New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-09-05

way because the trl0e Will see oho hoPoie''
ness of resisting the tide Of white immigra-
ton, and will see, too, that by yielding TO 10
they will gain great advantages for themselves
which they could not hope to acquire in any
other way.
The Chickasaws are, proportionately, the
richest landowners among the five civilized
tribes. They number only 5000 souls, and they
hold 1850. 935 acres, making an average oil
775 acres to each member of the tribe. Inc
Cherokees have, not counting the otrip WHICH
they do net occupy, 5,O31, Dol acres giving
for population of $4,000 an average oil 1So
acres per head. The Choctaws, with Io'ooo
nopulation. have 1888, 900 acres, or Az acres
ner head. The Chickasaws stand third IN the
total amount Of their holdings, and first IN the
nronortion Of surplus lands. Their adhesion to
the policy of severalty would be the more sig
niGcant because large share OF the opposluoh
N n has come from the civilized tribes. ms
was no doubt encouraged by those who had sue
coded in acquiring actual possession and use
of large tracts of land, under peculiar system
Of monopoly which obtains in the Indian Ierrl-
tory. The land is owned in common out inc
richer members of the tribe occupy large tracts
for which they pay no rent and upon which they
probably employ as laborers numbers OF ono
tribe whose title to the land is equal with their
own. The result is a species of semi-slaVery
for tbo noorer Indians. Allotment by severalty
,yould secure to the latter equal rights in the
usa If the land. but many of them have up to
this time been led to Believe That the applica-
tion of this principle would deprive them OF
tLo;u land whereas it would really restore it
to them.
Under the Dawes Act the President has the
mower 70 order the reservation of any tribe to
be resurveyed and the lands allotted in several
~ whenever he shall deem it advantageous to
do so. but this does not apply to the i've civil
lied tribes, who hold their lands practically IN
fee simple. needing the consent OF the Govern
ment. however, to ALLEVIATE them. Allotment IN
severalty cannot be forced upon them. And
vet that policy has been contemplated by them
for more than twenty years. The treaties with
the three great tribes-Cherolees, Cboctaws
and ChickasawS-adopted in 1866 all contem-
Mated allotments in severalty Its introduce
tion into the Indian Territory, followed as /.
certainly would be, by the sale OF the surplus
lands. would work a great change in that re-
zion. There are about 39, 100000 acres OF
land in the Territory, after deducting Okla
homa. and only IS, 600 Indians all told. Other
classes bring the population up to about 1OO-
OOO These figures, of course, do not include
the population of Oklahoma, which was born
in a day. and now claims, through its Consu-
tutional Convention population of 10000.
Thus far allotments in severalty have not
made as rapid progress as was hoped, but this
seems to have been the fault of the Govern
ment rather than of the tribes. 1t would not
be the policy of the Government Of course, to
force allotments upon tribe where the con-
trolling sentiment was against the change, but
where tribes are anxious for it, the Govern
ment owes it to them to provide the necessary
machinery. The failure Of Congress to appro-
pirate money for the preliminary work delayed
allotments in a number of cases. The last re-
port of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs
showed that in the first year Of the new policy,
ending July / 1888, there had been 3,34 . al
lotments in severalty, amounting in all to
340.124 acres, more than one-third OF the
whole in area being at the Sisseton agency
in Dakota. No doubt the next report OF the
Commi ssioner will make much better showing.