al way, by which land, the
fee of which is owned by tenants in common, can be transferred, either
in fee or in occupancy out of their possession forever. But besides,
no act of the Indians was then valid unless confirmed by the General
Court. This deed, therefore, of 1783, was void at the time. It seems
nothing was done with it, until 1800, _seventeen years_ after, when
it was recorded in the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, at whose
instigation does not appear. Now in 1800, when this deed was recorded,
the Indians were legally minors, and could do no act, and make no
contract. All the power their Selectmen had in 1783, was taken away.
They were under five Overseers, who had power to improve and _lease_
the lands of the Indians and their tenements, but no power to sell,
sequester or dedicate any part of them. The Overseers had no power to
take a dollar from the Indians, for religious worship. While this was
the condition of the Indians under the law of 1789, (which continued
in full force, with an additional act in 1819, till the new law of
1834,) the deed was recorded, in 1800, _seventeen years_ after it
was made by persons who had no power at all to make such a deed. The
professed object was to set apart 400 acres, of the common land,
lying in Marshpee, "_and being Indian_ _property_," for a parsonage,
forever. The clear title then was in the Indians as tenants in common,
for the deed so declares it, in 1783. The parsonage was their property
then. How has it ever been conveyed out of their hands? The purpose
for which this land was to be used, as sequestered by Lot Nye, &c. was
for the sole purpose aforesaid, viz. "For the support of the Gospel
in Marshpee in all future generations, according to the discipline
and worship of the Church in this place, which is Congregational."
And this property, says the deed, "shall be forever for the important
purpose of propagating the gospel in Marshpee, without any let,
hindrance or molestation."

This, then was the design of the original signers of this deed, who
had no right to sign such a deed at all. Their object was to promote
the gospel in Marshpee, but how has it turned out? The property has
been used for twenty-four years, to pay a minister who preaches to the
whites, and whom the Indians with very few exceptions, will not hear.
Is not this a gross perversion of the design of the donors, even if
they had any power to have made this grant? No lawyer will pretend
that t