Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1886-04-29

breeches before attempting to wade
through the depths Of this resolu-
ton, because, If not really deep, it
is fathomlcss as to consequences.
The right to construe treaty stipu-
lations is certainly Of the council,
and placed where il should be,
because there it is nearer being
that of the people at large. This
right not only conveys an idea of
power or authority, but of duty or
obligation TO construe justly, and
according to the meaning and in
tent of the provision to be con-
struod, and according to the
fullncss Of tho right OF privilege
the provision conveys, and is to
be affected by such construction,
either fCf the present or for the
future.
The rights Of native Cherokees,
to which our colored citizens are
entitled under the treaty, and as
referred to in the resolution, are
according to the resolution, simply
cirH, political, and personal. The
rights thus generally defined need
about as much constituting as the
rights attempted to be construed.
They are only defined so far as
a denial goes, that they are not
entitled to any interest in the soil
or the proceeds thereof, "belong-
ing" as the resolution recites, "to
the Cherokees' and "subject to be
granted only at their option or for
value received" That is if the
Cherokees, to whom tne land
belongs and the proceeds of any
sale thereof, shall, of their own
free will and accord, give them an
interest in lands and monies.
Rights, civil, political and person.
al, all rights as defined by the res.
olution, that can be exercised as
separate and distinct privileges
from any interest in matters Other
than those the term indistinctly
imply. Civil rights are those of a
citizen in his relations with his
fellow-citizens, and to the country
in which he lives; political, are
those Of policy or politics, of state
affairs and public measurers gener.
ally--tho right to vote and hold
Office; personal, are those of indi-
vidual and property rights. How
these rights can be exercised with.
out any interest in lands and mon
les is a conundrum that can only
be solved by an allotment of lands.
These right are seeming inconsis-
tent with tenure of lands in COM
mon, because they are often SUBJ
jects for legislation. One denied
an interest in them should not, as
a legislator, be permitted to vote
upon measurers in relation to
them. But what becomes of his
political rights, of his right to vote
and hold office, if this was done2
As a councillor, should this reso-
luton pass and be approved, his
privileges would not be as great as
territorial representative in con-
gress, and his rights in the country
reduced to the privilege Of tenan-
try, with the ultimate certainty Of
being left in the event Of allot-
ment Of lands.
The resolution only comedies, as
rights of the colored citizens, such
right Of native CheroKees, as were
common to all at the time the
treaty was made, without reference
TO any other conditions that might
take place in the country; that is
the use of the soil as long as it re-
mains common property, but when
it ceases TO be such, their rights in
it TO cease likewise.
What has been said of the rights
Of colored citizens can to some ex-
tent be applied to the Delawares and
Shawnees. If they are not enti-
tied to any interest in our western
lands, they, as councillors, should
have no voice in disposing of them
or of the money arising from their
sale. A sort Of close communion
council ought to be held when such
questions come up.
Look out for a serious rucus if
this definition Of rights be adopted.
-
COLORED PEOPLE. SHAWNEES
AND DELAWARES.
l. .