Western Carolina University WCU University of North Carolina Asheville UNCA

Southern Appalachian Digital Collections

Western Carolina University (20) View all
University of North Carolina Asheville (6) View all
Great Smoky Mountains - A Park for America Back to search results
WCU - Great Smoky Mountains - A Park for America

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

11 of 13 items 11 of 13 items
  • wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9778.jpg
Copyright Download
Item 1 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9768.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_01
Item 2 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9769.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_02
Item 3 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9770.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_03
Item 4 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9771.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_04
Item 5 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9772.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_05
Item 6 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9773.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_06
Item 7 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9774.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_07
Item 8 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9775.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_08
Item 9 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9776.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_09
Item 10 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9777.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_10
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9778.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_11
Item 12 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9779.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_12
Item 13 - Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9780.jpg

Federal court records: Latimer v. Poteet, Meigs Post

GSMNP_13150_15_1128_13
Item
?

Item’s are ‘child’ level descriptions to ‘parent’ objects, (e.g. one page of a whole book).

  • OF THE UNITED STATES Lattimer v. Poteet. South Carolina Indian boundary. Now, the instruction must, have referred to the southern boundary of North Carolina ; and if the Indian boundary strikes this line, it is difficult to perceive, what application to the facts the instruction would have. But if the instruction referred to the Hopewell treaty line, it was not called for in the Holston treaty ; and under the circumstances of the case, we are not prepared to say that there was error in refusing to give the instruction. And we think there was no error in refusing to give the third, fourth and fifth instructions prayed by the plaintiffs' counsel. Nor do we perceive any error of which the plaintiffs can complain, in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth instructions given by the circuit court, on the prayer of the defendant. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Takey, Ch. J.—I agree with the majority of the court in affirming thesc- judgments ; but I dissent from some of the principles upon which they have founded their opinion. The court (as I understand the opinion) consider Hawkins's line to he the established boundary line of the treaty of Holston ; they think it is recognised as such in the subsequent treaty of Tellico ; and that being thus recognised by the political department of the government, the court (according to the principles deduced in Garcia v. Lee, and foster v. N^eilson) must also regard it as the true boundary line ; and must treai it as such, from the date of the treaty of Holston, in any question of property that may come before them. If the legislative or executive departments of the government, by ♦any clear and unequivocal act, had declared Hawkins's line to be _„. , IT T 116 the true line of the treaty of Holston, I should concur with the l majority of this court. But I do not find any act of that description by any department of the government. In the cases of Foster v. Neilson, and of Garcia v. Lee, an act of congress had been passed, describing particularly the boundary line therein mentioned, and declaring it to be the true line of that treaty. But in this case, we have no act of the legislative or executive departments of the government, recognising the line run by Hawkins as the treaty line. It is true, that jn the subsequent treaty of Tellico, the parties, in describing the boundaries of this new treaty, call, upon two occasions, for Hawkins's line, and upon both of them,rnn some distance with it. But there is no expression in this treaty which recognises the line thus called for as the boundary line of the treaty of Holston. It is mentioned and referred to, merely as a known point, like other places called for in this treaty ; and the lines spoken of, are run, merely as known lines. But so far from declaring it to be the boundary line described in the treaty of Holston, the treaty of Tellico does not even say, that it was run by Hawkins as the boundary ; nor is it described to have any connection whatever with the treaty of Holston. It is called for as a line, known in the country, and which, on some occasion or other, had been run by Hawkins ; but when run, or for what purpose, cannot be gathered from any expressions in the treaty of Tellico. We know, indeed, from public historical documents, that Hawkins's line is one of the many efforts that were made to fix a certain boundary between North Carolina and the Cherokee Indians, from the vague and imperfect descriptions contained in the treaty of Holston. Other lines were run tor this purpose, besides that of Hawkins. And we have no evidence that
Object
?

Object’s are ‘parent’ level descriptions to ‘children’ items, (e.g. a book with pages).

Related items

Part of Collection

Great Smoky Mountains - A Park for America

This digital collection was created to contribute to the public's understanding of the forces and ideas that led to the establishment of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park in 1934. The most vi...

View collection Read introduction
panzoom image
wcu_great_smoky_mtns-9778.jpg