who make the greatest cry against their barbarity and inhumanity in carrying on war, are the most forward to furnish them with tomahawks, scalping knives, muskets, powder, and ball, to increase their detestable mode of warfare. Nay, they have employed every mean in their power, by rum, feasts, harangues, and every provocative, to rouse their unbridled passions, increase their thirst for blood, and force them on to the destruction of their fellow men. They have forgotten the conclusive adage "qui facit per alium facit per se,"-He who does a thing by another, does it by himself. Must not such people be answerable to the great Judge of all the earth for this conduct ?" Ibid, Preface, p. 4, 5.

Second-Analectic Magazine.

"It has been the lot of the unfortunate aborigines of this country to be doubly wronged by the white men ;-first, driven from their native soil by the sword of the invader, and then darkly slandered by the pen of the historian.

"They cannot but be sensible that we are the usurpers of their ancient dominion; the cause of their degradation, and the gradual destroyers of their race. They go forth to battle, smarting with injuries and indignities, which they have individually suffered, from the injustice and the arrogance of white men; and they are driven to madness and despair by the wide-spreading desolation and the overwhelming ruin of our warfare. We set them an example of violence, by burning their villages and laying waste their slender means of subsistence; and then wonder that savages will not show moderation and magnanimity towards men, who have left them nothing but mere existence and wretchedness. "It is a common thing to exclaim against new forms of cruelty, while, reconciled by custom, we wink at long established atrocities. What right does the generosity of our conduct give us to rail exclusively at Indian warfare? With all the doctrines of christianity, and the advantages of cultivated morals, to govern and direct us, what horrid crimes disgrace the victorics of Christian armies! Towns laid in Vol. II. No. .

3

ashes; cities given up to the sword; enormities perpetrated, at which manhood blushes and history drops the pen. Well may we exclaim at the outrage of the scalping knife: but where in the records of Indian barbarity can we point to a violated female ?" Article entitled "TRAITS OF INDIAN CHARACTER."

Third-Rev. John Heckewelder.

"If lions had painters! This proverbial saying applies with equal force to the American Indians. They have no historians among them, no books, no newspapers, no convenient means of making their grievances known to a sympa. thizing world. Why then should not a white man, a Christian, who has spent among them the greatest part of his life, and was treated by them at all times with hospitality and kindness, plead their honest cause, and defend them as they would defend themselves, if they had but the means of bringing their facts and their arguments before an impartial public ?"

Historical Account of the Indian Nations, p. 327. "Every person who is well acquainted with the true character of the Indians will admit, that they are peaceable, sociable, obliging, charitable, and hospitable, among themselves, and that those virtues are, as it were, a part of their nature. In their ordinary intercourse they are studious to oblige each other. They neither wrangle nor fight; they live, I believe, as peaceably together as any people on earth, and treat one another with the greatest respect.-I do not mean to speak of those whose manners have been corrupted by a long intercourse with the worst class of white men-they are a degenerate race, very different from the true genuine Indians whom I have attempted to describe." p. 329.

I admit that the Indians have sometimes revenged, cruelly revenged, the accumulated wrongs, which they have suffered from unprincipled white men. The love of revenge is a strong passion which their imperfect religious notions have not taught them to subdue. But how often have they been the aggressors in the unequal contests which they have

had to sustain with the invaders of their country? In how many various shapes have they not been excited, and their passions roused to the utmost fury by acts of cruelty and injustice on the part of the whites, who have made afterwards the country ring with their complaints against the lawless savages, who had not the means of being heard in their defence?" p. 332.

The last of the foregoing questions Mr. Heckewelder has answered by a statement of some facts which are a reproach to our nation, and which deserve the serious consideration of our rulers.

Having shown how a war originated in 1763, by robberies and murders committed by white savages, and by "drunken militia officers and their men," and what a "hue and cry was raised against the Indians," for revenging the wrongs, Mr. Heckewelder states what the Indians say in their own defence :

They will tell you that there is not a single instance in which the whites have not violated the engagements that they made by treaties. They say that when they had ceded lands for the white people, and boundary lines had been established firmly established beyond which no whites were to settle; scarcely was the treaty signed, when white intruders again were settling and hunting on their lands! It is true that when they preferred their complaints to the government, the government gave them many fair promises, and assured them that men would be sent to remove the intruders by force from the usurped lands. The men indeed came, but with chain and compass in their hands, taking surveys of the tracts of good land, which the intruders from their knowledge of the country had pointed out to them. "What was then to be done, when not go off from the land, but on the numbers? Oh! said those people, frequently heard such language in the Western country,A new treaty will soon give us all this land; nothing is now wanting but a pretence to pick a quarrel with them!"

those intruders would contrary increased in and I have myself

Well, but in what manner is this quarrel to be brought about? A David Owen, a Walker, and many others, might, if they were alive, easily answer the question." p. 335.

Fourth-Hon. D. B. Mitchell, lately Governor of Georgia, but now Agent for Indian Affairs.

This gentleman, it appears, being a resident in the Indian country, was called on by the Committee of the Senate of the United States for his testimony relating to the Seminole war. His deposition has been published in the newspapers, and it bears strong marks of candor and impartiality. In speaking of the private acts of violence and outrage which were made the ground of public war on the Seminoles, Mr. Mitchell says,

"Those petty acts of aggression were increased and multiplied by a set of lawless and abandoned characters, who had taken refuge on both sides of the St. Mary's river, living principally by plunder. I believe the first outrage committed on the frontiers of Georgia, after the treaty of Fort Jackson, was by these banditti, who plundered a party of Seminole Indians, on their way to Georgia for the purpose of trade, and killed one of them. This produced retaliation on the part of the Indians, and hence the killing of Mrs. Garret and her

child."

There is another part of the deposition of Mr. Mitchell, which will probably be quoted in a future Number. We may here only remark that, having mentioned his own exertions to preserve peace, and some effects of these exertions,-also the arrival of Gen. Gaines, and his sudden attack and destruction of Fowl Town,-he adds, "truth compels me to say, that before the attack on Fowl Town, aggressions of this kind were as frequent on the part of the whites as on the part of the Indians."

We now submit these several testimonies to the serious consideration of our fellow citizens, with an expression of our hope, that the time is not very distant, when it will be understood by white people, that Indians are men, that they

have souls and rights, that it is possible to treat them unjustly, that to make war on them to obtain their lands is atrocious murder; we also hope, that in future the American government will not subject the United States to a needless war with the Indians, to gratify "a set of lawless, abandoned characters, living principally by plunder." It is already believed by many intelligent men in the United States, that the greater number of our wars with the Indians have been caused by white savages, robbers, murderers, unprincipled land speculators, and knaves, who were more deserving of the halter, or a residence in a State's prison, than of being heard as witnesses against their less savage, less wicked red brethren.

REVIEW OF MODERN DEFENSIVE WAR.

In the course of this work we have had frequent occasion to remark the general consent of Christians to this alarming truth-that the aggressor in public war is a murderer. We have also observed that in every modern war, each party has pretended to act on the principles of self-defence, and endeav cred to fix on the other the reproach of aggression and murder.

In the late war with the Seminoles, all the operations on our part were professedly defensive. Such were the professions of the government, and of the commanding Generals. Nor shall we pretend that these professions were not as sincere, and as well founded, as such professions generally are on the part of those who are first in appealing to arms for the decision of controversies. We may therefore in allusion to recent facts, state some things which may be done on the modern principles of defensive war.

First. A great and powerful nation may make war on a small and feeble tribe for the alleged offences or wanton acts of a few unauthorized individuals, and that too, while, to impartial men, it is difficult to say on which side the unauthorized aggressions originated, or which party had sustained the greater injuries.-See the late Report of the Committee of the Senate of the United States.