the whites are now in the possession of the white people; these slaves can not be obtained for their Indian owners without a lawsuit, and I see no reason why the Indians shall be compelled to surrender all slaves claimed by our citizens when this surrender is not mutual.”  Meanwhile the annuity began to be withheld from the Indians in order to force them to return Negroes, and a friendly chief, Hicks, constantly waited upon Humphreys only to find the agent little more powerful than himself.  Thus matters continued through 1829 and 1830.  In violation of all legal procedure, the Indians were constantly required to relinquish beforehand property in their possession to settle a question of claim.  On March 21, 1830, Humphreys was informed that he was no longer agent for the Indians.  He had been honestly devoted to the interest of these people, but his efforts were not in harmony with the policy of the new administration.

Just what that policy was may be seen from Jackson’s special message on Indian affairs of February 22, 1831.  The Senate had asked for information as to the conduct of the Government in connection with the act of March 30, 1802, “to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes and to preserve peace on the frontiers.”  The Nullification controversy was in everybody’s mind, and already friction had arisen between the new President and the abolitionists.  In spite of Jackson’s attitude toward South Carolina, his message in the present instance was a careful defense of the whole theory of state rights.  Nothing in the conduct of the Federal Government toward the Indian tribes, he insisted, had ever been intended to attack or even to call in question the rights of a sovereign state.  In one way the Southern states had seemed to be an exception.  “As early as 1784 the settlements within the limits of North Carolina were advanced farther to the west than the authority of the state to enforce an obedience of its laws.”  After the Revolution the tribes desolated the frontiers.  “Under these circumstances the first treaties, in 1785 and 1790, with the Cherokees, were concluded by the Government of the United States.”  Nothing of all this, said Jackson, had in any way affected the relation of any Indians to the state in which they happened to reside, and he concluded as follows:  “Toward this race of people I entertain the kindest feelings, and am not sensible that the views which I have taken of their true interests are less favorable to them than those which oppose their emigration to the West.  Years since I stated to them my belief that if the States chose to extend their laws over them it would not be in the power of the Federal Government to prevent it.  My opinion remains the same, and I can see no alternative for them but that of their removal to the West or a quiet submission to the state laws.  If they prefer to remove, the United States agree to defray their expenses, to supply them the means of transportation