Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-12-08
OKLAHOMA LANDS.
rhe stops which u iIes noen Necessary
fot unrle SAM to Take to Keep the
Meo with the Hoe ut Iies.

TO say about The Oklahoma lands. The
following extracts are taken from the
report,
By the treaty OF August 10, iaee, &, ls
stipulated that elm compliance with The
desire Of the United States to locate
other Indians aud freedmen thereon, the
Semlnulcs ccdv 10 the United states their
entire domain,n consisting % s,lGg,0sU
acres, at the rate Of l5eonts per acre.
by the treaty OF August W., iScG the
Greeks, for tue same purpose, coded to
the United States The west half OF their
entire domain, which cosslon passed
8ips, $50 acres, az The rate OF 80 cents per
acre, The two ccsslons combined nv
grcg0teIe~' 81 $40 acres The Indians
have been paid therefor according 10
agreement.
mpursuaucc Of the purpose for which
these lands wep cedcd to the United
states, portions ON tho east and west
thereof have huon from time 10 time set
apart for aud assigned 10 certain tribes
and hands OF friendly Indians for their
use aud occupancy,
That portion OF tho land remaining IN.
appropriated to the trust provided for
In the treaties lies very nearly In the cen.
ter OF the Indian Territory II N nm uu-
appropriated tsact That Is commonly
called the "Oklahomo couutfyn No
agent OF the government resides upon
THIS lnnd, aud Il IN not occupied Ia any.
way by any person or persons for any
purpose under any authority of this de-
parlment,
An organized movement by certain per-
sons was began and set on foot soma
years past for the iowiblc possession Of
and settlement upon those lands under
the plea that they formed part Of the
public domain aud were subject 90 entry
and settlement under the general land
laws OF the United States. ia prevent
such unlawful aud Unauthorized settle.
mcnts II became necessary for the rNecu.
tive 10 Issue the proclamatiOns OF April
20, 1879, February ~, 1880,
and July /, 1884, defining
the status of those lands, and
warning all persons against any attempts
TO go or settle thereon II mad also been
made necessary 20 use Il part of the milf,
tnry force OF tho'tlnltcd States 60 remove
lntrudcrs who had succeeded IN getting
Into that country.
Whom assumed charge Of this depart
ncnt il was alleged that certain indl,
ylduuls, associations Of persons and cor.
porations were Va The unauthorized
possession of portions OF the "Obiabomn
country aud also that certain other
persons and associations were preparlnp
10 enter, occupy aud settle upon said
lands
The matter was considered aud the
president, on the 18th Of March, 1880,
issued proclamation warning all per.
sons then upon the lands and those IN.
tending, preparing or threatening 10 enter
and settle upon the same, that they would
not be permitted 20 enter upon that ter.
rltory OF remain thereon II already there,
Tho parties claiming the right Co entor
these lands, alleging thom 90 be public
lands, argue that the United States must
have understood The treaty NTH the Sem
inoles aud Greeks, while the meaning and
Intent thereof was irnshly In their minds
and knowledge, rs restoring the lands 10
the public domain, since by act of con.
gress OF July 81, 1866, passed In the same
month that The treaties were proclaimed
IA right of way with a subsidy of
land was granted the Atlantic Pacific
Railroad company over a route described
which passed through the "Oklahoma
country" They claim that by author
izing the use OF portion Of the land for
railroad purposes the United States ad.
mltted that they could be used Tor other
thnn Indian purposes, and that this must
have been conceded by the Indians, who
failed 10 object TO lts appropriation for
rallrond purposes.
This argument would hardly have
been advanced II the advisers " these
parties, or the parties themselves, had
carefully read the concluding clause OF
section 2 of The granting act, which IL NJ
fOllowgi
Tho United states shall oNlinpish as rapid
| Iy ~ may be consistent with public policy mud
| the welfare OF tho Indiana and only by thclf
| voluntary ceHslpn, tic Indian title 10 Hli lnnds
| failing undcr The operation Of this net and no
| pulrcd In The donation 10 The foad named IN
| the act,
For the purpose Of this act the Indian
| title 10 that portion OF the "Oklahomn
country through which the railfoad WAS
proposed 60 run, has not becn eXtln.
guiShed. The railroad has not been con
| structcd upon or extended into that
| territory, aud consequently Il has not ac-
CURED possession nor the right Uf pos
session Of any portion OF those lands nm.
der the law.
Ia the ease OF the United States ys. u.
| H. Payne, tried IN the district court OF Tho
| United States for the Western district OF
| Arkansas, Judge Parker cited the doce
ions Of the supreme court In the ease of
| Wilcox w jackson, "whcrcln u Is held
that whenever n. tfact Of land has been
! appropriated 10 the public use II ~ sey.
| erred from the mass Of the public domain,
and subsequent laws Of sale are not con,
strued 10 embrace II though they
do not IN terms accept H." He also
refers 10 the case Of the Lcayenworth,
| Lawrence & Galveston road W. the United
1 States, which atilrms the doctrine In VIII
coz vs.. Jackson, and holds that "thls doc
| trlnc applies with mora force 10 Indian
than 10 military reservations" Judge
| Parker then adds
| think therefore, from the authorities ! have
/ cited aud from The lanEdhEe Of this section,
that there N no Doubt that thiH act Of congress
| has not changed The Had ia controversy from
The condition Of reaergaei0n
Notwithstanding the rulings Of The In
terror department. the procamatloDs Di
/ the executive aud the solemn ndjudlea-
1