Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1886-01-07

"
Ans. Copies ol these inslruc
! lions 10 tho delegation referring /,
! these lands, together with the let
j lers were submitted ~ the seore
! lary OF the interior.
Ques. How, then is Il that YOU
{ letters Of Jan. ilh and 9TH did mol
conform with the instruction 10 lh,
delegation concerning lands wesI
OF Arkansas riyerG
Ans. The delegation never did
propose 20 exceed their inslsuc.
lions which were before the seero,
tary
Quoa. Did you make a speech
70 the National Council in 1883,
Mayg
Ans. Yes.
Cues. Did you at the time you
made the address TO the National
Council, May 1888, special session,
give the National Council to under.
stand that the U, s, government
had raised the price Of the lands
occupied by the Pawnees, Poncas,
Nez Percos, Otoes and Missourias
10 sl.25 per acre, and that the
$780, 600 was appropriated on that
raised appraisemeniY
Ans. stated that the payment
Of the $500, 900 was on the occupied
lands by the Pawnees, Poncas, Nez
Perces, Otoes and Missourias, and
the price Of the lands was about
ls1.l7.
Ques. Did you not state that
the reason why the full amount
was not appropriated, was be-
cause the committee had reserved
the balance for the expense Of
survey, &c. ?
Ans. Yes.
Ques. Do you recognize the let
ter Of Jan. 4, 1888, here exhibited,
as a true copy of the one address
ed to II. NJ. Teller, secretary Of the
interior
Ans. | think it is a true copy,
Ques. Have you a statement
from the experimentation Wash.
ington city--corroborating your
statement that the price of the land
was sl.l7 per acre
Witness submits a letter from
Secretary Teller, dated January
81, 1888, directed to Hon. Henry
c. Dawes, chairman Of the COM
mittee on Indian affairs.
Ques. In the appropriation act
Of March 3, 1888, due under ap-
praisement, " was there but one APP
praisement Of these lands2
Ans. There was 10 appraise-
ment Of the occupied tracts, except
the letter of Secretary Teller Of
January 81, 1888.
Ques. Then, Mr.. Phillips, the
act of March 3, 1888, appropriating
$500, 900 for the Cherokees, says:
"due under appraisement,n y must
allude solely to the unoccupied |
lands west Of the Arkansas river,
does it mott ?
Ans. 1t alludes solely to the |
occupied lands west of the Arkan-
sas river.
Ques That there is a full pay
ment for the occupied lands at
sl.17 per acre?
Ans. Yes.
Ques. Does not fair construc-
tion of your letters OF January 4
and make you say that you were
prepared to make a full aud inn
mediate sale, for any and all pur-
poses, Of the lands west Of the Ar
kansas river?
Ans. No. The delegation stat
ed distinctly to the secretary that
they were only authorized to dis
pose Of the occupied tracts.
Ques. Did you on trying to get
additional payment give the sec
retary reason to think that you
were willing to sell all Of our lands
west Of 800?
Ans. No.
Ques. Have you since March 8,
1888, after the $500, 600 act Of con-
gress, try to get statement from
the secretary Of the interior that
the 100000 was only on occupied
Iands--I mean a written statement?
Witness submitted the secre-
Lary's letter as contained in Elk.
Doc. No. II, 4Sth congress,
Ind session. In addition to this
witness referred to the deeds for
he occupied lands, which bears on
he face $500, 600 as consideration
or the deeds.
Ques. Have you ever personally +.
Secretary Teller to give
you statement to show that the J
money was paid on the occupied !
ands2
Ans. ] have; and the answer is
he letter from Secretary Teller.
Ques. Was your attention ever
Iirected to the danger that the !
United States authorities will some s
ime claim that this money was an .
dditional payment on all the lands
rest Of 96? Q
Ans. Not officially, | have seen !,
lot Of rubbish in the newspapers '
} which | paid no attention.
Ques. Did you ever demonstrate :
18th anyone about a bill being y
assed in May 'S3 by the National y
ouncil 10 provide for the chief, :
nd delegation to proceed to Wash. .
lgton and execute deeds to the oc- u
lpied lands in accordance with '.
le act Of Congress, March 3, 1888, v
rovided the 100000 was an sddi- F"
onal payment on the occupied
acts? $
Ans. III spoke Of any bin at =
! il was the one agreed upon by "a
ie principal chief, delegation,
Icretary and solicitor. y
Ques. Did you tell anyone that
turu1 lu uhau-frrs IL. rnr,.cot - nl