.MTA2NA.NzIzNDE

occupancy in the boundless forests in which they roam. Hence the civilized man, we are told, has a right to expel them from their native forests, or to take possession of these forests and govern the savages upon them. But suppose that this civilized invader, far inferior in strength to the wild aborigines, instead of assuming the alleged mastery over them, comes & asks their hospitality, prays for a small cession of their lands by treaty, obtains from them cession after cession, by treaty, their title to the residue of their lands, and their right of self-government on those lands; interests himself to civilize these savages and succeeds; converts them to agriculturists, teaches them to till the earth within a territory acknowledged to be theirs; and assists them in framing a constitution and laws for themselves, not only acknowledging their right to their lands, but guaranteeing them by solemn treaty; the question is whether the civilized man, after all this, can revert to his supposed original rights, which he has thus voluntarily and Solemnly waived and abandoned, and proceed to expel from these lands men no longer savage, but as civilized as himself, and civilized by his means; agriculturists like himself and therefore capable of gaining and having gained a rightful title by occupancy to the soil which they cultivate; whether he can subvert the constitution & laws of his own government by which he, the civilized man, had strikeout solemnly consented to be bound? This is the true question: and it is one which we should suppose can be immediately answered by common honesty & commonsense, the deity which the Globe author professes to reverence. But let us return to the general course of this author's essay. Having satisfied himself that the civilized communities of Europe had a perfect right to take this country from the aborigines, or to assume the government both of their persons and