Treaties of October 25 and 27, 1805, considered together.—This course was pursued, and after several fruitless conferences the commissioners succeeded in concluding the treaties of October 25, 1805, and October 27, 1805. Inasmuch as these two treaties were negotiated by the same commissioners, acting under the same instructions and at the same conference, they will be considered together. The treaties were upon their conclusion transmitted to the Secretary of War,[152] and, upon submission to the Senate, that body duly advised and consented to their ratification. They were ratified and proclaimed by the President on the 24th of April and 10th of June, 1806, respectively.[153]
Secret agreement with Doublehead.—Following the transmission of the treaties to the Secretary of War by the commissioners, the latter addressed[154] an explanatory communication to him, in which they set forth that by the terms of the treaty of October 25, 1805, there were reserved three square miles of land, "for the particular disposal of the United States, on the north bank of the Tennessee, opposite and below the mouth of Hiwassa." This reservation, they affirmed, was predicated ostensibly on the supposition that the garrison at Southwest Point and the United States factory at Tellico would be placed thereon during the pleasure of the United States, but that they had stipulated with "Doublehead," a Cherokee chief, that whenever the United States should find this land unnecessary for the purposes mentioned it was to revert to him (Doublehead), provided that he should retain one of the square miles to his own use, but should relinquish his right and claim to the other two sections in favor of John D. Chisholm and John Riley in equal shares.
Purchase of site for State capital.—The cession by the treaty of October 27, 1805, of the section of land at Southwest Point was secured upon the theory that the State of Tennessee would find Kingston a convenient and desirable place for the establishment of the State capital. A subsequent change of circumstances and public sentiment, however, caused it to be located seven years later at Nashville.
Boundaries surveyed.—On the 11th of July, 1806, the Secretary of War notified Return J. Meigs of his appointment as commissioner to superintend the running and marking of the line "from the junction of the fork at the head of which Fort Nash stood with the main south fork of Duck River to a point on the Tennessee River bank opposite the mouth of Hiwassee River." He was also to superintend the survey of the lines of the reserved tracts agreeably to the treaty of October 25, 1805.
He was directed to appoint a surveyor, but before running the line from Duck to Tennessee Rivers above described, to have him survey and mark the lines of the 3-mile tract reserved opposite to and below the mouth of Hiwassee, and also, when completed, to designate the most suitable site for the military post, factory, and agency, each site to be 300 feet square and 40 rods distant from the others.
Commissioner Meigs followed the letter of his instructions and caused the lines to be surveyed in accordance therewith. The line from Duck River to the mouth of Hiwassee was begun on the 9th and finished on the 26th of October, 1806. The point of departure at the west end of the boundary line was a red elm tree, trimmed and topped, standing on the extreme point of land formed by the confluence of that branch of Duck River at the head of which Fort Nash stood, with the main south fork of the river. The eastern terminus of the line was a mulberry tree on the north bank of Tennessee River opposite the mouth of Hiwassee River, 73 miles and 166 poles from the beginning.[155]
CONTROVERSY CONCERNING "DOUBLEHEAD" TRACT.
Colonel Martin, who was employed by Commissioner Meigs, also surveyed under the latter's direction during the same month the four small reserved tracts described in the treaty of October 25, 1805.[155] One of these afterwards produced much controversy. The language of the treaty called for three square miles on the north bank of Tennessee River, opposite to and below the mouth of Hiwassee River. Colonel Meigs, who was one of the commissioners who negotiated the treaty and was therefore entirely familiar with its intent, caused this tract to be surveyed adjoining the main line of cession, extending from Duck River to the mouth of Hiwassee and north of that line, which placed the tract opposite to and above the mouth of Hiwassee, instead of "opposite to and below" the mouth of that river.[156]
As above stated, while this reserve was ostensibly for the location of a military post and factory or trading establishment, it was really intended for the Cherokee chief Doublehead and other influential persons, as the price of their influence in securing from the Cherokees the extensive cession of land granted by the treaty.
This was sought to be secured by means of a secret article attached to the treaty. This article was reported to the War Department by the treaty commissioners[157] and made a matter of record, but it was never sent to the State Department nor to the Senate for the advice and consent of that body. After Agent Meigs had erected the Hiwassee garrison buildings on the tract, suit was brought in 1809 by Colonel McLung against the agent for the recovery of the land and mesne profits, basing his claim to title upon a grant from the State of North Carolina, of date long prior to the treaty of 1805. The suit was decided in the plaintiff's favor by the Tennessee courts. Subsequently, in 1838, John Riley made application to the Government for compensation for the loss of his one-third interest in this tract. The question was submitted to the Attorney-General of the United States for his opinion. He decided that the secret article, not having been submitted to the Senate for approval, was not to be considered as any part of the treaty; but that, if the commissioners had any authority for making such an agreement, the defective execution of their powers ought not to prejudice parties acting in good faith and relying on their authority; nevertheless, no relief could be had except through the action of Congress.