214 CHEROKEE NATION OF INDIANS. 
HISTORICAL DATA. 
POLICY OF REMOVING INDIAN TRIBES TO THE WEST OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 
In the settlement and colonization by civilized people of a country 
theretofore a wilderness, and inhabited only by savage tribes, many im- 
portant and controlling reasons exist why the occupaticn of such a 
country should be agcomplished by regular and gradual advances and 
in a more or less connected and compact manner. It was expedient 
that a united front should be presented by the earlier settlers of this 
continent, in order that the hostile raids and demonstrations of the In- 
dian warriors might be successfully resisted and repulsed. Therefore, 
the settlements were, as a rule, extended from the coast line toward the 
interior by regular steps, without the intermission of long distances of 
unoceupied territory. This seemed to be the policy anterior to the 
tevolution, and was announced in the proclamation of King George in 
1763 wherein he prohibited settlements being made on Indian lands or 
the purchase of the same by unauthorized persons. 
The first ordinances of Congress under the Articles of Confederation 
for disposing of the public lands were predicated upon the same theory. 
But after the close of the war for independence, circumstances arising 
out of the treaty of 1785 with Great Britain and the acquisition of Louis- 
jana from France imposed the necessity for a departure from the old 
system. Within the limits of the territory thus acquired sundry settle- 
ments had been made by the French people at points widely separated 
from one another and with many hundreds of miles of wilderness inter- 
vening between them and the English settlements on the Atlantic 
slope. The evils and inconveniences resulting from this irregular form 
of frontier were manifest. 
Settlements thus widely separated, or projecting in long, narrow col- 
umn far into the Indian country, manifestly increased in large ratio the 
causes of savage jealousy and hostility. Atthe same time the means of 
defense were rendered less certain and the expense and difficulty of 
adequately protecting such a frontier were largely enhanced. 
Such, however, was the condition and shape of our frontier settle- 
ments during the earlier years of the present century. Settlements on 
the Tennessee and Cumberland were cut off from communication with 
those of Georgia, Lower Alabama, and Mississippi by long stretches of 
territory inhabited or roamed over by the Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, 
and Chickasaws. 
The French communities of Kaskaskia, Vincennes, and Detroit were 
similarly separated from the people of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and 
newly settled Ohio by the territory of the hostile Shawnees, Miamis, 
Wyandots, Pottawatomies, Ottawas, Kickapoos, et al. 
A cure for all this inconvenience and expense had been sought and 
given much consideration by the Government authorities. 
