The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1908-09-28


the lightest possible manner even to cen
| sure Mr.. Haskell for his manifold mis-
deeds; and you ask that he be held quit
less of them unless convicted in court OF
law although you well know that as re-
CARDS the worst of them no action in
court of law would lie.
You ask that we leave the courts to
deal with Mr.. Haskell. AS to some mat
tiers the courts have already dealt with
him. As to others, various private indi-
yiduals whom he has wronged and the
United States government on behalf of
helpless Indians whom he has wronged,
are striving to have the courts so deal
with him.
More Haskell Charges.
MIR. NJ. L. Mott, national attorney of
the Creek Nation, write me as follows:
I'm October. 1906, Mr.. Foulke of
Richmond. Ind, was sent to investigate
the matter of the townsite frauds in the
Creek Nation Mr. Foulke's report is in
the hands of the Secretary of the In
terror. Several parties connected with
these frauds have used the same means
and methods. Upon the report filed by
Mr.. Foulke, I, as attorney for the Creek
Nation was directed by the Secretary OF
the Interior to file suits in equity for the
cancellation of all deeds to town lots IN
the Creek Nation where the same had
been secured by fraud. Proceeding under
Instructions and after full investigation,
I found that Gov. c. N. Haskell, among
others, had secured deeds to quite num-
Der of lots in Muskogee by conspiracy
and frauds; that he had had these lots
scheduled In the name of dummies or
straw men who lived In the state Of
Ohio and elsewhere, and had them make
quit claims back to him without oonsld-
Grafton. BY this dishonest means he sue
eeeded in getting deeds to large num-
Der of lots belonging to the Creek In
dams at one-half their appraised value. l
have filed quite number of suits against
Governor Haskell in which conspiracy and
fraud is charged, and the manner of con-
summating 1t Is set out in detail. Has
kell has not filed any answer in any OF
these cases. He has simply, through his
attorney, filed dilatory motions, such az
demurrers, pleading to the jurisdiction,
etc. He dare not answer and deny the al
legations set up in our bill; such an an
swer would be a sworn lie and known to
be by the large number of straw men
and dummies he used in perfecting the
fraud"
For this particular act of the man
whose public records you indorse, you
may rest assured that the interior de-
partment will endeavor to see that the
courts do Justice to him.
Judgments Filled.
'When Mr.. Haskell was in New York
various judgments were filed against him.
I will not at this moment discuss the
charges of perjury and fraud made
against him by Attorney Albert H. Wal
ker of New York, in connection with the
suit decided by Judge Laeombe in March,
1902. But the records of the county clerk
of New York county show that on Feb
ruary 81, 1900, Judgment for damages
and costs, amounting to s42,2S5.4 49, record
ed in the supreme court, was filed against
Charles N. Haskell On April 2, 1900,
this judgment was returned on the sher-
ifs execution satisfied to the extent of
only S29, $50, and the remainder of 1t re-
mains still unsatisf1ed. Neither shall I
touch upon the various suits of all kinds
now pending against him for all kinds
of reasons. Thus, 1t is reported in the
press under date of September 10, 1908
that a $500 judgment had been obtained
against Mr.. Haskell by an attorney OF
Arkansas, who was employed by him to
lobby before the city council of Musko-
gee to get through a franchise Tha
attorneys fee was never paid, but the
franchise was granted; nor again. shall
I touch upon the fac-simile published
in the press of September %, last show
ing Mr.. Haskell to have three years ago
Joined an organization to prevent union
idDOF from SHlSTlIlB The city III WHICH H6
lived Indeed as regards this last state
ment wish distinctly to acquit Mr.. Has
kell of being opposed on principle to
either trade unions or corporations; for
I wish to acquit him of being opposed
on principle to anything.
Standard Oil Deals.
sNow as to Governor Haskell's con-
nection with the Standard Oil company
IL, yau o1x
the fact that the United States govern
ment permitted the Standard Oil COM
pany, on the same terms as any and all
companies, to enjoy the legal privileges
to which it was entitled on the Indian
reservations of Oklahoma, as his justi1-
cation for having given 1t Illegal privi-
leges, to which 1t was not entitled in
the state of Oklahoma The excuse fur
nishes the measure of Governor Has
kells moral quality. The federal act of
March II, 1904. conferred upon the Sec
rotary of the Interior the right to grant
| permits for oil and gas pipe lines to
cross Indian reservations.
Regulations to carry out the law
were drawn up by the Indian office
| and approved by the Secretary of the
Interior April 81, 1904. In compliance
with the law and the regulations, the
| department of the interior permitted
the Standard Oil pipe line (the Prairie
Oil and Gas company and the various
rival pipe line companies (such as the
| oklahoma Natural Gas company, the
| Cary River Gas company, the Dense
| Portland Cement company and others,
including the Texas and Gulf company
| all on the same terms and under the
| same conditions, the right of way
| across the Indian reservations. No
| preference or privilege was granted
to any company that was not also
| granted to all others. Any other ac-
ton than that actually taken by tho
interior department would have been
as grossly improper as the actions of
Gov Haskell himself,
Permit of Government.
1.-THE permit of the national govern
| ment as set forth in the telegram of
| the Secretary of the Interior to Gov.
Haskell of April 23, last was merely
| to cross or use the restricted allot-
| ments and tribal property Of the In
dams; it had nothing to do with the
question of compliance with the laws
of the state of Oklahoma, and con-
| ferred no privilege to cross territory
| in Oklah oma outside of these reserva-
| lions. Coy. Haskell refuses to permit
| any proceedings to be taken against
| the Standard Oil company, although
| this company declines to obey the law
| of Oklahoma. He claims that the
! Standard Oil rights were superior to
the requirements of the Oklahoma con-
| stitution, for which he was himself
mainly responsible. He took the decision
of this question away from the courts.
| and against the opinion of his ATTORNEY