Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1899-03-30

OF the principal chief, without any
trial as to whether they were citi-
zens or not; upon the demand OF
the principal chief they were to be
put out OF the nation. Congress
In the Curtis act has said "that is
a lIttle too drastic; we will give
them a day in court; the United
States court Will determine
whether the particular piece of
land upon which they are located
shall be taken away from them"
and the United States court was
| given jurisdiction, the very iuris-
diction which was conferred upon
the secretary of the interior by the
Strip agreement. The language of
the statute is, land if it be found
upon trial that the same are held
unlawfully against the tribe by
those claiming to be members
thereof, and the membership and
right are disallowed by the COM
mission to the five tribes, or the
United States court and the judg-
ment of that court has become
final, then said court shall cause
the parties charged with unlaw-
fully holding said possessions to be
removed from the same and cause
the lands and tenements to be re-
stored to the person or persons or
nation or tribe of Indians entitled
to the possession ofthe same. "The
court shall cause the persons to be
put in possession. Now how shall
the court cause them to be re-
moved? First ascertain that their
right to citizenship has been de-
MED. That in the issue in this
case; "Has their right to citizen
ship been denied?" If so. then
this court is required by law to
cause these persons to be removed,
not to permit the defendants to re-
main in possession of that land in
detinltelyoruntil some higher court
shall say that they are not entitled
to it. But this court shall cause
the plaintiff to be put in posses
sion. The defendant s right of ap-
peal is not destroyed. The de-
tendant can go to higher court
and discuss mis- case as long as he
pleases, but this court is required !
to put this plaintiff in possession |
at once. That is pointed out in
Section 5 of the Curtis bill as fol- !
lows:
That when a judgment for restitu-
tion has been entered by the court 4
the clerk shall, at the request of tie /
pldinliH or his attorney, issue d writ /
Of execution thereon, which shall /
command the proper officer of the
cOur 10 cause the defendant or defend
ants to be forthwith removed and
elected from the premises aud the
plainliH given complete and undis-
tUrbed possession of the same
Now what does this language
imply? Does it mean that il the
defendant files a supersedeas bond
that this judgment shall be stayed
until the courts of appeal have
passed upon the case? II so, there
was no necessity for passing this
legislation upon that subject.
There was enough in the Arkansas
statute for that. That statute is
ample and sufficient il a superse-
deas Is 10 issue. Are the defend
ants to be permitted to supersede
this judgment and 90 on in the
regular course Of procedure? Con-
gress has provided another course.
To permit the intruder to retain
possession Of the lands of the
Cherokee nation for three or four
years longer would not be carry
ING out our agreement with the
Cherokee people. 1t was neces- {
sary to provide a more summary I
method. So far as these new pro-
visions are concerned they are re- {
ougnant TO the provisions
on this subject Of section /
2640 of Mansfeld's Digest.
section 264O Of Manstield's Digest I
g as follows:
"When the judgment for the plain !
i'll i both for the recovery Of the pos /
session Of the premises and for the ,
damages. the plaintiiI may have Il writ !
II possession. which shall command
he officer 10 whom 10 Is directed 20
ieliver 10 the plaintiff possession of
-he premises, aud shall also command 1
aim 10 levy and collect the damages !
ana costs, As in executions on judg-
nentS in personal actions"
Does that section bear the same
construction as the provision in /!
section s of the Curtis act which
nave read? 1t is as different as
anguage can permit. Under sec.
ion s, when judgment for resti-
ution has been rendered by the
court, the clerk shall, not may, he
shall, at the request of the plaintiff
Dr his attorney, issue a writ of res !.
tuition. 1t is an act that this
.lerk Is commanded to do under
his law. He shall issue a writ
which shall command the proper {
'iicer OF the court "to cause the
defendant or defendants to be re- {
moved forthwith, and elected from
ne premises, and the plaintiff
lven complete and undisturbed I
possession of the same" Congress {
7hen 1t passed this law meant
lst what it said. 1t recognized c
be fact that after the Strip agree I
lent we were bound to put these !.
ltruders out They complained OF u
he method OF expulsion by the =,
acretary Of the interior and the u
chief. They demanded ;
mother method, namely: that the 7
'nited States should authorize a Il
lmmission to determine whether =
icy were citizens or not; that the g
nlted States court should pass I,
pom the question is each case. u
ongress granted that request. a
l. .