*The exclusion of all other Europeans necessarily gave to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring the soil from the natives and establishing settlements upon it. It was a right with which no Europeans could interfere. It was a right which all asserted for themselves, and to the assertion of which by others all assented.*

In the establishment of these relations, the rights of the original inhabitants were in no instance entirely disregarded, but were necessarily to a considerable extent impaired. They were admitted to be the rightful occupants of the soil, with a legal as well as just claim to retain possession of it, and to use it according to their own discretion; but their rights to complete sovereignty as independent nations were necessarily diminished, and their power to dispose of the soil at their own will to whomsoever they pleased was denied by the original fundamental principle that discovery gave exclusive title to those who made it.

While the different nations of Europe respected the right of the natives as occupants, they asserted the ultimate dominion to be in themselves, and claimed and exercised, as a consequence of this ultimate dominion, a power to grant the soil while yet in possession of the natives. These grants have been understood by all to convey a title to the grantees, subject only to the Indian right of occupancy.

Spain did not rest her title solely on the grant of the Pope. Her discussions respecting boundary, with France, with Great Britain, and with the United States all show that she placed in on the rights given by discovery. Portugal sustained her claim to the Brazils by the same title.

France also founded her title to the vast territories she claimed in America on discovery.

The claim of the Dutch was always contested by the English -- not because they questioned the title given by discovery, but because they insisted on being themselves the rightful claimants under that title. Their pretensions were finally decided by the sword.

[long history of english claims on the new world]

By the treaty which concluded the war of our revolution, Great Britain relinquished all claim not only to the government, but to the "propriety and territorial rights of the United States" whose boundaries were fixed in the second article. By this treaty the powers of government and the right to soil which had previously been in Great Britain passed definitively to these states. We had before taken possession of them by declaring independence, but neither the declaration of independence nor the treaty confirming it could give us more than that which we before possessed or to which Great Britain was before entitled.

It has never been doubted that either the United States or the several states had a clear title to all the lands within the boundary lines described in the treaty, subject only to the Indian right of occupancy, and that the exclusive power to extinguish that right was vested in that government which might constitutionally exercise it.

The ceded territory was occupied by numerous and warlike tribes of Indians, but the exclusive right of the United States to extinguish their title and to grant the soil has never, we believe, been doubted.

*The United States, then, has unequivocally acceded to that great and broad rule by which its civilized inhabitants now hold this country. They hold and assert in themselves the title by which it was acquired. They maintain, as all others have maintained, that discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the Indian title of occupancy either by purchase or by conquest, and gave also a right to such a degree of sovereignty as the circumstances of the people would allow them to exercise.*

@UOC first sale in two months

The title by conquest is acquired and maintained by force. The conqueror prescribes its limits. Humanity, however, acting on public opinion, has established, as a general rule, that the conquered shall not be wantonly oppressed, and that their condition shall remain as eligible as is compatible with the objects of the conquest. Most usually, they are incorporated with the victorious nation, and become subjects or citizens of the government with which they are connected. The new and old members of the society mingle with each other; the distinction between them is gradually lost, and they make one people. Where this incorporation is practicable, humanity demands and a wise policy requires that the rights of the conquered to property should remain unimpaired; that the new subjects should be governed as equitably as the old, and that confidence in their security should gradually banish the painful sense of being separated from their ancient connections, and united by force to strangers.

**Humanity, however, acting on public opinion, has established, as a general rule, that the conquered shall not be wantonly oppressed, and that their condition shall remain as eligible as is compatible with the objects of the conquest.**

Frequent and bloody wars, in which the whites were not always the aggressors, unavoidably ensued. European policy, numbers, and skill prevailed. As the white population advanced, that of the Indians necessarily receded.

However extravagant the pretension of converting the discovery of an inhabited country into conquest may appear; if the principle has been asserted in the first instance, and afterwards sustained; if a country has been acquired and held under it; if the property of the great mass of the community originates in it, it becomes the law of the land and cannot be questioned.

alright i'll stop

just some great stuff in there

If you give the TLDR I would be interested

I like lawyers face to face as they are wonderfully blunt and concise but their written documents are the opposite

I would generally agree except that I think this opinion should just be read as legal/political philosophy

the TLDR is twofold

1: Indians don't have the title to their land, they have a "right of occupancy" so indians can't sell their land to private citizens, because they don't have title in the first place. The US does. So Indians can only cede their right of occupancy to the US.

2: Some really thoughtful discussion about the "right of discovery" that forms the basis of the US government's right to sovereignty over conquered land

Aztec spergs don't own anything

that's a TLDR to the TLDR

What percentage of lawyers are suicidal

Cursed image

a lot

I think only dentists are more suicidal

I want to become a scientist less each day

I want to be a lawyer less each day

Yeah but I'm still young enough that I can switch my occupation fairly easily

You're already doomed

Haha

I'm pretty doomed, but I am developing a few decent exit strategies

what science are you doing @TendieLord

@J · physics and chemistry

Physics is awful

Chemistry is ok

haha im majoring in physics, i really like it