This page has been validated.
for the faithful discharge of his trust: That, for receiving, safe keeping, and conveying to the treasury the money he may receive, he shall be entitled to a compensation to be hereafter fixed.
Approved, May 18, 1796.
Statute Ⅰ.
[Expired.]
Chap. ⅩⅩⅩ.—An Act to regulate Trade and Intercourse with the Indian Tribes, and to preserve Peace on the Frontiers.[1]
A boundary line between the United States and various Indian tribes to be ascertained and marked.Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following boundary line, established by treaty between the United States and various Indian tribes, shall be clearly ascertained, and distinctly marked, in all such places, as the President of the United States shall deem necessary, and in such manner as he shall direct, to wit: Beginning at the mouth of Cayahoga river on Lake Erie, and running thence up the same, to the portage between that and the Tuscaroras branch of the Muskingum; thence down that branch, to the crossing place above Fort Lawrence; thence westerly to a fork of that branch of the Great Miami river, running into the Ohio, at, or near which fork, stood Laromie’s store, and where commences the portage, between the Miami of the Ohio, and Saint Mary’s river, which is a branch of the Miami, which runs into Lake Erie; thence a westerly course to Fort Recovery, which stands on a branch of the Wabash; thence southwesterly, in a direct line to the Ohio, so as to intersect that river, opposite the mouth of Kentucky or Cuttawa river; thence down the said river Ohio, to the tract of one hundred and fifty thousand acres, near the rapids of the Ohio, which has been assigned to General Clark, for the use of himself and his warriors; thence around the said tract, on the line of the said tract, till it shall again intersect the said river Ohio; thence down the same, to a point opposite the high lands or ridge between the mouth of the Cumberland and Tennesse rivers; thence easterly on the said ridge, to a point, from whence, a southwest line will strike the mouth of Duck river; thence still easterly on the said ridge, to a point forty miles above Nashville; thence northeast, to Cumberland river; thence up the said river, to where the Kentucky road crosses the same; thence to the top of Cumberland mountain; thence along Campbell’s line, to the river Clinch; thence down the said river, to a point from which a line shall pass the Holsten, at the ridge, which divides the waters running into Little River, from those running into the Tennessee; thence south, to the North Carolina boundary; thence along the South Carolina Indian boundary, to and over the Ocunua mountain, in a southwest course, to Tugelo river; thence in a direct line, to the top of the Currahee mountain, where the Creek line passes it; thence to the head or source of the main south branch of the Oconee river, called the Appalachee; thence down the middle of the said main south branch and river Oconee, to its confluence with Oakmulgee, which forms the river Altamaha; thence down the middle of the said Altamaha, to the old line on the said river; and thence along the said old line to the river Saint Mary’s; Provided always,Provision for alterations which may be made by treaty. that if the boundary line between the said Indian tribes and the United States, shall, at any time hereafter, be varied, by any treaty which shall be made between the said Indian tribes and the United States, then all the provisions contained in this act, shall be construed to apply to the said line so to be varied, in the same manner, as the said provisions now apply to the boundary line herein before recited.
- ↑ The act of March 30, 1802, having described what should be the Indian country at that time, as well as at any future time, when purchases of territory should be made of the Indians, the carrying of spirituous liquors into a territory so purchased after March, 1802, although the same should be frequented and inhabited exclusively by Indians, would not be an offence within the meaning of the act of Congress, so as to subject the goods of the trader, found in company with those liquors, to seizure and forfeiture. American Fur Company v. The United States, 2 Peters, 358.
