Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1892-04-07
RIGHTS OF ADOPTED CITIZENS
Capt. jackson Comes Back at
Henry Clay Dean.

EDITOR CHIEFTAIN:-I see in
your issue of March 3 letter from
Henry Clay Dean replying to my
letter of February 16, 1892.
In answer to Henry Clay Dean
i will say that | am sorry that |
have never heard of the gentleman
before, nor can | find any of my
friends that are acquainted with
him. He must be in some remote
place, and his reading of the con-
stitution must be about as correct
as the way in which he reads my
letter. Ii he will read my letter
again he will see that | am not
particularly defending the rights
of the white man more than any
other adopted citizen. In fact,
think when defend the constitu-
ton OF tie Cherokee nation | de-
rend the rights OF all her citizens,
and | have a greater respect for
that document than TO treat il so
lightly as Henry Clay Dean does
He says that any ten-year-old boy
knows that the constitution was
made for Cherokees. / will ask
the gentleman if it was made for
Cherokees by blood and no others.
MIR. Dean says that the Cherokees
could not have sold the white man
any land if they had wanted to.
This | will admit; and why could
they not sell land? Because il
is the common property Of the
Cherokee nation. Here then Mr..
Dean gives himself away. No, as
citizens they have the same right
TO use the land, and the indie
feasable right to their improve
ments-the colored man, the white
man, Delaware, Shawnee and
Cherokee by blood, all the same
in that respect. But the land is
common property, says the con
stitution, and no one has right
to sell it, but all citizens have a
right to enjoy il.
The stand that | take is this:
That the land and money belong
TO the Cherokee nation, and call
the attention of those that dispute
il to the act of union between the
Eastern and Western Cherokees.
They first agree that their coun-
try shall be named the Cherokee
nation; they then declare that all
titles TO public lands or any other
public interest belonging to either
branch of the Cherokee family or
derived from any source shall
henceforward rest entire and un-
impaired ia the Cherokee nation.
Now, Mr.. Dean, this property, g.,
land or money belongs TO the
Cherokee nation, and you may be
a full blood Cherokee; whenever
you leave this country with your
goods and effects, and become a
citizen of another country, you
forfeit everything here, and before
you can again enjoy any or the
rights Of a Cherokee you must be
reinstaied TO citizenship by Il
special act Of council. This is
conclusive TO my mind that citi-
zenship amounts 10 something.
Now, what is the difference be-
tween the native and adopted
citizen to-day in regard to holding
property of any kind? Cannot the
adopted citizen defend his farm in
his own name in the courts Of the
country as well as the naliye7
again assert that no one but a
citizen has any right to share in
the public property, and no citi-
zen can justly be denied, let his
color be what il may. If this land
is a family inheritance, why did
not the North Carolina Cherokee
get his share when he sued for il
inthe United States court OF clainsl
He was a Cherokee by blood. In
that case blood had nothing to dc
with the decision, but If he wished
10 enjoy any OF the benefits OF the
Cherokee fund he must come here
and become a citizen ef the Chero.
kee nation.
think | have clearly shown
that the money aud land belong to
the Cherokee nation. Now, who
does the nation belong to? have
before stated that the Cherokee
nation belongs to all her citizens,
This is the point that Henry Clay
Dean and differ on, aud he asks
me the question, when and where
and how the white man acquired
any right 10 the soil and monies Of
the Cherokee nation.
My answer is, when he was
adopted into this country as q eili-