Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1883-02-16


struct anywhere within the limits
other "Commou domsin" SO the
Improvement does not infringe up
on the equal right Of all other citi-
sens TO make improvements, or j.
not made in yiolst'oi Of law,
which so far as the law relates to
the common property" Is moth
ing more or less. than the disposi-
ton of the same by the owners
thereof; or Gas the constitution ex-
presses it) the improvement shall
be made and held in possession
"rishyully" i. e., consistent with
the individual and collective rights
Of every other member of thetribe.
Such being the csse, 80 far as the
mere right is concerned to make
and ewn improvements on any
part of the lands recognized as in
cluded within ssthe Cherokee Ma
tion," neither the Chief nor the
National Treasurer was vested
with authority TO permit or forbid
citizens to make Improvements on
the lands west Of Sc. As the
method OF taking possession Of and
occupying their common domain
the Cherokees permanently settled
and arranged for themselves in
the fundamental instrument Of
their government.
The question. therefore, 30 far
as the U. 8. government il con-
cerned, whether Cherokee citissns
have or have not the right to make
and own Improvements on the
lands west of 96 (subject of course
to the appropriation Of such inn
provemcnts by "friendly Indians"
should the improvements fall with
in any District, sold to and oecu-
pied by such Indians hercafter) re-
solves itself into the question
whether the lands areyet covered by
the Cherokee title, and Is subject
10 the Possession and jurisdiction"
Of the Cherokee Nation.
In view of the course Of tho Gen.
sral Government for several years
past, and especially in view Of the
refusal Of the Department to REQ
ommend an appropriation to pay
this Nation the appraised value of
these lands, for the sound reasons
given by the Honorable Commits
sioner in his letter of February
l7,h, 1882. before referred to, but
one answer is in my opinion, pos
sible TO the above question.
II under the circumstances and
facts detailed by the Hon. Com
missioner in said letter, it is inn
possible to dispute that the lands
in question are Cherokee lands and
yet covered by the Cherokee title,
any further question that may
arise in regard TO the legality in
propriety Of structures made thsro-
on by citizens upon the assumption
that such structures are improve
ments, and provided, no complaint
OF such structures is made by cit
liens Of the United States lawfully
interested, is purely a question ef
internal administration, 70 which
the General Government has de-
cisively pledged itself not to suffer
any interference with. With this
distinctly undcrstood in order that
ysu may understand the fencing
matter in its Internal as we'll as err
tsrnai relations, II is proper to state
that the fences made by citizens
west Of 96 do not under our laws
confer right of use and occupation
Of the lands enclosed. Considered
a. an improvement" OF itself, .
line Of fence anywhere within the
Nation cannot vest In the claimant
right to the occupancy Of any more
Of the common domain than il in
cluded within one quarter Of =
mile on either side. And this
quarter of a mile is, in the Lam
guage Of the Cherokee Supreme
Court "usufrues" only; in other
words a pr;er right 10 the use and
benefit Of so much of the unim-
p ovel domain contiguous to the
improvement. Thus the extcn-
s-e line Of fences west Of . vest
no superior night Of occupation 10
The enclosures beyond the space
hey actually occupy with the
''usuffust" attached. Az pevman-
mt improvements hey ara there
r - -