Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1888-09-06

ing so much.
A company, whether incorporate
or not, can only be considered res
ponsiblc as far as its ability goes
to meet its obligations. This is a
plain proposition A statement
may be ventured that neither the
committee nor the council, nor
even Mr.. Boudinot himself can
produce the proof that the Chero-
kee Strip Live Stock association
are actually worth more personal
ly, or have more sat their com
mand, or are more responsible
aud trustworthy than the honest
faced and unpretending Patrick
Henry q Company. There was
too much on the outside to con-
vince the people that the effort to
release to the old company was
controlled by such considerations.
In the abstract Mr.. Boudinot may
not be very far wrong in claiming
for the council the right to deter
mine the responsibility of parties,
but when bribes are offered, whisky
used to stupefy legislation, mem
bers induced away, kept concealed
or continually shadowed, there
was something more than respon-
sibility, chartered rights and
promptness TO meet former obli-
cations, that got in its work. If
such acts as these in their perpe-
tration make up qualifying condi-
tions, it may be safely said that
Mr.. Henry is more than glad that
his slS5, 900 offer was rejected.
But why put so much stress on
any consideration further than
the presence of the money
itselfto meet an obligation2 Is
it because the nation can take le-
gal action before courts of Texas
against Henry g. Co., should they
fail to pay the rental, or of Kan
sas against the Cherokee Strip
Live Stock association for a like
failure ? If you can't, why this
everlasting harping about charter.
ed and unchartered companies.
and trying to make the public be-
lieve there's all the difference Of
responsibility?
The claimed willingness of the
old company to take chances as
they may appear in "encumbranc-
es and drawbacks, real, probable,
and possible" is another reason
why the council acted exactly
right in rejecting a lower for a
higher bid. There has been about
five years of breath spent in deny
ing and trying TO prove that there
=. rvseH Hy,-ttaL lunm Iney nair ua-
occupied lands, and why it should
be brought up as an argument now
TO justify the council for refusing
Mr.. Henry's bid, because he want
ed some assurance that he would
be given possession of the country,
no satisfactory reason can be as
signed other than the sore
straights one its put 10, to defend a
crooked cause. But it does look
a "leelle" like going back on
things.
Having all the chances in their
own hands, aud having been in
control Of them for the last five
years, and perhaps longer than
that, if we 60 beyond the date of
their lease, and being in undis-
turbed possession Of the country,
almost anybody, even Mr.. Henry
himself, would be willing TO say
as much as the old lessees. All
Mr.. Henry e. Co. wanted was that
the national authorities put him
and them in possession, first hav-
ing removed the present incum-
bents. Having once got posses
sion, no fears need be entertained
that they would not be able TO
take care Of themselves, as it is
well known fact that Texas cow
boys always do, wherever they
may be. But can it be claimed
by the advocates of the councils
action, that the old company, with
all their promises, would go on
paying the rent as it became due,
until the close of the lease, if the
United States would, next spring.
send troops into that country and
sweep it clean Of cattle and cattle
men? Or would they want no re-.
duction Of the rent, should the
same authority, under treaty con-
sent, settle large tract with
friendly Indians E? No one but an
idiot would believe or expect such
a thing, unless they secured the
lease at such low figures, which
they tried to do probably to meet
such contingency, that they
could afford TO pay the original