The United States authorities at Washington were anxious that nothing should occur in the adjustment of these boundaries which should cause a feeling of irritation among those tribes. Commissioners had been appointed in the summer of 1815 to survey and mark the boundaries of this Creek cession, and in August of that year we find the Secretary of War giving instructions to Agent Meigs, of the Cherokees, to meet the boundary commissioners, with a few of the principal Cherokee chiefs, at the point on Coosa River where the south boundary of the Cherokee Nation crossed the same, in order that the Cherokees should be satisfied that the commissioners began at the proper point. Several additional reminders were given the agent, during the progress of the survey, that the matter of boundary was a question of fact to be ascertained and determined from the best attainable evidence, and that care must be taken that no injustice should be done the Cherokees.[204] In the following spring[205] a delegation of Cherokees was brought to Washington, by direction of the War Department, and, pending the completion of treaty negotiations with them, the boundary commissioners were instructed not to mark the line between the Cherokees and the Creek cession until further orders. These negotiations resulted in a second treaty of March 22, 1816[206] (the one for the cession of the tract in South Carolina bears the same date), wherein it was declared that the northern boundary line of the Creek cession of 1814 should be established by the running of a line from a point on the west bank of Coosa River opposite to the lower end of the Ten Islands, above Fort Strother, directly to the Flat Rock or Stone on Bear Creek, said Flat Rock being the southwest corner of the Cherokee possessions, as defined by the treaty with them concluded January 7, 1806. This boundary brought forth a vigorous though unavailing protest from General Jackson, who argued that the Cherokees never had any right to territory south of the Tennessee and west of Coosa River, but that it belonged to the Creeks and was properly within the limits of their cession of 1814.[207] All efforts were fruitless in securing any further cession of lands, either north or south of the Tennessee.[208]