The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1885-02-13

to Liberia and agent to the freedmen
in the Indian Territory, is in receipt
of a letter from his clients requesting
him to go to- Washington and present
the claims of the freedmen before the
congressional committee. Mr.. Turner
says he is an authorized agent of the
freedmen in Indian Territory, where
as Phillips, who drew 3 S25, 900 bonus
for a sale of Cherokee lands, had no
legal right to act as agent, the United
States statutes requiring that before a
white man can contract for the Indians
he must have a permit from the secre-
tary of the interior and the Judge of
the nearest United States court. When
the C~herokees received $500, 900 tor
the sale of their lands beyond the Goth
meridian they divided it pro rata
among the native-blood Cherokees,
and refused to give the freedmen of
the nation, who were entitled, under
the treaty of 1866, to the same rights
as the full-bloods, q cen in the divide.
The freedmen are now asking that
they be paid out of this sum, the same
as the Indians. The sum claimed Is
somewhere in the neighborhooa of
$500 or $4,000. Last summer
Senator Dawes commission were ex-
pected to visit the Indian Territory
and investigate this and other ques-
tons in dispute, but they failed to go
on account of the presidential election.
MIR. Turner thinks that the questions
can be explained to the committee so
as to save them from the necessity of
visiting the Indian Territory. Under
the the treaty of 1866, it was provided
that the western portion of the terri
tory be %retroceded to the United
States for the purpose of placing
thereon other Indians and freedmen.
BY a subsequent act of congress it was
provided that other Indians be placed
on this territory, and under the treaty
the freedmen could be the only occu-
pants. 1t has been held by the people
of the territory and the courts that the
freedmen alluded to in the treaty in
Guided only the former slaves of the
Indians in the five civilized nations.
Mr.. Turner takes the ground that
according to the meaning of the treaty
that provision embraces any freedman
in the United States outside the Indian
Territory, for the reason that provis-
ions are made in the treaties for giving
the freedmen in the several Indian
nations the anne rights and privileges
as the native Indians. 1t is therefore
concluded that, as the former slaves
among the Indian tribes are provided
for, the treaty does not mean them,
but "other freedmen outside the terri
tory, the same as it applies to other
Indians"
Judge Parker held the former view
in relation to the Interpretation of
the treaty, but now, according to MIR.
Turner. the judge agrees with him,
and in a subsequent decision the treaty
was construed by him as meaning
freedmen outside the boundaries Of
Indian Territory. Under this inter-
probation. Mr.. Turner claims he has a
perfect right to go into the territory so
set apart ''for the Indians and freed
men," He said that the so-called
"Oklahoma colonists'' were excluded
under the treaty, but he informed
Capt. Payne how he could get in there
and not be legally liable t. expulsion
as an intruder, but Capt. Payne was
obstinate. and could not see in that
light. The plan was this: Mr.. Tur-
ner proposed that if Capt. Payne
would furnish the means, he (Turner)
would take a colony of negroes into
the Oklahoma tract, in which case they
would not be disturbed by the mill
tary. Then, after they had effected a
settlement, Capt. Payne, with his fol
lowers, would come in, effect a joint
settlement with the negroes, and
should they (the whites) be disturbed
or threatened with removal by the
military forces, they could legally,
under the constitutional amendment,
claim the same rights as the negroes,
for these rights were reciprocal, and
no power could legally remove them,
and the courts would SO decide, should
an issue under such circumstances be
made.
The theory, to say the least, is an
ingenious one.-St. Louis Republican.