Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1910-08-13
testimony at Land Inquiry Says
Choctaw County offered Rich
Field for Lawyers Represent
ng Claimants,
FIVE MILLION DOLLARS
EXPENSE IN SINGLE CASE
McMuray and His Partners
Pfofited Immensely in Rep
reSenting Cases of Claimants
Before The Government,

\ Before The Government,
Inv Morning journal Special raased wirsl
Sulphur, Okla, Aug. 12.-Lawyers
n expense accounts running as high as
100000 a single fee already paid
amounting to $75O,0O0. and conting-
ent fees still pending that would ag-
gregate about s5.000,00O figured in
the investigation of the Indian land
affairs by the special commtte APP
pointed by the house of representa-
lives today
Il was pointed out that the Indians
never had secured large amounts Of
money due them without having TO
pay large sums in the shape of fees,
and although they employed regular
lawyers on yearly salaries. extra fees
were constantly paid for the employ
ment of special counsel The special
fee of $3.50, 900 was paid several years
ago to J. f. McMurray and his law
partners after they had prosecuted
what are known as the citizenship
cases which 1t was stated, kept off the
rolls $4,000 claimants who wanted TO
participate in the claims against the
government
By the winning of this suit it was
eYDlained that-the value of the prop
efiy to the Indians who are named on
the rolls, was enhanced SIC, 100000 on
a basis of $1,000 for each of the 3D.
600 claimants who We're kept off, The
sale Of the property and the division
of the proceeds is still being fought
for by the Indians
This testimony developed in the ex-
animation of George T.. Scott a Choc-
taw Scott Was active in securing sig
natures for the McMurray contracts
TO promote the approval of which byI
congress Senator Thomas p. Gore
charges on May G he was offered a
bribe of $4,000 or $4,000.
McMurray's contracts. Scott testi-
fies if carried out in their entirety
would dispose of about S50.000,0 900
worth of property which at ten per
cent attorneys fee" basis would re-
suit in a net profit to McMurray and
his associates of almost $4,000 600.
This fee, according to Senator Gore,
and members Of the committee who
interrogated the witnesses, would he
paid for services that the government
already had promised to give the In
dans without cost.
Scott also showed in his testimony
that the cost of employing McAIurray
would be in addition to 100000 now
paid annually to regular attorneys.
Scotts contention was that the at
tOrOaNrc n 10
not as active as contingent fee at
torneys
Scott appeared after his name fire.
quently had been mentioned by prev
ions witnesses.
It was he who testified he had sem
kilograms to Washington urging the
approval of the contracts He had
been working for McMurray without
any written or verbal agreement, he
said, MS to sharing in the fee, and had
induced many Indians TO sign. lie
worked in this respect among the In
dans despite the opposition of Green
McCurtain, chief of $4,000 Choctaws.
In one telegram to Richard A. Ad-
ans, an attorney at Washington he
referred to Vice President sherman
and Senator Curtis of Kansas as "un-
aerstanding better than any one else
what the Indians wanted"
Questioned as to what he meant by
mat. Scott said he understood Mr..
sherman and Senator Curtis long had
been familiar with Indian affairs ana
he thought they were the ones to he
appealed to. Notwithstanding II had
been shown that both Mr.. sherman
and Mr.. Curtis had protested against
me 10 per cent fee. They thought
II too high and unnecessary.
Before being connected with NC
Murray, Scott had been treasurer OF
'he ChOctaw nation.
When cross-examination came. the
witness said the department OF the
Interior sometimes had complained
concerning his method of cashing
warrants for money due against the
nation. He said he sometimes had
favored friends in making payments |
when his authority for doing so, was
In dispute.
Did you ever make any payments
after you had received notice from l
,he department that Won we're not 70
80 so until the act authorizing you to
make such payments had been APP
proved by tho president ." asked Rep
sentative G. p. Miller.
Yes. 7 believe I did. hut IL was
Nhen the act itself was in dispute.
Then you admit that you deliber- I
i'eiF violated the order from the de-
partmentP"
understand it was the opinion Of