Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1898-04-07
THEIR BRIEF REVIEWED.
DELEGATIONS DELAWARE CLAIM
DOCUMENT CONSIDERED.
In Every Respect an Able Presenta-
tiOn, but not Altogether on the Line
Of the Dick Adams Faction.
CooDr's BLUFF. 1. T.. April 2. lsss.

Please allow me space for a few
words about the delegates brief
in your issue of the 18th inst.
The first proposition to which
they call attention is "That the
lands and moneys of the Cherokee
people are common property in
which every citizen has an equal
interest. We believe this prop
osition is true. We have ever held
this view. 1t is only very recently
however, that the Cherokees
adopted it. 10 all of the legal
documents and papers that | have
seen from the Cherokees since the
controversy was carried to the
courts they have always contended
that the Delawares did not have
an equal interest with the CherO-
KEGS, but an interest as defined by
the Cherokee-Delaware treaty of
April s, 1867, viz: 157 800 acres Of
land. For proof of the above see
the communication of the Chero-
kee delegation to the senate COM
mittee of Indian affairs in report
of committee of Indian affairs for
the year 1895, page 430, which is
a. follows: "As has been seen the
Delawares purchased 157 900 acres
of Cherokee lands, lying east of
the 96o This was an absolute
and unconditional purchase, and
in which the Cherokee nation has
no title or interest"
The next contention is that the
Delawares gave up their tribal
government and became n compo-
nent part of the Cherokee tribe OF
Indians, with the additional rights
guaranteed to them in the agree
ment of April Sth, 1867, by and be-
tween the Cherokee nation and the
Delaware tribe which gave the
original regist, red Delawares on
the Delaware roll at the time they
were incorporated and merged
their identity into the Cherokee
tribe the right to have, when the
land shall hereafter be allotted, not
less than 160 acres each OF the tri-
bal lands" To this proposition
we also subscribe, and that conten-
ton, in my judgment, settles the
whole matter in favor of the Della
wares. For if the Delawares are
entitled to the additional rights
guaranteed them by the treaty of
April Sth, 1867, as the brief of the
delegation admits. the controversy
is at an end, as it is just what the
Delawares claim and ever have
claimed. for the treaty expressly
states that in case of an allotment
of Cherokee lands each registered
Delaware shall receive 100 acres of
land. After quoting the treaty by
which provisions were made for
the locating friendly Indians in
Cherokee country, which is not (
germane to the subject, they refer
to the decision of the supreme
court in the case of Journeycake
VS.. the Cherokee nation, which is
as follows: $50 far as the provis-
ions of the agreement for the pur-
chase of homes is concerned it
is perceived that no absolute
title to these homes was granted.
We may take notice of the fact
that the Cherokees in their long
occupation of this reservation had
generally secured homes for them
selves; that the laws of the Chero-
kee nation provided for the appro-
priation by the several Cherokees
of lands for personal occupation,
aud that this purchase by the Della
wares was with a view of securing
TO the individual Delaware the like
homes; that the lands thus pur-
chased and paid for still remained
as part of the Cherokee reservation
AID as a further consideration for
the payment of this sum for the
purchase of homes the Delawares
were guaranteed not merely the i
occupar CIV thereof but
also that in case of subsequent
In severalty of the entire
body of lands among the mem bers
ofthe Cherokee nation, they should |
receive an aggregate amount equal /
10 that which they had purchased, {
and such a distribution as would r
secure 10 them the homes upon I
which they had settled, together y
with their improvements. So that +
f, when the allotment was made, +
here was for any reason not land q
10 secure each member of a
he Cherokee nation 160 acres the a
)elawares were to have at least n
hat amonnt, aud the deficiency I
would have to be borne by native /
Cherokees pro rata. In other Y
words, there was no purchase of a h
distinct body of lands as in case of V
he settlement of other tribes with q
n the limits of the Cherokee reser- y
alton" Why the Cherokee dele ;
alton introduced this portion of I,
he decision | am at loss TO uD- II
erstand. 1t appears to me to t,
1ake and clinch the point the s.
)elawares are contending far be- a
ond question or controversy. D
lear in mind the decision says: a
And as q further consideration O,
or the payment of this sum for the q
urchase of homes the Delawares II
-ere guaranteed not merely the A