Viewing page 26 of 41

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

of the great men of that day they were not entitled to the privileges of free inhabitants under the confederation nor of the rights of citizens under the Constitution. If we go further back into the common law we find only the words "Nullus liber" no freeman can be deprived of life, liberty and property except by the law of the land. Nulus liber were the words of Magna Charta and of the Bill of rights and they cannot be tortured into including Indians. Suppose we ask what is meant by the liberty and rights of an Indian? When we speak of the rights and liberties of a citizen we know what is meant. We know that liberty is not unbridled license but freedom limited by law. We know that liberty consists is pleasing yourself and using your own as you wish so long as you do not interfere with the rights of others. We know that we are entitled to ask for and enjoy many rights and privileges, because we have surrendered to the government part of our liberty and property. Hence when we say that no freeman shall be deprived of life liberty and property except by due process of law we know that the citizen has a fixed legal status, that he has many rights and privileges recognized and guaranteed by the constitution and the laws and perhaps some rights not denied. We know that the rights, liberties and privileges of the citizen have a history

[[margin]] 348 [[/margin]]