The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1900-07-11
NEW RULING
Concerning AllOtments in In
hiCkaSaw Nation.

~AANA'-hACANi@f - i III AN,-kDleCldLI
Judge Hosea Townsend has rendered a
decision in the Madin townsito case-the
first ruling I'm any Indian territory court
ON the allotment towusite law Tha de-
cision affects hundreds OF holdings OF the
Chicakasaw nation and many towns a ong
the Frisco railway extension from Sapul-
pa TO Dennisun.
The decision sustains the rights of the
Indians to build towns on their pro pee
tive allotmeV's. II is an inter, ing &c.
cision. and is as follows:
"Of course we all understand that the
conditions ext ting here are very anoma-
lous; that is, with reference to titles and
the acquisition Of titles, the rights of pos
session and all that sort of thing 1t is
my opinion that the object and purpose
of the Atoka agreement and the Curtis
act are simply to provide means for
the winding up of the ana RS of these In
dian tribes. In other words, they are in
process of liquidation, as l understand
it, and the purpose is to take the title
out Of these tribes and to put the titles
into the different individual memrsrs oil
the tribes ami ,hen to sLllow these rnem-
bers in certain years to sell, or on certain
terms and in certain manner to sell and
pass a fee simple title.
"All of the land is to be divided up
equally, pro rata, according to ITS valuus
except the townstes that were existng at
the passage Of the act, | think that is
made clear in tie statement wi y refer
ence to the townsite commissioners. and
what power 'aey Nave and what they
can do and whaht towns they are to op-
crate upon; and then tn. 81. AMI The
asphalt, and the soal, pernzDs we're re-
served, to be leased by the government,
the royalty to be paid to the United
States, for the use and benefit of the
tribe.
'At the same time they allow, as they
have prior to the passage of these laws,
the individual Indian to have the right of
possession to certain property, and now
he is supposed to be confined to what his
approximate share Of his allotment is, un-
til the allotment is actually made and
takes place
well here is an individual Indian, in
possession of his allotm5 mt under the law
that is he is in possession of such an
amount of agr cultural and grazing lands
as would be an approximate share coming
to himself AM wife and h;.' 90 Now,
when he is in r)ossession of that, what
what can he do with it? He has the use
Of it and is entitled to receive the rents
thereof. That certainly contemplates his
renting that property. Now is there any
limitation as to how he shall rent it?
Whether he shall REM It in lots, blocks
or in ten, hs,y or hundred are trict~1
Is there any limitation on his authority?
l don't know of any. If he has the right
to rent it, why can't ne rent it for any
/ t. .f,I, To-
"He is given the express right to rent
that prop rty, and now what do you n
tlemen ask me to do? You come in here
and say that you ask me to stop him by
injunction from doing that thing which
under the law he is given the right to do.
Isn't that exactly what you are asking?
If he has the right to rent that property,
why should he enjoined by any court
from doing it? / can't understand why.
Is there any prohibition against his lay
ing it out into streets and alleys and
blocks and lots?
'I don't know of any prohibition. If
there is under the intercourse acts, possi-
bly, he can be sued and the penalty re-
covered If he an be and th2 in.s.csotse
: acts are in force and he violates them
by renting and receiving the rents and
marking, ect., why then the law furnish
es a means to reach him for doing some-
thing he ought not to do. But is that any
ground for enjoining?
isn't all this matter about Injunction
purely and simply imaginary? You SIM
ply talk about towns being built up and
about what may happen in the event GER
tain things happen. / am to sit here and
enioin because the government In GER
tain contingency depending on some 9TH
er contingency all Of which may never
exist in the world, may have to bring
some suits to recover possession of the
: land Who ever heard of a court of equi~
ty being asked to do anything of that
2 sort?
e "Who is encumberng the property? The
e man who has a right to do it, From the
i way I look at il gentlemen, you are not
(, entitled to any inJunctiDl may be
wrong, but that is the way I look at 1t.
= I am perfectly willing to refuse the in-
junction and 4 sIhiss the hi.l and lei
I you appeal and go to the upper courts
d and see if you can get another injunction
there or take any other course you see fit
"I most emphatically holI tnlt ihcre 1:
e no limitations as TO the renting"