ROYCE. | TREATY OF DECEMBER 29, 1835 285 
Sir, that paper * * * called a treaty is no treaty at all, because not sanctioned 
by the great body of the Cherokees and made without their participation or assent. 
I solemnly declare to you that upon its reference to the Cherokee people it would be 
instantly rejected by nine-tenths of them and I believe by nineteen-twentieths of them. 
There were not present at the conclusion of the treaty more than one hundred Chero- 
kee voters, and not more than three hundred, including women and children, although 
the weather was everything that could be desired. The Indians had long been noti- 
fied of the meeting, and blankets were promised te all who would come and vote for 
the treaty. The most cunning and artful means were resorted to to conceal the 
paucity of numbers preseut at the treaty. No enumeration of them was made by 
Schermerhorn. The business of making the treaty was transacted with a committee 
appointed by the Indians present, so as not to expose their numbers. The power of 
attorney under which the committee acted was signed only by the president and sec- 
retary of the meeting, so as not to disclose their weakness. * * * Mr. Schermer- 
horn’s apparent design was to conceal the real number present and to impose on the 
public and the Government upon this point. The delegation taken to Washington 
by Mr. Schermerhorn had no more authority to make a treaty than any other dozen 
Cherokees accidentally picked up for that purpose. Inow warn you and the President 
that if this paper of Schermerhorn’s called a treaty is sent to the Senate and ratified 
you will bring trouble upon the Government and eventually destroy this (the Chero- 
kee) nation. The Cherokees are a peaceable, harmless people, but you may drive 
them to desperation, and this treaty cannot be carried into effect except-by the strong 
arm of force.! 
ELIAS BOUDINOT’S VIEWS. 
About this time there also appeared, in justification of the treaty and 
of his own action in signing it, a pamphlet address issued by Elias 
Boudinot of the Cherokee Nation. Mr. Boudinot was one of the ablest 
and most cultured of his people, and had long been the editor and pub- 
lisher of a newspaper in the nation, printed both in English and Chero- 
kee. The substance of his argument in vindication of the treaty may 
have been creditable from the standpoint of policy and a regard for the 
future welfare of his people, but in the abstract it is a dangerous doc- 
trine. He said: 
We cannot conceive of the acts of a minority to be so reprehensible ard unjust as 
are represented by Mr. Ross. If one hundred persons are ignorant of their true situa- 
tion and are so completely blinded as not to see the destruction that awaits them, we 
can see strong reasons to justify the action of a minority of fifty persons to dc what 
the majority would do if they understood their condition, to save a nation from po- 
litical thralldom and moral degradation. 2 
SPEECH OF GENERAL R. G. DUNLAP. 
It having been extensively rumored, during the few months imme. 
diately succeeding the conclusion of the treaty, that John Ross and 
other evil disposed persons were seeking to incite the Cherokees to out- 
break and bloodshed, the militia of the surrounding States were called 
into service for the protection of life and property from the supposed 
existing dangers. Brig. Gen. R. G. Dunlap commanded the East 

‘Senate confidential document, April 12, 1836, p. 200. 
* National Intelligencer, May 22, 1838. 

