The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-09-21
CURTIS IS HEARD.
Gives Out Interview About
Indian Territory Situation.
Says the Government Should
Make an Investigation.
SHOULD NOT BEINNEED
Members of Indian Tribes Are
Amply Provided For.
Would Set Aside All Leases Of
Lands.

out an interview, under a Washington
date line on the situation in the Indian
Territory. The Leavenworth Times
accuses Mr.. Curtis of going to Wash
7 ington in order to cover up matters
which might be brought out in the
coming investigation of Indian affairs.
but in his interview Mr. Curtis says
that a full and complete investigation
should be made at once. He saws:
II have read the charges made
against the members of the Dawes
commission and other officers in the
Indian Territory. 1 have not had time
to visit the Territory and look into
them. but expect to before congress
meets in extra session.
while l believe the newspaper re-
ports are exaggerated. yet 1 think it is
the duty of the government to cause a
thorough and speedy investigation of
the whole matter. Every branch of
the service should be looked after. and
a full and complete report should be
made at once. 1 believe the law is
ample to protect the rights of the In
dams. If it is not all the officers of
the government need do is call the at
tention of congress to the legislation
needed to protect their rights. and T
know congress will enact it without
delay. The lands in the Territory are
rich, and there is no necessity of a
member of either tribe being in need
All th2t is necessary to make the MEM
pefs seh-supporting is to protect them
Ia what they have, or will have as
rlembers of the various tribes of In
alsns- l understand the method used
j. 10 send 'nestlers' out into the coun
try and have them gather up A load of
Indians and bring them to an aIlotting
town. where they are turned over TO
representatives of certain companies.
VINO secure contracts from them for
grazing at from Z to 10 cents per acre.
ana for farming at so cents to 81 an
acre. whereas grazing lands are worth
Irom 30 to so cents per acre and farm
Lus lahds from Sl50 to 50. These leases
aIe mace for much lower rental than
the lands arc worth and are a abSnI,,taTvy
VOID and all sales are void unless an
proved by the secretary of the interior
e~vsPt III the Chickasaw and Choctaw
counules' where they may sell their
surplus in one year.
l think under existing laws the gov
ernncnt officials have full authorize 70
remove so-called 'nestlers' from the ter
Iltofy and II is their duty to do so but
you ask. Have not the courts held that
a person cannot be removed from the
territory. The courts held that where
3 man had bought and owned a town
lot II gave MIN right to stay in town
and do business there, but the courts
nave not held that men that were oh
Jecuonable to government and wbu
were rcbbing the Indians could not h.
removed ard the courts will hold they
can be removed if the question is ever
raised.
II claim the leases are void for two
reasons. first. because they are made
In pursuance Of contracts executed he
foFe the patents were delivered: second
the leases are not for a fair and reason
able consideration. This is surely true
or the land in the Chickasaw and Choc-
taw counties for section 29 of the act
of June Is. 1898. requires that leases
Grafton.
Another thing that seems to have
neen overlooked is the law requiring
the United States Indian agent 10 nut
each indian in possession of his aIlot-
ment Section % of the act of Tt1lv
1892. makes the duty of Indian agents
70 place allottees in possession of their
allotment and to remove therefrom. all
persons Objectionable to such alIottees
ard the act of the Indian agents cannot
be interfered with by the writ or pro-
cess Of any court.
This section alone is ample to pro-
tect the rights of members of the Chick
ssaw and Choctaw Indians. Section 21
OF the Cherokee act contains the same
provisions and section 8. of the Greek
act. requires the United States Indian
agent 10 put each Creek Indian in unre-
stricted possession of his land and re-
IAONt ali ODIHfLlOndDie persons there
PROM and while there is no provision
n this section in regard to writs of
court IS there is in the Choctaw and
Chickasaw and the Cherokee act vet
there is no question but what the
courts would refuse to aid anv person
I'm his efforts to rob an Indian of his
land or possessions. The courts would
sustain the officers in their efforts to
protect the Indians.
1T is not necessary for me to quote
Sections Of the 6fft 7 inc fef
the officers viii but carry out the law.
there is ample provision to protect the
Indians and ] believe if any officer is
neglecting to do his full duty he should
be removed.
Tn considering the conditions that OK
ist in the territory it must be remem-
bered:
"First-That all allotments to mem
bers of the five civilized tribes must be
made by the Dawes commission and
that the secretary of the interior is
authorized to make all needed rules and
regulations to carry out the various acts
or congress relating to the lands in the
indian Territory.
'Second-That no Indian can make a
valid lease until after his allotment is
made and that, even then. in the Chick
asaW and Choctaw country. the leases
must be for reasonable consideration.
lnird-That it is the duty of the Uni
ted states Indian gent to put each Indian
IN possession of his allotment and to re-
move all Objectionable persons there
from. and the acts of the agent are not
subject TO process issued from any
court
'Fourth-That no sale of Indian lands |
IN the Creek or Cherokee countries is |
valid unless approved by the secretary |
of the interior
In addition to it being the duty of |
the government officials to protect the
indians. each of the five tribes has an |
attorney. who is paid a large salary by |
lhe year. and believe they should help !