The Topeka state journal., 1906-05-04
Said That It Wouldn't Cost
State a Penny.
COLEMAN WAS BUSY.
Question Arises by Whom We're
His Expenses Paid.
Ex-GOY. Stanley Talks About
the Suit.

explanation of his consent for institute
ing suit in the name of the state OF
Kansas against the government in be-
half Of the Missouri. Kansas & Texas
Railway company created almost as
much comment here as did the original
filing of the suit. The interview with
the governor was printed in all the
eastern papers and he was quoted as
saying that the suit would not cost
the state of Kansas a penny" If this
statement be true, the question at once
arises, Who paid the expenses Of At
torney General Coleman, who came to
Washington and spent several days
here?
II Kansas did not pay Attorney Cen
eral Coleman's expenses, it must either
have come out of his own pocket or
that of the governor who directed him
to come, or from the Missouri, Kansas
& Texas Railway company. If the de-
velopments should show that the ex-
penses of Attorney General Coleman
are being betrayed by Kansas. It would
necessitate some sort of an explanation.
II the expenses of the attorney general
are borne by the railway company, it
would be quite as embarrassing to the
governor. In this particular suit, the
state of Kansas neither stands to win
nor lose money. but Kansas has al
ways maintained that It was very much
a part of the United States. and the
United States stands to lose not less
than so million dollars.
In another paragraph of his interview.
Governor Hoch says: Il believe that
rights of the people who have taken up
this land and who are living upon it as
we'll as to ascertain what rights the
railroad company has TO the land"
The suit is against the government
the ofncials of the government and the
Indian allottees. The right OF the Indian
allottees calnoJ be questioned for the
Indians obtained their title to the land
by treaty which is the highest title the
government can recognize. The entire
Hoch's connection with this case has
been thoroughly discussed by the MEM
bers Of the delegation here
1t is said that when the late r. n.
Sedgwick of Emporia, ex-general attor-
ney for the Missouri Kansas & Texas
Railway company, quit it was the uni
versal impression in Kansas that he
would be succeeded by Ike" Lambert
of Emporia or one of the other Kansas
| attorneys of the company Instead of
Mr.. Lambert being appointed John
Madden was selected and Mr.. Madden
had a short time before been offered
the position as private secretary to Gov
ernOr Hoch, but had declined 1t. Mad
den's selection as general attorney, 50 It
| is sas by Kansans here, was a com
plete surprise to everybody and those
who kept in close touch with develop
! ments of this character attributed It
\ to Governor Hoch. The only explana-
/ ton which anybody here has offered for
| Governor I4ocn's action is the one con-
tained in William Allen Whites inter
view, which, like everything else in re-
gard to this suit is being thoroughly
exploited in the eastern newspapers At
| torne-y General Coleman did not confer
with any of the Kansans here prior to
bringing his suit and left town Tues
Stanley Raps the Katy.
Wichita, kan, May 4.@'I am Of the
belief that the Missouri, Kansas &
Texas railroad has no moral right TO
the claims made in the suit relative to
Indian Territory lands" said ex-Gover-
nor Stanley, a former member Of the
Dawes commission, today.
''I can not see how tn state OF Kan
sas and Governor Hoch get into the
fight, or rather can not see on what
grounds they get in. The fight should
not be taken up by the state for this
railroad COM pany. The company Is
able to fight for itself II necessary.
LAS I understand it. the Missouri.
Kansas & Texas contends that it com
piled with the original grant There
was a contest between several roads TO
reach the country first and the Katy
| conTended that it reached the southern
border of Kansas first and was there
fore entitled to the grant
when the land was opened to the
five civilized tribes the company fled a.
/ claim before the Dawes commission.
/ The commission took no recognition Of
the claim on the ground that it was
not morally just even should il be
| proved to be legally just. It was the
general understanding at that time
that a suit would be fled. but no enc
ever believed that the name Of the
state of Kansas would be back of If.
Whether or not the conditions of
/ the grant have been complied with is
a question that I should not like to
/ pass on in a legal way at present. But
I even If they had been, this railroad
company has no moral right to these
lands. Kansas has no moral right to
back the company in its suit and much
/ Injustice will be done the Indians if
/ the railroad wins.
IF Governor Hoch has made a deal
with the Missouri, Kansas & Texas it
ought to become known to the voters
Of Kansas It Is too big a matter to be
/ passed without recognition