The Vinita daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1913, 1903-09-05
You Church by Working

ever, that those very "specia
iacis'' which we've to cut off, ant
prevent such reversion, were d.
signedly provided in the plan Q
allotment; to wit, the Cherokee
Nation is to convey by deed in fs'
simple directly to the allottee;anC
the United States is to approv'
such deed, which approval is t.
work REIMBURSEMENT to the al
lottee of all interest that tb'
United States ever held in th'
property. The reply is easy anC
conclusive. What ever may have
been the design of these provi
sions, they are utterly futile al
safeguards for the protection o
the allottee against the railroad
claim
In the first place, the deed from
the Cherokee Nation, as a mum
ment of title. is absolutely worth.
less; 1t is not worth the paper on
which il is written. The Chero
kee Nation, having only a life es
tate in the property, can not con
vey so as to defeat the rights OF
reversion. Nor is it in the power
OF the United States, as reversion-
or, to help the infrmity OF this
deed OF the Cherokee Nation, any
more than any other stranger
might do; because as early as 1866
the United States parted with and
granted to the railroad company
all the interest in the property il
then had, or ever expected to
have. The railroad thus succeed
ed to all the rights OF the United
States, and is now the ultimate
reversioner Upon the extinction
of the Indian ownership, the
United States stood only as a me-
dium through which the title
would have technically to pass in
its instantaneous transition from
the Cherokee Nation to the rail-
road company. Up to this point
OF the discussion, the railroad
cOu pany is unquestiOnably the
real owner Of said section No. 80
But it is said again that the
charter carries in itself a safeguard
sufficient to afford The allottee all
needed protection; the railroad
company is mol 20 have the land
when the Nations title Is extin-
guish ed but ii has still to wait un-
iii the land in question has as.
sumed that technical form IN
which it can be properly called the
"publc lands Of the United
States" and this, it is said, it
never viii do.
lis noticeable that this is an ar
gument the force Of which con
sisis merely in the ardor Of hop f;
it'll sincerely hoped that lhese
lands may never become the
"public lands Of the United
States. p II is very certain that
The railroad company, when they
lobbied this charter through con-
gress, had aa eye to some future
day RAen this latter condition
would be iulflled, and their title
perfected; and if the same antici-
patton was not also at the time
present aciuanng the mind Of con-
gfess, We have az least one IN
stance 10 which that august body
laid of its dignity, aud came
down Co meaningless lrihing end
legislative chiesnery. Indeed The
very existence oi such q proviso
carries with Il the reservation of
the right on The part Of congress
TO enact. at the suggestion of public
policy, any such laws in the future
as may be needed 10 give the same
lands the character OF "pubic
lands 81 The United States" il
amounts to a notice to the allottse
that he must take his allotment at
his own risk; and ttal hi- title 20
bis allotment is not to be regarded
as a judicial, but merely 3 poIiti-
cal question.
These views, it is true, may be
reproached by some classes Of
minds as too extravagani for reali