/ 
 
 25th Congress, ^ Doc. No. 274. ] Ho. of Reps. 
 
 2d Session. War Dept. 
 
 u 
 CONTRACT—GENERAL JESUP, CREEK CHIEFS, &c. 
 
 LETTER 
 
 FROM *^* 4^ ^ 
 
 THE SECRETARY OF WAR, ^^ 
 
 'J 
 
 TRANSMITTING 
 
 tS report from the Commissioner of India)! Affairs, accompanied hy 
 copies of a Contract made between General Jesiip, certain Creek 
 Chiefs, and J. C. Watson Sf Co. 
 
 March 23, 1838. 
 Referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. 
 
 War Department, March Q2, 1838. 
 Sir: In compliance with the lesolution of the House of Rej)re.scntatives 
 of Februai'y 19, I iiave the honor to tiansmit a report from the Commis- 
 sioner of Indian Affairs, accompanied by copies of a contract made be- 
 tween General Jesiij), certain Creek chiefs, and J. C. Watson & Co., and 
 papers connected therevvitli. 
 
 Very respectfully, your most obedient servant, 
 
 J. R. POINSETT. 
 Hon. James K. Polk, 
 
 Speaker of the House of Representatives. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, March 21, 1838. 
 Sir : In obedience to your direction, I have the honor to submit copies 
 of a contract made between General Jesup, certain Creek chiefs, and 
 James C. Watson & Co., and of the other papers called for by the resolu- 
 tion of the House of Representatives of February 19. The assent of the 
 Indians to this contract was taken by Cai)tain Page, and the form of the 
 assent is in every instatice the same. A copy of one only is given, there- 
 fore ; but this is accompanied by a list, showing the names of all the In- 
 dians whose lands have been conveyed by the contract, and describing the 
 reserve of each. This list corresponds with the register of Colonel flo- 
 gan, referred to in the contract, and making the basis of it ; atid it is con- 
 sidered unnccessai*y, therefore, to furnish a copy of the latter. It is j)ro- 
 per to observe, that the contract made between some chiefs of the tribe, 
 Tbomas Allen, print. 
 
2 [ Doc. No. 274. ] - ^ / . . 
 
 and Messrs. C J. M< Donald N: Cd., on the 7tli ol October, 1 837, of which 
 a coj)} is furnished, was placed upon the files at the time of its reception, 
 withtjut being foniially considered by the Depaitnient, many circ iiinstan- 
 ces Cfimbining to render its recognition inexpedient ; and this course was 
 adopted with the c<»nsent of the represewtative of the persons claiming un- 
 der it. 
 
 A cry respectfully, your most obedient servant, 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 , C 071X711 issi oner. 
 
 Hon. J. R. POINS iTT, 
 
 Secretary of Jf^ar. 
 
 p. S. It is proper to remark, that no action has taken place in this de- 
 partment on the assents taken by Captain Page, above referred to : they 
 having been received but a short time since, and the limited force of Miis 
 oflice having hitherto prevented their examination. Of course, therefore, 
 it cannot now be sai«l that they are or aie not in confoi-rtiity to the require- 
 ments of the President's conditional confirmation of the contract. 
 
 C. A. H. 
 
 HeADQ.! AUTERS, ArMY OF THE SoUTH, 
 
 Tallassee, Alabama, Jlugust 30, 1836. 
 
 Sir: The embarrassments in the way of Iinlian emigration were, until 
 recently, so formidable, that I began to apiirehend the measure would 
 entirely fail. Suits wei-e multiplied against the Indians; their negroes, 
 horses, and other property taken; themselves driven almost to des|)eration 
 the ditllculties which surrounded them, the greatest dissatisfaction pre- 
 vailed among them. There seemed to me to be no means of getting tlicm 
 out of the country, peaceably, but by enabling them to pay the just demands 
 against them, and defending them against those \s hich were doubtful or un- 
 just. The ex|)ense of feeding the Indians, added to that of supporting the 
 army, which mustnecessaiily be retained in servjcewhilst they remain in the 
 countiy, is from seven to ten thousand dollai's a day. The chiefs insisted 
 on seveial points, and, among others, they refpiired the settlement of their 
 land clainjs, and the payment in advance of their annuity for 1 837. Sound 
 policy, as well as economy, seemed to require that their demands, to a cer- 
 tain extent, should receive a favorable decision. I accordingly a|)|)oinied 
 Colonel John A. Campbell, of Montgomery, a lawyer of high standing, 
 and a member of the Legislature of Alabama, to treat with then) in relation 
 to the advance of their annuity ; and. having been |)ermitted by the Presi- 
 dent to raise, if possible, an Indian Once for service in Florida, I directed 
 that the furnishing of that force should be made one of the cotnlitions. I 
 enclose a coi)y of the arrangement entered into. The wairiors required 
 arc to be raised; the annuity to be advanced ; and, in addition, where the 
 services of the warriors in Floiida shall have terminate<l, the chiefs are to 
 receive ten tliousand dollars as a subsidy or Imunty. And to prevent delay 
 in the movement westward, IIopo«'tl:le Yoholu, the ),iin( ipal chief, is to 
 receive, for his inlluence and exertions in putting the Indians in motion to 
 the West, two thousand dollars: about one fourth of the expense to the 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. 3 3 
 
 country of one day's delay. I employed Colonel Campbell, also, to 
 examine the claims against the Indians, and to defend the suits in the cases 
 which he should think ought not to be paid. 
 
 A proposition was made to the Indian chiefs by acompany to purchase the 
 riglits of the Indians to all the stolen or disputed lands within what is called 
 Doctor McHenry's district, except the Upper Thioblocco and two or three 
 other towns. Seventy-five thousand dollars was offered for the rights ; the 
 company to taketlie placeof the Indians. Ifeltmuch doubt as to the propriety 
 of such an arrangement, as well as the power of entering into it; consider- 
 ing, as I did, that each individual Indian had a vested right in his particu- 
 lar location. The chiefs, however, insisted on a settlement previous to 
 removal, and informed me that their people had been so often deceived 
 that they had no faith in promises, and believed, if thry should leave the 
 country without a settlement of theii- claims, they would receive notliing 
 for them. I consented that they might, if they should think proper, dispose 
 of their unadjusted interest; and I ap|)ointed Colonel Campbell to conduct 
 the negotiation on the part of the United States, and to prepare the con- 
 tract for the signature of the pai'ties. 
 
 The chiefs having consulted, as far as circumstances permitted, their 
 people, and conferred among themselves, accepted the terms offered, and 
 one-half the sum offered has already been paid. I have ratified the con- 
 tract, subject to the approval of the President ; and I herewith enclose a 
 copy of it. Nothing j«hort of the absolute necessity of satisfying the Indi- 
 ans, and removing from their minds the impression that they would receive 
 nothing for their lands, would have induced me, under any circumstances, 
 to have sanctioned it; but I am of opinion, and Colonel Campbell concurs 
 with me, that no other course could, under the ciicumstances, iiave been 
 adopted, promising equal benefit to the Indians. The band of Hopoeihle 
 Yoholo are now loading their wagons preparatory to their removal, 
 and a few of the warriors for Florida have already come in. 
 
 I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 THOS. S. JESUP. 
 
 } 
 
 The State of Alabama, 
 
 Tallapoosa county. 
 
 This indenture, made and concluded at the town of Tallassce, in the 
 county and State aforesaid, on the 28th day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
 the United States of America, of the first part; and Opothe Yoholo, Mad 
 Blue, Tuckabatche Micco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy, chiefs of the Creek 
 tribe of Indians, and James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, William 
 Walker and Company, Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, of the third 
 part, witnesseth : 
 
 That whereas, by a treaty between the United States of America and 
 the Creek tiibe of Indians, ratified in the year of our Lord 1 832, each head 
 of a fan)ily belonging to said tribe became entitled to one-half a section of 
 land, which was subsequently allotted according to tiie same : and where- 
 as, by the same treaty, it was provided that no sale slinuld be valid unless 
 the contract should meet with the approbation of an agent of tlie United 
 States, and confirmation by the President thereof: and whereas the par- 
 ties of the second part allege, on behalf of individuals of the said tribe, that 
 
4 [ Doc. No. 274. "j 
 
 frauds liave been ])erpetratcil upon the liolderH of land tinder the said treaty, 
 wliereliy tlicir titU's liave birofne itiv«)lved w itii (lillirulty, their riglits jeop- 
 ardizt'd, and conrnlence in their security impaired : and wlieiras investi- 
 gations liave taken ])lace, without results, and they are about to leave 
 the lands redetl, for their homes in the West : 'I'o the end of settling 
 all their business in this country, of transferring IVom themselves the 
 bu;<leii of liiigation. and of obtaining s(iin«'thing for their claims pro- 
 porti«)ned to their \aliie, and at tlie same time to make a provision for the 
 fail- and bona fiile purchasers from the peojjjetif their tribe, [tiiey have] ad- 
 vise<l their people holding said claims to accede to a general disposition of 
 them, and lia\e obtained their consent to remise, release, and forever (piit 
 claim, on the pait (»f all and each r>f them, to the parties of the third part, and 
 each of them, ol all tlieir right, title, inteiest, ilaim, and demand, to all the 
 tracts and parcels of land situate, l> ing, and being in liiat |)art of the teiri- 
 tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, comprised within the district of lands in 
 which R. >V. Mcllenry was the certifying agent, whiih has formed the sub- 
 ject of contest before tlie agents of the United States, and which ha^e either 
 been certified and niai ked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified, 
 without authority in the agents of the United States to witness said sales, 
 or certify said contiacts, (the same being the cases ci>ntained in the reports 
 of the investigating agents:) subject. ho\\e>er, to the restrictions imposed by 
 the party of the first |)art, as follows : 
 
 1st. J'hat the title liereby obtained, or whicii may be obtained in pursu- 
 ance of this coi»tract, sliall not interfere with tlie i-igiits of any individual 
 who has made a prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of said lands, 
 (whether the same has been certified or not,) or any part thereof; hut the 
 respective claims (if necessary for settlement) shall be investigated by an 
 agent appointed by the President of the United States, and the ratification 
 of the I'residenl shall be necessary to the perfection of the titles : provided, 
 nevertheless, that, for the ascertainment of the faii-ness and validity of any 
 claim, as well as for the protection of the j)artles of the third part, they 
 shall be entitled to the benefit of the same lules that the Indians would 
 have been entitled to, but for this contract, under the instructions of the 
 War Department. 
 
 2d. Tliat when any contiact shall be preferred by the said agent, upon 
 investigation, the parties of the tiiird part shall be entitled to the same 
 security for the consideration as tlie Indian would have had but for this 
 contract : jirox iileil, if the amount paid into the hands of the agent of the 
 United States shall exceed on any parcel of land the pro-rata xnluiilion 
 made in this contract, then one-half of said o\erplus shall be retained by 
 the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heirs. 
 
 3d. That the money hereafier stipulated to be paid, shall be jiaid to the 
 Indian entitled to the land, in jiresence of the chief and an otHcer of the 
 United States ; and, until such payment he made, it shall be dejiosited with 
 the certilying agents of the district: the payment <d' whicli shall be a 
 consummation of this conliact. 
 
 4tli. That if any one Indian holding any parcel of land therein con- 
 veyed, shall lefusc to carry into effect the provisions of this contract, 
 in that case a pro riita allowance upon the consideration herein stipulated 
 shall be made to the jiarties of the third ])ai-t : |)i-ovided, his consent shall 
 he given before the consummation of this contiact. 
 
 5lli. That all those lands w hich have not been sold, including those where 
 the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation, to be made 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 5 
 
 by the persons who may be appoitited by the agent of the United States ; 
 who shall finally close the arrangements provided for in this contract ami 
 the treaty : provided, that this shall not refer to any claims embraced in 
 previous articles of this contract : and provided further, that valid letters 
 can be obtained therefor. ' i • k 
 
 The parties of the third part agree to receive the conveyance hereinbe- 
 fore made, subject to all the conditions and stipulations herein contained, 
 and will pay therefor the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars : one-halt to be 
 paid upon the sealing of these presents, to the agent of the United States who 
 may be appointed to receive the same ; and one-half in four months, at 
 Fort Gibson, in the State of Arkansas. , 
 
 In testimony whereof, I, John A. Campbell, appointed by Major Gen- 
 eral Thomas S. Jesup, commanding southern army, as agent ef the Uni- 
 ted States to execute the same, &c. 
 
 In testimony whereof, we have hereunto set our hands and athxed our 
 seals, the day and date above written. 
 
 Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 
 
 Mad Blue, his x mark. 
 
 Tuckabatche Micco, his x mark. 
 
 Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 
 
 Witnesses, 
 John Page, 
 
 Cajit. Supt. Creeks. 
 J. Y. Lane, 
 
 Capt. V. S. ^rmy. 
 
 Little Doctor, 
 Jim Boy, 
 J. C. Watson. 
 Edward Hanrick. 
 Wm. Walker. 
 Peter C Harris. 
 John Peabody. 
 
 his x mark, 
 his X mark. 
 
 Sanctioned by me, subject to the ratification of the President of the United 
 
 States, August 28, 1836, ^^oxtt, 
 
 ^ THOS. S. JESUP, 
 
 Maj. Gen., commanding Jirmy of the South. 
 
 This contract shall apply to the towns only of Coosawda's, Tuckabatche's, 
 Aufula's, Chat-tof-sof-kin's, Koiiomatska's, Catchka's,Luchipo.ga's, Sou- 
 gahatchee, Tallassee, Tuskegee, Chehawtown on Eufula creek, Thlob- 
 thlocko or Jim Boy's town, Clewella, Talmachussee, Tawwassa, Ottasa, 
 Autauga. The chiefs before stated declaring that they have no advice or 
 consent from the other towns. 
 August 28, 1836. 
 
 Tuskegee, Alabama, 
 
 September 12, 1836. 
 
 Sir: The recent proceedings of the Indian chiefs, or a portion of them, 
 at Tallassee, by which a paper called a treaty has been made with certain 
 white men, viz: Watson, Walker, Hanrick, Peabody and Harris, and, as 
 it is understood by me, with the assent and approbation of General Jesup, 
 
6 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 of the United States army, lias caused, very naturally, great excitement 
 and dissatisfaction amongst iliose citizens of this and other States, who, 
 relying upon the faith ot ihe Government, had hought and paid for lauds 
 8ii|iposed to have been, beyond doubt, good propeity as to title : having 
 been purchased fioni tiie common Indians, \vhose right alone it was to 
 pass away or alienate their property in them. 
 
 1 have denoniinated this pajier ♦♦called a treaty;" for it would be a 
 misnomei- to call that a treaty which was negotiated uj)on the spur of the 
 occasion, with a few chiefs and a set of speculators, and consummated at 
 the hour of midnight, or an hour or two thereafter-, by which six hundred 
 and fifty tico hall sections of Alabama lands were transferred by one dash 
 of tlie pen, from probably as many owners to some half dozen speculators, 
 for a jjotoriously trifling consideiation ; and that, in fact, not by the owners, 
 but by a fere chiefs assuming the pierogatixe of selling the title to land- 
 ed ])roperty of several hundred of the covimon people of their tribes, 
 without thfir ajiprobation. and, lor aught that is known tt) the contrary, 
 against tht ir desire. Irr fact, it has come within my own observation, that 
 the commorr Indians are greatly incerrsed against the chiefs in consequence 
 of the sale of these lands, denying their- right to have done so ; and, in one 
 instance, the life of the chief was threatened, if not menaced, in conse- 
 quence of the proceeding. 
 
 It is deemed unnecessai-y, sir, to dwell, in a communication of this char- 
 acter, upon the anomalous ftatures of this paper purporting to be a 
 ♦♦treaty." It is obviorrs that the high contracting party on one side, who 
 paid down the half of £75.000, must have had some guaranty tirat the 
 amount would not be lost to them ; arrd if nothing more was designed by 
 the paper than merely to operate as a doucerrr to the Indians to emigrate 
 quietly and |)eaceably, then it carr be justified upon the liighest principles 
 of public policy and justice. But if, on the contr-ary, this paj)cr-, which is 
 now doubtless in the power of the Department, shall be received by tlie 
 Government, arrd approved and acted on as a ♦• treaty," binding on all, 
 and, in the language of the constitution, the sripreme lawof the land, then 
 Mill the case assume arr entirely diflVreut aspect ; and it will again open 
 to the already gaping jaws of political agitation food and errcouragement 
 for years, which may produce, by possibility, the most unfiietidly state of 
 things between the State and Federal Go\er-rrments. For- it is not to be 
 supposed, tor a moment, that our- State courts will sit(|uietly on their seats, 
 and \\itness the glaring individual injus'ice whrch a ratification of this 
 midnight treaty by the Go\ernment will pr-oduce. 
 
 It would avail nre nothing to disguise the fact that I am interested in 
 defeating the corrsummation of this miscalled treaty. There is, however, 
 motive enough, independent of this, which pr-ompts mc to solicit your 
 perusal of this sheet. The public voice may be still at present ; birt the time 
 has t(» come, and that ere long, wlien it will be hear-(l in thurrder- against 
 the authors of the wide-spread scene of violation of j)r'oper-ty and sacrifice 
 of human lile whiih their- unhallowed proceedings have occasioned. I 
 forbear to dwell u{)on this to|)ic ; the moral character of the nation, as 
 well as of this immediate commuirity, is concerned, in dragging before 
 tlie world tlie instigators of the late outrages on the Creek nation ; and, 
 reposirrg still with some confit^ence in the wisdom and purity of the Gov 
 ernmerrt, I will not permit myself to doubt birt that the guilty instiga- 
 tors of these bloody scenes will be brturght to justice, and the sanctity of 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 7 
 
 private riglit and property secured against the corruptions of a heartless 
 and unprincipled band, seentjingly resolved to monopolize all the wealth, 
 and, through that, to control the very administration of the Government. 
 It remains for me, in conclusion, to offer to the consideration of the 
 Department the following facts, and to solicit its deliberate action upon 
 them. 
 
 Within the compass of the last twelve months, myself and another gen- 
 tleman have made purchases, in a fair and open manner, and, as we believe, 
 in the manner contemplated by the Government, of certain half sections 
 and sections of land from the Indians actually located upon the lands, for 
 which they have received valuable consideration, and for which we hold 
 the regularly executed deeds of the individual Indians who owned it, attest- 
 ed by the judge of the county courts and other respectable witnesses. 
 Previously, however, to our obtaining these evidences of title, we applied to 
 the certifying agent, with the Indians present who owned the lands, who 
 refused to certify them, upon the plea " that his instructions did not 
 contemplate the certification of any lands that had been under disputed 
 claims." But you will observe, sir, that these lands identified below were 
 a part of those, the transfer of which had been reversed by the investigating 
 agent of the Government on the ground of fraud ; and we very naturally 
 supposed that our purchases of tlie real owners of the land, and in the 
 presence of the agent, would have been duly certified, and thus secured to 
 us the property in the lands. I would remark, at the same time, that the 
 character of the certifying agent forbids the idea that, in the refusal to 
 certify, he was actuated by any other than an honest conviction of the pro- 
 priety of his decision. 
 
 The provisions of tlie recent " treaty," (so called,) are yet, to myself and 
 others, a profound secret between the contracting parties ; all that we 
 have learned of those provisions is from report, which is not often an 
 infallible guide of action. 
 
 I hope sincerely that those provisions may have been misrepresented, 
 and that the agents of the Government may not have at *' one fell swoop" 
 consummated the mischief which will ensue if it should turn out that the 
 reports are but too true. In order to place the Department in possession 
 of the evidences of our titles to the lands described below, I shall embrace 
 some early future moment to forward a copy of all the deeds to the lands, 
 accompanied with alfidavits of respectable citizens of the identity of the 
 Indians conveying the lands, and that th^y were entitled to the lands so 
 conveyed in the deeds, and tliat they were located on them, that we paid 
 the money, and accompanied the Indians to the office of the certifying 
 agent, who declined to certify ; and, also, (if to be obtained,) an explanation 
 of the agent, containing his reasons for refusing to certify. All these 
 documents will be forwarded at the earliest practicable moment. 
 
 In the mean time, the object oj this communication, in advance of the doc- 
 uments here advised of to be forwarded, is to apprize the Department of 
 my intention to contest every inch of ground in maintaining my right to 
 the property in these lands, against the pretensions of the land company; 
 and firmly but respectfully to protest against the issuing of patents to any one 
 of the half sections or sections described below, to the company with whom 
 he Indian chiefs and GeneralJesup treated, or to any other person or per- 
 sons ; sin(\ I do hereby protest, before the judge of the circuit court now 
 
8 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 sitting at Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, against the issuing of 
 patents to the lullowiiig sections <»(' land lying within the limits of the 
 State of Alabama and tlie Creek nation, viz : 
 
 In the Tuckabatche town. 
 Section 15, township 13, range 24. 
 ♦* 12, *' 13, *' 24. 
 
 North half of section 13, township 13, range 24. 
 
 «< 
 
 
 28, 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 West half 
 
 
 34, 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 Morthhalf 
 
 
 16, 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 » t 
 
 
 21, 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 South half 
 
 
 9, 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 t< 
 
 
 6, 
 
 
 13, 
 
 
 25. 
 
 North half 
 
 
 22, 
 
 
 18, 
 
 
 25. 
 
 East ♦• 
 
 
 14, 
 
 
 13. 
 
 
 24. 
 
 North •< 
 
 
 11, 
 
 
 13, 
 
 
 24. 
 
 South ♦< 
 
 
 30, 
 
 
 13, 
 
 
 £5. 
 
 In the Tallmachusse town. 
 
 South half of section 19, township 14, range 28. 
 
 North •« « 30, " 14, ** 24. 
 
 •♦ " « 35, " 17, '' 21. 
 
 In the Clewella town. 
 East half of section 31, township 17, range 22. 
 
 The property on all the above-described half sections and sections I here- 
 by claim as legal and erpiitable owner, and the patents to which I claim as 
 due to me from the Govci'nment, ami deny to the Government the right of 
 issuing them to any other person or peisons whomsoever. 
 
 Should the pi'otest not be addressed to the proper Department, the un- 
 dei'signed would feel obliged if the Depaitment to which it should have 
 been addressed might be furnished with it, and that it might be placed on 
 thejiles of the Jiepartinent, and common or special record, for evidence 
 hereafter, should it be ajjplicable in any suit in law or equity in the State 
 or Federal courts. 
 
 In addition to the above protest, I hereby claim of the Department the 
 patents for the half sections and sections previously described, so soon as 
 I shall have fuinished it with the evidences of title promised. 
 
 All of which is most respectfully submitted by, sir, vour obedient ser- 
 vant, JULIKN S. DEVEREUX. 
 
 To the Hon. Lewis Cass, 
 
 Secretary of the War Department, TVashington. 
 
 State of Alabama, ") 
 
 Montgomery county. J 
 
 I, Eli Shortridge, presiding as judge of the circuit court for the county 
 aforesaid, do hereby certify that Colonel Julien S. Devereux did sign the 
 above pretest before me, on this day, and lecjuest of me to certify the same. 
 Given under my hand this 15th September, 1836. 
 
 E. SHORTRIDGE. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274, ] 9 
 
 Montgomery, September 15, 1836. 
 Sir : I do hereby protest, before the judge of tlie circuit court now sit- 
 ting at Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, against the issuing of patents 
 to the half section of land described below, in the same manner, and from 
 and for the same reasons, as are contained in tlie foregoing protest ; said 
 land lying within the limits of the State of Alabama and the Creek nation. 
 
 In the Tuckabatche toivn. 
 South half of section 13, township 13, range 24. 
 
 BIRD FITZPATRICK. 
 
 To the Hon. Lewis Cass, 
 
 Secretary of the War Department, Washington. 
 
 State of Alabama 
 
 Montgomery county 
 
 - •■} 
 
 I, Eli Shortridge, circuit judge, presiding in the county aforesaid, do 
 hereby certify that Bird Fitzpatrick did sign, in my presence, the above 
 protest, and reijuested of me to attest the same, which is hereby done. 
 
 Given under my hand this 15th day of September, 1836. 
 
 E. SHORTRIDGE. 
 
 Columbus, Georgia, 
 
 September 16, 1836. 
 Dear Sir: The newspapers inform us that a contract was recently 
 concluded betwixt a large company of speculators and certain Indian 
 chiefs, by which the stolen lands of the Creeks (as they are called) have 
 been sold and purchased. It is presumed that, if the President approves 
 this general sale, he will endorse his approval upon the certificates hereto- 
 fore granted by the certifying agents, and now in the hands of the Presi- 
 dent for final decision. The contract, however, above alluded to, contains, 
 as I am informed, a provision that "such individual Indian may dissent 
 from the contract before its consummation, and his land will be excepted 
 from the arrangement." Since this contract was entered into, several In- 
 dians of respectable character, inhabitants of the town of Tallassee, in- 
 cluding Echo Hadjo, being very much dissatisfied with the arrangement, 
 and having had no agency or participation in it, have proposed to sell 
 tlieir individual claims to me; and believing that great injustice had been 
 done them, and that their claim and title to their lands were indisputable, 
 I have agreed, in conjunction with five other gentlemen of this place and 
 of Alabama, forming a small company, to purchase these lands. Our ob- 
 ject is to obtain good settlements at fair prices, and we have paid, bona fide, 
 what is considered a reasonable valuation for all that we have bought. There 
 seeming to be no certifying agent at present, the only mode which we could 
 adopt of executing the contracts, was, to take conveyances from the In- 
 dians to ourselves, together with powers of attorney, giving us the same 
 power to dispose of the land, or to obtain titles, that the Indians had or 
 might have. These Indians were friendly during the war, were in the 
 service of the Government, and acquitted themselves witli credit. They 
 are now of the number who have volunteered to go to Florida ; and the 
 
10 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 principal man or chief. Echo Hadjn, has the unlimited confidence of Gen- 
 eral Jfsiip. and is, in fact, a man of most respectable character. They 
 have never sold their lands, although they have been certified to in the fi'au- 
 dulent manner so extensively piactised upon this ignorant and unfoitunate 
 people. 1 understand that the certified contracts in iheir names are amongst 
 those now retained by the i^resideiit, and, unless withheld from the opera- 
 tion of this gtiicriil arrangement, will, wln-n approved by him, pass the 
 title to the pretended former purchaser. It will readily occur to you, sir, 
 and I doubt not to the President also, that if these Indians have never 
 heretofore sold their lands bona fide ; if they did not consent to the 
 c<»ntract recently made with Walker k Co. and others ; if they dissent 
 therefrom, and have sold for a fair price to a bona fide purchaser, this 
 last sale ought to be allowed and confirmed. ^^ e have it in our power 
 most completely to j)rove that the original contracts, certificates of which 
 are now in the President's liamls. purporting to be contracts or sales made 
 by these Indians, are false and fraudulent. Wliat I desire, and have to ask 
 in behalf of myself and those interested with me, as well as for the In- 
 dians themselves, is, that the President may suspend further action upon 
 these particular cases, and withhold the certificates from approval and de- 
 livery, until we can have an opportunity of sustaining our claims to the 
 lands in question, in such manner as may be indicated by you. We shall 
 proceed, as soon as practicable, to produce the necessary proofs to Messrs. 
 Balch and Craw ford, of the fraudulent nature of the former or old certifi- 
 cates, and of the bona fide and fair charactei' of our own contract. We 
 expect to obtain fiom these commissioners a rej)ort upoti the subject to the 
 President, and shall be content to leave the matter to his wisdom and jus- 
 tice. >\'e have at least to request that the cases now presented shall be 
 f<»r a time exempted from the operation of the general contract, in order 
 that we may be properly heard in behalf of our claims. I hereto annex a 
 list of the cases already paid for, and shall go to Tuskegee to-day to close 
 the purchase of several others w hich have been contracted for, and a list of 
 which w ill also be forwarded to you in the course of three or four days. 
 If the commissioners, Messrs. Balch and Crawford, are not empowered to 
 make investigations into alleged frauds, and report thereon to the Depart- 
 ment of War-, we should be pleased to be informed to whom we shall look 
 to hear our evidence in the cases in which we aie concerned, and what 
 course will be considered proper foi" us to proceed in the establishment of 
 our claims. In conclusion, I beg leave to state that the persons who are 
 now adUi-essing you, through me, are not speculators; having none of us 
 been interested, either diret'tly or indirectly, in any purchase of Indian 
 lands for more than two years past, and have not the slightest connexiwn 
 with any fraudulent contracts made with these Indians. Our operations 
 are limited to a few half sections lying in a body ; are intended principally 
 for individual use ; and we therefore tliink that we are at least entitled to 
 be heard fairly, in behalf of claims ojjenly made and honestly paid for, in 
 opposition to the overgrown and bl(>ated demands of an extraordinary mo- 
 nopoly. 
 
 I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 ALFRED IVERSON. 
 
 Hon. Lewis Cass, 
 
 Secretary of H ar. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 11 
 
 List of purchases above referred to. 
 
 Echo Hailjo, Tallassee town, east half section 22, townshi}) 16, range 25. 
 Echo Fixico »< south «' " 15 « 16 " 25. 
 
 Wac-se-ho-lata, ♦* west " " 14 " 16 '* 25. 
 
 Toc-ka-sa Fixico, « west << '* 6 << 15 " 25. 
 
 P. S. I have to request that the enclosed letter be submitted to the con- 
 sideration of the President as soon as he shall return to Washington, and 
 before his final action upon the contracts alluded to. 
 
 A.I. 
 
 Columbus, Ga., September 25, 1836. 
 
 Sir: I herewith transmit an additional list of reservations in which I 
 am interested, and which I have to request may be reserved, if proper, from 
 the operation of the sale made to General Watson and others, recently, at 
 Tallassee, should that sale be approved by the President. 
 
 When 1 wrote you some two weeks since, I was under the impression 
 (generally prevalent) that t!ie pui'chase or contract made by General W^at- 
 son and others, of all the disputed claims and unsold lands of the Creeks, 
 was made in behalf of the fraudulent speculators, and would, if confirmed, 
 operate to their exclusive benefit. I owe it to General Watson, and those 
 concerned with him in this transat tion, to state, that from information re- 
 cently obtained, I am satisfied such was not the fact ; that the contract 
 is wholly unconnected with the fraudulent purchasers, and is intended to di- 
 vest their title. If the contract was made, as now represented, at the in- 
 stance of General Jesup, ami contributed to the speedy removal of the In- 
 dians, and was bona jide, I should regict to add any thing to the prejudice 
 and opposition which prevails against that contract. All I ask is, that 
 the lands which we have purchased, and i)aid for at fair prices, may be ex- 
 empt from the operation of the contract above named. 
 I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 
 Hon. L. Cass, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 List of reservations of lands purchased by Devereux Sf Thompson. 
 
 TUCKABATCHE TOWN. 
 
 
 
 
 Section. 
 
 Township. 
 
 Range 
 
 Tom-marth Hadjo 
 
 - 
 
 - E half 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Co-nip Yoholo 
 
 - 
 
 - W '< 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Ich-has Yoholo 
 
 . 
 
 - N '* 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 No-case Hadjo 
 
 . 
 
 - N «' 
 
 16 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Ho-ges Hadjo - 
 
 . 
 
 . S '' 
 
 9 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Tuckabatche Hadjo 
 
 - 
 
 - N " 
 
 28 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Tallassee Fixico 
 
 . 
 
 - N " 
 
 21 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Ho-poethley 
 
 . 
 
 - W<' 
 
 34 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Osar Fixico 
 
 . 
 
 - S '* 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 Cle-wothle Hadjo 
 
 - 
 
 - S " 
 
 14 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
12 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Im-nta Hadjo 
 
 - N half 
 
 1£ 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Pascoaf Eiiiarllilar, 
 
 - S «' 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Co-wocke-che 
 
 - N ** 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Elirliotlilcboier - 
 
 . S « 
 
 SO 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 Ne-liai-locco liadju 
 
 -N " 
 Talmachuseb town 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 Ubar-talka 
 
 - S half 
 
 19 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Se-tao-we 
 
 - N " 
 Clewella town. 
 
 SO 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 Se-b(j(h-ka 
 
 - E half 
 
 31 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 These reservations have been purchased by D. Ac T. long before the 
 contract was made by Watson #c Co., from Indians who never sold before, 
 and whose lands were '^stolen." The company of Iverson, Dent, & Co. 
 have purchased one-half of them from D. & T., and, if excepted from the 
 operation of the late sale to Watson and others, will be carried before 
 Messrs. Balch k Crawford for investigation. 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 
 We have also purchased two other reservations in the Tallassee town, 
 the numbers of which I have not yet obtained. The names of the Indians, 
 however, are Big George, (brother of Echo Hadjo, ) and Sparna Fixico, 
 both being Indians of Echo Hadjo's town. 
 
 IVERSON, DENT, & Co. 
 
 HEADqUARTERS, ArmY OF TUE SoUTII, 
 
 FortMilchelU September 28, 1836. 
 
 Sir : I received, last evening, your letter of the 1 4th instant ; and 1 liave 
 the honor to state, in leply, that, though I considered the arrangement in 
 relation to the land unavoidable, I entertained strong doubts of the right 
 of the chiefs to enter into the arrangement. 
 
 As to llic gratuities to the chiefs, they actually saved a heavy expense, 
 and enabled me to raise a regiment of warriors for service in Florida, 
 whirli will be fully as elHcient, and will not cost more thati two-thirds as 
 much, as a regiment of white men. The gratuities to the chiefs do not 
 amount to two days' expenses of the army, and I sincerely believe they 
 forwarded our o|)crations more than three weeks; and not only was ex- 
 pense saved, but the troop.^ not discharged were left disposable for ser- 
 vice in Florida. 
 
 I am anxiously waiting the return of the steamboats on which the In- 
 dian regiment descended to Appalachicola, in order to send the regular 
 troops. 
 
 'Jlie warriors are concentrating about fifteen miles west of this place, 
 and will be ready to go on should Governor Call require them. 
 
 I have the honor to be, sir, most respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 TH. S. JESUP. 
 
 Hon. C. A. Harris, 
 
 Acting Secretary of War, Washington city. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 13 
 
 La Grange, Troup county, Georgia, 
 
 October 17, 1836. 
 Sir : You will please excuse me for troubling you with those perplex- 
 ing questions growing out of that part of the treaty with the Creek In- 
 dians, in relation to the conveyance of their reservations. I assure you 
 that I should not do so under any other than extraordinary circumstances — 
 a high sense of duty which I owe myself, and a full conviction that it will 
 afford you ])leasure to be placed in possession of all the facts connected 
 with the official acts v\hich you are called on to discharge. Such, sir, is 
 the interest I have taken in tiie subject of this communication, that I 
 lately visited Nashville, for the purpose of having witli you, in person, an 
 interview : but, much to my disapi)ointment and regret, I learned that you 
 had a few days before left the Hermitage for Washington. The object of 
 this communication is most earneslbj and solemnly to j)rotest, in behalf of 
 many otiieis as well as myself, against the approval of a late treaty, com- 
 pact, or contract, (as it may be termed^) between General James C. Wat- 
 son and others, of the one j)art, and some five or six chiefs of the Tucka- 
 batche town, of the other part, for the sale and conveyance of certain classes 
 of reservations therein mentioned; comjjrehending, in all, some two hun- 
 dred and fifty or three hundred sections of land. Having been refused, 
 (for what reason 1 have always been at a loss to conjecture,) by those in 
 charge of the matter, the liberty of taking a copy of said contract, I am 
 compelled to rely, in speaking of its contents, on sketches takcw from a 
 single hasty perusal. If, tl^erefore, I should err in rej)resenting its terms, 
 I hope it will be attributed to this cause, and not to a disposition to mis- 
 represent. From my sketches, I understand that contract to comprehend 
 the reservations of tliose Indians who have died since their names as en- 
 titled to land were registered, and subsequent to their location, but be- 
 fore a sale of the same before a certifying agent; also, all reservations 
 not marked " certified" on the said agent's books ; and all the lands that 
 have been stolen, or certified by personating, in Doctor McHenry's dis- 
 trict. It must at once strike you most forcibly that those chiefs, being the 
 chiefs and headmen of a single town, could have no right, either under 
 the treaty or Indian custom, to make such a contract ; thereby assuming 
 to themselves the disposition of the individual property of the dead as 
 well as the living. By the first article of the treaty, the United States 
 gave to each head of a family a half section of land. Now, what right, 
 propei'ty, or estate, is thereby created or vested in the Indian ? Does it 
 make the subject-matter of the gift, to wit, the land, the sole and indi- 
 vidual property (if the head of a family ; or does it create a joint estate 
 in him and the balance of his town, his nation, or his principal chiefs ; or 
 does it create a trust estate, and constitute his chiefs his trustees ? The 
 answer to this question is obvious. The terms of the article above alluded 
 to are too plain to admit of a doubt but that it vests a sole and exclusive 
 right in each head of a family to his portion, as his individual property. 
 Who, then, has the right to dispose of it ? It would follow, as a necessary 
 consequence from what has just been said, that the individual whose prop- 
 erty it is, and he only, or his legal representative, could legally and 
 properly sell and convey it away. But, on tliis point, we are not driven 
 to reason or implication. The second article of the treaty settles the 
 question, and places it beyond dispute. It contemplates and provides only 
 
14 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 for the sale of reservations by those to whom they have been given. It re- 
 quires theapnoiiitnicHt of a certifyingageut to examine such contracts ah)ne, 
 and authorizes the President to apprcne none other. Is the contract which 
 has been, or will be, submittt-d to } ou fur your appioval, such a ofio ? 
 Has the Indian, whose land is conveycil, been exaininrd, whetliei- he un- 
 derstands till' contract, whether he is willing thereto, and whether he has 
 received the consideration paid, or any part tliereol r If so, w here is the evi- 
 dence of itr I tinay be contetided (hat the common Indians ha>e, either direct- 
 ly, or by established custom, dehgattd to those chiefs the power to sell their 
 lands. If expressly conferred, when and where was it done? and what evi- 
 dence of it has been furnished the President ? IT by ( ustom, what custom 
 justifies it? I'lie chiefs of the uulion (not of a single town) have, ifi gen- 
 eral council, (not sccrtt!ij.) by treaty, .sold large tracts of country, when it 
 was national and not individual property, to the United States, but not to 
 individuuls. There exists no custom to justify such a sale as that presented 
 to you. But to pietend that such powers had been delegated, would be an 
 assumption most positi\ely conti-adicted by all the facts and cii'cumstances 
 connected with the transaction. Of this cinitract, Ihe common Indians 
 knew nothing, and could know nothing. At tlie ver-y time of its execu- 
 tion, they had collected in huge luimbers about the office of the certifying 
 age!it ; and many of those who had stolen their lands, dr-eading the inves- 
 tigations of the Government, had I'elinquishecl their* claims to a great 
 many locations, and wtre therr fast ielinf|uishing and bringing forward 
 the true owners of the lands, who, in almost every instance, were willing 
 to sell and r'eceive their money jji-ejiar-ator-y to llieii- departurT west. Such, 
 sir', was the state and condition of that branch of the business, as your 
 certif} ing agent will repcu't to joii, when theoidei' from Geneial Jcsnp to 
 stop the certifying was received at the olKce. At the very period when 
 the sole and much-desire<l object of the investigations was about to be ac- 
 complished, this contract was thrown irr the way, to prevent it, by the nran- 
 agement of those who had no little agency in making those investigatiorrs 
 necessary. Sir, when this matter- is properl} understood, it will be found 
 to be nothing more nor- less tiian a mor-e o|)en. plausible, and daring attempt 
 to take from those Indians w hose lands tiiey |)ietend to sell, that which 
 it has been befor-e attemjited to deprive them of. by secretly and corruptly 
 using their names, and personating their persons, before the certifying 
 agent; artd with the further view of suppressing all fiitnr-e investigations. 
 A large portion of those stolen lands have been j)ur'(liased of the true 
 owner by third persons, who did so under a full knowledge that the first 
 preternled contr'act was fraudulent, with a deii'iininaiion <if ex|)«>sing that 
 fr'aurl, if possible, befor-e the invesligating agents of the Goveinment ; and 
 should they fail of success in that way, they intenderl r-esoiting to the reg- 
 ularly constituted tribunals of the country. Now, all they ask is, that they 
 be placed on the same footing with, and iliat no advantage be gi\'en to, the 
 fraudulent purchaser- ; and that the ['resident will not gi\e 'hem, by the ap- 
 proval of this coritr-act, the sanction of his judgment, and conserpiently 
 gr'eafer* weight of rhai'actei', if not complele sccurily, in futiiie inves- 
 tigations. Hut, sir*, how cati the Piesidrnt ap])i o\e of a cmitract dis- 
 posing of the i-eser-vatiorrs of tlmse Indians w ho ai-e dearl. when, hni^ since,, 
 in pur-suance of advice, if not of dii-ectimis, in \ar-i'>u8 letter-s contained, re- 
 ceiM-d fr-om the War Df'partmcnf, ailininjstr-ations ha\e been regular-ly 
 takerr out, and sales legally made according to the laws td" the Slate of Ala- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 15 
 
 bama ? It would seem lo be exceedingly hard and unfortunate that an ad- 
 ministrator acting under the advice and directions of the Government, 
 and a purchaser buying in conformity with the laws of the State, should 
 become sufferers by a change in the views of that Government, or a branch 
 thereof. But, sir, apart from all questions of vested rights, or authority in 
 and duty of the President to approve, there are circumstances attending 
 the execution of that contract, which ouglit, and which nmst when known, 
 wholly destroy it. The inadequacy of the price paid for the lands conveyed, 
 is not among the least. Seventy- live thousand dollars, for two hundred 
 and fifty or three hundred sections of land, worth, at a very low estimate, 
 three hundred and fifty or four hundred thousand dollars! This was once, 
 as was understood from directions to the certifying agents, a sufficient and 
 fatal objection to the approval of any contract. This objection, it is true, 
 has been very ingeniously kept from the face of the instrument, and conse- 
 quently from the eye of the President, by classifying the lands thereby con- 
 veyed, without specifying what quantity each class comprehends. Had 
 that been done, it would have appeared that almost one-half of the 
 locations in tiiat particular district of country were included, and 
 it would have amounted to an insult to have asked the approval 
 of the President to such a sale. But it is to be tlie more regretted 
 that that small and inconsiderable sum should have been paid out of the 
 funds of the Indians, and not with the money of (he purchasers. Such, how- 
 ever, is the fact. On the day before the consummation of this contract, (or 
 at least within some short time before.) an annuity, and probably two an- 
 nuities, was paid to the Indians, (and, if I mistake not, into the hands of 
 those chiefs who executed that instrument;) and it was a part of that iden- 
 tical money which paid the first payment, to wit, ^37,500, of the afore- 
 said purchase-money, and the balance payable on condition tliat the Presi- 
 dent approve the sale. 
 
 These, sir, are facts quite notorious with those at all familiar with the 
 transaction, and susceptible of the clearest proof. Then, suicly, the President 
 cannot approve a contract which, upon its face, has a consideration wholly 
 inadequate, and, when examined, is totally without any corsideration what- 
 ever. It is to be sincerely hoped that the President will, (before he acts on 
 this subject,) by his agents, have a strict and close examination made of all 
 the circumstances connected with this contract, let it reflect on whom it may; 
 that he may consider well the effect it will and must have in future inves- 
 tigations of frauds heretofore practised — frauds, which I have once visited 
 Washington for the purpose of exposing, and which I am well convinced 
 the President then anxiously sought to investigate. Should he do so, I 
 am well satisfied that he will never approve this contract ; in other words, 
 this ingeniously devised stratagem to shield from public exposure the most 
 fraudulent and iniquitous transactions. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 The President of the United States. 
 
 WILLIAM DOUGHERTY. 
 
 Green's, near Tuskegee, 
 
 October 19, 1836. 
 
 Sir: By a communication to us from the Commissioner of Indian Af- 
 fairs, we are required to give our opinions upon the validity of a contract 
 
16 [ Doc. No. 274. | 
 
 entered into by James C. Watson and others, with General Jesup, acting 
 onbehalCof the United States, and certniji Indian chiefs of the Creek nation, 
 covering nearly seven hundred reseivations to heads of Indian families, of 
 three hundred and twenty atres each. 
 
 As soon as we received the lettrr <d'Mr. Harris. \vc resolved to pursue 
 such a course in this mutter as we believed would give satisfaction to 
 General Watson, and to the large ntmibcr of persons w ho claim reserva- 
 tions adversely to any rights which he may set up, founded on (he stipula- 
 tions of that contract. n> e advised General Wats(»n of the reference which 
 had been made to us ; retjuiied him to file n memorial, ])raying that the said 
 contract might be sustained; and offering him the option to sup|)ort this 
 memorial by such arg(in)ent, in writing, as he might think jiioper. To 
 the Honorable Alfred Iverson (whose protest against the confirmation of 
 the contract iiuiuestion we transmitted to your Department, and which fiad 
 been enclosed to us,) wc sent a copy of tliec«)niract of General Watson, and 
 invited a written discussion of its conditions, and a legal examination of 
 its validity. 
 
 As soon as these documents come into our oflice. and which will be in a 
 few days, we shall |)j()eeed to examine thenu aiefnlly, and shall prejiare our 
 written opinions ii|)on the whole case, foi- the derision of the President. 
 
 If any additional steps are, in your judgment, necessary to be taken to 
 render our examination of this matter more complete and satisfactory, we 
 will tiiank you to suggest them. 
 
 The j)osition of General Jesuj) in this transaction is a <lelicate one; and 
 entei'taining, as we do, a thoroiigli conviction tliat he acted in it with a 
 view ojily to the promotion of the jjiiblic interest, we thought it due to him 
 to proceed in a formal manner, lest lie and the publir might suppose, in the 
 event of a decision agaiust a very important oflicial act of his, that we had 
 jjroceeded with improj>er haste, and overturned what he had done, without 
 due care and consideration on our part. 
 
 With great respect, wc havetlie honor to be your obedient servants, 
 
 T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD, 
 ALFRED BALCH, 
 
 Commissioners. 
 
 Hon. B. F. BiTLEK, 
 
 Secretary of War, TTashington. 
 
 CoLUMBvs, Georgia, 
 
 October '29, 18S6. 
 Sir: I have been instructed by Iverson, Dent, &: Co. to notify the De- 
 partment of War that they are tlie ))urchasers of half section E. 5, 15, 24, 
 located to Micco Hatkai", an Indian of the Tuskegee town of Creek Indi- 
 ans. 1 am also authori/.ed to say, in behalf of the Indian above mentioned, 
 that he dissents fi'om the contract made with General Watson and others 
 with certain chiefs at Tallassee, ^cc, and requests that his land maybe 
 exempted from its operation, if approved. I have to request that this case 
 be considered upon the same footing as those heretofore indicated by me to 
 the Department. Wc have declined, at present, making any further pur- 
 chases; and should these few cases in which we arc interested be excepted 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 17 
 
 from the contract of Watson and otiKTs, we shal! have no cause or objection 
 to iji'ge aj^ainst the aj)j)rovai of that contract, and bi'.c; to he cojisitlcred as 
 withdrawing any opjjosition heretofore indicated against ic. 
 1 am, respectfully, vour obedient servant, 
 
 A. I VERS ON, 
 for 
 IVERSON, DENT, & Co. 
 Hon. B. F. 13 in LEU, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 Green's, near Tuskegee, Alabama, 
 
 December 1, 1836. 
 
 Sir : A communication from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs of ti»e 
 22d September last, addresse*! to the commissioners for investigating al- 
 leged frauds in the purchase of the resei-vations of the Creek Indians, re- 
 fers to them a contract entered into by J. C. Watson and others, on the 
 28th of August last, vvitii certaiji chiefs, which has been sanctioned by 
 General Thomas S. Jesup, subject to the ratiilcation of the President of 
 tlie Uiiited States. The i-efereiice and accompanying instructions state 
 tiiat " an important step has been taken by General Jes'.ip for the dispo- 
 sition of the lands in Dr. McHenry's district, the contracts for which have 
 been contested. From a consideration of the present enjbarrassed condi- 
 tion of the Creeks, and a conviction of the desii-ableness and necessity of 
 their instant removal, he has given his sanction, subject to tiie approval 
 of the President, to a contract for the sale of tiiese ti'acts. Copies of his 
 letter, of the contract, and other paj)ers less directly connected with this 
 transaction, you will find encloseil. No opinior! has been expressed by the. 
 Department upon this pj-oceeding ; but General Jesup i]as been advised of 
 this reference of the [)a|)ers to you. I Imve to request that yofl will give 
 them a thorough investigation, with a view to ascertain the beai'ing they 
 have, or may have, upon measures previously taken tor the ^ale of tiiese 
 lands; and whether any ohji^ction. arising out of the provisions of tlie laws 
 of the State, or of the treaty witli the Creeks, can he sustained. The re- 
 sult of this investigation yon will rei)ort as early as [)racticsble for tlie con- 
 sideration of the. President." 
 
 Immediately on the receipt of tiie within, the commissioners gavenotiLC 
 to General J. C. Watson, one of the purchasers by the contract, and t!ie 
 first wiio signed it, of the reference ; requesting hint t-) take such steps as 
 he might he advised were ])ro])er, as soon as he conveniently could. He 
 gave it early attention, as did several of tlie others (jjerhaps all) wiio were 
 associated with him in the jiurch.ise. Those who were interested to op- 
 pose the ratification of tiie agreement, and were known, were at the same 
 time informally acquainted witli its submission to the commissioners. Of 
 these notifications, the several memorials, evidence, and arguments, Jiere- 
 with transmitted, were the fruit ; and the pretensions, inteiests, and vievv's 
 of the contendii-ig parties were fairly rrjir-esented and brought before the 
 commissioners, to which end the fullest oppm-tu'iity was given to tliem, re- 
 spectively J which has protracted our action longer than was desirable, but 
 2 
 
18 [ Doc. No. 274. j 
 
 it was iinavoidablo. Giealor haste might, and probably wonld, have pro- 
 UuccU (lissatislactioii ; and it' it did not, wmihl have been itiexciisable in 
 those charged with such responsible tlnties. Tlie question is one of the 
 fust inipiTssion. Vast interests are involvo-il : the ccMiscquences must be 
 of very extensive operation, as the conliact may he allirtncd or repudiated, 
 and this cnmminiity is deeply exciteil on the subjrct. It \n as due to all 
 tliese considei ations that every i-easonable indulgence should he granted to 
 the parlies on either side of the question, and their counsel ; and that iheir 
 representations and arguments, the contract, and all the attendant circum- 
 «tances, should receive. fr(un the commissioners the gravest deliberation. 
 
 The dilliculties that involved the Indians, and encompassed General Jes- 
 up in regard of them, sulliciently a|)pear by the letter of Opothe Yoholo of 
 56lii August last, to that ollicei', and by his communication td" next day to 
 tlie Commissioner of Indian Aft'air-s ; and whatever opinion may beentei-- 
 tained and ex|wessed of the \ alidity of the conliact, it is manifest that the 
 purest and most patriotic motives inftuenced the commanding general in 
 sanctioning it. His letter of the 30th August to the Secretary of Wai-, 
 Contains a frank exposition of his feelings and opinif)ns on the occasion, and 
 ieaxes no place to doubt that he yielded to what seemed to him an ovei*- 
 ruling necessity, and ad(t|)te(l his course when theie a|)pcared to be no al- 
 ternative. "Nothing short of the absolute necessity of satisfying tlie In- 
 dians, and removing from their minds the impressioti that they would re- 
 ceive nothing for their lands, would have induced me, under any circum- 
 stances, to have sanctioned it." Besides the above contract, he effected on 
 the same day an arrangement, by which a body of Creek wai'riors were 
 engaged for service in Florida, to aid in suppressing the Semimde hostili- 
 ties ; and it is highly probable, if not certain, iliat this last agreement was 
 greati/ facilitated by the fust : they were jiarts of one whole. 
 
 The ^onti-act, which is executed by Opothe Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tucka- 
 batche Micco, Little Doctor, (chiefs of the Tuckabatche town,) Jim 
 Boy, (chi"f of Thlobthlocco town,) and Tustenugge Chopco, "(chief of Tal- 
 lassee town,) is as follows : 
 
 State of Alabama, 
 Tallapoosa ''.oiintij. 
 
 This indenture, made and concluded at the town of Tallassee, in the coun- 
 ty and State af(,resaid, on the 28th day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
 the United State- of America, of the first part; and Opothe Yoholo, Mad 
 Blue, Tuckabatch-i Micco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy. chiefs of the Creek 
 tribe of Indians, aid James C. Watson, Edward Ilanrick, >Villiam Walk- 
 er Ac Company, IVei- C. Harris, and John Peabody, of the thinl j)art, 
 witnesseth : That wheieas, by a treaty between the United States of Amer- 
 ca and the Creek tribe of Indians, ratified in the year (»f our Lord 1832, 
 each head of a family b.'longing to said tribe became entitled to one half a 
 section of land, which was subsequently allotted according to the same: 
 and whereas, by the same treaty, it was j)rovided that no sale should be 
 valid, unless the contract should meet with the approbation of an agent of 
 the United States, and confuniation by the President thereof; and where- 
 as the parties of the hccond j)art allege. o:j behalf of individuals of the said 
 tribe, that frauds have been jjerpetrated upon the holders of land under 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 19 
 
 the said treaty, whereby their titles have become involved with diiritulty, 
 their lights jeopardized, and confidence in their security impaired : atid 
 whereas investigations have taken place without results, and they are 
 about to leave the lands ceded. Cur their homes in the west : To the end of 
 .settling all their business in this country ; of transCerring from tlK-mselves 
 the burden of litigation, and of obtaining soincthiiig for their claims jno- 
 portioned to their value, and at the same time to make a j)rovision f(/r the 
 lair and bona lide j)urchasers from the people of theii* tribe : they havo ad- 
 vised their people holding said claims to accede to a general disposition (»f 
 them, and have obtained their consent to remise, release, and foi-ever quit 
 claim (on the j»art (d'all and each of them) to the parties of the third part, ami 
 each of them, of all their right, title, interest, claim, and demand to all tlic 
 tracts and ])arcels (»f land, situate, lying, and being in that part of the tei'ii- 
 tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, com[)rised within the distiict of lands in 
 which R. W. McHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed tin; 
 subject of contest bel'oie the agents of tlie United States, and which have 
 either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold 
 and certified without autlujrity in the agents of the United States to wit- 
 ness said sales, or certify said contracts, (the same being the cases con- 
 tained in the i'e|)orts of the investigating agents ;) subject, In.'wcver, to the 
 restrictions imposed by the party of the first part, as follows : 
 
 *• 1st. That tiie title hereby obtaitied, or which may he obtained in pur- 
 suance of this contract, shall not intei'fere with the rights (d' any Individ- 
 ual who has made a prior valid contract with the i-ightful clairjiaJif of said 
 lands, (whether the same has been certified or not,) or any part thereof; 
 but the respective claiiris(if necessary for settlement) sliallbe iuvestigiited 
 by an agent appointed by the President of the United States, and the ratifi- 
 cation of the President shall be necessary to the peid'ection of the titles. 
 
 •♦ i*rovided, nevertheless, that for the ascertainment of the fairncs 
 and validity of any claim, as well as for liie protection of the parties of the 
 third j)art, they shall be entitled to tiie benefit of the same rules that the 
 Indians would have been entitled to hut for this contract, under the instruc- 
 tions of the War Dejiartment. 
 
 *' 2nd. That when any cimtract shall be preferred by the said agent upon 
 investigation, the |)arties of the third part shall be entitled to the same 
 security lor the consideration as the Indian would have had but for this 
 C(mtract ; provitled, if the amount paid into the hands of the agent of the 
 United States shall exceed, on any j)arcel of land, the pro rata valuation 
 made in this contract, then one half of said overj)lus shall be i-etaincd by 
 the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, oi-, if dead, his heirs. 
 
 ♦' 3d. That the tnoney hereafter stipulated to be paid, shall be paid to 
 the Indian entitled to the land, \» presence of the chief, and an officer of 
 ttie United States ; and until such payment he made, it shall be deposited 
 with the certifying agents of the dis;rict. The payment of which shall 
 be a consunnnation of this contract. 
 
 " 4tli. That if any one Indian holditig any parcel of land herein con- 
 veyed, shall refuse to cariy into effect the provisions of this contract, 
 in that case a pro rata allowance ujMm il»e cfMisideratimi herein sipuliieil. 
 shall be made to tlic j)arties of the third part : provided tiiis conseiit shall 
 be given hefote the consummation of this cotitcai't. 
 
 ♦•5th. That all those lands, which have not been sold, includii g li'ose 
 where the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation to he 
 
to [ Doc. No. 274. 3 
 
 inade by tlic persons wiio may be appointed by the ncjent nf tlie United 
 States, wbu slujll fiiiaHy ( !om- tlie arrangements piovi'Ied for in tbis ron- 
 tracl, and tbe treaty : pri>vi(led, tbat Ibis sbull not refer to any claims em- 
 braci'd in jjrevious articles of tbis rontrai:t : and provided turtber, tliat 
 valid titles can be obtained tberefor. 
 
 "Tlic parties of tbe tliird i)art aj^ree to receive tbe conveyance hcrein- 
 befiir niade, subject to all tbe conditions and stipulations lierein contained, 
 and will pay tberefor tbe suni of seveniy-five tbousand dollars; one-balfto 
 he paiti upon tbe sealing of tlje^^e jUTsen's, to tbe agent (jf tbe United 
 States wbo may be appointed to receive tbe same ; and one-lialf in four 
 moiillis, at Fort Gibson, in tbe State of Arkansas. 
 
 '♦ In testinjony wbereof, I, Jobn A. Camj)bell, ajjpointed by Major 
 General Tbomas S. Jesup, commanding Soutbern arnjy, as agent of 
 llie United States to execute tbe same, &c. 
 
 "JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 *' III testimony wbereof, we bave bercunto set onr bands, and affixed our 
 seal:-, tbe day and dale above w rilten. 
 
 Opotbe Yobolo, bis x mark. 
 
 Mad lilue. bis x mark. 
 
 'ruckabatcbe-Micco, bis x mark. 
 'I'ustenugge Cbopco, bis x mark. 
 Little Doctor, bis x mark. 
 
 Jim Boy, bis x mark. 
 
 J. C. W'atson, 
 Witnesses : Edward Hanrick, 
 
 Jolin Page, >ViHiam Walker, 
 
 Cfl/)/. Sn-pt. Creek Removal. Peter C. Harris. 
 
 J. V. Lane. Jobn Peabody. 
 
 Capt. U. S. .irmy. 
 K. Marsball, Interpreter. 
 
 '' Sanctiotied by me, subject to tbe ratification of tbe President of tbe 
 United States, August 28, 1 836. 
 
 ''THOMAS S. JESUP. 
 ** Maj. Gen. Commanding Jirmy of the South. 
 
 <'Tbis contract sball apply to tbe towns only of Coosawda's, 'I'licka- 
 batcbe.'s, EufaUi's, Kialiga's, Cbattossofkins, Ko!jo-mats-ka-catcb-ka, 
 L'«cliip"gi>. Soiigabatcbce, Tallassee, Tuskegee, Cliebaw town on Eufala 
 crerU, i'lilobtblocco, (Jim Boy's,) Clewalla, Talmacbussce, Towarsa, 
 Ottesa, Autauga. Tbe ( biefs before stated, (ieclaring tbat tbey bad no 
 advice or consent from llie oliier towns. August 28, 183G. 
 
 JOHiN A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 "Tbe Tallassee cbief declared, w ben he signed tbe contract, tbat be 
 had not the assent of bis jjcoplc to tbe act." 
 
 THOMAS S. JESUP. 
 
 ♦ » We do hereby acknowledge to bave received from John Page, agent 
 of tbe United States, who was apj)oiiited by Major General 'IMionias S. 
 Jesup to receive tbe same from tbe parties of tbe third part, mentioned 
 
[ Doc. ISTo. 274. ] 21 
 
 within, thirty.seven thousand and five hundred dollars in cash, and the 
 note of t!ic parties of the third {(art, payable at four months, for the same 
 sum. Tiiat this has been done at the instance and consent of our j)eop!e 
 interested herein, and for distribution among them whose rigiitshave been 
 disposed of. — August £9tli, 1836. 
 
 Done in our presence : 
 
 Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 
 
 Th. W. Bateman, Mad Blue, his x mark. 
 
 Linit. J. Insp. and Dis. Jigent. Tuckabatchee Micco his x mark. 
 
 Barent Dubois, Little Doctor, his x mat k. 
 
 Jlssvitant Jigent. Jim Boy, his x mark. 
 
 James L. Alexander, Tustenugge Chopco, his x n)ark. 
 
 .Assistant .Sgent. Tnsconer Hadjo, his x mark. 
 
 Colche Emarthia, his x mark. 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that the chiefs had no personal interest what- 
 ever in the subject matter of tiie contract, which was coJifined exclusively 
 to halt sections. 
 
 The first bi-anch of the inquiry is, what bearing may tiiis contract have 
 upon measures heretofore taken for the sale of the Indian reservations? 
 
 If it shall be ratified by the President, it will obviously transfer to the 
 vendees all the rights that remained to the Indians, as well of lands as of 
 money due on fair purchases, and will extinguish all Indian claims, except 
 to one-half of any surplus that may be received for a tract of land (liere- 
 tofore sold, and the contract for whicli shall ''be preferred" or sustained,) 
 beyond the proportion that $75,000 bear to the whole district embraced iu 
 the agreement. The lands that have never been sold are not, of course, 
 included in this observation. As to them, tiie pre-emption is sicured 
 to the purchasers at a just valuation ; but as to the lands which have been 
 the subject of controversy, Creek titles, securities for money, and "the 
 benefit of the same rules that the Indian'* was entitled to, ai'e all trans- 
 ferred. With the exceptions above noted, this compact will remove tiie 
 Indian from the ground on which he stood, and substiuite for him those 
 who will itave been placed in his position ; henceforward the contest will 
 be between white men. The purchasers are themselves iioldeis of nume- 
 rous contracts which this arrangement will establish. All the lands re- 
 certified must become theirs, (and they seem to have been in the miufis of 
 all parties to this proceeding ;) for the i'e-certification by the agent, licfore 
 the reversals were confirmed by tlie President, was, with the single excep- 
 tion of a written admission of fraud, without authority, according to the 
 construction v.liich has (rightly I conceive) been given to the ti'eaty ; and 
 if Colonel Hogan's action of reversal was in evei-y instance well founded, 
 the agreement would throw into their hands upwards of 200,000 acres of 
 land ; reserving, however, "the rights" of any individual who lias made a 
 prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of the said lands, (whether 
 the same has been certified ov not,) oi* any part thereof." As in a huge 
 shai'e of the cases overturned by Colonel Hogan, the parties did rmt ap- 
 pear, it is n()t uniikeh' they tnay be able to show in n)any instances fair 
 and honest contracts ; and there may, and probably will, be numerous 
 fair "prior" conti'acts, that have never been certified, and that would be 
 good against these vendees, however they may be r-egarded as against the 
 Indians. How niany there may be of either or both classes, nothing short 
 of an investigation can disclose. To whatever extent they may leach, the 
 
22 I Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 conlrf)V(TS!c.s to wliicli the piirclia'^crs will be exposed must necessarily 
 invdUc great tnmble ant! considerable expense; but it is nnt tt) be snp- 
 j)t)sod tliev would have entered into this large business wilhtnit the reas«>fi- 
 sible expectation <d" a prtifit. correspondent to their outlay and all the dif- 
 ficulties that SMI-round it. As, therefore, the contract, in the event of its 
 conliiMialion, will put an end. now and forever, to all measures lor- sales 
 hy Irrdians, of iheii- reservations, (with the foi-ei^oing exception^,) ami 
 mnsf, as indeed it shonld, ii-snlt in the realization by tiie pur cliaser-s of a 
 sum sullicient (o remunerate thern. it follows that the •• bearing" «>f the 
 conlriKt cannot be lavorable to the Indian reservees, who, if tlie agree- 
 inent is a good one for the vendees, must rcceixc a nnr( h smaller* sum 
 than would arise from a <lisposition of theic lands and a jji-osecntion of 
 their- interests, in the rrrode heretofoi-e jiresci-ibed. In tlic opinion of wit- 
 nesses w ho ha^e hi-en examined, and whose testiirrony you will receive 
 li«'i-i-with, the loss to those whose lands are within the circle drawn by the 
 contract must, if it should he ratified, be ver-y great. 
 
 The secorrd aspect irr uhich the commissioner-s ai-e instr-ucteil to look at 
 the corrtr-act, makes it their dirty to inrpiir-e whether it is obrroxious to any 
 well-founded ohjt-ctions ni:dei- the lawsof Alabanra and thetr-eatyof 183il? 
 
 The treaty makes a |)lain case of tr-ust. The United Slates are the 
 trustees of tiie Cieek, and the legal title is vested in them to jrrevent im- 
 provident sales. Tiie Indian is the cestuy qui trust, holding the beiie- 
 frciary e\ idence. Ninety ( hiefs, and each head (d" a family, are severally 
 entitled t<i select a tract of land, which "shall be reserved from sale. 
 fiir their nse, for" the tei-m of live years, unless sooner disposed of by them.'* 
 They may efl'ect sales, by cnnreT/tnicc, to any oiher persons for a fair* cori- 
 sider-aiiorr, ••in such maniK-i- as the I'r-esident may direct ." rrpon his a])- 
 pi-ol)ation of the contr-ac; that may "be certified by some person a|ipoint- 
 ed for- that pui-post-," the same shall be valid, and "a title shall be giverr 
 by the United States on the completiorr of the payment;'* and if, at the 
 end u\' liveyear-s, any of the reservees choose to i-emain. tiiey shall receive 
 jratcnts in fee-sirn;)le for their selections. The feeble teiurre by which the 
 Irrdians formerly held their lands was surrendered by the treaty, and a 
 deeper- and rnor-e abiding interest created, v\hich that instrument j)Ut into 
 their- hands, and enahh-d them to seize l>y a fii-mei" gi-asp. In no part <dit 
 is there any prdvision which goes to limit their- usufruct of the land, which 
 is clearly, in my judgment, co. extensive, irr dur-atioir with the legal estate 
 held by the Go\er-nment. Thei-e is no re(|uir-einent of residence. n«n* 
 ])enalty on alrandonment. The use is to continue for five years, if the 
 Indian chooses ; and then, if it be his pleasure, to r-ipen into a full arrd 
 perfect right. If his interests or w i><hes lead him to a sale, he is to cnnveii — 
 what ? I'r-oper-iy in the land, (d" which the jxir-chaser is to i-eceive the full 
 evidence iir the shape of a patent. Indepernlently of the special pr-ovisions 
 of the treaty, which restrict thern to a ricsignated coirr-se. the character* 
 whicli the Unite<l States have assume«l by tiiat inslrrrment would prevent 
 Ihem funn efTeciing a sale withoirt Indian assent; for- it is a settled princi- 
 ple of law, that "the trustee is consider-ed merely as the instrument of 
 corrveyance. arid can in rio shape :inect the estate, unless by alienation for 
 a valuable considei-alioii to a pni-chasei*, without notice :" which could not 
 he alleged, as the Cr-<fk r-igh's and interest, and the seciir-ify thrown around 
 theirr, are of such jnrbliiity and character-, that all must h(> pr-esumed to 
 know them. Tlie Indian holds "a liefeasible fee — a qualified fee," in the 
 language ul the supreme court of Alabama, [Chinrrubbee vs. Nicks et al. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J as 
 
 — June (rrm, 1836, MSS.] vvliicli descends upon his heirs, according to the 
 laws of the State, and has been ol'ten sohl under (h-crees of the courts 
 (HI llie application of his administrator ; and this interest, in combination 
 with the legal title in the United States, constitutes a full and perfect 
 ])roperty in the [and. It may be important to keej) in view and separate 
 the interest of the Creek, which is the whole usufruct, from tiie jjower ; 
 and it is no moi-e than a power reserved by tiie United States to control 
 his contract, and t(» furnish the titJe as conchisive pro'>f of that contract. 
 It has been contended, in argutnerU, that tlie rnsti-ument now under con- 
 sideration is exceptionable, on the ground of non-conformity to the law 
 of Alabama, inasmuch as tlie authoi'ity, if any existed, from the individual 
 Indians to the chiefs who signed the contract, is not in. writing. The law 
 of the State, which is supposed to sustain this opinion, proviiles that *'n(> 
 action shall be brought whereby to chai'ge any executor oi- administratoi-, 
 upon any special piomise, to answer any debt or damage out ai' his own 
 estate, or whereby to ciiarge the defendant Uj)on any special i)romisc, to 
 answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another pej-son ; or to 
 cliai'ge any person upon any agreement niade upon consideiation of mar- 
 riage ; or upttn any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, or heredita- 
 ments, (ji- the making any lease thereof for a larger term than one year ; 
 or uj)on any agreement, which is not to be performed witliin the space of 
 one year from the making thereof ; unless t!ie ])rotni.se or agreement, upott 
 which such action shall be br-ought, or some memcn-andum or note thereof, 
 shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be char-ged thei'ewith.or some 
 other persorj by hi'U thej-eunto lawfully autlmrized." The force of this 
 objection is not felt. The above is very closely co{)ied from the 4th sec- 
 lion of the statute of 29 Car. II. ch. 3., and does not contain the requi- 
 sition insisted on. The 1st and 3d sections of the statute of Charles 
 re(juire that an agent, who assigns or conveys estates, should be *• there- 
 unto lawfully authorized bif writing;" and the distinction between a mere 
 agreement to sell, where the authority may be by parol, and a conveyance, 
 wlierc it must be in writing, is fully recognised in England. Sugden*s 
 Law of Vendors. 74 : Advertisement to Roberts on Fi-auds. 10; Mort- 
 lock vs. Buller, lO Vesey's Ch. Rep. 310, 311, ' 2 Starkie on Evidence. (cd. 
 of 1834) p. 351 ; and in Ireland, (where the statute of frauds was copied 
 fi-om the English law.) by the justly celebrated chaiu'ellfu'. Lord Redes- 
 ilale, in Clinan vs. Cooke, l ; Schoales & Leiroy, 22 — vide Coles rs. 
 Trecothick, 9 Vesey's Ch. Rep. 234. The provisions of the 1st and Sd 
 sections of 29th Car. 11. have not been i-e-enacted in Alabama, and witii- 
 out determining whether the contract of 28th August is an engagement to 
 convey, or amounts to an actual conveyance, it is suihcient to observe, that 
 the laws of this State do not refpiire the authority of an agent who signs 
 •♦a contr-act for tite sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments" to be in 
 writing. Whether, in point of fact, there was authoi'ity. and, if there 
 was, whether the treaty and the mode of transfer j)resciibed in it are not 
 at war with such authority, ai e other and very different questions, to be 
 hereafter' cou'^idered. 
 
 Notwithstanding the authority of the agent is not required to he in 
 wi'iting, yet there is another ground, nf)t mentioned by counsel, in connex- 
 ion with the statute of frauds of Alabama, though commented on by them 
 for a (lifTerent purpose, which strikes me as giving to that law a fatal op- 
 oration on this contract. Uj)on an examination of the agreement and tes- 
 timony, it will be apparent that Opothe Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatchee 
 
24 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Micco. aiul I>itlIo Doctor, cliicfs ol" riirkabatclioc town, and Jiin Boy, 
 cliit'l" of 'J'lilobllilocco, r('j)r<'.soiiti'<l llit'se town-, and tlit'ui alone. Tiic 
 only other Indian win* signed the arra/»isemeiit was Tuslfnuggcc L'liopco, 
 cliiel' ol" the 'I'al lassie town, which is tak»*n ont of the contract by his dec- 
 Jaration. made at the time of j-igninj;, and cnlerKi hy Genci'ai Jesnpat the 
 foot of the paper, *'that he had not tin' assent ol liis people to the act." 
 (Siigden's Law ol' Vendors, 75.) 'i'hi' iiupiii-y here is in search oi' (luihuriiii 
 to sign the agreement, ant), ui conrse. piece<ling il ; if this he wanting, aller 
 consent will not vuir. ijie tielVct. (Morthu k vs. iiiitler, 10 Vesey'sCii. Kep. 
 31 1.) Il cannot be maiulained that the above ciii*'t's, as smc/i, had power to 
 hin<l the Indians of Casawda. Enfala, Kialega, Chaltofsofker, Ko-ho- 
 niuts ka-catcii-ka, Luci!e|»oga. Sougaliatchee, Tiiv.kegee, Chehew town nti 
 Kiilala creek, Clewalla, 'ralmaciiussee, 'I'owarsa, Ottessa, and Autauga 
 towns ; ami you will look in \ain lor any evidence «if theii- assent to tiiis 
 contract prioi- to its execution ; and yet these fourteen towns ai-e mentioned 
 hy \Miting on the agreement, as emltiiued liy it. Captain I'age* states 
 that he went to the square of (as I understood him) Tuckabatchee town, to 
 pay over the nn)ney ; that he explained the contract and the amount of 
 consideration ; that *Mriany of the chiefs of the Uppei- Creeks were pres- 
 ent, and many ot their peoj)lc ;" that he believes tlie contract was perfectly 
 undeistoofi by them, as they were several tiays in council on the business, 
 and on ibat vei-y rlay consulted for an h'»ur before they said they compre- 
 hemled the matter-; thai there was no o!)jectioii, and tliey were ready to 
 receive the money. Can sti-ongcr pi'oof be adduced that they had not con- 
 sented t<» the coritr-act on the 28tli Airgust ? If they had. why consult 
 about what was befur'c air-arrged between tiiemselves and the contractiirg 
 chiefs? But we arc not left to conjectuie ; h>r the captain says Opothc 
 Y(di(j|o stated to him that Jim Boy iiad gone home (on the day thecotitr-act 
 was ma;le, 1 ])iosume, and cerlairrly after* it: was exenrted,) •' to consult 
 his people on lln^ sultject." This kind of aiithor-ity, us r-amblingas their 
 habits, and as loose as their morals, is not what tire law irrpiires. Toerr- 
 ablc otre man to bind another by contract, full authority must be confer- 
 red ; il must be inrlividually given by each, for himself; as they had sev- 
 eral inter-ests and pi-operty, so tnirst the power* to others to birrd them he 
 several. (Mortlock r.s. Duller-, before citerl, 10 Vesey's Ch. Rep. 311.) No- 
 thirrg shmtof it carr divest theii- estates, 'i'he declaration made hy tlieTal- 
 Jassee chief, and the form of it — '• tlie assent of his people;" the tt-rins 
 emplo>ed in the corrtiact, tirat tiic chiefs who were parties to it "have 
 advised thtir pcopU'f holdirrgsald claims, to accede to a gerreral dispositimr 
 of them ;" and tlie fact ci^mmunicated to Captain Page by Opothe Ycdiolo, 
 that Jim Boy had gone home, after the conti-act was signed, ♦' t<» consult 
 his people on the suliject ;" all prove corrclusively that the chiefs arr-ogated 
 
 • Tile deposition of Captain Pape has been twice taken, anfl as often objected to by the 
 counter-memorialis'.s, on lejjal gionnds, arisinpoui of non conformity to tiie notice of taking 
 it, and of irregularity in the service of itie notice ; a. tliirJ order Itas been pranted for tak- 
 ing it. I liave seen the depositioii made on each occasion, vviien offi red and excepted to ; 
 and as, from tlie captain's high rc|mtatiiin for inte.cjrity, liis tehlim'<ny will he always the 
 same in siil)stance, I have, in forming my opinion, used the facts lie furnishes, which liis 
 deposition, npidarly taken, will establish, when il shall be forwarded to the War Depart- 
 ment. I have l.ad the less diflicully in doing so, as the evidence, in my view, operates 
 against the priil\ Jsoliritoiis to prodMce it, imd longer delay will be thereby prevented. 
 
 Tfie depo>iiti( n of Capiain t'age, recjnlirly t^ken, has been filed since tlie above note was 
 made, and will form a pari of this transmission. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 25 
 
 to themselves the power of bargaining away lands that (lid not belong to 
 them, am) over wliicii tlioy had no rightful control. But it may he said 
 that '* inany {hiefs of the Upper Creeks were })reseiit, and lUAuy of their 
 people," at ruckahatchec square, and assented. Without dwelling upon 
 the insufiiciency of this general consent, expressed through their chiefs, 
 and the time when, it may he asked, who were those chiefs ? of what towns 
 were they the heads ? how many or how few of tiieir people " j)resent" 
 were entitled to lands, or interested in the contract ? and how many of 
 the foui'teen towns within named Xvere represented by chiefs, or nienibers 
 in tliiscouricil? how many, even in this sweeping way, haveconsenied ? All 
 is uncertainty. Tiie obligation of establishing the authority of the chiefs 
 who assumed the relation of vendors, was upon the purchasers. They 
 have not shown it. On the contrary, with the fullest opportunity to do 
 so, they have failed in furnishing this all-important link in the chain ; for 
 the payment made by Job Taylor to some thirty-seven or thirty-eight 
 Indians — we know not whom — of Chattofsofker, is not shown to have been 
 made to tiiose entitled to land ; that they knew what they were receiving 
 it foi-, or conversed about the contract at the time, much less assented to 
 it ; while ther-e is negative testimony by Thomas S. Woodward, a witness 
 lor the memorialists, which proves that Jim Boy *' understood tlie said 
 contract as including all tiie disputed lands in fiis town.'' No authority 
 over tiiB fourteen towns namesi, or their inhabitants, belonged to the 
 chiefs who signed the c(n>tract, by virtue of their offices, nor by special del- 
 egation, nor any consent given antecedent to the contract. And theTallas- 
 see chief having confessedly neither power nor assent, it cannot be en- 
 forced against them in Alabama, even on the supposition that they nfter- 
 warils severally assentec! to it; for, so f^ir as tliey wei-e concerned, the agree- 
 ment was not signed by the j)arties to be charged therewith, nor by any 
 person or persons by them »• thereunto lawfully authorized." The statute 
 of {"rauds of the State will ap[)ly with equal force to the Tuckabatchee and 
 Th!obthh)CCO towns, if it shall a|)pear tliat the contr-acting chiefs were not 
 specially and previously authorized to make tlie contract by their own 
 })eople. Ko such authority has been established or shown ; and it will be 
 seen, in tlie course of this opinion, that their official character and attri- 
 butes did not give it. It need only be further remarked, that the case of 
 the memorialists, in this branch of it, is not strengthened by the pay- 
 ment to the agent of one-half of tha sum agreed on ; for it is now consid- 
 ered to be fixed and settled law, that part payment of t,he consideriition 
 money does not take a case out of the statute of frauds. It appears to me, 
 therefoi'e, that the entire transaction is inoperative and vicious. 
 
 The contract has been assailed on the ground of inadequacy of consid- 
 eration, and evidence adduced in suppoi-t of the objection. This agi*ee- 
 ment I believe to have been one of entire fairness. Colonel John A. 
 Campbell, a lawyer of high standing, and a member of the Legislature of 
 Alabama, was selected by Genei'al Jestip, and authorized by oi-der of 28th 
 August, " to aid the Indian chiefs in the arrangement of tlieir land claims, 
 should they think propei- to discuss, or acccjit, the pi-oposition made to 
 them by the comjyany of Watson, Walker, awd others." It was approved 
 by Genei-al Jesup, as estimable in |n'ivate life as distinguished for public 
 conduct; and it is averred in the memorial of the purchasers, and not con- 
 tradicted, (which might have been easily done, if the facts admitted of it,) 
 that tlie pariiculiir terms of said contract "were arranged between the 
 
26 [ Doc. No. Q71. ] 
 
 agents of the United States and tijemselves ; tliat tliey did not rnnsiilt or 
 advise with tlie Indian rhii-fs aforesaid, but witli tin- olVicers of tlie United 
 States, who ronimnnicated the ptojxjsitions of the Indians to them, and re- 
 ceived their answers for the Indians;" and wc have the statement of Cidonel 
 Campbell that he knew of •» no nnfairness. eitliei' in the negotiation oi- t-x- 
 eculion of this contract :" which is conlir-nied by the testimony of Captain 
 Page. The (|iiestioti recurs as to the iiiade(-|uacy of consideration. I'er- 
 haps no |)ritirip|e ol law is better setth-d than that mere ina(le(iuacy of 
 j)rice is no ground i'ov the court to set aside an agreement, "if it appears 
 to have been fairly entered intoand understood;" unless, imlecd.wheie itis 
 *<so gross, strong, and manifest, that it must be impossible to state it to a 
 man of common sense, without producing; an exclamation at the inecpialitv 
 of it." ("nio. Hutler et nl..vs. E. Haskell, 4 E.p Kep. So. Car. 692.) 'i'h'e 
 language of Chancellor Kent ol' New York is cfpialiy ]H)inted: "'rhc 
 iue(|iiality amounting to fr-aud must be so strong and manifest as to shock 
 the conscience and conlound the judgment of any man of common sense." 
 (Osgood rs Franklin, 2 Johns Cli.Kep. 23.) In this case,the price stipulated 
 was seventy-five thousand dollars. The district of Doctor McHenry, cm- 
 braced by the contract, would cover, according to my estimate, six 
 hundred and thirty tracts, or two hundred and one tfiousand ami six 
 hundred acres oi' land : (t!ie argutnents of counsel on either side make 
 the (juantity larger;) for which the sum mentioned wouhl give thirty-seven 
 rents and a fraction per* acre. Tlie considei-ation was adopted, as Colonel 
 Campbell inloiins us, by deducting thirty-thi-ee per cent, from the price'at 
 which the certificates were originally given, '"for the contract tiiat would 
 be determined against" the vendees. (See his statement.) Mi-. W. Thomp- 
 son, a respectable witness for the C(!nnter-memorialists, is of o])inion that 
 the half sections in Jim Boy's town (and he knows the (|uality well) art^ 
 \v<n til one thousand dollai-s each, of wiiicli there are some fifty-lour : while 
 Thomas S.Woodward, a witness for the memorialists, consiilers •• the mo- 
 ney which lias been jireviously paid to said town foi- lands, togethei" with 
 the proportion received by Jim Boy out of the money paid by Watson and 
 others, is a fair e(]uivalent for the lands in said towti, in tiie way that Indian 
 lands have usually sold." and says he is also well acquainted witli their 
 quality ; and George Clough testifies that he estimates the lands, tlie title 
 to which hail been tlie subject of investigation, "to be worth twD hundred 
 thousand dollars." How many of the first class may be awarded to memo- 
 rialists who now setup claim to tliem, or what the relative «piality «d' those 
 which shall be shown to belong to individual purciiasers from Indians, com- 
 ])are(l with those that may fall to the vendees nndei* this contract, no man 
 can now know ; and how far the sum mentioned by Mr. Clough shall be 
 reduced by <lecrees to prior |)Ui*cliasers, wIkj are now asking them at the 
 hands of the commis^-ioners. it is impossible even to conjecture. The con- 
 dition of thiiiirs on the iStii of August is the cruide. The whole district, 
 which is the subject of contract, is one scene of apparent!}', atul perhaps 
 really, inextricable confusion. Dilliculties of magnitude meet you on every 
 hand. He who enters into the conflict as the champion of eithei* entire 
 side of the ipiestion, must do it at great expense u{' time, money, andcom- 
 lort. and reap an uncertain harvest. I am aware tliat it has been decided, 
 and often too, "that the hazard run by a buyer of losing what he advances 
 on some contingency, does not prevent courts from giving relief;" and the 
 peilect involution that enwraps the title to these lands is stated, not as an 
 obstacle to the just operation of gross inadequacy, if it exist, but as an in- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 27 
 
 gredient that deserves to be weighed in fixing the price, and as evidence 
 that the consideration was not st> palpably inadequate as at first blush 
 it niigiit socin to be. All the cii'cumstances that surround the parties, and 
 the subject of their negotiation, must be carefully looked at : and surely no 
 prudent nian would give the full value for land, tlie ownership of wiiich 
 would at otice lead him into several hundred controversies ; few would en- 
 gage in them at all. I an> of opinion, therefore, that, although the consid- 
 erntion is not ecpjivalent to the value of the lands tliat the purchasers may, 
 and probably will, acquire under this contract, it is not so glaringly dis- 
 l)roj)()rtione(l as, standing alone, to afford legal grounds for setting aside 
 the agreement. Are other considerations adduced, wliich will, in connexion 
 with the inequality, raise the legal presumption of fraud ? The incidents 
 usually relied on. and often successfully, in courts, to strengthen the ar- 
 gument of inadequacy, are, that the one party was ignorant, weak, or 
 in a distressed and necessitous situation, and tliat the other took an undue 
 advantiige tlierettf. The Indians were sufficiently uninformed, simple, a»id 
 embarrassed ; but their condition was a |)eculiar one. They were undes- 
 the immediate guai-dianship and protection of a United States officer of el- 
 evated ratik ; the negotiation was conducted oji their behalf by a legal 
 gentleman of high character appointed for that particular purpose ; and 
 they were diffVM'ently situated from those parties who have been usually liti- 
 gant before ordinary tribunals, in the special j)rotecl!on thus extended to 
 them. Mr. Clougli testifies that " a pvoposit^orj was made to the chiefs to 
 take all the disputed lands in McHenry's district at valuation. Opothe 
 Yoholo said he was willing to accede to the proposition ; and an agreement 
 was made to meet tlie same evening i?i Tallassee to confirm the agreement, 
 but the chiefs did not meet. Deponent says that he made aimther proposi- 
 tion to the chiefs to take the land in a body at $150,000 ;" and again, that 
 these |)ropositi()ns "were made a few days before the contract of Watson, 
 Haniick, and others, was made." Witness, on ais cross-examination, sta- 
 ted further, that "he and his comjjany would give them one hundred and 
 fifty thousand dollars for the lands above referred to;" tliat the company 
 consisted '• of himself, his brother, O.K.Freem.an, Mr.Samuel K. Hodges, 
 and Colonel Seaborn Jones; and that he was in Tallassee on the 28th day 
 of August, and understood a negotiation was going on for making a con- 
 tract fertile land ; but he did imt make his jiroposition to General Jesup, 
 or Colonel Campbell." This appears to be relied on; but it cannot escape 
 notice, that, with the single exception of one chief of one town, it does not 
 appear to whom these propositions were made — whether to tlie chiefs who 
 signed the contract, or to all the chiefs who rule in Dr. McHenry's district. 
 And to how many of one or the other description is unknown ; unless, in- 
 deed, the testimony should lead to the jirobable conclusion, that the commu- 
 nication was made to Opothe Yolinlo alone, through whom it was expected 
 to i-cach others. Be tliis as it may, an isolated proposal, containing alter- 
 native terms, or even two distinct pi-opositions, made in the loose and ir- 
 legnlar manner mentioned, to persons that the witness must be presumed 
 to know could not consummate a contract, cannot weigh much. What 
 was the motive of Opothe Yoholo for not acting on the suggestions of the 
 witness, we know not; certain it is, that for some reason they were disre- 
 garded. But it is remarkable, that an intention of making a purchase of 
 such magnitude and extent should not have been communicated to General 
 Jesup, or Colonel Campbell, by an individual who was at the place where, 
 
28 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 and cngnizantof tlic fact, lliat a negotiation was in progress for the pur- 
 chase ol {\w lands lliat lie ami his cdMipatiy sought to possess. \N'('i"e these 
 proposiliiMis, or i'illi('i-<if them, mentioned to anvhody at Talhisscc on Iho 
 28th August ? I infer not; from the fact that Captain I'age, who was 
 present, and, from his acipiaintance and intercourse witii the Creeks, wouhl 
 he likely to hear from some quarter of such a movement, if made, de- 
 poses lliat he knew •• of no oflVr heing made to General Jesup, or to the 
 Indians, for a larger sum than tlie one named in the contract.*' Did Gen- 
 eral Wat-^on and liis co-purchasers know of the proposals, or any otlier, 
 and use in>|)ri)j)er inlluejice o\er the sellers? I have seen no evidence tliat 
 would warrant me to say so; nor do I perceive that additional force is 
 giverj to tiie allegation of inecjuality of price, hy any consideration that 1 
 have been able to bestow on the testimony of Mr. Clough. I have not ad- 
 verted to the distinction sometimes taken between contracts executory and 
 executed, because the result of my rellections rendered it unnecessary ; if, 
 indeed, it could have been important in any view of a contract which is 
 sui generis. Tlie shape that this brau( h of the incpiiry has assumed likens 
 it to applications to open the biddings at public sales, (»r auctions, which 
 modern decisions discoui-age as dangerous ground of judicial action, un- 
 less coming within the great and salutary principles before mentioned, and 
 well established. I cannot advise the rejection of this contract (ui the 
 score of inadequacy of consideration, taken singly, or in combination with 
 any facts in proof. • 
 
 Tlie following (piestions remain h hind : 
 
 1. ^^ as Genci;il Jesup authorized to make such agieemcnt ? 
 
 2. Can the agreement, on any ccmstruction.be extended beyond the towns 
 whose chiefs signed it; and could they transfer the half sections of the 
 members even of their own respective tribes ? 
 
 3. Is the contract sustainable under the treaty ? 
 
 4. Was it performed according to its own provisions? 
 
 The instructions to General Jesup, so far as the subject under consider- 
 ation is involved, are contained in a comnuinication to that ollicer from the 
 War Department, of the 19th May last. They follow : "Tlie President 
 has been desirous of ascertaining what frauds have been committed upon 
 the Indians, in the sale of their lands, with a view to remedy the evil as 
 far as possible. I5ut this effort, a succinct account of which will be com- 
 municated to you by the Cominissi<»ner of Indian Affairs, has been now 
 stopj)ed by war. It is still, however, desii-able that the friendly part of 
 the Creeks, (if, in fact, any of them should remain friendly,) slmuld be 
 relieved from the cmbarrassujents under whicli they have labored with re- 
 spect to their lands. 1 enchtsc the cojiy of a letter from Captain Page, by 
 whicli you will perceive the views of that ofticer on the subject, and the 
 proposition made by the U j)per Creeks. This proposition has been ap- 
 proved, and Captain Page advised of the fact. So far, therefore, as any 
 part of this division of the Creeks shall remain jieaceahle, you are au- 
 thorized to sanction the proceedings recommended. IJut whatever is done, 
 must be done without delay ; for it is very imjjortant lljat these people 
 should be immediately sent off. You will assure lliem that the Government 
 is anxious t<» do tliem justice ; and that the claims fif those who remain at 
 peace, and remove to the country west of the Mississippi, will be duly 
 attended to. A descriptixe roll of all these persons will be taken, in order 
 to determine their cases hcrcalter. It is iinpt)ssible, IVom the want of lime, 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 29 
 
 1o cause abstiacts to be prepared, showing the sales that have been made 
 by the Creek Indians; and, fheret'ore, no decisions can be given for any 
 definite ])roceedings upon tliat subject. There is no objection, however, 
 in the cases of these friendly Indians, to permit them to sell agreeably to 
 the established regulations (a copy of wiiich you will herewith receive) if 
 the purchaser can satisfy himself that no contract has been heietofore made 
 for the sale of the land. Butif this is dotie, he must do it upon his own re- 
 sponsibility; foi'ifa j)revious valid contract has been entei-ed into, the first 
 purchaser must hold the land. If the airangement stated by Captain 
 Page should take effect, you are authorized to select a competent otHcer, 
 should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done; and also to apj)oint 
 rt cej-tifying agent to certify contracts, should any be entered into, as above 
 mentioned; his duties and compensation will be governed by the prescribed 
 regulations. 
 
 '•If, however,ihesc matters cannot be satisfactoi-ily arranged, j)i'evious to 
 the departure of the Indians, you will assure the friendly-disposed part of 
 them tiiat measures will be taken as early as j)racticable, to see that jsistice 
 is done to them, and that the land shall bedis})osed of at its fair value, and 
 the proceeds paid over to them." 
 
 it is manifest that, if the reservations must be disj)osed of before the 
 Indians removed west, two coui-ses, and two only, were within the scope of 
 the General's powers: one requires of him an observance of the rules and 
 regulations which had been prescribed by the Government, to conti-ol 
 Indian sales of i-eservations, and to whicli the services of a certifying agent 
 were necessary ; the other enjoined uj)on him the adoption of the plan 
 suggested in Captain Page's letter. If neither of these lines of conduct 
 were regartled, but he marked out a different path for himself, and 
 walked upon it, the conclusion seems to follow, that, how sifigle and 
 ]»atriotic soever his motives, he misjudged and transcended his authority. 
 That the rules imposed upon agents, in the ordinary mode of transferring 
 Indian reservations, were not observed in executing or jierfurming 
 the contract of 28th August, is quite sure. Whetiier the j)lan communica- 
 ted by thechief to Captain Page, and by his letter of 9th May transmitted 
 to the Secretai-y of War, was carr-ied out by this proceeding, is now to be 
 ascertained. 
 
 What was the pfOj)osition detailed in that letter ? In a talk held by the 
 captain with the U{»))er Creeks, OpntheYoholo, a leadingcbief of the Tucka- 
 bachee town, said, "I have come on one plan, which I wish to adopt, and 
 be off imjnediately ; which is this : A company of gentleuien liave seen 
 nearly all the conij)anies who purchased our lands, and they have agreed 
 to I'aise a sum of money equivalent to the value of the lands we claim to 
 have been defrau<led of. Tliey proj)ose to pay us in this v\ay, for instance: 
 I will call all tiie persons in my town together, whose lands have been 
 taken by peisonating, or other frauds practised on them : and the j)ur- 
 chaser or his agent, being present, in the presence of the two piiiu'ipal 
 chiefs of each town, and an agent (if the United States, sliall pay to tlie i-ight.- 
 ful holder of the land a sum of mr)ney to his and the chiefs* ftill satisfaction ; 
 and in case the parties cannot agree, two i-esj)ectable a3id disinter-ested 
 white men shall (one by tlie chiefs, and one by the purchaser) be selected 
 to value the land and the ainonnt of their valuation, under oath, shall be 
 paid. 'I'he receipt of the money, and theacknowledginent of satisfaction by 
 the Indian, shall be certified to by an agent of the United States and the 
 
30 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 chiefs of titp town ; ami tlic title to he pcrl'ccttMl in the name of the pmcliaser, 
 wiitten (til tlii'liKC ortlic lir-sl (it ed. passed iiiand (crtincd to liy any ol'tlic 
 ci'ililying agenls. wtietlier the I'residi-nt may liave. levci-sed and made void 
 tli«-. deeds a|iprov(cl or not approved, and, consequently, tlie land and 
 llie titles belong t(» the original purchaser', before either u\ the certirying 
 agents, 'llie cliii-fs id" cacli town are well ac<|nainled, and know well the 
 frands, and the injured persons j and in this way we can settle all our dilli- 
 culties, and relicvi^ the Go\ernini'nt «d' all further trouble with us. He 
 then asked me il 1 could not be jnesent and witness these payments. I told 
 him, if he was det»'rmined to adopt the plan, 1 would: if I could not be there 
 all the time. Lieutenant Deas, Doctor Randall, or Mr. Somerville, wouhl 
 answei' in my absence.'* The foregoing, in connexion with a communica- 
 Uon from the Commissioner of Indian Alfairs of 2(Jlh May, leciting what 
 had been done in the Cieek country by the agents wiio had visited it, and 
 the rules under whi(li they aited, contain, so fai" as I am aware, the cntiic 
 instmctions of (ieneral Jesup on the sultject, and the j».)wers delegated. 
 Were the Indians of the towns called together, and the rightful holder of lite 
 land paid a sum with which he was content, or, according to a valuation 
 on oath, in the j)reserice (d' two piincipal chiefs and a United States agent? 
 Were receipts givi-n by the Indians, and the titles perfected in the manner 
 proposed ? N\ eiethe wronged Ci-eeks identified, with a view to have their 
 itijuries redressed? In what feature <loes the contract in cpiestion resemble 
 the plan of Opoihe Yoliohir I cannot |»erceive. The genei-al, in his letter 
 ol 30th August, announcing the conti'act to the Uepartn.ent of War, re- 
 niaiks: •• I felt much doubt as to the propriety of such an arrangement, av. 
 well as the power of entering into it ; considei-ing, as I did, that eacli 
 individual Indian had a vested right in his particular location." The 
 openness of this avowal is highly creditable to him, and makes the duty of 
 saying that these doubts were well founded less j)aiiiful. No discretion, 
 beyond what has becti mentioned, was confidetl ; for it is \ery clear that 
 the Government contemplated Indian r-ennval as a probable e\ent, prior to 
 any clisposition of these lands. The Secretary, iH the foregoing letter- of 
 19th May. says, " It is very imjxirtant that these people should be immc- 
 diutely sent i>ff. You will assure them that the Governinent is anxious to 
 do them jirstice, and that the claims of those who remain at peace, and re- 
 move to the iountry ivest of the Jlississippi, yviU be dvlij attended to. A 
 descr'i|»tive roll of all these pervsons will be taken, in order to determine 
 iheir cases hereafter :^^ and again. '* if. however, these matters canuot be 
 satisfactorily arranged," (i-eferring to the j)lan indicated by CajMain I'age,) 
 •» previous to the departure (»f the Indians, you will assure the friendly- 
 disposed part (d' them that measures will be taken as early as practical)le 
 to see that Justice is<lonc to them, ami that the land sliall be disposed (fat its 
 fair value, and the proceeds paid over to them.'* No view, however liberal, 
 of the authority with which General Jesup wasclollied. warr-ants thea^iee- 
 inent of the 28th August ; and I am constrained to say that it is, for that 
 reason, in my jiulgu.ent, an invalid transaction. 
 
 Can the contract, (e.xcluding the operationof the statute of frauds) on any 
 construe tion, be extended beycnid Tuckabatchee and Thiobthlocco towrrs; 
 andean the communities in them be held to the agreement, on tin; pr'inciphr 
 td representation of tlnir chiefs as chiefs, or- by \ir-tue of any s|ic( iai ;iu- 
 ihority bestowed fur* the occasion, or- b) subsecjuent r-ecognition ? There is no 
 lunger any Creek nation east of the Mississippi, nor was there any in 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 31 
 
 August last. There was not then any chief of the Creek nation, wliose 
 (Joniiuion was as wide as the circle of all tlie Creek communities. The 
 treaty of 1832 ended their national existence, anti broke into distinct and 
 sepai-ate j)arcels wliat had before been common and undivided. From tliat 
 time fortii, their customs, usages, and laws were abandoned and proscribed 
 by themselves, and by the State of Alabama, wliich, in tlie same yeai", provi- 
 ded by law that " all laws, usages, and custonjs, now used, enjoyed, or 
 practised by tlie Ci-eek and Cherokee nations of Indians, within the lim- 
 its of this State, conti-ary tw the constitution and laws of this State, are 
 hereby abolished. If any Indian or Indians shall meet in any council, 
 assembly, or convention, and there make any law foi- said tribe, contrary 
 to the laws and constitution of this State, such Indian or' Indians shall, upon 
 conviction, be imprisoned in tlie common jail of (he proper county, not 
 less than two, nor moi-e tliaii four months." The nation, as such, had not 
 only no rights of proj)erty west of the Cliattahoochce since 1832, but, what- 
 ever system of policy had theretofor-e prevailed among them, regulating 
 either the exercise of powei- by the headmen, or the intercourse of in- 
 dividuals, was uprooted and jn-osirated. If a chief or «)thers, as their 
 usage miglit be, presumed to take away the life of a homicide, he or tiiey 
 were liable to be prosecuted for murder. If any summary modes of 
 redi-ess presci'ibed formerly by their customs, foi" injui-ies to person or 
 jiroperty, were i-esorted to, the actors were amenable to the laws of the 
 State. In no country does the power of cession of land pertain to the 
 ruler, except in i-espect of national domain. Private property may in all 
 be taken for public use, more or less summai'ily, according to the form of 
 goveriunent, upon making compensation for it ; but that priuciple lias no 
 application to this case. Prior to the tieaty, the chiefs unquestionably had 
 the power to cede the lands of their tribe or nation, and all our Govern- 
 ment compacts witli them derived their validity from such authority. But 
 even then, one or two ti-ibes could not cede by their chiefs any part of the 
 public domain ; for it was national, and it is understood to have been their 
 practice to precede any such act by a meeting of the towns in general 
 council, and the giving of common consent to the impoi-tant steji about to 
 be taken. A new state of things has ai-isen since 1832. What was be- 
 fore common })roperty, became individual and private estate. There is no 
 more any national domain, nor does there exist any town estate. The 
 bond which held them together as one whole on this side of the Missis- 
 sijipi, is cut ; and they have fallen away into small separate communities, 
 having no interest, nor any thing else, in general, except their color, their 
 misfortunes, and theii' savage habits. There ar-e. or* were in August, in 
 Dr. McHenry's district, forty-one chiefs, who, as Maj.T. J. Abbott testifies 
 are e([ual in grade and rank, and, as far as he knows, in j)oint of authority. 
 Of these, the chiefs of but two towns (excluding the Tallassee chief) signed 
 the c(mtract. They had, it is obvious, I think, no general official power 
 to bind the fouiteen towns which did not acknowledge their rule. That 
 they iiad no special power is already shown, and, in ad<lifion, is proved by 
 Colonel Campbell's statement transmitted to the commissioners, and 
 herewith sent. On page 8, he says "The authority of the chiefs to 
 make the sale can hardly be doubted. I speak not of authority derived from 
 eacli Indian. This was not to be expected. The offer of the Goveri nc nt 
 in 1 833 did not contemplate this. The chiefs stand in the place of represen- 
 tatives for their towns. They transact all business for them. They 
 
32 I Doc. No. 274 J 
 
 represent tlirm in roimrils:" and apjain, on paj^c 13, " They were required 
 in CDjistilt their yroplc. Tlicy wt* nt oil" for tlii' purpose, and declared that their 
 consent was nbtained." Thcst' statements, by (he s;<Mjtlema!i who condurt- 
 ed tlip negotiation on IM-Iiall" of tlie liidiaiis, are conclusive, in the j)articu- 
 lar tuidei* review. It seems to tne impossible to donbt on the siiijject. The 
 chiefs, itj consultation with him, did not even profess to act for any t«)wns 
 but their mrn, and were not required, imr diil they, confer with any j)eople 
 bnt t/ieir own ; and aniUl not, upon any j)iin( iple that presents itself to 
 niv mind, ctmtract an obligation that would extend beyond their orvn 
 towns (ind people. Had they the [)ower to hind them ? It has been shown 
 that the contracting cliiefs liad no standing authority for such purj)r)se. 
 Were tliey s|)ecially clothed with any ? Much remaik has been already 
 indulged on this subject whei-e itseemed applicable, and will Hot be repeated. 
 There is testimony going to show that Jim IJoy repudiated his own ^cts. 
 His declarations made in the absence of the purchasers, and after the exe- 
 cution of the j'ontract, catuiot legally be admitted on behalf of the coun- 
 ter-memoi"ialists to ini|)Mgn his own covenants ; but the testimony of Cap- 
 tain Page and (ieneral Woodward, proihiced by the memorialists, is con>- 
 peteiit evidence, and proves that this chief, in woi-dsaml comluct. admitted 
 lie had not the assent «)f liis peo|)le at the time of contracting. The agree- 
 ment itself shows that tu) such assent had been obtained by the cliiefs, 
 notwithstanding their lepresentations to the contrary; for it provides for 
 dissent, and there is an entii-e absence of evidence establishing consent or 
 ainhority, as regards all the tribes, at any time preceding the execution of 
 the agreement, which it was iiicumbent on the menH)rialists to pj-ove. 
 Sullicient has been already said of what followed the £8th August, in 
 j'ogard of assent; and I forbear to make any remark as to Tusconer 
 Hadjo, chief of the Fishpond town, who signed the receipt for one-half of 
 the purchase money, but was no party to the cmitract. The agreement, in 
 this aspect, I i-egard to have been made without authoi-ity; to be without 
 even the weak sanction that adoption migiit be supposed to give; and void, 
 asi'es|iects all pei'sons but those whose names are attixed to it. 
 
 Does it sta»id in a more fortunate attitmle in reference to the treaty ? 
 By the second article of this instrument, " ninety i)rincipal chiefs of the 
 Creek tribe 'are allowed* to select one section each, and every othei* head 
 of a Creek family to select one-half section each; which tracts shall be 
 reserved for sale, for tlieir use. foi-the term of five years, unless sooner dis- 
 posed of by tliem." The third aiticle provides that •» these tracts may be 
 conveyetl bif the persons selecting the same, to any other persons, for a fair 
 ccjusideralion. in sucii manner as the ['resident may direct. 'I'.'ie con- 
 tract shall be certified by some person appointed for that purpr>se by the 
 President, hut shall not be vali<l till the President apjiroves the same. 
 A title shall be given by the United States on the completion of the pay- 
 ment." And by ariicle 4tii, "at the end of five }ears, all the Creeks 
 entitled to these sections, ami desirous of remaining, shall leceive j)atent3 
 therei(»r in fee-simple." Much of what might be regarded as belonging to 
 this t.ipic has been antiripated ; hut it may be observed, that the treaty is 
 tin' supreme law of the land, and prescribes certain forms of proceerling, 
 which cajMiot be passed by. The Indians might, assuredly, by a full and 
 inteili"-ent consent given by (ill C(mc.erned, vary or dispose with these 
 ])rovish)ns ; but it is iielieved they have not done so by such an act as the 
 occasion required. In conformity with this treaty, the President pre- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 33 
 
 scribed rertaiti rules and regulations for tlie government of the agents 
 employed under it, wliicii wenr to tiie idcni\ficatiun of the individual reser- 
 vee, a fair valnntion of his land, and t!»e achial payment of the full 
 equivalent into his o'lcn hands, before his estjite should be divested. The 
 policy of the general administration, for years, has been wisely and 
 huinaneiy (iirected to securing individual Indian rights; and the annui- 
 ties have been understood to be distributed on that foot, so as to prevent 
 the chiefs iVom defrauding their enslaved and besotte<! people. But, in this 
 instance, the rights of tiie reservees stand upon a broader and firmer basis 
 than any usage or instruction. They are secured by ti-eaty — the highest 
 of all obligations. Its every pi'ovision looks to that security ; and the 
 articles cited — inserted fur the exj>ress purpose of preserving personal 
 j-igliLs — seem to be most inconsistent with the contract, which sweeps them 
 off at one brush, and does not conform to the regulations laid down by the 
 President, by which General Jesup was to be governed, except in the 
 single event that tlie plan communicated by Cajjtain i'age could not be 
 carried out, from w hich this contract is a wide depaiture. It has been 
 further established, as the true construction of the treaty, that when a 
 contract by an Indian reservee has been certified to the President by an 
 agent, his act of approval or rejection can alone dispose of such certifi- 
 cate. Every tract of land included in the agreement of August 28 has 
 been so certifieil, and has not yet been finally acted on by tlie Chief Magis- 
 trate, because of defects in the report njade by the agent. Will not this 
 construction of the treaty, and the correct one, be invaded by a confirma- 
 tion of this contract ? It has been strongly pressed in argument upon the 
 commissioners, that the United States, holding the legal title, can control 
 the manner of disposition. This is certainly so ; but it seems to have been 
 overlooked that it is a power of control restricted by the terms of the 
 treaty; that the power of 'the United States is merely an<l purely directory 
 and aj)prol)atory ; that the Indian must be the active and moving agent, as 
 he ought to be, in selling what is substantialiy his own : and tiiat the Gov- 
 ej-nment has exercised this power in the manner deemed best calculated to 
 give efft'ct to the treaty, and security to the private i-ight under it. 
 
 Every agreement, to give it efficacy against one party, should be faith- 
 fully and fully comjilied with by the other. The tliird restriction of the 
 contract provides " that the money hereafter stijiulated to be paid shall be 
 paid to the Indian entitled to the land in presence of the chiefs and an officer 
 of the United States ; and, until such payment be made, it shall be deposit- 
 ed with the certifying agents of this district : the payment of which shall be 
 a consummation of this contract." The fourth restriction stipulates that 
 any Indian may dissent from the comjiact ; which must, however, be ex- 
 pressed before its consummation. That consummation was to be effected 
 by the payment — to wliom ? Certainly to the reservee, and in the mode 
 prescribed in the third restriction. What other opportunity had he. or was 
 it possible for him to have, to ex|)iess liis dissent, but the one which an of- 
 fer to pay him the money would present ? And yet this sole chance f>f pro- 
 testing against the infraction of his rights is cut off and taken away, al- 
 most in the same breath that told him it ws^s secured. It is reuiarkable 
 that these provisions were no sooner made than disregarded. Tliey would 
 seem to have been inserled with a vi(;w to the treaty, and the regulations 
 undei- it ; but the next day the result shows the money to have bi-en paid, 
 not to the Indians entitled to the land, but to the chiefs. Where it is now, 
 
34 f Doc. Xo. 274. ] 
 
 is unkudwn; but General VtOodw aid's rUposition proves (Iiat at least one 
 tliiel', Jim Bov, retains the jjidpottioii ol' his town, and lias rai'iitMl it willi 
 liini to Florida, wliere lie and ii are sidjject to tlie \icissitu(les of war. By 
 what ainli()rit> tliis course was taken, i am at a loss todiscoM-f. 'V\n^ reason 
 Colonel L anijibcll I'lirnishes in his statement alieady relened to, page 9 : 
 ♦» the money IS stii»nlated to be paid to eacii rcservee," This pi'o\isi(ni 
 was not earned into eilect, but the alteration was made by the agents of 
 the Uniteil States and the Indians. \\ lits lor thousands of dollars were in 
 the hands ofsherin's and constables. To place i.ioney in the hand.-j of the 
 Indian^, would be to opi-n tlie door lor' oppression and iiijusticc; I'oi- both of 
 which the circumstances of the case permitted noiemedy. 'J'he money 
 was thereloie paid to the chief, lor the use of his people. The puichaseis 
 were n<it a party to, nor consenting to, this ; it was determined on as best 
 foi- the Indians. 'I'hc same prudential i-egard for Indiati interest would 
 liave justified the United Stales in receiving the pnce <»f every selectii>n ir> 
 the Cieek counlrv ; lor it is to be lamented that in almost every instance 
 they wasted or were (iefrauded of their funds. But such a course wiiuld 
 have been as unjustifiable as the payment of the money to the chirfs (fti 
 this contract was a palpable departure from it, in the most material stip- 
 ulations lor individuals it contained: although thepui-chasersare not charge- 
 able with this, (and, standing alone, it would not, for that reason, be good 
 cause for setting aside the contract,) it comes strongly in aid of the o:hcr 
 grounds which have been laid for that course. 
 
 Finall}, it has been zealously urged that the existing circumstances in 
 '• the nation "justified and sanctioned the measure adojited. It is certain 
 that they were peculiar, and that the gentleman in command heie was in 
 a most dillicult |)osition. The Indians had been waging war against our 
 fellow-citizens, destroying their lives and j)ro|)erty. This community was 
 much and justly excited, ami the removal of tlie Indians indispensable. 
 That General Jesup should have yielded to the necessity that seemed to 
 exist for taking this, or some kindicd step, (and notiiingless than which, 
 he inlorms the Government, would have induced him "under any circum- 
 stances to have sanctioned it,'') is not lemarkable. But, with the purest 
 motives, the best men may err ; although there was an impeiious neces- 
 sity for renn)ving the Indians, there was no such necessity for selling their 
 land ; and the Secretary of War, as alieady observed, in the letter of I9th 
 May, contemplated their i-emoval and the dis|)osition of their lands subse- 
 quently. Wliat advantage have these reservees (hiived from the sale ? 
 SVho lias pi'o\t'd that a solitai-y Indian "entitled to the land ''has received 
 one dollar of the thirty-seven thousand and live hundred dollars paid ? 
 Besides, and over and above all these consideration'^, this isa(]uestion not 
 of expeditncy, but of right. 
 
 The c(jntract of 28tli August, being ojiposed by the statute of frauds of 
 Alabama — as it was made, without autliority either in Gener'al Jesup or 
 the Indian chiefs, is contiary to the treaty, and does not c(nisist w itii either 
 its Idler oi- spir-it, and w;«s not pei foj-nn-d according even to its ow ji |)ro- 
 Yisions — it is not, in my ojiinion, entitled to the ratificalion of the I'lesident 
 of the United States. 
 
 There remains only one other siihjert of brief ri'inark. upon w hich, though 
 it may be thought gratuitous, I will \enture. Tlie purchasers ha\e paid 
 thirty-seven thousand and live hundred dollais, fail ly and honestly, on a 
 contract executed under the direction of United Slates ollicers, \\lio were 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 35 
 
 actuated by the most laudable motives. The jjayment was made under the 
 fullest coMvictioii thai the couipact would be ratified, wiiich General Watsoti 
 and tlidse associatt (I with him liad reason to rely on. A great object has 
 been gained by the United States, atid the citizens thereof resident in Al- 
 abama and Georgia ; and although there was, in my estimation, an error 
 of judgment in the supijosition that this measure was necessary to its at- 
 tainment, it was undoubtedly one of the levei-s by which the Creeks were 
 removed west. Peace, quiet, and security, are restoi-ed to this lately 
 disturbed region; and to whatever extent tl;e arrangement in (iuestion may 
 have opej-ated in procuring tiiis happy change, its contribution of aid would 
 be cheaply jjui-chased by the United States in I'efunding the above sum to 
 the venders. Indeed, if a pecuniary standard is resorted to, and the calcu- 
 lations of the financier are substituted for the loftier sentiments of the pat- 
 riot, it will be found that the cessation of the expenditures incident to the 
 j)rescnce of the Indians, for four ilays only, retained in the treasury a 
 larger susn than has been paid on the contract. But the more <xj)anded 
 view is the better one. 'I'he purchasers had an undoubted right to be- 
 come parties to the contract; it was fairly, however illegally, made. Tl;e 
 money which they paid has been, in all human jjrobability, scattered to 
 the winds, and cannot be returned by the Indian chiefs ; and if the Pres- 
 ident should approve of the views put forth in this opinion, and set aside 
 the contract, tiiose wlm entered into it should, I think, be reimbursed by 
 the United States the sum exj)ended on the faith of that instrument ; fur 
 which, in the event supposed, 1 trust provision will be made by the Legis- 
 lature of the Union. 
 
 I have the honor to be, with the hiirhest respect, your obedient servant, 
 
 " T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD. 
 
 lion. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Secretartj of ff'ar. 
 
 OPINION. 
 
 Several questions arise out of the case which is made here, by the par- 
 ties to the foregoing contract of the 28th August, 1836, and those oj)po.se(l 
 to its confirmation, which require careful examination and grave consid- 
 eration. The |)roperty attempted to be conveyed by that contract is of 
 great value. It may be supposed that the i)arties claiming it feci an in- 
 tense interest concerning the result of the pending controversy. Upon 
 every principle they are entitled to be fully and fairly heard. 
 
 A preliminary inquiry is indispensable to a fisll comprehension of the 
 legal principles involved in this case. 
 
 "what kind of an estate does a Creek Indian reservee hold in his reserve, 
 under the provisions of the treaty of March, 1832 ? 
 
 It certainly is not an estate for years, nor an estate at will, nor an estate 
 by sufferance. 
 
 It is not a conditional fee ; for such a fee, at the common law, was a fee 
 restrained to some particular heirs, exclusive of others — as to the heirs of 
 a man's body ; by which only his lineal descendants were admitlec!, in ex- 
 clusion of collatej'al heirs. 
 
36 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Accnnlirig to tlie common law, their a?-e limited fees or such estates of 
 iiiliiiilance as are clogged or coufnied with coiiditiotis or qiiaiilirations. 
 Tiii^ estate i s a Lee, because, bv jwssibHilij, it may endure lorcver in a man 
 and his heirs ; yet, as that duration depends upon the coucui-rence of 
 (Collateral circumstances which (pialify the puiity <jf the donation, it is 
 tbi'J^'ii'JlL a (jua lifi c<nee. 
 
 Hut it is not so material to settle the tcclmicnl dennition wliich should be 
 gi\en of the estate which a Creek Indian holds in liis reserve. 
 
 J would say that the treaty of the 24lh Match. 1832. has vested in him 
 n frcihuld, so long as he remains upon or holds the control of his reseive : 
 and tliat, if he iiolds his conti-ol for five years, he is clearly entitled to a 
 tilh' in fee simjde — to a patent to be issued by the (iovertmient, conveying 
 to him, his heiivs and assigns, forever ; thereby making the Indian the tenant 
 in fee simple, oi- lathei- tlu- tenant in fee. 
 
 'J he leserve of an Indian is his ieucmtut — a woicl <»f so extensive import 
 as to cover the estate or intei.est (whatever it may be) held by the reservee. 
 Each reseivce has in his reserve a substantial abiding interest in the soil ; 
 the nnim-umbered use of it is secured to him by a solemn treaty, and 
 the United States are jjlcdged to protect him in the peaceable and lawful 
 cultivati<Mi of it. 
 
 It is asked by the memorialists that cei-tain Creek reservees, by virtuir 
 of the contract of the !£8lh of August, shall be divested of llair qualified 
 ftes — their tenements in the lands reserved to them by tiie said treaty of 
 the -2At\\ (jf March, 1832. 
 
 Tlie contract for the sale <»f these reserves is in writing ; it is signed 
 by six Indian chiefs, in behalf t)f about six hui.dred ami tiliy reservees, 
 who had given no authoiity in wriliii^ to these chiefs to make the same. 
 
 1 he (juestion made on this part of the case is. Can an auihority be 
 communicated by one man to anothei-, by parol, to contract for the sale of 
 his leal estate l.^ing in the State of Alabama, where the 4th section of the 
 statute oc frauds and perjuries of the 29lh Car. II, cliap. 3, is in full 
 force. 
 
 The Legislature of this State has declared "that no action shall be 
 brought to charge any person ui)un any contract for the sale of lands, 
 tenements, or hereditaments, unless the promise or agreement upon whicli 
 such action shall be brouglit, or some memorandum or note theieof, shall 
 be in writing, and signed by tlie party to be charged therewith, or by some 
 other person by him thereunto lawlully authorized." 
 
 It will be seen that the language em[)loyed iti the statute is simply "by 
 him thereunto lawfully authorized." 
 
 In tiie 1st and 3d clauses of the statute which relate to leases, &c., and 
 wilif li are in force in England, the words arc "by him ther-eunto lawfully 
 authorized in writing.'' 
 
 An agf'nt in England who executes such leases, &c., must be author- 
 ized in writing. 
 
 I'his riuestion has been well settled both in Englaml and the United 
 Sfa'es. In 9lh Ves., Lord Kidon <leclares that an agent need not be au- 
 thor iztrl in writing. See also istSch. and Leiroy, 28; 2d Taunton, 38; 
 nth Massachusetts, 27 and 97 ; 1st Yeates, 23 : and 13lli Johnson, 297. 
 
 Fidin tlie forTgoing casi's. and marry others, it ajrpears that an agerrt may 
 uign a contract for the t>ale or purchase ui' lands, without authority in wri- 
 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 37 
 
 ting from his principal ;an(l that the principal will be required to complete 
 sticli sale or pm-chase by all necessary conveyances, although he may 
 j)Iea(l the statute of frauds and perjuries to any prayer for a decree against 
 him. 
 
 But it may be alleged that the estate conceded by tiie treaty of 1832 
 to arj Indian, is not such an estate as is covered by tlie statute of 29 Car. 
 II, chap. 3, sec. 4. 
 
 In deciding this question, we may inquire, What interests in land arc 
 covered by this statute, according to the decisions in England and our 
 own country ? 
 
 Whatever interests would be protected in that country and in other 
 States of the Union, would, it is jjresumed, be protected by the decisions of 
 the courts of Alabama. At least, the judges here would regard the adju- 
 dications upon this statute of frauds, of otlicr courts distingulslicd for 
 talents and learning, with profound respect. 
 
 It has been decided in England, that a share in the New rivei* is pro- 
 tected by the statute of frauds, 2 Peere Williams, 127. Tiie operati-m of 
 the statute is extended over shares in canal navigation, and in general to 
 all descriptions of tolls. 
 
 The word tenement is used in the statute — a term of the broadest im- 
 port. A contract for rents issuing from lands is protected by the statute, 
 2d Ves. Jr. 232 : likewise whatevei* savors of the reality, when it be- 
 comes the subject of contract. The 4tij clause of the statute contemplates 
 not only a ti-ansfer of the fee in the soil, but some Interest therein. (Sec 
 4th Jolmson'sRep. 81 ; 7th do. 205 ; 14th do. 358 ; 15th do. 200; l5tiido. 
 503 : 1st Johnson's Ch. Rep. 131 ; 1st Munford, 510; 7th Cranch, 177 ; 
 6th Wheaton, 577; 17th Massa. 571 ; 13th do. 309; 1st Hen. and Mun- 
 foi'd, 91. 
 
 But if it be admitted, as it is, that these chiefs might lawfully contract 
 foi' the sale of these reserves under an authority communicated by jjarol ; 
 stil! it is indispensable that this authority and its extent shall be establish- 
 ed by the clearest and most indisputable testimony. 
 
 It may be proved by oral testimony. This follows, of necessity, from the 
 doctrine that the power with which the agent is clothed need not be com- 
 municated by writing. A will not be permitted to set liimself up, pre- 
 sumptuously, as the agent of B, and contract for the sale of B's real es- 
 tate, liis tenement, the residence of himself and his family. It must be 
 j)roved that A was authorized to assume the character of agent, and that 
 he acted within the scope of his authority. 
 
 In tiie case un(U;r consideration, where is the j)roof that tlie six hundred 
 and fifty reservees owning the reserves marked in Hogan's l>ook for re- 
 versal, ever authorized Tuckabatchee Micco and his associates to contract 
 for the sale of their interest in their reserves ? 
 
 Where is the proof that they ever assented to the contract, which was 
 made after the preliminaries were agreed on, and before the contract was 
 reduced to vvritins: ? 
 
 There wei'e Indians at the place where the conti-act was written and 
 signed. But were they the Indians who had been shamefully defraud- 
 ed by "personation ?" or were they the reservees, who had not been 
 cheated, who had sold for a fair consideration, and iiad receive/1 the same ? 
 We are not told any thing on this most material part ot this case. 
 
38 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Wc are not called on to consider \\\c natiitc of the contract of tlie 28(h 
 August. 'I'liat instrinni-nt i-: not a nu-re rofjtrart or inenioi'andinn in wri- 
 ting Uu- a sail" of the reserves. Snrh a conliact is hiruling, altliongli the 
 agent acts undt-r parol authority. 
 
 IJut, it an interest it: the land is intended to he pa-sed hy the insti-nment 
 (Xecnt.-d. then the authority to coMttHCl and transl'i-r vivst he in writing. 
 In the (h'cd of the 28th August, all the right, title, interest, and claim of 
 the reserxees in and to six hnmlred and fifiy reserves marked for reversal 
 in llogan's hook, is transferred ami conveyed to the niemnrialists, (N\ at- 
 son and others.) This the chiefs hail no authority to do, on a /jarofinstruc- 
 tion to that enVct. 
 
 The deed of the 2S1h August does not pa*^s the estate or interest of the 
 re«ervees to the memorialists. It is not exidence (d" a memorandum or 
 agreement for a sale. Still. I shall admit it is so. rather than examine this 
 •jnotion : and then, in what predicament ilo the memorialists stand r They 
 <!o not hold the title — the (pialilied fees of the reservee.s. They hold jiothing 
 higher than an agi-eement of the Imliaus to ct)nvey their right and title. 
 
 'I'liey have not conveyed their interests, because the chiefs Iih<I not aii- 
 thoiity ill wiiting. Somt- additional act must he done, provided they are 
 «'ntilh(i. like othei- freemen, to the benefit of the statute «d' frauds and per- 
 j'jiies, before they can be divested <d' their freeholds. 
 
 The act whicii has been done by tliese reservees is not sinh as is con- 
 leniplated by the treaty, and the well-considered and wise restrictiotH cr)ri- 
 tained in the regulatio?is ado|)ted by the I'resident to save these unlettered 
 children of the forest from the white man's cupidity. 
 
 To make the best of the case o[ the n»eii>orialists, tliey stami on no 
 higlier ground than that of a pai'ty holding an agreement or memorandum 
 for a sale executed hy an agent having a jiaiol authority to contract, an«l 
 who Comes into a court of chancery seeking a decree for a specific per- 
 formance, (See Morllock vs. Builer-, lOth Vesey, Jr. 293.) 
 
 The memoiialists must go behind this agreement of the 28th August. 
 and set it up by proof that the cliiefs were authorized by these identical 
 ownei's of these reserves to make that contract. ^Nothing less will sat- 
 isfy tlie rerjuii-etnents of the jaw, or the demand of common justice atid 
 common honesty. In the case of {'oles vs. Trecothick. (9th Vesey, Jr..) it 
 was pr'o\ed that Trecothick agreed to the very terms set forth as the jiarol 
 agreement between the jjarties, anri gave, in the most express terms, the 
 authority that was exercised by the agent. If this ))roof liad not been 
 made, the chancellor would not have dared to stir in behalf of the coni- 
 ])!ainants. 
 
 Ill this case, the statement of Mr. Campliejl and the lestinmny oi' Cap- 
 tain I'age are relied on to pi-nve that the chiefs were invested with aiithoiMv 
 lo contract, and also had the assent of the reservees to all the stipulations 
 and conditions containerl in tliat agreement. Let us see what tliese disin- 
 teresteil and unexcepiionaljle witiiesses say. 
 
 The former tells us that the Indians were collected into camps prepar- 
 atory to their removal ; that the slaves of the Imliaus had been attached : 
 that they themselves had been an-ested on bail writs; were subject to con- 
 stant vexation ; that a swarm of hungry creditors, or jjersojis calling 
 themselves so, infested their camps, and sei/ed upon all who were siispecieil 
 of being in possession of a d(dlar. Under tliese aggiavating and dis- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 39 
 
 tressirig circumstances, the contract was clo^^ed. General Jesup, says the 
 witness, secured for each bona file purchaser a lair investigation of his 
 ("laiin, and for each individunl Lutian the right to dissent. 
 
 What mode, if any, was adopted to secure this right to dissent, we are 
 not told. The whole transaction, in trutli, was gotten up, carried out, 
 and concluded, in a hurry. Six hundred warrio!-s were to be j)rocuied for 
 the Seniinole canjpaign. which was to he opened in a shor-t time. Amidst 
 the active movements of large emigrating parties for the West, sustained 
 at enormous exj)enseun the one side, and tise collection of an efficient mili- 
 tary Indian force to he moved on the Southeast, no time was left to search 
 out t!ic reservers whose lands had been stolen ; they were not searched 
 out; their deliberate judgment was not ascertai!:ed ; and, under the cir- 
 cumstatices. could not be imbodied as the ground of any valid binding 
 contract concerning their interests. 
 
 Captain Page tells us that many of the chiefs of the Upper Creeks, a»id 
 many of their people, were present when the contract was exvcuted. Be 
 it so ; but, whetl>er they were these i-eservees, neither he nor any one else 
 can tell, for not a step was taken to ascertain Ihis fact. 
 
 Captain Page also tells us *' that the business of the Intlians is managed 
 by the cliiefs in council ; the consejit of the individuals is ascei-taincd by 
 tlie chiefs, and I vndcrslood that tiiis consent was fully obtained in the mat- 
 ter of this contract ; and I know of no better mode of settiitig tiie land 
 claims in the short time allowed by General Jesup, tiian the one in whicii 
 it was done. " 
 
 This statement is all perfectly true ; but it is not sufficient that the witness 
 should have understood that '• this consent" had been given. He must 
 knoxv the fact, and prove it, before tiie right of the reservee can be di- 
 vesti'd. 
 
 Here, by this testimony, another in\porta»)t (jiiestion arises for our ex- 
 amination. Were these Indians in a condition t(» make a conti-act on the 
 2Sth of August ? Did tliey stand on fair and equal ground ? Had liiey in 
 truth (iny uplion ? 
 
 in tiie case of Fox and Macki'oth (■^ee Cox's Cises in Equity) the couj't 
 ])rocecded upon the ground that Mr. Fox was not in circumstances t<J make 
 the contract in question. So here, the Indians were not j)laced in circum- 
 stances to make this contract. It was executed utsder a control almost 
 amounting to duiess. As a body of nnni, they had a degree of weakness, 
 nnadvist'd as they were, amounting very nearly to legal incapacity. 
 
 It may be urged that t!ie memorialists are entitled to a confirmation of 
 the contract in question, by reasoti of j)art j)erformance in the payment of 
 the sum of thii ty-seven thousand live hundi-ed (i(dlars. If the chiels were 
 fully authorized to make the contract cd" the 28th of August, and to receive 
 t!ie money that was ])aid, Watson and others were not hound to see the 
 application of this purchase-money. Tliis is Jiot one of those cases em- 
 braced in the doctrine on this head of chancery. 
 
 Let us see how this question of j)art performance, by the payment of a 
 mciterial portion <d' the pnrcliase-mojiey, stands upon authority. 
 
 Formerly it was decided in England, that the payment of a material 
 jia'-t of tlie purchase-money was a p'art peiformance of a contract for land, 
 ami would take an agreement for its sale out of the operation of the statute 
 of IVau(!y. Stich was the decision of Lord Hardwirke, 2d Atkyns, Lacoa 
 vs. Martin; Owen vs. Davis, 1st Yesey, sen.; in Main vs. Melbourne, 
 
40 [ Doc. No. 27-1. ] 
 
 4tli Vfsey, jiiii., Tin. The court siistainod tlic <l<icttitic advatircd in the 
 cast" ill Alk^yiix. This (|iiesti()ri lias l)tH'ii examiiMMl in in:uiy nf tlio coni'ts 
 (if Ihc I nitcd States; st-e 2(1 Day, ^25; 5th do. 67; Sd Cainc's Cases in 
 Error. 87: 5tli IJinney, 2lG ; 15th Massa. 85. 
 
 But in the case of Clitiaii rs. Cooke, Loi-<l Redesdalc, wliose decisions 
 are always regarded witli respect and adiniiation, has ilecided tliat jjay- 
 metit of piirchasc-nioney is nr)t u |iai-t peifoiinance. In that case the court 
 said, •* Nothing is to be considered a part perloitnance which does not put 
 the parly into such a situation that it is a fraud upon him unless the 
 agreement he performed ; as, for instance, where possession is taken, the 
 party becomes a tiespassii- if there be no agreement ; in which case, for 
 the |niipose of dffendirig himself against a charge which niig'.t be made 
 against him, such evidence is admissible, and, if it be admissible for such 
 ])urpose, there is no reason why it should not be admissible throughout. 
 But payment of money is not jiart perfoimance, for it may be repaid, 
 and then the jiarties will be just as tliey were before, especially if re|)aid 
 witli interest." It would seem that this case contains the true doctrine, 
 and, therefore, that the payment of the sum of thirty-seven thousand five 
 hundred dollars is not a part jierformance of the contiact of the esth of 
 August, and does not take the case out of the operation of the statute of 
 frauds and perjuries. 
 
 We come now to the (jnestion of the inadefjiiacy of the consiileration 
 agreed \o be j)aid for the^e six hundred and fifty l•eser^es. 
 
 It is insisted that tiiis consideration is wholly inade(|uafe, and that upon 
 this ground the contract of the ilSth of August is void, and should not he 
 confirmed hy the ['resident. 
 
 Let us look into this case upon authoi'ify. There is no case, says Chan- 
 cellor Kent, in 2d Johnson's Chancery Reports, page 23, where mere in- 
 adefjuacy of price, independent of other ciicumstances, I-ias been held suf- 
 ficient to set aside a sale made between parties, standing on ctjunl ground, 
 and dealing with each other without aiiy impositifni (tr opjjression. The ine- 
 <juality amounting to I'raud must he so sircnig and manifest as to shock the 
 conscience and c:infou:Ml the judgmetit of any man uf common sense. See 
 also 9th Vesey.jun., 246, and 16 do. 517. 
 
 It is to be observetl here, that there is a very important distinction which 
 runs through all the cases between oidering a contract to be rescinded ami 
 decreeing a specific |)erforinance. Inadetjiiacy of price is not a ground 
 lor decreeing an agreement to b(^ delivered u[), or a sale to be rescinded, 
 (unless its grossncss amount to fraud.) yet it may he sullicient for the court 
 to refuse to enforce from inaderpiacy, and at the same time refuse to rescind. 
 
 If the memorialists have ctnitenled themselves with u contract and not 
 a conveyance, they. o»i pi-oof of great inadeijuacy of j)rice, are not entitled 
 to a confirmation of their claim from the President. 
 
 If advantage be taken on either side nf the ignoratice or distress of the 
 othei', or piominent facts are concealed, such cit cumstances afford a new 
 and distinc I ground, and great inader|uacy may form a presumption of op- 
 pr-ession. If inipositimi be pia(tise<l, the contract w ill beset aside. — 3d 
 Vesey and Beames, 117. 
 
 The reserves in this case at the time of the sale wcie heavily encum- 
 bered. Lands so situated have no determinate value, and are not to be 
 estimated by the |)rice of lands the title to which is clear. 
 
 It appears to me that the price agreed to be given for l.'iese lands is not 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 41 
 
 so inadequate that a chancellor, on the evidence adduced, taking merely 
 the inadequacy into view, would be authorized to refuse as|)ecific perform- 
 ance to Watson on the one side, or to rescind the contract in favor of the 
 reservees 0!i the other. 
 
 But the question i-ecurs : Is this case one of mere inadecjuacy of price ; 
 or are tliete facts and circumstances connected with this inade(|uacy which 
 demand imperatively that the Pi'esident should refuse to coisfirm tlie con- 
 tract of the 28th August ? I think that there are. But that the President 
 may be fully able to decide for himself, it is necessary to examine with care 
 and circums{)ection the proofs which apply to this part of this cause. 
 
 The preamble to the contract of the 28th August declares, that the 
 chiefs who are i>arties to tlie same allege, in behalf of individuals of the 
 Creek tribe, that frauds had been perpetrated upon the reservees of lands, 
 whereby their* titles had become involved with difficulty, their rights, 
 jeopardized, atid confidence in their security impaired : that whereas in- 
 vestig<!ti<)iis had taken place without results, and they (the Indians) are 
 about to leave the lands ceded to them for their homes intiie West : To the 
 end of settling all their business in this country, of transferring from 
 themselves the burden of litigation, and of obtaining something for their 
 claims p!o|)ortioHed to their value, the chiefs have advised their people to 
 accede to some general disposition of them, and they sell to Watson and 
 others ''all the tracts and parcels of lansls lying and being in that ])art 
 of the territory ceded in the treaty of 1832, comprised within the district 
 of larids of which R. W. McHenry was the certilyiiig agent, which has 
 foi'med tiie subject of contest before the agents of the United States, and 
 which have either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have 
 been sold and certified without authority in the agents of the United States 
 to witness said sales or certify said contracts, the same being the cases 
 contained in the reports of the investigating agents." 
 
 It will be seen that the reserves here intended to be purchased are those 
 on whicli John B. Hogan had rej)orted, being about six hundred and fifty 
 in number, each containing three hundred and twenty acres. By this 
 contract Watson and othei-s have borne the highest testimony to the accu- 
 racy and integr-ity of that officei*. They have staked a large sum of 
 money upon his correctness. If they had not known that the cases re- 
 versed by Hogan were fraudulent, and that the persons in whose names they 
 stood certified, could not hold them, tliey would hardly have given any, 
 tlie smallest sum, for the right to contest them. 
 
 But who were they who clain:ed large portions of their lands, that had 
 become involved with difficulty by the perpetration of fraud ? We must 
 look for tlieir names, and recoi-ded evidence of their acts in [>ast times, to 
 the abstract of Colonel ilogan. It will not be permitted to Watson and 
 others to dis|)Ute the trutii of tiiis document ; for one of their witnesses, 
 ^^oo<hvH_rd, swears that tlie memorialists conned it over just before the 
 contract was closed, and interrogated him about the value of certain tracts 
 designated therein. 
 
 Indeed, this abstract was to be at once a shield to pi'otect the memorial- 
 ists, and a sword in their hands against all those who would not ask that 
 their contracts should be *^ respected,^' to use the language of the witness 
 Taylo!-. 
 
 If the contract under consideration were confirmed to-day, to-morrow 
 the meniorialists would demand of the Pi-esident, as they would have an 
 
42 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 undoubted riglit to do uiidor llie j)r')visioiis of tliat rnntrart, that an agoiit 
 should be aj)|)oifitod to iiivestigati* tlie frauds i-eported by IL)gati ; and his 
 abstract. swoIUmi as it is into a folio voiiinie, would reveal the names of 
 those who had been einj»loyed in plundering the ignorant savages of their 
 jiropcity. In a word, the memorialists would be substituted for the reser- 
 vees, and would stand in their shoe-^. This (lovei-nment agent would 
 prosec ule his laht»rs at the public expense, not for the benefit of tliose who 
 had been wronged, but for the esju-cial advantage of those who had per- 
 petrated many of the injuries comj)!aini'd of. 
 
 liut let us turn oui* attention to tlie pai'ticular facts found in tliis 
 abstract. 
 
 One of (he first names that meets the eye, is that of William "NValker. 
 one of the memorialists — a party to the contract (»f 2&lli of August ! 
 I'hirty-nine cases to whicli his name was attaclied were reversed by IJogan, 
 co\ering t\vel\e thousand four bundled and eighty acre*;, which, atone 
 dollar and twenty-five cents per acre, would bring fifteen thousand six 
 bundled dollars. 
 
 In iliese thirty-nine cases, Walker has divers partners. They arc 
 Thornton, McDougald, Coker. & Company, Vi'ho cotistitute this coinpany. 
 AAC are luit told ; and how lar >\ alker w as interested in other reversed coti- 
 tracts, standing in the names of his co-partiiei-s. we are left to conjecture. 
 To what extent his interest as a dormant pai-tner reaches, has m)t been 
 disch.sed. 'j'he witness, Jol) Taylor, swears that, to his knowledge, 
 AValkei- atnl Watscm are interested in claims reversed on the giound tliat 
 the right Indian was personated. 
 
 The next name in this abstract which ai'i'ests our attention, is that of 
 John I'eabody. He is also a jjarty to the contract of the 28th August. 
 Jn exhibit A, hereto aj)petided, theie are twenty-six half sections cejtified 
 to I'eabody, amounting to 8,320 acres, which, at gl 25 per acre, an^ 
 efjiial to ten tiiousand foui* hundred (hdlars. 'I'he partnei's of Peabody 
 aie Watson, lludsoii, I'hornton, Reeves, NVojsham, and Companif. 
 
 The next name is that of McDougald. He is a partner of Walker. 
 There aie 51 cases in the name of McDougald and his co-partners noted 
 by Hugan for leversal. The amount of these cases is 16,320 acres. 
 N\hich, at ^ 1 25 per aci-e, are etjual to ^20.500. There are ujiwaidscjf 
 twenty cases in this abstract certified to the witness Job Tayloi-, but he 
 tells us ihat he is intei-csted in from 40 to 45. These amount to 12.800 
 acres, which, at $1 25 per acie, arc ecjual to ^16,000. 
 
 Woodward, a witness for the menniiialists, acknctwledges that he has a 
 deep interest in the reversed (ontracls. Can any man believe that the 
 l)arties to the contract of the 28th August do not cherisli a fraternal feel- 
 ing towards their partners ? Would it not be cruel anil unnatural in 
 I'eabody and his associates not to cast t!io fnldsof this protecting contract 
 o\er the shouhh'rs of their brethren in speculation, and unite with them in 
 a cause of mutual danger and distress ? 
 
 I have set down these lands at the average price of Si 25 j)ei' acre, 
 because, since the certification by McHenry, the j)rice of Indian reserves 
 has advani ed one hunilied per cent. 
 
 The question will be asked. Did tin* Irnlians stand on fair and etpuil 
 grouri'ls, wIu'u the contract (d" the 2otli August was dosed ? Were they 
 jdaced in ciicumstances l)y M'atson \ Co. to make (hat contract? Were 
 the secrets id" this abstract which >\'atson and otheis held in their posses- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 43 
 
 sion reveale*] to GeneralJesup or to Mr. Campbell, or to the Indians ; and 
 wci-e tliey told that they, the metnorialists, wei-c claimants of lai-ge mim- 
 bcrs ol'ihese reversed contracts ? They certainly were not. 
 
 Facts of vital importance, necessary to enlighten the ininds of General 
 Jesiip and the Indians, were studiously concealed. 
 
 On one side tiiere were knowledge, skill, and management ; on theothei-, 
 ignorance and mental imbecility in the actual owners (»f the lands. On the 
 one side, there was overwhelming strength ; on the other, unresisting weak- 
 ness j and lastly, on one side, thei-e was wealth and active capital ; on the 
 otlier, sfjualid poverty and deej) distress. 
 
 Would not tlie mind of every sound equity lawyer be filled with amaze- 
 ment, were he to i-ead that a cliancellor in Great Britain or the United 
 States had decreed that such a contract as this, undei- the circumstances 
 attending its execution, should be specifically performed ; 
 
 If the statute of frauds does not reach and control the contract of the 
 28ih Aui^ust ; if it is not aftected by any of the laws of Alabama, and 
 stands or falls wholly uninfluenced by them, and must be govei-ned only 
 by the provisions of the treaty ; still, like every other contract, it must be 
 afTected by the principles of natural justice, by fraud, concealment, injus- 
 tice, oppression, distress, inadequacy of price, and the suggestion of false- 
 hood. 
 
 We have now reached the last leading question which this case presents 
 for our consideration, to wit : Whether this contract is in conformity to 
 the j)i-ovisions of the treaty of March, 1832, to the regulations of tlie Ex- 
 ecutive with regard to the sales of Creek Indian reserves ; arsd whether 
 the national faith, which is pledged to the Indian in that treaty, would be 
 violated by a confirnsation of this contract. 
 
 In the 2d article of the treaty, it is provided that each head of a family 
 may select one half section of land, which tracts shall be reserved from 
 sale for theij* use for the term of five years, unless sooner disposed of by 
 them. 
 
 In the Sd article, it is declared that these tracts may be conveyed by the 
 pei'sojis selecting tiie same, to any other perstni, /or a fair consideraiiim, in 
 such manner as the President may direct. The contract shall be certified 
 by some person appointed for that purpose by the President, but shall not 
 be valid until the President aj)j)roves the same. 
 
 Tiie ))ower of contracting lor a sale is hei-e resei'ved exclusively to the 
 Indians, and for the term of five years. They might remain (juiescent if 
 (hey pleased. But if their "ivlll was excited inti> activity, then the super- 
 vising agency of the President became indispensable. He was bound to 
 see that tlie |)ropos('d sale was for a fair con.s Ld-Cration. He cannot confirm 
 any sale nnle-<s his conscience is satisfied that the consijleration to be j)aid 
 is fair. Until this event does occur, the Pi-esident is but a jjassive instru- 
 ment under the trea'y. When it d(<es occur, his authority is awakened into 
 life and enei-gy. 
 
 Every contract for a resei-ve is required to be certified by sonje jierson 
 apjiointed by the President for that pui-pose. 
 
 The act of General Jesnp in signing tiie contract of the 28th August, is 
 of no greater legal authoi-ity than if it !)ad been signed by a mei-e certify- 
 ing agent, althouglj he held a high command in tiie army of the South. His 
 act was to be subir.itted to the supervision of the President, as tiie treaty 
 expressly requires. 
 
44 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 The President oT tlie United States is clothed with great powers. But 
 lie deilves llieni fnun the r«)iistitutioii arnl the laws. He can no inoic 
 transcenfl the resti-iclioiis of either, thatj the hiunhlest inilividiial in the 
 community. 
 
 Tiie national faitli is solemnly |)le(lge(I in the tr'*aty of 183-2, that the 
 ('reck reservi'cs shall receive a lair considci-afion loi- tiieir reserves ; that 
 an honest Ijargain shall be driven witli tlienj in all the contracts made lor 
 their reserves. 
 
 'Ihe untarnisiied personal honor- of the Executive is pledged to a sabred 
 discharge of the ol)ligations imposed upon him by this treaty. He is placed 
 by that instrument iii /oco ;)r/reri/ts towards these dcgi-aded and helpless 
 savages, and their women and children. 
 
 It is alleged tiiat the [Resident constituted General Jesup the agent to 
 certify this conli'acf. If so. we must find the power, and see whether it 
 has been strictly pursued. If the contract is at war with the stipulations 
 contained in the ti-eaty, the presumption is, that General Jesup mistook 
 bolli the jiature and extent c)f his authority. 
 
 As soon as the reserves conceded by the treaty were surveyed and allot- 
 ted, the manner in which they weret(» be disposed of was regulated. The 
 Indians were j)ermitted by the treaty to sell and convey in such manner as 
 tiie I'lesident might direct, on condition that they ret fived a fair consider- 
 ation. Why was this conditio?! inserted ? Sim{)ly because the reservees 
 Were liable to gross imposition. A heavy white pi)|)ulation was collerted 
 along the wlnde westei-n boundary of tlie Creek country, and along tiie 
 whole extent of the Chattahoocliie, stretching south nearly three hundred 
 miles on its eastern boundary. This population was pressing Iwavily ujion 
 them, an<l had already broken in on the Creeks at many points. Under 
 these circumstances, what diil tlic President do in tlie discharge of his duty 
 as a j)arty to the treaty, representing the nation? 
 
 lie declared as follows: ♦• I'hat all ap|)lications foi- certifying contracts 
 with Creek reservees should be made in v. riling, and should be accompanied 
 by the written contract itself. That if the |)ayments were all made to the 
 satisfaction of the Indian, and the fart was (dearly established to the satis- 
 faction of the apj)rnving agent, tlien an absolute deed from the Indian to the 
 white person may be certified. That if the payments were !iot all mado 
 at the time the parties appeaie«l before the approving agent, then the con- 
 tract should distinctly state the time ant! mode of pav ment, and the amount 
 actually received ; that the agent should make such inquiry as might be in 
 his power, into the actual value of the tracts ; and if he believes that such 
 value is nr)t paid or secured, he should not certify the contract." 
 
 It was fur-ihei" oi-dered that, in every case where it was practicable, the 
 agent should have an interview >vith the Indian. ex[)lain to him the tians- 
 actiofi, and ascertain whether he understood and approved it on a full con- 
 sideration of the niatter ; that the approval ol' the agents was in no case to 
 be final, nor was the title of the grantee to be valid, until the President ap- 
 jiroved the same. See <Iocument No. 276, p. 88. 
 
 It will be perceived from these regulations that they were easily to be 
 understood, and that the great object of the President in adopting them, 
 was, to secure to each Itidian a fail- ((insideration for his reseive. 'I'hese 
 regulatio'.-.s are to this moment unrepealed, and the ceitifying agetits now 
 acting under- tlie authoi-ity of the Cicek commissioners ai-e pursuing them. 
 In these regulations no authority for the act of General Jesup of the 28th 
 
I Doc. No. 274. J 45 
 
 August can be found. It is not pretended tliat lie acted conformably to 
 tliesc regulations, in the arrangesnent between the Creek cliiefs, Watsoti 
 and otliers, and bimseiF. 
 
 But on tbe 9t!j of May, 1836, Captain Page addressed a letter to the 
 "War Dej)artnient, the consents of wbicb require particular examination. 
 See doc. No. 276 H. R. p. 384. About tiie time this letter was wiitten, 
 the friendly Indians became sensible that tliey must remove to the West. 
 'I'he frauds which had been committed uj)on them were certainly one cause 
 of their opposition to a removal. A conference was held with Opothe Yoholo 
 and other Indians by Captain Page, and in that conference this leading 
 chief pi()j)osed as follows: ''A company of gentlemen have seen nearly all 
 tlie comjjanies who purchased our lands, ami they have agreed to raise a 
 sum of money ecjuivalent to the value of the lands we claim to have been 
 defrauded of. They pi'opose to pay us in this way. He says. I will call 
 all the persons in my town together, whose lands have been taken by per- 
 sonating, or where other frauds have been practised upon them, and the 
 purchaser or his agent being ])rcsent, in the jirescnce of two principal 
 chiets of each town, and an agent of tlic United States, pay to the rightjul 
 holder o[ \\\{i land a sum of money to his and tUrt chiefs' full satisfaction ; 
 and in case the parties cawnot agree, two respectable and disinterested 
 white men shall, one by the chief and one by the purchaser, be selected to 
 value the land; and t!ie amount of their valuation, under oath, shall be |)aid. 
 The chiefs of each town are well acquainted, and know all the frauds 
 and the injured })ersons, and in this way we can settle all our difficulties 
 and relieve the Government of all further trouble with us." 
 
 Here was an honest pr-oposition on the part of this uneducated Indian. 
 It agreed substantially in its terms with the regulations of the President. 
 It re(juired that i)ayment should be made to the riglitful holder of the land, 
 to his and the cli lets' full satisfaction. 
 
 We must now turn ouj* attention to the instructions of the Secretary of 
 War upon this subject, dated 19th May, 1836. See doc. No. 276, p. 86. 
 
 In tliis letter the Secretary of \S nv observes : "I enclose you a copy of 
 a letter fiom Caj)tain Page, by which you will perceive the views of that 
 officer on the subject (the frauds on the Creeks) and the proposition made 
 by the Ujiper Cieeks. This proposition has been ap|>roved, and Captain 
 Page advised of the fact. So far, tiierefore, as any |)artorthis division of 
 the Creeks shall i-emain j)caceable, you are authoiized to sanction ihe pro- 
 ceeding recommended." 
 
 Again the Secretary observes, ''If the arrangement stated by Captain 
 Page should take efttct, you are authoi-ized to select a competent officer, 
 should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done." 
 
 'I'he p'lwers of General Jesup aie hei-e limited to the pi'oj)osi!ion of 
 Ojjothe Y')hnlo, and that jjroposition was accej)ted by the Departnient with 
 every restiiction attached to it. No discretionary power was given to 
 Gcnral Jesup concerning it ; noi- could such discretion have been given 
 la\\ fully by Goveriu)r Cass, because the reservees could not dispose of their 
 reserves, unless for a fair consideration. The })roposition of Opothe Yoholo 
 expressly demanded this/«ir consider atinn. 
 
 It is my opinion that General Jesup ha<l no authority to sign the con- 
 tract of tlie 28th of August, and that, in doing so, he exceeded the power 
 with which he was invested. 
 
 The undersigned reached the scene of these transactions within thirty- 
 six hours after the contract of the 28th August, and sought an interview^ 
 
46 [ I3oc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Mitli General Jcsnp. lie brramr satisfied that this officer, in transcending 
 his iuilhoiilv. Ii:id acdd i:ii(!cr a (Ife|i anxiety to promote ihc be.-,t iiiicfests 
 of thtt country. 
 
 It has bctii said, ♦* If the fact be that any of the iHirchascrs named in 
 tlie contract uf thi- !28lh ofAuL^nst hoh) IVaudiilent ( laims t() Indian reser- 
 ^ations, that they are men of wealth, anil emphtyed agrnts to purchase these 
 lands for ilicm: that if frauds were committ«'d, they had mi knoNNh'dge of 
 them." !>«• it so — ••ciiar-ity thinketh no evil." But it is very certain that 
 the law iti siifli a case as this will seize iipini tlie fruits of nnconsi ientious 
 prartices, wiiether they shall he found in ilic hands of innocent j)rincipals, 
 or i:i those of ihcir pcdlntcd agents. 
 
 All of which is re,-.j)ecifullv submitted. 
 
 ALFRED BALCII. 
 
 Cumuiissioncr. 
 
 December 7, 1836. 
 
 In the matter of the memorial of James C. \Vats(»n and otl:ers, atid tlie 
 c<innter-mtiiiorial of Ware, Dougherty, and others, filed before thecommis. 
 sioners appointed by tin; President of the United States to examine certain 
 alhged frauds in the sale of (Ji-eeU Jmlian reservations : 
 
 The memorialists. James C. Watson and others, have filed their memo- 
 rial, alleging, in substance, as follows : That they purchased from certain 
 Indian cliiels of the Creek tril)e of Indians, acting cm behalf of the itnli\ idu- 
 als of tiieir tribe, whose claims to lands had either been certified and 
 marked f»r reversal, or which had been sold and certified without authority 
 in the agents of the United Stales (said tracts being contained in the le- 
 jjorts of the investigating agents) all of tiie Indian reserves so situated, 
 and also the reserves of all those Creek Indians who weie entitled as such 
 under the treaty with the Creek tribe dated 24th Marcli, 1832.. and wiio 
 had not sold the same. 
 
 The memorialists allege further, iliat they were called on by Majm- 
 General Jesup, wlut then commanded llie army of the South, to know iipim 
 w hat terms they wduld purchase said lands ; that said purchase was made, 
 with tlie apjirobation of the ollicer w ho represented the United States in 
 the execution of tlio saitl contract of sale and purchase. 
 
 I'he memorialists further allege, that no IVaud, artifice, combination, or 
 unfair practices were employed by them to obtain said contract : tiiat the 
 j)articular terms of said contract were arranged between the agf'uts of the 
 United States and the said r-idians ; that they di<l not advise or consult 
 with the chiefs, but with the olliceis of the United States, who ctnniiiuni- 
 cated the projmsitions of the Indians to the said memorialists, and read 
 their answers for the Indiatis. 
 
 The memorialists declare, that they paid on said contract thii'ty-seven 
 thousand five hundred dollais to Captain .Iidin I'age, for and on account 
 of said Indians, and exfcufed their note for the like amount, payable four 
 months alter date to said l*ag<'. in trust lor the Indians, as a full consiim- 
 m.ition on their part <d' the said contract. 
 
 Anil it is fill ther a\eire(l by the miMnorialists, tha' the said contrart 
 provides that the consent of each imlividual holding a reserve as afoiesaiil 
 should be presumed, unless he should dissent before t!ie consummation of 
 the contract; they, the memorialists, declare tliat \\\ey know of no dissent, 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 47 
 
 and pray an execution of the said contract, by tlie emanation of patents to 
 them for all tlie said lands. 
 
 I'he said inenioiialists allege, that the originals, or copies of the reports 
 of the investigating agents, as well as the said conti-act itself, arc in the 
 ])ossession of the commissioners aforesaid, and ask that .reference may be 
 liad thei-eto, as evidence of tlie truth of their allegations: they also aver 
 that they, the memorialists, aie parties to some of ihe contracts contained 
 in the said leports, and pi-ay that their titles to these tracts may be 
 confirmed. 
 
 The men)oriaIists state, and charge, that there arc many contracts for 
 Indian reserves in said Mclienry's district, which they believe to have 
 been made in/jvija/ of the rights of the Indians, located thereon, which they 
 pray that they may be permitted to contest. 
 
 The memorialists admit that there are contracts foi* Indian reserves 
 which are fair and bona fide, and that the purchasers arc willing to pay 
 foi- the same ; they pray that the article with regard to these, C(yniained in 
 the said agreement, may be enforced. 
 
 The memorialists ask that no contract for a reserve to a Creek Indian 
 lying in the said McHenr-y's district shall be cei-tilied without a notice to 
 them of the application. 
 
 They finally pray that all the lands lying in said district for the sale 
 of wliich no valid r)utstaiiding bonils have been taken, may be appi-aised 
 and adjudged to them according to the Jerms of the said contract. 
 
 The memorialists, to sujjport the allegations in their memorial, ami tlie 
 claims founded thereon, and the several |)rayers thereof, read in evidence 
 the contract which was made by them witi» the said Tliomas S. Jesuj) and 
 the said Indian chiefs. 
 
 The substance of the preamble to tlie said contract is as follows : Tliat 
 a treaty had been made between the United States and the Creek tril»e of 
 Indians, on the 24th day of JMarcii, 1832 ; that each head of a family in 
 the said tribe had become entitled thereby to one half of a section of land, 
 which had been duly allotted ; that the said heads of families might sell 
 their reserves with the approbation of the Presi(ient of the United States, 
 and through the agency of a certifying agent; that the chiefs who wei-e 
 j)arties to the said contract alleged tfiat tiie said heads of families had 
 been defrauded out of tiieir reserves, the titles to which had become involv- 
 ed in difficulty and doubt; and tliat the Creek Indians wei'c about to re- 
 move to their homes in the West. 
 
 The preamble to the said conti-act declai'cs fui'ther : Tiiat, to the end of 
 settling their business in the Ci'cek country, of transferi-ing from them- 
 selves the burden of litigatioiu and of obtaining something for their claims 
 pro[)ortioned to their value, and at the same time to make a j)rovision for 
 the fair and bona fide puri;liasei's from the [)eople of their tribe, the chiefs 
 have advised their people holding said claims to accede to a general dispo- 
 sition of them, and have obtained tiuMr consent to convey all their right 
 and title to said lands to James C. Watson and others, lying in what is 
 called McHenry's district, which have been marked for reversal, or sold 
 and certified without authority in the agents of the United States to wit- 
 ness said sales or certify said cmitracts. 
 
 This contract contains the following conditions an! restrictions : 
 
 1st. 'I'hat the title hereby obtained, or which may be obtained, in pur- 
 suance of this contract, shall not interfere with the rights of any individ- 
 
48 [ Doc. No. 271. ] 
 
 iial who lias nia<lc a prioi- valid conti-act willi tlie iic;litfiil claimant of said 
 lariils, (wlii'tluT till' same liatl bt-cti cerlitied or not. ) «ir any |)art lliereof; 
 but the rcs|)cctivc claims (it" necessary to settlemtiit) siiall be investigated 
 by an agent a|<j)oitited by tlie I'resident of tlie United States, and the rat- 
 iliration by liie I'lesident of the Unite<l States shall be necessary to the 
 lieilVciion of the title: ]iro\ided, nevertheliss. that foi* the as( ert>tiiiment 
 of the (airness and validity of any claim, as well as for the proieclion of the 
 said Janu'S C. M atson and others, they sliall be entitled to the briielit of 
 the same rnles that tlie Indians would have l)een entitled to, but for this 
 contract, under the instructions of the War Departnjent. 
 
 2d. That when any contract shall be preferied by the said agent, 
 upon investigation, the jiarlies, NVatson and others, shall be entitled to the 
 same secnriiy for the consi<liralion as the Indians would have had, but 
 for this contract : j)ro>ided, if tiie amount paid into the hands oi' the agent 
 of tlie Lniied States e.\cee«ls on any parcel of land the /;ro rata valuati(m 
 made in this contraet, then one-half of said ov<'i'plus shall be letaineil 
 by the agent, for the Indians located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heirs. 
 
 3d. Ihat tlie money heieinafier stipulated to be paid, shall he paid to 
 the Indian entitled to the land, in presence of the chiefs a>id an oHicer of 
 the United States ; and until such paymentshall he matle, it shall he depos- 
 ited with the ccilifying agent of this liistrict ; the payment of wliich shall 
 be a consummation of this contracf. 
 
 4tli. That, if any one Indian, holding any parcel of land herein con- 
 veyed, shall refuse to carry into effect the provisions of this contract, 
 in that case, a ]}ro rata allowance upon the consideration herein stip- 
 ulated shall be made to the said Watson and otiiers : provided, this dis- 
 stiit shall he given before the consummation of this contract. 
 
 5th. That all tiiose lands which have not been sold, incliuling those 
 where the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation, to he 
 made by the persons who may be appointed by the agent of the United Stales. 
 who shall tinally close the arrangeinents provided for in this contract and 
 the treaty : piovided, that they shall not refei- to any claims embra(ed in 
 jirevious articles «if this conti act : and jn'ovided, further, that \alid ti- 
 tles (an be obtaiiu'd therefor. 
 
 AVatson and others bind themselves to pay foi' the lands aforesaid, in the 
 said district, seventy-lne thousand dollars ; one-half in cash, am! the bal- 
 ance in four months. 
 
 The memorialists, and several chiefs of the Creek tribe signed and 
 sealed the said contract. General Jesiip approves the same in the follow- 
 ing wcuds : 
 
 •• Sam tioned by me ; suliject to the ratification of the I'resident of the 
 United Slates, August 28, 183G. 
 
 Til OS. S. .TES^UI'. 
 Major General, commanding army of the South.^^ 
 
 The evidence read by the memorialists is, in substance, as follows : 
 Joii Taylor, a witness, swears that he receixcd, a shoi-t tin>e after the 
 emigrating pai»y which licsl went to Arkansas, being a |)orti'»n of the 
 
 Creeks, had left tln'ii- (^unp-, (Vom . a chief of the town, 
 
 which lits in Mcllcnry's tlistrict, between live and six tlniu^and dollars, 
 and was diret ted lo pay the same over tu the individual Indians of said 
 town, which he did. The share of each Indian amounted to one hundred 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 49 
 
 and twenty-seven dollars and fifty cents. The number of Indians paid 
 was between tlilrty-eiglit and thirty-nine. Deponent was acting as the 
 agent of tlie eniigtating party. 
 
 Witness has understood tliat the same parties who made the contract 
 for the lands were interested in the emigrating contract. Witness is inter- 
 ested in some forty or forty-five contracts marked for reversal. There is 
 no understanding between this deponent and any of the paities to said 
 contract that his claims should be arranged. He has heard some of the 
 parties observe that many of the contracts would be amicably arranged. 
 He knoivs that fFalker and Watson are interested in contracts whicli are 
 marked fur reversal, on the ground that the right Indian was personated. 
 
 The witness believes that most of his contracts are marked for reversal 
 on the same grounds. Deponent does not know that, in any of the con- 
 tracts of Watson or Walker, the wrong Indian was introduced ; but 
 believes that the agent thought such was the case. The witness does not 
 know that Ware, Dougherty, & Company have any contracts marked for 
 reversal on that ground. De])onent went to Columbus, in pait to make 
 some arrangcn)ent for his contracts marked for reversal ; but he had other 
 business there. He made the application to the parties interested, through 
 the medium of others. He understood tiiat the claims generally would 
 be amicably adjusted ; and that he might feel satisfied, or something to 
 that amouiit. 
 
 Deponent says that from what passed between him and General Watson 
 at Tallassee, he believed his contract would be respected on the same prin- 
 ciples that others would. 
 
 Captain John Page deposeth and saith, that he was in Tallassee in the 
 n.onth of August last, wiien General Jesup, in behalf of tlie United States, 
 and certain chiefs of the Upper Creeks, made a contract with James C. 
 Watson and others, for selling the disputed or fraudulent claims in Doc- 
 tor McHenry's district. Tiiis contract was several days under consid- 
 ei'ation. On tlie 2Sth of August it was finally concluded. I saw the money 
 paid by the parties; and I know that the sum of seventy-five thousand 
 dollars was the price to be paid — one-half in cash, and a note at four 
 months for the balance. 
 
 I received the money and note, and was directed by Mr. Campbell, tf»e 
 attorney, to pay it over to the Indians, whenever they assured me that 
 they were ready to receive it on the terms of the contract, which I was 
 directed to ascertain were understood by them. And it was by the request 
 of the chiefs that I received this money. I proceeded to the square, where 
 the Indians met to do their business, when Opothe Yoholo stated to me that 
 Jim Boy had gone home to consult his people on the subject, and would 
 return the next day, and he would inform me when to return. 
 
 I retired to Tallassee, and the next day or day after (I do not recollect 
 which) he, Opothe Yoholo, sent for me and said that they were ready to re- 
 ceive the money. I proceeded to the square, and stated to them that I had 
 come to pay over the money for their lands on the contract. The Indians 
 were in council, and I requested them to say, after I had fully explained to 
 them the subject and consideration, that if any of them !.:ad any objections, 
 then to state it ; and if there was none, I should proceed to pay it out. 
 The chiefs and their people consulted one hour longer, and then gave me 
 their answer — that they were ready to receive their money ; that ther« 
 was no objection, and every thing was fully understood by them. 
 4 
 
U) [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 I was dii*ectr(l by Mr. Campbell, their attorney, to make these state- 
 ments lully, tliat thei-e should be no niisuii(lerstaii(lir)g on Uiis subject, be- 
 foie I paid the money to thetii. The suliject ol' the note 1 likewise ex- 
 jfiainod, and tolil them it was good, and would be paid. I had every rea- 
 son l«» believe that the chiefs and Indians generally understood the con- 
 trmt, as they were several days in coum( il on the business. I believe that 
 the general custom of transacting business am(nig the Indians was fol- 
 low e<l in this instance, as I have jor six >ears transacted it with them, and 
 in this manner — through their chiefs, with the consent of their people. I 
 eoiK eive that U|)eth leholo has more powei- than any chief in the nation 
 amiing the Upper Creeks ; and believe that the Government so considered 
 him. Many of the chiefs of the Up|)er Cieeks were present, and many of 
 their people. The Indians sent for me w hile at Wetumpka, as they w anted 
 the money divided. 1 did not do so, and stated that I did not know how 
 the money was to be divided. 
 
 I know of no oflTer being made to Cientral Jesuj). or to the Indians, of a 
 larger sum tiian the one named in the contract. Tiie business of the In- 
 dians is managed by the chiefs in council. The consent of the individuals 
 is ascertained by the chiefs ; and I understood that this consent was fully 
 obtained in the matter of this contract ; and I know of no better mode of 
 ftetlling the land ilaiins, in the short time allowed by Geneial Jcsup, than 
 the one in whi( h it was dojie. 
 
 The matter of the contract was not kept a seriet, so far as my knowl- 
 etlge extends. It was known tliat the Indians were making a bargain with 
 tl»e Government, and some persons, for settling their disputed claim«», for 
 aome time befoie it was finally closed. 
 
 Thomas S. Woodward, a witness in behalf of the memorialists Wat- 
 Mon and others, dejjoses in substance as follows : That he has seen the In- 
 dian chief, Jim lioy, fre(juently since the making of the large contract be- 
 tween Watson and others, and the Indian chiefs. On the march to Flori- 
 da, and at Appalachicola, witness conversed with Jim Hoy about sai<l con- 
 tract. He informed witness that he understood said contract as including 
 all the disputed lands in his town ; that he had received seven thousand 
 five hundred dollars, as the j)roportion which his town was entitled to, out 
 of the uioney |)aid by Watson and others. Jim Boy rerjuested witness to 
 tell his people not to listen to pei-sons who should come ann)iig them for 
 ll>e pujpose of making them discontented with said contract ; that he would 
 take care of their money, and would keep it for tiiem until they «juit the 
 country ; and the reason why he had not paid ittu them wa.s, that he knew 
 that the officers would take it from them. 
 
 Witness also knows that the Indians in Jim Boy's town have i-eceived 
 other large sums of money for lands in said town, the contracts for which 
 lands have been marked fur reversal, and which the Indians do iM)t consider 
 fraudulent contracts. 
 
 Witness considers the money which has been previously paid to said 
 town for lands, together with the proportion i-eceived by Jim Boy out of 
 tke money paid by Watson and otliers, as a fair equivalent for the lands 
 lA said town, in the way that Indian lands have usually s(dd. 
 
 Witness is well acquainted with the quality of the lan<ls in said town ; 
 he also knows that a large pro])ortion of the Indians belonging to Jim 
 Boy's town were jyresenl when the negotiation of said contract was goinf. 
 •n, including all the principal men in said town. lie was present at th 
 time the contract was closed^ and heard Irvia S. Devercux say, that 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 51 
 
 they would pay liim a certain amount, (wliicli amount witness does not re- 
 member,) he would be in favor of the contract ; but if they would not pay 
 him, (le would have it broken up if he could. 
 
 Witness is not a member of the company who made the said contract, 
 nor interested in the same ; but is interested in several tracts of land, the 
 contracts for which have been marked f(n' reversal previous to the execu- 
 tion of said contract, but which he expects to be able to settle with the 
 said company. Witness is well acquainted with the comm<»n Iiidiiins in 
 Jim Boy's town, and knows tliat tliey look up to him, and are governed by 
 him, in most instances, in the trarisactiun of business. 
 
 On crosse-xamination, the witness states that he has an interest in some 
 contracts in Dr. McHenry's district, marked for reversal ; that he is a 
 brother-in-law of James C. Watson ; that he never has had any interest 
 in the contract of Watson and others; that he has not ])ledged himself to 
 support the said contract, but belimes it to be the best arrangement, for 
 both whites and liidians, that couhl be made. 
 
 Witness further states that he has received no satisfactoi-y assurances 
 that his claims should be respected more than the claims of other persons; 
 that if he can prove his claims just and honest, they will be respected ; 
 that said Watson and others have never made any pledges to witness, any 
 further than he has heard the members of said com]»any say that all just 
 claims should be res|)ected. 
 
 Witness believes General Daniel McDougald as likely to be a party to 
 said contract as any person whose name is not inserted in said contract. 
 
 Witness states tiiat he does not recollect of receiving any written com- 
 munication from W^atson's company, but has frequently been in ctmipany 
 wiih Watson, Harris, and Feabody, since said contract was made, and 
 has heard them converse in relation to said contract. 
 
 Said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, observed that said contract was a 
 just and fair one ; that the proposition was first made by the chiefs and 
 General Jesuj) to enter into said contract, and that the proposition was 
 not made by the said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, to the Indians. 
 
 Witness has not understood that the parties generally to the said con- 
 tract have personated Indians. It will be found in the books of the in- 
 vestigating agents that contracts certified to Peabody & Company have 
 been reversed. 
 
 Witness states that he has been in company with said individuals when 
 the said contract was the subject of conversation. He did not insist that 
 he should be a party to said contract ; but after the contract was closed he 
 made ap|)lication for an interest, but was refused an interest because he 
 would not advance the sum of money recpiired. 
 
 Witness does not know that the annuity money was pledged for the re- 
 funding of the money if said contiact was not confirmed. He heard one 
 of the company to said contract say, that if the same was not confirmed, 
 they would lose their money if Government did not pay it to them. 
 
 Witness states that he was in Harlin's tavern, inTallassee, in company 
 with the members of said contract, at the time they were examining Ho- 
 gan's list of reversed cases, and they were consulting as to the price they 
 should give to said Indians for said lands, and said purchasers would oc- 
 casionally ask witness the value of certain tracts of land. 
 , Witness states that he does not know that General Daniel McDougald 
 !^ is a party to said contract of James C. Watson and others, 
 
 ]i 
 
52 I Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 The coiinter-mrmnrials of Irvin Lawson, Jamrs S. Callioiin, Ware, 
 Doiiglicity, and Citiii)»atiy» ami others, alh-ge, in snbstance, as follows : 
 
 'I'hat they have been engaged in |)iiicha»'ing Cretk Indian resei-vations, 
 under the treaty of March C4, 1S32 ; that the Indian reservces had a right 
 to sell their reser\e,s under the restrictions coniained in the iiiles and 
 regulations prescribed by the President of the United States, with regard 
 to the sale td such reserves; that theie are certain reserves in what is 
 called M(Ilenr>'s district, which certain individuals fraudulently and 
 wickedly piocured to beceitified tu them by the said Mc Henry, who w;.s 
 then aceriif>ing agent duly appointed by the President of the United 
 States; that sai«l iiidi\iduals ha\e never coiilracteil furor puichased the 
 said reserves of any real owner of the same ; that said Iramlulent persons 
 combined with certain Indians, and procured then) to go before said certi- 
 fy ing agent, and personate and claim the name of the true owner of said 
 tiacis ui land. In conse(|uencc of which acts, the sa'd agent wa« imposed 
 iijHUi as to the identity of the .'aid Indians, and certified the said contracts for 
 the consideration of the President of the United States, as if they had been 
 made by the true owDers theieof. BelieN ing that the Goveiriment would 
 not sanction such gross frauds, the memorialists became the purchasers of 
 inar.y Indian reserves in said McHenry's district from the true owners 
 thereof. 
 
 These reserves, so purchased by the memorialists, were marked for rever- 
 sal by the agents of the United States. 
 
 The memorialists further allege, that on the 28tli day of August, 1836, 
 a ccnitract was made, purporting to be between the United States of the 
 first j)art, certain Indian chiefsof the second part, and James (.'. Watson and 
 olheis of the third j)art ; in which cotilract said chiefs sold and forexer 
 fpiit claim to the said N> atson and others, of all the lands Inng in 
 McHrniy's district aforesaid, and included in the number alleged to have 
 been fraudulently certified, ami whidi had formed the subject of contest 
 before the agents of the Government of the United States, and the pri\i- 
 lege of purchasing all the unsold lands, and those belonging to Indians, 
 who had rlied suljsecjiiently to the location and who had not sold. 
 
 The mennnialists aver, that the sum to be |)aid for the contisJed claims 
 was seventy-five thousami dollars, and that all the saiti |)roceeding9 were 
 saiu lioi ed by llic said Major General Jesu]) on the said aSlli day of 
 August, 1836. 
 
 The memorialists declare, that the contracts w liich they have made for the 
 resei'Ncs claiir^ed by them they have, ready to show and to prove that ther-e 
 arc six hundred and fifty-two reserves mar ked for reversal by the agents 
 of the United States in said McHenrj's district, exclusively (»f those to 
 v\hi( h the right of pre-emption is attempted to be sccui-ed by the ter-ins of 
 said contract. 
 
 'I he memorialists insist that the said contract was made in violation of 
 their vested r ights, and in vi(dation of the provisions of the treaty jjf the 24lli 
 of Marrh. 1832; and pray that the same maybe declared by the President 
 of the United States null and \oid, and of no force or- effect whatsoever. 
 
 The ( (luritei'-memorialists have proved by George Clough, a witness, 
 that a pi(i|)osition was marie to the Creek chiefs to take all the disjiuted 
 lands in Mdlcnrv's district at valuation. Opothe Yoludo agreed to lire 
 proposition, and als*> agrerd to meet at Tallassee for that purpose ; but 
 lire chiefs did not meet. Deponent therr offered one hundred and fil ty thou- 
 
f Doc. No. 274. J 53 
 
 sand dollars for the disputed lands in a body. He believed tbat the dispu- 
 ted lands, excluding those that were unsold and tliose laid off to Indinns 
 who were dead and had not sold, were worth two hundred thousand dollars. 
 
 These propositions were made a few days before Watson purchased. A 
 few days afler the sale the Indians met and protested against it, as a negro 
 interpreter, in whom dej)onent had confidence, told deponent. 
 
 The witness was present at the assemblage of the Indians, but did not 
 understand their language. 
 
 On cross-examination, witness stated that he and his compahy would 
 give one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the cotitested lands ; that 
 his company consisted of himself, his brother, S. H. Hodges, and Colonel 
 Seaborn Jones. Deponent did not make his proposition to General Jesup 
 or Colonel Campbell. 
 
 I. S. Devereux, a witness, says he was at the square of Opothe Yoholo's 
 camp on the day that the first party of Indians started to Arkansas. 
 Tuckabatrhee Micco was tiiere. Tiie wiiitc men were ordered to go 
 away, unless they had business. Witness said he could not know whether 
 he had business or not, unless he could know what the Indians were assem- 
 bled there for. It was said tiiey were going to enrol the Indians to go to 
 Florida, and that they were going to pay the annuity to the Indians. Two 
 or tliree Indians were called up, whose reserves had been purchased by 
 dejjonent and one Tliompson. The witness rose and told them that if tliey 
 were going to pay //iose Indians any money for their lands, he wished tlien 
 to ask them if thty had not sold to witness and Thompson. 
 
 Dubois then rose and said, it would take a week to go through the busi- 
 ness. He went off one way, and Tuckabatchee Micco another, and the 
 Indians generally dispersed. 
 
 Tuckabatchee Micco had bank notes in his hat, but witness does not 
 know how much. Some one said the Indians were assembled to pay them 
 for their lands. Edward Hanrick, one of the purchasers with Watson, 
 was there, and was engaged in making calculations to see how much each 
 Indian would be entitled to out of the money. AH this ha])pened late in 
 the evening. Tlie wagons of the emigrating party had started. Depo- 
 nent remained till dark, but saw no money paid to the Indians. 
 
 The witness is interested in eighteen reserves, all of which were pur- 
 chased subsequent to the reversal of them, and before the contract with 
 "Watson and others was made. 
 
 Thomas J. Abbott, a witness, says that he was served with a notice 
 from Watson and others not to certify any more contracts ; to which he 
 replied, that he would pay no attention; but that if he was forbidden to 
 certify any more by the proper authority, he should respect it. Deponent 
 was then directed by General Jesup not to certify any more, and he obeyed 
 this direction. When these notices were served, witness was engaged in 
 certifying contracts which had been marked for reversal, and to which the 
 previous purchasers were about to make a relinquishment in writing. 
 Tliis class of Ciises deponent was auihorize«l to certify. 
 
 Some time after the making of tlie large contract, Jim Boy came before 
 deponent to identify an Indian. He said, if he had sold so much land as 
 they sp'>ke of, he did not know it; that he had applied to have his name 
 struck from the contract, and that he had been told that it had been done. 
 Witness does nut think that Jim Boy could understand the contract 
 
54 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 entered in(«, if read to liim in tlie words in which it is written. The wit- 
 ness slates fnither, that Opothe Yohoht, 'riiikabatchce Micco, Mad Blue, 
 atnl Little Doctor aie among the principal chiefs residing in the Creek 
 nation, and hclotig to Tiickahatchec town. He knows nothing of the 
 authoritij of the |)riri(ipal chiefs, or of their le^iil power. Twenty of the 
 ninety principal chiefs were enrolled in I'nckabatrhee town. 
 
 Wililridge Thompson, a witness, swears that Jim Boy protested Ihathe 
 did not know that he was selling his people's lands, and that his j)eople 
 never had authorized him to sell their- land»^. "^riic people thetnsehes told 
 witness, that when they wanted to sell their lands, they would do it them- 
 selves. 'J'he witness believes that the half sections in Jim Hoy's town are 
 worth one tliousand dollar's each. He knows their lands, and has resided 
 in the Crxek country since 1830. 
 
 The treaty of the 24th March, 1832, has two aspects : the one looks to 
 the ti ibe or- nation ; the other to each individual, the head of a family of 
 the Creek tr-ibe or- nation. 
 
 Art. 1st. The Creek tribe of Isdians cede to the United States all their 
 land last of the Mi>isissipj)i river-. 
 
 Art. 2(1. The United States engage to survey the said land, as soon as 
 the same can be conveniently done, after the ratification of this treaty, and, 
 when the same is surveyed, to allow ninety ])rinci|)al chiefs of the Creek 
 tribe to select one section each, and every other head of a Creek family to 
 select one half section each ; which tracts shall be reser-ved for sale for 
 their use, for the ter-m of five years, rrnless sooner disposed of by them. 
 A census of these persons shall be taken under the direction of the Pi-esi- 
 dent, and the selections shall be made sd as to include the improvements of 
 each persotr v\ithin his selection, if the same can he so made ; anti if not, 
 then all the per-sons belonging to the same town, entitled to selections, and 
 who cannot make the same so as to include their improvements, shall take 
 them in one hotly in a pro|)pr form. 
 
 Art. 3tl. Tliese tr-acts may be conveyed by the persons selecting the same, 
 to any other per-sons, for a fair consideration, in such manner as the Pres- 
 ident may direct. The contract shall be certified by some person appoint- 
 ed by the President for that purpose, hut it shall noi be valid until the 
 President ap[)r(»ves the same. A title shall be given by the United States 
 on the completion of the payment. 
 
 Art. 4 III. At tlie end of live years, all the Creeks entitled to these selec- 
 tions, and desirous of remaining, shall r-ereive patents therefor, irr fee- sim- 
 ple, fr-om the United States. 
 
 'J'he pr-o\iso to the 12th article of the treaty declares that this article 
 sliall not be construed so as to compel any Creek Indian to emigrate, but 
 they shall be fr-ee to go or- stay, as they please. 
 
 See John A. Camjibell's original statement, herewith transmitted. 
 
 ALFRED BALCH, Commissioner. 
 
 Montgomery, Alabama, 
 
 Ocbber22, 1856. 
 
 Gentlfmkn : Your- letter of the 1 Itir instant to General Watson and 
 others, \Nith one from General Watson, was received by me last evening. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 55 
 
 Your letter to him contains the information that the contract to which 
 several Creek chiefs representing tlierein many individuals of the trihe, 
 General Watson and others, and tlie U«iited States, were respectively 
 partirs, had been referred to your consideration by the War Department, 
 and that opinions were required upon its provisions and validity with 
 reference to the treaty of 1832. You request that u memorial maybe 
 filed, setting forth the claims of Watson and others, with an argument 
 (if they choose) in favor of their claims. 
 
 General Watson requests me to prepare these documents, to attend as 
 bis counsel to support his claims, and those of his associates, before you. 
 Connected as I was with that contract, I do not feel at liberty to receive 
 any benefit, in any way, under it, or in consequence of its execution. 1 
 am not the counsel of the purchasers under it, nor do I bear that relation 
 to them ; yet I have thought it due to General Jesup, and due to General 
 Watson and his associates, when the (piestion of its validity is to be de- 
 cided, to state the circumstances under which the contract was made, the 
 inducements that led to it, and the reasons in support of it. It is a part 
 of the history of the country that a portion of tlie duties that were devolved 
 upon General Jesup, was, to provide for tiie removal of the Indians, and to 
 superintend that work. It became the most arduous and didicult portion 
 of the duties he was called to perform. After the hostiles had been conquered 
 and removed from the country, several weeks were spent in collecting the 
 Indians in camps, [ireparatnry to their removal. The military force, sta- 
 tioned in different ])arts of the country, alone kept these people together. 
 As the period for them to leave their ancient homes approached, their un- 
 willingness to do so increased. When called upon to fix the day for their 
 departure, obstacle after obstacle was opposed. At last it became a matter 
 of consideration whether military force would not be required to coerc» 
 their removal. This shocked every principle of justice ; and the writer of 
 this well knows that a meeting was held by the officers of the Alabama 
 volunteers, in wiiich they declared their determination not to submit to be 
 employed on this service. 
 
 The obstacles offered by the chiefs consisted of demands upon the Gov- 
 ernment ; some of which were, to deliver their slaves from attachments, 
 and themselves from arrests ; to advance the annuity of 1837 ; to allow 
 to some lands, who had been overlooked in the register of reserves ; and, 
 above all. to make some disjjosition of their land claims. These submit- 
 ted to, they would raise from 600 to 1,000 men for the PMorida campaign, 
 and remo> e forthwith. 
 
 These demands were anxiously evaded by General Jesup. He was not 
 disposed to meddle with so involved and complicated a business as that 
 connected with the unadjusted land claims. The Indians insisted again 
 and again. The matter was finally considered, and one of three courses 
 of action appeared open for him. All of these contained matter of weighty 
 objection. The removal of the Indians was a matter of imperious neces- 
 sity ; the Government demanded it; the excited country demanded it; 
 their helpless condition demanded it. They remained in the country at 
 an expense to the United States nf $10,000 per day, as was calculated by 
 General Jesup. The slow and formal mode of sale hitherto pursued could 
 not be permitted : this was objectionable on account of delay. Tlie In- 
 dians would only be subject to fresh vexation from bail writs ; a swaroi of 
 
56 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 knngry creditors (or persons declaring themselves to be so) infested their 
 camps, and seized upon all who wcie suspected of bi-ing in possession of 
 a (h)llar. If the lands were sold, it must be <ionc in a body. There were, 
 then, three courst's open to General Jesuj). 
 
 First, foi- the Government to become the purchaser ; to advance the re- 
 quisite sums of money ; and, if there should be any surplus upon an investi- 
 gation of the claims and a sale of the lands, fo ])ay it to the Indians. This 
 would have been most equitable and just. But General Jesiip Iiad rmt the 
 authority to make such a contiact ; the money to execute it was not ap- 
 propriated ; the Indians wanted to carry money to Arkansas; the posses- 
 sion of the money was the only evidence of a settlement tliat they could 
 or would appreciate ; they were not sndsjied that this arrangement should 
 le made, and the delays foi* the appropriation of the money to be incurred. 
 
 The second course was to leave the suiiject in tiic posture it tiicn occu- 
 pied — to remove the Indians, and investigate the claims, and sell the 
 lands afterwards. Tlie Indians objected to this ; they claimed an imme- 
 diate settlement of these dilKculties ; tliey expressed their wish to wind up 
 all their business in the land they were about to leave; they declareil, with 
 much force, that they would carry the evidences of fraud witli them, and 
 that investigation would be (lillicult. I refer you to the jireamble ot the 
 contract, whicli repeats almosts verbatim what they said was their m itivc 
 for the sale. Tiiis coui-se was reluctantly al»andoned by General Jesup. 
 
 The third course was that pursued. The objection to that was the 
 diOiciilty of procuring an adefpiate consideration. None were willing to 
 buy IathIh shingled (ixev with titles, except those, perhaps, who had been en- 
 gaged in speculations. It was difficult even for tiiose to tell how far the 
 transaction might be prudent and safe. The advance of mojiey i-equired 
 was great. Tnis course was adopted : General Je8U[) securing for eacli 
 bo.ia fide purchaser a fair investigation of his claim, and for each individ- 
 ual Indian the right to dissent. I submit to every man whether, under 
 all the cii'cumstances. the course adoj)ted was not the most judicious. 
 The Indians were well satisfied. Chiefs who were not embraced in the 
 arrangement made apjjiication, to my knowledge, for a similar disposition 
 of their claims. The warriors for Fh)ri(la were obtained, and the emigra- 
 ting parties fortiiwitli started foi- the West. 
 
 I deem it proper here to state, that I never have had the sliglitest con- 
 nexion or claim tf) any portion of these lands ; I have not the most remote 
 connexion with any puichaser of Indian reserves ; I was summoned by 
 General Jesup to attend to these arrangements ; and I had no motive for 
 advancing them, other than the wish to aid him in the discharge of his 
 duties. 
 
 I will now proceed to examine the contract with reference to the treaty 
 of 18 32. 
 
 It has ever been considered by the War I)e|)aitment that tlie legal title 
 to the Indian reservatif)ns has always remained in the Government of the 
 United States. This opinion was expressed by General Cass, in 1833, 
 in his correspondence with Governor Gayle, and enforced with so much 
 ability as to receive general support and arcpiiescence. lie says, «» These 
 ♦ biffs [those whf) negotiated the ti-eaty] were exceedingly anxious that a 
 fttipulalion should be insei-ted providing for the extension of the intercourse 
 act of 1302 over the country, and thus vesting the whole jurisdiction in 
 
f Doc. No. 274. I 57 
 
 the United States. But they were explicitly told that the President could 
 not and would not assent to this; but as the land, by t'.ie cession, would 
 become the property of the United States, all intruders from it should be 
 removed as they should be removed from other public lands." 
 
 The same opinion was expressed in the controversy by Judge Hopkins, 
 one of the judges of the supreme court of this State. He says, that ''accord- 
 ing to the treaty, the legal title to all the lands is in tlie United States. 
 Tlie Indians have no right, upon any condition, to sell improvements ; and 
 none to transfer reservations, but upon contracts which the President may 
 approve. Should they do either act, there would be no autliority for it ; 
 it would be a violation of a right of the United States in the lands of the 
 Union, which the treaty does not relinquish. As an individual might do 
 in the case I have supposed — recover the land by a law-suit, which is the 
 lawful mode for him to obtain redress for the injury; so the Government, in 
 the existing case, has the right to pursue the remedy which is lawful for 
 her — and that remedy is the one that the act of 1807 prescribes. In regard 
 to the improvements and reservations, also, until the end of five years from 
 the ratification of the treaty, or until they may be sold under the Presi- 
 dent's ratification : the Government is a trustee for the Indians, and, as 
 trustee, refused by the contract which gave her this character to allow the 
 Indians to sell the right to the possession of the improvements or of the 
 reservations. As the United States did not give the right to the Indians to 
 sell the possession of either, a purchase of the possession is a violation, not 
 only of the legal rights of the Government, which would authorize her to 
 enforce the act of 1807 ; but it is a clear violation of the trust committed 
 by the treaty to tlie Government, whiclj that solemn instrument intended 
 to secure for the exclusive benefit of the Indians, in defiance of their acts, 
 which miglit be the consequence of their drunkenness, their ignorance, or 
 their weaknesses." 
 
 This opinion has been adopted in the supreme court of this State. 
 That court has determined that the right to dower was not an incident to 
 the estate of a chief in one of the reserves. That the trust was not of such 
 a character as that any interest in the land, beyond possession, became an- 
 nexed to it for the benefit of the Indian. That his right was a riglit to 
 occupy — a right to sell with the consent of the United States ; and after 
 five years, on condition of his receiving an absolute right in the land it- 
 self, to be evinced by patent from the United States. These opinions 
 have settled the minds of the legal profession on tliis subject, in this State. 
 In recurring to the treaty, we find abundant support for this construction. 
 
 The Indians, having nothing but an occupancy right, cede that to the 
 United States, which claim, before this cession, the absolute fee. The Indi- 
 ans reserve from this cession, for each head of an Indian family, a particu- 
 lar portion described in the treaty. The occupancy riglit to this is re- 
 tained. T he privilege (previously enjoyed) of selling the land, with the 
 consent of the United States, is retained. The privilege of holding the land 
 in ])erpetuity, is granted: *' provided, at the end of five years, that they 
 shall be desirous of remaining." The title is to he completed by the Uni- 
 tpd States. In the mean time, the possessory right reserved is to be 
 defended from intrusion, as the Government defends other rights of prop- 
 erty ; and property must be had in the land, before this right to protection 
 could be exercised. 
 
58 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 The Government being, then, the sole proprietor of the land, and being 
 charged with a disposition of it, for the benefit of the Iiulians respectively, 
 was not tied down to any formal mode of disposition. The War Depart- 
 nient has more than once sanctioned the idea that the reserves were rights 
 which did atlord a legitimate subject for a treaty with tlie tribe. 
 
 lu 1833, Messrs. Benson, Martin, and Filzpatrick, were appointed 
 to negotiate witii the leading chiefs for a deputation to be made of some of 
 their number to visit Washington city, in order to treat witli the United 
 States for a sale of the Indian reserves. The instructions to these, gentle- 
 men state : (tiiey are before me,) that »4he President is very desirous that 
 an ariangement of this nature should be made with those Indians, as he is 
 firmly persuaded that their |)rosperity, and, in fact, existence, depend up- 
 on it. But he is also satisfied that the measure could be much better 
 accomplished here, tlian in their own country, wiiere they might be sur- 
 rounded with ati improper and extraneous influence. You aie therefore 
 authorized to propose this subject to the Creek Indians, and say to them, 
 if they \\ill appoint a deputation of six or eight persons, and fully author- 
 ize them to treat for cession of their reserves," Ate. 
 
 Suppose such a treaty to have been made : would any Indian, or purcha- 
 ser from an Indian, have been |)ermitted to hold said reserve r Suppose 
 a patent should issue from the Government, to the purchasers under this 
 contract : what party could (piestion the title ? Tlie answer is, the title 
 would be perfect. The rpiestions then arise upon the contrat t, or rather, 
 of equitable consideration. There is no question of the power of the Gov- 
 ernment. The question then arises. Can this contract be considered as 
 imbodying tlie sentiments of the Creek Indians ? The chiefs who signed 
 it are the principal chiefs of the trihe; none others were consulted during 
 the war. Their voice was loud to their people. They were rer|uired to 
 consult with them ; they declared they iiad done so ; they professed to know 
 their wishes ; they urgently demanded this sale, as best for their interests. 
 
 Tiie aulhoriiy of the chiefs to make the sale can hardly be «loiibted. I 
 speak not of authority derived from each Indian ; this was not to he expect- 
 ed ; the offer of the Government in 1833 did not contemplate this. 
 
 The chiefs stand in the place of rej)resentatives for their towns ; they 
 transact all business for them ; they represent them in councils. A portion 
 of this contract the IndiaJis have already executeil, at the same time that 
 a contract was entered into for the services of the Indian wariiors. It was 
 part of the same conti-act. Tiie negotiations were conducted between the 
 same persons ; and the settlement of the land claims was a portion of the 
 consideration. The Indians have furnished the warriors stipulated for- 
 There can be no question, then, that the chiefs acted for the best, and that 
 their* peoj)le will and have sanctioned their acts. 
 
 Tlie instructions of the War Department to (reneral Jesup and Captain 
 Page were both kept in view in the stipulations of the contract. The dis- 
 sent of any Indian made known before the consummation of the contract, 
 his land was excluded from its operation. The money is stipulated to be 
 paid to each reservec. This provision was not carried into effect, but the 
 alteration was made by the agents of the United States, and ihe Indians. 
 Writs for thousands of dollars were in the hands of sheriffs ami constables. 
 To place money in the hands of Ihe Indians, would be to o|)en the door for 
 oppression and injustice; for both of which, the circumstances of the case 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 59 
 
 permitted no remedy. The money was therefore paid to the chief, for the 
 use of Ills people. The purchasers were not a party to, nor consenting to 
 this. It was determined on as best for the Indian. 
 
 The instructions to Greneral Jesup permitted a purchase by any person 
 of the lands in dispute, provided the purchaser would take upon himself 
 the burden of all valid incumbrances made by the Indian upon the land, 
 and the risk against all valid outstanding purchases. The instructions 
 permitted the person who had made a contract with an Indian not entitled 
 to the land, to procure the confirmation of the title from the Indian enti- 
 tled to sell ; the money to be paid to him in the presence of his chief and a 
 Government agent. 
 
 The stipulations imposed by the United States in the contract were dic- 
 tated by these instructions. 
 
 The risk incurred by the purchasers was prescribed in the first. The 
 mode of payment was adopted from the last. Any deviation from 
 the letter of the contract was in consequence of advice from the officers 
 of the United States, fully justified by what they saw about them. 
 
 They saw the village crowded by those who wished to make their final 
 efforts at spoliation and robbery upon the Creek people. They saw writs 
 in the hands of officers against Indian women, though the laws of the 
 State prohibit the arrest of women. They saw writs and bail required 
 of them for thousands, when hundreds were only due. They, therefore, 
 recommended that nothing should be paid to the common Indian. They do 
 not believe this contract ought to be affected by this advice. 
 
 None of the modes of action that were open to General Jesup could 
 have been followed, without a violation of the literal terms of the treaty, 
 in the very point in which an alleged violation has occurred. 
 
 Suppose he had adopted the idea of purchasing the lands for the United 
 States. The same chiefs would have been consulted. Their statements, 
 as to their authority, would never have been questioned. The mode of 
 payment would have been identical with that employed in this case. No 
 man would have conceived of any other course. Had the lands been 
 permitted to remain for disposition by the agents of the United States, it 
 would have deprived the "Indians selecting" these tracts of their right 
 to convey them to other persons. 
 
 The departure from the treaty arises from the peculiar condition in 
 which the Indians were placed. They were forced to emigrate. The Gov- 
 ernment required the immediate removal of the Indians ; this was hardly 
 in accordance with the treaty. The Indians, anxiously clinging to their 
 territory, oppose difficulty after difficulty. They have interest in lands 
 covered over with litigation and embarrassments. Deeds are outstanding, 
 that have received the approval of an agent of the United States. These 
 have been marked for reversal by another agent ; but his report is not ap- 
 proved. In the mean time, the Indian has sold his land over again. If 
 any of these sales are bona Jide, they ought to be respected. The Indians 
 are clamorous for a sale — officers of the United States consent to a sale, 
 and purchasers are found who are willing to purchase. Consenting to 
 bear the burdens that the Indians bear — consenting that every bona file 
 claim should be re'spected, they advance their money. The Indian is sat- 
 isfied, and the policy of the Government advanced. If any bona Jide pur- 
 chase has been made, that is entitled to priority over this pirc/iasc, can 
 
60 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 any sticli purchaser complain of this coTitract ? No ailditifnial burden is 
 imposed u|)i»n him by this contract. The only difference to him is, there 
 is a difft'rent party to receive the money — a party from whom it cannot 
 be taken alter paynient. Fraudulent purchasers may be injured by such 
 substitution ; tlie fair and honest purchaser cannot be. I'lie ditlirulty at- 
 tending the identificalion of the venilor (Indian) is not an incident to this 
 contract, but is a consefjuence of their removal from the country. Strong 
 prodf of identity would have been recpiired under any system that might 
 have been adtij)ted. Tlie difficulty of procuring this, is not attributable 
 to the provisions of the contract. 
 
 I'liC; adequacy of the consideration was settled by the Indians. It is 
 dependent ujion circumstances, whether the contract will be beneficial or 
 otherwise. There is lisk and uncertaitity. 'I'lie criteiion ado|)ted was 
 the price at which the certificates were originally given, deducting 53 per 
 cent, fur the contracts that would be determined aejainst (heni. 'I'here was 
 no better ciiterion. It was satisfactoiy to the Indians, and agreed to by 
 the purchasers. If they could got all the land, the purchasers would make 
 enormous profits. No individual suj)pnses that this will be done. Should 
 all the lands be held under the certified contracts, there will be a total 
 loss. Tliis is not expected. The officers of the United States did all that 
 they could do to get the best price. Having done this, they felt they had 
 done their duty. 
 
 In conclusion, I will add, that I know of no unfairness, either in the ne- 
 gotiation 01- execution of this contract. The whole was fully explained 
 to and understood by the chiefs. They were required to consult their peo- 
 ple ; they went off for the purpose; declared that their consent was ob- 
 tained. They fulfilled all they promised in the negotiation, and ai)peared 
 contented with what they had done. There was no persuasion attem|)ted 
 by General Jestip, or those acting under him. It was a mattei* that they 
 wished to evade all interference with. No promise was held out to the chiefs ; 
 and I cannot but believe that the contract is abona fide contract, binding 
 «II the ])arties to it. 
 
 I am, very respectfully, gentlemen, your obedient rervant, 
 
 JOUN A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 T. Hartley Crawford, ") ^ „ 
 
 Alfred Balch, Esquires,) (Commissioners, ^-c. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 EXHIBIT A. 
 
 61 
 
 The following is taken from Colonel Hogan's abstract of reversed cases ^ 
 and refers to the reservations of which any of the following persons 
 are purchasers, to wit : Daniel McDougald, TVilliain Walker, Job 
 Taylor, John Feabody, James C. Watson, Peter Harris, and the 
 firm or firms loith lohom they are associated in the purchase of res- 
 ervations, as described in the said abstract. The marginal num- 
 bers of Colonel Hogan's book, the names of the firms, and the 
 amount paid for each reservation, are used in this copy ; so that, by 
 referring to the corresponding numbers in his book, the name of the 
 Indian reservee, and the section, township, and range, so purchased, 
 can be iminediately found. 
 
 No. 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 4 
 5 
 18 
 45 
 54 
 58 
 71 
 75 
 
 55 
 65 
 78 
 81 
 120 
 150 
 
 139 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 Eufala town, on Tallapoosa. 
 Thornton, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 Chat-tok-sof-ke town. 
 McDougald, Wardswortli, and Co. 
 
 u ^t ti 
 
 n <( «( 
 
 (( <( <( 
 
 Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 
 Wardswortli and McDougald 
 McDougalil, Wardswortli, and Co. 
 Wardswortli and McDougald 
 McDougald, Wardswortli and Co. 
 
 Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 Luchipoga town. 
 
 Wardswortli and McDougald 
 
 Tallassce. 
 
 McDougald, Hudson, and Thornton 
 
 Tuckabatchee. 
 
 Wardsworth and McDougald 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 S300 00 
 
 £00 
 
 00 
 
 soo 
 
 00 
 
 300 
 
 oo 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 SOO 
 
 00 
 
 500 
 
 00 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 SOO 
 
 00 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 100 00 
 150 00 
 200 00 
 120 00 
 100 00 
 150 00 
 
 SOO 00 
 
 250 00 
 SOO 00 
 
68 
 
 f Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 EXHIBIT A— Continued. 
 
 JNo. 
 
 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 §450 00 
 
 50 
 
 ♦♦ <» . . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 6iJ0 00 
 
 52 
 
 MiJlory, Stone, aj»d McDougald - 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 500 00 
 
 65 
 
 WardsNvortli and McDougald 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 85 
 
 a »* _ . 
 
 • 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 86 
 
 «» << - - 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 100 00 
 
 IK. 
 
 <» »< - - 
 
 ' 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 132 
 
 McDougald, Hall, and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 ■ 
 
 400 00 
 
 136 
 
 ♦ » •' '« - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 600 00 
 
 154 
 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 400 00 
 
 174 
 
 Wai'dswortii, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
 183 
 
 .t n a 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
 187 
 
 >< a it 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 196 
 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 500 00 
 
 216 
 
 Wardsworth, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 218 
 
 t( (« n 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 150 00 
 
 223 
 
 • ( <( a 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 239 
 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 400 00 
 
 248 
 
 Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 249 
 
 « a 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 100 00 
 
 252 
 
 Wardswortli and McDougald 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 275 
 
 << it . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 100 00 
 
 288 
 
 (( <( 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 100 00 
 
 331 
 
 McDougald and Hall 
 
 T/doblhlocco. 
 
 
 
 500 GO 
 
 41 
 
 MrRoby, Stone, and McDougald - 
 
 , 
 
 „ 
 
 
 67 
 
 McBryde and McDougald 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 50 00 
 
 70 
 
 Tliornton, McDougald, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 400 00 
 
 73 
 
 Thornton, McDougald, Mills, and Co. 
 Autauga. 
 
 
 
 300 00 
 
 6 
 
 Thornton, McDougald, and Skylock 
 
 . 
 
 _ 
 
 400 00 
 
 49 
 
 it n tt 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 350 00 
 
 52 
 
 McRoby, McDougald, and Co. 
 Tallassee. 
 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 169 
 
 Coker, Walker, and McDougald - 
 Tuckabatcfiee. 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 300 00 
 
 9 
 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 
 _ 
 
 _ 
 
 100 00 
 
 20 
 
 Thornton and Walker 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 100 00 
 
 33 
 
 ti t( _ . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 34 
 
 it « . . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 200 00 
 
 119 
 
 '• " - . 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 EXHIBIT A— Continued. 
 
 63 
 
 rso. 
 
 197 
 287 
 289 
 333 
 340 
 349 
 368 
 
 16 
 
 27 
 29 
 
 42 
 
 42 
 49 
 68 
 
 6 
 31 
 
 32 
 40 
 42 
 43 
 
 29 
 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 
 Do do 
 
 Do do 
 
 Thornton and Walker 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 Walker and McDougald - 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 
 Tlilobthlocco. 
 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 William Walker and McDougald - 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 Walker and McDougald - 
 Walker, TUornton, and McDougald 
 
 Clewalla. 
 
 Walker and Thornton 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 Thornton and Walker 
 
 Talmachussa, 
 
 Thornton and Walker 
 Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 Do do - 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 Ottissee. 
 
 Walker, Thornton, ^nd Co. 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 5 
 
 Do 
 
 10 
 
 Do 
 
 22 
 
 Do 
 
 25 
 
 Do 
 
 30 
 
 Do 
 
 32 
 
 Do 
 
 35 
 
 Do 
 
 60 
 
 Do 
 
 64 
 
 Do 
 
 86 
 
 Do 
 
 •Autauga. 
 
 Walker and Thornton, 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 50 
 
 00 
 
 640 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 300 00 
 55 00 
 55 00 
 
 100 00 
 60 00 
 
 100 00 
 120 00 
 100 00 
 
 100 00 
 100 00 
 400 00 
 100 00 
 100 00 
 50 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 150 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 GO 
 
 250 
 
 00 
 
 250 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 200 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 00 
 
 100 
 
 GO 
 
 IGO GO 
 
64 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 EXHIBIT A— Continued. 
 
 No. 
 
 lullassee. 
 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 Iliidson and Pcabody 
 
 , 
 
 
 ^400 00 
 
 15 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 18 
 
 Thornton, Pcabody, and Reeves 
 
 . 
 
 " 
 
 400 00 
 
 fiO 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 21 
 
 Do do 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 23 
 
 Hudson and Peabody 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 24 
 
 Do do 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 26 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 150 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 166 
 
 Thornton, Peabody, Reeves, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 170 
 
 Hudson and Poabody 
 
 - 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 171 
 
 Tlioiiilon, Pcabody, Reeves, and Co, 
 
 . 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 180 
 
 Hudson and Peabody 
 
 Tiiskegee. 
 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 21 
 
 Thornton, Reeves, Peabody and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 • 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 
 Thlobllilocco. 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 John Peabody and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 350 00 
 
 4 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 400 00 
 
 19 
 
 Do do 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 500 00 
 
 23 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 25 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 46 
 
 Do do - - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 350 00 
 
 50 
 
 Do do - - 
 »9utavga. 
 
 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 22 
 
 Peabodv, Watson, and Worsham - 
 
 _ 
 
 . 
 
 
 500 00 
 
 23 
 
 bo do 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 50 00 
 
 36 
 
 Peabody, Watson, and Co. 
 
 Tallassee. 
 
 
 
 400 00 
 
 34 
 
 Woodland and Watson 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 500 00 
 
 
 Enjula, Tallapoosa* 
 
 
 
 
 
 53 
 
 Webb, Taylor, and Co. - 
 
 Chat-tok-snJ-kc. 
 
 " 
 
 " 
 
 
 250 00 
 
 37 
 
 Wel)b, Taylor, and Co. - 
 
 _ 
 
 . 
 
 
 150 00 
 
 40 
 
 J. Tn}lor and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 
 100 00 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 EXHIBIT A— Continued. 
 
 65 
 
 
 Tuckabatchee. 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 Tawer and Taylor 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 
 Sioo 00 
 
 63 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 150 00 
 
 72 
 
 Tawer, Taylor, and Co. 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 
 100 00 
 
 75 
 
 Tawer and Taylor 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 100 00 
 
 107 
 
 Do do 
 
 Chat-tok 
 
 -sof-ke. 
 
 
 
 
 100 00 
 
 27 
 
 Tawer and Taylor, 
 
 _ 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 50 00 
 
 28 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 100 (10 
 
 49 
 
 I. Taylor and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
 50 
 
 Tawer, Taylor, and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 150 00 
 
 61 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 350 00 
 
 63 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 350 00 
 
 65 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 • 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 350 00 
 
 68 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
 70 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 400 00 
 
 72 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 _ 
 
 450 00 
 
 80 
 
 Taylor and Tawer 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 100 00 
 
 112 
 
 Tawer, Tayloi", and Co. 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 400 00 
 
 114 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 . 
 
 150 00 
 
 117 
 
 Do do 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 128 
 
 Do do 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 150 00 
 
 
 Tuckabatchee. 
 
 
 
 
 
 337 
 
 P. Harris 
 
 • 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 
 Green's, near Tuskegee, Alabama, 
 
 JVovember 30, 1836. 
 I certify that the above is a true and correct copy, taken from Coh)nel 
 Hngan's abstract of reversed cases in Dr. Mcllenry's district, now on the 
 flies of tliis ofJice. 
 
 JNO. M. WYSE, 
 Secretary td Commissioners. 
 5 
 
66 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 Statr of Alabama, ) 
 
 TuUapoosa coHnlij. 5 
 
 This indiiitiii (', made and concluded at Jlie town of Tallassce, in the coun- 
 ty and State alnresaid, on the 2Sth day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
 tlie United States of America, of the first part ; and Opoilie Yoholo, Mini 
 Blue, Tnckabatche xMicco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy, chiefs of the Creels 
 trihc of Indians, atid James C. Watson, J'^dw aid Haniick, William M'alk- 
 er i\. Company, IVtei" C Ilarr-is, and .[ohn I'cahody, of the third part, 
 uitnessetli : That \Nltei'eas, by a tieaty between the United States of Amer-- 
 ca ami Uie Creek tribe of Indiatis, ratified in tlie year of oui* Lord 1«32, 
 eacli head of a family belonging to said tribe became entitled to one half a 
 section of land, whicii was subse«^uently allotted accoi-ding to the same: 
 and whereas, by the same treaty, it was provided that no sale should be 
 valid, unless the contract sln-uld meet with the approbation of an agent of 
 the United States, and confirmation by the President thereof : and where- 
 as the parlies of the seciuid part allege, o!i behalf of individuals of the said 
 tribe, that frauds have been perpetrated upon the holders of land under 
 the said treaty, whereby their titles ha\e become involve<l with dilliculty, 
 their lights jeopardized, and confidence in their secuiity impaired : and 
 whereas investigations have taken place without lesults, ami they are 
 about to leave the lands ceded, for their homes in the west : To tlie end of 
 settling all their business in this country, of transferring from themselves 
 the burden of litigation, and of obtaining sonietliing foi* their claims pro- 
 ])ortioned to their value, and at the same time tt) make a provision f(»r the 
 fair and bona fide purcliasers from the people of their tribe, they have ad- 
 vised their j)et)i)le liolding saitl claims to accede to a genei'al disposition of 
 them, and have obtaineil their consent to remise, release, and forever quit 
 claim (on the part of all and each of them) to the parties of the third part, and 
 each of them, of all Hieii- right, title, interest, claim, and demand to all the 
 tracts and ])arcels of land, situate, lying, and being in that part of the terri- 
 tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, compi-ised w ithin the district of lands iti 
 which R. W. >TcHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed the 
 subject of contest before the agents of tlie United States, and which have 
 either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold 
 and certified without authority in the agents of the United States to wit- 
 ness sai<l sales, or certify said contracts, (the same being the cases con- 
 tained in the r-eports of the investigating agents :) subject, however, to the 
 rcstiictioiis imjiosed by tlie party of the first i)ait, as ftJlows : 
 
 " 1st. Tiiat the title hereby obtained, or which may be obtained in pur- 
 suance of this contract, shall not interfere with liie rights of any individ- 
 ual who has made a prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of said 
 lands, (whether the same has been certified or not,) or any jiart thereof; 
 but the respective (laims(if necessary for settlement) shall be investigated 
 by an agent appointed by the Presidentof the United States, and the ratifi- 
 cation of the Piesident shall be necessaiy to the perfection of the titles. 
 
 •♦ Provided, nevertheless, that for the ascertainment of the fairness 
 and validity of any claim, as well as Ibr the protection (d' the |)arties of the 
 third part, they shall be entitled to the benefit of the same rules that the 
 Indians would have been entitled to but for this contract, under the instruc- 
 tions of the War Department. 
 
 "2d. That when any contract shall be preferred by the said agent upon 
 investigation, the panics of the third part shall be entitled tu the same 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 67 
 
 scctnity for the consideration as the Indian would have had but for this 
 contract ; jjrovided, if the amount paid into the liands of the agent of the 
 United States sliall exceed, on any pairel of land, the pi'o rata valuation 
 made in tliis cotitiact, then one half of said overplus shall be J'clained by 
 the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heii's. 
 
 " 3d. That the money hereafter stipulated to be paid, shall he paid to 
 the Indian enlitled to the land, in j)reseuce of the cliief, and an officer of 
 the United States ; and until such j)ayment be made, it shall be deposited 
 witli the certifying agents of the district. The payment of whicii shall 
 be a consummation of this contj-act. 
 
 " 4tli. That if any one Indian holding any parcel of land herein con- 
 veyed, sliall I'cfuse t(» carry into effect (he provisions of this conti-act, 
 in that case a pro rata allowance ;ipon the consideration herein stipulated, 
 shall be made to the parties of the tiiird part : provided this consent shall 
 be given before the consummation of this contract. 
 
 "otii. That all those lands, which have not been sold, including (hose 
 where the indian has died before sale, shall he taken at a valuation to be 
 made hy the persons who may be ap])ointed by the agent of the United 
 States, who sliall finally close the arrangements provided for in this con- 
 tract, and the treaty : jirovided, that this shall not refer to any claims em- 
 braced in previous ai-ticles of this contract : and provided further, that 
 valid titles can be ohtaitied therefor. 
 
 "The parties of the third j)art agree to receive the cotneyance herein- 
 before made, subject to all the cotulilions and stipulations lierein contained, 
 atid vvill pay theiefor the sum of seventy. five thousand dollars; one-half to 
 be paid upon the sealing of these presents, t(j the agent of the United 
 States who may be appointed to receive the same ; and one-half in four 
 months, at P\)rt Gibson, in the State of Arkansas. 
 
 ♦' In testimony whereof, I, John A. Campbell, appointed by Major 
 General Thomas S. Jesup, commanding Southern army, as agent of 
 the United States to execute the same, &.c. 
 
 "JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 " In testimony whereof, we have hereunto set our hands, and affixed our 
 seals, the day and date above written. 
 
 Opothe Yoholo, liis x mark. 
 
 Mad Blue, his x mark. 
 
 Tuckabatclie-Micco, his x mark. 
 Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 
 Little Doctor, his x mark. 
 
 Jim Boy, his x mark. 
 
 J. C. Watson, 
 Witnesses : Edward Hanrick, 
 
 John Page, William Walker, 
 
 (jai)t. Supt. Creek Removal. Peter C. Harris. 
 
 J. F. Lane, John Peabody. 
 
 Copt. U. S. Army. 
 B. Marshall, Interpreter. 
 
 *' Sanctioned by me, subject to the ratification of the President of the 
 United States, August 28, 1836. 
 
 ''THOMAS S. JESUP, 
 " Maj. Gen. Commanding ^rmy of the South. 
 
68 [ Doc. 'So. 274. ] 
 
 " 'I'liis rnntr;irt sliail rtpjily to the towns only of Consawdn's, Tiicka- 
 l)at(li{'*s, Eiilala's, Ki;ilii;;i*s. Cljattossoriciiis, Koho-matsUa-catcli-k;!, 
 Liichip-'S^a, Sou£;aliatcli('t', Tallassee, 'riiskc^cc, Clicliaw tow n on Eiilala 
 (MCI k, 'J'lilobtliliKCo, (Jim Boy's.) Clewalla, 'I'alinarlmssec, Towarsa, 
 Ottcsa. Autauga. Tlic cliit'l's bel'ore stafi-d, »!cclaring tliat tlicy Iiad no 
 advice or consent from the otliei- towns. August 28. 183G. 
 
 JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 '• riic Tallassee cliief declared, when lie .signed the contract, that he 
 had not the assent of iiis jjcoplc to the act." 
 
 THOMAS S. JESUP. 
 
 •♦ We do hereliy acknowledge to have rereived from John Page, agent 
 of the United States, wh(» was appointed hy Major General 'j'honias S. 
 Jesup to iecei\e the same IVom the parties of tlic third part, Jiientioned 
 witiiin, thirty-seven thousand and five hundred dollars in cash, and the 
 note «)!" the parties of the; third pait. payable at lour months, loi- the same 
 sum. That this has been done at the instance and ctmsent of our people 
 interested herein, and for distribution among them whose rights have been 
 disj)osed of. — August 29th, 1836. 
 
 Done in our presence : 
 
 Opothe YijIioIo, his x mark. 
 
 Th. W. Bateman, Mad Blue, his x mark. 
 
 Lieut. J. Insp. and Dis. Jlgent. Tuckabatrhee Micco his x niark. 
 
 Barent Dubois, Little Doctor, his x mark. 
 
 Jlssistant Jlgevt. Jim Boy, his x mark. 
 
 James L. Alexantler, Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 
 
 ^issistaiit .Igent. Tusconer Uadjo, his x mark. 
 
 Colchc Emarthia, his x mark. 
 
 In the matter of the memorial of James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, 
 and others, and the counter-memorial of Ware, Dougherty, and others, 
 dc|M'nding before the commissioners under the Creek treaty, ui)on the 
 order of said commissioners, Thomas H. Crawford and Alfred IJalcli, 
 I have this day proceeded to take, hy consent of both jiarties to saiil me- 
 morial and counter-memorial, the depositions of the following witnesses, 
 to he read in evidence in the said cases, to wit : 
 
 George Cloiigh. a witnessfor the counter-memorialist, deposeth and saith : 
 That H proi)ositi<in was made to the chiefs to take all the disjnited lands in 
 Mclleiiry's district at valuation. Opothe Yoholo said he was w illing to ac- 
 cede to the j)roposition. and an agreement was made to meet the same even- 
 in"' in Tallasseeto confirm the arrangement, but the chiefs did not meet. De- 
 ponent says that he made another proposition to the chiefs to take the land in 
 a body at Si SO. 000. Deponent tlif)Ught. at the time the jjroposition was 
 made, that the lands which had been the subject of investigation, without in- 
 cluding the i)ie-eniption to unsold lands and the lands located to dead Itnli- 
 ans, was worth two hundred thousand dollai-s. 'I'hese propositions were 
 made a few days before the contract with Watson, l!anrick. and others, was 
 ma(!e. Dfjionrnt fui-ther states, that alter the (xecution of the contract 
 with Watson, Hanrick, and others, and a day or two before the Indians 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 69 
 
 belonging to the Tiickabatchee ^nwn had left their camps to move wcst- 
 wardly, he, tliis dejioiient, was at tlie square established near the camps, 
 and vvlieie public meetings were usually held ; that the Itidians belongitjg 
 to the town had generally assembled there, and held a talk, and he was 
 informed that the subject ot'the talk w'as about i-eceiving the money which 
 the chiefs had gotten for the disj)uted landfj. The Indians stated tliat they 
 had not sold tiieir lands to the chiefs, and the cisiefs had no right to sell 
 them in the way they did ; tliat the lands were their own, and they would 
 sell them themselves, and therefore they refused to take the money. De- 
 ponent states that he knows but little of the Indian language; that tlic 
 talk above referred to was explained to him by a negro interpreter, who 
 had been in his employ for some time, and in whom he has confidence, 
 never having detected him in making false interpretations. 
 
 Cross-examined. Deponent says that he and his company would give 
 them one hundred and fifty tliousand dollars for the lands above referred 
 to. He further stated, that the company consisted of himself, his brother, 
 O. K. Freeman, Mr. Samuel K. Hodges, and Colonel Seaborn Jones. 
 Deponent was in Tallassee on the 28th of August, and understood a Jiego- 
 tiation was going on for making a contract for the land, bur he did not make 
 his proposition to General Jesup or Colonel Campbell. Dej)onent did not 
 see the money ])aid at all ; thinks there wei-e about two hundred Indians in 
 the scjuaie, at tlie time of the meeting referred to in his answers to the 
 direct investigation. The Indians disperssd immediately after his inter- 
 ])reter told him they had refused to take the money. Is not certain whethci* 
 General Jcsup or Colonel Campbell was present, but thinks Captain 
 Page was. The interpreter refeired to is a slave. 
 
 Re-examined. States that, from his knowledge of tlie Indians, there 
 were few, if any, of the Indians from the up[)er town, in McHenry's dis- 
 trict, aboutTallassee, or about thecamps, when thenegotiation wasgoing un. 
 He states that between one-iialf and three-foui'ths of the Indians he saw 
 about Tallassee were from the Tuckabatchee town, atid those below it ; he 
 does not know where the others were from. 
 
 GEORGE CLOUGil. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me, this I6th day of November, 1836. 
 
 WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 
 
 Julian S. Devereux, another witness for the counter-memorialists, 
 deposes and says: I understand very little of the Indian lattguage ; I was 
 at the s(piare at 0[)otlie Volioln's camp, on the day that the Indians set out 
 for Arkansas. Tuckabatchee Micco, and other Indians, were there ; the 
 white men were oi'deied to go away by a United States officer, unless 
 they had business, I told the otficer (who I think was Captain or Lieu- 
 tenant Lauderdale) that I could not know wiiether I had business, unless I 
 could be informed what the Indians were assembled tiiere for. I was first 
 told that they were going to enioll tlie names of Indians to g(» to Floi-ida, 
 and I was told also that they were going to pay the annuity to the Indians. 
 I saw them call U[> two or three Indians, w liose lands myself atid Mr, 
 Thompson had purchased. I theii rose, and told them that, if they were 
 going t(» pay Ihose Indians any money for their lands, I wisised thesn fo ask 
 them if they had not sold to us. Dubois tliets got up and said it would take 
 
70 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 a week to get (liroii^Ii the hu^ine'-s ; and I)- went off one way. and Tiicka- 
 lialcliee Micro juiollier, and tlie IndLiiis gi-nerallv dis|)er-sed. Tiickabatcliee 
 Micco liad bank notes in liis hat: hou nuich there was I am nnahle to 
 state. I wast(dd hy some |iei-.son, whom I took ;o be a Unitrd States 
 ollicer, that the Indians were assembh'd thereto be paid for their land. ( 
 was also inlormetl tliat the ollicer above alluded to was named Landeidalc. 
 Mr. Ed\\ai«I llanrick was |irt'sent at tlic time ami place above mer)tione<l, 
 and was engaged in maki?ig calnilations tn see how much each Indian was 
 cntithd to out of the money. It was late in tlie evening : the wagons of 
 th." emigiating party had starte<l. I remained till dark, and saw no nn)iiev' 
 paid to the Indians. I am interested in eighteen re>er'ves, which have 
 been inai ked on the books lor reversal; but the purchases above alluded to 
 were made subseijuent to the sairl reversal, before the coniract between 
 General Watson and others, atnl the Indian chiefs. 
 
 JULIAN S. UEVEUKUX. 
 
 Saoiii to and subscribed before me, this iClh day of November, 18S6. 
 
 WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, X P. 
 
 Major 'I'homas J. Abbott, another witjiess for the rounter-memoiialists, 
 deposes and says : 1 was served with notices on the 29th of August last, at 
 Tallassee, a ropy of which notices is hereunlo annexed. Tiie first no- 
 tice was signed by General Watson and olliers; and w h<'n it was served on 
 nic, I |-e|)lied that I could not recognise tin' au(ht)rity of those individuals, 
 but if they would bring an order IVom the pioper autiioi'ity 1 sliould ie- 
 sjject it. I was then served witii l!ie other notice or order from General 
 Jesiip, which I obeyed. At the time the notices were served, 1 was en- 
 gaged in reitif'ying contracts which had been marked for reversal, and to 
 which the pi-evious puichasvrs were about to make a je|in(|uishment in 
 writing; and in which class of cases I was authuriz<Ml by my insti'uctions 
 to certify. 'I'here was at that time before me a rase of the above character, 
 and I understood theie weie a nund)er cd' other cases thai were coming be- 
 iore me of the same kind: tlu'i-e were a number of Indians as well as wliite 
 persons j)resent : lite rocnn was large, antl much crowded. Some time after 
 *l)<' making of tlie large contract, Jim Boy came belo»e me for the purjjosc 
 o! idiMitifying an Indiaji ; when he was asked by some person how he came 
 to sell so fnuch land ? he rejdied. that if he had done so, he did not do it 
 knovsingly, and tliat he had applied to have his name erased fi-oin the in- 
 strument, and !iad been iidoiined tliat it had been doti(\ This conversa- 
 tir)n was '-ar-ried on thn'Ugh an intei'preter — I thitd<. David Barnard. Jin» 
 B'>y understands the English language ])relty well ; but I do not think 
 sulliciently well to understaml so coinpiicrated an instrument as the con- 
 tract, if it was read to him in the words in which it is written. 
 
 M^jor Abbott contimuMl : Opothe Yoholo. 'ruckal)atchee Miccf», Mad 
 Blue, and IJltle Doctoi". ai-«' an)ong tiie ninety principal chiefs, as recog- 
 niscil liy the fi-eaty, as belonging to t!ie nation and belonging to the Tnck- 
 abatchee town. 
 
 He has always considered that Neah Micco, Opotlie Yoholo, and 'I'nsk- 
 rnawhaw jios^ess the mo^t infliuMice among the |)eople of the Creek nation, 
 ami that each other chief having a location of a mile sipiaie iindei" tiic 
 treaty, forty-one (4 1)of wliich ciiiels, by a reference to the register of lo- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 71 
 
 cation, appear to be in McHenry's districf, arc upon an cqnalify in point 
 of grade and rank, and, so Car as lie knows, in point ofantliority. Major 
 Abbott lias resided among tbe Creek Indians since 1832; btit is un- 
 acquainted as ro tiie extent of the authority of the principal chiefs. He 
 considered Tuskenawhaw and Opothe Yoholo as possessing more per- 
 sonal influence than any other chiefs of the town. But as to their legal 
 autliority he knows not. Twenty of tlie said ninety chiefs are to be found 
 enrolled on the register, as belojiging to the Tuckabatchee town. The 
 interlineation of the words ''among the ninety'* "as recognised by tbe 
 treaty" "as belonging to the nation" is admitied. 
 
 THOMAS J. ABBOTT. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me, this I6tli November, 1836. 
 
 WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 
 
 WildridgeTliompson.a witness for the counter-memorialists, deposethand 
 saitli : That a short time after the contract with Watson and others was 
 executed, through David Barnard, an intelligent half-breed, who understands 
 the Creek and English languages, (considered, also, in his neighborhood, 
 a correct and faithful interpretei-.) held a conversation with Jim Boy, 
 who stated that he had signed tlie contract, but at the time he did 
 so, he did not understand that he was selling his [)eople's lands and 
 after he became to understand it, he said that he applied to Wm. Walker, 
 of Macon county, (alluding, in the understanding of witness, to William 
 Walker, one of the j)aj'ties to the contract,) to have his name erased, or 
 taker) off of the contract, and stated that he was told by Walker that he 
 would take bis name oft", and afterwards that NValkerhad told liiu) that he 
 bad done so. He also, Thompson, stated that he had asked Jim Boy, 
 tlii'ougfj the same interpi-eter, whether his peoj»le had authorized him to 
 sell* heir lands. He told him that they had not: and that he has since conversed 
 througii iiiterpreters, in whom he had coniidence, with a good many Indi- 
 ans of the Tuckabatchee and Jim Coy's town, wliose lands were included in 
 tliis contract, who stated that they had not autliorized their chiefs to sell 
 tiieir lands, and that, when they wanted to sell them, they would sell 
 them themselves. Mr. Tiiompson (witness) says that he is interested in 
 some eighteen contracts marked for reversal, and included in the contracts 
 which were purchased subsequent to their being marked for reversal. 
 
 Witness, from his knowledge of the country in Jim Boy*stown, believes 
 the iialf sections of that town to be worth, on an avei-age, a thousand dol- 
 lars each. Witness has resiiled in the Creek country since 1830, and is 
 acquainted with the quality of the aforesaid lands. 
 
 WILDRIDGE C. THOMPSON. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 16th day of Novemiier. 1836. 
 
 WILLJAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 
 
 Job Taylor, a witness on behalf of the memorial for the contract, de- 
 posetli as follows : That he received a short time after a poi-tion of the emi- 
 grating party left tlieir camps, from Winowva. the chief of the Cliotok-saufk 
 town, included within lln; district of Dr. McHenry, between five and ten 
 th(?usand dollars, and was directed to pay tiic same over to the indivi<Iual 
 Indians of said town, which he did. The sliare of each indiat! amounted 
 to SI^27 50. Deponent understood from WinoNvva that it was a part of 
 
72 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 the money reci'ived for the lands to Watson, Ilaniick, and others. The 
 number of Indians paid was, as nea!- as the dejionent lerollects, between 
 thirty-seven and thirty-eight. Deponent was acting as the agent of the 
 emigrating party. Witness has umlerstuoii that the same parties wlio ma«Ic 
 the contract, were interested in the emigrating contract: he is interested in 
 some forty or forty-five contracts marUeil foi- reversal. Tiiei'e is no un- 
 dei'standitig between this (K'ponent and any of the parties to said contract, 
 that his chiiins shouhl he arranged. 
 
 Witness has heaid some of the parties observe t\\;\t many of the con- 
 tracts would be atnicably arranged. Deponent knows that Walker and 
 AVatson are interested in contracts which are marked for reversal, on the 
 gi-()iHi(l thai (lie rigiit Indian was j)ersonated. V»itness believes that must 
 of his contracts are niaiked lor reveisal on the same grounds. Deponent 
 does not know that in any of the contracts of Watst)n or A^aiker the 
 wrong Indian was intioduced, but believes the agent thought that was the 
 case. M itness does not kn»)W' whether ^^ are, Dougherty, in. Co. have 
 any contiacts marked for reversal on that ground. Witness went to Co- 
 lumbus, in part to make some airangement for his contracts marked for re- 
 veisal, but he had other business thei-e. lie made the apjilication to the 
 jtarties interested. I'lirough the medium of others, he understood that the 
 claims generally would be amicably arranged, and that he might rest sat- 
 isfied, uv somelhiMg to that amount. Witness says that from wliat passed 
 between him and General Watson, at Taliassee, the day after the contract 
 was signed, he believed his interests would be resj;ected on the same 
 jjiinciple that others would. 
 
 JOB TAYLOR. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 16th day of November, 1836. 
 
 JULIAN S. DEVERELX, J. P. 
 
 Alabama, 1 
 
 Jluain I'inintii. J 
 
 I. William M. Chapman, a justice of the peace, in and for tlie county 
 and State aforesaid, do hei-eby certify, that I proceeded, on the l6th day of 
 November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty- 
 six, to take the aforesaid depositions, with the exception of those of Mr. 
 Job Taylor, at the house of John Guin. in said county and State : and I 
 hereby certify that the said witnesses signed tiie said (le[)ositioiis w ith their 
 own proper hands, and that Ihcy and each of them were duly sworn by 
 me to tlie truth of the same. 
 
 Given under inv hand and seal tliis 17th of November, 1836. 
 
 WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 
 
 I 
 
 Taixassee, Alabama, 
 
 Jlugust^g, 1836. 
 Sin : You will |)lease take notice, the undersigned and company have 
 entere<l into and close<l a contract with the United States and tlie Ci-eek 
 Indians, within the district known as Di-. McHenry's district, whereby we 
 have purchased and obtaitied the entire [right] of all the Indians to all 
 disputed claims, as well as those yet open and never sold ; all undei* tlie 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 73 
 
 sanction and approval of tl)e commanding general of the Soutliern army. 
 You will, therefore, please desist or decline any further certifying without 
 our consent. Respectfully, 
 
 J. C. WATSON, 
 EDWARD HAN RICK, 
 PETER C. HARRIS. 
 Major Thomas J. Abbott, 
 
 Certifying agent. 
 
 Headquarters, Army United States, 
 
 Tallnssec, Jlngust 29, 1836. 
 Sir : The chiefs of the Creek nation having disposed of their disputed 
 land claims to Messi's. Watson, Walker, Hanrick, and others, for the sum 
 of seventy-five thousand dollais, suhject to the ratification of the Presi- 
 dent, no cases of that description will be certified after the receipt of 
 this order. 
 
 THOS. s. jesup, 
 
 Major General S. Armtj. 
 Maj. T. J. Abbott, 
 
 Certifying agent. 
 
 State of Alabama, ") 
 
 Macon County. J 
 Deposition of Thomas S. Woodward, a witness in the matter of the mem- 
 orial and counter-memorial of James C. Watson, James S. Calhoun and 
 others, depending before Thomas H. Crawford and Alfred Balch, com- 
 missioners, taken befoie Abraham B. Jackson, justice of the peace, at 
 Youngblood's tavern, in the town of Tuskegee, Macon county, on Mon- 
 day the 21st of November, 1836, between the hours of 12 a. m., and 5 p. 
 m., in conformity with an order of said commissioners. 
 
 Tiie said witness being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, as follows : I 
 have seen Jim Boy frequently since the making of the large contract be- 
 tween General Watson and others atid the Indian chiefs, and on tlie march 
 to Florida and at Appalachicola I conversed with him about said contract, 
 and he informed me that he understood the said contract as including all the 
 disputed lands in his town ; that lie had received seven thousand five bundled 
 dollars, n'^ tliv' iH'oportion which his town was entitled to, out of the money 
 j»ai<] by said Watson and others. Jim Boy also requested me to tell his peo- 
 })lenot to listen to persons who should come among them for the purpose of 
 making them <liscontented with said conti*act, and that he would take care 
 of their money, and would keep it for them until they quit the country ; and 
 the reason why he had not paid it to them was, that he knew that the officers 
 would take it away from them. I also know that tiie Indians in Jim Boy's 
 town have received other large sums of money foi* lands in said town, the 
 contracts for which lands have been marked for reversal, and which the In- 
 dians do not consider as fraudulent cowtracts ; and I consider the money 
 which has been previously paid to said town for lands, together with the 
 proportion received by Jim Boy out of the money paid by Watson and 
 
74 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 others, as a fair equivalent for the lands in said town, in the way that In- 
 dian lands have usually sold ; and I am well acquainted w ith the (jualiiy of 
 the lands iti said tow ti. I nlso know that a lai-£^e piojioition <»(' the Indians 
 hclunging to Jim Boy's town weie present when the negotiation of said 
 contract was goin,^ on, including all the principal men of said town. I was 
 ])resent at the time the contract was closed, and heard Julian b. Dmereux 
 say, that if they would pay him a cei-tain amount, (whicli amount I <lo not 
 recollect,) he would l)e in favor of the contract : hut if they would not j)ay 
 him, he would have it broken up if he could. 1 am )n)t a member of the 
 compatiy who njade the said cotitrart, noi* inteiested in the same: hut am 
 interested in several tracts of latnl, theconti-acts for which had been marked 
 for reversal previous to the execution of said contract, hut which I exjiect 
 to be able to settle with said company ; I am also well ac«|uaiiited with 
 the common Indians in Jim Boy's town, and know thiit they look nj) to 
 him, and are governed by him in most in^ilances, in the transaction of 
 business. 
 
 Questions by the counsel of Robert Ware, \>'illian» Dougherty, James S. 
 Calhoun, and Truman Lumson, to witness : 
 
 Have you any contracts in Dr. McHeni-y's district marked for reversal? 
 
 Answer. That he has an inter-est in some contracts marked for reversal. 
 
 Question as above. Are you not a brother-in-law to Geiiei-al James C. 
 Watson? 
 
 Answer. 'J'hat he is the brother in law of Watson. 
 
 Question as above. Had you not a direct or indirect intei-est in the 
 said contract at the time it was first made, or subsequently thereto ? 
 
 Answer. I had not any ititerest, neither have 1 any at this time, noi* 
 have I had. 
 
 Question as above. Have you not pledged yourself to snj)port this con- 
 tract as far as in your |)ower ? 
 
 Answer. That I have not pledged myself to support said contract, but 
 believe it to be the best arrangement for both whites and Indians that 
 could be made. 
 
 Question as above. Have you not received satisfactory assurances, or 
 some understanding, that youi- claims should he respected in said contract ? 
 
 Answer. That 1 have leceived no satisfactory assui-ances that my claims 
 should be respected nn)re than the claims of other persons : that if I can 
 pi'ove my claims just and honest, they will be res])ected ; that said con- 
 Tractoi-s have never- made any pledges to this witness, no farther- than he 
 has heard the member-s of said conrpany say that all just claims should be 
 respected. 
 
 Question as above. Do you believe Gener-al Daniel McDougald a j)ar- 
 ty to said conti-act ? This rjuestion ohjecteil to by tlie opposite counsel. 
 
 Answer-. That he believes him as likely to be a j)aity as any pvrson 
 whose name is not inser-ted in said contract. 
 
 Question as above. Have you nut r-eceived divers communications vei-- 
 bal or- written, fr-cnn General Watson, oi- some of the comj)any of said con- 
 tract, since the matter came belbr-e tin*, cornmissicmers ? 
 
 Answer. I do not recollect of r-eceiving arry wr-itten communications 
 fi-om the said ccnnjrany, birt have IVerpiently been iii conijrany witli Watson, 
 Harris, ami Peahody. since saiil contract was made, and have heard them 
 conver-se irr r-elatif)n to said contract. 
 
 Question as above. What was the pui-poi-t of said conversation ? 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 75 
 
 Answer. That said Watson, Harris, and Peabody observed, that said 
 contract was a just and fair one ; tliat tiie proposition was first made by 
 tlie ( hiefs and General Jesnj) to enter into said contract; and that the 
 proposition was not made by the said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, to the 
 Indians. 
 
 Question as above. Ai'e not some of the pai-ties to the contract gener- 
 ally understood to be those j)ersons who have fraudulently personated tlie 
 right Indian before the certifying agent, or caused them to be so person- 
 ated ? Question objected to by opj)osite counsel. 
 
 Answer. 1 do not understand that the parties are generally understood 
 to have personated Indians. It will be found on the books of the investi- 
 gating agents that contracts certified to Peaboby & Co. have been reversed. 
 
 THOMAS S. WOODWARD. 
 
 Taken, subscribed, and sworn to before me, this 2 1st day of November, 
 1836. 
 
 ABRAHAM B. JACKSON, J. F. 
 
 Dejjosition of Thomas S. Woodward, continued : 
 
 Question as above. Were you not in consultation with the parties to 
 said contract, upon the subject of said contract, previous to the same being 
 closed ? 
 
 Answer. That he has been in company with said individuals when the 
 said contract was the subject of conversation. 
 
 Question as above, liid you not insist that you should be a paity to 
 said contract belbre it was consummated? 
 
 Answer. I did not; but, after tlie contract was made, I made applica- 
 tion ibr an interest, but was refused an interest, because I would not ad- 
 vance the sum of money required. 
 
 Question as abo\e. Do you not know tiiat the annuity money to be 
 paid to the Indians was pledged for the refunding of the money if said 
 contract is not confirmed? 
 
 Answer. I do not; but I heard one of the company to said contract 
 say that, if the same was not confirmed, they would lose their money, if 
 Government did not pay it to them. 
 
 Question as above Weieyou in Hurlin's tavern, in the town of Tal- 
 las.see, in consultation with the purchasers above mentioned, in examining 
 books, the price to be given foi' said lands, or any other matters relating 
 to said c(nitract previous to its execution ? 
 
 Answer. That he was in Hurlin's tavern, in company with the members 
 of said contract, at the lime they wei-e examining liogan's list of reversed 
 cases; they were consulting as to the pi-ice they shotild give to said Indians 
 foi* said lands, and said purchasers would occasionally ask witness the 
 value of certain tracts of land. 
 
 Question by counsel for Watson and others: 
 
 Do you know tliat General Daniel McDougald is a party to said con- 
 tract ? ' 
 
 Answer, 'i'hat he does not. 
 
 THOMAS S. WOODWARD. 
 
 Taken, subscribed, and swon: to, before me this 21st day of November, 
 
 1 n r* /? 
 
 A. B.JACKSON, J. P. 
 
76 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Deposition of Tolm Page, a witness on the part of James C. Watson and 
 otlici's, in tlio case of a conti'act between tliem and tlie ofticers of tlie 
 Goveininent and certain chiefs of the Creek nation. 
 
 I was at Tallassce in the month of August last, when General Jesup, 
 in behalf of United States, and ceitain cliiefs of the Upj)er Creeivs, made 
 a contract with James C. Watson and others, for selling the disputed or 
 fraudulent claiinH in Di-. Henry's disttict. This contract was several 
 days under consiileratioti. On the 28tli instant, if my memory serves me, 
 it was finally concluded. I saw the money paid by the parties; and know 
 that the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars was the price to be |)aid : 
 one-half in cash, and a note, at four months, for the balance. I received 
 the note and money ; and was directed by Colofiel John A. Campbell, 
 counsel employed by General Jesup on the part of United States, to pay 
 it to the Indians whenever they assured me that they were ready to re- 
 ceive it on the terms of the contract, which I was directed to ascei-tain 
 were understood by them. 1 proceeded to ihe square where tlie Indians 
 met to do their business, when Opothe Yoholo stated to me that Jim 
 Boy had gone home to consult his people on the subject, and would return 
 the next day ; and he would inform me when he retuined. I letired to 
 Tallassee; and the next day oi" day after, I do not recollect delinitely 
 which, he, Opothe Yoholo, sent J'nr me, and said that they were ready 
 to receive the money. I proceeded to the scjuare; and stated to tlicm that 
 I had c«)mc to |)ay over the money for their lands on the contract. I'iic 
 Indians were in council ; and I retjuested them to say, after I had fully 
 ex|)lained to them the object and consideration, that if any of them had 
 any objections then to state it, and if there was none I should proceed to 
 to pay it out. The chiefs and their people consulted about one hour 
 longer, and then gave me their answei- : that they were ready to receive 
 the money : that there weie no objections ; and every thing was fully 
 understood by them. I was directed by Mr. Cam[)bell, their attorney, to 
 make tiiese statements fully, that thei-e sliould be no dilUculty or 
 misunderstanding on this subject, befoi-e I paid the money to them. The 
 subject of the note I likewise ex|)lained ; and told them it was good, and 
 would he paid. I had every reason to believe that the chiefs and Indiatis 
 generally understood the contract, as they were several days in council 
 on this subject. 
 
 [ believe tlint the genei-al custom of transacting business among the In- 
 dians was followed Ih this instance — as I have for six years ti-ansac:ted it 
 with them; and, in this manner, through their chiefs, with the consent of 
 their people. 
 
 I conceive that Opothe Yoholo has more powci' than any chief in the 
 nation among the Upper Creeks; and believe that the Govei-nmeni so 
 consider him. Many of the chiefs of the Upper Creeks were present, 
 and marjy of their peo[)Ie. 
 
 The Indians sent for me while at Wetumkce, about twenty-five miles 
 west of Tallassee, when the contract was made, for the ()ui'[)ose of dis- 
 tributing the money. I did rM)t do so ; and stated to them 1 did not 
 know how this money was to be divided. I know of no offer being made 
 to Cieneral Jesuj), or to the Iinlians, of a larger sum than tlie one named 
 in the contr-act. The business of the Irulians is managed by the chiefs in 
 council : the consent of the individuals ai'c ascertained by llie chiefs; and 
 1 understood that this coriberit was fully obtained iir the matter of this 
 
 I 
 
[ Doc. INTo. 274. ] 77 
 
 contract : and I know of no better mode of settling the land claims, in (lie 
 short time allowed by Getieral Jesiip, than the one in which it was done. 
 
 The matter of the contract was not kept a secret. As far as my knowl- 
 edge extends it was known that the Indians were making a bargain with 
 the Government and some persons foi* settling their disputed claims for 
 some time before it was finally brought to a close. The names to the 
 contract are chiefs or principal men among the Upper Creeks. 
 
 Cross-examined. 
 
 1st. Was the foregoing proposition made by the chiefs to the purchasers, 
 or the purchasers to the chiefs r 
 
 Answer. I do not know. 
 
 2d. Do you know any thing of the consent of the Indians to this con- 
 tract but from the report of the chiefs to you ? 
 
 Answer. I do not. 
 
 3d. Do you know that the Indians understood the contract but from the 
 repoi-t of the ciiiefs ? 
 
 Answer. I do not. 
 
 4th. Were there any others except the Indians of the Tuckabardiee 
 town and Jim Boy's town present at the time spoken of in the direct in- 
 terrogatories ? 
 
 Answei*. There were some others. 
 
 5th. Did yon receive an answer to your letter of the 9th of May, 1836, 
 to the Secretary of War stating 0[)othe Yoholo's proposition ? 
 
 Answer. I believe that I received, but cannot find, the answer. 
 
 6th. Whether, from the answer to your letter of the 9th of May, you 
 were to carry into effect said propositions ? 
 
 Answer. I was authorized or directed to carry said proposition into 
 effect, but cannot say which at this time. 
 
 Re-examined by the purchasers. 
 
 1st. Did not the circumstances of the war, with the orders of General 
 Jesup foi' the speedy removal of the Indians, thereafter render it imprac- 
 ticable to carry into etfect the proposition of Opothe Yoholo ? 
 
 Answer, it was impracticable. 
 
 2d. Did not the Indians insist upon a settlement of their land business 
 in this country j)revious to their removal West ? 
 
 Answer. Many of them app!ie<l to me frequently, and insisted upon it. 
 
 3d. Were not all certificates of land, by your order, to be closed on the 
 25th of August, 1836: and do you know that the agents liad any authority 
 to certify after that time ? 
 
 Answer. They were ordered to be closed at that time; and I know of 
 no authority aftei'wards ? 
 
 4tii. Were you not instructed to explain, in open council to the Indians 
 generally, the contract; and ascertain whether there were ajiy objections 
 to it ? 
 
 Answer. I was so instructed by Colonel Campbell, and did so. 
 
 5tli. At the time of ])aying ovci" the mosiey in open council, did you not 
 make an appeal to the common Indians interested, and state to them, that 
 if there was any objection on their part to the consummation of the con- 
 tract, to make it known then, as the business was then to be closed ? 
 
 Answer. I did so to the common Indians and chiefs present, and no ob- 
 jection was made. 
 
78 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 Gill. Wa.s it lint agreed by all the Indians present, that the money should 
 be j)aid to the ( liiels ? 
 
 Answer. I cannot say that all ihc Indians gave tiicir assent. 
 
 rth. Was it not understood by all, and did any one dissent ? 
 
 Answer. As far as I nndej'stood or my knowledge extends, it was under- 
 stood by all (M'esent, and Tionc dissented. 
 
 8tli. Was nut a large Jiund)er of Indians j)resent witnessing the pay. 
 nient of the money, and was tiie money not paid at the s(piai'e? 
 
 Answer. 'l'hei-c was a large nnmbt'i' of Itulians present, a!id I stepped 
 aside to evade the crowd, about live steps, to a large log, and pai<i out the 
 money pid»licly to llie chiefs. 
 
 9th. Was there not a large number of jiei-sons at that time round about 
 Tallassee when the contract was made and arianged r 
 
 Answer. 'I'here was. 
 
 10th. Was not the contract a subject of i)ublic notorie y [)revious to its 
 consummation ? 
 
 Answei'. So far as I know there was no seci-ecy about it. 
 
 1 1 til. Do vou kn(»w of any Jinfairness or management on tiie pait of either 
 party in arranging the contract i* 
 
 Answer. 1 do not. 
 
 12th. Did you know of ai-.y other persons at that time other than those 
 there who took the contract that would have taken said contract ? 
 
 Answer. I do not know. 
 
 13th. What members to this contract aic embraced in the contract for 
 emigrating the Indians, and name them ? 
 
 Answer. As fai' as I know Watson, Walker, and Hanrick. 
 
 14tli. Arc the !iames of J(d)n Peabody and Peter C. Harris named in 
 the contract for emigrating the Indians? 
 
 Answer. They are not. 
 
 Re-examined by defendants. 
 
 1st. Were Opothle Y(diolo and Jim Boy's people fiiendly and joined 
 themselves to the whites in |)utting down the hostile Indians ? 
 
 Answer. They manifested themselves friendly, and joined the whites 
 against the hostile Indians. 
 
 2d. Was it in the power of General Jesup, after his arri\al at I'uske- 
 gce, to visit Tuckabatchee and Jim Boy's town, in safety, at any time ? 
 
 Answer. It was in his power, with a j)roper escort. 
 
 3d. When the Indians are assembled in council, have the common In- 
 dians any voire in council ? 
 
 Answer. Tiie business is generally done through the chiefs. 
 
 4th. How long after you made the said explanation to the council the 
 day you paid the money, did you receive the answer ? 
 
 Answer. About one hour. 
 
 5th. Did you receive the answer fi-om the chiefs ? 
 
 Answer. Yes. 
 
 6tli. Did you j)ay any money to any common Indian ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 7tli. Did you receive any answer from any common Indian ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 8th. Did you pay the money to the chiefs who signed the recei[)t on the 
 contract ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. 3 79 
 
 Re-examined by plaintiffs' purchasers. 
 
 1st. During the one hour you said you explained the contract and the 
 time you obtained the answer, did tiie Indians retire from tiie square ? 
 
 Answer. No. 
 
 £d. Did you not understand tliem, during that time, consulting their peo- 
 j)le to know if there was not a general assent to the conti'act and tlie pay- 
 ment of the money ? 
 
 Answer. They were all in the sfjuai-e consulting each other, and Isiip- 
 j)ose tiiey were. 
 
 5d, liow many Indians were in attendance and in the vicinity of Tal- 
 lassee, attending on tlie contract ? 
 
 Answei*. 'I'liree or four thousand were about the camp, three or four 
 miles from Tallassec. 
 
 JOHN PAGE, 
 Capt. Sitpt. Creeks. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 51h of December. 18S6. 
 
 ENOCH JOHNSON, J, P. 
 
 of Russell county, Ala. 
 
 The foregoing examination taken by consent, and it is agreed Captain 
 Page sliould send to tiie counsel a copy of the letter of the Secretary of 
 War, in answer to his of the 9th of May, 1836, if he should be able to 
 find it. 
 
 SEABORN JONES, 
 Att 'y for Ware, Dougherty, ^" Co. 
 THOMAS G. GORDON, 
 Att 'y for James S. Calhoun. 
 
 J. C. WATSON, 
 
 For self and others. 
 
 NOVEMBEK 30, 1836. 
 
 Sir : You are hereby notified that on Saturday next, between the 
 hours of (10) ten a.m. and (4) four p. m.. at F(»rt Mitchell, Russell 
 coimty, the testimony of Captain John Page will be taken on tlie 
 jtai't of the niemojialists, in the matter of the memorial of James C. 
 Watsorj and others, and counter-memorial of James S. Calhoun, and 
 Ware, Dougherty, and others, |)en(ling before Thomas H. Ciawford 
 and Alfied Balch, Esquires, commissioners, he, when and Mhereyoucari 
 attend if you think jjroper. 
 
 GEO. GOLDSWAITE, 
 AtVy for memorialists. 
 
 To In WIN Lawsox. 
 
 State of Alabama, ") 
 try. j 
 
 Tallapoosa county, j 
 
 Personally ap{)eared before me, John C Holman, a justice of the peace 
 in and for the county aforesaid, George Stone, who. after being duly 
 sworn, deposeth and saith that he, the said Stone, in his own proper per- 
 son, did, on the 30th of November last, place in the hands and serve upon 
 
80 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Irwiti Lfwvson, in Iiis own jjroper person, an original notice, (»f wliicli the 
 wiiliiii is Ji true and exiict copy. 
 
 GEO. STONE. 
 Sworn and subscribed to before nje this 1st (lav of Derember, A.D. 1836. 
 
 JOllN C. UOLMAN, ./. P. 
 
 It is agrc'od tliat the time of taking Captain Page's testimony be post- 
 j)()iie(l until Monday next, and that it be taken between the hours of nine 
 and four o'clock of that day — 3d December, 1836. 
 
 SEABORN JONES. 
 ^tt -y for Ware, Dougherty, Sf Co. 
 J. C. WATSON, 
 
 For self and others. 
 
 To Thomas II. Crawford and ./llfrcd Batch, Esqs., commissioners, ^-c. 
 
 State OF Alabama, Macon county. 
 The memoiial of Irwin Lawson, James S. Calhoun, and others, respect- 
 fully sheweth that they have severally been engaged in the purchase of 
 Indian locations or reservations in the territory ceded by the Creek tribe 
 of Inilians to the United States, by a ti-eaty made and concluded on the 
 twenty-f(»ui-th day of March, one ihousand eight hundied and thiity-two, 
 and subseciuently ratified in due foi-ui by the said United States, and which 
 said locations ui- reservations, your memoi-ialists are ativised, and believe, 
 the said Indians had a right to sell and dispose of by saiil treaty, under 
 certain regulations and restrictions j)rescribed by tlie Pi-esident of the 
 United States. And your memorialists firr-ther represent, that these arrd 
 certain locations, situated in what is termed McIIerri'y's district, whicli 
 var-ious individirals fraudulently, wickeilly, and vNi'h intent to deceive, did 
 ])rocure to be certilied to therrr by the said Robert W. McIIerrr-y, who was 
 iherr a cer-tifying agent, duly ai»p('intfd by the Pr-esident of the United 
 Stales ; the said irrdividuals having never in anywise contracted for- or 
 ])ur'cht"se(l the same of the r-eal and l)ona fnle owner-s ther'eof, but ha\ irrg 
 combined and corrfederated with certain other evil-disposed persorrs, to wit : 
 certain Indians did cause and procure them to go befur-e the said certify, 
 iug agent, and |)er'S(inate and ( lairn the name (d' the tr-uc holders of said 
 tracts of land. By reason wiier-t-of, the sairl Rob't W. McHenr-y, being de- 
 ceived and imposed n|)on as to the identity of said Indians, did certily the 
 said contracts for the corrsideratiorr of the President of the United States, 
 and as made by the true ln)lder's thereof. And your memorialists aver, 
 that relying ujion the integrity and justice of the Guver-nmerrt, and believ- 
 ing that countenance would not be given to such gross frauds jir'actised 
 iri)on individuals, tliat the Government weir boirnd to pr-otect fr-onr imposi- 
 tion by the snlemn obligations (d" a tr-caty, tiiey became pirr'chaser-s of 
 many and various locations iiiade to Indians withirr said distr'ict, fr-om the 
 trire holders thereof, many of which had been stolen, but which had been 
 nrar ked for* reversal by the agents of the United States. Your- memorial- 
 ists woirld further show Ihat they have been arlvised, arrd ver'ily believe, 
 that orr *<v about the 28th day of Airgirst, A. O., 1856. an instrurrrent of 
 writing, called an indenture, hut which, to your memorialists, is verily a 
 iiondescr-ipt, was made between the United States of America of the first 
 part, Opolhe Yoholo, Mad-Blue, Tuckabatchee Micco, Little Doc- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 81 
 
 tfii', Tusteiuiggo Cliopco, styling tliemselves cliiefs of the Creek tribe 
 of Indians, of the second ])art ; ant! James C Watson, Edvvai'd Hanrick, 
 William Walker- & Co., Peter C, Hai-ris. and Joiin Peabody, of'tlie thii-d 
 part. By wliicli said instrtuncnt of writing, it would seem to appear, that 
 tlie said Indians did agree and did suppose to remise, release, and forever 
 quit claim, &c., to the said Watson and others, of all the lands lying in 
 McIIetjry's district, and iticluded in the number alleged to have been fraudu- 
 lently certified, and which had formed the subject of contest before the 
 agents of tlie United States ; and also a privilege, amounting to the right 
 of pre-em[)tion, to take all the unsold lands, and those belonging to 
 Indians w!io had died subsequent to tiieii* locations, and who had n(»t sold, 
 for the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars — one half to he [»aid in cash 
 at the time the said instrument of wiiting was made, and the otlier half 
 to be paid in four months at Fort Gibson, in the State of Arkansas : all 
 which said proceedings were sanctioned by the said Major General Jesup, 
 on the same day. Your memorialists are free to confess that they are at a 
 loss to understand the meaning of this novel and singular instrument. But 
 they are still more at a loss to determine iiow the United States have been 
 brought to be ma<ie a party to this instrument. But believing that said in- 
 strument was made in violation of tiie vested rights of individuals, and 
 that the same is contrary to tlie treaty, and consequently illegal and void, 
 your memorialists crave your attetitioii. 
 
 Ist. Accoiding to the treaty of tiie 24th March, 1832, the Creek tribe 
 rede to the United States ail their lands east of the Mississippi river; 
 and the United States, among other things, allow to ninety principal 
 chiefs one section of land each, and to eacli head of a Creek family 
 one half section each ; wliich said tracts of land are reserved fronj sale 
 foi* their use, for the term of five yeais, unless sooner disposed of by 
 tliem. It is further provided by said treaty '' that these tracts may 
 be conveyed by the persons selecting tiie same to any other persons, 
 for a fair consideration, in such manner as the President may direct." 
 Prior to said treaty, your memorialists admit that all the lands in the 
 Ci'eek tei'ritory weie !)eld in comnion; but they insist tliat, upon the execu- 
 tion of this treaty, the United States became possessed of the authority to 
 control the lands ceded by the treaty ; and the tenure by which they were 
 held was so changed, that the sections and half sections allowed to the 
 chiefs and heatis of families were held by them, under a right somewhat, 
 and for the time, imperfect; but which would ripen, after the expiration of 
 five yeais, into a perfect title in fee-simple in them and their heirs, unless 
 sooner disposed of by them, under regulations prescribed by the President 
 of the United States ; in which case, the right which they would liave had 
 to a jjatent from the United States, after the expii-ation of five years, had 
 they remained on the land, passed to the purchaser; and the United Slates 
 bound themselves to perfect a title to the purchaser, on the comj)leti(ni of 
 the payment. Under this view, which your memorialists believe to be 
 coirect in fact, in law, and in equity, they cannot but be convinced, and 
 trust that it will be consider-ed a fair ititerence, tliat the Indians had such 
 an estate under this treaty as could ju)t |)ossihiy bo divested but bv their 
 0\y.ti proper act and deed; and then only, as has already been sai(i, agripeaT 
 hly to tlie regulations prescribed by tlie President of the United States. 
 Your menioiialists ai*e then brought to this natural, and, they believe just 
 conclusion, that, although the chiefs of the tribe may, previous to the treaty, 
 6 
 
.82 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 as the rcj>iPsenlati\c.s of llic pooplc of the tribi', have had jiower tn <Ii.s- 
 jjcse (>r these lands ; \et, ii|)(>ii tlie latiCication ul" ihe treaty, lliey were 
 ceded uiir«)iidili<»iially to liie Ciiitcd States ; aiid tlu'V. eoiistqueiitly, as 
 chiel's, emild haM' ixt lai-ther < oiitrnl over l!i«in, and muid not sell litem to 
 afiy iiidixidiial \\ liale\ re. Haviirg, as be/ore stated, paited witii ail the 
 light N\hirh tluy. as a nation, liild n\ci- the lands, thry accejiti'd. as cliiels 
 and heads of laniilies, seclioris and liaUsrclinns. which it was in tiieir power 
 To convey as indivjilnals, and as individnals only* ior a t'airconsidri-ati<»n. 
 >Veie this all the aiguinenl whieii emild hi- adduced against the validity ami 
 legal I'oice t)l' this contract. > our memorialists hclieve that it would he sulfi- 
 cient to stt it aside as nothing worth in law. But tliey ad\ anee anotlier ar- 
 gument against this sale hy the nation, \>hich is noihing less than the 
 rxpress written law, jMohiltiting the sale and purchase ol lands IVom 
 Indian tribes, by any jierson or persons whomsoever, declaring all such 
 pur( liases null and void. 
 
 ir, then, it be contended that this contract was made by the chiefs, as 
 the r«'prcsentatives of the nation, we plead the art td' Congress above re- 
 ferred to in bar of its sanction, and say that the United States could alone 
 have m;ule tiie purchase. If as the agents and repiesttilativts of the in- 
 dividual leservi'es, we answer, that the individual reservees had no power 
 to delegate to others ilie right to dispose of their reservations, even if they 
 had been so disposed. 'I'he right of individual rebervees haxing been 
 granted to them by the treaty, the chiefs could imt take that which be- 
 longed to otiiers, and conve> it away, either as chiefs, (lor the treaty for- 
 bids it,) or as private individuals, (for the statutes of the land forbid it.) 
 Your memorialists j)resume that tlie grantees under this indenture, will 
 not pretemi that their claim shmdd be considered as a treaty made 
 with the nation, for that would be (ontrary to all law and the true policy 
 of the United States. It must, therefore, be h»oked upon as a contract ; 
 and, if a cimtract, it must be construed and governed by the settled atnl 
 established law.s of the land govirning contracts. Before (juitting this 
 part of the subject. }our memorialists would say that, according t<i law, 
 no contract for the sale of lands has, or can have, any binding force or 
 efticacy, unless made by the j)ai-{y entitled to convey the same, in writing, 
 or by some ])erson thereunto by him lawfully auilnnized. Aow it will 
 not be contemled that any written authority was ever given these chiefs to 
 sell the reservations belonging t(j others, and w hich are attempted to be 
 conveyed away in this instrument; and this bargain and sale, (if it be 
 such,) being deficient in this important particular, is void and of no force. 
 Mr. Canii)bell, who w as apitointed by jSlajor General Jesiip to draugfit the 
 contract for the signature ot the jiarties, was satisfied that the consent of 
 the individual reservees was necessary, before they could be bound by the 
 contract ; and, in support of this, }our memorialists would call your atten- 
 tion to this important allegation in the contract; but which is unsu|)ported 
 by the slightest shadow of proof, namely : that they '• have obtained the 
 consent of their jyeople to remise, release, and forever <juit claim to all their 
 right to these lands." Upon such an im|)ortant matter, is it not at least a 
 presumption against the contract, tliat no attempt has been made to prove 
 or support this allegation iiy legal testimony ? Your memorialists assert 
 that it cannot be proved that such consent, either verbal or written, ever 
 was given ; and they hold that, under every princi|)le of e\idence, the 
 jmi thubers under the contract are bound to prove this vital asseveration. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 83 
 
 If tlipy fail to prove if, their contract must fall to the ground. But, to 
 convince tlie comini.ssioners, so far as most of the towns iiu!u(ie(l in 
 the contract are concerned, that this consent never was given, }t»ur me- 
 ujor-ialists would i-efei- to the entry signed hy General Jesiij) on the conti-act 
 itself, that 'I'ustenugge Chi>j)co, the chief of the Tallassee town, as- 
 fserted, at the titne tlial he signed fhe contract, that lie had not ohttiiiied tiie 
 consent of his people. They offer further to prove, should the commis- 
 sioners re(piire it, that Jim Boy, who also sigm^d the contract, and \\\ui is 
 the chief of the i'liiobtiilocco town, has assei-ted that, although he signed 
 tliecoiitract, it was not ex[)!ained io him; and that iie did it without the 
 C(nisent of his peoj)lc. The other towns included in the contract, except 
 Tuckahatchee, wei'e iiot represented hy their chiefs. But admitting, for 
 the sake of ai-gumeiit, that this consent was obtained to remise, re- 
 lease, &c. : youi" memorialists take the position, that they have not so re- 
 mised, i-eleased, &c. ; that this insti-nment of writing < annot he; consti'ued 
 intt) an indenture or deed, but must be cotisidert^d a jnere contract to do 
 that w hich they allege they have obtained the consent to pej-form ; and that, 
 under this paper, really nvthing is; (Conveyed. In the assei-tion, that the 
 consent of tbe peojde of the towns in Mclit-nry's district was obtained by 
 the chiefs who signed (lie contract, it surely was the indiicement by which 
 the chiefs shniild ha^e been actirated : and sucji inducement l»eing a ma- 
 teria! fact, ouglit to he fully proved ; and how can it be ()ri>ved to tlie sat- 
 isfaction of a legal tribunal, but by some instrument or memoramlum in 
 writing, signed by the individuals giving such consent ? Suppose that a 
 reservee under the treaty shcnild not emigrate to Arkansas, (and there 
 are some who have not, and who jn-obably will not,) but should remain on 
 the land til! the expiration of five years, and an action of ejectment or 
 ti'esj)ass to try titles wei-e commenced against him by the purchasers un- 
 der tiiis contract : would not a couit of law Indd tlie puichasej-s to a proof 
 of his consent, made in wi'iting, and sigm-d by him, before they couid sus- 
 tain their action ? Surely they would. J3ut the consent alleged to have 
 been obtained by the chiefs seems to be nothing more than that the people 
 had consented to remise, release, he. tlieirown lands. And, from the phra- 
 seology of tiie coTitiMct, it cannot be implied, and it is not expi'essed, tiiat 
 they gave consent to the chiefs to i-emise, lelease, &c. This apjiears to 
 your memoi'ialists to he the fairest intei-pretation, and they submit it for 
 your consideration. But again : while upon the subject of consent, your 
 menuM-ialists would take leave fui'ther to remark, that, so far from the fact 
 of the people consenting, they are ready and willing to j)rove to the com- 
 missioners that, upon the assemliling of the Tuckal)atchee town, tiie In- 
 dians expressly declared that they had not sold their lands, and would i-e- 
 ceivein> part of the money. 
 
 2d. But should the commissioners come to the conclusion that thecliiefs, 
 as the representatives of their towns, have therightto alieirate and dispose 
 of the lands of others in which thry themselves have no interest — for it 
 must be i-ecol!ected tiiat these chiefs had, pi-evious to the date of this con- 
 tract, disposed of their own reservations in the mode piescribed by the 
 President of the United States — your memoi-ialists insist that they can 
 only alienate and convey the lands belr)tiging to such towns as were rejJiTseut- 
 ed by their chiefs, and whose chiefs signed this contract. They trust they 
 have shown, conclusively, that upon this principle, neither the Tallassee 
 towQ nor the Thlobthlocco town, although their chiefs signed the con- 
 
84 [ Doc. No. 274. | 
 
 tract, ought to lie boniid by it. The instrument itself shows that no 
 chiefs signe(-l the contract fi-oni fourteen towns which are included witliin 
 its operations ; so that, of the seventeeti towns embraced in the contract. 
 theiT is but one, to wit, Tuckabatchee, whicii can l)e aflfected by it, even 
 should you come to this conclusion. 
 
 3d. IJut your memorialists would call your attention to another ])art of 
 the contract. According to the third article or provision of the conti-act, 
 it is in express terms said, "that the money hereafter stipulated to be paid, 
 shall be paid to the Indian eutilled to the land, in the presence of the ciiief 
 and an olUrei- of the United States; and until such i)ayment be made, it 
 shall be deposited with the certifijins; agent of this district : the pavment of 
 which shall be a consummation of the c(uitract." Has this stipulation in 
 the contract been complied with, eithei* in whole or in |>3rt, by the parties 
 claiming under it ? Has the numey, in any single instance, been |)aid to 
 the Indian entitled to the laud, eiliu-r in the j)resence of an ollicer ol the 
 United States, or out of it ? Has the money been deposited with the cer- 
 tifying agent of this district ? The |)ayment of tlie UKUiey to the Indian 
 entitled to the land, in the presence of the chief and an oIBccr of tlie Uni- 
 ted States, or a dcpositeof the money with the ceitilying agent of this dis- 
 trict, being a condition precedent, the contract could not have been con- 
 sunmiated until one or the othei- had been done. That neithei- has been 
 performed, must be apparent to the commissioners ; that tliis condition pi-e- 
 cedent has not been complied with on the part of NN atsoti and wther>-, y<m 
 have ocular proof on the back of the conti-act itself; it being there shown 
 that the sum sti[)ulate(l to be paiil. to wit, S;'7,500, was paid to Opolhe 
 Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatchee Micco, Tusteniigge Chopf-o, and 
 Tusconee Uadjo, the lattei- of whom is a chief of the Fish-poiul town, 
 not included within McHenry's district, who never signed the con- 
 ti-act, and whose peoj)le were not interested therein. Your memorirdists 
 assert, without fear of contradiction, that the Indians, whose lands were 
 thus attempted to be ccjnveyed away, and who were the Indians entitled to 
 the lands, and cotisefjuently to receive the money accor-ding to the stipula- 
 tions of the contract itself, never have received one (hdlar arising fiom said 
 sale. The Indians have thus been robbed of their lands; and when a far- 
 cical sale is pretended ly made, and for a trilling sum in comparison with 
 the real value, the real owner, even then, does not receive the miserable 
 moiety to which he is entitled under the contract. 
 
 4th. The fourth article or (irovision of the contract, it seems to your 
 memorialists, is utteily contradictory of the preandile to the same instru- 
 ment. The clause to which they refer is in these words : *'thatif any 
 Indian, holding ajiy parcel of land herein conveyed, shall refuse to carry 
 into elTect the provisions of this contract, then, and in that case, a pro rata 
 allowance upon the consideration hereinafter stipulated shall be made to 
 the parties of the thii-d part, j)rrtri<i<'(/ that this consent shall be given be- 
 fore the consummation of the contract." As there is nothing to be as>cnt- 
 ed to by the Indian, rtnd as the sentence is ])eifectly unintelligible as it 
 r«)W stands, they jjresimie that the last clause of the sentence should have 
 read, " provide<l this dissent shall be given," &c. : considering it thus, 
 your memorialists would say that they have never seen a more glaring in- 
 stance of di^ingenuousness. If the consent of the Indian be necessar-y to 
 the validity of this ( untract — us your memorialists conti'iid tiiat it is. both 
 under the law and by the admissions of the contract itself — how, they would 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 85 
 
 ask, would it have been possible for six hundred and thirty Indians, whose 
 locations and whose habitations were scattered over an extent of country 
 cfjual, at least, to three thousand six hundred square miles, many of them 
 5)1(1 and infirm, wlio might have dissented, enter such dissent when the con- 
 tract was made and executed, and the money paid to the chiefs at one and 
 the same time, in a retired j)]ace, and at an howr after midniglit : Your me- 
 morialists confess that to them it requires more than human charity to give 
 such proceedings a favorable contemj)lation. But they may be told that 
 the time for the Indian to dissent was when the money was offered to him 
 in the presence of the chief and ati officer of the United States : to this 
 they answer, that such an offer has not been made ; if it has, they call upon 
 those claiming undei* the contract to produce legal evidence of tiie fact. 
 
 5th. Your memorialists would now call your attention to ti)e considera- 
 tion exjjressed in the contract. They aver that the consideration given for 
 these lands was wholly inadequate to the true value thereof. From the 
 reports of the investigating agents, tiiere are at least six hundred and thirty 
 half sections tliat are the subject of dispute, and these contain over two hun- 
 dred thousand acres of land. Now, it is a legitimate inference that these lands 
 would never have been stolen from the Indians if they had not been good 
 and valuable ; and by aiithmetical calculation you will (i]u\ that, by the con- 
 sideration expressed in the contract, but a fraction over thirty-seven cents 
 an acre was to be paid for said lands. INow your memorialists aver that 
 many of the tracts included in the contract would readily command over 
 one thousand dollars, atnl none are of less value thajj sixty-two and a half 
 cents per acre. But the commissioners are not left to vague opinion as to 
 the value of the lands. Your memorialists offei- to prove that §150,000 
 was offered for the same lands on the same day that this contract was 
 made, and befoie it was executed. Had General Jesup and his agent. 
 Colonel Campbell, acted their parts as became the vice-guardians of this 
 much-wronged people, they sui-ely would not have taken S75,000 for that 
 for which they could as easily have obtained ^'^150,000. Nay, your 
 memorialists feel assured, had Major Abbott, who was the certifying 
 agent foi* this district, been allowed by General Jesuj) to have certified to 
 conti-acts under the regulations then adopted by the President, and a copy 
 of which bad been transmitted to Geneial Jesup, that sales would have 
 been made by the individuals who were entitled to the land, and who only, 
 in their own proper persons, had a right to sell ; and tjiat an aggregate 
 sum, equal to the amount of three lumdied thousand dollars, would have 
 been received by the rightful ownei's, whom these contractois are now 
 seeking to defraud out of their just rights. One of the regulations adopt- 
 ed by the Pi*esident was, that the certifying agent should cei-tify "that 
 the Indian who sold had received the full value of the land." Can this 
 boaj'd of commissioners, with the facts made ])!ain to their view, certify to 
 tire Fresident that they believe that these Indians have i-eceived the full 
 value of their lands, or that they, the individual reservees, who wei-e en- 
 titled to the land, ever* received one dollar therehir ? Your memorialists 
 further state that Mr. Campbell, v. ho was appointed by General Jesup, at 
 the request of the chiefs, to see that justice was done them, has»not and 
 will not certify that he believes that the full value was given. 
 
 The last argument to which your* memorialists would call your atten- 
 tion is one founded on the instructions of thePr-esident, tr-ansmitted through 
 the Secretary of War-, to Major General Jesup; and if they can show, as 
 they do not doubt they can, that General Jesup has transcended the plain 
 
86 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 IcUor <<riiis instruolioiis, oi- that lie has totally disrM'g.irdcd tlicm. and that, 
 too, witliin till* know ledge ot flic partiis claiiiiiiig under lliis cuiitiact, tliev 
 do not think that they hit asking loo innch to ask >ou to derUle against ils 
 validil>. Tin* inslt uctions. then, to (jein ral Je>n|» aie in theM' words, 
 and are I'linnded on a |iro|iosition inaiU- hy Opothe Yuhulo lo Captain 
 Tag**, and hy that nflntr communicated lo ihe Secretary of ^Var, lor tiic 
 inlonnatioti of the Presiilent, and lor his decision thereon. Opolhe 
 Yolndo says : " I have conic on one pla-i \\hi( h 1 wish t<» adopt, and be ofT 
 inuiieiiiauly ; which is this : a company id" i^entlenien have seen nearly all 
 the companies who purchased our lands, and lliey have agreed to raise a 
 sum ol" money ecpiivalent to ihe value of the lands wc claim to have heen 
 defrauded of. 'J'hey |irii|)ose to pay us in this way, for instance: 1 will 
 call all the persons in niy town together whose lands have heen taken by 
 l>ersonating, or other frauds practised on them ; and the purchaser or 
 iiis agent heing present, in the presence of the two principal chiefs of each 
 town, and air agent of the United States, shall pay to the rightful holder 
 of the land a sum «(f money to his and the chiefs' full satisfaction: and in 
 case the parlies cannot agree, two disinter ested and res|)ectable white men 
 shall (one hy the chiefs and one hy the |)urihaser) he selected to \alue the 
 Jand. and the amount of their valuation under oath shall he paid. The 
 receipt id' the money, and the acknowledgment of satisfaction by the Indian, 
 shall he cerliHed to hy an ageirt of the United States and the chiefs of the 
 town, and the title to he perfected in the name rd' the purchaser written on 
 the face «d" the first deed, [)assed in and (crtiiied lo hy any of the ceriilving 
 agents, whether the President may have leveiseti and made void the deeds 
 approved or not ajiproved. and consequently the lands and titles belong to 
 the original jnirchaser. before either of the {ertifying agents." The fact 
 of this |)iri[)osilion having been approval and ado|)ted by the President, is 
 evident from the letter cd' the Seeietary <»f Wav to Major General Jesuj), 
 dated May 19th, 183G. of which the lollowing is an extract : "I enclose 
 the copy of a letter IVom Captnin I'age, by which you will per<eive the 
 views (d'lliat ofiicer rm the subject, and the projiosition made hy the L|i|)er 
 Creeks. This proj)osilion has been ajiproved, and Ca|)lain l'"ge advised 
 of the fact. So far, therefore, as any part of tliis division c»f the Creeks 
 shall remain peaceable, you are authorized to sanction the proceedings 
 recommended." And further: "If the arrangement stated by Captain 
 Page should take elTect, vou are aulhoii/.ed to select a comp^'tent oHicer, 
 should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done; and also to a)»poiiit 
 a certilyiiig agent, should any he entered into as above mentioned : his 
 duties and compensation w ill be go\erned hy the prescribed regulations." 
 These regulations having heen adopted and apjiroved by the ['resident, 
 (ieneral Jesiiji was hound to act agreeably to them, or not to act at all. 
 He had no power over the matter, other than that delegated to liim by the 
 President. lie had no power to sanchon any other contiact than one 
 foundeil upon ami follouing the prnpusiliiui made hy (Jjiothe Yolndo, 
 and which f<>rmi-d the havis of his instructions : and just so far, and no 
 farther, as he followed Ihe rcgulalions prescribed hy the President, could 
 Iris sanction give any validriy to a contract. He, alihougli a major 
 general, had no more right to «lisohey the instructions of the Piesideiit, 
 as OMiimunicated to him by Ihe Secretary of War, or to mark out a plan 
 for the dis|)osili()n of these lands diirerent from that which the I'lesident 
 had ajipr(j\ed, than had accitifj>ing agent. Suppose, then, il being re- 
 
[Doc. No. 274.] 87 
 
 c{airc(l by oncoF the regulations adopted by tbc President, that a certifyinj^ 
 aajent sliali ''certilV that said IiKlian canie before him," &c. : that the. 
 
 agent, instead thereof, should state in iiis certifirate that said Indian did 
 not coMie before me, as rerjuiied by the regulations, but that I iieard that 
 lie had consented to sell his land to A H for wiiatt-ver C D chose to take 
 for it : surely no one would cuntend t!iat tiiis! would be such a comiiliancc 
 with the instructions as would {»ass a (itle to the juircbaser and authoi'ize 
 the ai)i)rovai of the President. 
 
 If. then, the certificate of tbe certifying agent in tiie case above stated 
 would not give validity to a deed, so neither will General Jesup's sanc- 
 tion to a ilwi\ made by six chiefs out of twenty- four enrolled in the seven- 
 teen towns included in tbe contract, give validity to it ; and particularly 
 when the contract was consummated without notice to tbe purchasers 
 who were intended to be benefited by the instructions, was not publicly 
 made, but in a private room, and after tbe hour of midnight. The c«)ntract 
 not benefiting, as it was the intention of the President it should do, the 
 gi'eat mass of pui-chasers vvlio bad coittested claims, and who were willing 
 to buy i)eace, but only benefiting a few itulividuals, and that at the ex- 
 ])eiise, as they have already shown, to the individual res^M-vees, even admit- 
 ting that tiiey had received what was j)aid to the diiefs, of sevettty-five 
 thousand doiiurs ; this contract, so made in vi(dation, as your memo- 
 rialists have attemjited, and tliey hope successfully, to prove, of all law. 
 and the plain regulations of the President of tlie United States, is now 
 attempted to be set up; and tbe effect of it would be to depi-ive your 
 ineuiorialists of rights guarantied to them by the treaty, and to rob six 
 hundi-ed and thirty individuals of the poor pittance which the Government 
 has given as a miserable compensation for the large country of which they 
 and their fathers vvei-e possessed. 
 
 Your memorialists pray, therefore, that you would order and decree 
 that said six individuals, pretending to be chiefs of the Creek nation, had 
 no right to sell and dispose of lands guarantied to individuals' reserves, 
 either with or without their consent ; aiid that Major General Jesup, in 
 sanctioning said contract above referred to, transcended the authoriry 
 given him by the President of the United States. And furtiier. inasmuch 
 as sai<l insti-uctions, oi* a copy of tliem. were jnj!)lished in the public 
 gazettes i'ov the information of all concerned, and as said claisnants must 
 liave seen theiu. and consequently could not have been deceived as to the 
 j)Owers of the said Major General Jesup, tliey pray tUat their pretended 
 contract may be set asi(le, and ren!lere<l null and void, and of no force or 
 effect. And your memorialists, as in duty bouiid. will ever pray, &c. 
 
 HENRY THOMPSON, 
 JOHN H. PETERS, 
 JOSEPH BRYAN, 
 
 JiWys for memoridlisfs. 
 
 On t'.ie 28(h August, 1836, a contract was entered into between the Uni- 
 ted States of the first part, certain cliiefs of the Creek tribe of Indians of 
 the second jjart. and James C. W;itson and otiiers of the third part. To 
 sustain t!ie contract, a memorial has been submitted to the commissioners 
 by tiie parties of the tiiird part : and in supj)ort of tlie memoi-ial atid tlie 
 contract, they now submit, for the consideration of the commissioners, the 
 following argument : 
 
88 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. I 
 
 The first article of the contract uliicli it is piuiposcd fo consider, is a 
 tiansler and conM'Vanco of all the tracts ol" land ceded by tlic treaty of 
 1831', within certain limits, which have lonned the suhject of contest be- 
 fore the agents of the United titates. The other articles of the contract 
 provide for the security of pi i.ir bona fide |)nrcha>.ers from tlie liglitfnl 
 claimants ; secure to individual reservees the right of dissenting before 
 the execution of the contract ; extend to other lands of the same class, in 
 a diiri-reiit situation; ami provide for the payment of all. These articles 
 it is unnecessary, for tli(> jiresent, tr) examine ; involving, as they do, the 
 same (jut stions of validity and legality which are presented in tlie consid- 
 eration of tiie first article. 
 
 1 lie contract, upon its lace, ajipiars to have been made with reference to 
 the treaty of 1832; ami the first <|uestion which aiises is, whether its pro- 
 visions arc in agi cement or contra\ention of that instrument. 
 
 The first article of the treaty is an unconditional sui render, by the 
 Creek tribe of IiMJians. of all tlu-ii- lands cast of the Mississippi river. 
 The second article provides, after the survey of the laml, fur liie allow- 
 aiK e to each head of a family to select onehalf section of each, which 
 tracts ''shall be rescr\cd from sale, for their usl\ for the term of five years, 
 unless soonei- disposed of by them." The third article, that these tracts 
 may be conveyed, •' by the persons selecting the same, to any other person, 
 for a fair consideration, in such manner as the Presidoit may direct." 
 'Ilic contract shall be certified by some person ap|)oin'ed by the President 
 for that jturpose, but shall not be valid till "the Ti esident apjiroves the 
 SHine." A title shall be given by the United States on the completion of 
 the j)aymeiits. The fourth article provides, that at the end of five years, 
 all the Creeks entitled to these sclecti(ms, and desirous of remaining, shall 
 receive patents therefor, in fee-simiile, from the United States. 
 
 ThesL- are the only articles of the treaty which, it is apprehended, have 
 any bearing on the stdiject undei- consideration. 
 
 'Jhe ihiid article of the treaty expressly gives to the Indian the rigiit to 
 con\ey his reserve foi- a fair ccinsideration, in such manner as the Presi- 
 dent may direct; and in the examination (»f this contract, with reference 
 to this clause of the treaty, the i|uestions arise : 
 
 1st. Can the rcservce delegate the conveying power to another ; an:I, 
 
 2d. Uhether a parol delegation of this power is sufficient. 
 
 In relation to tlie first jioint. it is dilHcuIt to conceive of any reason \\liy 
 the resi-rvee should foini an exception to the general and estal)lishe(l rule 
 of law. The same reasons exist for the ajiplication of the rule to the In- 
 dian as to the wliiti- maji ; and as some cases must necessarily arise, in 
 which the exercise of tf:c ctrnvcying power might be dilficult or impossi- 
 ble for the rcsevce to execute othervxisc than by agent, is il to besup|)osed 
 tliat in tliose cases the party should be depriveil of the benefit intended to 
 be extended him by the treaty ? IJy that instrumi-nt liie conveyance is to 
 be made "in such manner as the I'resident may direct ;*" and, unless thn 
 term conreytinct is to be taken in its most refined and technical sense, a 
 ])arol or \erbal cwnveyance, if adopted by the directing power, is as con- 
 clusi\e and binding as the most soleinn instrument. 'I'lie rights of the 
 indi\idual reservees could be as well protected by the adoption of th'j one 
 mode as the other; and to recjnire, in all cases, a cojiveyance in writing, 
 would olien expose him to the frauds and machinations of su|)erior ednca- 
 iutn. The relation which exists between the United States and the Indian, 
 
 I 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 89 
 
 approaches to that of guardian and ward; and the treaty, keeping in view 
 tills relation, .secures the protection of the President, hy submitting to his 
 discretion the njode and manner of llie conveyance, to adopt that which 
 may he tlie best calculated to stcnre tlie interest of tlie paity and realize the 
 objects of the treaty. If there is any doubt as to the construction of the 
 term •' convey," it is resolved by a refei'ence to the |)recediiig article of 
 tJie treaty, in which the word "dispose" is used instead of ••convey." 
 The teiins, we think, are synonymous. 
 
 Tiie mode and manner of tlie conveyance, wiiether in person oi' by 
 agent, verbally or in writing, being entirely at the discretion of the Pres- 
 ident, and dependent solely u{)on his appi'oval, we jiroceed to inquire 
 wliethei', under the treaty, the delegation of tiie conveying power is re- 
 quired to be in writing. The only reason that can render it necessai-y is, 
 that by the reduction of the will to writing, the evidence of the act is 
 thereby rendered mor-e cleai- and explicit. In the ordinary transactions of 
 civilized life, the law dr)es not require it ; although ther-e, the pr-opriety of 
 the rule is not to be questioned. The tr-eaty does not, in expr*ess terms, 
 require it; and doubts nright well arise:_as to the correctness of the rule 
 when applied to the habits and manner of life of tiic Indian. If the evi- 
 dence of delegation or authoi-ity on the par-t of those exercising, is sulH- 
 cient, no satisfactory r'eason occur-s to us why the exercise of this will, by 
 ])aj'oI, should not be considered valid and oper-ative. We r-epeat again, tiiat 
 it is left entirely to the discretion of the President to fulfil the equities of 
 the treaty, in the manner best calculated to insure the most beneficial 
 results to the Indian. 
 
 We are aware that a distinctioir may be taken between natioiial and in- 
 dividual pr-operty, and that the United States have, in their intcrcoui'se 
 with the Indiair tr-ihes, r-ecognised ilie right of disj)osition by the chiefs so 
 far only as the national |)roj)ii'ty is concerned. The soundness of the dis- 
 tinction is not perceived. The recognition of the right of the chiefs to 
 treat for or surrender- national proper-ty, is based either on the particular 
 princij)les of their Government, or on their repi'esentative character', as 
 exercising a special authority delegated to them by the membeirs of their 
 tribe. If the fii-st i-ule is aclopted, the histor-y of the nation infornrs us of 
 the despotic and absolute power- of the chiefs over the pi-operty as well as 
 the ])crsons of their tribe ; a power which has been exercised by the chiels 
 and acknowledged by the nation, from the earliest period of their history. 
 The contract, however*, places it oir their representative character, and 
 exj)ressly states that they had ascer-tained the sense of their towns, and 
 secur-es the right of dissent to any individual r-eservee befor'e the consum- 
 mati(ni of the conti-act. Tin^ United States have themselves recognised 
 this exercise of authotity in the chiefs, irr their instj'uctions to Messr's. 
 Benson, Martin, and Fitzj)atj-ick, in relation to the i-eserves, part of which 
 are the subject of the present contr-act. Having established, as we think, 
 that the pr'(»vi.sions of the conti"act ar-e in accor-dance with tire ti-eaty of 
 1832, we will next inquii-e in what manner it is aftected by the laws of this 
 State. 
 
 By the fir-st article of the treaty, the nation make to the United States 
 an uuconditiorral surr'endei- of all their" lands east of the Mississippi river*. 
 Antecedent to this cession, they ])ossessed no title to the lands, which could 
 be recognised either* by the laws of this State or the United States. They 
 wer'e simply the occirpants of the soil, the ultimate fee of which resided in 
 the United States, charged with the special right of occupancy until ex- 
 
90 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 tinc;iii>!ir(l \\\ voluntary rcssiort. Tiy tlic first article of the tr'oaty tliis 
 riglit is i'Xtitis;iiis|ii*«l, and tlic al)soliili'. utujualilied, anil uncniMliti'iMal tfj- 
 tliijs vesfril ill ilic L'liifcii States, Have tin' (iciicral (ioveriiiDciit divt-st- 
 ed tliemsclvcs (if the title tliiis a('i|iiii-rd. as to any porfitMi of tin* ccdi'il ter- 
 ritory r By tlie second article itf the treaty, ea<li head of a family is efiti- 
 tled to ** select one halt" section of land, to he reserved from sale, lor tiie 
 use <d' the person niakiii!:; the selection, loc the term cd" five years." in the 
 niaiitiei' dii ecled hy, and stihject to the appi-oval of, the I'resident, lias 
 the re>^e|•vee any title under this ai'ticle which the law can rero^ni^ie ns tille/ 
 If he has, any further act of the Government would seem to he superHu- 
 ous. Hut these tracts are to be reserved from sale ; titles are to be made 
 either to the Indian or the purchaser, only upon certain conditions ; an<l 
 until these conditions aie fultilled, the reservee is entitled to the use of the 
 reserve <Mily. coupled with the ccmditional right of disposition. The re- 
 serves fo! ni a pirtion of the public domain. The (rovernment, ciiai'^ed 
 with the trust above specified in favor (d" the Indian, are the Ici^al owners; 
 and these lands can only be disposed of in the manner pointed out by the 
 treaty, atid prescribed by the laws <d" the United States. Snp[tose a re- 
 servee to dispose of his interest to an individual, without tiie ratification of 
 the Pifsident : what title or interest would thereby be conveyed ? The 
 answer is ob\ioiis. By the treaty, the title dejx'nds upon the appr«)val of 
 the I'lesident. and the issuance of the [)atenf : ami until these ac'.s are per- 
 formed, the undivided title is in the United States. The rit^ht to demand 
 the title of the (fuvernment, on the expiration of live years, to himself, (U' 
 to an approved jiui-chaser from !iim, before the termination of that pei-iod, 
 is in the reservee. 
 
 These views were maintained bv the Govertiment, in their well-known 
 controversy with Governor Gayle, in 1853. They receive additional 
 strength fVom the opinion of the Att<»rney General, in his communication 
 
 to the War Department, bearing date , 1836, in which the fd- 
 
 lowing language is applied to a ()Ui"stio!i of title un«ler the treaty: '• The 
 third article thus takes a disiinc.tion between the I'residenl's apjirobation 
 of the conti'act, and the perfection of the title. It evidently contemplates 
 the necessity of a further act. It is obvious that, as no title had been sjiven 
 in the Indian mnlcing the selection, some further act is necessary to vest in 
 the purchaser the title of the United States. In the cases provided lor in 
 the fourth and sixth articles, it is ex|)ressly declared that patents shall is. 
 sue to the Indian lor the selected li'acts. There is no dilference between 
 these cases and those provided for, except that, under the second anil third 
 articles, the title is to be given, not to tlie Indian, but to the purchaser 
 from him. The means of title must be the same in both cases ; that is to 
 say, a patent from the United States." 
 
 The same ductrine was <-onsidered as settled by the decision of our owti 
 supreme court, in which it was decided that the incident <d' dos\er did 
 not attach to an Indian reserve. In this case, tlie quantity of interest 
 possessed hy the reservee is cmisidered, and the adjudiralion made on the 
 ground that the Indian had no title. 
 
 It has been intimated that the statute of frauds of Alabama may have 
 son:e hearing or connexion with the subject. WijiU due deference, we 
 think that the reasons belore stated would apply to the exclusion of the 
 contract from the ojieration of the statute. If, lio\wver, the reservee in 
 reality possesses a disposable interest, the statii'e of frauds of this State 
 
[Doc. No. 274. ] 91 
 
 requires only tliat tlie contract should be in writing, "signed by the party 
 to becbarged, or some person by bim lawfully aiitliorized." 'J'be authority 
 to sign tlie contract is not required to be in rcriting^ but may be by pa- 
 rol. (See Roberts on Frauds, 113; Sug. Ven., Coles vs. I'recotbick, 9 
 Vesey, 251.) Again: tbe contract has been executed, by tbe jtaynient of 
 a portion of ibe consideration — a circtnnstance whicli, altbougb, according 
 to tbe (ale autiiorities, not sufficient to take tbe case out of the statute, is 
 entitled to much weight in tbe equitable consideration of tbe conti-act. 
 
 One question o\\\y renjains to be disposed of : Is the consideration, stip- 
 ulated to be paid by tbe contract, a fair consideration within the terms 
 and meaning of the treaty ? 
 
 It is inij)ossible to lay down any definite rule to determine upon the ade- 
 quacy of consideration. In every contract, it must necessarily depend 
 upon the different ideas of the contractoi-s in relation to the object of their 
 contract. What may be a full and fair consideration to one, is to another 
 totally inadequate. Tiie current of authorities, both English and Ameri- 
 can, does, we think, establish W\tt position that mere inadequacy of price 
 affords no ground, eithei- at law or equity, for vacating a contract in 
 other respects perfect. (2 Roberts on Frauds, 151; 2 Bay, 380; Hand, i. 
 27B: 6 Hand, i. 276, 282.) 
 
 By the treaty, however, a fair consideration is necessary to the validity 
 of all contracts for the sale of reserves. 
 
 Two classes of lands are embraced by the present contract : Ist. The 
 tracts included withiri certain towns, »*which have either been certified and 
 marked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified without au- 
 thority in tbe agents of the United States ;" and, 2<lly, I'hose tracts 
 in the same towns which have not been sold by the reseivees. As these 
 last tracts are to be taken at the valuation of the agents of the United 
 States, our in(juiries as to the adeipiacy of consideration need only to 
 extend to that class of lands embraced by the first article of the contract. 
 For these lands, the sum of seventy-five thousand d(dlars has been paid ; 
 and the individual reseivcc is entitled to one-half of any amount hereafter 
 to be j)aid upon any contract for any selection, which shall be preferred 
 by the agents of the United States : provided, it exceeds the pro rata val- 
 uation under the contract, assuming, as a l>asis of calculation, that there 
 are six Inindied and fifty tracts conve3ed by the fii-st article (if ti>e con- 
 tract — which is believed to be a fair estimate — a fraction above thirty-six 
 cents an acre has been paid for these lands ; fop tracts of w hich, all are 
 dis|)uted, and many covered by more tlian one adverse claim. The time 
 at which the conti-act was entered into is, by no means, aw immatei-ial cir- 
 cumstajice ; foi' it is scarcely within the pale of probability, that the most 
 valuable ti-acts should remain the longest unsold. More than four years 
 had elapsed since tbe ratification of the treaty : and mor-e than thr'ce since 
 the location of tbe i-esei'ves. The histor-y of the Creeks, during that pe- 
 riod, is one of fraud and spoliation, injustice and oppression. The swarms 
 of hungr-y creditors and gi-ecdy speculator's which, dui'ing this pei'iod, in- 
 fested tbe nation, as well as the r-apid itrfiux of jjopulation, support the idea 
 that the most valuable of the lands were disposed of before tlie execution 
 of tlie contract. If we ai-e right in these conclusions, the tracts con- 
 veyed were riot only inferior* in (juality, but covered with advei'se claims 
 difficult to adjust; cither t() be comjironiised at a heavy expense, or liti- 
 gated at an expense still greater by the ])ui'cliasers. Some time must 
 
92 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 also elapse before the settlement of these claims : duringallof whirl), the 
 capiial of the invcsiiiuMU must he iiiipi'nchictive. All these were rousidet-- 
 atioiis which entered (lee|)lv into the minds of the contractors in acceding 
 to the offer. M 'he contract was entered into and confiiined under ciicura- 
 starices of more than ordinary solemnity and puhlicity. 
 
 The individual reservees (many of them) were present, and all of them 
 were represented by their chiefs, expressly authorized for that pur|»ose, 
 after having ascertained the wishes of theii- towns. Kvery security was 
 j)rovided for the juotection of rightful claimants. Tiie consideration was 
 salislactory to tlie parties wlio r(linr|uislied their reserves, and was con- 
 siilcred an e(|ui\ah'nt hy the nuist sagacious of their chiefs. It was con- 
 siilered an e(|uivalent by the United States, represented by oliicers deser- 
 vedly high in their estimati(»n, as is manifested by their sanction and ap- 
 proval ; and, finally, it was open to all who were present. It was entered 
 into under tin- full helief that it would he ratilied and approved by the 
 l*rfsi<!ent : and, under that conviction, has a portion ol" tlie consideration 
 been i)ai(I, and notes executed lor the remainder. Good faith, as well as 
 ]iublic policy, seems to reipiire that a contract thus solemnly executed by 
 the United States, and satislactoiy to the j)ai'ties contracting, should nut 
 be lightly set aside. 
 
 GEO. GOLDTHWAITE, 
 
 Jittorney for memorialists. 
 
 In the viatler of James C. Wat son and others. 
 
 The points upon which the validity and legality of the contract hy Wat- 
 son and others wiih the Indians rest, appeal" to be the following, arising 
 out of memorials which have been filed in sui)port of and against its legal 
 efficacy. 
 
 1st. NN liether the same has been made conformably with the j)rovisirms 
 of the treaty made with the Indians in theyeai- 183£ ? 
 
 2d. \N hether the contract for the i-eservatioiis of lands has been made 
 in C()mj)iiance witli the conditions of the statute of frauds ? 
 
 5d. NVheliier it has heen consummated by the ])ayme)it of the price 
 agreed upon to the Indians entitled to the land, in pursuance of the pro- 
 visions of the contract itself ? 
 
 4th. Whether it shall not be considered fraudulent and inoperative, from 
 the gross inadefpjacy of the j)rice to the j)r<»|)erty intended to he conveyed? 
 
 It seems to he admitted hy the counsel for both parties, that it is abso- 
 lutely necessary to the legality and validity of the conti-act, that it should 
 have been made in accordance with the terms of the treaty. Hy that in- 
 strument each Indian to whom a I'eservation was made was entitled toc(»n- 
 vey the same, in such manner as the President of the United .States might 
 j)rescribe, and subject to his approval. This is not denied hy those \\\\n 
 contend lor the validity of the contract ; but tiiey contend t!ie terms of tln^ 
 treaty have not been violated hy the transfei* made by the chiefs in behalf 
 of the IndiansWho were entitled. 
 
 To sup|)ort this position, it lias heen insisted — 1st. That the Indians 
 have the right to delegate the power of alienation given to them by the 
 treaty. I2d. That this jiower or authority need not be in writing, but 
 may be by ])arol. 
 
 In su|)port of the first position, they urge th-\t the Pn-sident, having the 
 right to prescribe the manner, has the right to say that the conveyance 
 
[ Doc. ]Vo. 274. ] 93 
 
 may be verbal ; and if lie were to prescribe a parol or verbal conveyance, 
 it woukl be a compliance with the treaty, and therefore good and valid. 
 
 T-.vo answers at once pi-esent themselves to this argument : 1st. That 
 the President has prescribed a different nianner, to wit : that the Indian 
 should ap{)r()ve tlie contract in tiie presence of the agent appointed by iiim ; 
 that t!ie money should be ])aid in his presence ; and that he should cci-tify 
 these facts, and that he believes (he consideration given is a fail- one. 2d. 
 Tiiat if the contract were by parol, the agent could not certify and send it 
 to the President for his sanction. It must necessarily be reduced to wri- 
 ting, to undergo the solemnities required by tlie treaty to its legal validity. 
 Alfiiougli it is contended that the conveyance may be verbal, yet this seems 
 to be done as the introduction only to the agreement; that the power given 
 by the Indian to anotiier person may be by parol ; for it is urged tliat the 
 contract itself is in writirsg, though the power to make that contract is 
 only vei-bal. 
 
 Tiiis is really the true point <»f this part of the case. An attentive con- 
 sideration of the as-gument in favor of the conti-act has not enabled us to 
 find any thing which would authorize the pai'ty to convey lands re(juired 
 under the treaty of 18.j2 by parol ; and thence to infer the right, by parol 
 or verbal powei% to aulhoi-ize another to make a conveyance foi- tiiem. 
 The counsel seemed to be fully aware of this fact, and they have therefore 
 thrown themselves up()M the history of the Indians, to sliow that the chiefs 
 have the absolute })o\ver over the pei-sons and property of the individual 
 Indians. We are of the opinion there is some mistake in this matter. 
 While the lands remained in common, the chiefs ha<l the right, by tiie cus- 
 toms and usages of the nation, to convey tiiis land t(» tiie United States, 
 and not to individuals ; for their usages and customs wei-e so far restrained 
 by the laws of tiie United States, that the cliiefs could not, by treaty or 
 contract, convey the lands to any nation or persons other than the United 
 States ; but we have yet to learn that the cliiets ])ossesse(l any power over 
 the i)rivate property of the Indian, which would authorize them to convey 
 that property to any other person. But whether they had or not, is whol- 
 ly unimportant ; they were, by the terms of the treaty, deprived of any 
 such i)ower, (if they ever possessed it,) and the Indians entitled to <he res- 
 ervations were authorized to convey. The chiefs, therefore, as chiefs, had 
 no authority : no power or authority in writing was given to them by the 
 Indians entitled ; and tiie conveyance made by them is directly contrary 
 to the provisions of the treaty. We may also add, that no verbal author- 
 ity wa given, for none has been or can be proved ; and we must conclude 
 that none exists. 
 
 2d. The second question to be considered brings us to an examination 
 of the contract, under the statute of frauds. And here our inquiry must 
 necessarily be short, for it is not even contended that there is any agree- 
 ment for the sale of lands :)igned by the parties to he charged thereby, 
 but that the contract is signed by an agent or agents autljorized by parol. 
 In answer to this, we say that the purchaser-s Iiave exhibited no proof 
 that the individual Indians ever did authorize their chiefs, or any other, to 
 make such a conti-act for them ; and tliat a parol authority is iiisullicient 
 to authorize an agent to convey lands, according to the statute of fiauds. 
 The leading decisions upon this subject take a distinction between sales 
 at auction of goods and of lands ; iioiding the auctioneer the agent of both 
 
94 [ Doc. No. 274. "| 
 
 parlips. and that the entry oT tlie i)urc!jasei*s name by liim is sufticipnt sign- 
 in;^ fur the |.uichiisc fit' goods, but not lands. Hut tliese decisions are con- 
 lihcd to unction snlcs, and do not extent to any olhiTs ; and we a|)j)rehi'n(l 
 there is a \side ditlcrence between those sahvs at auclion, and tin' pi-csent 
 i'ontr-act. Tin'y are public, and genei-aily in the presence of hundii-ds. 
 This contract was pi'ivate. In auction sales, the anctioneer. acting as agent, 
 acfnally signs the name of the party purchasing. In tiiis contract, the 
 ( lucl's sign tlieir own names. In those sales, the signing «»r the name by 
 the anctioneer closes the contract. Here, it is admitted, the Indians may 
 refuse, after ttie chiefs having power and authority over their persons and 
 |)roperty have actually dis|)osed of the latter, and that, too, as tin-y say. 
 with the advice and consent of the Indians. But it is said, the United 
 States themselves recogniseil this exercise of authority in the chiefs, in 
 their instiuctions t(» Messrs. Benson, Martin, ami FitZ|)atrick, in i-elatioti 
 to tlie reserves ; this was before the locations were ninde, which set them 
 a|)ait to imlividuals, at which time the Secretary of War did contend for 
 the liglit to treat with the chiefs for them. liut lie puts the right on that 
 ground, to wit : that tlie locations had not tlien been inacie. \V\{\i t\i\v (\('t\'v- 
 ence to the legal learning «d' the lale Se(-retary (d" War, we think the trea- 
 ty gives to the individuals such private liglits, that the chiefs could not have 
 relin(|uished them by treaty. That instrnujent pointed o»it where most of the 
 locatiiMis should he made, " to imimie tlieir improvements ;" and the max- 
 im oi' law, id certnm est (jnod redde certnni potest, gave ihem a right to 
 the particular piece of land on whicli their improvements were, 'i'he lo- 
 cations could do no more. We are not dis])osed to enter into tiiis coniro- 
 versv, in this case, as we believe the settlement of it can have m)intlnen('e 
 upon the questions connected with this contract, and growing out of it. It 
 is admitted on all sides that the Indian had some interest in the land, 
 either legal or e(iuitable ; that he had such an interest as authorized bin) 
 to convey to the purchaser a right to olitain a fee simple title IVom the 
 United States, upon the apj)roval by the ['resident of the contract and the 
 com|»letion of the, payment, or a right to a fee-simple title himself, by re- 
 maining in possession Hve years. And the important legal <]uestions ari- 
 sing out of this contract, are : 1st. Has it been made in accordance with 
 the treaty ? and, 2d, Has it been made iti compliance with the laws 
 of the State of Alabama, in which tlie lands lie? We had intended todis- 
 miss both of then), under tiie (irm conviction tliat snilicient had been sliowii 
 to satisfy any candid and imj)artial mind that it was violating botli the 
 treaty and statute of frauds ; both of whicli ai-e laws of Alabama. But 
 tlie statement made by Cidonel (.,'ampbell, who assisted General Jesup ami 
 the Indians in making thecontract.furnishes additional evidence of its want 
 of necessary re(p)isites to establish its validity. 
 
 In page 1 I he says. '• None of the modes of action that were open to 
 (xcner.il Jesuji could have been followed without a vi(dation of the literal 
 terms of the treaty, in the very point in which it is alh'ged that vi(dation 
 of the treaty has occurred." In what is it alleged that violatimi of the 
 treaty has occurred ? In taking from the Indian the right to sell, (which 
 is guarantied by the treaty ?) — in vesting in the chief tliat authority ? I^ 
 that a literal or substantial violation ? It is believed that the gentlemen who 
 drew up tliat argument in favor of the jiurchasers, would believe the con- 
 btituti')!! was snbstuntialhj \\\A u^^K f//cr«//«/ violated, if his private prop- 
 
f Doc. No. 274. ] 95 
 
 o» t.v was taken from liiin, not for public use, but was sold either by ilie 
 Goxenimciit of tlie United Staten, or by tlie State of Alabama, to another 
 individna!. 
 
 if he would, it cannot be ui'ged that onlif the lileral terms id" Ihe treaty 
 were violated. But he must admit that a most substantial rigiit lias been 
 laken from tlie indlN idual Indians, in violation of a substantial j)ruvision of a 
 treaty made in theii* favor. it is, therefore, evident ihat the contract was 
 not made in conformity with the provisions of treaty «ir of the staiutc of 
 frauds. It is contended, hovvevei*, by Colonel Catitpbell, ami also by the 
 counsel employed, that the necessities of the case not only permitied, but 
 Jiislifies, tills dej)ai'ture from the tiraty, the statute (d" frauds, and the in- 
 structi<ms given t(» General Jesuj) by the Secietary of War. Befoi-e we 
 ])roceed to examine the reasons given by Colonel Campbell, let us look at 
 the insti-uciions of the Secretary of Wai-. In a letter to Genej-al Jesup 
 under date of tlie I9th May, 18S6, he says, " I enclose the copy of a letter 
 Irom Captain Page, by which you will perceive the views of that (dlicer 
 on that subject, and the projjosition made liy the Uj)per Creeks. This i)ro- 
 position has been appi-oved, and Captain Page advised <d' the fact; there- 
 lore, so long as any part of this division of the Creeks shall lemain j)eace- 
 able, you are authorized to sanction The proceeding reconiuiended. But 
 whatever is done, must be dotie uilhout delay, for it is vevy inijiortant that 
 their j)eo|)ie should be immediately sent off; but you will assure them that 
 the Government is anxious to do them justice, and the claims of those who 
 remain at peace and remove to the counli-y west of the Mississijipi will 
 be duly attended lo," &.c. "There is no objection, however, in the cases 
 of these friendly Indians, to jiermitting them to sell, dscrecahly to the es- 
 tdhlished regulations, if the purchaser can satisfy himself that no contract 
 has been heretofore made for the sale of the lands. But if this be done, lie 
 must do it upon his own resi>onsibi!ity," &c. " If the arrangeujeiit stated 
 by Captain i'age should take elFec t, you are authorized to select a comjie- 
 tentoHirer, should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done, and also 
 to appoint a certifying agent To certify contracts, shouhl any be entered 
 into as above menlii/iied." By reference to Captain Page's letter, we are 
 informed what the plan was wliich was referred to in the letter of the Sec- 
 retasy of War to Genei-al Jesup ; that letter is dated tlie <Jtli of May, 1836, 
 stating to the Secretary of War, a talk he had held with Opothe Ytdiolo ; 
 he goes on, he (Ojiothe Yoholo) says, •• 1 have come on one ])lan which I 
 wisti to ad«ipt, and be <iff immediately, which is this : actimpanv of "-entle- 
 uien have seen nearly ail the companies who purchased our lands, and they 
 have agreed to raise a sum of money erjuivalent to the value of the lands 
 we claim to have been defrauded of; they propose to pay us in iliis way, 
 lor instance : I will call the persons in my town together, w hose lands have 
 been taken by personating, or other frauds practised on them ; and the 
 jiurchaser or agent being present, in the j)resence of the two cliiefs of each 
 town, and an agent of the United States, shall pay fiver to fhe ri^^htful 
 holder of tlie land a sum of money to his and the chiefs' full satisfaction- 
 and in case the parties cannot agree, two respectable and disinterested 
 white men shall, (one by the-chief, and one by the purchaser.) be selected to 
 value theland: and theamount of their valuation under oath shall bejiaid- the 
 receipt of the money, and the acknowledgment of satisfaction by the Indian, 
 shall be certified to by an agent of the United States and the chiefs of the 
 town ; and the title to be perfected in the name of the purchaser, written on 
 
96 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 the face of tlie fust «lec(l, passed in and certified to by any of the certifying 
 agents, whether the President may have i-eveised and made \oid the deeds 
 approve*! or not approved, ainl consi-tpiently the hind and title helong to 
 tlie original puirhasce. helopc either ol the ((.itilying agents. The chiefs 
 of each town aie well actpiainted, and kr;o\v well the Iraiids and the in- 
 iuied persons; and in this way we can settle all our diOiculties, and relieve 
 llie Go\einnKiil of all futihei- tronhle with ns." 
 
 From lliis talk of Opothe Yoholo, we ai'e able to ascertain wiiat the 
 arrangement was, which is relei-red to in the letter to (Jeneral .Tesnp. and 
 which was to he a guide to him in settiing all dilliculties with tlic Indians, 
 and relieving the Government of all furtiier troidile with (hern, lie was 
 not at liberty to depart from tliat jjlan; and a consideration of that plan 
 will show that the Secretary of War did not feel himself at liberty to depart 
 from the trei'.ty. and the regirlations which ha<l been framed under- the di- 
 rection of the I'lTsident, for- the government of the certilSing agents, and 
 the pirrchasers lA' lands fr-om the reservees. What are the substairtial 
 pro\isions of that plan. Tliat the Indians er»title«l to i-escrvations were to 
 be assembled, whose lands had been stolen, or of which they had been 
 otherwise defr-auded. The person who ha«l been guilty of rlefrauding the 
 Indian or his agent was to be present, and, in the pr*esence of twd jirincipal 
 chiefs and tlie ollic er of the United St-.ites. the money w as to be paid to the 
 ])i-oper Indian, who was t<» be identilied by those chiefs. That this ar- 
 rangement is to he made with the original or- iVaudiilent jjirr-chascrs, and 
 those only, and that new corrtr-acts are not to be certifred, birt only the old 
 ones which have been impeached. The only objection to these instructions 
 of the Secretary of War, i.^, that a right of preemption is given to pt-rsons 
 and to contracts which had been impeached for- fi-aud, and which, of all 
 others, ought not to have been preferred. That, however, we admit, carr- 
 not now be a subject of impiir-y. M'hat we would now present to your 
 consideration, is, the inquiry whether- the contr'act before voir has heeir 
 made in |)ursuance of those instructions ? They i-equire the Ind'uins en- 
 titUd to be br-ought before the two principal chiefs of their- r-espectivc towns, 
 and an oUicerof the United States, thereto be identified by the chiefs, to 
 sell their lands and receive their money. 
 
 'I'his ciMitract is not made with them, nor ai-e they pr-esent ; but is made 
 with six chiefs, and no money is jiaid to the Indians entitled, but to their 
 six chiefs and another chief. 
 
 I'hese instri'.ctions i-e(piire the sale to he made to the oi-iginal or- fraudu- 
 lerst purchaser, and the old contract is to be recertified. 
 
 This contract is not made with those j)urchasers, as such; and tl»e old 
 contracts are not recertified, but to five jjersons (whether those purchasers 
 or not does not appear;) and this contract is substituted iir place of the old 
 contract. 
 
 These instructions were dr-awii up irr conformity with the tr*eaty and the 
 laws of the State of Alaliama. This contract is in direct violation of both 
 the treaty and laws ol Alabama, and cannot plea<l the poor apology of 
 having been made agreeably to instructions. 
 
 The reasot\s urged by Colonel Campbell for sanctioning it, are princi- 
 ])ally the necessity of an ear-ly depai-tiiie of the Imlians ; the necessity or 
 (lesire of tlitrn to sell tlieir- lands hilme their de()a?-tiii-e : and the necessity 
 existing for the payniiit ol'lhe money fur t'leii- lands, to enaltle llnin to pay 
 their debts before they lelt this Slate, and to prcverrt them from being 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 97 
 
 liarasscd by slieriflTs and constables urged on by hungry creditors ; and, 
 to sw ell the catalogue of calamities, to prevent women being held to bail. 
 
 If we were to admit the existence of all these reasons, tiie admission 
 could not certainly authorize a contract to be made, which is contrary to 
 the treaty, contrary to law, and contrary to the express instructions of 
 the Secretary of War. Those reasons, however, which have been urged by 
 Colonel Campbell as moving and inducing to the making of this contract, 
 do not apply. The difficulties suggested did not exist, or there were other 
 and amj)le means for their removal. 
 
 1st. Although there may have been bail-writs out against women, they 
 were protected from arrest by the laws of Alabama. This contract, then, 
 was not necessary to protect them. 
 
 2d. Tiic departure of the Indians by the sale of tlieir lands, could, 
 before that time, have taken place, so far as depended upon the sale. The 
 letter to General Jesup was writtvii on the 19th day of May, and there 
 Was amj)le time between the recei;)t of this letter and the 28th of August, 
 to have made the sale of all the land embraced in the instructions of the 
 Secretary of War, and in the contract now before you. Iti that letter, an 
 eaily departure of the Indians is urged, and directions given to carry that 
 arrangement into effect. Captain Page had made this ari-angement known 
 to Eli S. Shorter, Esq., one of the purchasers of fraudulent cases, and 
 attorney for others; and he wrote to the Secretary of Wa!', under date of 
 the IStii May, 1836, that the pur chnsfrs accepted tlie proposition, declaring 
 ** they will cheeifuliy make up and pay to them a considerable sum of 
 money, whenever they are ready to surrender up the land and leave the 
 country." The letter of the Secretary of War was addressed to General 
 Jesup, at Washiwgton, appointing him to the command of the forces em- 
 ])Ioyed against the Indians, and he ariived at the theatre of operations 
 about the last of May or first of June. Surely there was time sufficietit, 
 between his arrival and the 28th August, to carry into effect this arrange- 
 ment, and have the Indians paid, and the contract recertified to the origi- 
 iial purcliasers, agreeably to that arrangement and the instructions of the 
 Secretary of War. That the Secretary of War did not intend to de])art 
 from the substantial provisions of the treaty, and the regulations pre- 
 scribed, is proved by an examination of tiie time of that arrangement ; and 
 it receives additional confirmation from the suggestion made in the letter 
 above referred to of Mr. Shorter, and which was not adopted by the 
 Secretary of War. In that letter, he says, " As there may be much diffi- 
 culty in assembling the Indian claimants, as there is much danger in 
 travelling through the country, and as expedition is now essential, I ask if 
 it is not proper to instruct Captain Page to ratify whatever those chiefs 
 may recommend, and to assure the purchasers, that whatever Captain 
 Page may do or recommend will be approved, sanctioned, and executed by 
 the President." This letter must have reached Washington only a few 
 days after the letter of the 19th May was written, and delivered to Gene- 
 ral Jesup either a day or two after he left, or while he was in Washing- 
 ton. The subject may be said to be yet before the St^cretary of War ; his 
 instructions were yet fresh, and impressed upon his mind. Suggestion is 
 made to alter them in a material and important part — to change tliem f/om 
 the acceptance and adoption of a specific ])roposition which was then 
 accepted also by the purchasers of fraudulent cases, and to give a discre- 
 7 
 
98 I Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 tionary power to the commaiuling general, who was charged also with 
 this business. All the difficulties of completing the proposition or arrange- 
 ment, made on the part of Indians, and accepted by the |»nrchasers, were 
 pointed out by a man well acfjuainted with tlicm ; and yer, with all these 
 things before him, the Secretary of War did not feel liimseif at liberty to 
 disn'gaid tiic treaty, and previous regiih.tions n)ade in jjursiiance theieof, 
 and authorize a depaiture from those instructions. If, then, the Secretary 
 of War would not do so, can a contract, made in violation of substantive 
 provisions of the tieaty, of the statute of frauds, and of the instructions to 
 General Jesup, be sanctioned ? 
 
 The contract was not necessary to enable the Indians to pay their debts 
 and prevent them from being iiarassed by sheiifls, constables, &.c. 
 
 The assumption that unjust demands were made u|)oii tliem, and bail- 
 writs taken out against them for thousands, where they owed only hun- 
 dreds, is certainly gratuitous. Colonel Campbell could certainly have no 
 means of determining their validity ; and t!>e information he received was 
 most likely to come from those most interested in giving him incorrect 
 information, for the purpose of deceiving him and obtaining this contract. 
 The chiefs, too, appear to have been deeply interested in having the con- 
 tract made. ;ind no doubt they weic more interested than we may be able 
 to prove. There could be no proof of such fact exhibited to him, and none 
 has been produced before this commission. That such necessity did not 
 exist, is made manifest by an examination of the order of Genei-al Jesup 
 under date of the 7tji or ITth August, (tlie cojiy of the order we have is 
 under date of the 7lh August ; it may have been the 17th, as Colonel C. 
 was at Tallassee about ten days.) aj)i)ointing Colonel Camjibell com- 
 missioner. He is, by that order, authorized to stipulate that their annuity 
 money for 1837 shall be paid, to enable them t<» pay their debts and those 
 of their people, and to get clear of the numerous suits against them ; and 
 he is further authorized to stipulate that the sum of ten thousand dollars 
 shall be i)ai(i to the cliiefs, to be disposed of as they may see fit. 
 
 Heie. then, is the sum of ^10,000, besides the sum of S37,500, the 
 annuity for 1837, paid to the Indians : and the annuity for 1836, upwards 
 of A4U,000, was paid at the same tin)e — and for what ? To enable them 
 to i»ay their debts, and to get clear of the numerous suits against tiiem ! 
 It is evident this was considered sufficient by General Jesup for that |)ur- 
 pose, and we have no evidence that it was insufficient. We must, there- 
 fore, conclude that the making of this contract was not necessary to en- 
 able them to emigrate. Wc have additional evidence of this, from the 
 fact that this contract money was not paid either to the Indians or to their 
 creditors, but to the chiefs, that it might be carried off, and that the credit- 
 ors migiit not get any of it. 
 
 However plausible the reasons which have been assigned for making 
 this contract, in violation of the treaty, the statute of frauds, and the posi- 
 tive instructions of the Secretary of War, they either do not exist, or have 
 no intluence upon it. 
 
 A-'ain, we would remark, that even between the date of the order to 
 Cohfnel Camjjbell and the date of the contract, there was ample time for 
 collecting the Indians who had been defrauded, having them identified, 
 having the money paid to them in the presence of the two chiefs and 
 an officer of the United States, and having the old contracts recertified by 
 the agent. All this could have been done: why was it not done? It 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 90 
 
 would have been legal and valid ; for the instructions were in accordance 
 with the treaty and la\i. 
 
 Before we (lis|)o.se of this legal branch of this case, it may be proper to 
 inquire what estate the reservees had in their respective locations upon 
 whi( h the statute of frauds would operate. It will not be denied that this 
 contract has not been in accordance with the treaty. It is pretended that 
 the Indians have delegated their power to convey to the chiefs. There is 
 no proof of this fact, and we cannot admit it. What proof is necessary 
 may depend upon the ai>piication of the statute of fiauds to the estate held 
 by the Indians ; and therefore it becomes necessary to see whether the estate 
 held by them is such a one as conies w ilhin the statute of frauds. By the 
 statute of frauds, as passed in Alabama, " no action shall be brought 
 whereby to charge, &c. upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, 
 and hereditaments, in the making any lease tiiereof, for a larger term than 
 one year." What, then, are lands, tenements, and hereditaments, as 
 known to the law ? «» Tenement, in its proper and legal sense, signifies 
 any thing which may be holden," &c. ''Hereditament includes not only 
 land and tenements, but whatsoever may be inherited, be it corporeal or 
 incorporeal, real, personal, or mixed." If we were to take the extensive 
 signification of the woid Itereditainents, it will include ex vi /ernjiwi, every 
 thing whicii may be itdieiited, whether real or personal property. It is 
 enough for our purpose, then, to maintain such an estate in lands as may 
 be inherited. The estate which those Indian reservees had under the 
 treaty, though at first view they seem to be ?na'(/i/f, are classed and named 
 in the laws. They hold an estate upon condition^ which may be either in 
 fee simple or otherwise, accorditig to the nature of the grant creating such 
 estate. Estates on condition, says Blackstone, " are more properly qual- 
 ifications of others' estates, than a distinct species of themselves ; seeing 
 that any quantity of interest, a fee, a freehold, or a term of years, may 
 depend upon these provisional restrictions :" they may be either implied 
 in law, or expressed in the deed or grant. 
 
 "An estate on condition, expressed in the grant itself, is where an 
 estate is granted either in fee simple or otherwise, with an express qualifi- 
 cation annexed, whereby the estate granted may either commence, bt 
 enlarged, or be defeated, ujmn the performance or breach of such qualifica- 
 tion or condition. These conditions arc, therefore, either precedent or 
 subsequent. Precedent are such as must happen, or be performed, before 
 the estate can rest or be enlarged.^* Again, in page 156, *' These express 
 conditions, if they be impossible at the time of their creation, or after- 
 wards become impossible by tlic act of God or the act of the feoffor him- 
 self," &c. " are void.*' 
 
 The words of the treaty give these reservations to the reservees respect- 
 ively, with the right to convey them under the approbation of the Presi- 
 dent ; and under that approbation the purchaser receives the right to a fee- 
 simple title himself, by residing upon the land five years. 
 
 This, then, is an estate upon condition, expressed in the grant; the con- 
 dition to besubse(|uently performed, to wit, either selling with the approba- 
 tion of the President, or continuing in possession five years. The Presi- 
 dent has no right to compel them to make a sale ; nor has he any right 
 to drive them off the land within the five jears. If either condition become 
 impossible by the act of God, the condition is void, and the estate becomes 
 absolute. 
 
tt)0 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 The deceased Indians, therefore, herame nnahle to iierform t!ie rondi- 
 Itoii, by the act of God, and tlieir heirs inherit (V(in» tlieni. h would he strange 
 1« Nay the Indians liave no estate in the land, or no estate roming within 
 the statute of frauds ; when, upon their de^th, tlieir children itdierit ; 
 %lien, by the teiins of the tri'iity itself, a purchaser from them takes fee- 
 wniple estates : and \\hen, by an art tlepending upon their own vidition, 
 they have a liglit to den)anil a title in fee simple. We cannot believe the 
 commissioners can enleriain any doid)t that those reservees are entitled by 
 treaty to those tracts of land, ar.d Indd such a title that they, and they 
 only, can convey ; and that, without siirh authority, any conveyance by 
 !hc chiefs, or any other person, is rontrary to the statute of frauds, and 
 toid by the law ; and that these violations of the treaty and the law have 
 not the sanction of instructions from the Secretary ol" War, and cannot re- 
 rei\e the sanction of the I'resich'nt. AVe are next to incjiiire whether it 
 kas been consnmtnated by tiie p:»_\ ment of the price agreed upon to the 
 IrK'lians entitled to the land, in pnisuatice of the provisions of the contract 
 itself. In tlie ])reamble it is staled •* that tlie chiefs have advised with 
 their people, and that their ])eople have consented to a general disposi- 
 lion,*' &c. The third article of the contract provides «» that the money 
 hereinafter stijmlated to be paid, shall be paid to th'' Imlians entitled to the 
 land, in the presence of a chief aod one riflicer of the United States ; and, 
 until such payment be made, it shall he deposited with the certifying agent 
 nf this district : the pa} tn( iit of v\hich shall be a consiirnmation of this 
 contract." By the 4th, it provides that, if any Iidian, holding a parcel of 
 land herein conveyed, shall refuse to carry into effect the provisions of 
 this contract, in that case, a pro ralu allowance, upon the considera- 
 tion herein stipulatid, shall be made t(» the parties of the third part : jiro- 
 vided, that this consent shall be otdy gixen upon the consummation of 
 the contract,'* >Vhal is the meatiing of tiiese two provisions ? That the 
 money must be paid to the Indian entitled to the reservation; that when 
 it is tendered to him, he may refuse to receive it — if he does not, he sliall 
 be understood to consent ; that this ])ayment shall be made in the presence 
 of a chief ami an oflicer of the United States ; that, if the Indian ac- 
 cepts the money \\\\vn it is paid, it shall be consideied a consummatiiti of 
 the contract. It is contended that the |)ayment to the chiefs, as entered 
 on the back of the contract, is a payment in terms of tlie contract ; and 
 tliat it was the duty of the Indians entitled, to enter their dissent befor-e 
 tliis payment was made ; that, not having done so, they air |)recluded by 
 the 4th article. Such a contract would be prepr»sterous ! Their chiefs 
 Riade tlir contract : and although they ])r-etend to ha\e had the consent of 
 theii- |)eople, they expressly piovide that the payment of the money to the 
 Indian, arid his receiving it, shall be a consumir»ation of the contract, un- 
 less he then objects. He could not ohje( t till the off.r was made to pay 
 liim ; for he would not be advised of the making of the contract. The 
 contract was signed after 11 or 12 o'clock on the night of the 28th 
 August; and the next day, the 92th, the money was paid to the 
 chiefs, and they gave a recei|)t for it. The Indian had no opportunity to 
 object or consent. The contract declares the money shall be paid to him, 
 m deposited with the certifying agent. The payment and de|)ositing are 
 two distinct acts, and so understood by (he parties. Neither has been 
 done. The Indians have not been |)aid, noi* has (here been any offer to 
 pay them; nor has the money been deposited with (he certifying agent. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 101 
 
 There is no proof tliat tliey have been paid; and the, proof exliibite«l 
 shows tliey have not. The testimony of Mr. Taylor shows that, aftffr 
 he left Tallassce with the Indians, at the request of Manowa, he paid 37 
 or S8 Indians of the Chattoksof ker town. An examination of tlie books 
 will sIjow that he has many contracts wii!i Indians marked for rever- 
 sal, who lived in that town. But he does not pretend that the money pat4 
 by him was done in the presetice of any chief, .>r any United States of- 
 ficer. 
 
 The books show 75 or 80 conti-acts marked for reversal in that town. 
 Mr. Taylor swears that he had 40 or 4 5 in tiiat situation ; and the pre- 
 sumption is strong, iliat only tho^e in vhich he was interested were paid, 
 to make his own contract better. But we come now toconsider the last charge 
 made by tlie counter-memorialists, to wit, the great inadequacy of consid- 
 eration. The gross sum of seventy-five thousand dollars, one-half to be 
 paid in cash, and the balance in lour months : and here we would remark^ 
 that the contractors were so careful of their interests, that they caused a 
 special clause to be inserted in the connact, whi( h piecluded them from the 
 possibility of h)ss. The 2d article of the contract says that, when any 
 contiai t shall be pieferred by the said agent, uj)on investigation, the par- 
 ties of the third part shall he entitled to the same security for the consid- 
 eration, as the Indian would have had but for this contract, &c. Again, 
 in 4tli article : that if any Indian, holding any parcel of laud herein coh- 
 veyed, shall refuse to carry into efTect the provisions of liiis contract, ira 
 that case, a pro rata allowance upon the consideration herein stipulated 
 shall be made to the parties of the third pait, &c. These two clauses 
 plainly show the impossibility of loss on the part of the pruchasers ; and 
 4thex iVe consequently driven from their subteifuge, that tlie risk which 
 they ran, in not getting the aj)j)roval of the President to the contract, in 
 the subsequent contest with former purchasers, either honest or pretended, 
 should be taken into account in determining the adequacy of the consider- 
 ation. If any valid conti'act had been made, they could requiie the mo- 
 ney to be paid into the hands of an agent from whom they, standing in tlic 
 place of, and occupying by the contract the precise situation of the In- 
 dian, could demand it. If the Indians, or any of them, refused their as- 
 sent, in that case the chiefs became liable to pay them tlie whole amount, 
 should all lefuse ; or a pro rata for such as did refuse. And the comniis- 
 sioners must peiceive that this would have clearly been the result, had the 
 contract been complied with according to its imperative iequirements« 
 That it has not been done, has been clearly proved ; aiul these purchasers 
 caiiiiot now hold out the idea, that if the contract is not sustained, 
 they must lose the amount of the consideration paid. If they had carrieiS 
 out the contract according to its provisions, it would have been impossible 
 for tliem to have lost a solitary farthings 
 
 We assert that the consideration given foi- the right or claim of the In- 
 dians was wholly inadequate to the value of the property conveyed by the 
 contract. In support of this alhgation, Mr. Clough, a witness, says that 
 he, for himself and his company, offeied Opothe Yoholo one hundred 
 and fifty thousand dollai's for the same laud conveyed by the contract, and 
 that he thought then, and still thinks, tliat the land in question was wortb 
 two hundred thousand dollars. Mr. Tlnmipson, another witness, says, 
 that, tVom his knowledge of the land in Jim Boy's town, he considers it 
 worth at least one thousand dollars a half section. By reference to tl»e 
 
102 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 abstract of CoIi)nel Ilogan, it will be fi)iin(I that (here were fifty-four 
 cases in that town inatked for reversal, and wliirh were consequently em- 
 braced in the contr-act : the value of tlie lands, then, in this one town, was 
 fifty-four thousand dollars, which would reduce ihe price of tlie balance of 
 the land to less tlian forty-one dollars a half section. A sum so low, bottom- 
 ed upon testimony unimjx'ached and unimpeachable, must strike the mind 
 of evei-y unj)iejudiced person, and carry with it a conviction that the consid- 
 eration was gioss'.y if not fraudulently inadequate, and founded uj)on the 
 ignorance of, and want of caj)acity in, the Indian to put a value uj)on the 
 land. 
 
 Having, then, established the proposition (we trust satisfactorily) that 
 the consideration was wholly inadequate to the value of the lands conveyed 
 by the contract, we proceed to inquire \\hether inade([uacy of considera- 
 tion is a good ground, either in law or in equity, to set aside a contract ; 
 and hei'e we aie not left to speculate. The books are full of authority on 
 this point, all concuning and establishing, beyond (outradiction, that the 
 courts will set aside conti-acts when the consideration is grossly inadccjuate. 
 In the case of Nott rs. Hill, (2(1 Yernon, 27,) it was decided that the sale 
 of an estate in remainder, by a sorj who was in necessity, was \oid. on ac- 
 count of the gr-oss inadequacy, though the purchaser would have lost all, 
 if the son had died first. The decree was affirmed on re-hearinsc ; the 
 L)r'd Chancellor declaring it was an unrighteorrs bargain in the beginning, 
 and that nothing could help it. In the case of Wir-eman vs. B<'ake, (2 Ver- 
 non, 121,) relief was granted against a bargain on account of gross inade- 
 quacy, though the pur-chaser was to lose all if the seller did not survive his 
 uncle. 
 
 In these two cases, the contingency relied upon in support of the bargains 
 was held to be of rro importance. In the case under corrsideration, it has 
 been shown that, had the purchasers cousummafed their cuutvact ugreedbli/ 
 to its terms, they could have lost notliing. How nruch more for-cibly, their, 
 does the want of adequate consideration, ivilhout the contingency of losSf 
 aj)ply to it? In Baugh vs. I'lice, decided irr the Exchequer, and reported 
 in 3 Wilson, 320, r-elief was given, and actual corrveyancy set aside, though 
 the inaderpracy did rrot exceed one-half the value. Tliis, said Chancellor 
 Desaussiei*, irr commenting upon it, " is a very importarrt case, (4 Eqirity 
 Rep.) 690. In the case under considei'ation, the price paid is jiroved to be 
 far less than one-half <»f the value of the |)ropcrty conveyed." In the case 
 of Chesterfiold vs. Jansorr, Lor-d Chancellor Ilar-dwicke said : "Tneieare 
 har'd unconscionable bargains which have been corrstr'ued fraudulent, and 
 this corrit will relieve against |)iestrmptive fraud ; to take advantage of 
 another man's necessity, is equally bad as takir)g advantage of his weak- 
 ness." Fraud is pr-esinned fr-orn the cir-cumstarrces arrd condition of the par- 
 ty's weakness and necessity on the orre side, and extortioir and avar-ice on 
 the other ; and mei'ely from Ihe intrirrsic uncorrsciorrableness of the bar- 
 gain. How far- the parallel holds good in the case above referred to and 
 th»* case rrnder consider-ation, we leave the commissioners to d< terniiiie. In 
 the case of Gwyrrrr vs. Heaton, (l Uio. C. C. 1,) it was decided by Loi-d 
 Thur-low that tlie grant of a reversionai-y rent, charged alter the death of 
 plaiiitiflT's lather, who was old and infirm, npoir unreasonable terms, 
 shorrld be set aside, althoirgb the defendarrt was invited irrto the baigaiir by 
 the plaintiir, after- consultation with his friends, and the same ter-nrs offer-ed 
 to other persons ; and although there was a contingency by which llie de- 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 103 
 
 fendant might have lost all his advances, and though the disproportion was 
 not enormous. Tlie Lord Chancellor said the ground for relief was gross 
 inequality; that the charges of fraud and oppression were not proved; that 
 the vendor made the offer to the |)urchaser, who accepted in the very shape 
 offered, and did not labor to lower the ternjs; there was no misleading the 
 judgment of the vendor, nor tampering with his poverty. In the case now 
 under the consideration of the commissioners, it is testified by Mr. Tay- 
 lor,oneof their own witnesses, that some, if not all the purchasers under the 
 contract, (and the report of Colonel Hogan will show that all of them) were 
 interested previous to the date of the contract, in lands marked for reversal. 
 It must, therefore, be aj)parent that their own acts, in connexion with oth- 
 ers, drove the chiefs to tlie necessities (which the contract says existed, 
 and wliich Colonel Campbell and General Jesupsaid existed) to make the 
 contract. Have not the purchasers under the contract, by their own acts, 
 in connexion with others, driven the chiefs to accept a consideration so 
 grossly inadequate that it would be impossible to state it to a man of com- 
 mon sense, without producing an exclamation at the inequality of it? Mr. 
 Clough says he considers the land as worth two hundred thousand dollars ; 
 and Mr. Thompson says that he considers fifty-four of the half sections 
 as worth fifty-four thousand dollars. Can any man be found who would 
 not exclaim at the great inequality of foity-one dollars apiece for the 
 balance of the half sections, in comparison with the real value? In Mort- 
 lock vs. Buller, (10 Vesey, 292,) Lord Eldon refused to decree specific ex- 
 ecution of a contract for the sale of land, when the inadequacy did not ex- 
 ceed half the value, though there was no imputation on the conduct of the 
 buyer. In Day vs. Newman, (10 Vesey, 300,) Lord Alvanley refused to 
 decree specific execution of a contract in a case clear of all fraud, when 
 the inadequacy was very gross, being about half the value. In Tilley vs. 
 Pars, (10 Vesey, 301,) the court, ujmn the mere consideration of it being a 
 hard bargain, will not enforce it. In Pickett ts. Logan, Lord Chancellor 
 Eldon gave relief to the plaintiffs, and set aside the agreement and the final 
 conveyances, and even the fine conveying the estate to the defendant, upon 
 the ground of gross inadequacy of price and the vendors being in distress, 
 and ignorant of the real interest and its value, and not j)roperly protested 
 by counsel, though a great lapse of time had occuiied. In this case 
 the answer denied that the plaintiffs were drawn in by any advantage ta- 
 ken of their ignorance or distress. The contract under consideration ad- 
 nuts that frauds had been perpetrated upon the holders of land under the 
 said treaty, "whereby their titles had become involved with diffirulties, their 
 rights jeopardized, and confidence in their security impaired," kc. ; that 
 they are about to remove to their homes in the West, to the end. &c., of ob- 
 taitiing something for their lands, &c. The ])roof shows that some if not 
 all the parties to the contract had been charged with perpetrating the 
 frauds complained of. 
 
 The evidence in the case of Pickett vs. Logan, stated that the deeds 
 were read and explained to the plaintiff by the attortiey, and they were 
 made to undejstand the nature and value of the property ; but they were 
 in great poverty and distress; that they were very ignorant people; and 
 though some description of the property was given in the deeds, it was not 
 so full as it should have been. The price being so inadequate, (about one- 
 fifth its value.) the Chancellor had no difficulty in giving the relief sought. 
 In the contract of Watson and others, there is no evidence that the con- 
 
lOi f Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 tract ever was explained to llie parties inaking if, nor tiiat tliey were made 
 to iiiiderstaiid the natiiie and value (d the piojX'ily com eyed away. The 
 coniract admits ihey were in poverty and dihtresp, and the argument or 
 explanation of Colonel Cam[)bel] confirms it. From the testimony, the 
 inad'<|uacy of consideration is about the same in this (ase as in the case 
 of Pi( kett vs. Logan, above relerrcd to. If justice and ecjuity retpiired 
 that the ci>nliact should be set aside in liic one case, it equally recjuires ii in 
 the other. The cases above rel'erred to, were lecentjy con^ideted in the court 
 «»fe(|uity in South Carolina, in the case ofThos. Butler et (il., vs. Haskell, 
 (4 E«)uiiy Reports, 652.) and conlirmed by the court (d" appeals ; Chan- 
 cellor Desaussier, who pronounced the decree in the case, declaring that 
 the en:inent men who have sat in chancery have gradually apj)lied the 
 great principirs of e<|uiiy, on which rtlief is granted, to every case when 
 the dexterity of intelligtMit men had obtained bargains at an enormous and 
 unconscij iitious disprojjoiti* n, from the ignorance, the weakness, oi' the ne- 
 cessities of others. The case of Watson and othei-s is not without the 
 pale of these decisions. The laws of the country should be equally ad- 
 ministered to the poor and to the rich, to the red man and to the white 
 man. Arguing upon these j)i inci|)les, from every view of the case wiiicli 
 we have been able to take, we are led to the irresistible conclusion, that, 
 to establish thi.^ contract would be conti-ary to law, coutraiy to equity and 
 good conscienc<> ; and that it ought not, therefore, to be approved by the 
 President of the United States. 
 
 S. JONES, 
 JOS. BRYAN, 
 JNO. H. I'EIERS, 
 HKNRY Til OM ['SON, 
 Jttorneys for memorialists. 
 
 To the honorable T. Hartley Crawford and Jilfred Balch, commission- 
 ers of the United States for the ijivestigatioji of frauds upon the In- 
 dians of the Creek tribe holding reservations, (^t. 
 
 The memorial of James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, William Walker, 
 Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, res[)ccl fully sheweth : 
 
 That on the 28ili of August, 1836, tliey entered into a contract with 
 several chiefs of the Creek nation, acting on behalf of the individuals of 
 their tribo, whose claims to lands have either been certified and marked 
 for re\er)-al, or which had been sold and certified without authority in the 
 agents of the United States ; said tracts being contained in the reports of 
 th« investigating agents ; and also the individuals of their tiibe who had 
 not s(dil or disposed of their reserves under" the treaty of April 4, 1832, 
 for the jmr ( base of said tracts of land. 
 
 Youi- memorialists further stale, that they wer-e called upon by Major 
 General Jcsup. who then commanded the arnry of the South, to know upon 
 what ter ii;s tliey would bity said lands ; and that the piircliase was made 
 rtndei' his s^ticiioti, and with tiie aj)pr'oval of the ollrcer- who represented 
 the United States in 'he execution of the contract. Your memor'ialists 
 further state, that no fraud, artifice, combination, or unfair- practices wer-e 
 employed by them to obtain said ciitract. I'ltcy further state, that the 
 particular terms of said contract were arranged between the agents of 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 105 
 
 the United States and themselves; that they did not consult or advise 
 with the Indian chiefs aCoiesaid, but with the officers uf the United States, 
 who communicated the jjropositions of the Indians to them, and received 
 their answers for the Indians. 
 
 They further state, that tliey paid to Captain John B. Page thirty- 
 seven tliousand five liutidred (hiilais, and executed their note to him for the 
 same amount, payable fdur months after date to said Page, in trust for the 
 Indians, as a full coMsummation on their i)art of said contract. 
 
 They furthei* state, ihat it was provided in said contract that the con- 
 sent of each individual liolding said land should be presumed, unless he 
 should dissent before the consummation of the contract. 
 
 Your memorialists know of r.o cases of dissent, and pray that said con- 
 tract be executed, by aj>p(>iiitirig them a title to the lands therein specified. 
 
 They are informed that }ou liave the originals or copies of tlie reports 
 of (he investigating agents, as well as the said contract, which they pray 
 may be referred to for the natuie or extent of their claim. They state that 
 theie are some of the contracts contained in their reports to which they 
 are paities, and would pray that titles be confirmed. 
 
 There are niatiy contracts that your memorialists believe to have been 
 made in fraud of (he rights of the Indians located upon the reserve; they 
 pray tliat they may be permitted to contest these contracts. 
 
 There are (ontracts which your memorialists believe to be fair and bona 
 fide, and the purchasers willu g to pay for the same. They pray, as to 
 them, that the article of the contract in that behalf be enforced. 
 
 They pray that no contract be certified, witliout a ncjtice to them of the 
 application. They pray, finally, that the lands for which no valid out- 
 standing bonds have been taken, may be appraised and adjudged to them 
 accoi ding to the terms of the contract. 
 
 GEO. GOLDTHWAITE, 
 
 Jittorne'i) for memuriulists. 
 
 State or Alabama, 
 
 Macon county. 
 
 To Thomas Hartley Craivford and Jilfred Batch, Esqs., CommiS' 
 
 sioners, <5'C. 
 The memorial of Ware, Dougherty, and Company, and others, respect- 
 fully sheuefh : That your memorialists have been engaged since the 
 ratification of the treaty, made between the United States and the Creek 
 nation of Indians in 1832, for the cession of lands lying between the State 
 of Georgia and the then temporary line of the State of Alabama, in pur- 
 chasing lands reserved, and located to the chiefs and heads of families of 
 said Cieek natinii. That, among other lands, they have purchased many 
 tracts lying within McHenry's district, from the proper and genuine Indi- 
 ans ; but of which, certain individuals had before attempted to defraud 
 said Indians, by hiring or otherwise piocuring other Indians to personate 
 the rightful owners of said reservations, and in their name to go before 
 the certifying agent appointed by the President of the United States, and, 
 in his presence, to sign and contract for said reservation, and to receive 
 money for the same. These contracts maile with your memorialists are 
 ready to be shown, whenever the commissioners may require them. And. 
 youi' memorialists further show, that on the twenty-eighth day of August, 
 in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, a cer- 
 tain contract was made and entered inte by John A. Campbell, Esq., an 
 
106 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 aecnt anncinted bv Major General Jesnp on the ,.art of the United States, 
 six Indians prole'ssing t.. be chiefs in the Crerk .uU.on, and ^^e .ndmdu- 
 als for the sah' and purchase of the claim of the Indians to all he lands 
 included and en.braccd in contracts alleged to be fraudulent a'"' ;"'^'-l<^,'J 
 f..r reversal bvthe agent of the United States, I> ing NMthin Dr. Mel enrv s 
 district, Nvith the exception of certain tosvns therein excepted ; and lurlher 
 rieht of pre-emption to all the unsold tracts belonging to the Indians under 
 the treaty, and alsothose belonging to the families of .lead Indians who were 
 
 cntitled,"and lor which the sum of seventv-five thousand d.dlars was stipu- 
 lated, one half to be paid in cash, and the residue in four months : and wliicli 
 contract was, on the same day. sanctioned by Major General Jesup, sub- 
 iect to the ratification of the President of the I nited States. An.l >ou, 
 memorialists woul.l further show, that there were six hundred «>"! <• ty 
 two contracts marked for reversal by the agent of the Lnited States, 
 uhich will make the average value of each case erp.al to the sum of one 
 hundred and fifteen ^|^ dollars, without allowing any part ol the P"«'chase 
 money, as a consideration for the right of pie-emption secured by the 
 said contract to the said individuals. 
 
 And your memorialists further represent, that the said con ract was 
 made contrary to the provisions of the treaty, and without authority ot 
 law, or from the Indians, whose right and property Nvere intended to be 
 transferred: and is destructive of the rights and interests of your memori- 
 alists, and many other of the good citizens of this State, and ought not 
 to receive the sanction of the President of the United States, for the fol- 
 lowing reasons, to which your mem..rialists would take leave respectfully 
 to draw the attention of the commissioners: 
 
 1st. For that, by the second article of said treaty, ninety chiefs of said 
 Creek nation were allowed to select one section each, and every other head 
 of a familv to select one half section each; which tracts were to be re- 
 served from sale for their use, for the term of five years, unless sooner 
 disposed of by them ; and those selections were to be so made as to include 
 the improvements of each pers.m Avithin his selection, if practicable And 
 by the third article of said treaty, " the persons selecting the same wee 
 authorized to convey the tracts so selected to any "J '^';. 1'^';^""/;;',Vh o 
 consideration, in such manner as the President should direct. And b) the 
 fourth article of said treaty, the persons entitled to these selectmns and 
 desirous of remaining, were entitled to receive patents for the same in fee 
 simple from the Unifed States. These articles of the treaty are s. pan 
 and explicit, that c^cvy candid an.l reasonable mind n.ust admit that these 
 tracts, which had ther^f.fore been held hy the nation in common, were set 
 apart to individuals, to whom an inchoate right was secured, which might 
 be conveyed to other persons by iliem, and by them only, wiih the appn.ba- 
 tion of the President of the United States within five years from the date 
 of the treaty, and which, hv their continuance in possession for hat 
 length of time, would be ripened into a fee-simple title in them and the.r 
 l.ei?s. If this construction he correct, (and we ^^"""^ ^ rTi o'^hiofs 
 successfullv controverted,) such a title was veste. in each of tl'<"^e H efs 
 and heads of families as could not be .liveste.l hut by themselves, ^'Xl'^' I'X 
 sale or bv removal. A sale, with the approbation of the President would 
 c.nvey a'right to the title to the purchaser, and a voluntary removal heloc 
 such snie, and within five years would revest all the right secured by the 
 treaty to those Indians in the United States. Whatever right the nation, 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 107 
 
 or the chiefs, as the representatives of the nation, may have had to dispose 
 of those tracts of land before the treaty, was relinquished by that treaty ; 
 and all the riglits over the land before possessed by the nation became 
 vested, by tiie express words of the ti-eaty, in tiie United States, and sub- 
 modo, in the chiefs and heads of families. Tiie conclusion, then, is irresis- 
 tible, that the nation or cliiefs, as tlieir representatives, having parted with 
 all their rights, could not possibly convey any to those purchasers, or any 
 other individuals. Again, by a law of the United Stales, no individual, 
 or number of individuals, can be authorize*! to treat witli the Creek nation 
 for a cession ot" their lands, or any poi'tion of them. If we were, there- 
 fore, to admit the right of the chiefs, as chiefs and representatives of the 
 nation, to sell and dispose of the property of the individuals of the nation, 
 a cession of the lands belonging totlie nation could not, by law, be made to 
 any individual, or, indeed, to any other nation than the United States, or 
 some one of the States. Tlje dilemma, then, in which the j)urchasers are 
 placed, is truly unpleasant and difficult. If the land belonged to the nation, 
 it could not be conveyed to any individuals. If it belonged to individuals, 
 then the chiefs, as representatives of the nation, could not take from those 
 individuals the rights guarantied to them by the treaty. In the pream- 
 ble of the contract it is conceded that each head of a family was entitled 
 to a half seclioj) of land, and that the same has, pursuant to the provisions 
 of the treaty, been allotted to him ; but it seems to be insisted that reasons 
 of state authorize a divestment of their rights, and a disposition by the 
 nation of those reservations. We do not see the force of those reasons, 
 nor can we believe they will be considered of sufficiejjt legal force to take 
 away from the Indians their vested rights. It will not be denied that pri- 
 vate property may be taken for public uses, upon the payment of a just 
 compensation; but we cannot believe that clause of the constitution has 
 ever received, or ever will receive, a construction which would authorize 
 any person in authority, however high, to take away the property of one 
 individual and sell it to another ; nor can we believe that the distinguished 
 individual who is now Chief Magistrate of these United States would wish 
 to i)lace himself above tiie laws and the constitution, and arrogate to him- 
 self such rigiit, or countenance any construction, which would seek to place 
 such dangejous power in his hands. 
 
 2d. The contract alleges that the chiefs who made the contract have 
 advised their people to accede to a general disposition of their lands, and 
 have obtained their consent to remise, release, and foieverquit claim, &c., 
 to all and each of their right, title, and interest, and cluim. Now, if we 
 were disposed to avail ourselves of a strictly legal objection, we might 
 properly uige, tliat, altiiough such consent may have been given, yet the 
 said chiefs have never in pursuance of such consent, actually remised, 
 released, &c., the right or claim of said Indians. But we would prefer 
 to call your attention to more substantial objections to this part of the 
 contract. There is no evidence that any such consent was given, by the 
 Uidians having the right to the reservations, to the chiefs to dispose of them 
 in this manner. The fourth ])rovision in the contract, impliedly, if it does 
 not |)ositively, forbids such a conclusion. If the Indian had consented, and 
 autliorized such a conti-act befoi-e it was made, he could not be permitted 
 to refuse afterwards. If he did not, then it is necessary to show his consent 
 to the contiact after it was made. The purchasers certainly should be 
 
108 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 held to prove one m- tlie otlicr. By the regulations prescribed hy tiie 
 President, the consent of an Indian entitled to a reservation must be in 
 writing, signed by him in the presence of the agent. We will not requiic 
 tiieni to be luM to ibis strictness; but we sutel) cannot be considered un- 
 reas(»nabN', wlien wo ncjuirc some hgal »">idenceor fiiis consent to the dis- 
 j)osilion of ihe land sicured to them by tbe treaty. AVidi such consent, the 
 sale migiit be \alid; without, it cannot be legal. None lias}et been shown, 
 and we |)resume none exists- as it is so important that it would not be 
 williheid if it could be produced. 
 
 S(\. N^ e will not, however, content ourselves with urging the entire 
 abseiKeol'all evidence of such consent to the sale, wliich the parties claim- 
 ing under this contiact are bound to j)roduce; but we urge that, so far 
 from any consent having been given by the Indians entitled to the lands, 
 most of them were not even represented by the chiefs of their towns, 
 or any other person ; and that the chiefs who were present, an<l signed the 
 contract, were either deceived, or acted without advising with and obtain- 
 ing the consent of the individuals in the towns to which tbe chiefs belonged. 
 
 There are twenty-four chiels belonging to the towns includtd in Doctor 
 McHenr}'s district, in which the lands lie which ha\e been convened by 
 the contract. Ninety principal c hiefs aie recognised by the treaty as 
 belonging to Ihe nation; twenty-four of these belong to the towns included 
 in this contrac t. Only six cliiels have signed the contract. The most for 
 which the purchasers can possibly contend, in the absence of all proof of 
 the consetit of the Indian to this sale of his reservation, is the implied au- 
 thority which the chief of the town has over the individuals of tliat town. 
 Of the six chiefs who signed the contract, four belong to the Tuckabatchee 
 town, one to 'riilobthlocco or Jim Boy's tow n, and one to tbe Tallassee 
 town. The chief of the last town declared, when he signed the contract, 
 that he had not the assent of his people. Jim Boy has since declareci that, 
 although he signed the conti-acN he did not understand it; and he therefore 
 could not have befoie obtained the consent of his peoj)le. And the 'I'ucka- 
 batcbee chiefs, when they assembled tbeii- people to pay them the |)ro rata 
 valuation, were told l)y their people that they had made no sale, and would 
 receive no money : nor did they receive any from them. The first is 
 proved by the entry of General Jesup on the contract, which enlr-y is 
 signed by him ; and the others will be pr'oved to the satisfaction of the 
 commissioners, by competent evidence. There ai'e seventeen towns in- 
 cluded in the ciitract; only three have been [jretended to have been repre- 
 sented by tlicir- chiefs; and they will be pro\ed to have acted without any 
 aut!iorit> : hfteen towns were, theiefor'e, wholly unr-epi-esented. 
 
 4th. By the thiid provision, the money stipulated to be paid was to be 
 paid to the Indian entitled to llie land, in the presence of the chief and an 
 ofticer- of the United States; and this contract cannot be consummated till 
 that is done. J here is not the slightest exidence that any payment has 
 been made to a single Indian entitled to the land. The proof exlubited 
 sliows that it lias not, and cannot be done. It has been paid to the six 
 chiefs wlio signed the c< ntr-act and to Tu'-conee Iladjo, a chiei of the 
 Fish-|(ond town, who never signed the contiact, whose town is not in 
 M( Henry's district, and whose people were not entitled to an acrr. If we 
 may be allowed the expression, it appears like an attempt on llie part of 
 these chiefs either to swindle their jjeople out of their money, who have al- 
 
I Doc. No. 274. J 109 
 
 ready been defrauded of tlieir lands, or to swindle the purcliasers. Be 
 this as it may, the Indians v\lio were entitled to the land jjave never re- 
 ceived one dollar of tite money, and in all probability never will. 
 
 5th. The consideration given t'oi* the claim or right of the Indians is 
 wholly inadequate to the value of the property conveyed by the contract. 
 By the report of Colonel Hogan, there are six hundred anfl fifty-tw) cases 
 reported for reversal; the average value of each would be one hundred and 
 fifteen dollars and three cents. There are \evy few tracts uow hcl(»nging 
 to the Indians in McHenry's distiict worth less than that price, and there 
 are many worth eight hundred or one thousand dollars. Besides, with this 
 average value for each of the contested claims, there will be nothing paid 
 for the right of pre-emption of the unsold tracts, and those behmging to 
 families of rcservees wlio died before their lands were sold. We are not 
 loft to our opinion upon this subject. An offer was made to Opothe 
 Yoholo of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the same lands con- 
 tained in this contract. If General Jesup was acting in beiialfof the 
 Indians, to protect their rights, or if Mr. Campbell was appointed by him 
 in pursuance of the letter of the Secretary of War, '* at the desire ot the 
 liulians to see tliat justice was done them," it would ai'gue gi'eat obliquity 
 of intellect to believe that justice was done in advising and inducing thejn 
 to take seventy-five thousand dollars, instead of double that sum, for the 
 same lands conveyed by that contract. At the same time that this con- 
 tract was negotiating, there were pui-chasers with ample means of payment, 
 and Indians desirous to convey, under the sti[)ulations pi'escribed by the 
 President, the lands belonging to them ; and they were not permitted to do so 
 f )r want of an agent to witness the cotitracts and to certify them. We will not 
 further utge upon the commissioners the total inadequacy of tha conside- 
 ratioti paid to the value of the property conveyed. We feel satisfied our- 
 selves of that fact, and believe it must be apparent to all. We feel assured, 
 also, that it will appear manifest that the Indians entitled to the land have 
 not been paid any money, and are not likely to be paid ; that the chiefs 
 who made and signed the contract, have acted without authority from 
 the Indians; that the President cannot approve it, without a total disre- 
 gard of the constitution and laws of the land atid of the rights of the In- 
 dians; and that its sanction will be a consummation of the greatest fraud 
 that has yet been practised upon that poor deluded people. 
 
 SEABORN JONES, 
 WM. DOUGHERTY, 
 JOSEPH BRYAN, 
 JOHN H. PETERS, 
 HENRY THOMPSON, 
 Attorneys for memorialists. 
 
 The following is submitted to the commissioners, in reply to the argu- 
 ment of the counter-memorialists, in the matter of James C. Watson and 
 others : 
 
 It is contended by the counter-memorialists, that it is necessary to estab- 
 lish by proof that the individual reservees delegated to the chiefs signing 
 the contract the authority to dispose of the lands embraced by its provisions. 
 If this was a case in which the two parties only (the chiefs signing, and 
 the grantees) were concerned, it is admitted that the authority of the chiefs 
 thus to dispose of the tracts selected by the individual reservees would be 
 
no [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 necessary to be established by proof. But the contract under considera- 
 tion is executed by the United Slates as well as the Indian ; and, in the 
 cthcial (listhaige of their duties, it is not to be supposed that the oflicers 
 representing the Government on that occasion, and ie(|uired by every ob- 
 ligation of duty to prevent the practice of fraud anil imposition, would 
 permit the exercise of an authority by the chiefs, if any doubt existed as 
 to the delegation of this authority to thcnj by the individual reservees. It 
 was for them to supervise, direct, and control tlie contract, in such a man- 
 ner as would protect the interests of the iridiviilual reservees, and fulfil 
 the substantial reijuisitions of the treaty. It is to be presumed that the 
 degree of evidence ofTer-ed to ihose who represented the United States in 
 the contract, was sulficient to convince their minds that the reservees au- 
 thorized the chiefs contracting to dispose of iheir' interest in the reserves. 
 Again : the same proof has been made in relation to the present contr-act, 
 which is required by the pi-escribed regulations of the Government, or 
 which is necessary under the treaty ; by the third article of which, it is 
 required that the "contracts" for the sale of selected lands shall be cer- 
 tified by some jicrson appointed by the President for that pui pose. The 
 contract, by i-eference to the same article, is a conveyance on a fair con- 
 sideratifin. To comply v\rth the treaty, therefore, son»e olliccr", appointed 
 5y the President, must certify to the conveyance and consideration, which 
 constitute the contract. Is a greater degree of evidence necessary in this 
 case ? Or;e of the highest othcers of the Government, appointed for that 
 purpose, sanctions the contract, and thus certifies the same. This evidence 
 is before the commissioners, and is of as high a character* as that on which 
 the other contracts for the sale of Creek reserves are approved. 
 
 But it is said that this contract is in contravention of the instructions of 
 the Government to General Jesup; and that, being rontrary to their express 
 instirictions, it would be unwise and impolitic in (he Gover-nment to sanc- 
 tion it by their- apjnoval. It is to be reiollected that hy far the most im- 
 portant duty that devolved upon that officer (General Jesup) at me termi- 
 nation of the Creek hostilities, was the immediate removal of the tribe to 
 the country assigned them west of the Mississippi. AHolhcr object of in- 
 struction was the raising of an Indian for-ce to assist in the prosecution of 
 the war against the Seminoles. Howwere these two objects, the subject 
 of direct instructions, to be effected? The Indians were unwilling to r-e- 
 move ; and they were equally averse to raising the force r'eijuired by the 
 Government, withowt the settlement of certain pr-climinaries, which ar'e 
 fully stated in the communication of Colonel Camjibell ; and, among these, 
 the settlement of their disputed land claims was insisted upon ; and, from 
 the statements of their chiefs, these claims formed the pr incipal objection 
 to their immediate emigration. Under these circumstances, some dispo- 
 sition was necessary to be made of these claims, before the main object of 
 instructions could be effected. The Go\ernmerit demanded the immediate 
 removal of the Creeks : and to adopt the mode prescribed by the Secretary 
 of War, as to the dis|)osition of the selections made under the treaty of 
 1832, or that which had been suggested by Captain Page, and recommend- 
 ed by the Department to General Jesup, would bring with it a delay ren- 
 dering the requisitions of the Govirnment, as to the immediate removal 
 of the indians, impossible. 'I'lie instructions v\ere two-fold. The fir'st 
 coni( ni|)lated the imincdiiitc removal of the tiilie ; and the second, the set- 
 tlerMut of their land claims. If the particular mode rec(jriimcnded by 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 144 
 
 the Dopartment in relation to the latter object would, by a strict and lit- 
 eral pursuance of its tet ins, eitlier prevent or endanger the former, no 
 objection can be peiceived to the adopting some otiier mode than that re- 
 commended by the Department, if it was necessary to effect the end pro- 
 posed, provided it v\as equally in agreement with the spirit and mean- 
 itig of the treaty, and in accordance with the laws of Alabama. Since 
 the suggestion of the mode by Captain Page, (before referred to,) the re- 
 lation between the Government and tiie Indian had been, in some degree^ 
 changed by tlic hostilities scarcely tei'minafed. As far as the rights of 
 the Indian is concern* d, it is obvious that no injury could result from pur- 
 suing a mode differing from that directed by the Department, provided 
 the rights stdemnly secured to them by the treaty were observed and 
 respected. I'his, we apprehend, is the important question. And when 
 once settled that the terms of the contract are in agreement with the 
 provisions of the treaty, it seems to follow that it should receive the sanc- 
 tion of the Executive. Motives of expediency and policy induced its exe- 
 cution. The Government is not only a party to the instrument, but has 
 taken a benefit under it, by the immediate reduction of an expense esti- 
 mated by General Jesup at near ten thousand dollars a day ; and also the 
 procurement of the Indian force ; both of which, aIthoug!i they may not 
 be included in the terms of the contract, are the consequences of its exe- 
 cution. Tlie interests of third |)arties have become deeply involved. On 
 the faith of the Government the contract was executed ; and to them the 
 good failh of the Government is j)ledged for its ratification. 
 
 If, however, the contract is in violation of the treaty, or the laws of 
 Alabama, in which State the contract was made, no considerations of ne- 
 cessity or policy should induce the sanction of the Executive to it. 
 
 ^Ve are thus brought to a consideration of the arguments of the counter- 
 memorialists, as to the validity and legality of the provisions of the con- 
 tract, with reference to the treaty of 1832, and the statutes of Alabama. 
 
 On the first point, it is contended that the contract under consideration 
 is in violatiorr of the third article of the treaty, which, they say, forbids the 
 disposition of the reserves to be made by any other than ** the persons se- 
 lecting the same;" and the I'eason assigned in srrppoit (»f this branch of 
 the argument is, that the conveyance by any other person than the res- 
 ervee, aithoiigb he be fully author-ized by hinr, is in violation of the "lit- 
 eral terms" of the article of the treaty above referred to. 
 
 Admitting, for the pr-esent, that the exercise of a delegated authority 
 in the sale of the reserves is a departure from the '* literal terms " of the 
 treaty, the objection is fully answered by showing it to be within the 
 spirit and meaning of that instrument; and no other construction can be 
 placed on the third article, than that the Indian should be allowed to dis- 
 pose of his reserve to the best advantage and for his own benefit ; and this 
 end can be attained as well, and in many cases better, by the delega- 
 tion of this power to another-, tharr by the exercise of it in person. In some 
 cases it would be difliicirlt or imi)ossible for the reservee to execute this 
 power otherwise than by agent, as in the case of absence and infirmity; 
 and could that be regar-ded as a fair and liberal construction, which would 
 deprive the party of an intended benefit, depentlent upon his will, because 
 the exei'cise of that will was manifested thr'ough the agency of another I 
 If it isclear that the individual r^eservee consented to the sale, and received 
 a fair consideration, it is all tiiat the treaty requires. 
 
112 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 It is (loubtful wlictlier a conveyance executed by an agent c;\n properly 
 be considered a departure even fi-om the '* literal terms" of the treaty. 
 The execution of conveyances by agents falls witliin ot>e of the first max- 
 ims of the law; and it is believed that not asinglecase can be piodured, in 
 ^\hich a mere executoi'y act cannot be performed by agent. Kveii trust 
 ])owers, jealously as they are regarded by the law, can be executed by at- 
 torney, unless a personal trust and confidence is implied, or in discretion- 
 ary case>*, \Nhich, from their natuie. cannot be delegated. In this case, the 
 individual reservees are willing to dispose of theii- interest for a speci- 
 fied sum ; the j)iice is agreed upon, and they aufhorize their chiefs to exe- 
 cute the conveva?>ce. It is the act of conveyancing alone which is delega- 
 ted, and in that act is implied neitlier confidence nor discretion ; the discre- 
 tion, if any exists, as to the mr)de or manner of conveyancirig, being by the 
 treaty committed to the President ahme. If these conclusions are coi-rect, 
 it may be asked, of what use are the woids of the second ai-ticle of the 
 treaty, iM'oviding that the selections "maybe ccmveyed by the persons 
 St'Kcting the same ?'* We atiswei", they define only by w liom the disposing 
 ])ower may be exercised ; but they do not forbid the exercise of tliat pow- 
 er by another. Tne woi-d "convey," immediattly pre(eding, cannot give 
 a diflTerent meaning ; because what the conveyance is to be, is by the same 
 article left entirely at the discretion ui' the Picsident. If the woi'd *• con- 
 vey " is to be taken in its most refined and technical sense — if by it is meant 
 an instrument of writing alone, why refer to the discretion of the President 
 in \^hat manner this conveyance Khf»iild be made ? If a specified mode was 
 defined by the treaty, the special mo !e must be |»ursued, to the exclusion 
 of all others, and would e(jually pteilude the appointment of any other by 
 the President. We insist, thereloie, that the mode of conveyance, whether 
 in person or by agent, in writing or by parol, is not pi-escribed by the 
 treaty, but is left entirely at tin* discreti<m of the Piesident, for him to 
 adopt that course which would most efTectually guard the disposing pow- 
 ei" of tlie rcsei'vee fi'om fraud and imposition. 
 
 That the President has prescribed a course differing from that pursued 
 by Gencrul Jesup in the present instance, is no argument against the va- 
 lidity or legality of the contract, considered with reference to the provi- 
 sions of the ti'caty. The dii-ecting and controlling power is vested in the 
 President ; and it will not be denied that he can change or modify the reg- 
 ulations for the sale of reserves as he may tiiink proper, or as necessity 
 or circumstances may refjuire. As to the second point, it is contended by 
 the counter-memoiialists that the contract falls within the statute of frauds 
 of Alabama, and is consequently void. In reply, the memorialists urge 
 that the treaty commits to the Presidewt the sj)ecies as well as the form 
 of the contract, w ithout reference to tlie statute of frauds : that, without his 
 sanction, the contract is migatory and void, deriving its existence as a va- 
 lid conveyance only from the time of his approval. 
 
 But the memorialists further insist on this, subject, that apart from 
 the treaty, upon principle, the p«)\\rr to alienate the inteiest possessed 
 by the reservee can by him be didegated to another by parol. The stat- 
 ute of frauds of Alabama is almost identical with the English statute 
 29th Chailes II, on that subject ; and utidcr this section, it has been deter- 
 mined that in certain cases, a paiol or verbal authoiity to con'ract is suffi- 
 cient. Does the case of Watson and others fall within these cases ? 
 
 It is contended, on the other part, that these adjudications refer only to 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 113 
 
 sales at auction, and that between such cases and the present a wide 
 distinction exists. The distinction which is stated to exist between 
 the two cases is, that those are public, these private ; there, the agent 
 signs tlie name of his principal ; in this case, the agents have signed their 
 own names. 
 
 The distinction first staled docs not exist, as the testimony on the part of 
 the counter-memorialists shows, which states that the terms of the con- 
 tract were under consideration for some days ; that the witnesses them- 
 selves possessed full knowledge of the salej that many others were pre- 
 sent. From their testimony, the publicity of the sale is clearly shown. 
 This is also confirmed by the statement of Colonel Campbell, as to the 
 manner in which the negotiation was conducted. The cases cited by the 
 counter-memorialists will be found, on examination, not to have been de- 
 cided on either of the above giounds, but on principles of necessity and 
 public policy in those particular cases. Since the determination of those 
 cases, the authorities have gone much further ; and as the law at present 
 stands, the signature of the auctioneer only, or even his clerk, is held to 
 be a sufficient signing within the statute. [Coles vs. Trecothick, 9 Ves. 
 251; Blorevs. Sutton, 3 Meiiv. 246; Blagden vs. Bradbear, 12 Ves. 
 466; Buckmaster vs. Harross, 13 Ves. 472; Kemmeys vs. Proctor, 3 
 Ves. and Bea. 59 ; Emerson vs. Hulis, 2 Taunt. 47.] In the case of 
 Coles vs. Trecothick, the sale, although made by an auctioneer, was a pri. 
 vate one, and t!)e signing by the clerk as liis agent. In the case before the 
 commissioners, the parties are described in the contract, and the names of the 
 chiefs are signed as agents for the reservees, and the sale is a public one. 
 What distinction can be drawn in the one case, which does not equally 
 exist in the other ? And considei-ations of necessity and policy apply, if pos- 
 sible, morestiongly to the contract under consideration. Again : tlie stat- 
 ute does not make tlie contract void ; it only denies the remedy ; and the 
 benefit of its ptovisiotis can only be claimed by the parties who are souglit 
 to be chai'^^ed, and tijen only when brought to the special notice of the 
 courts. In this case, the parties do not claim the benefit of tlie st;\tute; 
 but the advantage is claimed by strangers, unknown to the contract, and 
 affected by none of its provisions. It was not in favor of volunteers that 
 the statute was intended to oj)eratc. Under this branch of the argument, 
 it may be necessary to examine the quantity of estate possessed by the 
 reservee; for it is clear that, if he has no interest that can be recognised 
 as an alienable estate by the laws of this State, the statute of frauils 
 cannot operate on what does not exist. Has the reservee, under the t/ea- 
 ty, a disposable estate ? By disposable, we mean a union of the will with 
 the act ; which, of itself, is sufficient to pass the interest to another. The 
 answer is obvious, that he has not ; because the grantee can take no in- 
 terest from him until sanctioned and approved by the Government, in 
 whom the fee resides. The United States, seised in fee, grant to the re- 
 servee the use, for five years, with the power to alienate, subject to tiieir ap- 
 proval. The fee still resides in the Government, and the conveyance by 
 the reservee, of itself, passes no title. The title is passed only on the a|)- 
 probation of the Government, and is manifested by the issuance of the 
 patent, which perfects the title of the purchaser in the manner defined by 
 the treaty. Tliat the reserves are public lands, is clear from the fifth ar- 
 ticle of the treaty, which is in these words: "All intruders upon the 
 country hereby ceded, shall be removed therefrom in the same manner as 
 8 
 
114 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 intruders may be removed from other public lands, until the country is 
 surveyed and the selections niadej excepting, lidwever, from this provi- 
 sion, those white persons who have made their own improvements and not 
 expelled the Creeks from theirs. Such persons may lemain until their 
 crops are gatiiered. After the country is surveyed, and the selections 
 made, this article shall not ojjerate on that part of it not included in such 
 selections. IJut intruders shall, in the manner bef«)re describe<l. be re- 
 m«Aed from these selections for the term i f iUe years from the ratification 
 »)f this treaty, or until the same is conveyed to white ])ersons/' Anterior 
 to the execution of the treaty, Alabama had extended her jurisdiction over 
 the territory subsequently ceded. (See Aik. Dig.) Without inquiring into 
 the constitutionality of the laws of Alabama on this sul>ject, it will be 
 sullicient to observe that this doctrine has received the assent of her judi- 
 ciary. The United States were the owners of the soil, the jurisdiction of 
 which belonged to Alabama. Of course, any article of the treaty pro\i- 
 ding for the removal of intruders upon lands belonging to the citizens of 
 Alabama, or within her jurisdiction, not being public lands, in any other 
 way than the one recognis«d by the laws of that State, would be unauthor- 
 ized and ilh gal. The intruders upon seh ttions are to be lemoved in the 
 sane manner as intruders on other public lands ate renmved, for the term 
 of five years, or until the same are con\eyed to while persons. By the 
 tteaty, theiefore, the reserves are considei* d as j.-ublic lands. They were 
 so co'nsideird by the Secretary of War, in his correspondence with Gov- 
 ernor Ga}le, bearing date 5th September, 1833, in which he observes : 
 " The other limitation of the treaty is as to the district of country, confi- 
 ning the obligation of the Government to remove intruders on the tracts 
 located to the Indians after the country is surveyed and the selections 
 made. It is obvious, therefore, that the treaty imposes on the Govern- 
 ment the dutv of removing intruders from these lands. 1 may add the 
 fact, that the whole subject was fully explained to the Cretk chiefs previ- 
 ouslv to tlie execution of the treaty, and they were told what were the 
 kga'l poweis of the Government upon this subject, and how they would be 
 cai ried into effect. They were told by the Tresident, that as the land, 
 by the cession, would become the property of the United Stales, all in- 
 trudeis may be lemoved, as they may be iemo\ed from other public lands." 
 These extracts show that, in the opinion of the Government at that time, 
 thev were public lands, and could no more be disposed of by the Iinlian 
 who had tiie use of them, without the consent of the United States, than 
 anv other portion of the public domain. 
 
 '1 hat the exercise of an authority delegated by parol by the individual 
 reseivee to the chiefs, as in this case, has been sanctioned by the Govern- 
 ment, the commissioners are referred to the instructions from the War 
 Depailnunt to Messrs. Benson, Martin, and Fit/patrick, directing them, 
 if possible, to procure a delegation of chiefs to jjrocred to Washington, 
 authorized to treat for the sale of the reserves. At the time these instruc- 
 tions were given, it is believed that the reserves had not been located; but 
 while the whole suijject w'as under the consideration of the Department, 
 as well as the action of the commissioners, these selections were made 
 and the reserves located : and it was not until some time after the location 
 of these reserves, that the project was abandoned ; and then, not for any 
 wai.r of authority on llie jiart of the Government to make the j)urcl:ase 
 of the delegation, but because the reservees were at that time opposed to 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 115 
 
 sale. That the undivided interest to these tracts is in the United States, 
 receives further confirmation from the opinion of the Aitorney General, 
 cited in the first argument ; and the decision of the supreme court of 
 Alabama, as to the quantity of interest held by the reservee under the treaty. 
 
 The counter-memorialists, upon this point, urge, first, that thereservees 
 have an estate upon condition expressed in the gi-ant ; and, secondly, that 
 having this estate, any contract for the sale of it is necessary to be in wri- 
 ting, by the statute of frauds. 
 
 If the reservee has an estate upon condition, they err when from these 
 premises the conclusion is drawn that the estate is therefore either dispo- 
 sable or inheritable. Any estate which has a condition annexed to it, be-- 
 comcs an estate upon condition ; and it may be an estate not disposable by 
 the tenant, as an estate for years, limited to the person of the grantee, or 
 it n)ay be both disposable and inheritable. The fact, if it exist, of the 
 reservee having an estate upon condition, proves nothing. The question 
 is, Is the estate such as the leservee can, by his own act, dispose of? And 
 this question is doubly answered by the treaty, which refers the disposi- 
 tion to the President, allowing the reservee not in reality to convey, but 
 simply to direct the conveyance. That the Indian may contract for the 
 sale of his reserve, is stii)ulate(l by the treaty. The form of tlie contract 
 has not been prescribed by that instrument, and is nugatory and void un- 
 til approved by the President. Even then, it does not |)ass a perfect right 
 to the })urchaser, but only gives to him the right to demand a conveyance 
 from them. The engagements of the United States did not give to the 
 reservee more than the use of a portion of the lands ceded by the first ar- 
 ticle of the treaty, for five years, with the right, at the termination of that 
 period, to demand the fee himself, or in the mean time to direct the grant 
 of the fee to an approved purchaser from him. The contract to sell, can 
 only be considered as directing the United States to convey the title re- 
 tained in them to a ])aiticular purchaser; and this direction of title is 
 committed to t!ie discretion of the President, and can, sanctioned by him, 
 as well be exercised by parol as by the most solemn and technical instru- 
 ment. 
 
 It is contended by the memorialists, that the contract under considera- 
 tion does not fall within the statute of frauds : First, because the pa- 
 rol delegation of authority by the reservees to the chiefs brings the sign- 
 ing of the latter within the statute ; Secondly, because, imder the treaty, 
 he has not that degree of estate on which the statute can operate; and. 
 Lastly : because the present contract presents a peculiar case for the equu 
 table consideration of the President, expressly vested in him by the treaty, 
 in relation to all contracts for the sale of leseives. whether verbal or- 
 written, without refeience to the statute of frauds. 
 
 The memorialists have executed the contract, by the payment of one- 
 half of the consideration ; and the Gctvertiment, to whose consideration it 
 is committed, have in their own case sanctioned, by their instruction, the 
 same course of proceeding which has been adopted in the present in- 
 stance. 
 
 It is contended also by the counter-memorialists, that, apart from 
 all other considerations, the inadequacy of the price paid by the memori- 
 alists is so great as to vitiate the contract ; and authorities have been 
 introduced to show the instances on which the courts have either set aside 
 contracts on this ground, or refused to entertain bills for specific perform?- 
 
tie [ Doc. jNo. 274. ] 
 
 ancc. In all the cases cited, tlieie were other circumstances tending to 
 show that fraud or iiiipo.sition had heen |iractise«l or attempted by the 
 party seeking ilie interpusition of the court; and, on this presumption of 
 fraud, rendered conclusive by tlie union of circumstarjces, was the relief 
 decreed. 
 
 It is admitted, also* that where tl»c inadequacy is so great, or (in the 
 language of the law) so sluHking. as to force the mind to the conclusion 
 that no one in the. possessinu oi his senses could thus have bargained 
 reliel is granted, not on account of the inadequacy, but because the inad- 
 equacy is so great as to be legardcd as conclusive evidence of Iraud. 
 \> liere. however, the inade(juacy is not so great as to carry fraud upon its 
 face, and is not attended by fraudulent circumstances, it is mit sullit lent. 
 (16 Ves. 83 ; Pow. on Contracts ; 2 Har. 14. 16 ; Ves. 517 j 2 John. Rep. 
 1 ; 14 Jdin. Rep. 5^27 ; 1 1 John. Rep. 559.) 
 
 The (juestion is (hen reduced to whether ihe sum of seventy-five thou- 
 sand d<)llars. tlie coiisidecittion .stipulated in the (untract, is so disj)ortion- 
 ate lo liie \ aloe of the lands embraced by the Mist artirlc of that instru- 
 ment, (the other lands being taken at valuation.) as to pollute and Nitiate 
 the c.oritiaci. One witness swears that tiie wliole number of disputed 
 lands are w«)rth two hundred ihousand dollars. Another witness swears 
 that some of the tracts were worth, on an aveiage, one thousand dollars. 
 The reports of tlie contracts maiked (or reversal are before the commis- 
 sioners ; and on reference to those repoits, it will be found that the whole 
 number of reser\es, the subject of the contracts marked for- reversal, were 
 originally certilicd at the sum of one hundred and for tv -four- thousand dol- 
 lars. These certifrcalions include all the lands conveyed by the first article 
 of the contract, and were made by the olUcers of the United Stales ap- 
 pointed by the President for- that purpose. It is for- the commissioners to 
 say whether' the olKcei-s of the treaty, or- these witnt-sses. are correct 
 in their- estimates of the \alue. Sirrce these contiacls have been marked 
 for iTversal, one hundred ami four have beerr r-e' eriilied on new contracts, 
 at the sum of twenty-five thousand thr-ee hun<!red dollars. Estimating the 
 whole of the rever-sed tracts in the same jrroportion, tlie value of tlie whole 
 number* would be near one hundred and sixty thousand dollai-s. Deduct- 
 ing from this amount IIdso tracts which have beerr recer-tified, and al- 
 lowing thirty-three anrl a third jrer" c^nt. for- those contr'acls marked for 
 reversal which will probably he sustained, (which, it is btlie\e<l. i-a fair 
 estimate of the certified value of them,) the remaining contr-acts will not 
 amount to (|uite ninety thousand dollar-s. If the valuation of the wilm-sses is 
 ad«)pte<l as a basis of caldilation, the tracts are w<nth oire hundred and 
 sixteen ihousarul dollars ; and if the original certificatioir of the original 
 contracts, they amount to between seventy-nine and eighty thousand rlol- 
 lais. If the mean valuation of the three estimates is taki*n, the value of 
 the trads exceeds, by a fraction, the sum of ninelvfive thousand dollars. 
 
 In these calcrrlations, it is believed that the allowance made (to- those 
 contracts which will be supported, will be fourrd to have been too snrall. 
 The courrter--nrerrrorialists have shown rro circumstarrce indicative (d p(»si- 
 tive fraud irr the contract ; and w hirlrever- mode of calculation is adopted, 
 it is clear- that, rrrider- all the circumstances, the consideration (annot bo 
 regarded as iria(hr|iia(e. The tr-ouble, expense, and delay, irr litiga- 
 ting or com|)roin!siiig ail (he contracts marked for i-e\ei-sal. ar-c also to 
 be cuirsidered. It rr.ay be added, that the coiisidciatiorr was deeoied a 
 
[ Doc. No. 27 1. ] li7 
 
 fair equivivlent by the officers appointed by the President, and by the chiefs 
 selected by the nation. It was so considered by llie certifying agents pre- 
 viously ap])oiiitcd by the Government as is shown from their valuation; 
 and, as far as the evidence discloses, )t was so considered by those who 
 were present ; for, althougli one witness swears that he offeied a greater 
 sum for the land, yet (he same witness, from his own evidence, was pres- 
 ent when the parties were negotiating the terms of the contract, and did 
 not rej)eat the offer. What is the presumption ? He believed, according to 
 his own statement, that the lands were worth a much greater amount ; and 
 with the full knowledge tiiat they were about to be disposed of fur the con- 
 sideration stated in the conti-act, he stands by, permitting the sale to go 
 on, without repeating the offer (previously made by him) to the agents of 
 Government, whose duty would have required them, if he had either the will 
 or the ability to pay the price, to accept it. There is but one conclusion: 
 either that he was in reality unable to pay the amount, or that, on consider- 
 ation, he had declined doing so. Or, perhaps, in making the offer he had ex- 
 ceeded his authoiity. The testimony as to the declarations of Jim Boy is 
 illegal — being derived through the medium of Indian and negro interpre- 
 ters, who are, by the laws of Alabama, incompetent witnesses. (See Aik. 
 Digest.) If their oaths cannot be admitted, a fortiori their statements 
 cannot. Independent of these ol)jections, circumstances show that these 
 statements, if made by that chief, were untrue, and made thr«)ugh motives 
 of policy, to preserve terms with the whites, by whom he was surrounded. 
 (See testimony of General Woodward.) It is also in evidence that Jim 
 Boy understands sonjething of the English language. That the negotia- 
 tion was conducted publicly, and explained at the time, is proved not only 
 by the witnesses sworn, but by the statements of Colonel Campbell and Cap- 
 tain Page ; and the same chief is found receiving his proportion of the 
 purchase money. 
 
 By the third article of the contract, it is provided '< that the money here- 
 inaftei' sti[)ulated to be paid, shall be paid totlie Indian entitled to the land, 
 in the presence of the chief and an officer of the United States." And it 
 is charged that the payments have not been made in the manner required 
 by this article, and tliat, therefore, the memorialists are entitled to no 
 benefit of the contract. By the last article of the same instrument, 
 seventy-five thousand dollars is to be paid by the memorialists — one half 
 upon tlie sealing of the contract, to the agent of the United States who 
 shall be appointed to receive the same ; and the balance in four uionths, at 
 Fort Gibson. The third article applies only to the United States and the 
 reservees, and regulates the terms of payment to them, and does not apply 
 to the memorialists ; and if the payment is made by them in the manner 
 stipulated by the last article of the contract, and thus placed beyond their 
 control, no reason can be assigned why they should be held responsible, 
 on account of any alteration between the United States and the reservee. 
 That this j)ayment has been made to the agent of the United States ap- 
 pointed to receive it, in the exact mode in which by the contract they stip- 
 ulated, appears from the receipt of Captain Page, endorsed upon the con- 
 tract. The reasons, as well as the necessity of the alteration of the nn)de 
 of payment from the Government agent to the Indian, is fully explained 
 in the communication of Colonel Campbell ; and by the testimony of the 
 witness, Ta>lor, it is established that the reservees of one town received 
 their proportion of the purchase-money. That the number of the reservees 
 
118 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 who were paid docs not correspond with the number of contracts marked 
 for reversal, in tlic town to which tliis pavment was made, is properly 
 referrihie to tlie other payment, wliicli was shortly to he made ; oi-, that 
 those claims only are ronsidered as Iraudulent by the Itidiai>, in which the 
 reservee was jjcisonated, and not those contracts which have been marked 
 for reversal on other or merely lormal grounds. However it may be, it 
 i^ould be dillicult to conceive how the terms oC the conti-act on the part of 
 the memorialists could have been more fully complied with ; and equally 
 difficult to assign any leason why their rights should be aftected by an 
 alteration in the teinis of the contract, made without their consent, oi- even 
 by the neglect of those rej)resenting tlie United States in com|)l>ing with 
 their stij)ulations. That the contract was altered by the L nited States 
 and the Indian, as to the mode of payment fiom the agent of Govern- 
 ment, is admitted ; and equally certain is it, as stated by Colonel Camp- 
 bell, that circumstances rendered it absolutely necessary that a different 
 mode of pa}ment should be adopted. This was done for the security of 
 the Indians, was a matter of arrangeme»it between tliem and the United 
 States, and was neither suggested nor recommended by the mimorialists. 
 
 By the article of the contract is secured to the leservee the right 
 
 to dissent before he receives the payment in the mar.nei- stipidated in that 
 article. This was intended as a farther security for the rights of the res- 
 ervee, if he should either be dissatisfied witii the provisions of the contract, 
 or be able to make a more favorable disposition of his reserve. If, by the 
 accejjtance of his pioportion of the consideration, lie received a benefit 
 under the contract, his assent was rightly to be presumed ; and if he dissent- 
 ed, equal justice required a proportionate deduction to be made Irom the 
 purchase-money. The same equity and good faith are apparent in every 
 provision of the contract — the interests of the Indian jealously and faith- 
 fully protected, and the rights of bona fide purchasers in all cases respected. 
 The motives which induced the execution of the contract have been sus- 
 pected ; and the memorialists must be permitted to expr'ess their- surprise 
 that the validity of the contract is impeached, and its equities impugned, 
 only by those who claim to occupy the situation of bona hue purchasei's. 
 As claims of this character are specially protected by the contract, they 
 are at a loss to conceive how the rights of those individuals can be aftected. 
 Some explanation may possibly be found in that article of the contract 
 which, by its oj)eration, substitutes, in the place of the Indian, parties 
 more competent to defend their- rights, and better qualified to unra>el the 
 web of fraud in which many of the contracts marked for reversal ar-e 
 enveloped. 
 
 Irr conclusion, we have only to repeat, that in the opinion of the memo- 
 rialists the contract is in agreement with the j)rovisions of the tr-eaty. 
 It has been publicly executed and publicly acknowledged. It has received 
 the sanction of one of the highest officers of the Government, given with the 
 full knowledge of all the circumstances. The par ties are not dissatisfied, 
 and are not (bund complaining. It has been executed b}' the payment of a 
 |)ortion of the consideration; some benefit has resulted to the United States 
 from theexecution, and great injury must ensue to the memorialists, w ithout 
 its ratification. 
 
 GEORGE GOLDTinVAITE, 
 
 Counsel for inemoiialisfs. 
 
[Doc. No. 274.] 119 
 
 Washington city, January 5, 1837. 
 Sir: On account of the indisposition of the President, together with 
 your constant business engagements, to avoid the time and trouble which 
 a personal explanation of my business might impose, 1 have thougiit pro- 
 per to address the enclosed comuiunicatioH upon the subject to the Presi- 
 dent, which 1 must request the favor of you Xsaxamint, and have present- 
 ed to him for his consideration. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. WATSON. 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 Washington city, January 5, 1837. 
 
 Sir: The deep interest which I feel in the fate of the contraoi made be- 
 tween mj-self and otiiers, with certain Indians of the Creek tribe, in rela- 
 tion to the contested claims in McHenry's district, will, I trust, be a suffi- 
 cient apology for the trouble which this letter will give -to the Presidt-nt. 
 There are some facts and considerations connected with this contract 
 whicii may not have been developed by the testimony taken by the com- 
 missioners, Messrs Balch and Crawford, to whom it was referred, and 
 which the undersigned begs leave to submit as briefly as possible. 
 
 This contract was not sought for by me, or those concerned with me. 
 Whilst at Tallassee, in the Creek country, attending exclusively to the 
 business of emigration, (being one of the cotitractors for the removal of the 
 Creeks,) I was called upon by Col. Campbell, as the authorized agent of 
 General Jesup, and received from him the proposition to enter ir»to tlie 
 contract for the contested business of these Indians. Being satisfied by 
 assurances then given from General Jesup that the authority to make the 
 contract proposed was ample upon the part of the officers of the Govern- 
 ment, and tiiat the President would undoubtedly approve it, I acceded 
 to the terms proposed by General Jesup, and which were, as I understood, 
 recommended by all the Government officers present, and the contract 
 was closed. Tlie authority I could not doubt, when it was readily pro- 
 posed by General Jesup to make the Government a party to it. 
 
 At the time it was entered into, there were several thousand white per- 
 sons present or in the immediate vicinity, (citizens and troops,) and the ne- 
 gotiations were of public notoriety. It is not believed that tliere was any 
 other person or company of persons having either the ability oi* willing- 
 ness to enter into such a contract ; and this opinion is sustained by the ev- 
 idence of Captain Page, who was present throughout the whole transaction, 
 and took an active part as an officer and agent of Government. 
 
 It having been understood amongst the Indians generally that some dis- 
 position was about to be made of their contested claims before their depart- 
 ure west, a very large assemblage of them took place at Tallassee upon 
 the occasion, for the purpose of arranging this vexHtious subject, and trans- 
 acting other business preparatory to theii' emigratioJi. Almost all the al- 
 leged frauds had been committed in McIIenry's district j and Tallassee 
 being a central point, it is believed that almost ever)' Indian interested in 
 those claims was present upon the occasion alluded to. It is stated by 
 Captain Page that tliere were from three to four thousand Indians present, 
 
120 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 and that they attended personally to tlie settlement of this business ; that 
 they were clamoroi's for its adjustment, iiml uigcd their unwillingness to 
 go west until their business was settled ; tliat the nature and terms of the 
 contia("t were fully explained both to the common Indians and chiefs, 
 before it was consummated, and that the cunuion Indiaus, as woll as chiefs, 
 were called upon to njake known theirobjfctioiis, if any, and were assured 
 that all jieisons dissenting should be excluded Irom its operations ; that 
 no dissent was signified, but that all consented to its execution ; that 
 the money was jjaid at the public council-square, in [>resence of all the 
 Indians assembled, and that he considered it the best possible arrangement 
 uhich could iiavc been made for the interest of the Indians as well as the 
 countr} . The undersigned respectfully presents to the consideration of the 
 President, whether the foiins and mode usually pursued in the ti-ansaction 
 of business with Indians were not in this case particularly ol)served ; and 
 whetlier, in every point of view, the facts do not warrajitthe conclusion that 
 the chiefs who signed ihe contract were authorized to do so by all concern- 
 ed : and tllat each individual interested, or at least nearly all, understood, 
 approved, and authorized the execution of the contract. 
 
 If I am rightly inlormed, the Government of the United States has never 
 been very |)aiticula!' in its trans.iction of business with Indians, and has 
 seldom (ibseived the strict and technical rules of law in arranging con- 
 tracts with them. It would seem to the undersigned, that if the individ- 
 ual Indians, wliose lights were involved, were upon this occasion made 
 fully acquainted with the nature and extent of the contract proposed, and 
 that the forms usual and universal in theii- business transactions were ob- 
 served, the stricter forms of our own laws would not be considered essen- 
 tial, and that the contract thus made would be held valid. 
 
 It is attested by Mr. Taylor, that at least one town of Iiidians actually 
 received their |)oition of the money paid, and that the sums weie paid to 
 the individual Indians in person ; and Colonel Campbell testifies that it 
 was the advice of General Jesup, and adopted by the persons inteiested, 
 for the nnmey to be paid into the hands of the chiefs, to be held by them 
 in tru'it for the individual Indians, and to be paid out to them at some con- 
 venient point, beyond the reach of their numerous pretended creditors. 
 The undersigned liegs h^ave to call the attention of the President particu- 
 larly to the testiniony of Colonel Campbell, Captain I'age, and Mi-. Tay- 
 lor, taken by the commissioners, Messrs. Balch and Craw ford ; also to 
 the evidence of General Woodward, in relation to Jim Bov's Indians, and 
 the value of their lands. 
 
 Whether the sum jjaid by the parties to this contract was a fair equiv- 
 alent for the inteiest or claim embraced in it, is not a (juestion for the 
 judgnjcnt of the undersigned ; but when it is recollected that all those 
 lands had been certified to, and sold agreeably to the juovisions of the 
 treaty and regulations of the War Department, and their recovery (un- 
 ceitairi at best) could only be obtained at great risk, expense, vexation, 
 and truuble, and that all this was to be encountered by the purchasers, 
 an obligation also to take all their unsold lands at a fair valuation — it can 
 scarcely be doubted that the amount agreed to be paid was just and fair. 
 Besides, there wei-e many intelligent white Indian countrymen present, 
 who understood the country, and were able to determine upon a proper es- 
 timate. The Indi.iiH were satisfied with it, and it was more than could 
 have been obtained frtnu any other quarter. 
 
 I 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 121 
 
 The undersigned unhesitatingly expresses the belief that, if this contract 
 is disapproved by the President, a very large majority of the lands in 
 question will fall inevitably into the hands of those who have obtained 
 their certification, against whom the most glaring frauds have been al- 
 leged. The Iddians have gone to the West, far from the scene of these 
 transactions ; they liave neither the power nor capacity to prosecute in- 
 quiries into them ; and, unaided by those whose interests would ensure a 
 spirited and successful investigation, they would sievir be able to strip 
 those frauds of the veil with wiiich they have been enveloped. The Pres- 
 ident must in the end approve those fraudulent contracts, made in defiance 
 of every principle of humanity and justice ; or their reversal must take 
 place, amidst the most harassing and embarrassing obstacles, as endless 
 in their duration as they will be vexatious to the Government and inju- 
 rious to the country. On the other hand, should the contract be approved, 
 the undersigned confidently believes tliat he would have it in his power 
 to put a speedy termination to this embarrassing subject, either by favor- 
 able compromises with the speculators themselves, or by the most trium- 
 phant and speedy exposure of their unjust and unfair proceedings. Such 
 an issue would bring peace and quiet to the country in wiiich those lands 
 are situated, and produce a speedy settlement of it by an enterprising pop- 
 ulation, now kept aloof by the uncertainty and confusion in which the land 
 titles are involved. The undersigned asserts (what is, perhaps, unknown 
 to the President, but what is strictly true) that the opposition to the ap- 
 proval of this contract springs solely from interested white men, and is 
 confined exclusively to those who have had their portion of the odium and 
 imputation of fraudulent speculators, whose opposition could have been 
 avoided, and their support to the contract obtained, by accepting their 
 propositions, frequently made, for the settlement of their business in a par- 
 ticular way. The Indians do not complain ; and it is well known that the 
 people of Georgia and Alabama near the scene, and interested in the ear- 
 ly settlement of the country, are decidedly favorable to the approval of 
 the contract ; 1 believe I might say there would not be found a dissenting 
 voice, beyond those interested in the alleged frauds. Why, therefore, are 
 objections made, protests filed, and arguments made against it ? By one 
 of the stipulations of the contract, all bona fide contracts made with the 
 individual Indians before its consummation, are protected, and are to be 
 allowed and confirmed. Bona fide purchasers cannot be affected ; it is 
 therefore difficult to understand the object and extent of the objections 
 made to this contract, but by supposing they came from other than bona 
 Jide purchasers, and are intended to advance the interest of a few fraudulent 
 speculators, who seek, by overthrowing this contract, and thrusting aside 
 those interested in it, to carry out and consummate their unholy specula- 
 tions upon the ignorant savage. 
 
 The undersigned cannot permit himself to suppose that any course will 
 be adopted by the President of the United States, calculated to benefit 
 this class alone, at the expense of the Indian, and the parties to this con- 
 tract, who have paid a fair consideration, and who have acted openly, and 
 were drawn into it at the instance and upon ti>e faith of high officers of 
 the Government, acting with alleged authority from the President or 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 The undersigi»ed states that the last instalment, ^37,500, will become 
 due in a few days, and, by agreement, is to be paid into the hands of a 
 
1522 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Oovernment agent, and by him to be paid to the Indians. If the contract 
 be approved, tliis latter stun might be distributed by the agent to the 
 individual Indians having claims upon it, and wliose names and identity 
 may be ascertained by reference to the books of the certifying and investi- 
 gating agents : and if ar)y inecjiiality should be discovered in the first distri- 
 bution, it can be provided for in this, and ccjualizcd by the agent. 
 
 The undersigned does not hesitate to believe that almost evei-y Indian 
 N\hose (laim has been purchased in this contract, would be willing to re- 
 ceive at once his portion of that fund — thus recognising the validity of the 
 contract ; and the undeisigned resj)ectfully suggests that the distribution 
 of this fund might be made so as to ensure to each Indian intei-ested a just 
 and ecjuitable portion for his land. If such an end can be accomj)lished, 
 the undeisigned does not perceive that any stipulation of the tieaty by 
 which those lands have been resei'ved would be infringed : whilst substatitial 
 justice will be done to the Indians, and all dilliculties in the settlement and 
 termination of unpleasa»it and troublesome litigations be obviated, 
 
 Ihe uiideisigned, in conclusion, would respectfully suggest to the Presi- 
 dent the embarrassing situation of the jjai-ties to this contract. They have 
 been induced to enter into it by the representations of the public func- 
 tionaries. It tended largely, if not mainly, to promote the interests and 
 facilitate the objects of Government, in the removal ol the Indians, as well 
 as supplying the warriors for Florida. They have paid out a large sum of 
 money, which t.'iey cannot hope to recover back from the Indians, (having 
 relied solely upon the validity and approval of the contract,) and are under 
 written obligations to j)ay another heavy sum in a veiy few days. If the 
 contract be disaflirmed, the only prospect for remuneration seems to be a 
 resort to Congress j a very uncertain one, at best, and certainly tedious, 
 expensive, and vexatious. 
 
 I'he undeisigned could not hope to obtain the action of the present Con- 
 gress u|)on the subject; and delay for another year would be a serious and 
 heavy loss, and a matter of great inconvenience to all concerned. The 
 undeisigned has, therefore, to request of the I'resident an early consideration 
 of tlie subject ; and hopes that enough will be found in tiie circumstances 
 of the case to authorize a favorable decision. 
 
 With great respect, your most obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. WATSON. 
 
 The President of the United States. 
 
 Washington city, December 21, 1836. 
 
 Sir: Enclosed I hand jou the receij)t of Captain Page, which I beg may 
 be received and considered as part of the evidence in favor of the contract 
 to which it refers. 
 
 It w ill be seen by this receipt, that the agents of Government took upon 
 themselves the j)roper distribution of the money under the said contract ; 
 and I will here take the opportunity to state, that the contract was arranged 
 exclusively with the Government agents ; that I never had, directly or 
 indirectly, any thing to do with an Indian upon the subject. The propo- 
 sition came to me from General Jesup, by Colonel Campbell, his authorized 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 123 
 
 agent; and assurances given at the same time that I might rely upon the 
 approval of whatever he might do, as he should not go hcyond his authority. 
 The consideration in the contract was also fixed by the Indians and the 
 agents of Government. 
 
 With great respect your obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. WATSON. 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Acting Secretary of War. 
 
 Copy of the receipt mentioned in the foregoing tetter. 
 
 Received from James C. Watson, Wm. Walker, Edward Hanrick, 
 Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, thirty-seven thousand five hundied 
 dollars, in compliance with the third article of a contract entered into be- 
 tween the United States and certain individuals of the Creek tribe of Indi- 
 ans holding disputed claims to reserves, which is to be retained by me until 
 the assent of said people is given to said contract, and a person designated 
 to receive it on their behalf. 
 
 JOHN PAGE, 
 Capt. Superintendent Creeks. 
 
 August 29, 1836. 
 
 Washington city, January £4, ISSr. 
 
 Sir: I submit to your consideration the following plan for the disposi- 
 tion of the contract now under your advisement. 
 
 ist. That the contract be approved, conditionally — allowing the purcha- 
 sers or contractors an opportunity of arranging with the holders of certi- 
 fied contracts, so that in all cases in which the consent both of the company 
 and the holders of the certified contracts, or, in other words, the individual 
 (ostensible) purchasers, shall be obtained, the certified contracts shall be 
 approved by the President as they now stand. 
 
 This plan would settle a large majority of the cases, and preserve a strict 
 compliance with the treaty and the regulations. 
 
 £d. That a certain time be allowed the company to obtain the consent 
 or approval of the individual Indians, (reservees,)and that for that purpose 
 an agent be appointed by the President, at the expense of the company, to 
 go west, and take such consent in writing. 
 
 3d. That in cases where the consent of the reservees cannot be obtained, 
 either from death or other causes, the land shall be sold at public auction, 
 at the risk of the purchaser, and the proceeds be divided between the In- 
 dians and the company ; the company to have an amount proportioned to 
 the sum supposed to have been received by the Indian out of the S37,500 
 already paid by the company. 
 
 4th. That the agent to be appointed shall be furnished with an abstract 
 of the contested cases, showing the names, residences, and other evidences 
 of identity of the real reservees; that he obtain, from the best information 
 in his power, a knowledge of the comparative value of each reservation; 
 and that in all cases where the Indians ratify this contract, the remaining 
 837,500 shall be paid by the agent to each reservee, in proportion to the 
 value of his land. 
 
124 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 5tli. That in all cases where the consent or approbation of the Indian be 
 obtained, and no aii-angeinent has or can he etTectcd wilh thooiiginal indi- 
 vidual purchasei, the company shall be allowed an op|)()rtunity of setting 
 aside the certified contract, in the mode pointid out in the contract made at 
 Tallasscc ; and when set aside, then a patent to issue to the company for the 
 land. 
 
 In rondnsion, I wctuld respectfully suggest that the undeisigued would 
 be willing to throw aiound the a])|»roval of the contract any other addi- 
 tional guards which may be thought niccssaiy to comply with the treaty, 
 and do substantial Justice to the Indians. 
 
 1 am, very resj)ectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 J. C. WATSON. 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 January 24. 
 
 If the mind of the Secretary of War is inclined against ihe approval of 
 General Watson's contract, I have to rcf|ucst that tlie drcision be susjjend- 
 ed until Genei-al Watson can have an opportunity of submitting a prop- 
 osition, embracing a jdnn which may possibly obviate objections to its ap- 
 proval. 
 
 General Watson will submit it, whenever the Secretary will be pleased 
 to receive it ; and should feel obliged lor the opportunity before the case 
 is submitted finally to the President. 
 
 Respectfully, &c. 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 February 9, 1837. 
 
 Sir : Enclosed is a letter received this morning, which I wish you to 
 give that consideration which is due to a highly respectable citizen. It 
 is the second letter I have received on the subject : the first contained a 
 general exj)ressioji of opinion in favor of the claim; but as I knew the claim 
 to be well represented here, I did not send that letter to the Department, 
 or think that any thing on my part was necessary to be done. 
 
 If a decision on this subject has not bern made, I think, from the letter I 
 send you, it will be perceived that there are large interests involved on 
 both sides, and that no «letermination should take j)lace until the objec- 
 tions adverse to the claim, as well as the arguments in favor of it, should 
 be fully heard. 
 
 1 have no information whatever as to the fairness or unfairness of the 
 claim ; but as it appears by Mr. Bryan's letter there are large conflicting 
 interests, not merely among the Indians, but amtjng the citizens of Alaba- 
 ma and (icorgia, I have no doubt the propriety of great caution in de- 
 ciding this question will be perceived. 
 
 I 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 125 
 
 Will you have the kindness to inform me what decision has been had 
 on this claim, or what will likely be done with it ? 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 DIXON H. LEWIS. 
 
 The SUPEKINTENDENT OF InDIAN AfFAIRS. 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 February 25, 1837. 
 Mr. C. A. Harris, Commissioner, <^c., 
 
 Will please be so good as to send me a copy of the conti-act entered into 
 between General Jesup and Mr. Watson and others ; also the confirma- 
 tion of said contract by the President. In doing this as soon as possible, 
 you will greatly oblige your obedient servant, 
 
 DIXON H. LEWIS. 
 
 P. S. Please answer, by return of the messenger, at what time the copy 
 can be forwarded, as I am anxious to see it as soon as possible. 
 
 Columbus, Georgia, Jlpril 21, 1837. 
 Sir; Your letter of the 5th instant, addressed to the commissioners, 
 infoi-ming them that you had transmitted by mail '« a copy of Colonel 
 Hogan's report of his investigation in McHenry's district, prej)ared for 
 Captain Page," reached me on the 16th. The copy referred to, however, 
 did not reach Tuskegee until the I8th. 
 
 According to the instructions contained in your letter to the commis» 
 sioners, I compared it with the copy in my possession, and, after doing so, 
 transmitted it by mail to Captain Page, at Little Rock, under cover of 
 the frank of your office, covering the co\)y sent. 
 
 As I had reason to believe that Captain Page was at Mobile, anxious 
 to receive this document, I addressed him a letter to that place, informing 
 him of the course I had taken. I also addressed to him at Little Rock to 
 the same effect, 
 lam, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN M. WYSE. 
 To D. Kurtz, Esq. 
 
 Mtinsr Commissioner. 
 
 Office of Commissioners to investigate alleged frauds^ &c. 
 
 Washington, June 17, 1837. 
 Sir : In your communication of 17th February last to this board, will 
 be found the following instruction : " In the further progress of your 
 investigations, it is the opinion of the President that you should devolve 
 the burden of proof on the first purchaser; this will exclude, of course, 
 all examination of cases in which a tract has been resold, but not re- 
 
126 r I^oc. No. 274. J 
 
 certified after reversal, and in which it may have been resold and recer- 
 tifiiMl without autliority on the part of the agent." 
 
 Disposed to cany out and follow instructions, it has appeared to us, in 
 considering our extensive class of cases, that if the above directions are 
 pursued strictly, and according to their natural import, they will have an 
 effect not inttiidcd. The contract with (ieneral Watson and others, of 
 28th August last, j)rovide3 "that the tiilc hereby obtained, or which may 
 be obtained, in pursuance of this conti-act, shall not interfere with the 
 rights of any individual who has made a prior valid contract with the 
 rightful claimant of said land, (whether the same has been certified or 
 not) or any part thereof; but the respective claims (if necessai'y for set- 
 tlement) shall be investigated," \c. If the contracts which have not been 
 recertified are to be thrown aside by us, it is obvious that the contract of 
 28th August will cover much more ground than was contemjdated by the 
 parties to it, and will give to the purchasers lands which they did not 
 purchase. 
 
 We will thank you to say whether the instruction was intended to 
 operate to the full extent of which it is capable ; or how far. According to 
 the views of the War Department, it ought to influence our determina- 
 tions. 
 
 Very respectfullv, your most obedient servants, 
 
 T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD, 
 ALFRED BALCH, 
 
 Commissioners* 
 
 C. A. Harris, Esq. 
 
 Commissioner of Indian Jffairs. 
 
 Mobile Poist, Mahama, July 4, 1837. 
 
 Sir: I have the honor to acknow ledge the receipt of your letter of 20th of 
 last month. Immediately on my arrival at this place, I commenced on the 
 land business. I brought on with me to this place about one hundred and 
 eighty warriors: a large number of them belong to Jim Boj's town. The 
 second payment I have received from the company. I called on Jim Boy for 
 the piopoi'tion of the fiist payment which was in liis hands; he jiroduced it. 
 I added to it his propoition of the second payment. I have paid all of his 
 town, except fifteen — ten of whom are in Florida that did not come on with 
 me, five are dead, three killed in battle against the Seminoles, and two died 
 of sickness. The widows of these deceased Indians catne forward to re- 
 ceive the amount due their deceased husbands : I have stated to them I could 
 not pay it over to them until 1 had communicated with you o;i the subject, 
 though I considered it as so much money deposited in my hands for safe- 
 keeping. These widows have large families, and stand very much in need 
 of the money ; and seeing all the others receive their money, it was diflicult 
 forme to convince them of the ])ropriety of deferring the case before they 
 could receive it. To gratify thcni, I deposited the aniount in Jim Boj'.s 
 (their chief's) hands until I had communicated w ith you on the subject. I 
 w\\\ thank you to instruct me on this subject. 
 
 I have got tlwough with upwards of one hundred claims. Ldoubt if there 
 will be any necessity of my going to Arkansas, tivitil the balance of the 
 warriors return from Florida, when I can close up every thing here, and 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 12T 
 
 accompany them. If the land company think it advisable, I will go; but I 
 do not see iiow the business can be finally closed until the warriors, now in 
 Florida, return. 
 
 With respect, I have the honor to be, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN PAGE, 
 Captain and Disbursing Agent Emigration. 
 To C. A. Harris, Esq. 
 
 Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington City. 
 
 Washingtov city, JlugustZ, 1837. 
 
 Sir: Since the execution of the contract made between James C.Watson 
 & Co., and certain Ci'eek chiefs, for the lands in McHenrj's district, com- 
 monly called t!ie '« contested cases," it has been ascertained that several 
 of the individual rtservees have died, and their heirs have applied for the 
 money arising from the contract. 
 
 I am instructed by James C. Watson & Co. to present this subject to 
 the Department, and lo say tliat they are willing to pay over to the legal 
 heirs of all such Indians the just proportion of the consideration money, 
 and receive the confirmation of such heirs of the contract aforesaid, pro- 
 vided the ratification of the heirs shall be considered of equal validity with 
 that of the deceased reservee, and confer upon the purchasers under said 
 contract the same right. 
 
 I have to request that instructions be given to Captain Page upon this 
 subject. Respectfully, &c. 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 
 C. A. Haruis, Esq, 
 
 Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 
 
 Washington city, September 4, 1837. 
 
 Sir : We have the honor to enclose, herewith, an extract of a letter da- 
 ted the 19th ultimo, from Mr. Carlisle, of Alabama, in relation to a pur- 
 chase made by Mr. William Lyle, of tiie claim of Cliisa Hargo, to the 
 north half of section 31, township 21, range 22, in the Tallapoosa land 
 district, and beg leave to rcque(>t that we may he apprized if there are 
 any objections, known to your office, to the recognition of that sale; and 
 if so, that we may be informed of their nature, in ordirthat we may pro- 
 cure such evidence as the claimant may be able to adduce in support of his 
 rights; and that no decision may be had adverse to the interest of Mr. 
 Lyle, until that evidence is produced. 
 
 We are, very respectfully, sir, your obedient servants, 
 
 KING & WILSON, .^^en^s. 
 
 Hon. C. A. Harris, 
 
 Commissioner of Indian Jffairs. 
 
 Extract of a letter from W. TV. Carlisle, of Fredonia, Alabama. 
 Fredonia, Chambers County, Alabama, 
 
 August 19, 1837. 
 "It is a claim of an Indian location, which is in a train of investigation 
 before Crawford & Balch, Esquires, commissioners, &c., for the north 
 
128 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 half of Hoction 31, townsliip 21, and range 22, Tallapoosa land district, 
 located tu Cliisa Ilargo, an Indian. Tite land wa.s first stolen, and can 
 be clearly and i\\\\\ pioven, and lias been, befoie Dr. McHenry, while he 
 was recertifying Uie stolen contracts; after whicii, u|)on the assui'ance of 
 the agent that the land was bona tide tlie property o( tlie Indian, and sub- 
 ject to be bought, a very honest planter bought it all for the sum of ^ 1,000 
 cash, fi'oni said Indian, and took a warranty deed a short time bchtre his 
 emigiation. Subsequently, it seems, a sweeping contract was made with 
 the chiffs for all the land thus stolen. Mow you have the outlines and 
 features of the claim, which can be more fully set out hereafter, if you 
 should believe it a case that can be reached before the executive depart- 
 ment, or before Congress. A Mr. AVilliam Lyle is the claimant. The 
 Indian deed is in the hands of those commissioners." 
 
 Washington city, October 9, 1837. 
 Sir : In the short inteiview v\hich I had the honor to have with you 
 this morning, in company of the honorable Mr. King, of the ScHate. and 
 Mr. Lewis, of the House of Representatives, upon the subject of Creek In- 
 dian reservations, you desire that the matter might be submitted to wri- 
 ting, in order that it might be fully and fairly brought before you, for 
 your consideration. In obedience to that lequest, I proceed to lay the 
 case befoie you in as succinct a manner as is consistent with the riglits of 
 the individuals whom I represent. It is known to yon, sir, tliat as earl^ 
 as March, 1835, representations were made to the War Department, by 
 Doctoi- McIIeni'y, the certifying agent, that gross fiauds had been prac- 
 tised in the purcl)ase of Creek Indian i-eservations by various individuals, 
 by means of personating one Indian for- another'. Communications were 
 also made, containing the same charges, by Opothe \oholo, and otiier 
 chiefs of the Creek tribe. Upon the leceipt of these communications. Dr. 
 McHenry was ordered to suspend his certifying, and institute an iiic|uir'y 
 into the alleged fiauds. In the month of June following, Dr. McHeniy 
 proceeded to the investigation ; and after going tlirough most of the towns 
 in his district, Colonel Hogan was ap|)ointed to investigate. It may be 
 proper here to state, that Dr*. McHenry, in a communication made to the 
 AVar Department during his investigation, states that at least nineteen 
 out of twenty cases declared fraudulent by him were given up by the pur- 
 chasers ; or that they did n(»t attend to prosecute their- claims after notice, 
 and so were considered by him as relinquishing their- right. Dr. Mc 
 Henry, acting under a letter of the 1 8th June, 1835,* addressed to liim by 
 Judge Herring, gave notice to pur-chasers that he was authorized to r-e- 
 cer-tily any contract which has been declared fraudulent, provided the 
 then holder of the land was brougiit befoi-c him, and ideniilied by t!ie chiefs. 
 And in this manner- about two hundred conliacts were lecertified — all of 
 them, too, cer-tified in the presence of the chiefs , who identified the Indians, 
 nm\ in the public s<juare. Dr-. McHenry continued to certify contracts of 
 this descr-iplion, until a rumor got afloat that he was acting without au- 
 thority ; he tliei-efore suspended certif} iiig, and addr-essed a letter to the 
 
 * Vide Document 276, 1st session, 24th Congress, p 38. 
 
[ Doc. IS^o. 274. ] 129 
 
 War Department, iJiforming them of the construction wIjIcIi he hail put 
 upon {lie letter of Judi^e Herriiig of the 18th June, and stating tlie fact, 
 explicitly, that he had recertifie<l a large nunjher (»f contracts. In an- 
 swer to this letter, Judge Herring writes to Dr. McHenry : " It was not 
 intended hy my letter of the 18th June thatyou should recertify contracts, 
 &c. ; hut inasmucli as you considered that it gave you this authoj'ity, you 
 will suhniit these recertified conti-acts to the investigation of Colonel Ho- 
 gan," &c. In obedience to these instructions, the recertified contracts 
 were submitted to Colonel liogan, and his i-ejiort sustained them all as 
 Juir, hanesl, and bonajide contracts, with ime solitary exception, as vvill be 
 found by reference to an abstract of his report. Tiie repoi't of Colonel 
 Hogan not having been nia<le in exact conformity to his instructions, and 
 at tiie reijucst of a portion of the Gforgia delegation in Congress, Messi's. 
 Burney and Anderson wei-e associated with Colonel Hogan, and they 
 were directed to go through tlie investigation again. They commenced in 
 Judge Tarrant's district ; and as they were about to jiroceed in Dr. Mc 
 Henry's district, the war broke out, and the investigation before them 
 was not carried further. It is to this class of cases, i-eceitilied by Dr. Mc 
 Henry, and i-ejjorted upon favorably by Colonel Hogan, to which I wish at 
 this time particulaily to direct your attention. General Jesuj), who was 
 charged v\ith the management of the war against the Creek Indians, was 
 also instructed on the subject of the sale of Creek reseivatiims. The manner 
 in which tlie resei-vatiuns weie to be disposed of, was plainly defined in the 
 itistrnctions of tlie Secretary of War to General Jesuj), and no discretionary 
 ])uwer as to the disposition of them was given. I'hese instructions will be 
 found in a letter from Captain Page to tiie Secretary of War, dated May 
 8, 1836, p. 334, doc. No. 276, 24th Congress, 1st session. A coj)y of these 
 instructions was published in the newspaj>ers some time in July or August 
 of the sauje year, by Gener-al Jesup, for the information of all concerned ; 
 and many puicliases wcr-e made in good faith from the indivi<lual Indians, 
 by settlers and otliej* jjersons, under the full belief and confident expecta- 
 ti<jn that the policy of the Government would he carried out in good faith, 
 and that the instructions so given to General Jesuj), and [)ubli.shed by him, 
 were rmt intended to entrap those w ho were disposed to act honestly and 
 fairly in their purchases. In |)Ui'suance of these instructions. Major Ab- 
 bott, who was the certifying agent, together with Lieutenant Chambers, 
 were authorized by Genei-al Jesup to certify contracts standing open 
 ujion the books, and such othei* contracts contained on Hogan's at)stract 
 as tlie first purchaser would relinquish in writing. They were also in- 
 structed to require the production of the Indian who })ersonated and 
 jiassed the claim. 'Wiiilst these agents wei-e in the discharge of their 
 duty, a contract was made by James C. Watson and others, with Opothe 
 Yoholo and others, a jiortion of the chiefs of the Creek tribe of Indians, 
 by which the chiefs aforesaid conveyed, for the sum of seventy-five 
 thousand dollars, to the said Watson and others, <'a!l the tracts and 
 jiarcels of lands situate, lying, and being in that part of the territory 
 ceded in the treaty aforesaid, c(Mnprised within the district of lands of which 
 R. W. McHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed the subject of 
 contest before the agents of the United States, and which have either been 
 certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified 
 without authority of the agent of the United Stales to witness said sale 
 and certify said contracts ; the saiue being the cases contained in the reports 
 9 
 
130 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 (»f the investigating agents ; subject, however, to the I'estrictions imposed." 
 ^c. , as fnHows : •' Fifst, that the title hereby obtained, or which may be 
 obtained in j)ursuance of this contract, sliall not iiitert'er'C witli the riglits 
 of any individual who has made i\ fair vdlid contract with \\\c ri.zliffiti 
 cldiiiKint \t> said land, whether the stimc hns been certified or not, or nmj jutrt 
 thereof,'* Sir. 'I'his cintiact, having hfen san(ti(u!e<l by General Jesuj). was 
 transmitted to Wasiiitigton, and was afterwards submitted to Messrs. Ci'aw- 
 ford and Balch,cominissionei's. who, after hearing the testimony in sup|)(>rtof 
 and against the contract, reported the same as being contrary to the treaty, 
 and C')nse(|uently invalid : it was, however", sanctimied by Genei-al Jack- 
 son, the I'residt-nt of the United States. Entertaining tlie opinion that 
 the decision of tlie President could not extend the ctnitract beyond the 
 words contained in the contract itself, purchaser's holiliiig under- recer-ti- 
 fied deeds pr-rtcciMh-d to file memor-ials befor'C the c<nnrnissioner"s. in (U'der" 
 to prove the fair-ness of tiieir- contracts ; but they ar'c now stopped liy in- 
 structions purporting to be signed by Mr*. Harris, Commissioner- of Indiarr 
 Affairs, and sanctioned by yoir ; whicii instrrictions, addressed to the corrr- 
 inissioiM'rs, contain this clause: '•That their iiKjuirirs sliall not extend 
 to the validity of second contr-acts, unless tlie first has been set aside by 
 the Pr-esidcnt, or* the parties had consented, irr writing, tiiat the first shoirld 
 be set aside. It was stated in the abstract ol Cohniel llogair, transmitted 
 to him arrd his associates, Messrs. Bur-rrey and Amiersorr, «»n the 11th 
 Mar-ch, 183G, that the first had been given up." Believing, sir-, as I d(», 
 tliat, if tliese irrstructions are firral, and the coinmissiorrer-s are to be 
 goverrred, by them, it will operate heavily on a class of irrnocent pur- 
 chasers, who made tlieir contr-acts in good faith, and irmler the frr-m belief 
 tliat they would be protected by the Government, I mirst ask the favor 
 that yoir would irrquire into the whole matter, and so modify the instr-uc- 
 tions as to authorize the commissiorrers to sanctiorr sncli recertified cases 
 as shall a|)pear to them to have beerr fnirly made, and such contracts not 
 certified as were rirade after the publication, by General Jesiip, of his 
 instr-uctions, as shall appear to be fair and honest. By adopting this 
 course, this long and rrtij)leasant contr-oversy will be brought to a close ; 
 withorrt it, hirndreds of industrious and honest citizens, who were never 
 engaged irr the speculation, must inevitably be ruined, and for- years to conre 
 will our- c(nirts be filled with cases gi-owing out of disprrted land titles. 
 
 Yoirr- early attentiorr to this subject will oblige, sir-, your- obedient ser- 
 vant, 
 
 JOSEPH BRYAX. 
 
 Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 Washington city, October 19, 1837. 
 Sir : I have received, throrrgh your- kindrress. a copy of the letter of the 
 17th instant, addr-essed to Joseph IJryan. Esfjiiire. The heavy amount of 
 larrded estate irr my district d( pending orr the decisicni of the Secretar-y of 
 M ar, and the report of the commissioners appointed to investigate the va- 
 lidity of contracts made in the sale of Creek Indiarr r'eser-vatitns ; and 
 the fact that a coritr-act for- a large amount of sik h r-eser-vations, adver-se 
 to the interest of other purchasers, has beerr latilied by the Governmerrt, in 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 131 
 
 favor of James C. NVatson ami others, I must ask of you to send inc a 
 copy of tl«e opinion of Messrs. Crawford and Balcli, wiio were charged 
 witii tlie investigation of said contt art, and wiio made, severally, a j-eport 
 on said contract to tlie President. I have in my possession a copy of said 
 conti'iict and of its confirinatioii by the Pi-esident ; and thoiigli I liave seen 
 in the olKce t!ie opinions of Messrs. Crawford and Balch, I have never 
 had a copy of them, and therefore have not given them a critical examina- 
 tion. My inijjression is, ihat the principle Iai<l down iti the answer to Mr. 
 I3r-yatrs letter will throw into this contract a large amount of land 
 which was originally fraudulently jjurchased, but which fraudulent pur- 
 chases were afterwards set aside, and fair and bona fide contracts made 
 for tl.em. The importance of this question to tliose I represent must be 
 tny excuse for troubling the Dcj)artmcnt for a copy of these opinions. 
 Will you iiave the kindness to hdve thr* jiackage enclosing said opinions 
 direcleil. through the post olKce. to Mr. Edward Stelle, assistant libra- 
 rian of Congress, who, with otliei" papers, will see that it is forwarded 
 to me ? 
 
 [ am, very resjicctfully, sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 DIXON H. LEWIS. 
 
 Hon. Joel R. Poinsett, 
 
 b'ccretdry of (Var. 
 
 P. S. I desire (hat the aforesaid opinions be sent to Mr. Stelle as soon 
 as possible, that I may not be delayed in receiving them. 
 
 Gadsby's Hotel, October 26, 1837. 
 
 Sir : I have t.i ask the favor of you to cause me to be furnished with 
 the various communications made by Judge Iverson to the War Depart- 
 ment, on the subject of the contract luade by cei-tain Cieek Indian chiefs 
 with General J iuies C.Watson and others, uiuler dates September 16, 
 1835; September 25. 1835 ; October 29. 1835, and January 24, 1837. 
 It is impoitant to the interest of the various ])ersons whom I represent that I 
 should be furnished with a copy of the communications at as early a day as 
 j)racticable. 
 
 I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JOSEPH BRYAN. 
 
 P. S. I have in my possession a letter from the Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 
 Secretary of War, in wliich the Secretary remarks " tiiat an opportunity 
 w ill be afforded to establish secotul contracts." The letters above referred 
 to are wanted for the ])urpose of enabling the parties claiming under 
 second contracts, and in oj)j)nsition to the contract of General J. C Wat- 
 son and others, to bring the whole matter fairly before tlie Secretary of War, 
 after the rep<irt of Messrs. Crawford and Balch shall have been made. 
 
 JOSEPH BRYAN. 
 
 C. A. Harris, Esq. 
 
 Washington, Ocfofter 28, 1837. 
 Sir : Upon inspection of a letter addressed by Judge Iverson to the 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, Secretary of War, a copy of which was furnished to 
 
132 [ Doc, No. 274. J 
 
 me yesterday, I find that Judge Iverson refers to a proposition embra- 
 cing Ji plan wliicli may possibly obviate ohjeclioiis to tl>e approval of the 
 roiitiarl madi' with (iem'ral J. C. NVatson n?id others. He says farther, 
 that Gener-al W. \vi)l siihinit it whefiever tlie Secretary will be pleased to 
 receive it. Tlie letter of Judge Iverson beais date the 24th January, 1837. 
 
 I respectfully ask, if any such ])ropt>sition or jdau was »t>binitted, 
 that I may be furnished with a copy of it, for the reasons exjjrcssed in my 
 letter of the 20th instant, aski?ig for copies ot certain couiinunications of 
 Judge Iverson. 
 
 I have the honor to be, \ery respectfully, yowr obedient servant, 
 
 JOSEPH BRYAN. 
 
 lion. C. A. Uabkis, Esq. 
 
 LovvNDESBOKOL'GH, AxABAMA, Dcceiubcr 4, 1837. 
 
 Sm : I have been confined to my bed for some time by an itidisj)osition, 
 from whicli I am recovering, but shall probably »)ot be able to get to 
 Washington until between the 15th or 20lh of this n)otith. I feel, iiowever, 
 so much interest in the iej)oi-t of the coMiinissiorn'ivs chai-geii with the 
 examination of Cieek Indian frauds, tiiat I must ask of you to susihtkI a 
 decision on tliem till I can reach Washington. In a conference which (Jol. 
 King and myself hail with you or) that subject during the extra session, 
 you proiuised that wc should have an op|)ortunity of examining the report 
 of the commissioners, and of canvassing the same, before your decision 
 should be made. 
 
 This is all-important, as it involves lands in my district to the value of 
 millions of dollars; and the unconditional confirmation of what is called 
 Watson's contract, embracing what is claimed under it, would deprive 
 hundi-eds of prior bona Jide purchasers, whose contracts were certified 
 before tiie accredited agent of the Government, of n>ore than a million of 
 dollars. That contract, at best, is in violation of the ti-eaty : and if its 
 operation is extended to tiiis class of lands, will give rise to a litigation 
 for i-eal estate, from which our courts cannot be relieved for the next 
 twenty years. In my anxiety to j»rotcct these bona fide pui-chasers. many 
 of whom are the most res{)ectablc citizens of the State — against whon>, in 
 all the investigations, not a bieath of suspicion has been raised — I must 
 ask you to suspend any action till I shall be able to reach Washington, 
 which will not be later tliati the 20tli of tiiis month. I would also be glad 
 that the report of the commissioners, who investigated the value of pro- 
 perty destroyed by the Creek Indians, should not be reported to Congress 
 till my arrival. 
 
 I liave the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, vour ol»edient servant, 
 
 DIXON U. LEWIS. 
 
 Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 
 
 Secretary of IVar. 
 
 Custom-house, Mobile, AiiABAWA, 
 
 December 1 1, 1837. 
 Sir : The enclosed letter, which lias been addressed to me, is from Dr. 
 Kobert J. Ware, a highly lespectable citizen of Montgomery county, and 
 for several years a member of the Legislaturc^uf this State. As an act of 
 
[ Doc. ^o, 274. ] 133 
 
 common justice to Dr. Ware and others, I beg leave to lay the same before 
 your excellency, and to say, that if called on ofikially, I shall have no 
 hesitation in answering all the inquiries contained in his letter, or any 
 other that the Govenmient may desire me to answer, in relation to the 
 *» big contract," as it is called, of upwards of 200,000 acres of land being 
 sold for S75,000. 
 
 1 liave the honor to remain, your excellency's most obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN B. HOGAN. 
 
 To His Excellency Martin Van Buren. 
 
 Montgomery, December Q, 1837. 
 
 Dear Sir : As an act of justice to myself, as well as a numerous class 
 of individuals, a large portion of whom are now living in the late Creek 
 country, and who are interested in the decision of the President about to 
 be had in relation to the contract existing between certain chiefs of the 
 Creek nation, and Watson, Walker, and others, and known as the big 
 contract, I feel bound to call u|)on you to state wliat you know in i"t'U.tioa 
 to said contract ; the manner iti whicli it was gotten up by Captain Page 
 & Co. of the United States army ; whether the sum given is a fair equiv- 
 alent — say ^75,000 ; and if said contract will not have the effect of shield- 
 ing those persons who were so deejjly engaged in what is called stealing 
 the IndiaJis lands; and whether you consider the recertified contracts 
 executed before Dr. McHeniy, * * * was the ti'ue holderof the land ; and 
 whether or not you considei", as an act of justice to tlje bona Cu\e [iui'cha- 
 ser, that the Pi-esident should sanction all bona fide purchases made prior 
 to tlie date of the big contract, wliether the same be certified to or not. 
 You are appi-ized, sir, that in many cases the true holder had sold and 
 received the full amount agreed upon, and others a part only, there being 
 no oj)portutiity to have the contract passed before the Govei-nment agent ; 
 the i)urchaser ready at any time to pay the remainder, and the Ijidian to 
 close the bai-gain : all of which could not take place, and did not take 
 place, on account of tiiose land rogues. Should not the President sustain 
 all such cases, when an equivalent had been paid, or when a part iiad been 
 paid and the j)urchaser willing to pay the lemainder? Will you give me 
 your opinion fi-eely and fully on the whole subject? 
 
 From the various conversations you have had with myself and others, 
 and knowing that you are fully acquainted with the subject, and that your 
 (qnnioiis will have weight at Washington, I thougiit proper to address you 
 this hasty letter, believing you have a w ish to see this matter settled in ac- 
 cordance with justice and equity to all parties ; exposing those who are 
 guilty, and sustaining those who may be innocent. 
 
 In haste, your obedient servant, 
 
 ROBERT J. WARE. 
 
 Col. Jno. B. Hogan. 
 
 N. B. I should be glad to hear from you at an early day, as I intend 
 to use the same should I find it necessary. R. J. WARE 
 
134 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Ckeek Agency, Fort Gibson, 
 
 Odober 20, 18Sr. 
 Sik: I (i-iuisniit ln>rc\\i(li ceitain papfMs irlativo t.> a iici^iitiafniii between 
 Cliarles J. M(l)<ii)al(l i;: Co., and Uie |niii<i))al rliiels dI' llie Creek nation. 
 In:- ihe [juicliasc uT ilie residue oTilieir unsold lands in Alabama. 
 I bavc the lionor to be, \oiii- most obedient servant, 
 
 J. ^V. A. SANFORD. 
 
 Creek Jniliiin Jgsnt. 
 C. A. IIakkis, 
 
 Commissioner Indian .affairs, IVoshinglon City. 
 
 TUCKARATCIIEE Sqi'ARF-jCuEEK NaTION, 
 
 October 7, 1837. 
 Our Fuienh and Aoext : A coin|)any, under tlie style oC Charles J. 
 McDonald 6i. Co., of Georgia, have in the last lew days submitted to ns 
 :i |)i(»|iosiiiun foi* the pnreiiase (d" all unsold and unapproved locations, 
 being the projierty oi' our people whilst lesiding in Alabama, and which, 
 in Justice anil according to treaty, still belong to them. "We have Just 
 witnessed the final selllinient of a similar contr-act. inado with General 
 Josup, atTallassee. Again, authorized to act foi" otii- |)eople, we know no 
 reason why we should not again exercise the same r iglit in the case now 
 belorc us, as well as in the one which we have just mentioned. Our pow- 
 er is the same, the subject the san)e, the treaty the same. You have indeed 
 inlorMied us that Congress, at its last session, passed an act directing the 
 lands in (piestion to bo sold lor the benefit of the j)arties concerned. We 
 know r.uv voice has gi-owii too feeble of late to be heard ; but in our hum- 
 ble opinion, neithei- tiuje, change of residence, nor any oiher circumstance 
 whatever, ran impair our rights, or divest our people «)f their propeity, 
 without their immediate agency or consent. We speak this not in disre- 
 spi'ct of t!ie Government or its authoiities ; we indulge not the slightest 
 wish to cavil at any act having even the sen)blancc of favor* or kindness 
 towards ouiselves or oui* j)eople ; for, although the law which you have 
 mentioned is. in our conce|)ti()n, a manifest violation of every principle 
 which sauctiiies the posscssi(m of projierty, and secures it agaiu'^t arbitrary 
 and lawless seizure, and as such would have been denounceil had the in- 
 dividual rights ol" our white brothers been in controversy ; still we wercde- 
 tcrmiuf'd to await its operation in silence, in the hope that it would event- 
 ually work to our advantage. lint we have not long been permitted to 
 indulge even tliis deluded hoj)e. Already has our ((uinti-y been inlVstt'd 
 with a class of |)ersoi's who, under Various pretexts, have l)eeii secretly 
 equipping tliemselves with fictitious j)Uicliases anil foiged powers of attor- 
 ney, prepaiatoi-y to the sales which aie expected to take place, and who 
 shrewdly calculate, by the exhibition of these iniipiitous contrivances, to 
 intimidate other j)urcliasers, and thus to secure to themselves, at their own 
 price, all liie land of any real value. Past experience has clearly shown 
 
[ Doc. No. 271. ] 135 
 
 the utter futility and impracticability of atte!Tii)ting to thwart the efforts of 
 such a combination ; the public fears vvilJ become awakened, and the con- 
 sequence will be, that few will be found bold or inconsiderate enough to 
 embark in purchases which, in the very outset, aje threatened with law- 
 suits and controversy. Under these circumstances, we plainly foiesee tliat 
 the measure designed for our pi-otection must fail in its objrct, and the 
 intended public sale will only result in tlie renewal of former disappoint- 
 ments. We liave, therefore, u|)on calm and due i-ellection, being fuliy and 
 duly authorized by all j)arties whatsoever, concluded a bargain and sale of 
 certain lands, as set forth in the contract h(>rewi(h accompanying, witit 
 Charles J. McDonald &, Co., and which we desire niay be transmitted to 
 the President, to tiie eml that the latter clause of said agreement may be 
 executed with as little delay as possible. We have already disavowed any 
 controversial wish otj our pait with tiie Govei-nment or its authoiities ; 
 we do not believe the assertion of our I'ight a violation of this protVssion ; 
 we claim alone the privilege of disposing of what has been solemnly guar- 
 antied and (letermiiied by treaty to be oui- own ; we claim tliis, in the 
 fullest conviction that tlie rigiit is exclusively our own, and inalienable 
 except through our agency and consent. We claim its exercise rn)w, be- 
 cause we are as fully impowered to act as we were in making the treaty 
 itself, or upon any «)fher occasion subsequent to that })erio(l ; we claim 
 that the contract entered into w.ith Charles J. McDonald & Co., beifig the 
 only iiglitl'ul transaction relative to the lands in controversy, be laid be- 
 fore the President, and his sanction to tlie same be solicited. 
 Your friends ^nd brothers, 
 IVitnesses. Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 
 
 ,Tohn Page, Special Agent. Little Doctor, his x mark. 
 
 James L. Alexander. Tuckabatchee Micco his x maik. 
 
 F. A.Kerr. Tuckabatchee Hadjo his x mark. 
 
 IJarent Dubois. James Isleands, his x mark. 
 
 Jacob Elliot, Interpreter. 
 
 Gen. JoHiv W. A. Sanford, 
 
 Creek t/igent, Fort Gibson. 
 
 Creek Nation, ") 
 Arkansas territory, j 
 
 This indenture, made and concluded at the Tuckabatchee square, in the 
 Creek nation, in full counri! as^etnbleU on the 7th day of October, 1837, 
 between Opothe Yoholo, Little Doctor, Tuckabatchee Micco, Ar-beck- 
 oge Emarthlar, Tuckabatchee Fixico, TaliasHoe Fixico, Tiisronee 
 lladjo. Hellebee Hadjo, Osooch Fixico, Spoakoak Micco. Tomelee, Hobie 
 Fixico, Pascoaf Emarthlar, Narhouche Fixico, James Isieatids, Arlock 
 Hadjo, Coosee Micco, Arbea Emarthlar, Tustennugge Emarthlar. 'j'usta- 
 nug Hadjo, !nne Emaithlar. Hobie Hatka, ('onesce Emartlilar, Sally 
 Cogy, Tuskeega Micco, Langhtaniadaughaw, Koomul Hadjo, Fus Hadjo, 
 Tuckabatchee Hadjo, Cotchii Tiiskanugga, Yardaca Tuskanugga, Seclie 
 Cornols, chiefs ami headmen of the Creek ti'ibe of Indians, for themselves 
 and for their people on the one paj-t ; and Charles J. McDonald and 
 company, of Georgia, on the other part, witnesseth : That whereas, by 
 
136 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 a treaty made and ratified, at the rily ol" Wasliingtun, in the year of our* 
 Lord one tliitiisaiid eii'lit Imtidied and tliiitv-two, between tlie United 
 States «if America and said tribe ot" Indians, it was stipulated, anions 
 other tilings, that the head oC <'a(h family hehmging to said tribe should 
 have and receive one half section of land, to be located in the country 
 then ceded, atid said lands having been assigned to the individuals thus 
 entitled, agreeably to the provisions of said treaty : and whereas, the 
 speedy removal of our people after the termination of the late hostilities 
 compelled many to abandon the lands w hich had been thus acquired, and to 
 leave tiie same unsold: Now, be it known that we, the above-written 
 chiefs and head men, being fully authorized and impowered by said claim- 
 ants, rcservees, and all other- parties in interest, in virtue of said treaty, 
 and fully representing all and each of them, for* and in consider-ation of the 
 surr) of sixty-six thousand fivehundr-cd dollars, to be paid under the superin- 
 tendence of an agent to be ajjpointed by the President, whenever' this con- 
 tract shall have been approved by the l*r-esident, do bargain, sell, release, 
 and forever <piit claim to the said Charles J. M( Donald and Co., all such 
 reservations as ar-e herein mentioned, to wit : All such lands as have never 
 been sold or cer'tified ; all such other lands as may have heerr sold, op 
 conveyed away in any other- manner' tlian by the authority an«l sanction of 
 the President, and which, in justire, still belong to the or'iginal holder, or* 
 their descendants; all the dead locations,. that is to say, ail the reserva- 
 tions, or* the claims arising therefrom, <d" such Indiatrs as may have died 
 before or* since their* lands were assigned tlierrr ; all the afbiementioned 
 lands, situate, lying, and being in the State of Alabama, ami in tiiat par-t 
 ceded by the aforementioned treaty : said lands being those located to said 
 claimants, reser'vees, &c. as by treaty pr'ovided and dir'ected. And it is 
 frrrlher agreed, in consideration of the jjr'emises, that the President shall 
 issue patents to the said Charles J. McDonald & Co., upon receiving satis- 
 factory evidence that the sum specified in this contr-act has beerr paid. 
 In testimony whereof, we, the said chiefs and headmen of said Cr-eek 
 tribe, have hereunto set our hands and atUxed our seals, the dny and date 
 above written. 
 
 0[!othe Yoholo his x mark. 
 
 Little Doctor" his x mark. 
 
 Tuckabatchee Micco his x mark. 
 
 Arheckoge ?'.marthlar his x mat k. 
 
 Tuckabatchee Fixico his x mar'k. 
 
 Tallassee Fixico his x mark. 
 
 Ttiscorree lladjo his x mark. 
 
 Hellebee Iladj(» his x mar k. 
 
 Osooch Fixico his x tmuk. 
 
 Spoakoak Micco his x mat k. 
 
 Tomelee his x mark. 
 
 Ilobie Fixico his x mat k. 
 
 Pascoaf Emarthlar' his x mark. 
 
 Narbouche Fixico his x mark. 
 
 James Ishands, his x mar-k. 
 
 Arlock lladjo his x mark. 
 
 Coosec Micco his x mark. 
 
 Arbea Emarthlar his x mar-k. 
 
 TustennuggeEmarlhlarhis x mark. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. I 137 
 
 Tustanag Hadjo his x mark. 
 
 Inrie Emarthlar liis x maiU. 
 
 Hobie Hatka liis x mark. 
 
 Coiiesee Etnarthlar his x mark. 
 
 Sally Cogy liis x mark. 
 
 Tuskeega Micco his x mark. 
 
 Witness : Laiightamadaughaw his x mark. 
 
 John Page, Koomiil Hadjo his x mark. 
 
 Special Jgeni. Fus Hadjo liis x mark. 
 
 James L. Alexander, Tuckabatchee Hadjo his x mark. 
 
 F, A. Kerr, Gotcha Tuskanugga his x mark. 
 
 IJarent Dubois, Yardaca Tuskanugga his x mark. 
 
 Jacob Elliott, Interpreter, Scehe Cornols his x mark. 
 
 Creek Agency, Fort GiBsojir, 
 
 October 10, 1837. 
 My Friends: Your letter of the 7th instant, informing me of your 
 having negotiated a sale for the residue of the lands belonging to your 
 people, whilst residing in Alabama, with Charles J. McDonald & Co., of 
 Georgia, was handed me this morning. As the contract has been referred 
 directly to the decision of the President, it will be transmitted to him in 
 due time, fortiiat purpose. 
 
 In your letter you have particulaily remarked the practices of certain 
 persons as having jjrincipally influenced your decision in the matter. 11, 
 indeed, their machinations are of the character which you mention, and 
 are likely to be attended with the consequences you ajjprehend, you have 
 none to blame but yourselves. Again and again have I advised you to an 
 energetic course of conduct towards those whom you find intermeddling 
 with your prerogative, or with the affairs of your people. What I have 
 said to you already, 1 say to you again — instantly seize all such persons, 
 and bring them before the agent. The Government is disposed to protect 
 you, at all hazards, against their intrusion; and you may rest assured of 
 a prompt co-operation on my part, in carrying out its views. 
 
 Your friend and agent. 
 
 J. W. A. SANFORD. 
 To Opothe Yoholo, 
 
 and other principal chiefs, Creek nation. 
 
 "Washington city, December SO, 1837. 
 Sir: I have the honor to submit to your consideration the enclosed 
 papers, consisting of a contract made between the chiefs of the Creek 
 nation of Indians and C. J. McDonald & Co., and letters between the 
 chiefs and their agent. 
 
 Tiiese papers have been intrusted to my care by Judge McDonald, and 
 I am authorized to represent him and his associates in calling the attention 
 of the Department to the contract submitted. 
 
 I have to request its consideration as early as will suit your conveni- 
 ence, and beg to be allowed to present some views upon the subject before 
 any final decision is made upon it. , 
 
 [ am, respectfully, &c., 
 
 A. 1 VERS ON. 
 C. A. Harris, Commissioner, ^c. 
 
138 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Washington city, Januarij 4, 1838. 
 
 Sir: I lierewitli submit the report of Ca|)taiii Jolm Page, special agent 
 appointed t«» pay out certain moneys, and obtain the ratification of the 
 individuni reservees to the contract made between certain chiefs of the 
 Creek natiofi of Indians, and James C. "Watson & Co., for the contested 
 claim in Mclleniy's district, Alabama. 
 
 Arcf)inpHnying tlie leport of Captain Page are tlie written acknowledg- 
 ments of the Indians, and tlie certificate ot Captain Page in each case of 
 the identify tif the owiiei% and of the icceipt ol the money by him, agreeably 
 to insti'iictions issued IVoin the War Dej)artment. 
 
 In behalf of the paitics to this contract. I have now to ask that an 
 agent or commissioner be immediately appointed, according to the stipu- 
 lation of the same, foi- the purpose of adjusting ami deciding all cases of 
 contest between James C. Watson & Co., and other claimants to the lands 
 cmbiacetl in it. I am instructed by James C. Watson & Co. to ask that 
 a new commission be instituted, for the jiurpose above stated, iti ordei- 
 that the lights of the parties may be submitted to a tribunal wholly un- 
 occupied and unprejudiced upon the subjects in controversy. I am also 
 instructed to ask tiiat patents may issue as soon as j)racticable for all 
 the lands embr-aced in this contract which are free IVom dispute or contest. 
 A wiy large amount of money has !)een paid out by the purchaser-s 
 under tliis contract, which it is very desirous to reimburse, but which 
 cannot be done safely or advantageously until the patents issue. 
 I am, respectfully, vour obedient servant. 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 
 C. A, IIaukis, Esq., Counnis-r Iviliun Jiffairs. 
 
 Arkansas uivkr, J^ovemher 10, 1837. 
 
 Sir : I have the hojior to forward the sevei-al bonds taken of the Creek 
 Indians, agieeably to a contract made by James C. Watson and Co. The 
 Indiatis were collected in full council, by General J. W. A. Sanford. their 
 agent; and after remaining in council sevei-al days, and a list furnished 
 each chief of the din'erent towns that were entitled to the money, agreea- 
 bly to the abstract fui-nished by the Department, and the amount jiut 
 opposite each man's oi- woman's name that was due them, and theii- names 
 read over re|)eafe()ly in council until all was familiar to them, I pioceeded 
 to pay out the money. I confined niyself as strictly to my instructions as 
 it was possible for me to do. All was satisfactory to the Indians. They 
 stated the money had come at a very ap()i-o|)riate time, as there had been 
 a great deal of sickness among them ; and cold weather setting in, it enabled 
 a great many Indians with families, that were jjoor and destitute, to purchase 
 blankets and other aiticles of clotliing that they were suffering foi-. 
 
 Interest on the note was demanded, and I recjuired tlie company to pay 
 it; which they did, (about sixteen hundred (hdlars. ) 
 
 Tliere will be a few signatures I have imt been able to obtain, but will 
 procure them hereafter, if |)ossibIe. As the papers will be so bulky, I 
 have suggested to the company the projjiiety of sending them by express, 
 which I presume they will do. 
 
 \N ith respect, I have the honor to be vnur oliedient servant, 
 
 ' JOHN PAGE, Spechd Jigcnt. 
 
 C. A. Uarbis, Esq., Conim/s'r Indian ,6tffairSf ff'ashington. 
 
[Doc. No. 274. ] 139 
 
 Fomi of the assent given by the Creek reservees to the contract or agree- 
 ment of \%2Q, 
 
 Western Creek nation, ") 
 *8.rkansas. J 
 
 Be it known tt) all men, that I, do hereby acknowledge, rat- 
 
 ify, and confirm the contract or agreement made and entered into at 
 Tallassee, in the State of Alabama, on the twenty-eighth day of August, 
 in tlie year eighteen hundred and thirty-six, between James C Watson, 
 William Walker, Edward Hanrirk, P. C. Harris, and John Peabody, of 
 the first pai-t ; Opothc Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatciiee Micco, Little 
 Doctor, Jim Boy, Tustenugge Chopco, and Tusconee Hadjo, chiefs 
 of said nation, of the second j)art ; and General Tiiomas S. Jesup, of the 
 United States army, and as the agent of the United States, of the tiiird 
 part : by which it was agreed and contracted, amongst other things, that 
 liic said cl^iefs repi-esenting their j)eopIe, the individual ownei's, sold to 
 the said James C Watson and others, for tlie consideration therein ex- 
 pressed, certain reserves of land lying witliin the district commonly 
 called Robert McHenry's district, in that poi-tion of country known as the 
 Creek country, in the State of Alabama, and which were located to cer- 
 tain Creek Indians, agreeably to a treaty made between the Government 
 of the United States and the said Creek nation of Indians, on the 24tlj 
 <Iay of March, 1832, as will more fully appear by reference to said con- 
 tract. And I, the said . do hereby acknowledge and make knowii 
 that said chiefs had free and ample power and authority to make and enter 
 into said contract, for and in behalf of tlie individual reservees of said 
 land ; and more especially tliat the said chiefs had power and authority 
 from me to bargain, sell, and convey, with the approbation of the Presi- 
 dent of the U'lited States, to the said James C. Watson et aliis half 
 section in townsliip mimber and range number in the county 
 of and State of Alabama ; the same being the tract of land located 
 to me and in my name, in conformity with the treaty above mentioned : 
 and I do hereby i-atify and confirm the sale of said half section, as fully 
 and completely as if the same had been done in pei'son by myself; and I, 
 the said do hereby also acknowledge, that I have received 
 front the said James C. Watson & Co. a full and fair consideration in 
 money, for my said half section of land. In testimony whereof, I have 
 hereunto set my hand and seal, this day of 1837. 
 
 In presence of [l. s.j 
 
 I, ,Tohn Page, special agent, do hereby certify that the above 
 is liie bona fide owner of the half section of land designated in the forego- 
 ing acknowledgment, and that he has received from James C. Watson 
 k. Co. the sum of dollars ; and that I consider the san»e a just 
 
 an(l fair pioportion to the said of the sum of seventy-five 
 
 thousand dollars, which forms the consideration of said contract, and here- 
 by recommend the same for the approval of the President of the United 
 States, this day of 1837. 
 
 JOHN PAGE, Special Jlgent. 
 
140 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Statement of the reservees tmder the Creek treaty of 2'\th March, 1832, 
 ivho have given their assent to the contract, for the reserves herein 
 described, entered into tlie 2Sth day of Jiugust, 1836, between J. C. 
 Watson and others, certain Creek chiefs, and Ge7i. Thomas S. Jesup. 
 
 
 Indian names. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 cs 
 
 
 
 
 t. 
 
 
 
 u 
 O 
 
 
 IE 
 
 
 £ 
 1 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 u 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 
 6 
 
 c 
 
 V 
 
 bo 
 
 c 
 
 
 Autauga town. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Sur-war-ni Iladjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 5 
 
 To-maiis Emaitlilar 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 8 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 6 
 
 IlnbiP 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 20 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 10 
 
 Choak-cliar Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 21 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 13 
 
 Tal-Ie-gc Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 Co-c-giis Iladjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 25 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 MiccD Halka 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 25 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 To-biis-sulc Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 24 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 27 
 
 0-chas Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 13 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 29 
 
 Cu-bi-cacli-clie Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 SO 
 
 Ko-iiij) Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 31 
 
 0-leai--clie Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 33 
 
 Mirco-biis-tiis-ku 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 34 
 
 U-fau-Ia Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 36 
 
 To-scc-bo-b()o-hat-k('C 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 S7 
 
 Fixico Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 39 
 
 Tallas-sce Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 40 
 
 Fiis-suck-kc-a iladjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 S 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 43 
 
 Se-ne-i-e 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 47 
 
 Ar-fis-tar 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 43 
 
 Cle-iDarth Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 24 
 
 15 
 
 £1 
 
 49 
 
 Jock-lio-mi-go 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 50 
 
 Tu-we-ga 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 7 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 51 
 
 Mar-litch-char 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 7 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 52 
 
 E-n»artlilar 
 
 Luchipoga town. 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 31 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 6 
 
 Eacb-bas Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 30 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 7 
 
 Fiis Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 10 
 
 Ar-dic.c«)n Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 17 
 
 War-so-e Malta 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 3 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 20 
 
 Woc-se Yobolo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 26 
 
 26 
 
 Ilulliibba Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 31 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 32 
 
 Tuck-ta-ljiis-ta 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 33 
 
 Woc-se Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 1 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 141 
 
 
 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 Indian names. 
 
 County. 
 
 a. 
 
 _0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 01 
 
 In 
 
 
 (U 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 (m 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 _o 
 
 3 
 
 p 
 
 ko 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 d 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 3 
 
 t5 
 
 
 
 
 12; 
 
 h 
 
 » 
 
 34 
 
 Fiisliatrhe 'I'ustcniingga - 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 8 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 S7 
 
 Po-ith Ha(Jj() 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 S8 
 
 C!ias-se Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. lialf 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 41 
 
 Oak-liis-ka 
 
 Clianibers 
 
 E. bale 
 
 30 
 
 20 
 
 26 
 
 43 
 
 Hi II is Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. balf 
 
 3 
 
 18 
 
 26 
 
 47 
 
 Cue Eiiiarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 E. balf 
 
 10 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 48 
 
 Emat-lo-clie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 51 
 
 Oc-te-ar-clic Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 52 
 
 Oc-te-ar-clie Hatljo 
 
 do 
 
 E. balf 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 55 
 
 In-ne-hai- Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 35 
 
 6 
 
 24 
 
 65 
 
 Con-nar-his-che 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 66 
 
 So-ai*th-Ie-be 
 
 do 
 
 S. balf 
 
 12 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 68 
 
 Mo-lie-ab 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
 14 
 
 69 
 
 Icli-has Micco 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 25 
 
 73 
 
 Fet-to-par-sa 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 24 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 74 
 
 Ar-gis sa 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 19 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 75 
 
 Fai-no-me (or Sar-no-mc) 
 
 do 
 
 \V. half 
 
 SO 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 77 
 
 O-hi-at-kai- 
 
 do 
 
 N. balf 
 
 36 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 78 
 
 Yol-uo-ga 
 
 d.) 
 
 E. half 
 
 34 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 80 
 
 0-te-kar 
 
 do 
 
 S. balf 
 
 4 
 
 17 
 
 25 
 
 81 
 
 Mar-(jue-!io-kie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 25 
 
 84 
 
 Hicli co-yo. 
 
 do 
 
 S. balf 
 
 26 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 87 
 
 Clii)ck-ka lio-gua 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 29 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 88 
 
 Cai-bit-tiiiiHa 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 3 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 89 
 
 C()l)-bes-clia 
 
 do 
 
 S. balf 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 91 
 
 Haji> (or Harkie) 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 35 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 95 
 
 So-l'un-go 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 27 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 96 
 
 Im-foi-hie-mic 
 
 Cbantbers 
 
 W. half 
 
 30 
 
 20 
 
 26 
 
 97 
 
 Sar-tlu-clic 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 16 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 98 
 
 Oak-lar-na 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 8 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 100 
 
 In-lii Yiir-liaj'-gai' 
 
 do 
 
 W. balf 
 
 9 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 103 
 
 Fic-e CO Yatch-a 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 10 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 104 
 
 Sar-wi-yo-ga 
 
 do 
 
 E. balf 
 
 28 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 109 
 
 Ar-butcli-clia 
 
 do 
 
 W. balf 
 
 SO 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 117 
 
 Im lieach-kae 
 
 do 
 
 N. balf 
 
 25 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 120 
 
 Si-lio-iat-tae 
 
 do 
 
 >V. balf 
 
 34 
 
 19 
 
 25 
 
 124 
 
 Mi( CO Cliarte (or Chopco) 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 2 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 132 
 
 Soap-car 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 19 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 133 
 
 Se-ar-kar-bie 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 15 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 138 
 
 Co-cbar Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
 140 
 
 Hepsey 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 25 
 
142 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 STATEM ENT— Continued. 
 
 Indian names. 
 
 County. 
 
 Ifli-lias Fixiro 
 
 l*in-i;ar-l('acli-kar 
 
 Ar-cli-clia 
 
 Eiisliatclia Iladjo 
 
 Rose 
 
 Ar-wc-liigga 
 
 Ne-liai'-loc-co-clie 
 
 Li-la 
 
 Cuosa Emartlilai* 
 
 Clie-ar-liar 
 
 M()C-qu:i-gaii 
 
 Si lie V 
 
 Cliu Emarthlar 
 
 Ufaiila town. 
 
 Lottc YoImiIo 
 
 'I'us-sicU-ic Uadjij 
 
 Tvlar 
 
 Ar-tic-ca 
 
 Chis-se Iladjo 
 
 llin-iic'-liow 
 
 Spoak-rali Mirco 
 
 Nc-liaw-lac-ra Hadju 
 
 Fixico Hadjd 
 
 Coii-cliar-to Emartlilar 
 
 In-ne-liai' Fixico 
 
 Atli-loii Iladjo 
 
 Sit-lii-ti-ga 
 
 Un-dell Iladjo 
 
 M irco-rlio-lio-l\o-no-se 
 
 Yar-bolli-le 
 
 Nee-oak-kic 
 
 Clior Yo'iolo 
 
 Al-had Iladjo 
 
 TiK k a-Uatche Had jo 
 
 ls-to|.|ii-(lie 
 
 Cock-ra-li-go 
 
 O-rlic Iladjo 
 
 l*ar-fns-li-ga 
 
 To-inic-ti'a-clia 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 d.» 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 Coosa • 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 Coosa 
 'ralla[)oosa 
 
 do 
 Coosa 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 l'allaj)0()sa 
 Cc;osa 
 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 <lo 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 Coosa 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 Locaiion. 
 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 W. half 
 8. half 
 E. half 
 
 S. 
 
 N. 
 S. 
 
 S. 
 
 w. 
 
 E. 
 
 N. 
 N. 
 N. 
 E. 
 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 
 W. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 
 E. 
 
 S. 
 N. 
 E. 
 W. 
 
 N. 
 S. 
 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 S. hair 
 N. hall 
 S. half 
 W. half 
 W. half 
 
 9 
 28 
 12 
 5!i 
 22 
 
 6 
 20 
 
 1 
 13 
 36 
 S2 
 24 
 IG 
 
 22 
 \7 
 24 
 
 9 
 31 
 35 
 
 5 
 
 19 
 29 
 30 
 26 
 
 8 
 31 
 34 
 
 9 
 13 
 
 7 
 20 
 36 
 29 
 32 
 24 
 31 
 
 7 
 29 
 
 19 
 19 
 18 
 19 
 18 
 17 
 19 
 17 
 18 
 18 
 19 
 18 
 19 
 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 20 
 21 
 21 
 20 
 21 
 21 
 20 
 20 
 20 
 20 
 21 
 20 
 20 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 20 
 21 
 
I Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 STATEMENT—Continued. 
 
 143 
 
 
 Indian names. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 a 
 
 a. 
 
 c 
 
 .£• 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 ft) 
 
 in 
 
 "m 
 
 V 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 _g 
 
 O 
 
 ^ 
 
 bO 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 6 
 
 O 
 
 s 
 
 £8 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ;z; 
 
 h 
 
 P3 
 
 46 
 
 Col-laii-der 
 
 Coosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 6 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 47 
 
 Tal-Iea-cliet* 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 26 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 49 
 
 Ue-li-hea-clier 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 26 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 50 
 
 0-gil lis-sin-nc-liaw 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 35 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 51 
 
 So-mea-lea-gcr 
 
 Coosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 53 
 
 Mo lia-lig-tat- 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 56 
 
 O-soocli Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 57 
 
 Ufaii'a Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 58 
 
 So-de-dun-iia Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 29 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 59 
 
 Af-ar-le 
 
 Coosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 61 
 
 E-fai'-tiis-tan-nug-ga 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 62 
 
 Sa-ga-nic 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 63 
 
 Al-go-jiic 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 64 
 
 Con-chai'-to Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 65 
 
 Co-e-giis Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. !,«lf 
 
 11 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 66 
 
 Co-ge Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 32 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 67 
 
 Woc-se Micco 
 
 Coosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 26 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 68 
 
 Yar-back-lie-ga 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 31 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 70 
 
 Te-notli Hadjo 
 
 
 W. half 
 
 34 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 75 
 
 Sammy 
 
 Coosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 76 
 
 Ot-tis Yoliolo 
 
 (!o 
 
 E. half 
 
 9 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 78 
 
 Talla-dig Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 \V. half 
 
 12 
 
 23 
 
 20 
 
 79 
 
 Biliy 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 IS 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 80 
 
 Tai'-sar-figa 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 4 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 83 
 
 Yoliolo Cliopko 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 84 
 
 Pars-coaf Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 9 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 88 
 
 Clio-\vas-te Fixico 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 30 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 90 
 
 W(»c-.se Ha<ijo 
 
 Coosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 21 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 91 
 
 TJfaula Chopko 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 27 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 93 
 
 Clioc-cliar Micco 
 
 Coosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 94 
 
 UCaula Micco 
 
 jIo 
 
 N. half 
 
 7 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 95 
 
 Li f-tif Hadjo 
 
 d.> 
 
 W. hair 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 97 
 
 MolK»ga 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 8 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 99 
 
 Tus-ro-ner Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 23 
 
 108 
 
 Ha tul-ga Hiidjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 24 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 109 
 
 Paster 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 31 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 112 
 
 Co-war Sar-da 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 34 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 113 
 
 O-wat-te-li-ga 
 
 Coosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 5 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 118 
 
 Sin da 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 1 1 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 119 
 
 Sim-mot-Iia-ie 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 28 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 122 
 
 So-pack-ho-lo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 2>5 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
144 
 
 f Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 Indian names. 
 
 County. 
 
 Ot-tis Micco 
 
 Lot-to-ini 
 
 Ha-des-sa 
 
 Eufaula town. 
 
 Ne-har Fixico 
 
 Fick-lic-ni-ye 
 
 Ficli-c!iork-lii-yc 
 
 No cose Ytiliolo 
 
 In le to-ke 
 
 ilo-yar-ne-cliar 
 
 Einartlilcr Tustunmccliee 
 
 Su-i'ai'-che-ye 
 
 Eliza 
 
 Mar-sc-ke 
 
 P2 nar-lio-ne-har 
 
 Clio-te 
 
 Sle-l>e-rlie-pe 
 
 So\v-Sf)o-clie 
 
 Ho-yaii-ho-ye 
 
 Tuckabatche town. 
 
 0-cIie Iliidjo 
 No-cas ILidjo 
 Icli-lios Yoliolo 
 Pos-fone Einaitlilar 
 Ne-ali-l'irco 
 Ko-nip YolioIo 
 Coo-wai-sai t Iladjo 
 Si-arli Yolu)lo 
 Sa-has iladjo 
 Tiickabatrhe Hadjo 
 Pow-wos Ilnd jo 
 Tal lis-see Fixico 
 Hagis Hadjo 
 VN Oc-se Yoholo 
 Cle-waltli-le Hadjo 
 Ar-cliee le Hadjo 
 Coo-sis-te Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 Coosa 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 Macon 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 Location. 
 
 w. hair 
 
 N. Iialf 
 N. hair 
 
 N. half 
 N. hall" 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 half 
 half 
 . half 
 . half 
 >Vhole 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 E. hall 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 
 34 
 36 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 > 
 
 24 
 
 19 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 26 
 
 35 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 21 
 16 
 
 21 
 21 
 20 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 18 
 18 
 17 
 17 
 18 
 18 
 17 
 17 
 18 
 17 
 17 
 17 
 17 
 
 14 
 14 
 
 13 
 
 1 3 
 
 12 
 
 1 O 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 34 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 1 7 
 
 22 
 
 14 
 
 28 
 
 14 
 
 22 
 
 14 
 
 21 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 14 
 
 33 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 1 3 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 145 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County, 
 
 Location. 
 
 u 
 
 u 
 
 CS 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 .2 
 o 
 
 15 
 
 
 B 
 1 
 
 
 
 a 
 _o 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 6 
 
 34 
 
 to 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 c 
 c« 
 
 £0 
 
 Ho-po-ith-ley 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 21 
 
 Cho-il-Ie Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 Ne-ali-Ioc-co Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 HobJe 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 33 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 Ne.he Emarthlar 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 25 
 
 Haltli-le-bo-ie Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 26 
 
 Tus-ke-ne-haw 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 23 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 27 
 
 Cle chin Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 29 
 
 Eclio Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 24 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 30 
 
 Loate Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 32 
 
 Tuckabatche Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 33 
 
 Yo-ho-lo-c!ie 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 34 
 
 Ne-har-tnat-ta Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 11 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 35 
 
 Cle-clium-ma-ho-lot-ta 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 9 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 36 
 
 Ho-tul-go Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 S7 
 
 C!ie-ha\v Micco 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 39 
 
 Co-c-gas Yoholo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. hair 
 
 10 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 41 
 
 0-sic Hadjo 
 
 Coosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 2 
 
 21 
 
 18 
 
 42 
 
 Lu-chi Yoholo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 43 
 
 Ne- haw-lac- ca-che 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 10 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 44 
 
 'I'o maltli Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 45 
 
 Mar-hai'-ie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 46 
 
 E-par-sart 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 19 
 
 IS 
 
 24 
 
 47 
 
 Im-ma Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N.half 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 48 
 
 Let-teg 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 50 
 
 Co-wock-co-che 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 52 
 
 Toot-car-has Emarthlar - 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 22 
 
 59 
 
 Attos Neach-locco 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 18 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 60 
 
 Kenarth Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 62 
 
 Tallis see Fixico 
 
 Barbour 
 
 N. half 
 
 29 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 63 
 
 Tuckabatche Emarthlar - 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 19 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 65 
 
 Tal-marse Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 72 
 
 Choc-he-a-gar 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 73 
 
 Im-bo-hoat-tie 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 34 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 75 
 
 Yoholo Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 80 
 
 Fus-hatch Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 82 
 
 Chas-tie Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 83 
 
 Ko-no-bie Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 13 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 84 
 
 O-sich-liin-ne-how 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 85 
 
 So-ko-li-go 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 17 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 86 
 
 Micco Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 10 
 
L46 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued, 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 *^ 
 
 94 
 107 
 113 
 115 
 117 
 119 
 120 
 122 
 123 
 124 
 132 
 134 
 136 
 137 
 144 
 146 
 147 
 148 
 149 
 150 
 151 
 152 
 154 
 158 
 161 
 162 
 163 
 164 
 166 
 168 
 169 
 174 
 180 
 183 
 187 
 190 
 191 
 193 
 197 
 196 
 198 
 
 County. 
 
 Ar-cliu-lai" 
 
 Poe-ait-tie 
 
 Kie-(Jio-gai 
 
 Ko-Tio-lii-ga 
 
 Coii-cliad Einaillilar 
 
 Pas-koai Hadjo 
 
 Yolioli) Hadjo 
 
 E-tie-liai Tus-ta-nug-liadjo 
 
 Is-tuu-la-lo-lio-ga 
 
 Tiiii-iuo-ta 
 
 Tolio-le-go 
 
 Ne-liaw-niai-ta-sick Micco 
 
 Si lio-kit-le-ga 
 
 Ai-bo-kie 
 
 Fus-liatch Uadjo 
 
 E-clii'-os-ta Yoliolo 
 
 Litti-liie 
 
 Ti lai-lio-ie 
 
 Waltli-lf-i-ga 
 Sult-lioe-ga 
 
 Cliu-iac lladjo 
 
 S|)ack-toii-ci-cliu 
 
 Ar ko-iii-ga 
 
 Spoak-e-gie Micco 
 
 Is-))ol-lort-die 
 
 Yar-ruir-savv 
 
 Clie-cliaw-nie Hadjo 
 
 l^)-(:lii.s se 
 
 Toat-kar lie Einaithlai- - 
 
 Nc-liar Yoliolo 
 
 Fo-lot-liogie 
 
 E-i)ock-ko-lo-di-ga 
 
 Tim-lul-lio-ga 
 
 Clie-bi-e-liar 
 
 Catch char Fixico 
 
 Ho-bectii-chor 
 
 Yiiicy 
 
 E-maith-lo-che 
 
 Yoholo Micco 
 
 Siii-ne-ciie 
 
 E-si-e-gar 
 
 Location. 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 Coosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 Coosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 Coosa 
 Tallaj)oosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 >Y. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 
 N. JK.lf 
 
 ys. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 E. hall 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 W. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 NV. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 34 
 23 
 26 
 26 
 25 
 30 
 30 
 22 
 31 
 24 
 34 
 28 
 28 
 30 
 25 
 11 
 29 
 21 
 20 
 24 
 11 
 20 
 6 
 7 
 21 
 31 
 3 
 3 
 18 
 3 
 34 
 7 
 35 
 34 
 17 
 4 
 14 
 17 
 9 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 14 
 
 21 
 
 IS 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 14 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 25 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 19 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 14T 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 .2- 
 
 
 £ 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 .2 
 o 
 
 4) 
 
 tn 
 
 c 
 6 
 
 "35 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 bo 
 
 c 
 
 202 
 
 So-ni-clie (or Ao-ni-che) - 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 204 
 
 So-gea-})ie 
 
 do 
 
 E. l.all" 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 207 
 
 Aii-ny 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 211 
 
 Co-ie-ga 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 216 
 
 Major 
 
 Talla])oosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 12 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 218 
 
 To-gMl-car' 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 222 
 
 Saw-lias-kie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 10 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 223 
 
 Sour Co le 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 226 
 
 Sar-de pie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 3 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 231 
 
 Siisoii 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 34 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 232 
 
 Si-ne-ino-mcach-ar 
 
 do 
 
 AV. half 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 234 
 
 Sar-gin-liea 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 236 
 
 Ho-tor-bie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 239 
 
 Mo-do-gie 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 7 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 240 
 
 FuUIi-ga 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 24 1 
 
 Tin inis-ko-kie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 242 
 
 Ilo-lo-di-ga 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 3 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 244 
 
 Mos-lie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 246 
 
 Mar-lie-gar 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 248 
 
 Fe-ea-clie-clice 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 249 
 
 Hos-po-tock Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 250 
 
 Acclie-liotch Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 252 
 
 SoafKi-ie 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 24 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 254 
 
 Co-lo-gie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 23 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 256 
 
 Sin-nar-gof-tie 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. hall 
 
 5 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 258 
 
 Har-dof-ko-kie 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 36 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 259 
 
 Ho-ge-bic 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 36 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 263 
 
 0-gil-lis Sen-ne-har 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 265 
 
 Ho-par-lar Hadjo 
 
 Coosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 3 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 267 
 
 Tuckabatclie Fixico 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 29 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 271 
 
 Tim-me-li-che 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 273 
 
 Micco Locco 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 274 
 
 It-kad-die Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 275 
 
 Nock-ho-ie-ga 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 18 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 277 
 
 Hu-che-thatch-clii Hadjo - 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 18 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 278 
 
 Ful-li-ga 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 279 
 
 Los-te Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 281 
 
 No-co-sie-le 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 282 
 
 Tim mar-san 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 283 
 
 Tus-sick-ke-char-ga 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 :287 
 
 Me-gis-kar Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 25 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
148 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 
 
 E 
 
 
 
 o 
 c 
 
 u 
 en 
 
 u 
 « 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 V 
 
 bo 
 
 c 
 
 — 
 
 288 
 
 Ar-liar-lock Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 11 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 289 
 
 Sie-e-ga 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 24 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 29S 
 
 0-c!iis Iladjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 8 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 297 
 
 Far-lieitli-lie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 26 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 SOO 
 
 Ar-lo-lio-kar 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 27 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 301 
 
 Hoak-chou Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 36 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 302 
 
 Hea-rlic-tar-litatli-lar 
 
 (!() 
 
 S. half 
 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 307 
 
 Clic-liar-le-bo-yar 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 23 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 311 
 
 Irli-hoie 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 314 
 
 Timlica-cliar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 315 
 
 Ar-cliccloc Eladjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 316 
 
 Spatiri!)}' Fixico 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 10 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 317 
 
 Tommy Yuholo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 9 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 318 
 
 Sco-mar 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 30 
 
 19 
 
 22 
 
 324 
 
 O-soi- Fixico 
 
 Macnn 
 
 S. half 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 326 
 
 Ar-ait-tto Iladjo 
 
 Baibour 
 
 S. half 
 
 19 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 327 
 
 Ne-he E-martli-lar Yoliolo 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 24 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 328 
 
 Ai-rliular Yoliolo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 24 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 329 
 
 U-back-lio-lat-tar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 23 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 331 
 
 Tallisee Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 SO 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 333 
 
 It-lis-liatch-le-be-yar 
 
 Barbour 
 
 S. half 
 
 30 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 335 
 
 Is.[)o-hie 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 1 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 336 
 
 Co-we-gus Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 25 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 337 
 
 Coo-sa Hadjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 338 
 
 Micro Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 36 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 339 
 
 Tal-low-war Micco 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 12 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 340 
 
 Sarnar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 26 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 343 
 
 Mcdly 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 27 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 347 
 
 Cliowoc-co-lo Fixico 
 
 Barbour 
 
 N. half 
 
 20 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 349 
 
 Sta loc-co 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 351 
 
 Si-ir-che 
 
 Coosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 352 
 
 Saw-liie 
 
 Bai'bour 
 
 S. half 
 
 20 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 357 
 
 Ko nip l\i*p 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 3 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 360 
 
 Li Icy 
 
 Coosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 35 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 361 
 
 Mis-la-iia-ka 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 6 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 362 
 
 Ilo-liir-tar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 32 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 368 
 
 Jim 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 21 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 374 
 
 Old Tiuir.iloc 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 23 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 377 
 
 In-tiick-lia-ie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 7 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 383 
 
 Tuckabatclie Emarthlar - 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 2S 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
|_ Dog. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATE MENT— Continued. 
 
 149 
 
 
 Indian nsune. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 £ 
 £5 
 
 
 
 o 
 a 
 .2 
 
 o 
 
 <i> 
 en 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 6 
 
 '■i 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 h 
 
 1 
 
 
 Kialigee town. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 69 
 
 Sau-fuck-ka 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 W. half 
 
 18 
 
 20 
 
 2S 
 
 78 
 
 Nai'-gof-fie-che 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 18 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 92 
 
 0-sar- kin-haw 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 31 
 
 20 
 
 2s 
 
 101 
 
 Osoocli Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 6 
 
 19 
 
 2S 
 
 139 
 
 0-see Yoliolo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 7 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 158 
 
 0-che Hadjo 
 
 Ottissee town. 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 31 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 S 
 
 Coosa Micco 
 
 Macon 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 5 
 
 Oc-lo-har Micco 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 7 
 
 Spoak-oak Tus-ten-nug-ga 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 Co nip Yo-ho-lo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 23 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 17 
 
 O-saw-we Emartlilar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 36 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 Tuckabatche Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 25 
 
 Oe-tc-ai'che Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 30 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 SO 
 
 Oss-see Yokolo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 29 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 32 
 
 Tal-ma-chus Harjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 28 
 
 16 
 
 2'? 
 
 35 
 
 Coo-cher Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 33 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 40 
 
 Micco Pi)w-ic-gar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 58 
 
 Yar-har Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 60 
 
 Clie-lo-clie Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 61 
 
 Pas-coaf Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 64 
 
 Micco Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 68 
 
 Co-ne Hajo (or Jesse) 
 
 do 
 
 W.half 
 
 34 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 71 
 
 Ich-che Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 ^V. half 
 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 23 
 
 74 
 
 So-hoe-yar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 35 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 83 
 
 Tem-mul-lic-ga 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 86 
 
 Yo-ke-che 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 89 
 
 Ful-lo-ge-gar 
 
 Tuskegee town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 27 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 11 
 
 E-marth-lar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 14 
 
 Ho-tul-ga Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 26 
 
 IC 
 
 24 
 
 18 
 
 Tal-lovv-war Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 U 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 21 
 
 Micco Hatka 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 32 
 
 Sin-thlannis Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 12 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 S5 
 
 Car-war-bic 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
150 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 
 
 tl 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 c 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 d 
 
 o 
 
 c« 
 
 Z 
 
 
 
 
 Z 
 
 h 
 
 « 
 
 36 
 
 Oach-chiim Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. hair 
 
 S3 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 51 
 
 Sit-tiho Elka 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 25 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 61 
 
 Si!i-tha 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 30 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 62 
 
 Rachel 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 63 
 
 John Ward 
 
 Talmachussa town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 30 
 
 16 
 
 24 
 
 4 
 
 Hil-lubbu Tus-ten-nugga 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 5 
 
 U-Cau-la Tus-ten-nugga - 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 6 
 
 Hobic-jis Iliiniiugga 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 24 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 8 
 
 Co-liase Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 35 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 Can-chat Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 £9 
 
 Ke-tis-se-ne-ne-har 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 25 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 30 
 
 Woe-see Yoliolo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 19 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 31 
 
 U-ba-lat-kar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 19 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 52 
 
 Lc-tar-ne 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 SO 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 38 
 
 Ma- he-gar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 32 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 40 
 
 Te-}ar-mic 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 31 
 
 14 
 
 24 
 
 4.2 
 
 Socer-ho-ko 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 36 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 43 
 
 Me-har-kie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 25 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 47 
 
 Woc-se-ho-lat-tcr 
 
 Chattoksofka town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 26 
 
 14 
 
 23 
 
 1 
 
 I-shat-np-ho-se 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 S. half 
 
 9 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 2 
 
 Ho-bo-ethle 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 5 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 No-co-se Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 £2 
 
 22 
 
 4 
 
 Chu-ele 
 
 do 
 
 W.half 
 
 3 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 5 
 
 Nehar locco 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 4 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 6 
 
 Ilat-lot llar-kie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 12 
 
 Pil-kar 
 
 do 
 
 IN. half 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 17 
 
 Sam-iio-ker 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 34 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 18 
 
 Con-up hc-gee 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 19 
 
 Si (uk-ho-me 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 10 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 20 
 
 E-nc-he Emai thlar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 I-yob-lio-mo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 27 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 Iloth-lepi-ya 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 35 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 K()tl»-or Voliolo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 SO 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 25 
 
 Fase-liatch-a Uadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 7 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 27 
 
 Choch-i-he 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 31 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 151 
 
 £8 
 
 30 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 50 
 
 54 
 
 55 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 61 
 
 63 
 
 64 
 
 65 
 
 68 
 
 70 
 
 71 
 
 72 
 
 74 
 
 75 
 
 80 
 
 81 
 
 82 
 
 83 
 
 88 
 
 90 
 
 91 
 
 94 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 Yar-liar Hadjo 
 
 Yo-ho-Io Cliop-ko 
 
 Faseliatcli-opol-thla 
 
 Tar-bath-le 
 
 Ho-liil-ga Hadjo 
 
 Fis-lal-kie 
 
 Hol-kar-see-ga 
 
 Tar-lit-te 
 
 Ti-di-clie 
 
 Micco Chop-ko 
 
 Ar-tus Fixico 
 
 0-ke-!in-tie 
 
 Sa-e-mit-te 
 
 Sholtle 
 
 Pin Hadjo 
 
 E-ne.har-clio-ko-ne 
 
 Coo-sa Ernarthlar 
 
 Yar-coo-chcc 
 
 Sin-lio-mar-har-ke 
 
 Kin-gat-ha 
 
 Tus-tiin-muck Hadjo 
 
 Tal-se Micco 
 
 Uit-igey 
 
 Swicli Hadjo 
 
 Tal-niarse Hadjo 
 
 Sal-lim-da 
 
 Tus-tun-nuck-kee 
 
 So-wi gie 
 
 Cus-se-tar-opo-ethc 
 
 Clio-ne-lar 
 
 Tues-se-ke-ar Hadjo 
 
 Sim-nie-ho-ga 
 
 Yoholo Hadjo 
 
 Swicli Ernarthlar 
 
 Ho-tul-ke Yoholo 
 
 Ok-ti-ar-chee Hadjo 
 
 Si-meho-key 
 
 Fase Hajo 
 
 Cho-lit-tel Ernarthlar 
 
 Is-te Ernarthlar 
 
 Si-ko-ige 
 
 County. 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 Location. 
 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 N.half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 VV. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 E.half 
 W. half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 E. hulf 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 W. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 W.half 
 N. half 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 27 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 24 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 SO 
 
 8 
 
 32 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 13 
 
 33 
 
 21 
 21 
 22 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 22 
 21 
 22 
 21 
 21 
 21 
 22 
 21 
 
 12 
 
 21 
 
 3 
 
 21 
 
 35 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 7 
 
 21 
 
 6 
 
 22 
 
 U 
 
 21 
 
 31 
 
 22 
 
 31 
 
 22 
 
 14 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 22 
 
 8 
 
 21 
 
 30 
 
 22 
 
 25 
 
 22 
 
 1 
 
 21 
 
 15 
 
 21 
 
 32 
 
 22 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 21 
 
 10 
 
 21 
 
 25 
 
 22 
 
 35 
 
 22 
 
 32 
 
 22 
 
 4 
 
 21 
 
 28 
 
 22 
 
152 
 
 f Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 STATEME NT— Continued. 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 Eclio-o Id-dy 
 
 Ilar-liar Einartlilar 
 
 Is-iiar-gof-tie 
 
 Te-war-wi-ka 
 
 Is-kar-ne 
 
 Tal-of-e Hadjo 
 
 Siiii-mar-te 
 
 Sally 
 
 Con-chat Fixico 
 
 Ok-ti-arcli Emartlilar 
 
 Ke-le 
 
 Si-mar-kee 
 
 Saw-lio Si-ga 
 
 Is-kar-de 
 
 Steem-kar-kie 
 
 Ho-wo(»k-ko-clie Hadjo 
 
 Fase-ltatch Emartlilar 
 
 Su lio-lo 
 
 Chehau town. 
 
 County. 
 
 Chis-so-hoie 
 
 War-ga 
 
 Summer 
 
 Coosawda town. 
 
 No-ko-sie-ka 
 
 Ne-lior Fixico 
 
 Ecli-has lladjo 
 
 E-martli-le-che 
 
 Sin-no-che 
 
 Tal-hi-ka 
 
 Nancy 
 
 Sowgahatcha town. 
 
 Ar-liar-locco Fixico 
 Micco Ilajo 
 TDC-co-piiii nugga 
 0-ser iladjo 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 Chambers 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 Location. 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 N. hall 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 
 E. half 
 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 W. half 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 29 
 
 6 
 35 
 28 
 20 
 35 
 
 7 
 14 
 29 
 
 3 
 29 
 20 
 
 9 
 19 
 31 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 22 
 19 
 
 18 
 18 
 IS 
 4 
 28 
 34 
 32 
 
 1 
 
 10 
 6 
 
 25 
 
 22 
 21 
 22 
 21 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 21 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 21 
 22 
 22 
 21 
 
 17 
 17 
 18 
 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 15 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 
 19 
 19 
 19 
 19 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 153 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 p, 
 
 
 c 
 
 V 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 .2 
 
 o 
 <u 
 
 ^1 
 
 en 
 O 
 
 d 
 
 1 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 C 
 
 7 
 
 It-lat-ta Hajo 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 32 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 10 
 
 Sip-po-a Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 15 
 
 M8 
 
 24 
 
 11 
 
 E-pos Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 12 
 
 Coo Sar Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 N.half 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 15 
 17 
 
 Sap-po-ie 
 Chun ne-gar 
 
 do 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 
 8 
 17 
 
 19 
 19 
 
 24 
 24 
 
 £0 
 
 Far-lio-ke-nar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 17 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 21 
 
 Sim-mar-hor-ga 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 Mis-lio-yar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 32 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 Timmey 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 15 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 37 
 39 
 
 Sa-map-pie 
 Tal-la-de-ga 
 
 do 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 28 
 
 19 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 42 
 
 Yarth-Iar 
 
 Kohomatskacatchka 
 town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 9 
 
 Ar-chee Yoholo 
 
 Chambers 
 
 N. half 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 Ko-ne-be Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 7 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 46 
 
 Is-kar-kie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 53 
 
 Fus-liat-chee 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 62 
 
 Ne-!iar-ke 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 64 
 68 
 
 Ne-liaiv|occo Hadjo 
 Sinn-lio-ya 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 Chambeis 
 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 
 SO 
 
 28 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 26 
 
 72 
 
 Con-chad-do Micco 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 4 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 75 
 
 Luke-har Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 29 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 87 
 
 Fic-he-le-ga 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 29 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 91 
 
 Al-pet-ter -Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 104 
 
 Yar-nits-chaw 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 107 
 
 Yoholo Micco (or Charley) 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 26 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 108 
 
 Cus se-tar Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 29 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 109 
 
 Emarthlar Tustennuckee 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 15 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 117 
 
 Ne-har Locco 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 30 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 122 
 
 Ar-\vat-ke 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 123 
 
 Chaw-bofe Micco 
 Clew alia town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 3 
 
 Sar-tar Micco 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 4 
 
 U-fau-la I'usten-nugga - 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 6 
 
 Fu.s-liatch-che Micco 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 1 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 7 
 
 Micco Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 36 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
154 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 u 
 
 ce 
 a. 
 
 u 
 O 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 u 
 in 
 
 15 
 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 d 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 h 
 
 bo 
 
 e 
 
 10 
 
 Tallesee Ho-porth-ley 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 25 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 18 
 
 Neliar Yoliolu 
 
 do 
 
 W.half 
 
 31 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 20 
 
 Se-both ke 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 31 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 fi9 
 
 Put-it-ton 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 32 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 30 
 
 Metli-Io-no-ga 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 32 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 33 
 
 Ho-lat-tar Emartlilar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 34 
 
 Clio-co-lis Hatljo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 39 
 
 Lar-na 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 41 
 
 Pin Uadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 20 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 42 
 
 Chu-le Yoliolo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 I 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 49 
 
 Micco Hatka 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 35 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 57 
 
 Ho-me-liie-dar 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 25 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 66 
 
 Hilli.s Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 32 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 68 
 
 Men-(lor-la 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 29 
 
 17 
 
 25 
 
 76 
 
 Cub-brach che Emartlilar 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 33 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 77 
 
 Fus-hatch-clie Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 79 
 
 So-di-sa 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 27 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 89 
 
 Fuc-ta- bus-to Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 91 
 
 Tal-marse Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 95 
 
 Tal-loaf Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 98 
 
 Cho-gart-ta Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 101 
 
 Car-bit-clie Emarthlar - 
 Tallassee town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 10 
 
 Woc-se Micco 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 12 
 
 Wac-se Holatter 
 
 do 
 
 W. haU' 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 14 
 
 Tock-a-sa Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 15 
 
 Neali Najo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 26 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 17 
 
 Spanny Hnjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 4 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 Coo-sis-te Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 4 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 19 
 
 E-clio Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 Micco Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 21 
 
 fieoige 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 23 
 
 Echo Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 24 
 
 Spauney Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 25 
 
 Echo Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 Ar-bi-ock Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 5 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 32 
 
 E-back-kie 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 26 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 34 
 
 Fus-sic-ya Hatka 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 37 
 
 Emarthlar Hadka 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 24 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
f Doc. IVo. 274. ] 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 155 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County, 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 eg 
 o. 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 Li 
 
 o 
 e 
 
 o 
 
 V 
 
 en 
 
 o 
 
 0) 
 0] 
 
 o 
 6 
 
 d. 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 bo 
 
 C 
 
 38 
 
 Coo-sis-ta Emartlilar 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 o 
 
 Ad 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 
 41 
 
 Nor-co-me 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 58 
 
 Ho-|)o-ie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 19 
 
 23 
 
 67 
 
 Hobie Hatka 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 71 
 
 Ech-has Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 18 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 72 
 
 Sim-lim-mie 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 77 
 
 No-ak-har 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 21 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 82 
 
 Il-lin-dor 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 32 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 84 
 
 Cle-sart-tie 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 24 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 93 
 
 Ar-so-bo-gie 
 
 do 
 
 W.half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 111 
 
 Kin-liar 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 30 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 113 
 
 Ho ma iloattie 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 36 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 118 
 
 Sor-kor iio-li-ga 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 26 
 
 124 
 
 Simmor-ta-ne 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 126 
 
 Pop-luick-ker 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 N. half 
 
 28 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 127 
 
 Spoke-oak Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 128 
 
 E-marthla Chop-ko 
 
 Macon 
 
 S. half 
 
 4 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 129 
 
 Talmarse-loche 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 1 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 130 
 
 Wi-gue-che 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 25 
 
 133 
 
 Stim- mis-la 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 135 
 
 Hnrk-ko-bo-yi-ga 
 
 Tallapoosa 
 
 E. half 
 
 20 
 
 18 
 
 22 
 
 139 
 
 Chim-mor-poak-kie 
 
 Macon 
 
 W. half 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 156 
 
 0-sou-neer 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 4 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 164 
 
 Kinne-sor 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 165 
 
 Ar-loc Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 166 
 
 Ar-pitli-ke Yoliolo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 35 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 169 
 
 Fiis-Hatclia 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 27 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 170 
 
 Cheille Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 20 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 171 
 
 Tora-ma Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 35 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 173 
 
 Ar-heu-locco Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 20 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 174 
 
 dis Haijo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 176 
 
 Clio-gar-ta 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 180 
 
 Tock-co-hi-la ' - 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 18 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 184 
 
 Sim-me-car 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 186 
 
 Se-ho-juch-clie 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 ^^ 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 187 
 
 Cusse-ter Hajo 
 
 Thlobthlocco town. 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 1 
 
 Os-po-hock Micco 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 Illis Hajo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
156 
 
 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 County. 
 
 Location. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 V 
 CO 
 
 o 
 u 
 on 
 
 O 
 
 6 
 J5 
 
 ■•i 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 bo 
 
 c 
 
 et 
 
 4 
 
 Cloth-thlo Hadjo 
 
 Macon 
 
 E. half 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 5 
 
 Tiri-tlilanidh Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 7 
 
 Emarth-Io-clie 
 
 do 
 
 yV. half 
 
 SO 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 8 
 
 0-ge-da Ydholo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 O-sooch Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 9 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 13 
 
 No-co-se Emai'tlilar 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 4 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 Purse 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 9 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 Os-se Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 19 
 
 Wack-see-ho latter 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 21 
 
 Tal-iiia-chus Fixico 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 9 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 Emarth-lo-clie Harney - 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 9 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 Fus-liatcli Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 17 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 Hoak-chum Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 28 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 25 
 
 Ha-tiil-ga Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 26 
 
 Lu-chee Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 27 
 
 Con-chart Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 28 
 
 Wat-to-lee Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 20 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 29 
 
 Ne-he-inar-tee-chee 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 20 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 30 
 
 Chee-walla Uarjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 29 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 31 
 
 Ne-har-locco Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 29 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 32 
 
 Lif-tif Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 18 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 33 
 
 Ronij) Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 34 
 
 Ar-lock Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 28 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 35 
 
 In-ho-malt-holth-lo-bogo - 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 28 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 36 
 
 Tallissee Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 33 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 37 
 
 Tal-lo-Ia Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 33 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 38 
 
 Ho-j)oth-to Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 34 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 39 
 
 Hos-()o-tock Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 29 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 41 
 
 Ne-har-lock-ke Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 27 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 42 
 
 Ne-har-lock-ko-che 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 26 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 44 
 
 Ho-bie Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 23 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 45 
 
 Emarthlar Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 23 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 46 
 
 Echo Emarthlar 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 50 
 
 Kin-hau 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 51 
 
 Con-chart Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 52 
 
 O-chi-piy-se Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 W. half 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 53 
 
 Yoholo Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 55 
 
 Oak-F\iska Hadjo 
 
 do 
 
 E. half 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 57 
 
 Pin-de-hosse Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 58 
 
 Ottis Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 S. half 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
 59 
 
 Spoke-oak Yoholo 
 
 do 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 
 15 
 
 22 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 STATEMENT— Continued. 
 
 157 
 
 
 Indian name. 
 
 £ 
 
 1 
 
 
 60 
 
 Im-me-aut-te 
 
 62 
 
 So-la-fi ga 
 
 64 
 
 Pon-ar-lioie 
 
 67 
 
 Oak Hill 
 
 70 
 
 So-dark-kie 
 
 72 
 
 Par-saik-kie 
 
 73 
 
 Tallisee Micco 
 
 74 
 
 Ar-clie-hatch Hajo 
 
 75 
 
 Oak-fus-ke Hadjo 
 
 79 
 
 0-sa-ne-har 
 
 81 
 
 So-tle-sor Hadjo 
 
 
 Towarsa tovm. 
 
 6 
 
 Spauney Fixico 
 
 County. 
 
 Macon 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 Location. 
 
 S. half 
 E. half 
 W. half 
 E. half 
 E. half 
 N. half 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 S. half 
 N. half 
 E. half 
 
 N. half 
 
 10 
 3 
 2 
 29 
 32 
 33 
 20 
 33 
 34 
 15 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 15 
 15 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 16 
 15 
 
 17 
 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 22 
 £2 
 
 20 
 
158 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Washington city, January 9, 1838. 
 
 Deau Sir: I have recently been inroimed that Messrs. Ciawfoid and 
 Balch, conunisiiDiiers for investigating Iraiids in the sale of Creek reser- 
 vation, &c., ai*e pi'oieeding to investigate cases of conllicting claims 
 arising between James C. Watson & Co. and other individual claimants 
 to lands embraced in the contract entered into at Tallassee, Alabama, on 
 the 28th of Angnst, 1836, between James C. Watson & Co., and certain 
 Creek chiefs. 
 
 'JMic lirst article of the above conti-act |)rovides for the appointment of an 
 agent to iii\estigate all such cases; and the pui'chasei-s iindei- it have not 
 anticipated that tiiev \\owld be referred to Messrs. Crawford and Balch, 
 whose ojjinions, upon at least one imjjortant branch of the cases, arc known 
 to have been foi-med and expressed adverse to their claims. I have now 
 to re(|uest to be infoi-med whether these gentlemen have been charged with 
 the investigation and decision of the cases alluded to: and if so, respectfully 
 to protest, «)n the part of James C. NN atson & Co., against such reference. 
 Without intending, in the least, to imj)ngn the nioti\es, integi'ity, or ability 
 of the commissioneis, Justice to pai-ties having such impoitant interests 
 involved in the (juestioHs at issue i-e(juires that they should be submitted 
 to an uncommitted tribunal ; and 1 have, therefore, to i-cpeat the re(|uest 
 contained in a former communication for the early api)»intment of an agent 
 t<) investigate the cases alluded to. 
 
 I am, \erv respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 A. IVEIISON. 
 
 C. A. Hauris, Esq. 
 
 Commissioner of Indian JijJ'airs. 
 
 Washington, January 15, 1838. 
 Sir: There are fifteen cases before us which were reversed by Colonel 
 Hogan, and included in his leport of his investigations in iNlcHenry's 
 (listiict, which have been recertified by Major Abbott. He states to me 
 that he made these recertifications by virtue of written instructions to him, 
 emanating Irom the aullioiity of the Secretary of War; that these instruc- 
 tions were given early in the year 1836. 
 
 These lecertilicaiions were made in cases in which the President had 
 reversed former contracts, or in which the party claiming had relin(|uished 
 all their interest by some instrument in w rititig. It has become necessary, 
 with a view to (ieneral Watson's contract, that a copy of these instructions, 
 to which Major Abbott refers, should be transmitted to this board, in an 
 oflicial form. Major Abbott believes that these instructions bear date 
 about the 15th January, 1836. 
 
 Respectful I V, 
 
 ALFRED BALCll, Commissioner. 
 To C. A. Harris, Esq. 
 
 Commissiontr, <^'C. 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 January 17, 1838. 
 Sir: I daily receive letters protesting against the issuing ]>atents to the 
 Watson company, under the <' large contract," as it is called, until the 
 
I Doc. No. 274. ] 159 
 
 whole matter can be investigated, and the extent of the operation of that 
 contract fixed by the decision of the Department. I take it for granted 
 sucii patents ivill be suspended ; but as the patents are issued from the Land 
 Office, out of abundant caution 1 would suggest that an understanding be 
 liad, by which that office shall await the decision of tlie War Department, 
 befoie ])atents sliall issue for any of the disputed tracts of land. I expect 
 such an arrangement already has been made, and I should not have brought 
 it to your notice but fur the great apprehensions expressed by numberless 
 letters, and a report in circulation in Alabama, that the company rely 
 upon procuring the patents, under their contract already approved, to dis- 
 ])o«sess the occu])ants in spite of any decision which may hereafter be made. 
 Be pleased to enable me to relieve the settlers from such an apprehension. 
 AVith great respect, vour obedient servant, 
 
 DIXON H. LEWIS. 
 Hon. Joel R. Poinsett. 
 
 Wi\SHiNGT0X CITY, January 22, 18 38. 
 
 Dear Sir : I have already presented the rcjjort of Captain Page, ac- 
 companied with the written assent of the individual Indians to the con- 
 tract entered into at I'allassee, Alabama, between General Jesup, certain 
 Creek chiefs, and James C. Watson & Co., for the lands in R. W. 
 McHenry's district, which formed the subject of contest before certain 
 agents of the Government. 
 
 1 have also requested the appointment of an agent to investigate such 
 claims to the lands embraced in that contract as conflict with the title of 
 James C. Watson & Co. under it. The appointment of such an agent 
 is provided for by the contract itself, and the rights and interests of all 
 parties require the speedy adjustment of the claims. When the agent is 
 appointed, I presume, of course, that he will be instructed from the De- 
 partment as to the character and extent of the claims which are to form 
 the subject of his investigations, and which will be considered of higher 
 dignity than those derived from the contract. In view of such instruc- 
 tions, I beg leave to submit a few remarks, in behalf of J. C. Watson & 
 Co., upon the subject of anticipated cases likely to arise between them 
 and other claiuiants. 
 
 These cases, it is believed, will consist of four classes, as follows ; 
 
 1st. The original contract certified by the Government agents, and 
 which were investigated and reported as fraudulent. 
 
 2d. Contracts reversed by the President, and recertified. 
 
 3d. Contracts relinquished or surrendered by the original ostensible 
 purchasers, and recertified by the agents of Government. 
 
 4th. Contracts made with the rightful owners of reservations, but not 
 recertified. 
 
 In relation to the first class, I understand the President already to have 
 decided that they are to be considered ;jn?Jia/c/c?e, fraudulent and void, 
 and will be set aside to the benefit of J. C. Watson & Co., unless setup 
 aud supported by satisfactory evidence of their fairness dehors the record. 
 This decision, I presume, will be adhered to. 
 
 In relation to the second class, J. C. Watson & Co. are ready to 
 admit, that all cases which were reversed by the President and recer- 
 
160 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 tified by agents duly appointed, and agreeably to establislied regulations, 
 will have |»rprc(lcncc over their title. In such cases, however, the order 
 for reversal sliould clearly appear, and the regulations of the Department 
 for certifying contracts should have been implicitly pursued. 
 
 In regard to the third class, it is yielded by J. C. Watson h Co., 
 that in all cases when the original purcliaser aj)peared in person before 
 the Gnveriun*'nt agent, and signed a written relin(|iii;^lMnent of his con- 
 tract, aflcr which a contract for the same land was recertified agreeably 
 to tlie regulations, such contract will be held good. In all such cases, 
 however, the written relinquisliinent should be produced or accounted for, 
 and the same duly authenticated or proved according to law. 
 
 It is contended by J. C >> atscjn bi. Co., that no contract recertified 
 by the agents, except alter such relin<|uishment in wi-iting in presence of 
 tlie ngeni, although marked on the agent's book us *> given up," can have 
 any validity whatever. 
 
 In respect to the foui th class, it is admitted llial all fair and bona fide 
 contracts made anterior to the contract of J. C. Watson ^c Co., with 
 the rightful owner of the soil, and which have never been certified ac- 
 cording to the established i-egulalions, will be considered and held as 
 valid only as conferring upon the contracting party the pre-emption right 
 of purchase and execution, in conformity to the "regulations." in 
 other words, whenever an individual can establish the fact that the right- 
 ful Indian agieed to sell him his reserve, he will still have the right of 
 completiiig his purchase, by paying into the hands of the agent of the 
 Government the fair and full value of tlie lands as assessed by such 
 agent, and having the contract certified for approval as heretofore. The 
 money thus paid, and w hich must be the entiie sum or value of the land, is 
 to be disposed of by tlie agent, in the manner pointed out in the contract 
 of J. C. Watson & Co. 
 
 'Ihere will ])i'obably ai ise another class of cases, in which . le righU 
 and interests of J. C. Watson 6c Co. under their contract, and the 
 subse(|uent acts of Captain Page, will be concerned. In the supple- 
 mental instructions given to Captain Page, he was directed, in all cases 
 when the Indian reservie was dead, to pay the pro rata allowance of the 
 g75,000 to certain other persons in the place of the original reservee. 
 In carrying out these instructions, it was impossible for Cnptain Page, 
 without infinite trouble and delay, to disci'iminate between those who died 
 before and those who died subso(|uent to the date of J. C. Watson & Co.'s 
 contract. It appears from his report atul the accompanying papers, 
 that he paid the pro rata sum allotted to each reservee, in all the dead 
 cases, to the j)roper persons ; and J. C. Watson*& Co. will therefore 
 have an equitable claim upon the lands of these deceased Indians. There 
 may possibly exist cases in which the lands of Indians who were dead at 
 the date of the Watson contract had been sold by the heirs or administra- 
 tors of the deceased. In such cases, as the rightful heirs have never 
 received a portion o( the >5^75,000, J. C Watson \; Co. will be entitled 
 to the benefit of the previous coittracts, if any, and to the money arising 
 from them when paid into the hantis of the Government agent; provided 
 such sales sliall be ascertaiind to be legal and valid, and which must be 
 i)roved by the purchasers before the title of J, C. Watson & Co. can be 
 superseded. 
 
 I have lespectfully to ask that, if the Department shall entertain any 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] l6l 
 
 doubt as to the correctness of tlie views herein set forth, the same will be 
 indicated to me, that I may be heard more at length before instructions are 
 made out for the agent who shall he appointetl to investigate the claims. 
 I am, very respectfully, &c. 
 
 A. IVERSON. 
 C. A. Harris, Esq., 
 
 Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 
 
 War Department, September 14, 1836. 
 Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letters of the 
 27th, 30th, and 31st ultimo. 
 
 In the absence of the President, I deeni it proper to forbear expressing 
 an opinion upon the arrangements yo>i Iiavc sanctioned for the disposal of 
 the Creek lands, and upon the gi-atuities to the chiefs. As the questions 
 presented by them are of some diSRcnlty, I shall cause copies of the papers 
 you have forwarded to be sent to Messrs. Crawford and Balch, to obtain 
 the benefit of their opinions. Tiieir report will probably be received in 
 season to aid the President in forming l»is own judgment. 
 
 The removal of so large a number of the Creeks as stated in your let- 
 ter of the 31st ultimo, is gratifying 
 
 Very respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 Acting Secretary of War. 
 Brevet Maj. Gen. T. S. Jesup. 
 
 Extract from instructions to Messrs. Thomas H. Crawford and Al- 
 fred Balch, commissioners, dated September 22, 1836. 
 
 An important step has been taken by General Jesup for the disposi- 
 tion of the lands in Doctor M( Henry's district, the contracts for which 
 have been contested. From a consideration of the present embarrassed 
 condition of the Creeks, and a conviction of the desirableness and necessity 
 of their instant removal, he has given his sanction, subject to the approval 
 of the President, to a contract for the sale of these tracts. Copies of his 
 letter, of the contract, and of other papers less directly connected with 
 this transaction, you will find enclosed. No opinion has been exj)ressed 
 by the Department upon lliis proceeding ; but General Jesup has been ad- 
 vised of this reference of tlie papers to "^(m. I have to request that you 
 will give them a thorough investigation, with a view to ascertain the bear- 
 ing tliey have, or may liave, upon measures previously taken for the sale 
 of these lands ; whether any (»!)jertions, arisifig out of the provisions of 
 the laws of the State, or of the treaty \\\i\\ the Creeks, can be sustained. 
 The result of this investigation you will report as early as practicable, 
 for the consideration of the President. 
 
 You will also please to procure a list of the Indians whose lands are 
 embraced in this general contract. It is provided that the assent of these 
 Indians shall be individually given. As, in the event of the contract being 
 confirmed by the President, the duty of seeing it faithfully executed will 
 devolve upon you, you will please to ascertain from General Jesup to 
 what extent the Indians have assented toil; and also all other measures 
 U 
 
162 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 taken or ordered by him in regard to it. It will be necessary to learn, 
 by a comparison of the several lists, v\ hetlier any of the lands conveyed by 
 this instrument are covered by contracts on the lists of those reversed or 
 given up in Doctor McHenry's district ; if upon the latter list, you will 
 inquire into the fact of the surrender ; and if it is not established, and no 
 other objection is shown, you will notify tiie new contractors of the ex- 
 istence of this first contract, and that it will be laid before the President 
 for his favorable action. 
 
 Very respectfully, &c. 
 
 C A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 
 
 War Department, 
 
 O^ce Indian Affairs, September 24, 1836. 
 Sir : Your letter of September 1 6th has been received. In reply, I 
 have to inform you that, before its receipt, copies of General Jesup's letter, 
 and of the contract made for the disposition of the contested reservations 
 in Dr. McHenry's district, had been forwarded to Messrs. Crawford and 
 Balch, for examination and report; and until tiiisis received, the contract 
 will be subinilted to the President for his action. 
 
 Tliese gentlemen have power to investigate cases where fraud is alleged 
 to have been committed, and to take the proper measures for certifying con- 
 tracts. Very respectfully, ^>". 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 Colonel A. Iverson, 
 
 Columbus, Georgia. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, September 29, 1836. 
 Sir : In atiswer to your letter of the 12th instant, protesting against 
 the approval of the contract for the sale of Creek reservations, entered 
 into by General Jesup with certain individuals, I have the honor to 
 inform you that the contract has not been acted on ; nor will it be until 
 after the receipt of tiie views of the new commissioners, Messrs. Balch 
 and Crawfoid, to whom a copy has been sent for examination and report. 
 To these gentlemen a copy of your letter will be forwarded. 
 
 \ery respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 JuLiEN S. Devereux, Esq. 
 
 Tuskegee, Alabama. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, October 11, 1836. 
 Sir : I have received your letter of the 25th ultimo, upon the subject of 
 reservations that you have purchased under the Creek treaty; and which 
 will be acted upon, wlien the report of Messrs. Crawford and Balch upon 
 the contract sanctioned by General Jesup is received. 
 
 Very respectfully, kc. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 
 Col. A. Iverson, Columbus, Ga. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 163 
 
 War DErARTMENT, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, October 11, 1836. 
 Gentlemen : Herewith you will receive a copy of a letter from Mr. 
 A. Iverson, connected with the contract for Creek reservations, which has 
 been referred to you for examination and report. 
 Very respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner 
 Messrs. Thomas H. Crawford and 
 Alfred Balch, 
 
 Columbus, Georgia. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836. 
 Sir: Your letter of October 19th has been received ; and the course 
 you have adopted, in relation to the contract for the sale of reservations, 
 sanctioned by General Jesup, is approved, for ils fairness and judicious- 
 ness ; precluding, it would seem, all cause of complaint. I enclose copies 
 of letters received from Mr. William Dougherty and Colonel Iverson, 
 upon this subject. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner^ 
 Messrs. T. H. Crawford, and 
 
 Alfred Balch, Tuskegee, Alabama. 
 
 W"ar Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836. 
 Sir : I have received your letter of the 17th ultimo, protesting against 
 the contract for the sale of Creek reservations, made by the chiefs with the 
 sanction of Genei-al Jesup ; and have transmitted a copy of it to Messrs. 
 Crawford and Balch, the United States commissioners, at Tuskegee. 
 Under instructions from this office, they have invited the parties interested 
 to present written arguments or statements in relation to it ; and no deci" 
 sion will be made by the President until their rej)ort is received. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner^ 
 William Dougherty, Esq., 
 
 La Grange, Troup county, Georgia. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836, 
 Sir : I have received your letter of the 29th ultimo, requesting that a 
 Creek reservation may be exempted from the operation of the contract 
 made with General Watson and others ; a copy has been sent to the com- 
 missioners, and further action will await their report. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 Col. A. Iverson, Columbus^ Ga. 
 
164 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 War Department, 
 
 OJJlce Indian Affairs, February 10, 1837. 
 Sir: In iej)ly to your note ot yestoiday, I have tlie lioiior to state, that 
 the contract made by General NVatson and others, with the Creek chiefs, 
 for the .sale of reservations under llie treaty of March, 1832, is now under 
 consideration, in connexion with the reports of the commissioners, the 
 arguments of counsel foi- the contt nding parties, and theevidcnce, that have 
 been ti ansuiitted to this Dej)artnient. No definitive conclusion has been 
 formed ; but it is probable the contract will be eventually conditionally 
 confirmed. 
 
 The letter of Mr. Bryan is returned. 
 
 Vei-y respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 
 Commissioner. 
 Hon. D. H. Lewis, 
 
 Hovse of liepresentatives. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 OJice Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 
 
 Sir : You will receive, with this, a c(»py of the contract made between 
 the United States, certain chiefs of the Creek nation, and Messrs. W atson 
 and otheis ; and of a |)aper, exhibiting the considerations and conditions 
 on vhich it has been aj)jiroved by tlie I'residcnt. This last paper conte(n- 
 jdates the performance of certain duties by an agent to be selected by the 
 President, who has directed that they shall be (levolved upon you. The 
 expenses of ^executing these, it is provided, shall be borne by Messrs. 
 Watson & Co. Your own conjj)onsatioii, in addition to your military pay 
 and allowatices, has been fix< d by the Depat tnient, w ith the concurrence 
 of these gentlemen, at ^8 00 j)er day, foi- every day necessarily engaged in 
 the business. 
 
 Your fust duty, as ]»rrsriibed in the first condition, \\ill be to obtain 
 the assent of the individual Cicek reservoes interested to the terms of the 
 contract. In d(tiiig this, your personal knowledge of the Creeks, aided 
 by the information you may deiive from the chiefs, and others, will secure 
 you against mistakes as to the identity or title of the Indians who 
 present themselves as rightful claimants. And you will be careful to 
 refrain from any representations that may prevent their acting freely and 
 voluntaiily. 
 
 Before undertaking this branch of tlie business, you will lereive from 
 Messrs. Watson & Co. the amount of the seconti and last payment of 
 $37,500 ; of whicli, and of the first payment of ^37,500, you will per- 
 ceive it is the decision of the President that each leservee, justly entitled, 
 sliall receive his due pi-o|)uriion. 
 
 The mode and time in wliidi you ascertain what has been paid to each 
 out of the last named sum, and what can be recovered from the chiefs, for 
 distribution to the rightful claimants, and in which you will distribute the 
 first named sum, will be determined by yourself. It is distinctly under- 
 stood by Messrs. Watson Si Co., that they are to make good to each reser- 
 vee any deficiency there may eventually be in his just proportion of the 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. 'J 165 
 
 whole consideration of g75,000. You will, when the payments are com- 
 pleted, render an exhibit, showing the sum each reservee was entitled to, 
 and the amount paid to him ; which exhibit, with the receipts of the Indians, 
 will he admitted as evidence of the sum ench is further entitled to receive. 
 You will receive from this office, under this date, instructions in regard 
 to the removal of the Creek warriors a- d their families. It is possible 
 that this movement may be so timed as to permit your proceeding to Arkan- 
 sas without any great delay. Should it, however, be otherwise, and you 
 should find that, by waiting to accomjjany these emigrants, your execution 
 of these duties herein confided to you will be protracted to the inconve- 
 nience of Messrs. Watson and Co.* you will commit to the officers acting 
 under yonr direction, the charge of the emigrants, and procetd to carry 
 into effect these instructions. 
 
 A list of tiie contested cases in McHenry's district will be forwarded 
 to you as soon as it can be prepared, which I would advise you to com- 
 pare and certify by the records of the commissioners at Tuskegee. 
 
 Very respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 
 Commissioner. 
 
 Captain John Page, 
 
 Superintendent Creek emigration^ 
 
 Fort Mitchell, Alabama. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 
 
 Sir: I have the honor to transmit, herewith, for your information, the 
 copy of a communication addressed by this ofiice to the Secretary of War, 
 the recommendations in which have been approved by the President. From 
 it you will learn the terms and conditions \\\wn which the contract made 
 by yourself and others, on the 28th of April last, with General Jesup, for 
 the purchase by your company of certain Creek reservations, has been 
 approved by the President. 
 
 I also transmit a copy of the instructions this day given to Captain 
 Page, who has been directed to perform tiie duties growing out of the 
 contract as confirmed, provided for in the first six of the conditions of the 
 
 approval. 
 ^^ C. A. HARRIS, 
 
 Commissioner. 
 
 General J. C. Watson, Washington Citij. 
 
 War Depaktment, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 
 
 Gentlemen: The President has examined with care the reports made 
 by you upon the contract between the United States, certain chiefs of the 
 Creek nation, and General Watson and others, together with the contract 
 itself, in connexion with all the circumstances having a bearing upon it. 
 
 I now have the honor to inform you that he has approved the contract, 
 
166 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 upon conditions which are specified in the acconi])an>ing paper, marked A. 
 It is desirable that your early attention should be directed to this matter, 
 "with a view to llie cllcct it may have in restricting or enlarging your in- 
 quiries and duties. 
 
 Captain Page, as you will perceive from the enclosed copy of his in- 
 structions, marked B, has been cliaiged with certain duties, arising out 
 of the conditional ratificatiun of the contract; and I have to request that 
 you will gi\ e him such information and aid as he may require. 
 
 Mr. Wyse is now here, and copies of such papers as may appear to be 
 necessary to tlie piosecution of your labors will be prepared, as early as 
 possible, for transniission to you. 
 
 Jn tlie fuither progress of yonr investigations, it is the opinion of the 
 President that you should devolve the burden of proof oh the first purcha- 
 ser; this will exclude, of course, all examination of cases in which a tract 
 has been resold, but not recertified after reversal, and in which it may 
 l)a\ e been resold and recertified w ilhout authority on the part of the agent. 
 
 1 also enclose the draught of a bill,markt'd C, which has received a second 
 reading in the Senate, and w hich does not materially difler from the pro- 
 ject forwarded by Mi". IJalrh. Upon examination, in connexion with the 
 ratification of the contract, it will enable you to understand all the meas- 
 ures at present contemplated by the Executive in regard to this business. 
 
 It seems to me important to adopt some course, which, while it will 
 debar no one of a fair oppoitunity to jjresent his whole case to you, will 
 bring tijese examinations to a close withii; a reasonable time. 
 
 You are requested, therefore, to consider- and report whether it is not 
 expedient to issue notices that no claims will be examiiied by you, unless 
 applications are filed by a certain time to be fixed. 
 
 Very, &c., 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 Commissioner. 
 
 Hon. T. H. Crawford and 
 A. Balcii, Esq., 
 
 Tuskegee, Alabama. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office India?! ^iffairs, February \1, 1837. 
 
 Sir : I have the honor to lay before you, to be submitted to the Presi- 
 dent for his a|)proval, if you think pi'oper, a contract entered into on the 
 fiSth day of August, 1836. between the United States of tlie first part ; cer- 
 tain chiefs of the Creek nation, of the second part; and General JamcsC. 
 "Watson and others, of the third |iart ; for the sale of all the reserves, un- 
 der the Creek treaty of \%5-z, in the district assigned to Doctor R. W. 
 McHpnry as certifying agent: |)revious contracts for the sale of which 
 had been contested, or had been certified and marked for reversal, or 
 which had bocn resold and i-eccrtified without authority on the part of said 
 agtnt, and for all the reserves in the Creek country which had not been 
 Hold. 
 
 In presenting this contract for approval, upon the conditions that will 
 be heieinal'ter stated, it serms to be proptr to advert to the circumstances 
 whidi Ird to its formation, ajid to the measures which have since been 
 adopted in relation to it. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 16T 
 
 When the hostilities in the Creek country commenced, the duties of the 
 agents for certifying contracts for the sale of reservations were suspend- 
 ed, while a large quantity of landTremained unsold, and the questions 
 that had arisen in regard to contracts for the sale of a still larger portion 
 remained unadjusted. The removal of the Creek Indians was dttermined 
 upon; hut the objection was constantly made by them, that they had not 
 disposed of their reservations. It was in this state of things that a prop- 
 osition was made by the chi.^fs to Captain Page, then superintending the 
 emigration, to the following effect : Tliatthe chiefs would assemble in their 
 respective towns all the Indians whose lands had been wrongfully taken 
 fi-om them ; and according to a proposition that had been submitted, a com- 
 pany of gentlemen would pay to the true reservee, for his land, a sum sat- 
 isfactory to him and the chiefs, in the presence of an agent of the United 
 States ; if there should be a difference of opinion as to the price, the land 
 should be appraised by two persons, selected by tlie chiefs and the compa- 
 ny, and the value thus ascertained should be paid to the Indian by the lat- 
 ter. This proposition was approved, with an express condition, which is 
 stated in the instructions to Major General Jesup of May 19, 1836, that 
 no purchase made under it would be sanctioned, if a prior valid contract 
 for the same land existed. On the 30th of August, General Jesup trans- 
 mitted to the Department the enclosed contract. In the letter that accom- 
 panied it, he says, <' I felt much doubt as to the propriety of such an ar- 
 rangement, as well as to the power of entering into it ; considering, as I 
 did, that each individual Indian had a vested right in his particular loca- 
 tion. Nothing short of the absolute necessity of satisfying the Indians, 
 and removing from their minds the impression that tliey would receive 
 nothing for tlieir lands, would have induced me, under any circumstances, 
 to sanction it." This strong expression of his doubts as to the propi'ie- 
 ty of the measure, indicated to tiie Department the necessity of great cau- 
 tion in acting upon it. Tiie whole subject was therefore referred to 
 Messrs. Crawford and Balch, commissioners on the part of the United 
 States, in the Creek country, on the 22d of September, 1836, with a re- 
 quest that they would give it a thorough investigation, with a view to as- 
 certain the bearing the contract might have upon measures previously ta- 
 ken for the sale of the lands, or whether any objection, arising out of any 
 of the provisions of the laws of the State, or of the treaty with the Creeks, 
 could be sustained. The reports of these gentlemen were received on the 
 19th of December last. It appears that, upon receiving the instructions to 
 enter upon this investigation, they gave notice to the parties interested, 
 who filed with them written memorials, statements, affidavits, and argu- 
 ments. Upon a full consideration of these, they submitted elaborate re- 
 ports, in which they arrived ai the following conclusions : 
 
 1. The contract is not for the benefit of the Indians, '<who, if the agree- 
 ment is a good one for the vendees, must receive a much smaller sum than 
 would arise from a disjjositiun of their lands and a prosecution of their 
 interests in the mode heretofore ])iescribed." 
 
 2. The contract cannot be sustained under the laws of Alabama; having 
 been made without the assentof the individual reservees,and without author- 
 ity on the part of the commanding general. 
 
 3. The contract ought not to be affirmed, the money not having been 
 paid in their respective proportions to the several reservees. 
 
 I would respectfully submit some remarks upon each of these points, 
 
168 [ Doc. No. 274. J 
 
 without intending to detract in the slightest degree from the credit due to 
 the commissioners for the diligence and aliility \\ith whichthey have devoted 
 th('n)si'lvcs (o tlie (lisciiatgo of tl;eii- (hit \ . 
 
 1. Admitting it to be true that a hitger sum miglil have been obtained 
 for these lands if they had been disposed of in "tlic mode heretofore jiie- 
 scribed," it is obvious that the condition of the Indians rendered a 
 further adiierence to that mode all but iniprai ticable. That mode required 
 the ajjpcarance of the Indian and the purchaser in the presence of the cer- 
 tilyiiig agent, and the |)a}merit of what had been nsceitained by a pievious 
 apj)raiscnieiit to be a fair consideration. Could this have been done with 
 so large a nuiiilicr of reservees, in a cttuntry in which hostile movements 
 were in progress ? The pioposition of Ojothe Yoholo, in which this con- 
 tract oiiginated, seems to me to answer this question in the negative. And 
 it is not to be presunsed that the Department would have sanctioned a de- 
 jiaiture from "the mode heietoTore jjrescribed," had an adherence to it 
 been compatible wiih the rights of all the parties. The objection, it is also 
 to be ub^u'ved, can have relerence only to the lands for which the pur- 
 chasers had stijuilatcd in therontr act to i)ay $75,000 ; foi- the unsold lands 
 in the described district, they aie bound to pay tlic ascertained value u])oh 
 a fair aj)praisenient by disinterested pci sous. 
 
 2. The want of auihority in Genei'al Jesjip w ill no longer be an objec- 
 tion, wlun his procerdings art- aj)|)roved by the Executive; and the objec- 
 tion Connded u()(in ijie non-assent of the individual reservees will be obvia- 
 ted by a com])liai!ce with one of the conditions hereinafter prescribed. 
 
 3. The money was not, it is true, j)aid to the iridi\idual reservees, but 
 to the chiefs of the resj)ective towns ; to secure it, as is alleged, from pre- 
 tended claimants. 
 
 L<M)king to the circumstances of the Creek Indians at the date of this con- 
 tiact, ll»>' in. porfance of their early removal, their unwillingnes to emigrate 
 until their lands were finally disposed of, the advantage secured by the 
 engagement of a hand of warriors for tlie service in Florida, (which was 
 one (if the main inducements to its sanction by the commanditjg general,) 
 and the fact that one-hall of the stipulated consideration has been advanced 
 by the company, I would j-espectfully suggest that the accompanying con- 
 tract be submitted for the approval of tlie President, upon the following 
 conditions : 
 
 1. That the parties of the third part shall be allowed a reasonable time, 
 in the disnetion of the President, to obtain the assent of the Indians whose 
 reserves are embraced in this contract, through an agent to be ap])ointed 
 by the President, and in such manner as he may diiect. 
 
 2. That in evviy case where an Indian gives his assent, he shall receive 
 a rateable proportion of the whole consideration of $75,000 : to be ascer- 
 tained by dividing that sum by the number of reservees entitled thereto. 
 
 3. Tliat the parties of the third part shall be furnished with an abstract 
 of the contested eases, showing the names of the Indians ; nun)ber of the 
 section, townsliip, and range, to which each is entitled ; and such evidences 
 of identity and other i)articulai"s as can be piocured. 
 
 4. I'liat ilic |)arties (d" the third part shall pay the sum of $37,500, the 
 second and last payment stijiulated to be made, to an agent appointed by 
 the President to receive and distribute the same. 
 
 5. I'liat elVicieDt measures shall be adoi)ted, under the direction of the 
 President, to asceitain the amount each Indian entitled under this contract 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. J 169 
 
 has received as his proportion of the sum of S37,500, which was advanced 
 by the parties of the third part to Captain John Page, on the 29th of 
 August, 1836. 
 
 6. That whereas a receipt was given by Cajjtain John Page, United 
 States agent, superintendent of the Creek emigration, on the 29th day 
 of August, 1836, in the words and terms following, to wit : 
 
 Received of James C. Watson, William Walker, Edward Hanrick, Pe- 
 ter C. Harris, and John Peabody, tliirty seven thousand five hundred dol- 
 lars, incomj)liance with the tliird article of a contract entered into between 
 the United States and certain individuals of the Creek tribe of Indians 
 holding disputed claims to reserves, which is to be retained by me until the 
 assent of said people is given to said contract, and a person designated to 
 receive it in their behalf. August 29, 1836. 
 
 JOHN PAGE, 
 Captain, Superintendent Creeks, 
 
 And whereas the said sum of ^37,500, so acknowledged to have been 
 received of the parties of the third part, was paid to the chiefs of the towns 
 embraced in the contract, and not to the individual reservees, as stipula- 
 ted in said contract, and according to the terms of the foregoing receipt, 
 for reasons which, in the judgment of the agents of the Government, justi- 
 fied that course ; and whereas, in the opinion of the President, it is his duty 
 to secure the payment to eacli leservee his rateable proportion of the whole 
 consideration of |J75,00O; it is further made a condition to the ratifica- 
 tion of this contract, that the President will, in the use of all proper means, 
 through an agent to be by him selected, or otherwise, cause whatever sum 
 (if any) may have been retained by the chiefs out of the S37, 500, paid to 
 them by the agents of the Government, or may have been distributed by 
 them to persons not justly entitled to any portion thereof, to be returned 
 to said agent, for distribution to the rightful claimants ; and if tlie money 
 thus retained or distributed cannot be recovered, the President will rec- 
 ommend to Congress, at its first session after the ascertainment of this 
 fact, the appropriation of the requisite amount — not doubting that, with a 
 knowledge of the circumstances of the case, the fairness of tbe contract, its 
 benefit to the Indians and to the citizens of the United States, and the agen- 
 cy of the officers of the Government in framing and executing it, (which, 
 in his opinion, are sufficient to authorize and ensure it,) the early and fa- 
 vorable action ot Congress may be had thereon. But if said appropria- 
 tion shall be refused by that body, the parties of the third part w ill be re- 
 quired, in order to enable the President to fulfil the obligations herein- 
 before recited, to pay, within thirty days after the adjournment of the ses- 
 sion of Congress to which the subject shall have been presented, whatever 
 sum may eventually appear to be necessary to make good to each reservee 
 his fair proportion of the whole consideration of ^75,000 ; such sum to be 
 paid to an agent to be appointed by the President to receive and distribute 
 the same. 
 
 7. That inasmuch as the President has not, at present, any legal au- 
 thority to give his approval to the 5th article of the contract, it is under- 
 stood and agreed tliat the parties of the third part will, upon being called 
 upon so to do, within a reasonable time after the 4th day of April next, 
 submit anew the proposition contained in said 5th article, to wit : that all 
 the lands which shall not then have been sold, including those of deceased 
 
170 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 Indians, shall be taken by them at a valuation — which it is, however, agreed 
 shall be made (instead of the mode prescribed in said article) by two per- 
 sons appointed for that purpose, one by the President, tlie other by the 
 parties of the third part ; and in case of disagreement in opinion, a third 
 to be chosetj by these two persons. 
 
 8th. The cxj)enses of carrying into effect the first six of the preceding 
 conditioiH shall be defrayed by the parties of the third part. 
 
 Very respectfully, your most obedient servant, 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 
 Hon. B. F. Butler, 
 
 Secretary of JVar ad interim. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 February 17, 1837. 
 I recommend the contract alluded to above for approval, on the terms 
 and conditions above set forth. 
 
 B.F. BUTLER, 
 
 Secretary of JVar ad interim. 
 
 Approved, February 17, 1837. 
 
 ANDREW JACKSON. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, February 27, 1837. 
 Sir : In compliance with the request contained in your note of the 
 25th instant, I have the honor to transmit, herewith, a copy of the con- 
 tract made by General Jesup with Watson 6c Co., in relation to certain 
 Creek Indian reservations in Alabama, and of the conditional confirma- 
 tion of the same by the President. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 
 Hon. D. H. Lewis, 
 
 House of Representatives. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, June 20, 1837. 
 
 Sir : General Watson has requested and urged, througli Judge Iverson, 
 now here, that you proceed forthwith to the dischai-ge of the special duty 
 assigned you in relation to the further execution of the contract made 
 between himself and others, and certain Creek chiefs. As much delay 
 has already happened in this business, to the inconvenience and injury (as 
 represented) of the contracting parties, it is very desirable that it should 
 be closed as early as practicable. You will, therefore, i)roceed immedi- 
 ately to the discharge of the duty assigned you ; taking care, however, 
 that the proper arrangements exist for the prosecution of the business 
 connected with the Creek emigration. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 
 Capt. John Page, Mobile, Ala. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 171 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian affairs, June 21, 1837. 
 
 Gentlemen : I have received your letter of the 17th instant. In ex- 
 planation of the instructions of Fehruary 17th, I have to observe, that the 
 object of the contract with General Watson, to convey to him all the lands 
 in McHenry's district, (the first contracts for which had been contested, 
 unless the holder of the contract established its fairness and integrity,) 
 as in many instances McHenry had, without authority, set aside the con- 
 tract first certified by him, and certified another for the same land, it 
 became necessary to direct your inquiries to the one or the other. Obvi- 
 ously, the first contract was and is properly the object of investigation j 
 if that was or is so successfully impeached that the President has not, or 
 could not approve it, Watson's title would attach itself to the land. It 
 was for this reason, and with reference to this class of cases alone, that 
 the passage in the letter to you of February 17, which you have quoted, 
 was written. The only modification of it necessary, is, to authorize an 
 examination of contracts for any of the lands on list I, furnished you ; as 
 the first contracts for these liave been set aside by the authority of 
 the President. In the districts of the other agents, the first contract must 
 be vacated by the proper authority, before a second w ill be subject to your 
 inquiries. But to these lands Watson & Co. acquired no title under iheir 
 contract ; and the result will be, that if the first contract is vacated, the 
 land must be sold at public auction under the law of the last session of 
 Congress, except in the cases on list L, in which the President has annulled 
 the first contract, and a second |jas been properly certified by a competent 
 agent ; the second, then, would be open for your investigation. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 
 Hon. T. H. Crawford and Aiered Balch, Esqs. 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Affairs, August 2, 1837. 
 Sir : General Watson has represented to this office the great import- 
 ance to him of having the business connected with his contract for Creek 
 reservations closed at as early a day as possible. There are also many 
 public considerations making it extremely desirable that this should be 
 done ; and I have to request that you will proceed to Arkansas, as soon as 
 you can possibly do so with a proper regard to your other public duties. 
 Captain Batman having been directed to relieve you as superintendent of 
 Creek emigration, it Is hoped that there is now nothing to prevent you 
 from going west without delay. Very respectfully, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 Capt. John Vagts., Mobile, Ma. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiff'airs, Mgust 2, 1837. 
 Sir : I have received your letter of the 4th ultimo. In answer to your 
 inquiry, what course you shall take in the cases in which the Indians have 
 
172 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 
 
 died since the conclusion of the contract ? I have to state, that the assent of 
 the widow to the contract, or its ratification by her, will be considered as 
 sufficient to authorize a payment to her, if you are satisfied of her identity 
 and of her ability and disposition to expend the money profitably for the 
 family of the deceased. If you are not satisfied on cither of these points, 
 and the children aie adults, the money can be paid to them, upon their 
 confirming the contract by their written assent. If the children are mi- 
 nors, the payment may be made to the nearest relative, competent and dis- 
 posed to apply the money for the benefit of the family, upon his assenting 
 to the contract. Very, kc. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 Capt. John Page, Mobile, *3[a. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jffuirs, September 11, 1837. 
 
 Gentlemen : I have received your letter of the 4th instant, with the 
 enclosure. 
 
 A contract for the north half of section SI, township 21, range 22, to 
 Thornton, McDougald, & Co., certified by Doctor McUenry, is before the 
 commissioners, Messrs. Crawford and Balch ; and I am informed that 
 evidence has been presented to them, designed to invalidate it. This will not 
 be determined, however, until their repoit is made. Should this contract be 
 set aside, the land would pass to General Watson & Co., by virtue of the 
 contract made with them, which has been conditionally ap)>roved. The 
 warranty deed under which Mr Lyle claims, gives him no title, as the 
 sale has not been certified, and could not have been at any time prior to 
 tlie reversal of the contract, to Thornton, McDougald, & Co. 
 
 Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. KARRIS, Commissioner. 
 
 Messrs. King & Wilson, 
 
 Washington. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jiffairs, October 28, 1837. 
 
 Sir : In compliance with the request of the honorable Dixon H. Lewis, 
 of the 19th instant, I herewith transmit to you a cojiy of the opinion of 
 honorable T. H. Ci-awford and A. Balch, Esquire, on the contract enter- 
 ed into between certain Creek chiefs, and James C. Watson and others, 
 for Indian reservations. Very, &c. 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
 Edward Stelle, Esq. 
 
 Assistant Librarian of Congress. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Office Indian Jffairs^ January 3, 1838. 
 Sir: Your letter of the 11th ultimo to the President, and its enclosure, 
 a letter from R. J. Ware, Esq., have been referred to this office. 
 
[ Doc. No. 274. ] 173 
 
 Any statement or evidence which you may be able to make, or produce, 
 in relation to the contract entered into by General Watson and others, 
 with the Creek chiefs,for the sale of certain Indian reservations in Alabama, 
 will be received with pleasure, and respectfully considered. 
 
 Very, &c., 
 
 C. A. HARRIS, 
 Commissioner. 
 Colonel J. B. HoGAN, Mobile, Jilabama. 
 
 War Department, 
 
 January 20, 1838. 
 Sir: In reply to your letter of the 17th instant, I have the honor to in- 
 form you that the attention of Ihe Department has been properly given to 
 the subject of the issue of patents for the lands embraced in the contract 
 with Watson and others, and that no patent will issue without the sanction 
 of the Department. Very, kc. 
 
 J. R. POINSETT, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 Hon. Dixon H. Lewis, 
 
 House of Representatives. 
 
4: 
 
 k 
 
 ^^^ 
 
Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
 Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 Treatment Date: ^^^ ^y 
 
 BHKKEEPER 
 
 PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES. LP. 
 1 1 1 Ttxxnson Pv*- Dnv* 
 Cranbtny Twp . PA 16066 
 (4121779-2111