Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1889-05-30
WHY Wn pfFFnn

pie generally Of tho states seem
70 hold the opinion that the
title to our lands rests in the
government Of the Cherokee peo.
people, and the Authority TO relin-
quish the title TO any part Of them
is in the Cherokee legislature and
the chief executive, as representa-
tives Of the government. With us
II is held that tho title is in the
people, after the manner of cor
poration, and the authority to sell
must come from them. Commits
sioner Wilson indirectly commits
himself to tho opinion that the
title is in the Cherokee govern
ment, by requesting Chief Mayes
10 inform him of the time when
the council would be convened, or
a commission or q delegation be
appointed 10 receive the propo-
sitions he and others of his COM
mission are authorized to make.
The cause Of this opinion may, 10
some extent at least, be traced TO
the fact that the title to the public
lands Of the United States is in the
government Of the United States.
This is the natural inference Of his
inquiry, rs his ignorance Of our
affairs would cause him TO place
the title to our lands, especially
such as are without inhabitants, in
the Cherokee government, after
the manner Of the public lands of
his own government.
"Nation," as used in the treat
ies,is reversible term, and in the
treaties often means the Cherokees
as a people or a tribe, without any
political significa nee. II as often
means tho ceuntry of the Chero-
KEGS, and sometimes it has the
meaning Of an organized or politi-
eaI body under the control of a reg
ularly established government.
Before the Cherokees had an or
ganized government, except such
as they had in their primitive con-
dition, which must have been more
traditional than otherwise, the
term Cherokee Nation" was APP
piled to them, and to this day is q
common expression, when they, as
n tribe or q people or as political
organization, are referred to. As
far back as the treaty of 179l, and
mp TO the last and final one Of 1865,
this term has been applied TO the
Cherokees in its several meanings
Of country, people and govern
ment.
The expression, "tbe Cherokee
Nation of Indians,'' as used in our
patent, cannot well be construed
TO mean the Cherokee government
of Indians, without a violation Of
the usual (if not the proper appli-
cation Of the term. To constrpe
nation into government rather than
tribe, without reference to any Ie-
gal or accepted authority, would
be more arbitrary than otherwise.
The authority 10 construe what ma
tiOn means, as repeatedly used in
our patent, lies between the Cher
okee people and the government of
the United States. The Cherokees
in their constitution have declared
their meaning of the word by say
ing, "the lands Of the Cherokee
Nation shall remain common prop
eity." This-declaration is in di-
rect reference to the lands covered
by the patent, because there are
no others. and described in the
constitution itself. This constitu-
ti0n provides for a national coun-
Gil and proscribes its duties and
limits its powers. 1t has the "pow-
er to make all laws and regulations
which they shall deem necessary
and proper for the good of the ma
ton, which shall not be contrary
to the constitution" and as "the
lands Of the Cherokee Nation shall
remain common property" as this
same constitution provides, the
National council cannot remove
the condition imposed or sell one
foot Of the lands while remaining
common property, witout violating
their oaths Of Office. This being
fact, the conclusion cannot be
avoided that the title TO our lands
must be in the people and not in
the government.
The constitutional provision that
"the lands of the Cherokee nation
shall remain common property"
cannot by any manner of reasoning
be made 10 naean the common
property OF the Cherokee govern
ment and not of the people. Re-
move the restriction, "shall remain
common property there would
bo some excuse for claiming that
the title is in the nation as gov
ernment. and that the council and
chief, being its exponents in au-