Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, 1793-1797
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1795

...The House proceeded to consider the resolutions and amendments thereto, reported, yesterday, from the Committee of the Whole House on the report of the committee to whom was referred a motion of the twenty-fifth instant, respecting such persons as shall be assembled or embodied in arms, o[n] any lands belonging to Indians out of the ordinary jurisdiction of any State, or of the territory of the United States South of the river Ohio: Whereupon,

The first resolution being read in the words following, to wit:

Resolved, That all persons who, unauthorized by law, and with hostile intent, may be found in arms on any lands allotted or secured to the Indians by treaties between the United States and any Indian tribes, shall, on conviction thereof, forfeit a sum not exceeding -- dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding -- months:

The amendment thereto, reported by the Committee of the Whole House to add to the end thereof, the words "unless it shall be in immediate pursuit of Indians who shall have recently committed hostilities," was, on the question put thereupon, disagreed to by the House.--Yeas 39, Nays 46.

The yeas and nays being demanded by one-fifth of the members present....

...A motion was then made, and the question being put, to amend the said resolution by adding to the end thereof the following words: "unless it shall be in continuation of a pursuit to a distance not exceeding -- miles beyond the line of the particular Indians who shall have recently committed murder, or may be carrying off captives or plunder:"

It was resolved in the affirmative.

The said resolution, as amended, was then again read at the Clerk's table, and, on the question put thereupon, agreed to by the House, as followeth:

Resolved, That all persons who, unauthorized by law, and with hostile intent, may be found in arms on any lands allotted or secured to the Indians by treaties between the United States and any Indian tribes, shall, on conviction thereof, forfeit a sum not exceeding -- dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding -- months, unless it shall be in continuation of a pursuit to a distance not exceeding -- miles beyond the line of the particular Indians who shall have recently committed murder, or may be carrying off captives or plunder.

The second resolution being again read, and amended at the Clerk's table, was, on the question put thereupon, agreed to by the House, as followeth:

Resolved, That it shall be lawful for the military force of the United States to apprehend every person or persons found in arms as aforesaid, and him or them to convey to the civil authority of the United States within some one of the States, who shall, by such authority, be secured to be tried in manner and form as is provided in and by the act, entitled "An act to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian Tribes:" Provided, That no person shall be confined, after his arrest, and before his removal, more than – days....

Well now, that is interesting, yes? First, we see that the PEOPLE obviously had to have arms if they were found with them. Second, we see that the arms in the hands of the people were not the issue. But, rather the unauthorized assembling of armed people with hostile intent was the concern. And this, because of treaty obligations with the aforementioned Indians. Unless, the Indians had committed the crime of murder, kidnapping or plunder. Then, there was AUTHORITY for the armed people to pursue them for a defined distance.

The part of the sentence that reads; “o[n] any lands belonging to Indians out of the ordinary jurisdiction of any State, or of the territory of the United States South of the river Ohio”. Can rightfully be thought, and strongly suggests, that the bearing of arms was a commonly accepted practice throughout the land. And, NOWHERE is there even a hint of the people being disarmed. Or, forbidden from having, or disallowed from bearing, arms.