The weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Craig County, Okla.) 1905-1913, 1911-03-31
TITLES TO INDIAN
LANDS AFFECTED
Decision of State Supreme Court is
Most Sweeping-SeveraI Hundred
Thousand Acres Affected.

Oklahoma City, Mar 24.-Atter
close survey of the opinion of the
state supreme court in the case of
Parkinson VS.. Shelton from Okmulgee
county, lawyers from the east side of
the state say that it is the most
sweeping in its effect upon Indian
land titles in that section of Okla
homa ever handed down by any court
since statehood. According to Nate
/ Gibson of Muskogee, who is familiar
with Indian land conditions, the de-
cision of the court nullifies the titles
of thousands of land owners to sew
eral hundred thousand acres of land
in former Indian Territory.
The court held in this case that re-
strfctions upon the alienation of in
herited lands in the hands of the heirs
of deceased allottees of the Creek ma
ton were not removed under the act
of April 81, 1904, and, further, that
the homestead allotment of citizen
who died intestate and without issue,
as well as his surplus allotment, ex-
cept with the approval of the secre-
tary of the interior, were inalienable
by his heirs prior to the expiration of
five years from the date of the ap-
proval of the Greek supplemental
agreement, which became effective
August s, 1902.
This decision, as interpreted by east
side attorneys who have examined it,
means that any citizen of the Five
Tribes not of Indian blood who was
living at the date of the removal of
restrictions from this class of citizens,
April 21, 1904, had a right to sell his
, surplus allotment subsequent to that
time, but that if he died prior to that
date his heirs could not convey the
land, without the approval of the sec
retary prior to August g. 1907, which
was five years from the date of the
/ approval of the Greek supplemental
agreement.
The principal classes of Indian eiti-
zens from whom restrictions were re-
moved by the act of April 21, 1904,
were intermarried negroes and whites.
Between the date of the passage of
the congressional act ermoving the re-
strictions from such citizens thousands
of the original allottees died leaving
their lands to their heirs. When re-
strictions were removed upon this
: class of lands Indian territory lawyers
took the position that the restrictions
were removed upon the lands in the
hands of heirs of such citizens as we'll
as in the hands of original alottees
still living.
AS a result several hundred thou
sands of acres of inherited lands were
g purchased and a large majority of the
t tracts have been transferred several
times since that time passing from the
: hands of land men and spectators into
S the possession of farmers who have
t improved the land. The effect of the
! decision is that such lands now vest
: again in the heirs of the original allot.
I tees. \ 1t is stated that in some cases
: towns and city additions have been
: laid out on such lands and in all such
3 instances the title to every lot is up
e set. The case will doubtless go to the
. supreme court of the United States
for final determination.
= Another decision of the supreme
S court of vital interest to the east side
e of the state is that in the case OF
: Hooks VS.. Kennard from Waeoner
: county, in which the court holds that
S where citizens of the Creek nation
0 died prior to the supplemental treaty
d approved August 8, 1902, their allot
: ing to the Creek law of descent and
r ments descended to their heirs accord
Y distribution and that at no time prior
: to August 8, 1907, when restrictions
e were removed under the terms of the
supplemental treaty, could the lands
f of Greek Indians be devised by will
J. 1t is stated that during the years
Y preceding 1907 many aIlotments were
t conveyed by will by Creek Indians to
S their heirs. All these conveyances are
e invalidated by the court decision which
r has the effect of unsettling the titles
S to several thousand acres of Indian
: lands.
Y General interest is manifested on the
0 east side Of the state in the decision
t of the supreme court in the case OF
= W. H. Howard ct al VS.. w E. Farrar
t from Choctaw county. 1t is held in
e this case that a deed of a full-blood
+ Choctaw attempting to convey title to
: his land before removal Of restrictions
t is void and that notes given by such
/ aIIottee to indemnify the purchaser
+ for failure on his part to convey the
e land when he could legally do so, are
also void and non-collectable While