They interfere forcibly with the relations established between the

United States and the Cherokee nation, the regulation of which,

according to the settled principles of our constitution, are committed

exclusively to the Government of the Union.

They are in direct hostility with treaties, repeated in a succession of

years, which mark out the boundary that separates the Cherokee country

from Georgia; guaranty to them all the land within their boundary;

solemnly pledge the faith of the United States to restrain their

citizens from trespassing on it; and recognize the pre-existing power

of the nation to govern itself.

They are in equal hostility with the acts of Congress for regulating

this intercourse and giving effect to the treaties.

The forcible seizure and abduction of the plaintiff in error, who was

residing in the nation, with its permission, and by authority of the

President of the United States, is also a violation of the acts which

authorize the Chief Magistrate to exercise this authority.

Will these powerful considerations avail the plaintiff in error? We

think they will. He was seized, and forcibly carried away, while under

guardianship of treaties guarantying the country in which he resided,

and taking it under the protection of the United States. He was seized

while performing, under the sanction of the Chief Magistrate of the

Union, those duties which the humane policy adopted by Congress had

recommended. He was apprehended, tried, and condemned, under color of a

law which has been shown to be repugnant to the constitution, laws, and

treaties, of the United States. Had a judgment, liable to the same

objections, been rendered for property, none would question the

jurisdiction of this Court. It cannot be less clear when the judgment

affects personal liberty, and inflicts disgraceful punishment, if

punishment could disgrace when inflicted on innocence. The plaintiff in

error is not less interested in the operation of this unconstitutional

law than if it affected his property. He is not less entitled to the

protection of the constitution, laws, and treaties, of his country.

It is the opinion of this Court that the judgment of the Superior Court

for the county of Gwinnett, in the State of Georgia, condemning Samuel

A. Worcester to hard labor, in the penitentiary of the State of

Georgia, for four years, was pronounced by that Court under color of a

law which is void, as being repugnant to the constitution, treaties,

and laws of the United States, and ought, therefore, to be reversed and

annulled.

MANDATE OF THE COURT.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, _January Term_, 1832.

SAMUEL A. WORCESTER, } _In Error to the Superior_

_Plaintiff in Error_, } _Court for the County of_

_vs._ } _Gwinnett, in the State of_

THE STATE OF GEORGIA. } _Georgia._

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the

Superior Court for the County of Gwinnett, in the State of Georgia, and

was argued by counsel: on consideration whereof, it is the opinion of

this Court, that the act of the Legislature of the State of Georgia,

upon which the indictment in this case is founded, is contrary to the

constitution, treaties, and laws, of the United States; and, that the

special plea, in bar, pleaded by the said Samuel A. Worcester, in

manner aforesaid, and relying upon the constitution, treaties, and

laws, of the United States, aforesaid, is a good bar and defence to the

said indictment, by the said Samuel A. Worcester; and, as such, ought

to have been allowed and admitted by the said Superior Court for the

County of Gwinnett, in the State of Georgia, before which the said

indictment was pending and tried; and that there was error in the said

Superior Court of the State of Georgia, in overruling the plea so

pleaded, as aforesaid. It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged, that the

judgment rendered in the premises, by the said Superior Court of

Georgia, upon the verdict upon the plea of Not Guilty, afterwards

pleaded by the said Samuel A. Worcester, whereby the said Samuel A.

Worcester is sentenced to hard labor in the penitentiary of the State

of Georgia, ought to be reversed and annulled. And this Court,

proceeding to render such judgment as the said Superior Court of the

State of Georgia should have rendered, it is further ordered and

adjudged, that the said judgment of the said Superior Court be, and

hereby is, reversed and annulled; and that judgment be, and hereby is,

awarded, that the special plea in bar, so as aforesaid pleaded, is a

good and sufficient plea in bar, in law, to the indictment aforesaid,

and that all proceedings on the said indictment do forever surcease,

and that the said Samuel A. Worcester be, and hereby is, henceforth

dismissed therefrom, and that he go thereof quit without day. And that

a special mandate do go from this Court to the said Superior Court, to

carry this judgment into execution.

MARCH 5, 1832.

Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, at January Term, 1832, Delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall in the Case of Samuel A. Worcester, Plaintiff in Error, versus the State of Georgia With a Statement of the Case, Extracted from the Records of the Supreme Court of the United States · 第 3 / 3 段