Appellant
Samuel A. Worcester
Appellee
State of Georgia
Appellant's Claim
That the state of Georgia had no right to prosecute Worcester for illegally living on Cherokee land because the state of Georgia had no right of sovereignty over Cherokee land.
Justices for the Court
Gabriel Duvall, William Johnson, John Marshall (writing for the Court), JohnMcLean, Joseph Story, Smith Thompson
Justices Dissenting
Henry Baldwin
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
3 March 1832
Decision
Samuel Worcester, tried, convicted, and sentenced by the state of Georgia forillegally living in the lands of the Cherokee Nation encompassed by the state of Georgia, was found by the Supreme Court to have legally lived in Cherokee Nation, by virtue of the facts that the Cherokee Nation is a nation withinitself, and that the state of Georgia had no authority to mandate laws withinthe territory confined by the Cherokee Nation. The acts established by the state of Georgia that affected the lands of the Cherokee Nation were deemed unconstitutional and void.
Significance
This case reestablished the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation, and other Native American Nations, as nations separate from the United States and exempt from the laws of the States of the Union that may surround their territory.
Samuel Worcester was indicted in a superior court in Georgia "for residing onthe 15th of July, 1831, in that part of the Cherokee Nation attached by thelaws of the State of Georgia, without license or permit, and without having taken the oath to support and defend the constitution and laws of the State ofGeorgia, etc." To this indictment he pleaded that, on that date, in the Cherokee Nation, he was a citizen of Vermont and entered the Cherokee Nation as amissionary under the authority of the president of the United States and with permission of the Cherokee Nation was engaged in preaching the gospel. He added that Georgia should not maintain the prosecution, as several treaties between the Cherokee Nation and the United States recognized the Cherokee Nation as a sovereign nation, and that the laws under which he was indicted were repugnant to the treaties, were unconstitutional and void, and were repugnantto the 1802 act of Congress entitled "An Act to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes." The superior court overruled the plea, and the plaintiff in error was tried, convicted, and sentenced to four years of hard labor.
President Andrew Jackson and the United States cited and admonished the stateof Georgia and commanded the state to appear before the Supreme Court, pursuant to a writ of error. Chief Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court.
Marshall felt that the indictment and plea in the case brought up two questions. The first dealt with the validity of the treaties made by the United States with the Cherokee Nation, and the second question was the validity of a statute of the state of Georgia entitled "An Act to prevent the exercise of assumed and arbitrary power by all persons, under pretext of authority from theCherokee Indians," etc., that stated that all white people residing within the Cherokee Nation must conform to the rules of Georgia, including license orpermit from a state official of Georgia to live in the Cherokee Nation, taking an oath to the state of Georgia, and, failing to do so, being sentenced toa minimum of four years hard labor. The extraterritorial power to each legislature being limited in the action of its own citizens, Marshall wrote that the very passage of the act was an assertion of jurisdiction over the CherokeeNation.
The treaty between the United States and the Cherokee Nation was based on theprevious treaties between the Native American Nations and Great Britain. Accordingly, the United States received the Cherokee Nation into their favor andprotection. The Cherokee acknowledged themselves to be under the protectionof the United States and no other power. Protection did not imply the destruction of the protected. The manner in which this stipulation was understood bythe American government was explained by the language and acts of the firstpresident. The sixth and seventh articles stipulated for the punishment of the citizens of either country who may commit offenses on or against the citizens of the other. The only inference to be drawn from this was that the UnitedStates considered the Cherokees as a nation. Marshall wrote that multiple treaties between the United States and the Cherokee Nation again and again affirmed the Cherokee Nation's right to self-government and recognized it as a distinct community, occupying its own territory, over which the state of Georgia had no right.
Based on these arguments, Marshall wrote that the act of the state of Georgiaunder which the plaintiff was prosecuted was void. Marshall further wrote that the act of the state of Georgia interfered with the relations establishedbetween the United States and the Cherokee Nation and was in direct hostilitywith treaties repeated in a succession of years. Furthermore, according to Justice Marshall, the forcible seizure and abduction of Worcester, who was residing in the Cherokee nation, with its permission, and by authority of the President of the United States, was also a violation.
Related Cases
John Ross
John Ross.
John Ross (1790-1866) grew up in the ways of Anglo-Saxons, but later embracedhis Cherokee heritage. Born in present-day Alabama, Ross was seven-eighths European (mostly Scottish). As a young man, he operated as a merchant near present-day Chattanooga and in northwest Georgia, site of the independent Cherokee Nation. He became involved in Cherokee political affairs during the 1810sand, in 1828, gained election as principal chief of the Cherokee. Faced withfederal government demands that the Cherokee vacate their lands, Ross favoredresistance. But a minority clique under Major Ridge signed a treaty with President Andrew Jackson in 1835, and in mid-1838 the Cherokee embarked on the Trail of Tears, a trek that killed almost one-quarter of the tribe.
After a period of unrest after the move, the Cherokee entered a period of peace in the 1850s. This ended with the Civil War. Ross supported the Confederacy, but there is evidence to suggest that he was coerced. After the war, in part as a result of his negotiation, the federal government agreed to an 1866 treaty which preserved the Cherokee Nation intact.
Sources
Coleman, Kenneth, and Charles Stephen Gurr, eds. Dictionary of Georgia Biography. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1983.
Samuel A. Worcester
Appellee
State of Georgia
Appellant's Claim
That the state of Georgia had no right to prosecute Worcester for illegally living on Cherokee land because the state of Georgia had no right of sovereignty over Cherokee land.
Justices for the Court
Gabriel Duvall, William Johnson, John Marshall (writing for the Court), JohnMcLean, Joseph Story, Smith Thompson
Justices Dissenting
Henry Baldwin
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
3 March 1832
Decision
Samuel Worcester, tried, convicted, and sentenced by the state of Georgia forillegally living in the lands of the Cherokee Nation encompassed by the state of Georgia, was found by the Supreme Court to have legally lived in Cherokee Nation, by virtue of the facts that the Cherokee Nation is a nation withinitself, and that the state of Georgia had no authority to mandate laws withinthe territory confined by the Cherokee Nation. The acts established by the state of Georgia that affected the lands of the Cherokee Nation were deemed unconstitutional and void.
Significance
This case reestablished the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation, and other Native American Nations, as nations separate from the United States and exempt from the laws of the States of the Union that may surround their territory.
Samuel Worcester was indicted in a superior court in Georgia "for residing onthe 15th of July, 1831, in that part of the Cherokee Nation attached by thelaws of the State of Georgia, without license or permit, and without having taken the oath to support and defend the constitution and laws of the State ofGeorgia, etc." To this indictment he pleaded that, on that date, in the Cherokee Nation, he was a citizen of Vermont and entered the Cherokee Nation as amissionary under the authority of the president of the United States and with permission of the Cherokee Nation was engaged in preaching the gospel. He added that Georgia should not maintain the prosecution, as several treaties between the Cherokee Nation and the United States recognized the Cherokee Nation as a sovereign nation, and that the laws under which he was indicted were repugnant to the treaties, were unconstitutional and void, and were repugnantto the 1802 act of Congress entitled "An Act to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes." The superior court overruled the plea, and the plaintiff in error was tried, convicted, and sentenced to four years of hard labor.
President Andrew Jackson and the United States cited and admonished the stateof Georgia and commanded the state to appear before the Supreme Court, pursuant to a writ of error. Chief Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court.
Marshall felt that the indictment and plea in the case brought up two questions. The first dealt with the validity of the treaties made by the United States with the Cherokee Nation, and the second question was the validity of a statute of the state of Georgia entitled "An Act to prevent the exercise of assumed and arbitrary power by all persons, under pretext of authority from theCherokee Indians," etc., that stated that all white people residing within the Cherokee Nation must conform to the rules of Georgia, including license orpermit from a state official of Georgia to live in the Cherokee Nation, taking an oath to the state of Georgia, and, failing to do so, being sentenced toa minimum of four years hard labor. The extraterritorial power to each legislature being limited in the action of its own citizens, Marshall wrote that the very passage of the act was an assertion of jurisdiction over the CherokeeNation.
The treaty between the United States and the Cherokee Nation was based on theprevious treaties between the Native American Nations and Great Britain. Accordingly, the United States received the Cherokee Nation into their favor andprotection. The Cherokee acknowledged themselves to be under the protectionof the United States and no other power. Protection did not imply the destruction of the protected. The manner in which this stipulation was understood bythe American government was explained by the language and acts of the firstpresident. The sixth and seventh articles stipulated for the punishment of the citizens of either country who may commit offenses on or against the citizens of the other. The only inference to be drawn from this was that the UnitedStates considered the Cherokees as a nation. Marshall wrote that multiple treaties between the United States and the Cherokee Nation again and again affirmed the Cherokee Nation's right to self-government and recognized it as a distinct community, occupying its own territory, over which the state of Georgia had no right.
Based on these arguments, Marshall wrote that the act of the state of Georgiaunder which the plaintiff was prosecuted was void. Marshall further wrote that the act of the state of Georgia interfered with the relations establishedbetween the United States and the Cherokee Nation and was in direct hostilitywith treaties repeated in a succession of years. Furthermore, according to Justice Marshall, the forcible seizure and abduction of Worcester, who was residing in the Cherokee nation, with its permission, and by authority of the President of the United States, was also a violation.
Related Cases
- McCullough v. Massachusetts, 17 U.S. 316 (1819).
- Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821).
- Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1924).
John Ross
John Ross.
John Ross (1790-1866) grew up in the ways of Anglo-Saxons, but later embracedhis Cherokee heritage. Born in present-day Alabama, Ross was seven-eighths European (mostly Scottish). As a young man, he operated as a merchant near present-day Chattanooga and in northwest Georgia, site of the independent Cherokee Nation. He became involved in Cherokee political affairs during the 1810sand, in 1828, gained election as principal chief of the Cherokee. Faced withfederal government demands that the Cherokee vacate their lands, Ross favoredresistance. But a minority clique under Major Ridge signed a treaty with President Andrew Jackson in 1835, and in mid-1838 the Cherokee embarked on the Trail of Tears, a trek that killed almost one-quarter of the tribe.
After a period of unrest after the move, the Cherokee entered a period of peace in the 1850s. This ended with the Civil War. Ross supported the Confederacy, but there is evidence to suggest that he was coerced. After the war, in part as a result of his negotiation, the federal government agreed to an 1866 treaty which preserved the Cherokee Nation intact.
Sources
Coleman, Kenneth, and Charles Stephen Gurr, eds. Dictionary of Georgia Biography. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1983.
User Comments Add a comment…