson's who knew the two strangers and informed the Cherokees that one of them (Curtis) was the Deputy Sheriff of Carrol County, and the other (Bogus) a Major of the Militia of the same county, and requested the Cherokees to release them. They did so and then exhibited Lieut. Fowler's order as their justification for arresting them. The Deputy Sheriff stated that he had an execution in favor of Major Bogus against a certain white man who had sold two horses a year or two previously, to the Cherokees, and that these horses were subject to said execution, and that they had come to levy upon the horses, and had brought York along as a witness by whom to prove the horses. The Cherokees agreed to go with them to Lieut. Fowler to have the claim investigated and took the horses with them. York being a man of bad character was continued in arrest.- Upon their arrival at the Six's, Lieut. Fowler declined acting upon the claim, but ordered Curtis and Bogus with York to be conveyed under a guard of soldiers to Head Quarters, and advised the Cherokees to go along also and to take with them the two horses. Upon their arrival at Camp Eaton the Commanding Officer released Curtis and Bogus, who dismounted two of the Cherokees and took away their horses with any satisfactory explanation being given to the Cherokees. York was ordered under guard by the Commanding Officer and there kept a number of days. The two Cherokees who were thus dismounted had to walk home.

Since the United States Troops have been withdrawn from the nation, Bogus and Curtis have taken out State warrants from Georgia against the Cherokees for arresting them, under which pretext the irruption was made when Joseph Beanstick was captured. It is asserted by good authority that this youth had no agency in the arrest of Curtis, Bogus and York, as aforesaid-notwithstanding this, he was cruelly torn away from his father's fireside and mother's tender care, to the jail of Carol county, where he was committed and confined about four weeks during the coldest time of this winter, with no other covering than a cloak and an old saddle blanket- and when in the agonies of piercing cold, he would beg to be taken to fire to warm his frozen limbs, he would receive this unrelenting reply, not unless you pay me fifteen dollars. Whilst in this unhappy situation, the vicious and the malevolent would sometimes appear before the grates of the prison to gasconade, and to abuse him in the most impious and insulting manner-and at other times those more humane would also call to express their sympathy for his sufferings. Mr. David Vann was instructed to go and take steps for the release of this young man, and on his arrival at Carrolton, through the aid of a lawyer, the Inferior Court was convened, and Joseph was brought out of jail by a writ of Habeas Corpus. The Lawyer moved the Court to release the prisoner on the ground that he was in the custody of a person not in authority; (the jailor in authority being absent) the Court accordingly released him. Steps being about to be taken to have Joseph again arrested under a civil process, his friends succeeded in running off with him during the night.

In consequence of his cruel imprisonment in a cold jail, Joseph is most shockingly frost bitten in one of his feet, which caused his leg to swell up to the knee. Thus will be perceived some of the effects produced by the withdrawal of the United States authority from this nation-and this is a specimen of the acts tolerated under the usurped authority of Georgia.


P.S. The band of men who captured Joseph were so elated with their martial exploit, that, on their return march, they would occasionally form themselves on the road and discharge their fire-arms as a signal of triumph over the Cherokee youth in captivity.


Extracts of a letter from one of the Cherokee Delegation to his father, dated,


25th, Dec. 1830.

I hope from letters addressed to Mr. Ross you have been advised of what has transpired with the Delegation. To the President ' Secretary of War we paid our respects, and in a few days afterwards, visited the last mentioned for the purpose of ascertaining the views of the Government, in relation to the withdrawal of the Troops from our Nation, and the progress Georgia was making in her legislature on the subject of our vacant lands, which it was apparent was their design to survey. To obtain which I did not hesitate to propound to him the question, 'what was the intention of the Government to do, provided Georgia attempted to force from our possession, our lands?' It was interesting to the Cherokees ' it was due to them to receive a direct and frank answer, on the subject. It was with some surprise to find the Secretary inclined to equivocate, who replied, that 'the Government would decide on the matter when the crisis occurred, at this time Georgia was not going to survey any lands but those acknowledged to her, by the President South of Coffee's line.' He also told us to address the Department in writing which would be attended to; and which we have done at length, by the pen of William Coodey, which is one of much ability, directness and point. I have just finished a memorial to Congress which fills five manuscript sheets. 1st. On the lands taken by the Government from us and surrendered to Georgia. 2d. On the authorized intrusion of white people on the abandoned improvements by Arkansas Emigrants, by the President. 3d. the Gold mines, the sufferings our people have experienced there at, from intruders, Georgia officers and the Troops of the United States. 4th, Intrusions generally around our border, which remain unremoved and the withdrawal of the Troops. I have also represented to the Congress some of the aggravated cases of oppression our citizens have endured from the Georgians.

It would be unbecoming the frankness of a son to a father, did I withhold from your knowledge, the views I entertain of political affairs and to what source we must rely for eventual success in the struggles we maintain. This session of Congress is a short one, and will be closed little more than two months from this date. The policy of the President in regard to the Indians is deservedly unpopular, ' will meet with opposition in every stage, where the action of Congress is required. The Choctaw treaty is not yet ratified and only requires a remonstrance from the Choctaws to kill it. Leflore, the Chief, I understand is deposed, but it is yet doubtful whether they will send a protest against a treaty which no doubt was effected in fraud. We have strong, eloquent and good men who feel for us, and our friends. But effective assistance cannot come from a branch of the Government whose duties in Legislation, to meet the exigencies of a Great Republic, are immense. There is no question of the Cherokees having a vast majority of the people of the United States in their favor, even of the Jackson party inclusive.


A letter from the Secretary of War and the Governor of Georgia's Message to his Legislature occasioned thereby, are printed, which urge the propriety of granting reservations to Chiefs whenever they enter into treaty. To bribe the Cherokees now is their only hope. A member of Congress from the West, who is our friend, expressed to me the danger of addressing the cupidity of the Indian Chiefs, and hoped we would have our hands clear of such temptations. I assured him that in behalf of the Cherokee Chiefs,their friends need not entertain any apprehensions, they would not disgrace themselves, by throwing away the advantages of their descendants to self-government, and national prosperity to gratify individual aggrandizement.


To the Editor of the Cherokee Phoenix.

The lady who has repeatedly attempted to call the attend=tion of her country-women to the injuries and claims of the Cherokees wishes an opportunity to express her feelings to the people, for whom her sympathies, and those of thousands of her sex are so warmly enlisted.

It is said that the Cherokees are alarmed and distressed with the unjust measures now in operation against them, and are fearing that the interest of their friends in the United States is abating, and that they will be left to struggle alone.

But this is not the truth. The writer of this letter is extensively acquainted with many of the leading and most active friends of the Indians, and has extensive means of learning in various ways, the state of feeling, which exists throughout the land. The nation are looking to the United States Court as the safeguard of Indian rights, and believe, that through this medium, justice will be awarded to them, in full measure.

They deeply sympathize with them in the injuries and injustice they are now called to suffer, and would gladly, could any means be devised, protect them from it. But they hope that these evils are only temporary, and that soon, justice will triumph over oppression. Could the Indians learn the feelings of their many warm and faithful friends, they would come in such language as this.

'Brothers be not discouraged, and do not faint in the hour of adversity. Our hearts and our prayers are with you, and whenever our influence can do you any good, they shall be yours. We beseech you remember the example of our Lord Jesus Christ, and receive injuries with meekness and patience, remembering the words 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the Lord.' God will raise you up Protectors and friends in every hour of peril, for all the generous, the just, and the upright in this nation are on your side. Stay in your places.- do not give up your country, though it is shrouded in gloom and full of fears; soon light shall spring up in darkness, and peace and safety shall drive away fear. Put your trust in the Lord and you shall never fail, 'for in the Lord Jehovah, is everlasting strength.'

The friends of the Indians are beginning again to try the influence of petitions, and it is believed that soon there will be a general and full expression of the opinion of this nation, on this subject before Congress. Meantime the writer would assure the Cherokees, that though females are forbidden by the wise regulation of society, from appearing in any public way in their behalf, in the private walks of life, their influence is not wanting, nor is it unavailing; while every day from them, petitions are sent to an unrebuked audience, where by the King of Kings they are accepted and heard.


Extract of a letter to the Editor, dated

Choctaw Nation, Jan. 10th, 1831.

I have been delighted with the firm, temperate, united and persevering resistance which the Cherokees have made to the arbitrary and unjust proceedings of Georgia. Thus far, they must have secured the approbation and the sympathy of all the upright and unprejudiced in every portion of the civilized world. It is mortifying and humiliating to see how far self interest, prejudice and party have succeeded in sustaining a cause, so manifestly wrong, and which I doubt not posterity will almost universally condemn. I admit, with the Secretary of War, that on this, as on most other subjects, honest differences of opinion may arise. Many may have decided hastily and without the means of forming a correct decision. Situated as the United States are in regard to the Indians, the danger is, that we shall 'feel power, and forget right.' There is no danger on the other hand. We shall do well to bear in mind, that our judgments will all be rejudged; and every unrighteous decision will be reversed-most likely in this world certainly in the next.

You must have noticed a very material difference in some of the statements of the Secretary of War, in his late Report, respecting the Choctaw Treaty, from the accounts which have come before the public from other sources. The account copied into your paper of Nov. 13th from the Fort Gibson correspondent, is correct, the statement of the Secretary of War, to the contrary notwithstanding. The people have a right to expect, in public documents, emanating from high and responsible officers, a fair and correct statement of facts. When these documents lose their character for fairness and verity, every good citizen feels that his country is degraded. The Secretary says, arguments addressed to their judgements were the means employed. No threat was used; no intimidation attempted. Under those circumstances, a treaty was concluded and signed, more than five thousand Indians being in attendance at the time.- amongst them was great apparent unanimity. Would not every reader of the above unacquainted with facts, suppose that more than five thousand Indians were present when the treaty was signed? Whereas every person who was there, knows, that there was not a fourth part of that number present at the signing of the treaty. I know not what the Secretary of War would consider using threats of attempting intimidation, but I well know he could not have said anything, which would have operated more powerfully on the fears of the Choctaws, than what he did say, unless he had told them; that the United States would drive them off at the point of the bayonet. He told them the Agent, the Interpreters and the Blacksmiths would be discharged and all official communication with the Government would cease. That they would be left to the mercy of the Mississippi laws, and that they could no more live under those laws, than they could take wings and fly. That the Government would take their country West of the Mississippi for other Indians, and if they should find their situation ever so intolerable under the state laws, they could have no assistance in removing. Whether there was any threat or intimidation in all this, every one must judge for himself.

There was not only 'great apparent unanimity' but in reality great unanimity among the Choctaws, but it was to hold onto their country, and not to part with it on any considerations. It has been stated by those present, that four fifths of the people had voted against the treaty , and left the ground, before the signing commenced. And of those who did sign it is certain that many did not do it of their own free will and choice. It is difficult to conceive how the Secretary could assert that 'the great body of the nation were satisfied when he left them.'

Every effort has been employed to prevent any public ' general expression of the feelings of the Choctaws on the subject of the late treaty. The influence of the Chiefs and others interested in sustaining the treaty has been considerable, and the people are no doubt, better reconciled to the measure than they were at first. They have been told there is no remedy. Some of those who have been to explore the new country, represent it as much better than this. The trial is yet to come.

P.S. One word respecting Col. Leflore's letter to the Secretary of War. The Indians tell a different tale. They say they do not wish to remove. ' That their Chief told them that they must go, that their land was sold, that the white men were coming in, and would steal their horses, and ravish all their women, if they were not off immediately.' The fact is, after all that has been done to reconcile them to the Treaty, and all the glowing descriptions of their newly discovered paradise in the west, few if any of the Choctaws would remove, were it not from fear of the state laws, and other evils that must come upon them if they remain here. There is no such thing among the Common Choctaws, as a wish to remove,if they could be protected in their rights and privileges.


For the Cherokee Phoenix.

Mr. Editor: I have just noticed the following sarcastic paragraph from the Charleston Mercury and republished in the Southern Recorder. And but for the sacrilegious doctrine contended for by the Editor of the Mercury in relation to the case of George Tassels, I should pass it unnoticed.

The Editor of the Mercury remarks---

'Important from Georgia---It will be seen that Georgia does not evince a disposition to shrink (when a fitting opportunity presents itself) from declaring her rights and boldly maintaining them. We have repeatedly heard it asked where will all this end? The answer seems to us very plain. Why, with the death of the Indian. The supreme Court says, you State of Georgia, shall not hang the Indian. The State of Georgia says I will hang the Indian. Well the Indian is hung!-- What then-to whom is the State of Georgia answerable? To the Supreme Court? Surely not! Is she not a sovereign free and independent State and know no master save disposing Heaven? Besides how farcical would be the idea of a State having any rights at all if she cannot even enforce her criminal laws without permission from abroad. The only thing that strikes us at all remarkable in the proceedings of the Georgia Legislature is the temperate strains of the Resolutions. We should have expected a little more fire from the enormity of the indignity offered to the pride and sovereignty of Georgia.'

Now, Mr. Editor, in order to show that the above remarks were penned either through ignorance or corruption, it is only necessary for me to show that the appeal made in the case of George Tassels, a Cherokee Indian, tried, convicted and executed by the laws of Georgia for the murder of another Indian committed within the territorial limits of the Cherokee Nation, and claiming not to be a citizen of Georgia, is such an one as is contemplated by the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction of the case, without going into an elaborate discussion of the right in Georgia to extend her laws over the Cherokees.

The sovereignty and independence of the Cherokee tribe of Indians as a Nation have never until the present cases, been contested in a Court of Judicature. They were recognized by the Treaty of Hopewell in 1785 as a sovereign free and independent Nation, capable of declaring war against the States. The United States in a subsequent treaty pledge herself to protect the Indians in their occupant possession. And under these and other treaties the Indians have been permitted from the earliest settlement of this country to the present time, to enjoy all those privileges and immunities which a sovereign free and independent Nation may of right enjoy. And these rights having been acquiesced in on the part of the State of Georgia, so long- and the United States having pledged herself to protect the Indians in their occupant possession, by treaty stipulations, and they never having been considered and treated as citizens of Georgia- all these have taught them to believe that they were a sovereign and independent Nation-And as the extension of the laws of Georgia over the Indians, brings in question the validity of a treaty, the final Judgment of which is only cognizable by the Supreme Court, the Indian (Tassel) most clearly had the right to make the plea to the jurisdiction of our court, and if over-ruled, to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Constitution of the United States expressly declares that the Judicial power shall extend to all cases in law or equity arising under that constitution, the laws of the United States and treaties made or which shall be made, under their authority-See Constitution of the United States, Article 3- {86.

The case of George Tassels therefore is beyond all doubt such an one as is contemplated by the Constitution of the United States, and the Supreme Court has clearly the appellate jurisdiction of the question, because, by the act of Congress of the 24th of September, 1789,- 25, -'A final judgment or decree in any suit in the highest court of law or equity of a State, where is drawn in question the validity of a treaty, and the decision is against its validity; or where is drawn in question the construction of a treaty, and the decision is the title against right, or privileges set up or claimed under it, may be re-examined, and reversed or affirmed in the Supreme Court of the U. States upon a writ of error.' See Kents Commentaries---Page 295-6.

The Chief Justice was therefore bound by the Constitution and laws of the United States to grant the writ of error upon proper showing, and the State of Georgia was bound by everything she held dear to her character as a State to obey it-the temperate strains of the resolutions to the contrary notwithstanding.- 'Besides how farcical would be the idea' of the United States (Georgia included) having the power under her constitution, to establish a tribunal for the trial of all cases arising under her constitution and laws, if she had not the power of taking cognizance of those cases without the special permission of the parties against whom the cases might be brought. Such a state of things never did, it never can exist in a well regulated government.



From the National Journal.

President Jackson in his last message, communicating his views respecting the Cherokees, uses the following language:

'No act of the General Government has ever been deemed necessary to give the States jurisdiction over the persons of the Indians.

That they possess, by virtue of their sovereign power within their own limits, in as full a manner before, as after the purchase of the Indian lands; nor can this Government add to, or diminish it.'

This principle is not only at war with reason, and with the provisions of solemn treaties, but with the opinions expressed by sound moralists, genuine patriots and able statesmen. We have it on record that even one of the most influential advisers of Gen. Jackson, not many years ago, expressed sentiments diametrically opposed to those now uttered in his official communication by the President.- Mr. White of Tennessee, now a Senator of the United States, ' leagued with those who would oppress, coerce, exile and destroy the unfortunate Cherokees, in the year 1824 held other views and gave utterance to other opinions. When the right of the Indians to tax traders within their limits was denied by the government, Mr. White gave his opinion in full in opposition to the course of the Federal authorities. We subjoin a few extracts, as affording the best answer which can be given to the principles now laid down in the message of Gen. Jackson, and supported on the floor of the Senate, by the same Hugh L. White.

'I am not at liberty (said Mr. W.) to doubt but the Cherokees are to be considered as a nation a community, having a country distinctly marked out and set apart for their use; that their interest is as permanent and fixed in it as the pledge and the faith of the U. States can make it, in as much as they have solemnly guarantied it to them, as a nation, without any limitation of time.'

Again, expounding the application of the 8th section of the 1st article of the Constitution, respecting the power of Congress, 'to regulate commerce with foreign nation,' 'c Mr. Hugh L. White says:-

'The words here used in relation to the Indians are precisely similar to those used in relation to foreign nations; and it is hardly presumable that it ever was expected, that, because Congress is vested with power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, she is therefore vested with the right of interfering with the municipal regulations of either France or Great Britain.'

In this paragraph Mr. White explicitly denies the right of the government to interfere with the municipal or internal regulation of the Cherokees a denial which strikes at the root of the principle laid down by the President in his message. But Mr. White proceeds to fortify the position he has taken. Speaking of the Treaty of Holston, he declares in reference to the Cherokees:-

'These people are now to be viewed as a nation possessing all the powers of other independent nations, which are not expressly, or by necessary implication, surrendered up by this treaty.'

He then enumerates the powers which are 'surrendered up' by the Cherokees:-

'In the 10th article they stipulate that if any Indian, or person residing among them, or who shall take refuge in their nation, shall steal, commit murder or other capital crimes, on the citizens of the United States, they shall be bound to deliver him up, to be punished according to the laws of the U. States.'

The power to punish their own people for crimes committed on Indians, within their own territory, is not surrendered. Consequently, the opinion of Mr. H. L. White is against the usurpation of power which we have lately seen in Georgia. But to guard against the possibility of misconception, Mr. White places this point in a still more strong and clear light:

'The Cherokees (says he) were to be considered as a nation; the bounds of their territory were ascertained; within these bound they should have all the rights of sovereignty not surrendered; if a white man went within their limits; and committed a crime or trespass, he would have been amenable to the tribunals of the country where the offence was committed, ' the nature of his crime, as well as the measure of his punishment, would have been ascertained by the municipal laws of the country in which he had transgressed. Knowing this, and being unwilling on the one hand, that a guilty citizen should escape with impunity; and determined, on the other, that the guilt or innocence of an American citizen should not be ascertained by an Indian tribunal nor should the nature of his crime or measure of his punishment be ascertained by an Indian legislature this provision was inserted.'

Mr. White proceeds to argue that the Cherokees, having acquired property, have the right to make the laws which govern and protect it. These laws must emanate from some power:-

'Where (asks Mr. White) is the power? It must be in Congress or in the Cherokees. [He never admitted the idea that it was in the state of Georgia] Congress has never exercised it; the Cherokees always have. And if I have been correctly informed, one of the Presidents of the U. S., to aid them, digested a code of written laws, which he supposed suited to their society, and sent it to them, with recommendation that they would adopt them. The Nation gave them a candid examination; and did adopt such of them as they thought adapted to their situation.'

And again:-

'I cannot suppose it possible that in making these treaties, the United States either wished, or intended to take from the Indians the power of making municipal laws.'

Mr. White reiterates:-

'This country is solemnly guarantied by this treaty to the Cherokee Nation. Municipal laws to regulate its trade and all its affairs with in these limits, are to be made, from time to time, and those laws frequently to be changed, so as to suit the changing condition of their inhabitants, and thereby promote their happiness. Is it probable that the Executive of the United States, or his negotiators, would desire this power taken from the Indians,'c.'

Will General Jackson and his negotiators answer the question of Mr. White?

Georgia, as we are informed, sent her officers within the Cherokee limits, to arrest Tassels, for the murder of another Indian within those limits. On this point we quote Mr. White again:-

'By the 9th article of the Treaty of Holston it is provided, 'That no citizen or inhabitant of the United States shall attempt to hunt or destroy the game on the lands of the Cherokees; nor shall any citizen or inhabitant go into the Cherokee country without a passport first obtained.'

And, as Mr. White says in explanation:-

'It is not said, that his passport shall confer any other privilege upon him, but that of excusing him, from being considered as a trespasser, a person that is outlawed by his own government, as one that the Indians may punish, or not, as they choose.'

According to Mr. White, therefore, the Cherokees would have been justified in arresting the officers who went into their limits to seize Tassels, and hanging them on the nearest trees.

We have no space for comment, nor is comment necessary. Our only object is to place before the people the opinions entertained by Mr. White in 1824. Our readers are left to make their own inferences.