This memorial comes directly from the Indians. It was drawn up among them without the aid of a single white man. They applied to me to prepare it for them. They happened to select me, as their counsel, simply because I was born and brought up within a few miles from their plantation, and had known their people from my infancy. I told them to present their grievances in their own way, and they have done so. Not a line of the memorial was written for them.

On the other side, opposite to their memorial for self-government, is the remonstrance of Nathan Pocknet and forty-nine others, the same Nathan Pocknet, who in 1818 petitioned for the removal of the Overseership. This remonstrance was not prepared by the Indians. It came wholly from the Rev. Mr. Fish, and the Overseers. It speaks of the "unprecedented impudence" of the Indians, and mentions a "Traverse Jury." No one who signed it, had any voice in preparing it. It shows ignorance of the memorial of the tribe, by supposing they ask for liberty to sell their lands; and ignorance of the law, by saying that the Overseers have not power to remove nuisances from the plantation.

This remonstrance is signed by fifty persons, sixteen males and thirty-four females; seventeen can write. Of the signers, ten belong to Nathan Pocknet's family. Ten of the males are Proprietors, of whom two are minors, and one a person non compos. Of the non-proprietors, one is a convict, recently released from State prison, who has no right on the Plantation. Two of the Proprietors, who signed this remonstrance, (John Speen and Isaac Wickham,) have since certified that they understood it to be the petition for Mr. Fish, to retain his salary, but that they are entirely opposed to having Overseers and to the present laws.

Thus it is shown that out of the whole Plantation of 229 Proprietors, but five men could be induced, by all the influence of the Minister and the Overseer, to sign in favor of having the present laws continued, and but eleven men out of the whole population of 312. The signers to the memorial for a change of the laws are a majority of all the men, women and children belonging to the Plantation, at home and abroad.

Another document against the Indians who ask for their liberty, is the memorial of the Rev. Phineas Fish, the missionary. Of the unassuming piety, the excellent character, and the sound learning of that reverend gentleman, I cannot speak in too warm terms. I respect him as a man, and honor him as a devoted minister of the gospel. But he is not adapted to the cultivation of the field in which his labors have been cast. Until I read this memorial, I should not have believed that a severe expression could have escaped him. I regret the spirit of that memorial, and in its comparison with that of the Indians, I must say it loses in style, in dignity and in Christian temper.

In this memorial, Mr. Fish urges upon the Legislature the continuance of the laws of guardianship as they now are, and especially the continuance of the benefits he derives from the property of the plantation. What are the reasons he gives for this. Do they not look exclusively to his own benefit, without regard to the wishes of the Indians?

He states, as the result of his ministry, twenty members of the tribe added to his church in twenty-two years. This single fact proves that his ministry has failed of producing any effect at all proportioned to the cost it has been to the Indians. Not from want of zeal or ability, perhaps, but from want of adaptation. If not, why have other preachers been so much more successful than the missionary. There never has been a time that this church was not controlled by the whites. Mr. Fish now has but five colored members of his church, and sixteen whites. Of the five colored persons, but one is a male, and he has recently signed a paper saying he has been deceived by Mr. Fish's petition, which he signed, and that he does not now wish his stay any longer among them.

On the other hand, "blind Jo," as he is called, a native Indian, blind from his birth, now 28 years of age, has educated himself by his ear and his memory, has been regularly ordained as a Baptist minister, in full fellowship with that denomination, and has had a little church organized since 1830. The Baptist denomination has existed on the plantation, for forty years, but has received no encouragement. Blind Jo has never been taken by the hand by the missionary or the Overseers. The Indians were even refused the use of their Meeting-house, for the ordination of their blind minister, and he was ordained in a private dwelling. Though not possessing the eloquence of the blind preacher, so touchingly described in the glowing and chaste letters of Wirt's British Spy, yet there is much to admire in the simple piety and sound doctrines of "Blind Jo;" and he will find a way to the hearts of his hearers, which the learned divine cannot explore.

There is another denomination on the plantation, organized as "The Free and United Church," of which William Apes is the pastor. This denomination Mr. Fish charges with an attempt to usurp the parsonage, wood-land and the Meeting-house; he denounces, as a "flagrant act," the attempt of the Indians to obtain the use of their own Meeting-house, and appeals to the sympathies of the whole civilized community to maintain by law the Congregational worship, which, he says, "is the most ancient form of religious worship there!" "Why should Congregational worship be excluded to make room for others?" asks the Rev. Mr. Fish. "Where will be the end of vicissitude on the adoption of such a principle, and how is it possible, amid the action of rival factions, for pure religion to be promoted." [Pages 7, 8, 9, of Mr. Fish's memorial. Senate, No. 17.] Is this language for a Christian minister to address to the Legislature of Massachusetts? To petition for an established Church in Marshpee? Can he ever have read the third Article of the Bill of Rights, as amended?

What has been the result of those "rival factions," in Marshpee? Blind Jo and William Apes, have forty-seven Indian members of their churches, (fourteen males,) in good standing, collected together in three years. The missionary has baptized but twenty in twenty-two years. The Indian preachers have also established a total abstinence Temperance Society, without any aid from the missionary, and there are already sixty members of it, who, from all the evidence in the case, there is no reason to doubt, live up to their profession.

I do not say this to detract from the good the missionary has done; I doubt not he has done much good, and earnestly desired to do more; but when he denounces to the Legislature other religious denominations, as usurpers and "rival factions," it is but reasonable that a comparison should be drawn between the fruit of his labors and that of those he so severely condemns.

I confess, I am struck with surprise, at the following remarks, in the memorial of the Rev. Mr. Fish. Speaking of the complaint of the Indians respecting their Meeting-house, that it is not fit for respectable people to meet in, being worn out; he says, "As it was built by a white Missionary Society, and repaired at the expense of the white Legislature of the State, perhaps the whites may think themselves entitled to some wear of it, and being no way fit for 'respectable people,' the church and congregation hope they may the more readily be left unmolested in their accustomed use of it." [Page 4.] Again he says of the complaints of the Indians, that they were forbidden to have preaching in their School-houses. "The School-houses, built by the munificence of the State, began to be occupied for Meeting-houses, soon after their erection, and have been more or less occupied in this fashion! ever since; and your memorialist desires to affirm that in this perversion of your liberal purpose, he had no share whatever!"

Is this possible? Can it be a perversion of buildings erected for the mental and moral improvement of the Indians, that religious meetings should be held there, by ministers whom the Indians prefer to the Missionary?

The inequality in the appropriations for religious instruction, is remarked upon by the Commissioner, Hon. Mr. Fiske, who says in his report that if the present appropriations are to be restricted to a Congregationalist minister, some further provision, in accordance with religious freedom, ought to be made for the Baptist part of the colored people. [Page 29. No. 14.]

I regret too, the unkind allusion in the Rev. Mr. Fish's memorial to Deacon Coombs, the oldest of the Marshpee delegation, formerly his deacon, and the last proprietor to leave him. He says the deacon "once walked worthy of his holy calling." Does he mean to insinuate he does not walk worthily now? I wish you, gentlemen, to examine Deacon Coombs, who is present, to inquire into his manner of life, and see if you can find a Christian with a white skin, whose heart is purer, and whose walk is more upright, than this same Deacon Coombs. In point of character and intelligence, he would compare advantageously with a majority of the Selectmen in the Commonwealth.

With the religious concerns of Marshpee, I have no wish to interfere. I only seek to repel intimations that may operate against their prayer for the liberties secured by the Constitution. Neither do I stand here to defend Mr. Apes, who is charged with being the leader of the "sedition." I only ask you to look at the historical evidence of the existence of discontent with the laws, ever since 1693, and ask if Mr. Apes has been the author of this discontent. Let me remind you also, of the fable of the Huntsman and the Lion, when the former boasted of the superiority of man, and to prove it pointed to a statue of one of the old heroes, standing upon a prostrate lion. The reply of the noble beast was, "there are no carvers among the lions; if there were, for one man standing upon a lion, you would have twenty men torn to pieces by lions." Gentlemen, by depressing the Indians, our laws have taken care that they should have no carvers. The whites have done all the carving for them, and have always placed them undermost. Can we blame them, then, that when they found an educated Indian, with Indian sympathies and feelings, they employed him, to present their complaints, and to enable them to seek redress? Look at this circumstance, fairly, and I think you will find in it the origin of all the prejudice against William Apes, which may be traced to those of the whites who are opposed to any change in the present government of Marshpee. If aught can be shown against him, I hope it will be produced here in proof, that the Indians may not be deceived. If no other proof is produced, except his zeal in securing freedom for the Indians, are you not to conclude that it cannot be done. But his individual character has nothing to do with the merits of the question, though I here pronounce it unimpeached.

I will allude to but one other suggestion in the memorial of the Rev. Mr. Fish, [page 10.] To show the necessity of continuing the present laws, he says, "already do we witness the force of example in the visible increase of crime. But a few weeks since, a peaceable family was fired in upon, during their midnight repose; while I have been writing, another has been committed to prison for a high misdemeanor."

Now what are the facts, upon which this grave allegation against the whole tribe is founded. True, a ball was fired into a house on the plantation, but without any possible connection with the assertion of their rights by the Indians, and to this day it is not known whether it was a white man or an Indian who did it. The "high misdemeanor," was a quarrel between Jerry Squib, an Indian, and John Jones, a white man. Squib accused Jones of cheating him in a bargain, when intoxicated, and beat him for it. The law took up the Indian for the assault, and let the white man go for the fraud.

Respecting then, as we all do, the personal character of the missionary, can you answer his prayer, to continue the present government, in order to protect him in the reception of his present income from the lands of the Indians? Are the interests of a whole people to be sacrificed to one man?

What says the Bill of rights? "Government is instituted for the common good, for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people, and not for the profit, honor or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men."

I have now only to consider the report of the Commissioner, Mr. Fiske, who visited Marshpee in July last. The impartiality, candor and good sense of that report, are highly honorable to that gentleman. Deriving his first impressions from the Overseers and the whites, and instructed as he was with strong prepossessions against the Indians, as rebels to the State, the manner in which he discharged that duty, deserves a high encomium. He has my thanks for it, as a friend of the Indians. As far as the knowledge of the facts enabled the Commissioner to go, in the time allowed him, the conclusions of that report, substantiate all the positions taken in defence of the rights of the Indians. The Commissioner was instructed by the then Governor Lincoln, to inform the Indians that the government had no other object than their best good; "let them be convinced that their grievances will be inquired into, and a generous and paternal regard be had to their condition." They were so convinced, and they come here now, for a redemption of this pledge.

But his Excellency seems to have been strangely impressed with the idea of suppressing some rebellion, or another Shay's insurrection. Mr. Hawley, one of the Overseers, had visited the Governor, at Worcester, and because a few Indians had quietly unloaded a wood-cart, the calling out of the militia seems to have been seriously contemplated by the following order, issued to the Commissioner, by the Governor, dated July 5. "Should there be reason to fear the insufficiency of the posse comitatus, I WILL BE PRESENT PERSONALLY, TO DIRECT ANY MILITARY REQUISITIONS."

Think of that, gentlemen of the Committee! Figure to yourselves his Excellency, at the head of the Boston and Worcester Brigades, ten thousand strong, marching to Marshpee, to suppress an insurrection, when scarce twenty old muskets could have been mustered on the whole plantation?

With the utmost respect for his Excellency, I could not refrain on reading this "order of the day," from exclaiming, as Lord Thurlow did, when a breathless messenger informed him that a rebellion had broken out in the Isle of Man—"pshaw—a tempest in a tea pot."

Let us not, however, because the Indians are weak and in-offensive, be less regardful of their rights.

You will gather from the Report of Mr. Fiske, conclusive evidence of the long continued and deep rooted dissatisfaction of the Indians with the laws of guardianship, that they never abandoned the ground that all men were born free and equal, and they ought to have the right to rule and govern themselves; that by a proper exercise of self-government, and the management of their own pecuniary affairs, they had it in their power to elevate themselves much above their present state of degradation, and that by a presentation of new motives for moral and mental improvement, they might be enabled, in a little time, to assume a much higher rank on the scale of human existence. And that the Legislature would consider their case, was the humble and earnest request of the natives.

Is not the conclusion then, from all the facts in the case, that the system of laws persisted in since 1763, have failed as acts of paternal care? That the true policy now is to try acts of kindness and encouragement, and that the question of rightful control over the property or persons of the Indians beyond the general operation of the laws, being clearly against the whites; but one consideration remains on which the Legislature can hesitate: the danger, that they will squander their property. Of the improbability of such a result, Mr. Fiske informs you in his report, [page 26.] He found nearly all the families comfortably and decently clad, nearly all occupying framed houses, and a few dwelling in huts or wigwams. More than thirty of them were in possession of a cow or swine, and many of them tilled a few acres of land, around their dwellings. Several pairs of oxen, and some horses are owned on the plantation, and the Commons are covered with an excellent growth of wood, of ready access to market. Confine the cutting of this wood to the natives, as they desire, and they never can waste this valuable inheritance.

Mr. Fiske also says in his report, [page 30,] "that it is hardly possible to find a place more favorable for gaining a subsistence without labor, than Marshpee." The advantages of its location, the resources from the woods and streams, on one side, and the bays and the sea on the other, are accurately described, as being abundant, with the exception of the lobsters, which Mr. Fiske says are found there. The Commissioner is incorrect in that particular, unless he adopts the learned theory of Sir Joseph Banks, that fleas are a species of lobster!

Is there, then, any danger in giving the Indians an opportunity to try a liberal experiment for self-government? They ask you for a grant of the liberties of the constitution; to be incorporated and to have a government useful to them as a people.

They ask for the appointment of magistrates among them, and they ask too for an Attorney to advise with; but my advice to them is, to have as little as possible to do with Attornies. A revision of their laws affecting property by the Governor and Council, would be a much better security for them than an Attorney, and this they all agree to. Is there any thing unreasonable in their requests? Can you censure other States for severity to the Indians within their limits, if you do not exercise an enlightened liberality toward the Indians of Massachusetts? Give them then substantially, the advantages which they ask in the basis of an act which I now submit to the Committee with their approval of its provisions. Can you, gentlemen, can the Legislature, resist the simple appeal of their memorial? "Give us a chance for our lives, in acting for ourselves. O! white man! white man! the blood of our fathers, spilt in the revolutionary war, cries from the ground of our native soil, to break the chains of oppression and let our children go free."

The correctness of Mr. Hallett's opinions are demonstrated in the following article.

Other editors speak ill enough of Gen. Jackson's treatment of the Southern Indians. Why do they not also speak ill of all the head men and great chiefs who have evil entreated the people of Marshpee. I think Governor Lincoln manifested as bitter and tyrannical a spirit as Old Hickory ever could, for the life of him. Often and often have our tribe been promised the liberty their fathers fought, and bled, and died for; and even now we have but a small share of it. It is some comfort, however, that the people of Massachusetts are becoming gradually more Christianized.

[From the Daily Advocate.] THE MARSHPEE INDIANS.

The Daily Advertiser remarks that the Indian tribes have been sacrificed by the policy of Gen. Jackson. This is very true, and we join with the Advertiser in reprehending the course pursued by the President toward the Cherokees. If Georgia, under her union nullifier, Governor Lumpkin, is permitted to set the process of the Supreme Court at defiance, it will be a foul dishonor upon the country.

But while we condemn the conduct of General Jackson toward the Southern Indians, what shall we say of the treatment of our own poor defenceless Indians, the Marshpee tribe, in our own State? The Legislature of last year, with a becoming sense of justice, restored to the Marshpee Indians a portion of their rights, which had been wrested from them, most wrongfully, for a period of seventy-four years. The State of Massachusetts, in the exercise of a most unjust and arbitrary power, had, until that time, deprived the Indians of all civil rights, and placed their property at the mercy of designing men, who had used it for their own benefit, and despoiled the native owners of the soil to which they hold a better title than the whites hold to any land in the Commonwealth. These Indians fought and bled side by side, with our fathers, in the struggle for liberty; but the whites were no sooner free themselves, than they enslaved the poor Indians.

One single fact will show the devotion of the Marshpee Indians to the cause of liberty, in return for which they and their descendants were placed under a despotic guardianship, and their property wrested from them to enrich the whites. In the Secretary's Office, of this State, will be found a muster roll, containing a "Return of men enlisted in the first Regiment of Continental troops, in the County of Barnstable, for three years and during the war, in Col. Bradford's Regiment," commencing in 1777. Among these volunteers for that terrible service, are the following names of Marshpee Indians, proprietors of Marshpee, viz.

Francis Webquish, Samuel Moses, Demps Squibs, Mark Negro, Tom Caesar, Joseph Ashur, James Keeter, Joseph Keeter, Jacob Keeter, Daniel Pocknit, Job Rimmon, George Shawn, Castel Barnet, Joshua Pognit, James Rimmon, David Hatch, James Nocake, Abel Hoswitt, Elisha Keeter, John Pearce, John Mapix, Amos Babcock, Hosea Pognit, Daniel Pocknit, Church Ashur, Gideon Tumpum.

In all twenty-six men. The whole regiment, drawn from the whole County of Barnstable, mustered but 149 men, nearly one-fifth of whom were volunteers from the little Indian Plantation of Marshpee, which then did not contain over one hundred male heads of families! No white town in the County furnished any thing like this proportion of the 149 volunteers. The Indian soldiers fought through the war; and as far as we have been able to ascertain the fact, from documents or tradition, all but one, fell martyrs to liberty, in the struggle for Independence. There is but one Indian now living, who receives the reward of his services as a revolutionary soldier, old Isaac Wickham, and he was not in Bradford's regiment. Parson Holly, in a memorial to the Legislature in 1783, states that most of the women in Marshpee, had lost their husbands in the war. At that time there were seventy widows on the Plantation.

But from that day, until the year 1834, the Marshpee Indians were enslaved by the laws of Massachusetts, and deprived of every civil right which belongs to man. White Overseers had power to tear their children from them and bind them out where they pleased. They could also sell the services of any adult Indian on the Plantation they chose to call idle, for three years at a time, and send him where they pleased, renewing the lease every three years, and thus, make him a slave for life.

It was with the greatest effort this monstrous injustice was in some degree remedied last winter, by getting the facts before the Legislature, in spite of a most determined opposition from those who had fattened for years on the spoils of poor Marshpee. In all but one thing, a reasonable law was made for the Indians. That one thing was giving the Governor power to appoint a Commissioner over the Indians for three years. This was protested against by the friends of the Indians, but in vain; and they were assured that this appointment would be safe in the hands of the Governor. They hoped so, and assented; but no sooner was the law passed, than the enemies of the Indians induced the Governor to appoint as the Commissioner, the person whom of all others they least wished to have, a former Overseer, against whom there were strong prejudices. The Indians remonstrated, and besought, but in vain. The Commissioner was appointed, and to all appeals to make a different appointment, a deaf ear has been turned. It seems as if a deliberate design had been formed somewhere, to defeat all the Legislature has done for the benefit of this oppressed people.

The consequences have been precisely what the Indians and their friends feared. Party divisions have grown up among them, arising out of the want of confidence in their Commissioner. He is found always on the side of their greatest trouble; the minister who unjustly holds almost 500 acres of the best land in the plantation, wrongfully given to him by an unlawful and arbitrary act of the State, which, in violation of the Constitution, appropriates the property of the Indians to pay a man they dislike, for preaching a doctrine they will not listen to, to a white congregation, while the native preachers, whom the Indians prefer, are left without a cent, and deprived of the Meeting-house, built by English liberality for the use of the Indians. The dissatisfaction has gone on increasing. The accounts with the former Overseers remain unadjusted to the satisfaction of the Selectmen. The Indians have no adviser near them in whom they can confide; those who hold the power, appear regardless of their wishes or their welfare; no pains is taken by the authorities to punish the wretches who continue to sell rum to those who will buy it; and though the Indians are still struggling to advance in improvement, every obstacle is thrown in their way that men can devise, whose intent it is to get them back to a state of vassalage, that they may get hold of their property. All this, we are satisfied, from personal inspection, is owing to the injudicious appointment made by Gov. Davis, of a commissioner, and yet the Governor unfortunately seems indisposed to listen to any application for a remedy to the existing evils.

The presses around us, who are so eloquent in denouncing the President for his conduct towards the Southern Indians, say not a word in behalf of our own Indians, whose fathers poured out their blood for out independence. Is this right, and ought the Indians to be sacrificed to the advantage a single man derives from holding an office of very trifling profit? Let us look at home, before we complain of the treatment of the Indians at the South.

The following; extract refers to the act passed to incorporate the Marshpee District, after so much trouble and expense to the Indians. I should suppose the people of Massachusetts would have been glad to have done us this justice, without making so much difficulty, if they had been aware of the true state of facts.

THE MARSHPEE ACT

Restoring the rights of self-government, in part, to the Marshpee Indians, of which our legislation has deprived them for one hundred and forty years, passed the Senate of Massachusetts yesterday, to the honor of that body, without a single dissenting vote. Too much praise cannot be given to Mr. Senator Barton, for the persevering and high-minded manner in which he has prepared and sustained this act. With two or three exceptions, but which, perhaps, may not be indispensable to the success of the measure, it is all the Indians or their friends should desire, under existing circumstances. The clause reserving the right of repeal, is probably the most unfortunate provision in the act, as it may tend to disquiet the Indians, and to give the Commissioner a sort of threatening control, that will add too much to his power, and may endanger all the benefits of the seventh section. This provision was not introduced by the Committee, but was opposed by Messrs. Barton and Strong, as wholly unnecessary.

[Daily Advocate.

* * * * *

SMALL MATTER.

In the resolve allowing fees to the Marshpee Indians, who have attended as witnesses this session, the high-minded Senator Hedge of Plymouth, succeeded in excluding the name of William Apes, as it passed the Senate; but the House, on motion of Col. Thayer, inserted the name of Mr. Apes, allowing him his fees, the same as the others. Mr. Hedge made a great effort to induce the Senate to non-concur, but even his lucid and liberal eloquence failed of its noble intent, and the Senate concurred by a vote of 13 to 6. Mr. Hedge must be sadly disappointed that he could not have saved the State twenty-three dollars, by his manly efforts to injure the character of a poor Indian. Mr. Hedge, we dare say, is a descendant from the pilgrims, whom the Indians protected at Plymouth Rock! He knows how to be grateful!

[Daily Advocate.

It appears that I, William Apes, have been much persecuted and abused, merely for desiring the welfare of myself and brethren, and because I would not suffer myself to be trodden under foot by people no better than myself, as I can see. In connection with this, I say I was never arraigned before any Court, to the injury of my reputation, save once, at Marshpee, for a pretended riot. An attempt to blast a man merely for insisting on his rights, and no more, is a blot on the character of him who undertakes it, and not upon the person attempted to be injured; let him be great or small in the world's eyes. I can safely say that no charge that has ever been brought against me, written or verbal, has ever been made good by evidence in any civil or ecclesiastical court. Many things have been said to my disparagement in the public prints. Much was said to the General Court, as that I was a gambler in lotteries, and had begged money from the Indians to buy tickets with. This calumny took its rise from certain articles printed in the Boston Gazette, written, as I have good reason to believe, by one Reynolds, a proper authority. He has been an inmate of the State prison, in Windsor, Vermont, once for a term of two years, and again for fourteen, as in part appears by the following certificate of a responsible person.

CONCORD, N.H. JUNE 27, 1832.

To all whom it may concern.

This may certify, that John Reynolds, once an inmate of Vermont State Prison, and since a professed Episcopal Methodist, and also a licensed local preacher in Windsor, Conn. came to this place about June, 1830, recommended by Brother J. Robbins, as a man worthy of our patronage; and of course I employed him to supply for me in Ware and Hopkinton, (both in N.H.) in which places he was for a short time, apparently useful. But the time shortly arrived when it appeared that he was pursuing a course that rendered him worthy of censure. I therefore commenced measures to put him down from preaching; but before I could get fully prepared for him, he was gone out of my reach. I would however observe, he wrote me a line from Portsmouth, enclosing his license, also stating his withdrawal from us; and thus evaded trial. We have, therefore, never considered him worthy of a place in any Christian church since he left Hopkinton, in May, 1831. And I feel authorized to state, that he does not deserve the confidence of any respectable body of people.

E.W. STICKNEY, Circuit Preacher, In the Methodist Episcopal Church.

His wrath was enkindled and waxed hot against me, because I thought him scarce honorable enough for a high priest, and could not enter into fellowship with him. I opposed his ordination as an elder of our church, because I thought it dishonor to sit by his side; and he therefore tried to make me look as black as himself, by publishing things he was enabled to concoct by the aid of certain of my enemies in New York. They wrote one or two letters derogatory to my character, the substance of which Reynolds took the liberty to publish. For this I complained of him to the Grand Jury in Boston, and he was indicted. The following is the indictment:

The Jurors for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on their oath present, that John Reynolds of Boston, Clerk, being a person regardless of the morality, integrity, innocence and piety, which Ministers of the Gospel ought to possess and sustain, and maliciously devising and intending to traduce, vilify and bring into contempt and detestation one William Apes, who was on the day hereinafter mentioned, and still is a resident of Boston aforesaid, and duly elected and appointed a minister of the gospel and missionary, by a certain denomination of Christians denominated as belonging to the Methodist Protestant Church; and also unlawfully and maliciously intending to insinuate and cause it to be believed, that the said William Apes was a deceiver and impostor, and guilty of crimes and offences, and of buying lottery tickets, and misappropriating monies collected by him from religious persons for charitable purposes, and for building a Meeting-house among certain persons called Indians.

On the thirteenth day of August now last past, at Boston aforesaid, in the County of Suffolk aforesaid, unlawfully, maliciously, and deliberately did compose, print and publish, and did cause and procure to be composed, printed and published in a certain newspaper, called the "Daily Commercial Gazette," of and concerning him the said William Apes, and of and concerning his said profession and business, an unlawful and malicious libel, according to the purport and effect, and in substance as follows, that is to say, containing therein among other things, the false, malicious, defamatory and libellous words and matter following, of and concerning said William Apes, to wit: convinced at an early period of my (meaning his the said Reynolds) acquaintance with William Apes, (meaning the aforesaid William Apes,) that he (meaning said William,) was not what he (meaning said William,) professed to be; but was deceiving and imposing upon the benevolent and Christian public, (meaning that said William Apes was a deceiver and impostor,) I (meaning said Reynolds,) took all prudent means to have him (meaning said William,) exposed, and stopped in his (meaning said William,) race of guilt, (meaning that said William had been guilty of immorality, dishonesty, irreligion, offences and crimes;) these men, (meaning one Joseph Snelling and one Norris,) were earnestly importuned to investigate his (meaning said William,) conduct, and enforce the discipline (meaning the discipline of the church,) upon him (meaning said William,) for crimes committed since his (meaning said William's) arrival in this city, (meaning said city of Boston, thereby meaning that said William Apes had been guilty of crimes in said Boston,) though well acquainted with facts, which are violently presumtive of his (meaning said William's) being a deceiver, his (meaning said William's) friends stand by him, (meaning said William's) and will not give him (meaning said William,) up, though black as hell, (meaning that said William was a deceiver, and of a wicked and black character.) When I am informed that he (meaning said William) is ordained, (meaning as a minister of the gospel,) that he (meaning said William,) is by permission of the brethren travelling, and permitted to collect money to build the house aforesaid, (meaning the aforesaid Meeting-house,) for his (meaning said William's,) Indian brethren to worship God in, I shudder not so much because he (meaning said William,) is purchasing Lottery Tickets, (meaning that said William was purchasing Lottery Tickets, and had spent some of the aforesaid money for that purpose,) but because I know of his (meaning said William's) pledge to the citizens of New York and elsewhere, to the great injury, scandal, and disgrace of the said William Apes, and against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth aforesaid.

SAMUEL D. PARKER, Attorney of said Commonwealth, within the County of Suffolk. PARKER H. PEIRCE, Foreman of the Grand Jury. A true Copy.—Attest, THOMAS W. PHILLIPS, Clerk of the Municipal Court of the City of Boston.

Subsequently, I entered civil actions against two others, for the same offence, and had them held to bail in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars, with sureties. This soon made them feel very sore. They had put it in my power to punish them very severely for giving rein to their malignant passions, and they asked mercy. I granted it, in order to show them that I wanted nothing but right, and not revenge; and that they might know that an Indian's character was as dearly valued by him as theirs by them. Would they ever have thus yielded to an Indian, if they had not been compelled? I presume it will satisfy the world that there was no truth in their stories, to read their confessions, which are as follows:

Extract from a letter written by David Ayres, to Elder T.F. Norris, dated New Orleans, April 12, 1833.

"I have arrived here this day, and expected to have found letters here from you, and some of my other brethren respecting Apes' suit. I never volunteered in this business, but was led into it by others, and it is truly a hard case that I must have all this trouble on their account."

Extract of a letter written by David Ayers to William Apes, dated July 1, 1833.

"I am, and always have been your friend, and I never expected that any things I wrote about you, would find their way into the public papers. I am for peace, and surely I have had trouble enough. I never designed to injure you, and when all were your enemies, I was your warm friend."

Extract from a letter written by G. Thomas to Rev. Thomas F. Norris, dated New York, July 12, 1833.

"William Apes might by some be said to be an excepted case; but when this is fairly explained and understood, this would not be the fact. My good friends of Boston, and my active little brother Ayres, are to blame for this, and not me. I had no malice against him, I never had done other than wish him well, and done what I hoped would turn out for the best; but knowing he was liable to error (as) others, and the case being placed in such colors to me, I awoke up; and being pressed to give what I did in detail as I thought, all for the good of the cause and suffering innocence; but I am sorry I ever was troubled at all on the subject; I thought that brother Reynolds was a fine catch; but time I acknowledge is a sure tell-tale. And by the by, they have caught me, and eventually, unless Apes will stop proceedings, I must bear all the burthen. Reynolds has got his neck out of the halter, and Ayres is away South, and may never return; and poor me must be at all the trouble and cost, if even the suit should go in my favor. Can I think that Apes will press it? No. I think he has not lost all human milk out of his breast, and will dismiss the suit; and, as to my share of the cost, if I was able, that should be no obstacle. If he will stop it all, if my friends do not settle it, I will agree to, as soon as I am able."

* * * * *

I hereby certify, that I have copied the foregoing passages from the letters purporting to be from David Ayres and G. Thomas, respectively, as above mentioned, and that said passages are correct extracts from said letters. I further certify, that, as the Attorney of said William Apes, I acted for him in the suits brought by him against said Thomas and Ayres for libel, that while said suits were pending, said Apes manifested a forgiving and forbearing disposition, and wished the suits not to be pressed any further than was necessary to show the falsehood of the statements of said Ayres and Thomas, and contradict them; and, that he expressed himself willing to settle with them upon their paying the cost, and acknowledging their error, in consequence of which, by direction from him, after he had perused said letters, I accordingly discharged both suits, the bail of said Thomas and Ayres paying the costs, which amounted to fifty dollars.

I further certify, that during my acquaintance with said Apes, which commenced as I think, in March last, I have seen nothing in his character or conduct, to justify the reports spread about him, by said Thomas and Ayres; but on the contrary, he has appeared to me to be an honest and well disposed man.

HENRY W. KINSMAN, No. 33, Court Street. Boston, November 30, 1833.

I, the subscriber, fully concur in the above statement. JAMES D. YATES, Elder of the Methodist Protestant Church.

The original confession of Reynolds being lost, I trust that the following certificate will satisfy the reader that it has actually had existence.

To whom it may concern.

This is to certify that I have repeatedly seen, and in one instance, copied a paper of confession and retraction of Slanders, which the writer stated he had uttered, and published in papers of the day, against William Apes, the preacher to the Marshpee tribe of Indians, signed, John Reynolds, and countersigned as witness, by William Parker, Esq. The copy taken of the above mentioned confession by the subscriber, was sent to the Rev. T.R. Witsil, Albany, N.Y.

THOMAS F. NORRIS, President of the Protestant Methodist Conference, Mass. Attest, JAMES D. YATES. Boston, May 7, 1835.

Nevertheless, lest this should not be sufficient, I am prepared to defend myself by written certificates of my character and standing among the whites and natives, (the Pequod tribe,) in Groton. They are as follows:

We the undersigned, native Indians of the Pequod tribe, having employed Rev. William Apes as our Agent, to assist us, and to collect subscriptions and monies towards erecting a house to worship in, do hereby certify, that we are satisfied with his agency; and that we anticipated that he would deduct therefrom, all necessary expenses, for himself and family, during the time he was employed in the agency, as we had no means of making him any other remuneration.

By permission, FREDERICK X[Note: sideways X] TOBY, LUCRETIA GEORGE, By permission, MARY X[Note: sideways X] GEORGE, By permission, LUCY X[Note: sideways X] ORCHARD, WILLIAM APES, By permission, MARGARET X[Note: sideways X] GEORGE.

I, Pardon P. Braton of Groton, in the County of New London, and State of Connecticut, of lawful age, do depose and say, that I was present when the above signers attached their names to the above certificate, by them subscribed, and am knowing to their having full knowledge of the facts therein contained; and further the deponent saith not

PARDON P. BRATON.

Groton, Dec. 3, 1832.

County of New London, ss.—Groton, Dec. 3, 1832. Personally appeared, Pardon P. Braton, and made solemn oath to the truth of the above deposition, by him subscribed. Before me,

WILLIAM M. WILLIAMS, Justice of the Peace.

GROTON, INDIAN TOWN, CONN.

This may certify, that we, the subscribers, native Indians of the Pequod tribe, do affirm by our signatures to this instrument, that William Apes, Senior, went by our request as Delegate, in behalf of our tribe, to New York Annual Conference, of the Methodist Protestant Church, April 2, 1831. The above done at a meeting of the Pequods, Oct. 6, 1830.

WILLIAM APES, JR. Minister of the Gospel, and Missionary to that tribe.

As witness our hands, in behalf of our brethren, By permission, MARY X[Note: sideways X] GEORGE, By permission, LUCY X[Note: sideways X] ORCHARD, WILLIAM APES, By permission, MARGARET X[Note: sideways X] GEORGE.

I, Pardon P. Braton of Groton, New London County, State of Connecticut, do depose and say, that I am acquainted with the Pequod tribe of Indians empowering William Apes, Sen. as their Delegate to the New York Conference, as is above stated; and further the deponent saith not.

PARDON P. BRATON.

Groton, Dec. 3, 1832.

New London County, ss.—Groton, Dec. 3, 1832. Personally appeared, Pardon P. Braton, and made solemn oath to the truth of the above deposition, by him subscribed. Before me,

WILLIAM M. WILLIAMS, Justice of the Peace.

To all whom it may concern.

This may certify, that we, the undersigners, are acquainted with William Apes and his tribe, of Pequod, and that we live in the neighborhood with them, and know all their proceedings as to their public affairs, and that Mr. Apes, as far as we know, has acted honest and uprightly; and that he has done his duty to his Indian brethren, as far as he could consistently. And that he has duly made known his accounts, and appropriated the monies that was in contemplation for the Indian Meeting-house, for the Pequod tribe; and we also certify that said monies shall be duly appropriated.

Dated North Groton, Conn, Aug. 28, 1833.

JONAS LATHAM, ASA A. GORE, JOHN IRISH, WILLIAM M. WILLIAMS.

[Footnote 1: Here we were a little mistaken, not knowing in our ignorance, that we were making the Lieut. Governor commander in chief, and using his name to nullify the existing laws. Nevertheless, our mistake was not greater than many that have been made to pass current by the sophistry of the whites, and we acted in accordance with the spirit of the constitution, unless that instrument be a device of utter deception.]

[Footnote 2: "In respect to the measures you may deem advisable, let them be confined in their adoption to an application of the civil power. If there is resistance, the Sheriff will, with your advice, call out the posse comitatus, and should there be reason to fear the inefficiency of this resort, I will be present personally, to direct any military requisitions," &c.]

[Footnote 3: Surely it was either insult or wrong to call the Marshpees citizens, for such they never were, from the declaration of independence up to the session of the Legislature in 1834.]

[Footnote 4: I do not recollect uttering this expression, and it is not one that I am in the habit of using. It surprised me much, too, that the Sampsons should all swear alike, when it was impossible that they could have heard alike. If I used the word shine, it must have been in speaking to Mr. William Sampson, in a low tone, about fifty yards from the others.]

[Footnote 5: Christmas.]

[Footnote 6: By an Act of the Legislature in April last, 1835, One Hundred Dollars is hereafter to be appropriated annually, from the School Fund, for the public schools in Marshpee. For this liberal act the Marshpees are indebted to the representations made to the Committee on education by their Counsel, B.F. HALLETT, Esq. This is an evidence of the paternal care of the Legislature, for which we can never be too grateful.]

[Footnote 7: Meaning Envoy.]

[Footnote 8: His Excellency LEVI LINCOLN, who proposed to raise a regiment to exterminate our tribe, if we did not submit to the Overseers.]

[Footnote 9: The Counsel for the Indians, B.F. HALLETT, Esq. could not find a member of the House from Barnstable County, who would present the petition. The Indians will not forget that they owed this act of justice to Mr. CUSHING of Dorchester.]

[Footnote 10: Mr. Apes did not attend.]



AN INQUIRY INTO THE EDUCATION AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE MARSHPEE INDIANS.

On the subject of the means taken to educate the Indians, I will say a few words in addition to what has already been said, because we wish to show that we can be grateful when we have favors bestowed on us. Up to 1835, the State had done nothing for education in Marshpee, except build us two School-houses in 1831.

Last winter the subject came up in the Legislature of distributing the School fund of the State among the towns. A bill was reported to the House, in which Marshpee was made a School District and entitled to receive a dividend according to its population by the United States census. Now this was meant well, and we feel obliged to the Committee who thought so much of us as this; but had the law passed in that shape, it would have done us no good, because we have no United States census. The people of Marshpee, nor the Selectmen knew nothing of this law to distribute the School fund, and our pretended missionary, Mr. Fish, never interested himself in such matters; but our good friend Mr. Hallett, at Boston, thought of us, and laid our claims before the Committee, by two petitions which he got from the Selectmen and from himself, and the Commissioner. We are told that the chairman of the School Committee, Hon. A.H. Everett, took much interest in getting a liberal allowance for education in Marshpee. He was once before a warm friend to the Cherokees, and his conduct now proved that he was sincere. He presented the petitions and proposed a law which would give us one hundred dollars a year forever, for public Schools in Marshpee, which was the largest sum that had been asked for by our friend Mr. H. A number of gentlemen spoke in favor of this allowance, and all showed that a spirit of kindness as well as justice toward the long oppressed red men, begins to warm the hearts of those who make our laws, and rule over us. We trust we are thankful to God for so turning the hearts of men toward us.

The Bill passed the House and also the Senate, without any objection, and it is now a law of the State of Massachusetts, that the Marshpee Indians shall have one hundred dollars every year, paid out of the School fund, to help them educate their children. Our proportion as a District, according to what other towns receive, would have been but fifteen dollars. By the aid of our friends, and particularly of our counsel, (Mr. H.) who first proposed it, we shall now receive one hundred dollars a year; and I trust the Indians will best show their gratitude by the pains they will take to send their children to good schools, and by their raising as much more money as they can, to get good instructers; and give the rising generation all the advantages which the children of the whites enjoy in schooling. This will be one of the best means to raise them to an equality, and teach them to put away from their mouths forever, the enemy which the white man, when he wanted to cheat and subdue our race, first got them to put therein, to steal away their brains, well knowing that their lands would follow.

The following are the petitions presented to the Legislature, which will give some light on the history of Marshpee.

To the Honorable General Court:

The undersigned are Selectmen and School Committee of the District of Marshpee. We understand your Honors are going to make a distribution of the School Fund. Now we pray leave to say that the State, as the guardians of the Marshpee Indians, took our property into their possession, so that we could not use a dollar of it, and so held it for sixty years. We could make no contract with a school-master, and during that time, till 1831, we had no school house in Marshpee, and scarcely any schools. We began to have schools about five years ago, but still want means to employ competent white teachers to instruct our children. Our fathers often petitioned the Legislature to give them schools, but none were given till 1831, when the State generously built us two school-houses.

We also beg leave to remind your Honors that our fathers shed their blood for liberty, and we their children have had but little benefit from it. When a continental regiment of four hundred men were raised in Barnstable county, in 1777, twenty-seven Marshpee Indians enlisted for the whole war. They fought through the war, and not one survives. After the war our fathers had sixty widows left on the Plantation, whose husbands had died or been slain. We have but one man living who draws a pension, and not a widow. We pray you, therefore, to allow to Marshpee, out of the School Fund, a larger amount in proportion than is allowed to other towns and districts who have had better means of education, and to allow us a certain sum per year—and as in duty bound, will ever pray.

EZRA ATTAQUIN, : Selectmen and School ISAAC COOMBS, : Committee of Marshpee ISRAEL AMOS, : District.

* * * * *

To the Honorable, the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled:

The undersigned beg leave to represent in aid of the petition of the Selectmen and School Committee of the District of Marshpee, praying for a specific appropriation from the School Fund for the support of public schools in said district, that we are acquainted with the facts set forth in said petition, and believe that the cause of education could no where be more promoted in any District in the Commonwealth than by making a specific annual allowance to said Marshpee District. The Legislature have made a specific annual appropriation of fifty dollars to the Indians on Martha's Vineyard for public schools, and the undersigned are of opinion, that an annual appropriation of double that amount, would be no more than a fair relative proportion for the District of Marshpee. It is highly important that the District should be able to employ competent white teachers, until they can find a sufficient number of good teachers among themselves, which cannot be expected until they have enjoyed greater means of education than heretofore. The undersigned therefore pray that the petition of said Selectmen may be granted, by giving a specific annual allowance to said District.

BENJ. F. HALLETT, Counsel for the Marshpee Indians. CHARLES MARSTON, Commissioner of Marshpee.

Here it will be seen that the missionary for the Indians on Martha's Vineyard, did not go to sleep over his flock, or run after others and neglect what ought to be his own fold, as did the missionary, Mr. Fish, whom Harvard College sent to the Marshpees, and pays for preaching to white men. Mr. Bayley, the white missionary on the Vineyard, as I understand, took pains to send a petition to Boston, and he got fifty dollars a year for our brethren there, of which we are glad. From all we can judge of Mr. Fish, we should have sooner expected that instead of trying to help our schools, he would opposed our getting any thing for schools, as he also opposed our getting our liberty. He has done nothing for us, about our schools, and even tried to set the Indians against their counsel, Mr. Hallett, by pretending he had lost his influence. When Mr. Fish does as much for our liberty, and for our schools, as Mr. Hallett has done, we will listen to his advice.

Mr. Bayley, the missionary on the Vineyard, we understand has but two hundred dollars a year from Harvard College, while Mr. Fish, at Marshpee, has between four and five hundred, and wrongly uses as his own about five hundred acres of the best land on the plantation belonging to the Indians. The Legislature in 1809, took this land from the Indians, without any right to do so, as we think, and thus compel them, against the Constitution, to pay out of their property a minister they never will hear preach. Is this religious liberty for the Indians? Mr. Fish is now cutting perhaps, 200 cords of wood, justly belonging to the Indians, when there is scarce five who will go and hear him preach in the Meeting-house, erected by the British Society for propagating the gospel among the Indians, and given to the Indians, but in which Mr. Fish now preaches to the whites, (having but one colored male member of his church,[1]) and keeps the key of it, for fear that its lawful owners, the Indians, should go in it, without his leave. He will not let them have it for holding a camp meeting, or for any religious purpose.

Last August we invited Mr. Hallett to come and address us on Temperance, and to explain to us the laws. We appointed to meet at the Meeting-house, as the most central place. Mr. Fish at first refused to let the Indians go into their own Meeting-house, and the people began to assemble under the trees, when it was proposed for the Selectmen to go and ask for the key, that they might see if Mr. Fish would refuse it. At this moment, a white man who had been there some time, and had tried to pick a quarrel with Mr. Hallett and the Indians,[2] said he was sent by Mr. Fish with the key, and would let the people in, if they would promise to come out when he told them to. Mr. Hallett declined going in on such terms, and proposed to hold the meeting under the trees. This shamed the messenger of Mr. Fish, and he opened the door, and the people went in, where Mr. Hallett addressed them. While the Indians were thus gratified in meeting their friends, and in hearing good advice from Mr. Hallett, on temperance and their affairs, Mr. Fish's messenger interrupted the speaker, in a very abrupt and indecent manner, and tried to bring on a quarrel and break up the meeting. Captain George Lovell, always a friend to the Indians, tried to keep Mr. Crocker still, and Mr. Hallett declined having any controversy, yet the man persisted in his abuse, until he broke up the meeting. Had it been thought best, this insulting ambassador would have been put out of the house as a common brawler and disturber; but Mr. Hallett forbore to have any controversy with him. He afterwards met the Indians in their School-houses, and delivered two addresses without interruption from the emissaries of Mr. Fish. This is a sample of the way the Indians have been treated about their own Meeting-house. In some of the old petitions, the Indians speak of this Meeting-house as our Meeting-house, and it was built for them, without a dollar from the white men of this country, except when the Legislature, at the petition of the Indians, repaired it in 1816. And now, no Indian can go inside of it, but by the permission of Mr. Fish, whom they will not hear preach.

It seems that the Indians are not to have the benefit of any thing given to them. It must all go to the whites. The whites have our Meeting-house, and make Marshpee pay about one-third the support of a minister they will not hear preach. The other two-thirds comes from a fund. In 1711, a pious man named Williams, died in England, and in his will he said, "I give the remainder of my estate to be paid yearly to the College of Cambridge, in New England, or to such as are usually employed to manage the blessed work of converting the poor Indians there, to promote which, I design this part of my gift."

This was the trust of a dying man, given to Harvard College, that great and honorable Literary Institution. And how do they fulfil the solemn trust? They have been and still are paying about five hundred dollars a year to a missionary for preaching to the whites. This missionary, by his own statement, [see Mr. Hallett's argument,] shows he has added to his church twenty members from the tribe of over three hundred persons, in twenty-two years. Is not this more expensive in proportion to the good done, than any heathen mission on record? Mr. Fish has now been preaching in Marshpee twenty-four years. In that time he has received from the Williams fund, given solely to convert the poor Indians, about five hundred dollars a year, as nigh as can be ascertained, which is TWELVE THOUSAND DOLLARS for persuading twenty colored persons to join his church. This is six hundred dollars for every member added to his church, and if his other pay is added, it amounts to nine hundred dollars for each member.

Besides this, Mr. Fish has derived an income, we think not much, if any, short of two hundred and fifty dollars a year, from the wood-land, pasturage, marshes, Meeting-house, house lot, &c. which he has wrongfully held and used of the property of the Indians. Add this to his pay from Harvard College, and he has had EIGHTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS, of money that belonged to the Indians, and which, if it had been laid up for a fund, would have supplied missionaries for all the Indians in New England, according to the will of the pious Mr. Williams. We respect the President and Trustees of Harvard College. They are honorable men and mean to do right, but I ask them to look at this statement, then to read the will of Mr. Williams, and laying their hands upon their heart, to ask in the presence of the God of the Indian as well as the white man, whether they have done unto the Indians of New England and their children, as they would that the Indians should do unto them and their children? We are told that we might bring a suit in equity, or in some way, to compel the Trustees of the Williams fund, to distribute it as the pious donor meant, not for the conversion of the whites, even to the taking away from the Indians of their Meeting-house and lands, but for "the blessed work of converting the poor Indians," as Mr. Williams says in his will.

But it is hard for Indians to contend in the courts of white men, against white men. We can have none of our people to decide such questions, and what could we do against all the power and influence of the Corporation of Harvard College? If the President and Fellows of Harvard College prefer to deal unjustly by the poor Indians, and violate the trust of Mr. Williams, by giving the funds to the whites instead of the poor Indians, they must submit to the wrong, we suppose, for there are none strong enough to help them. They can take the money from the Indians, but cannot compel them to hear a preacher they dislike.

Some people may say that William Apes wants to get what Mr. Fish has, but all he asks is, that Harvard College and the State will not support an established religion in Marshpee, but leave the Indians free to choose for themselves. Mr. Williams did not give his property to the Marshpee Indians, more than to any others. It was designed for all the Indians in New England, and we cannot see what right Harvard College has to give it all for the whites near Marshpee and the Indians on Martha's Vineyard. If they are afraid that blind Joseph or William Apes, the Indian preachers, should have any of this money, if it is withdrawn from Mr. Fish, let them take it, and send a missionary among the Marshpee Indians they like. Or let them employ a man, some Elliot, if they can find one, to visit all the Indians in New England, to find out their condition and spiritual wants, and try to relieve them. This would be doing some good with money that is now only used to disturb the Indians, to take from them their Meeting-house, to create divisions among them, and turn what the pious Williams meant for a blessing into a curse to the Indians. What would the pious Williams say to Harvard College, could he visit Marshpee on a Sabbath? He might go to the Meeting-House built for the Indians, by the society in England, of which I believe he was a principal member. He would find a while man in the pulpit, white singers loading the worship, and the body of the church occupied by seventy or a hundred white persons, of the neighboring villages, scarcely one of whom lives on the plantation. Among these he would see four, five, six, or possibly ten persons with colored skins; not but one male among them, belonging to the church. He would probably think he had made a mistake, and that he was in a white town, and not among the Indians. He might then go to the house of blind Joseph, (the colored Baptist preacher,) or to the School-house in Marshpee, and he would there find twenty, thirty, or forty Indians, all engaged in the solemn worship of God, united and happy, with a little church, growing in grace. He might then visit the other School-house, at the neck, where he would find William Apes, an Indian, preaching to fifty, sixty, or seventy, and sometimes an hundred Indians, all uniting in fervent devotion. After the sermon, he would hear a word of exhortation from several of the colored brethren and sisters, in their broken way, but which often touches the heart of the Indian, more than all the learning that Harvard College can bestow. He would hear the Indians singing praises to God, and making melody in their hearts if not in their voices. What would he say then, when told that Harvard College had paid twelve thousand dollars of his funds for converting the poor Indians, to the white minister, who had made twenty members in twenty-four years, while the two Indian preachers, with forty-seven members to their churches, added in three years, were like St. Paul, laboring with their own hands for a subsistence?

All the Indians ask of Harvard is, take away your pretended gift. Do not force upon us a minister we do not like, and who creates divisions among us. Let us have our Meeting-house and our land, and we will be content to worship God without the help of the white man.

This Meeting-house might as well be in India as in Marshpee, for all the benefit the Indians have of it. It is kept locked all the time, with the key in Mr. Fish's possession. It is seen that he would not let the Baptist church of Indians have it to ordain their beloved pastor, blind Joseph in, and we see how it was granted to the Indians, when they wanted it for Mr. Hallett to address them last summer. Not only were we forbidden the use of the Meeting-house, but even the land which the Legislature unconstitutionally as we think, took from the Indians to give to Mr. Fish, is considered by him too holy to be defiled by the Indians, who are its true owners.

Last summer, sometime in July, my church desired to have a Camp-meeting, of which we had had one before, attended, as we believe, with a great blessing. We selected a spot some distance from the Meeting-house, in a grove, beside the river; but though not in sight of the Meeting-house, it was on the ground which Mr. Fish thinks has been set apart for his sole use. After the notice was given of the Camp-meeting, I received from Mr. Fish the following note, which is here recorded, as an evidence of the Christian spirit with which a church in Marshpee consisting of thirty-five members, who were Indians, was treated and molested in their worship, by the missionary Harvard College has paid so liberally to "convert the poor Indians," and who had but five Indians in his church, not one being a male member.

MARSHPEE, JULY 19, 1834.

Mr. WM. APES,

Sir,—Perceiving by a notice in the "Barnstable Journal," of last week, that you have appointed a Camp-meeting, to commence on the 30th inst. and to be holden on the Parsonage, and in the vicinity of the Meeting-house,

This is to forbid the proceeding altogether!

You have no pretence for such a measure; and if you persist in your purpose to hold such Meeting, either near the Meeting-house, or on any part of the Parsonage allotment, you must consider yourself responsible for the consequences.

I am &c.

PHINEAS FISH.

Rev. WILLIAM APES.

Soon after this, the Selectmen, one of whom was a member of my church, applied to Mr. Fish respecting holding the Camp-meeting on the parsonage. The place selected could not have disturbed Mr. Fish, any more than people passing in carriages in the main road. We had no Meeting-house, our School-houses would not hold the people, and we had no other means but to erect our tents and worship God in the open air. A pious family of whites from Nantucket, came on the ground, and began erecting their tent. Mr. Fish came there in person and ordered them off. The man told him that he had his family there, and had no other shelter for the night but his tent, which he should not remove, but would do so the next day, if he found that he was trespassing on any man's rights. But he added, if Mr. Fish turned him off, he would publish his conduct to the world. Mr. Fish's interference to break up our religious meeting, created much talk, and finally he wrote the following letter to the Selectmen; after which we went on and had our meeting, in a quiet, orderly and peaceful manner, and we believe it was a season of grace, in which the Lord blessed us.

To the Selectmen of Marshpee.

On mature thought, and in compliance with your particular request, I consent to your holding the Camp-meeting, which is this day commenced, on the spot near the river, where the first tent was erected. I consent, (I say,) on the following conditions, viz: That you undertake that no damage come upon the parsonage property, either wood land, or Meeting-house; that no attempt be made to occupy the Meeting-house; that there be no attempt on the Sabbath, or any other day, to interrupt the customary worship at the Meeting-house, and, that peace, order, and quietude be maintained during the time of the Camp-meeting. It is also distinctly understood, that this license is of special favor, and not conceded as your right, and no way to be taken as a ground for similar requests in future, or for encouraging any future acts of annoyance, vexation, or infringement of the quiet possession of the privileges, secured to me by the Laws. And that should any damage be done in any way as aforesaid, you will consider yourselves responsible to the proper authorities.

With my best wishes for your welfare, your friend,

PHINEAS FISH. Marshpee, July 30, 1834.

The reader may now ask, how came Mr. Fish in possession of this property, which he claims to hold by the Laws? I am at liberty to publish here, the following views of the law and the facts in the case, drawn up by legal counsel whom the Selectmen have consulted. And here I take my leave.



OPINION AS TO THE TITLE REV. PHINEAS FISH HAS TO THE PARSONAGE, SO CALLED, IN MARSHPEE.

The first act of the General Court which interfered with the right of the Indians to sell their own lands, all of which they owned in common in Marshpee Plantation, (including what is now called the parsonage,) was in 1650, which provides that no person shall buy land of any Indian without license of the General Court. In 1665, this was extended to grants for term of years. In 1693, the Indians were put under guardianship.

In 1701, an Act was passed specially to protect the Indians in the enjoyment of their lands. [Col. Laws, page 150,] It also shows why the restriction in the sale of their lands was adopted.

"Whereas, the government of the late Colonies of the Massachusetts Bay and New Plymouth, to the intent the native Indians might not be injured or defeated of their just rights and possessions, or be imposed on and abused in selling and disposing of their lands, and thereby deprive themselves of such places as were suitable for their settlement", did inhibit the purchase of land without consent of the General Court, notwithstanding which, sundry persons have made purchases, &c.; therefore, all such purchases of lands were vacated, with the exception of towns, or persons who had obtained lands from the Indians, and also by virtue of a grant or title made or derived by or from the General Court. All leases of land from Indians for any term or terms of years to be void, unless license was obtained for such lease from the County Court of Sessions. Provided, nevertheless, that nothing in this act shall be held or deemed in any wise to hinder, defeat or make void any bargain, sale or lease of land, made by an Indian to another Indian or Indians.

1718. This is the first act which took from the Indians their civil capacity to make contracts. It says, "whereas, notwithstanding the care taken and provided (by the former act,) a great wrong and injury happens to said Indians, natives of this country, by reason of their being drawn in by small gifts, or small debts, when they are in drink, and out of capacity to trade, to sign unreasonable bills or bonds for debts which are soon sued, and great charge brought upon them, when they have no way to pay the same, but by servitude"; therefore no contract whatever shall be recovered against any Indian native, unless entered into before two Justices of the Peace in the County, both to be present when the contract is executed by the Indian.

The act of 1725, recognizes the rights of Indians to employ persons to build houses on their own lands. Their own lands then were the commons, including the parsonage.

In 1763, Marshpee was incorporated as a District, including the land now called the parsonage. "Be it enacted, &c. that all the lands belonging to the Indians and mulattos in Mashpee be erected into a district, by the name of Mashpee." The Proprietors are empowered to meet "IN THE PUBLIC MEETING HOUSE," [the one now claimed by Mr. Fish,] to elect a Moderator, five Overseers, two to be Englishmen, a town Clerk and Treasurer, being Englishmen, two Wardens, and one or more Constables. The majority of the Overseers had the sole power to regulate the fishery, to lease such lands and fisheries as are held in common, not exceeding for two years, and to allot to the Indians their upland and meadows. This act was to continue for three years and no longer. It does not appear ever to have been revived. The revolutionary war intervened, and there is no act after 1766, until the act of 1788, after the revolutionary war, which last act put the Indians and their lands under strict guardianship.

In this interval between 1766 and 1788, the only transaction on which Mr. Fish can found any claim to the parsonage look place. There was then either no law existing, which could empower any person to sequester and set apart the lands of the Indians, or the law of 1693, (if that of 1763 had expired,) was revived, by which the guardianship again attached to the Indians. The Indians, it is believed, continued to choose their own Overseers, under the charter of 1763, after it had expired, and without any authority to do so. It was the only government they had during the troubles of the revolution.

We now come to the first evidence of any thing relating to the parsonage land being set apart from the common land. This was in 1783, and the following is the Deed from the Records of Barnstable County, and the only deed relating to this property.

DEED OF MARSHPEE PARSONAGE.

Know all Men by these Presents, That we, Lot Nye, Matthias Amos, Moses Pognet, Selectmen, and Israel Halfday, Joseph Amos and Eben Dives, of the district of Marshpee, for the support of the Gospel in said Marshpee in all future generations, according to the discipline and worship of the Church in this place, which is Congregational, do allot, lay out, and sequester forever, a certain tract of land, being four hundred acres more or less, lying within the Plantation of Marshpee, and being Indian property, which is to lay as a parsonage forever and to be improved and used for the sole purpose aforesaid; and the said tract or parcel of land for the said Parsonage, is situated on the East side of Marshpee river, and bounded as follows, viz: Beginning at a certain spring of fresh water which issues from the head a small lagoon on the East side of Marshpee river aforesaid, and runs into said river a small distance below, and South of the spot where negro Scipio and his wife Jemimai had their house, which is now removed, and from thence running due East into the land until it comes to the great road which leads into Marshpee Neck, so called, and from thence Northwardly bearing Eastward as the said road runs, until it comes to the great road, which is the common road from Barnstable to Falmouth, and then bounded by the last mentioned road Northwardly, and running Westwardly until it comes to Ashir's road, then crossing Falmouth road and running in Ashir's path till it comes to Marshpee river aforesaid, and then upon the said river Southwardly, and on the East side, until it comes to the first station, leaving Quokin, and Phillis his wife, quiet in their possessions; which tract of land, (except Mary Richards' fields and plantation,) which is within the said boundaries, and wood for Mary's own use, and fencing stuff for her fences as they now stand, with all the appurtinances and privileges thereunto belonging, shall be forever for the important purpose of propagating the Gospel in Marshpee, without any let, hindrance or molestation. In confirmation whereof, we have hereunto set our hands and seals, this seventh day of January, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three. 1783.

LOT NYE, MATTHIAS X[Note: sideways X] AMOS, his mark. MOSES X[Note: sideways X] POGNET, "

N.B. Before the insealing the premises, reserve was made by the signers of this instrument, for the heirs of Mary Richards, that they forever be allowed her in her life time, and Abraham Natumpum and his heirs, be allowed severally to enjoy and possess Scipio's cleared spot of land, and fencing stuff for the same.

ISRAEL X[Note: sideways X] HALFDAY, his mark. JOSEPH X[Note: sideways X] AMOS, " EBEN X[Note: sideways X] DIVES, "

In possession of: Gideon Hawley : Simon Fish.

Received November 10, 1800, and is recorded in the 25th Book of Records, for the County of Barnstable, folio 139, and compared.

Attest, EBENEZER BACON, Register.

Lot Nye was a white man, a great Indian speculator. The other five were Indians, two calling themselves Selectmen. Now what power had these men in 1783, to sequester four hundred acres of the common land of the Indians, for any purpose? If they were Selectmen, and had any power, that power was expressly limited by the act of 1763, to leasing lands for a term not exceeding two years. Here they undertook to make a perpetual grant, a sort of dedication of the property to a certain purpose. If they could dispose of one acre so, they might with equal propriety, have disposed of the whole Plantation. The Indians were all tenants in common, and no dedication or transfer of the common land could be made, without a legal partition, or the consent of every individual tenant. If the pretended Selectmen acted for the Indians, they could only do so by power of attorney to act for all the tenants in common. There is no other possible legal way, by which land, the fee of which is owned by tenants in common, can be transferred, either in fee or in occupancy out of their possession forever. But besides, no act of the Indians was then valid unless confirmed by the General Court. This deed, therefore, of 1783, was void at the time. It seems nothing was done with it, until 1800, seventeen years after, when it was recorded in the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, at whose instigation does not appear. Now in 1800, when this deed was recorded, the Indians were legally minors, and could do no act, and make no contract. All the power their Selectmen had in 1783, was taken away. They were under five Overseers, who had power to improve and lease the lands of the Indians and their tenements, but no power to sell, sequester or dedicate any part of them. The Overseers had no power to take a dollar from the Indians, for religious worship. While this was the condition of the Indians under the law of 1789, (which continued in full force, with an additional act in 1819, till the new law of 1834,) the deed was recorded, in 1800, seventeen years after it was made by persons who had no power at all to make such a deed. The professed object was to set apart 400 acres, of the common land, lying in Marshpee, "and being Indian property," for a parsonage, forever. The clear title then was in the Indians as tenants in common, for the deed so declares it, in 1783. The parsonage was their property then. How has it ever been conveyed out of their hands? The purpose for which this land was to be used, as sequestered by Lot Nye, &c. was for the sole purpose aforesaid, viz. "For the support of the Gospel in Marshpee in all future generations, according to the discipline and worship of the Church in this place, which is Congregational." And this property, says the deed, "shall be forever for the important purpose of propagating the gospel in Marshpee, without any let, hindrance or molestation."

This, then was the design of the original signers of this deed, who had no right to sign such a deed at all. Their object was to promote the gospel in Marshpee, but how has it turned out? The property has been used for twenty-four years, to pay a minister who preaches to the whites, and whom the Indians with very few exceptions, will not hear. Is not this a gross perversion of the design of the donors, even if they had any power to have made this grant? No lawyer will pretend that the grant was not void, under this deed alone. There was no grantee, no legal consideration, and no power to convey. The deed remained on record, until 1809, when the following act was passed by the Legislature, attempting to confirm a deed made 26 years before, by men who had no power to make such deed.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,

House of Representatives, June 15, 1809.

On the representation of the Overseers of the Indian Plantation of Marshpee, in the County of Barnstable, stating in behalf of said Indians, that it would be conducive to their interests, that a certain grant and allotment of lands therein described, formerly owned by said Indians, for the support of the gospel ministry among them, should be confirmed and rendered valid.

Resolved, That a certain grant or allotment of land made by Lot Nye, Matthias Amos, Moses Pognet, Isaac Halfday, Joseph Amos, and Eben Dives, of the District of Marshpee, in the County of Barnstable, as appears by their deed by them, and by them signed, sealed and executed, on the seventh day of January, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three, and recorded in the Registry of Deeds, in and for said County of Barnstable, in the fifty-fifth book thereof, and 139th folio of said book, said land being 400 acres more or less, according to said deed, be and the same hereby is confirmed and rendered valid to all intents and purposes by them in their said deed expressed, and the said tract of land shall be and remain forever as a parsonage, for the use and benefit of a Congregational gospel minister, as expressed and declared in their said deed. Sent up for concurrence.

TIMOTHY BIGELOW, Speaker.

In Senate, June 19, 1809,

Read and concurred.

H.G. OTIS, President. Approved, C. GORE.

June 19, 1809, [True Copy.]

Now, if the deed was not valid in 1783, without the concurrent action of the General Court, it could not be made valid by an act of the General Court 26 years afterwards. Besides, the land had been in possession of the Indians, by virtue of their title, more than twenty years, after the making of the pretended deed. The power of the grantors, if they ever had any power, had long expired, and Marshpee was governed by new laws. We might as well hold that an act passed by the House of Representatives in 1783, could be made valid by a concurrence of the Senate, in 1809.

It is plain, therefore, that unless the General Court had power without the consent of the Indians, to sequester this land in 1809, the setting of it apart from the common land, is wholly void, and an act of mere arbitrary power. But the general Court never assumed the power to convey any land for any purpose, belonging to the Indians without their consent. Where and how was their consent given to this act of 1809? They were minors in law, and could give no such consent. Their Overseers could give none for them, for their power only extended to alloting laws to the Indians, and leasing them. The pretence, therefore, that this was done at the request of the Overseers, gives no strength to the act.

Let another fact be remarked. The original sequestration in 1783, was to promote the gospel in Marshpee. The General Court profess to confirm and render valid the deed of Lot Nye and others, but they say that this four hundred acres "shall remain forever as a parsonage for the use and benefit of a Congregational gospel minister, as expressed in their said deed."

Now no such thing is expressed in their deed. There is not a word about a Congregational minister; only "for the support of the gospel, according to the discipline and worship of the church in this place, which is Congregational."

The General Court, therefore, gave a construction to the deed, which the deed never warranted. The whole proceeding must be illegal and void. The fee still remains in the Indians, and no power existed to take it from them without their whole consent as tenants in common, which they have never given, and could not give, because they were in law minors. Mr. Fish was sent to Marshpee as a minister, and ordained in 1811. The Indians, as a society, never invited him to come, or settled him. They never gave him possession of the land or Meeting-house. They were then minors in law, and could give no consent. The white Overseers and Harvard College, were the only powers that undertook to give Mr. Fish possession of the property of the Indians. It is true, he has held it twenty years, but the statute of quiet possession does not run against minors. The Indians were declared minors, and could bring no action in court.

This is the true history of the parsonage and Meeting-house now wrongfully held by Mr. Fish. Have not the Indians a right to their own property? Has the Legislature and Harvard College, a right to establish a religion by law in Marshpee, and take the property of the Indians to support a minister they will not hear? Where did the General-Court get any power to give away the property of the Indians, any more than the lands of white men, held in common? They cannot take the property of the Indians to support a private individual. Was it then a public use? But the Constitution says "no part of the property of any individual, can with justice be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people, and whenever the public exigencies require that the property of any individual should be appropriated to public uses, he shall receive a reasonable compensation therefor." Apply this to the act of the General Court, by which Mr. Fish holds four hundred acres of the common lands of the Indians, against their consent, and for which they never received a dollar, and answer. Is not the Constitution violated, every day he is suffered to remain on the plantation, against their consent, subsisting on the property of the poor Indians, not to benefit them, but to preach to the whites?

Look at this subject also, in connexion with religious freedom. The old article of the Constitution, gave the Legislature power to require the towns to provide for public worship at their own expense, where they neglected to make such provisions themselves; but it also provided that the towns, &c. "shall at all times have the exclusive right of electing their public teachers, and of contracting with them for their support and maintenance."

This right the Indians have never had in regard to Mr. Fish, nor did they neglect to support worship, and if they did, the Legislature had no power to take their property and set it apart, but might impose a tax or a fine.

But what says the amended article on this subject of religious freedom? "The several religious societies of this Commonwealth, (the Indian as well as the white man,) whether corporate or unincorporate, shall ever have the right to elect their pastors or religious teachers, to contract with them for their support, to raise money for the erecting and repairing houses of public worship, for the maintenance of religious instruction, and all religious sects and denominations, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good citizens, shall be equally under the protection of the law."