The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1909-02-10
WHITES FIRST TOOK POSSES.
SION AS souATTERs AND
STARTED TOWN.
UNMOLESTED IN OCCUPANCY
When the Land Was opensd These
Men Believed That Tney Were En-
titled to Consideration and the
Dummy System Was Started.

Muskogcc Ok. Fob Possession
of town lots by white men I'm the
Indian Territory par OF oklahoma.
now under investigation by the fed
cral government. is lhc outcome of
con nliiions peculiar to that country
Prior TO the building of railroads
into the Indian Territory n the ear.
ly 7Os. the five civilized tribes
practically were mdisurbcd by the
cncroachments of white men. Each
tribe held it's lands Jud tribal funds
I'm common condition that prevail.
ed until the last twelve or fifteen
years. when the fpd.al government
negotiated treaties for the allotment
of lapds i'm scvcrur, Each tribal
government was supreme in IT'S own
territory, enacting BIS own laws. and
even innictiug capital punishment
upon it's own cit.zns for certain
crimes
Opportunities for trade attracted
white men to the ulian Territory
whore they were permitted 10 cs.
tablish themselves upon payment of
head TAX, usually 81 a month and
such ad yalorom tan ou their person.
al property as might be- levied by
the tribal governments.
These white men were unable to
buy land ON which 10 erect homes
or business buildings though the.
need of such land was imperative.
/ Il was a custom in those DAYS 70,
n tribal citizen TO settle upon un.
/ occupied land. and fence as much as
/ he might need. as there was an
/ abundance for all From tribal
standpoint such persons were squat
/ tors, who. by common consent. were
never mOlested I'm their occupancy.
Tribal citizens, whose holdings were
| touched by railroads or were situ.
! ated favorably to trade. sold TO these
| invading white men the right TO live
am do business on these squattor
/ tracts. the payment usually being
| an annual rental The collection Of
/ this rental was not disputed by the
/ tribal government and was sustained
by usage TO such an extent that
/ The white man sold and transferred
/ his occupancy right to other persons
In such towns as Muskogoo. Vmlta,
/ Durant and McAloster white men in
vested thousands of dollars I'm build.
ings that stool on land held only
by this occupancy right
! When the tribal governments con
sented to divide their common prop
erty and give each citizen his per
capita share, there was more or less
uneasiness among white non.ctizens.
as to what protection wculd he
given their investments on these
squatter lands Their industry and
enterprise had opened lhe resources
of the country 10 development, aId
from commercial standpoint had
enriched the Indians. These white
men felt that in justice they held
some equity in the land they hal oc-
cupied so many years. In some of the
towns white men controlled as much
as five or ten acres for residence
purposes and owned the occupancy
right TO many business lots on
which they had buildings, there be-
ing no restriction on the amount Of
land that might be held IN this way.
The plan adopted by the federal
and Indian governments in the dis
posal Of this squatter property where
towns We're established was 10 segrc.
. gate the townsites from allotment,
, appraise the value Of each lot ac.
coriing to its desirability for bust.
ness or residence purposes, and sell
, the lots at public auction TO the
highest bidder Provision was made
in recognition OF the alleged equity
OF non-citizens in lots 10 which they
held occupancy rights, that such per.
sons should be permitted TO buy two
residence lots and one business lot
at one-half their appraised value;
for such other lots as they might
hold, title could be obtained only
by competitive bidding at public auc
ton.
In many instances the lots on
which this privilege was given were
only small per cent of the lots
| held by white non-citizen, who had
| Invested in these occupancy rights
from year to year, and the prospect
J of having to acquire these other lots