The Kansas herald of freedom., 1855-05-05
eeqefai 1pteiiigeQce.
Fr@ae the Missouri Republican.
Gov. Reeder to Commissioner Many

Eom the Kissomri Republican.
Gov. Reeder to Commissioner Many
penny.
To g. ". Aaaypenny, Commissioner
Of Indian affairs Sir :-On the 10th
of January last, four contracts made with
S. w. Johnston, for the sale of four tracts
of land in this Territory, which had been
granted to half-breed Kansas Indians,
were submitted to you as the head of the
Indian Bureau, for report thereon, with
memorials of the reserves, praying that
the contracts might be cofrmed and they
allowed to make the deeds. These con-
tracts were, for convenience sake, made
in the name of Judge Johnston, but it
was well understood that Judge Gilmore,
Col. Isacks and myself were equally in
terested. The grantors were Joseph
James, Louis Pspin and wife, Francois
Aubry and wife, and Moses Belmsrd and
wife.
In your report to the President of Jan
uary 18th you recommend that these
contracts be not confrmed-you allude
to them as ''disreputable attempts of GER
tain official functionaries to speculate in
these lands''-you characterize them as
"having a demoralizing tendency upon
the inhabitants of the Territory, both
Indians and whites''-you state that
''these purchases are the result of sys-
tematic plan to forestall competition in
the purchase and monopoly, at low prices,
of these reserves you stigmatise them
as marked by ''indelicacy and impropri-
ety"-you undertake to quote from and
endorse as entitled to the fullest credit, !"
letter, in which it is said that the grant
ors have been "cheated," and, at the
close of your report, you say that they
.'disclose acondition of things among the
Federal officers which if not rebuked,
must soon produce state of demorali-
zation in the Territory, the effects of
which will be as lamentable as the acts
themselves are disgraceful."
This report of yours you have given
to the public in the shape of a Congress
sional document, under resolution of
the House of Representatives, calling on
your department for information, which
resolution l have reason to believe was
offered by your procurement. Under
other circumstances the law and the logic
of your report would make a beautiful
and amusing theme, but matters of graver
import exclude the discussion. You
have thus raised an issue between your
self on the one hand, and myself and
three of the Territorial officers on the
other, which must be settled, not in a
corner, but in the full blaze of day and
before the whole public andit is no less
grave question than. whether ON the
one hand we are dishonest, dishonorable
men, guilty of revolving fraud, or wheth-
er on the other, yen are a vile and un-
scrupulous slanderer, who does moi, rec
ognize the binding obligations of truth
and justice, or the saeredness of private
character. You have publicly and de-
liberately asserted the one side of that
issue, and l now as deliberately and pub
licly assert the other, and before i am
done with you, sir, | intend to do with
my assertion what you have not attempt
ed to do, and cannot do with yoursNes-
tablish it by competent proof.
A controversy of this kind is to every
man of well regulated mind and delicacy of
feeling, a most distasteful occupation
TO the innocent man who does not repel
it with defiant indignation. it is an impu-
tation of base cowardiee-to the man
who gratuitously and baselessly provokes
it, it is the ineffaceable brand of inJus-
tice, brutality and Ealsehood. That you
have been ia this business only the cred
uleus tool of other men who have used
You to traduce me, cannot alter the
course which my reputation and self-re-
speet require me to pursue. If for their
own purposes they have duped you into
a difficulty from which you cannot be
extricated, it is no concern of mine. l
am equally bound TO defend my reputa-
tionagainst your ferocious assault, wheth-
sr that ferocity is the result of stupidi-
ty or malice.
AS set-off to your sweeping charges
OF fraud I win, before coming to the
main object of this letter, state few
facts, which, for the present, I rest onmy
own assertion. First, however, L allege
what suppose no sensible man viii deny,
that an individual by accepting a public
Office does not forfeit his right 10 buy
lands and make profit off them if he can,
provided the vendor is fully competent to