The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-12-23
-,.cn6E INDIAN PROBLEM
EX-SENATOR DAWES GIVES SOME
INSIDE HISTORY OF THE
NEGOTIATIONS.
The CHICKAShNS ARE OBSTINATE.
Did Everything to Defeat Rntihch-
ton of Trenty-Says the Territory
Should BE Lifted From Its Pres
Condition TO Statehood.

Washington, Dec. 21.-F'rom inside
history of the recent negotiations OF the
Dawes commission with the five civilized
tribes is given the statement which eX-
Senator Dawes of the commission has
submitted to the Indian committee Of
congress as to the much discussed Chloe
taw and Chickasaw treaty:
"This treaty was ratified by the Choc-
taw council. The Chickasaws prescribed
ratification by council and popular vote
so that the Choctaws pronounce they
have rejected the treaty. They pre-
scrbed that certain class of citizens here
tofore voters should not vote, on this
question--thc intermarried citizens.
They were the Choctaws. living in the
Chickasaw country. Inasmuch as their
treaty affected the land in that portion
of the territory, they ought to be per
mittcd to vote on it also. But they were
prevented from voting SO Che impress
sion has gone out. and so far as | am per-
sonally concerned is that they, III com
mon language, squclched the agreement
before the people so that 1t never llad
any fair trial. | was unable TO sign that
agreement for two reasons. one was
that it made no provision for the Choc-
taw freedmen who claimed 10 be citl-
zens and under treaty entitled to forty
acres OF land each. 1t excludes them
from all lands so that if their citizenship
claims are sustained there would he no
lands for their forty acres each, anu the
United States is Obliged to remove them
from the territory after they have be-
come citizens and pay them 500 each
out of the 100000 originally appro-
priated to pay them. With all land al
lotted, these four or five thousand freed
men would be on the hands of the United
States like the Cherokee intruders with
an obligation to provide for them. L
thought there should be reserved from
the allotment lands enough to insure
competency for them, if found to be so
entitled, but there are so many more i'm
portant points to be gained by the agree
ment that my colleagues thought they
would fail in their duty if they did not
sign.
"Another reason: The commission
was required to determine if the Mis-
sissppi Choctaws were not entitled to
an equal share in the Choctaw lands un-
der their treaty. With all land allotted
they will have none left for them if
found to be entitled and the United
States would be obliged to provide for
their support. Inc ChOctaW cOnlSSl0nerS
are bound up with the Chickasaws' and
while they have done all they could 10
carry out their treaty with the Chicka-
saws, they are quite different people,
and there are influences there which
would prevent the ratification by the
Chickasaws of any agreement that we
would be willing to impose. We can not
do anything for the Choctaws, but should
such 9 scheme be agreed on this winter
as will make these people see that it is
better to sit down with some Of their
commissioners and arbitrate this matter
by agreement, some good may result.
'Therc is u more serious question.
They have invited 100000 or more white
people there who are residents and not
intruders. Never was n territory or
ganizcd in the United States which had
one-half as many people as are there,
and congress could never turn its face
away from an application for recogni- |
tion which contained 100000 whites. Yet |
here is territory with over 100000 |
white people with citizens and towns.