.MTA2MA.NzE2Mzk: Difference between revisions
imported>Alanhisty (Created page with "(18,) the Indians, the land they resolved to cultivate. This laudable example was followed by Wm. Penn who planted a colony of quakers in Pennsylvania." The judgment of a man...") |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
(18,) | (18,) | ||
the Indians, the land they resolved to cultivate. This laudable example was followed by Wm. Penn who planted a colony of quakers in Pennsylvania." The judgment of a man disposed to obtain truth must yield it conviction to the force of such reasoning. The Indians in erratic or | the Indians, the land they resolved to cultivate. This laudable example was followed by Wm. Penn who planted a colony of quakers in Pennsylvania." The judgment of a man disposed to obtain truth must yield it conviction to the force of such reasoning. The Indians in an erratic or wandering state could have no right to domain and empire over a vast territory of country, over which they had seldom chased the bounding stag or traced the furious bear. The earth was made for the benefit of mankind. If then wandering Indians were not allowed to monopolize such countries, they yet had a right to their share, which the sword of the invader could not lawfully take away. But there is a question whether the Cherokees could ever have been probably called an erratic nation. Let us look to history for information. | ||
"It may be remarked that the Cherokees differ in many respects from to the | "It may be remarked that the Cherokees differ in many respects from to the Indian nations that have wandered from place to place, and fixed their habitation on separate districts. From | ||
Latest revision as of 16:03, 25 January 2022
(18,) the Indians, the land they resolved to cultivate. This laudable example was followed by Wm. Penn who planted a colony of quakers in Pennsylvania." The judgment of a man disposed to obtain truth must yield it conviction to the force of such reasoning. The Indians in an erratic or wandering state could have no right to domain and empire over a vast territory of country, over which they had seldom chased the bounding stag or traced the furious bear. The earth was made for the benefit of mankind. If then wandering Indians were not allowed to monopolize such countries, they yet had a right to their share, which the sword of the invader could not lawfully take away. But there is a question whether the Cherokees could ever have been probably called an erratic nation. Let us look to history for information. "It may be remarked that the Cherokees differ in many respects from to the Indian nations that have wandered from place to place, and fixed their habitation on separate districts. From