.MTA2NA.NzIzNDA

Now let us see how the author combats these propositions. We shall not deny to him the praise of address in keeping, as long as he can, far away from the true ground of the controversy, a comparison of the law of Georgia, with the Constitution, laws and treaties of the United States. More than one half of his essay is employed in the consideration of elementary principles as applied to the relative conditions of civilized and savage man. Through the first six columns and part of the seventh, he labours these principles with all the learning and dexterity which he can summon to his aid, and, with a great show of candor & humanity, conducts himself to the conclusion that civilized communities have a right to take possession of a country inhabited by uncivilized tribes, to assume jurisdiction over them, to appropriate to themselves such portion of the territory as they think proper, and that in the exercise of this right, such communities are the exclusive judges of the extent of jurisdiction to be assumed and of territory to be appropriated: that is to say, they are the exclusive judges in their own cause. Now if we were to concede to the author the justness of these conclusions (which we are very far from intending) the question would still remain whether these rights, thus alleged to belong to the civilized invader, may not be waived by him upon the universally acknowledged principle that any one may renounce a privilege or right introduced for his own benefit; and whether if, in the state of weakness in which he entered the country, he has actually waived it by solemn treaty with the more powerful aborigines, for the sake of peace & quiet, he can afterwards resume it, in violation of such treaty, whenever his cupidity, backed by increased power, shall prompt the measure. How do common sense and common justice to which this writer so frequently appeals, answer this question? But the case is still stronger. The ground on which this right of the civilized invader is placed, is, that he is an agriculturist, and may gain a rightful occupancy in the soil by tilling the earth, whereas the savage aborigines are yet in the hunter state, living by war, & the pursuit of game, and can therefore gain no right of occupancy