THE CHEROKEE CASE.
{"character_count": 4933, "word_count": 840, "ccnet_language_score": [0.963699996471405], "ccnet_perplexity": [1857.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
THE CHEROKEE CASE.

 Ln the Supreme Court ofthe United States.

 Samuel A. Worcester us. The State of Georgia.

 On Saturday last, MT. Chief Justice MAR SHALL delivered the opinion of the Court in this case. reversing the judgment of inc Su- periut Court of Gwinctt county. in Georgia. The effect of this decision is, that the recent acts Of Georgia taking possession of the Cher okee cOUntry, and providing for the punish. ment of persons therein residing ilhuut the license of the Governor, and without taking an oath of allrgiahte to the State, are decIar. ed nu1t and void. as contrary to the constiiu- ton, treaties, and laws of the United States.

 The opinion of the Chief Justice was very elaborate and clear. He took review ofthr origin ofihc European title to lands in Amer ica. upon the ground Of discovery. He es- tablIshrd that this right was merely cOnven- tional among the European Governments themselves, aud for their own guidance, and the regulation of their UWn claims in regard to each other, and in no respect changed or affected to change the rights of the Indians as occupants Of the soil That the only effect of the European title was, as between Eu- ropean nations, to recognise an exclusive right of trade and intercourse with the Tn- dians, and of ultimate domain in the terrt0

 

 nation or government whose subjects were the frat discoverers. Tha; all the European governments, Spain, France, and especially Great Britain, had uniformly recognised the Indian tribes and nations as distinct commu- mites, capable of, and entitled to, self govern Dent, as States, and in DO respect, except as to their right of intercourse V ith other Euro pean nations, and the right of pre-empti0n in the discoverers to purchase their sOil, as under the control or power of the EurOpeans.- They were treated as nations capable of hold ing and ceding their territories, capable Of making treaties and c0mpacts, and entitled to all the powers of peace and war, and not as conqusred or enslaved communities. He demonstrated this from various historical facts; and showed that when upon the Rev olutiOn the United ColoHies succeeded to the rIghts and claims of the mother coun- try, the American Congress uniformly adopt ed and adhered to the same doctrine, both before and after the confederation that since the adoption of the Constitution the same doctrine had as uniformly prevailed in all the departments fthe Government; and that the treaties with the Indians were held to be trea- ties, and obligatory in the same sense as trea- ties between European soverei Sns. He show ed also that this had been the established course of things recognised by Georgia herself, from the adoption of the Consultation down to the year 1929, as evidenced by her solemn acts. compacts. and laws. He then showed that by the Constitution the exclusive pow CT belonged to the United States to regulate in- tercourse with the Indians, and to receive cessi"ns of their lands. and to make treaties with them. That their independence of the State Governments had been constantly up. held; that the right of PossessiUn to their land was solemnly guaranteed by the United States and by treaties with them, until that title should. with their own consent, be ex- iinguished, and that the laws passed by Con- gress had regulated the trade and intercourse with them accordingly. He now reviewed the hws of Georgia in question, and pro- nOunced them to be repugHant tO the cOnsti- tuition, treaties aud law s, of the United States. And he concluded by maintaining that the party defendant in the present indictment was entitled to the protection of the constitution, treaties and laws, of the United States; and that Georgia had nO authority to extend her laws over the Cherokee country, or to pun ish the defendant for disobedirnce to those laws in the Cherokee country.

 Mr. Justice MCLEAN delivered separate opinion. eOncurring,. in all things. in inc opin- ion of the Court. Mr. Justice BALDWIN dis InteHi igencer, March5 5.

 [The dissent of Judge Baldwin related only to matter of form-n"t of principle. Six Judges were present. Judge Johnson, of s. c. was absent.

 Mr. Chester, ,fhe Attorney for tho MissiOn- aries. has prOeerded to Georgia. with 8 copy of the record and judgment of the Supreme Court, expecting to arrive before the adjourn mrni of the Court by whom the Missionaries were tried and sentenced. He will mOse for kabeGs corpus and discharge of the prisoners, as we presume. In ease of refusal the exec uiise must be invoked. In the remarks of the Chief Justice and of Judge Mclean. it was iniin'at~d that on the strict enforcement of the decisi"n might depend the question of the Courts ever Ve e.GsssmbliRg.-Ib.

 The hOdy of . man aged about 2S, waa Goaad 0nihe top oG Bergen Hill, Hohoken, opisasi1e New. York. en Ss1aday mSFmlng. shes through she breast hs was Sil warm . P'SsOl lsy ssas hia. aad sss'AsF s' sher disssee,