The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1893-03-25
spscial Dispatch TO tie Daily racle.

Special Dispatch TO the Daily bacle.
WELLINGTON, Kan. March 24-Judge
Ray, in the district court, this afternoon,
rendered a very important decision in the
case of c. j. Harris. principal chief (suine
for the Cherokee nation) vs. the Cherokee
Strip Live Stock association. The court sus
tanned the demurrer of the defendant tt
the plaintiffs amended petition, and il
doing SO delivered carefully prepared
opinion covering twcnty-eight type-writ
ten pages. Warner. Dean and Hagerman
of Kansas City and w. w. Schwinn OF
Wellington were attorneys for the nation
and Chester l. Long of Medicine Lodge
appeared for the association. 1t required
three days 10 argue the case.
The opinion discusses every phase of the
action. The suit WAS brought to recover
$500, 600 for rent of the strip from July 1,
1890, to July l, 1891. President Harrison
issued proclamation on Feb. II, 1890,
forbidding the taking of any more cattle
into the outlet after that date, and order
ing all there to De removed by Oct. ], 1890.
The association did not pay rent after
July !, 1890. The Cherokees alleged in
their petition that they had fee simple
with 1t as they pleased, while the associa-
tiop set up the plea that the lease was
void, and that the Cherokees had no right
TO use the strip, except as an outlet.
The Cherokee council meets at Table
Quah next Tuesday, and there is quite
sentimenC against the ratification of the
amended agreement. This is the first
time that the Cherokees have ever gone
into court to sustain their title, and if
they had succeeded they probably wonld
decline to take IS. 600 for tract of land
that is worth five times that amount. But
if they have simply right to use the strip
as an outlet aud cannot lease or sell it,
they will accept the governments offer of
eS. .000, 900 for what is In fact quit claim of
their interest.
The following is synopsis of Judge
Rays opinion.
THE DECISION.
1t is Of course conceded on both sides
that the title TO tie iaud in controversy
was, prior to any conveyance TO the plain
tiffs, In the government of the United
States. In investigating the title to the
land i'll controversy. it is not necessary to
60 farther back among the Indian treaties
han the treaty made by the plaintiffs the
2Sth day of May, 1928, rs they claimed
title by patent issued to them in pursu-
arce of that and other treaties. The Sec
ond article of the treaty of May. 1928, or
so much of it as is necessary TO read, reads
as follows:
Art. 2. The United States agree to pos
less the Cherokees and to guarantee it to
them forever, and that guarantee is here
by solemnly pledged, of 1000. 900 acres of
land. to be bounded rs follows"
Then follows the boundary, which does
not embrace the land in controversy.
After giving the boundary embracing
1000, 600 acres it continues:
In addition to the seven million of
acres thus provided for and bounded, the
United States further guarantees to the
Cherokee nation, perpetual outlet west
and free and unmolested use of all the
country lying west of the western
boundary of the above described limits,
ns far west as the sovereignty of the
United States and their right of title
extends
After making this treaty it was dis
covered that the boundary of the seven
million acres. AS defined by the treaty, III
cluded land that had been ceded to the
Creek nation of Indians in 1926 by treaty
with the United States; so, to correct that
mistake. another treaty was made with
the plaintiffs in this case, Feb. IA, 1888, in
which the boundaries Of the seven million
acres are corrected, and in this treaty
again occurs the language as follows:
In addition to the seven million acres
OF land thus provided for aud bounded,
the United States further guarantees to
the Cherokee nation a perpetual outlet
west, and free and unmolested use of all
the country west of the western boundary
OF said seven million acres, as far west as
the sovereignty of the United States and
their ri ght of soil extends"
On. December 29th, another treaty was
made with the plaintiffs, and in this treaty
after describing the home lands or other
lands CT the Cherokees, aside from that in
controversy, the outlet, the same identical
language, with reference TO the outlet
west Is again used, and in the third
article of SAID treaty il provides
The United States also agree that the
lands above ceded by the treaty of Feb
ruary IA, 1853, including the outlet, and
those cened by this treaty, shall all be in
Guided IN one patert executed to the
Cherokee nation of Indians by the pres