Return to revision history
Revision as of 22:15:17, 28 April 2021 by Gerberlb
Created page with "[unintelligible] unreasonably [unintelligible] must be permittance is thanks. [unintelligible] at this request, are they now to be take that they will be treated like [uninte..."
Revision as of 22:40:13, 29 April 2021 by Gerberlb
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[unintelligible] unreasonably  [unintelligible] must be permittance is thanks. [unintelligible] at this request, are they now to be take that they will be treated like [unintelligible] from them [unintelligible] if they [unintelligible] natural [unintelligible] is leasing before them business [unintelligible]? So far from aiding them [unintelligible] removal, by [unintelligible] is them just wishes. I thereby withdrawing all [unintelligible] in the way of emigration. The [unintelligible] the affirmation [unintelligible] already dissatisfied people by threat of "force" There is no obstacle to their emigration except what can be easily [unintelligible] conforming to law and with a rigid [unintelligible] to [unintelligible]. Why then the determined refusal [unintelligible]? Can it be possible that "force"  is a thing [unintelligible] be a [unintelligible] reliable resort for [unintelligible] with a [unintelligible] half [unintelligible] nation of Indians [unintelligible] right of [unintelligible]? [unintelligible] desire to have an [unintelligible] nation which, as an [unintelligible], in 1844. I [unintelligible] would be governed in all [unintelligible] by a determination to exact [unintelligible] from all, [unintelligible] is to all. I [unintelligible], them the [unintelligible] when a [unintelligible] which will be [unintelligible] as [unintelligible] makes [unintelligible] which from other [unintelligible]
+
[illegible] unreasonably  [illegible] must be permittance is thanks. [illegible] at this request, are they now to be take that they will be treated like [illegible] from them [illegible] if they [illegible] natural [illegible] is leasing before them business [illegible]? So far from aiding them [illegible] removal, by [illegible] is them just wishes. I thereby withdrawing all [illegible] in the way of emigration. The [illegible] the affirmation [illegible] already dissatisfied people by threat of "force" There is no obstacle to their emigration except what can be easily [illegible] conforming to law and with a rigid [illegible] to [illegible]. Why then the determined refusal [illegible]? Can it be possible that "force"  is a thing [illegible] be a [illegible] reliable resort for [illegible] with a [illegible] half [illegible] nation of Indians [illegible] right of [illegible]? [illegible] desire to have an [illegible] nation which, as an [illegible], in 1844. I [illegible] would be governed in all [illegible] by a determination to exact [illegible] from all, [illegible] is to all. I [illegible], them the [illegible] when a [illegible] which will be [illegible] as [illegible] makes [illegible] which from other [illegible]