And then the Senator says you can construe the language of their treaty. the eleventh article of this treaty. broad enough to save the UnitedStates in that way. Let us see what that is: The stipulations of this treaty are to be a fall settlement of anl claims of said Creek Nation for damages and losses of every kind growing out of the late ebellionI do not think he means thatand all expenditures by the United States of annuities in clothingHe does not mean thatand feeding refugee and destitute Indians since the diversion of annuities for that purpose consequent upon the late war with the socalled Confederate States. and the Creeks hereby ratify and confirmWhat ?ai such diversions of annuities heretofore made from the funds of the Creek Wation by the United States. and the United States agree that no annuities shall be diveed from the objects for which they were Originally devoted by treaty stipulations with the Creeks. to theuse ot refugee and destitutclndians other than the Creeks or members of the Creek Nation after the close of the present fiscal year. June 80. 1866. If the Senator can find in the language of that section of the treaty which I have read that it includes what the United States in 1832 agreed to pay to certain individual orphans described in the treaty. he not only is able to find in it what I cannot find buthe at once arrays himself against the law officer of the Government. who has come into court and confessed away in behalf of the Government the very ground that the Senator assumes. for the law officer of the Government has put upon record that thie Government cannot justify its diversion of this fund by any such language as that. because that language refers to their old annuities.