Articles of agreement with the Creeks. Jan. 8, 1821.. Treaty with the Ottawas, Chippewas, and Pottawatimies. Aug. 29, 1821 Great and Little Osages. Aug. 31, 1822 Indians in Florida. Sept. 18, 1823. Iowas. Aug. 4, 1824......... Sioux and Chippewas, Sacs and Foxes, Menomonies, Iowas, Sioux, Winnebagoes, ... 272 Articles of agreement with the Winnebagoes, Pottawatimies, Chippewas, and Ottawas. Aug. 315 ..... Articles of agreement with the Delawares. Aug. 3, 1829. Supplementary article to the treaty with the Delawares of Oct. 3, 1818. Sept. 24, 1829 Treaty with the Sacs and Foxes, the Medawah-Kanton, Wahpacoota, Wahpeton, and Sissetong bands of Sioux, Omahas, Iowas, Ottoes, and Missourias. July 15, 1830 328 Piankeshaws and Weas. Oct. 29, 1832 ..... Articles of agreement with the Senecas and Shawnees. Dec. 29, 1832 Treaty with the Chippewas, Ottawas, and Pottawatimies. Sept. 26, 1833 Convention with the Pawnees. Oct. 9, 1833..... 388 391 393 Convention with the Sioux of Wa-ha-shaw's tribe. Sept. 10, 1836 Treaty with the Iowas, and Sacs and Foxes. Sept. 17, 1836 Pottawatimies. Sept. 20, 1836. Pottawatimies. Sept. 22, 1836 Pottawatimies. Sept. 23, 1836 Convention with the Sacs and Foxes. Sept. 27, 1836 Treaty with the Sacs and Foxes. Sept. 28, 1836 ... Sacs and Foxes. Sept 28, 1836.... Convention with the Ottoes, Missourias, Omahaws, and Yancton and Santee bands of Sioux. Supplemental article to the treaty with the New York Indians of Jan. 15, 1838. Feb. 13, 1838. 561 Treaty with the Chippewas of Saganaw. Jan. 23, 1838.... Contract between Robert Morris and the Senecas. Sept. 15, 1797... 601 Schedule of claims referred to in treaty with the Pottawatamies. Sept. 20, 1828. 603 Schedule of claims and debts to be paid by the United States for the Chippewas, Ottawas, and Pottawatamies. July 29, 1829... 604 INDIAN TREATIES. THE editor of this work has considered it obligatory upon him to exhibit, as preliminary matter to the treaties between the United States and the Indian tribes, the general principles which have been recognised by the Supreme Court of the United States in relation to the Indian tribes, the Indian title to the lands occupied by them, and the effect of treaties with them upon their claims to these lands, or the claims of others under Indian grants. In the case of Johnson and Graham's Lessee v. William M'Intosh, 8 Wheaton's Reports, 543; 5 Condensed Reports, 515, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, who delivered the opinion of the Court, said: The plaintiffs in this cause claim the land, in their declaration mentioned, under two grants, purporting to be made, the first in 1773, and the last in 1775, by the chiefs of certain Indian tribes, constituting the Illinois and the Piankeshaw nations; and the question is, whether this title can be recognised in the courts of the United States ? The facts, as stated in the case agreed, show the authority of the chiefs who executed this conveyance, so far as it could be given by their own people; and likewise show, that the particular tribes for whom these chiefs acted were in rightful possession of the land they sold. The inquiry, therefore, is, in a great measure, confined to the power of Indians to give, and of private individuals to receive, a title which can be sustained in the courts of this country. As the right of society, to prescribe those rules by which property may be acquired and preserved, is not and cannot be drawn into question; as the title to lands, especially, is and must be admitted to depend entirely or the law of the nation in which they lie; it will be necessary, in purS g this inquiry, to examine, not singly those principles of abstract justice, which the Creator of all things has impressed on the mind of his creature man, and which are admitted to regulate, in a great degree, the rights of civilized nations, whose perfect independence is acknowledged; but those principles also which our own government has adopted in the particular case, and given us as the rule for our decision. On the discovery of this immense continent, the great nations of Europe were eager to appropriate to themselves so much of it as they could respectively acquire. Its vast extent offered an ample field to the ambition and enterprise of all; and the character and religion of its inhabitants afforded an apology for considering them as a people over whom the superior genius of Europe might claim an ascendency. The potentates of the old world found no difficulty in convincing themselves that they made ample compensation to the inhabitants of the new, by bestowing on them civilization and Christianity, in exchange for unlimited independence. But, as they were all in pursuit of nearly the same object, it was necessary, in order to avoid conflicting settlements, and consequent war with each other, to establish a principle, which all should acknowledge as the law by which the right of acquisition, which they all asserted, should be regulated as between themselves. This principle was, that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects, or by whose authority, it was made, against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession. 1 (1) A |