Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1890-06-05

indications as yet, nor viii be,
perhaps. until some action is pro-
posed with reference to it. The
failure Of the commission to ac-
complish anything at all, except
any amount of unfair motive on
their part, within the time they
have been ''monkeying" with
things, may enter into the consid-
Grafton Of the expediency to con-
tinue their services. But after al i,
the necessity for such a commits
sion TO carry out the projects of
the government in relation TO In
dian lands now within the terri
tory of Oklahoma, and to the out
let to be treated for, may be argu-
ment sufficient 10 retain in service
such trust, or to create 4 new
one, as the difficulties of the un-
dertaking may present themselves
OF the lack of good management or
of diplomacy may appear On part
of the old commission.
There may be some inquiry or
thought suggested, at least, as to
any compulsiOn on part of the
Cherokee nation to sell to the
United States government the
lands Of the outlet, after having
considered the purport Of the fol-
lowing, taken from the decision of
the supreme court in the case of
the Cherokee nation against the
Southern Kansas railway eompa-
ny, delivered on the 18th inst:
The fact that the Cherokee
nation holds these lands in fee
simple titles under patents from
the United States, is of no conse-
quence in the present discussion,
for the Uni.ed States may exercise
the right of eminent domain, even
within the limits of the several
states, for the purposes necessary
to the execution Of the powers
granted to the general government
by the constitution"
"These lands" as used by the
court, must certainly be the lands
condemned as the right Of way for
the Southern Kansas railway COM
pany, and the cOmpany's road be-
ing across the outlet, "these lands"
must be a part Of the lands to
which the commission and many
members Of congress say we have
no title. The question is there
fore suggested, has congress the
right TO declare the lands opened
to white settlement, without the
consent of the Cherokee people?
Can the purposes necessary to the
extinction of the powers granted
the general government BY the
constitution be extended to the
condemnation of G, ,0OO, 600 acres to
satisfy the greed Of Unsuitable
boomers2
The next question that suggests
itself is, has the president of the
, United States the authority suffi-
cient, against & fee simple title, to
issue a proclamation forbidding
the occupancy Of the outlet, under
any manner of right, tor any pur-
pose whatever? Would it be of
any use to petition congress for
the privilege of testing the presi-
dents authority, before the su-
preme court Of the United States,
FOR issuing such a proclamation?
These questions can only be an
swsred by reference TO the peculiar
conditions in which the lands of
the outlet have been placed by the
treaty of 1866, the title encum-
bered by the right of the govern
ment TO settle friendly Indians up
on them, which right, with an
other to regulate trade and inter
course with US under n treaty
stipulation, make up a combina-
ton of conditions, 10 test which
the result would certainly be moth
ing more than a conviction of the
governments power TO do more
than to exercise the right of emil
nent domain even in our country.
These considerations are grounds
for believing that the condition
the strip lands are now in would
not be relieved by an appeal to
the courts. but will be sustained
by the government, II Tor no other
purpose than TO force MS into a
surrender Of all Of our interest in
the outlet.
Why l am so liberal in my views
on this subject Is, because l have
no political axes, tomahawks or
scalping knives to grind, nor any
purpose 10 mislead the people by
a concealment of what | consider
to be facts. Respectfully,
JONI L. ADAIR.
liberated Sors Throat.
Two years ago / had liberated