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.”

Are the Indians at Marshpee, protected in the same manner the whites are, in their religious freedom?  The Indians think not, and with good reason; and yet they cannot get redress.  They have warned Mr. Fish to leave their property; they have dismissed him as their minister, if he ever were such, and have forbidden his using their Meeting-house, or carrying off their wood.  But he persists in holding and using their property, as they say wrongfully, and even prohibits their having a religious meeting in the woods, without his consent.  He is, it is stated, at this time employing men to cut and cart wood off the plantation, for his support, and it is supposed he will thus take of the property really belonging to the Indians, about two hundred cords of wood the present year.

Now if this land belongs in common to the Marshpee Indians, as they contend it does, Mr. Fish and the white men he employs, (and it is understood he employs no others,) violate the law of 1834, and are liable to indictment.  That law says, “that no person other than proprietors or inhabitants of said District, shall ever cut wood [upon the common lands,] or transport the same therefrom.  And every person offending against this provision, shall be liable to indictment therefor, and upon conviction, shall pay a fine of not less than fifty, nor more than one hundred dollars, to the use of said District.”  In this mode, by indicting the white men employed by Mr. Fish, to cut and carry off wood, the question could be tried, which is simply whether the fee of the parsonage is in the Indians, or whether it is in Mr. Fish, who never had any deed of it in any way.  The parsonage was common land in 1783.  Has it been legally changed since in its title, is the question.  But even in this matter, as we are informed, the courts of justice which are open to white men, are closed to the poor Indians.  At the last session of the court in Barnstable, the Selectmen of Marshpee complained against the white men employed by Mr. Fish, for cutting wood on their common lands.  The District Attorney on ascertaining that the wood was taken from the parsonage, so called, undertook to decide the whole question,