The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1901-07-23

Dul that JufleuictioA c1.p "-e -~
courts Of Oklahoma and from
there 10 the supreme court direct.
That is all he decided. Every
point raised by Judge Springer in
his presentation Of the case TO that
court was evaded because the
court SIMPLY decided it had not
jurisdiction"
"Upon what do you base your
statement that you will WIN the
easel"
ssIt wouldtake about three days
to tell you that replied Mr.. John
son. Briefly, however, the con-
tentions Of Lone Wolf are based
on the following facts, as present
ed by Mr.. johnson;
"The Kiowa, Comanche and
Apache Indians occupied, prior to
1857, what was known as the
Wichita reservation Of the Kiowa
and Comanche Indians in the west
ern part Of the state Of Kansas.
and the government Of the United
States entered into what was
known as the Jerome treaty,
whereby the Indians vacated their
reservation in western Kansas and
had allotted to them and set apart,
under this taeaty the lands now
sought to be opened under an al
legged recent treaty.
"Under the jerome treaty it
was agreed that the reservation
set apart to those Indians should
forever be theirs; that the gov
ernment Of the United States
would protect them for all time in
the peaceful enjoyment of their
possessions, and that the reserva-
ton should never opened 10 settle
ment by the white man unless
two-thirds Of the Indians at the
time Of proposed opening consh-
tuting this federated tribe agreed,
in grand council, to such opening
''That is the FIRST point.
"Secondly, the government in
to negotiations with view to bring
ing about a second treaty that
would permit the opening Of the
lands, securing to each indian 100
acres Of hand. and the remainder
to be opened to settlement
sAt the time this second treaty
was made with the Indians, the
commission appointed by the pres
libent selected an interpreter for
the Indians, and that interpreter
mIsrepresented the terms and con-
ditions OF the treaty, and bv inn
posing on the Indians secured its
ratification by about one hslf Of
them.
"One half of these indians new
or did consent to the ratification of
this second treaty, while under
the Jerome treaty two thirds was
necessary 10 ratafy. We contend
there was fraud upon the indians
and the United States cannot and
ought not carry into execution this
fraud.
"Then congress, before appsov
ing the treaty. modified il in vari
GUS ways without the consent Of
the Indians. These notifications
work a hardship on the Indians
and we're in derogation Of their
rights.
"The United States ought new
er attempt to take from Indian.
by fraud or by changing the term,
Of their treaty, lands which the
government said should be theirs
forever, without there being val
liable and reasonable considera
tion thereof. Under existing con
ditions, there Is absolutely no con
sideration given the Indians fol
the surrender Of their rights undei
the treaty Of 1867.
"1hen too, the treaty Of 1S6i
was a fraud upon the Indians wa
an outrage.
"There are no political righti
involved because tho Indians havI
no political rights. The onll
rights involved are the rights o
property. The constitution q
the United States provides iha
no person shall be deprived Of BIZ
property without due process O
law and "due process Of law
should not be fraud and ROBBERY
"It seems to me, however mucl
the people may want to take fror
the Indiau his last reservation o
however much they may wish
drive him from the face Of th
earth. they cannot afford 10 do S
II the title they acquire 10 the lam
is tainted With dishonor, decei