petual and unmolested use of these lands. Does the honorable committee, whose report is now before us, regard this guaranty any more subject to nullification than it would be if the title conveyed by it were a "fee simple"? If the Cherokees have a right to the use of these lands, the fee being in the United States, it would be none the less wrong to deprive them of that easement by an arbitrary act of legislation.

That Cherokees have only an easement in these lands is a conclusion which the honorable committee have arrived at through a false interpretation of the word "Outlet." They maintain that it means only the "right of transit" outward. The Cherokees hold that it means now, and did at the time the treaty was made, the soil. But whether it is the one or the other of these two things is a question to be settled by the ordinary rules of interpretation and construction. We submit that the most popular signification of the word is the opening, or aperture, through which the egress is to take place, that is to say, in this case, the land itself which afforded the "Outlet." That this is a correct view is corroborated by a long established custom, as well with the United States as the Indians; that is, to give particular names to specified tracts, as the Neutral Land, the Strip, the Home Tract, the Outlet, No Man's Land, etc., among the Cherokees. And the same practice prevails among all the other tribes. These are not technical terms, but in each case the soil is the thing signified. Again, that the Cherokees, as well as the United States, understood that the word "Outlet" had reference to the soil, and not to a mere easement upon it, is clear from the further fact that the latter agreed to grant the same to the former by patent, that is, in "fee.' By the third article of the treaty of 1835,

"The United States also agree that the lands above ceded by the treaty of 1833, including the Outlet, and those ceded by this treaty, shall be included in one patent executed to the Cherokee Nation of Indians by the President of the United States." Now, to grant an "easement" by patent, that is to say, "in fee simple," is, to say the least, a very novel mode of conveyancing in this country. No, the terms in which the title to this land was, in the first place, promised by the United States, are too broad, deep, and solemn, and the instrument by which it was subsequently to be conveyed and guaranteed is of too high a nature, to be consistent with the idea that, after all, the Cherokees were to take only a poor determinable easement.

That the United States understood the word "Outlet" to signify

the soil, and not a mere "right of transit," is further evidenced by the frame of the patent itself. This patent was issued December 31, 1838. In the preamble of this patent is recited :—

"And whereas the United States have caused the said tract of seven million acres, together with the said perpetual outlet, to be surveyed in one tract, the boundaries whereof are as follows," etc.

And, after concluding the preamble, the patent proceeds as follows:

"Therefore, in execution of the agreements and stipulations in the said several treaties, the United States have given and granted, and by these presents do give and grant, unto the said Cherokee Nation, the two tracts of land so surveyed and herein before described, containing in the whole 14,374,135 acres, to have and to hold the same, together with the rights, privileges, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, to the said Cherokee Nation forever."

Now, as bearing upon the question as to how the term "Outlet" was understood by the United States at the time of the negotiation, we may notice: 1. That the United States actually measured off this Outlet in solid acres of soil; we do not measure easements in this manner. 2. That this Outlet, thus measured out in acres, is classed with and considered a part of the seven million acres ; there is no reference here to any "easement." 3. That this measuring of the Outlet, and the other tracts, and grouping them together for the purpose of conveying the same by patent, is said to have been done in pursuance of the treaties.

As showing further that the United States understood that the Cherokees' title to the Outlet was a "fee simple," the words of the sixteenth article of the treaty of 1866 are conclusive. Speaking of the tracts to be occupied by such friendly tribes as might be settled upon the Outlet, the treaty says:

"The boundaries of each of said districts to be distinctly marked, and the land conveyed in fee simple to each of said tribes."

Here, then, is an agreement with the United States that the Cherokees should convey portions of this same Outlet in "fee simple." But how could they do this unless they owned the "fee"? What sense would there have been in the United States agreeing with the Cherokees that they should do this unless she at the time understood the Cherokees to be the owners of these tracts in "fee simple"?

The history of negotiations in reference to this Outlet shows beyond doubt that the parties to the treaties understood, at the time of the agreement, that the Cherokees were taking the land by grant in fee, and not a mere easement. And it is a well understood rule of construction that as the parties understood the contract at the time it was concluded, so shall it be.

To" open up" the Cherokee Outlet for white settlement, without the consent of the Cherokees, would be a deplorable violation of vested rights.

TAHLEQUAH, I. T.

D. W. C. Duncan.

CRITICISM VERSUS ECCLESIASTICISM.

II. ECCLESIASTICISM.

WITH the fall of Napoleon the wave of reaction which the French Revolution had excited rolled swift and far throughout Europe. The excesses of the revolutionary movement had frightened the timid and conservative, and, except under extraordinary circumstances, these are always the vast majority. The tide set so rapid and strong that it seemed, at least to the superficial observer, as if Europe would be carried back to the state it was in previous to 1789. The governments of the various European countries appeared to be established upon a basis more solid and conservative than before. A system of coercion and repression was put into operation that for a time, at least, eliminated all prospects of advance or progress. All institutions which tended to preserve the old order were cherished and enlarged. Politically this tendency expressed itself in that solemn absurdity, "The Holy Alliance," while the fears of men sought continually for new channels through which to express their utter abhorrence and detestation of the Jacobite spirit. The Christian religion had been attacked and rejected by the revolution, and therefore it was now looked upon as one of the mainstays and preservatives of law and order.

The ill-treatment and persecution of the Pope had excited the sympathies of Europe, and the church thus gained a prestige which it had not enjoyed for a long time. Statesmen strove to impress upon the popular mind that which it was too ready to receive, that the church which had such a long and venerable history, which was so widespread and universal in its activity, whose

power over the mind was so deep and strong, and whose spirit was so cautious and conservative, was one of the firmest and wisest friends of civilization.

An ecclesiastical reaction set in, proportionate in strength to the destructive and hostile tendencies of a previous generation. Europe was sick of French infidelity, atheism, and goddesses of reason. The Pope became again one of the great figures in the drama of European history, and the Roman communion gained influence, importance, and authority in the most widely separated localities.

Few things are more striking in the history of modern Europe than the sudden change which took place in the attitude of men toward religious institutions as shown in the position which the Roman Church occupied in 1820, contrasted with that in which it stood thirty years before. But it was not with reference to the Latin communion alone that this tendency displayed itself. The Protestant churches felt the same movement, and an ecclesiastical party arose in Germany which exerted a very widespread and marked influence over the progress of Christianity in that country. However interesting it would be to trace the growth of the Roman Church from the revival in the early decades of this century until it reached its final and logical culmination in the Council of 1870, the ecclesiastical movement has a more direct and personal interest as it developed itself in the Established Church of England.

It will be necessary for a clear understanding of the causes and strength of this movement to take a swift glance at the political, social, and religious condition of England in the early part of this century.

In its opening years England was engaged in the greatest contest of modern times. What Spain was in the sixteenth century, that France was in the nineteenth, and it was given to the same nation to shatter the power of both. The long agony of the Napoleonic wars was drawn out for almost a generation, and those who saw the Constitutional Assembly, and hailed the birth of the new era of liberty, had for the most part passed away when the battle of Waterloo settled the fate of Europe.

During this terrific struggle all other interests besides those of patriotism were swallowed up in this sea of fire, and there was a general stagnation of public activity in all other directions save of war and defense. So little did men seem to care for other things, so strong was the antipathy excited by the career of Napoleon, that,

after peace was restored, it was determined to efface that terrible quarter of a century in which Europe had struggled for her very existence, and ignore all the new hopes and thoughts which had been stirred into life. With the return of peace, however, the minds of men were turned to those affairs which had been so long pushed aside, and the check to the normal activity of public life only caused an increased interest, and the stream flowed on with accelerated speed.

The outlook was in many respects singular. A generation had grown up whose training had been such as to stimulate the highest intellectual activity, but the institutions, customs, and ideas which still prevailed were those of the eighteenth century.

The process of adaptation must now go on with an energy that should give some promise of producing that harmonious relation which exists between a nation and its laws, institutions, and ideas when the national development has not been interfered with or checked. If the political ideas seemed but ill-adapted to the new conditions amid which the nation found itself, the religious life of the people was no more hopeful or promising. That great portion of the people called the middle class, and so largely composed of dissenters, was coming more and more prominently into view.

The Established Church, however, still remained unchallenged, and all who belonged to it as yet seemed satisfied with the state of affairs. The church was divided into the two great parties that have always existed, the High Churchmen, and the Low Churchmen, or Evangelicals.

The old-fashioned High Churchman was as dull in the reign of George the Fourth as he had been under George the First.

This is the one party in the church that seems to change the least, and certainly never intends to change at all.

It repeated its formulas, executed the routine functions of its office, and was in all ways well satisfied with itself. It was as indifferent to the great mass of the new and powerful classes which were forming as they were to it, and had sunk into respectable desuetude.

The Low Church party, or Evangelical, had done a great work. The spirit of the Wesleys had found in it a hearty recognition, and the deeper religious life which it had called forth saved the church from becoming utterly dead.

Though the Evangelical spirit survived in many localities, the party was fast losing its power, and the intolerable weariness and