University of Virginia Library

Politics

1. They All Do It

(from Indian Journal, May 17, 1901)

Chas. Gibson's Argument Proves That.

The humblest, the greatest, the richest, the poorest all, all do it. Take a minister of the Gospel, take the good old deacons; in fact any Indian of the Five tribes--there is not one in 500 but what will take a little "sumthin" and one calls for two drinks, etc., and so on up to where they lose all respect and pride and of course are prone to go down under the weight of drink.

We often hear the white man preacher score the public for drinking. Not one in five whites get in the gutter while four out of five Indians will get to the gutter. Some of the ablest and best Indians of the Five tribes will make no halt at one or two drinks of whiskey. After getting one drink all of them [lose] their self respect and will get gloriously drunk. The first or second drink is taken with closed doors but after this they will take it where there is room to elevate the elbow and bottle. This thing of drink is a worse curse to Indians than any other race on the face of the earth to-day. Had it not been for Christopher Columbus and his four ten-gallon kegs of whiskey this U.S. would belong to the American Indians. This is a whole mouth full to say but Indian tradition tells us when Columbus was unable to get communication with the Indian he one night had a lifeboat landed on the beach with four kegs of whiskey with three or four dozen tin cups handily placed around the kegs and had the heads knocked out, in which shape Mr. Indian found things on the beach. He approached the kegs with caution, looked into the well filled kegs of whiskey with a great deal of pride. In fact he had all his pride with him. He stuck the end of his finger into the kegs and tasted each and saw that it was good not only to look upon but was fair to the Indian taste. He and others went from keg to keg tasting with the tips of their fingers until they were all feeling, as the fellow said, salubrious. Just there is where he lost his pride and each of them got a tin cup and drank with the white man's whiskey.

The next morning found several of the bucks in the gutter as it were, not able to stagger away. Then Columbus knew he had the ropes on Mr. Injun so he landed another yawl or lifeboat and proceeded to scoop Mr. Injun and dump him into his life boat previous to carrying him to his ships which he did on short notice. After getting him or them aboard it was no trouble to swap land, his friendship, his birthright or anything else that came handy for whiskey. Since which time the Indian has had a weakness for strong drink. If the Indians could, in making treaties with the U.S., have the U.S. to make a law to hang every white man who sells whiskey to Indians and to hang the Indian for drinking the whiskey it would settle the Indian problem, which problem has caused the U.S. no little trouble.

In case the Cherokees make another agreement we would suggest that this little hanging clause aforesaid be amended to their next agreement and all will be calm and serene in the Cherokee nation and we will try and have congress do likewise unto us.

2. Did You Ever Think Of It?

(from Indian Journal, May 24, 1901)

The Indians Were But Now Are Not. Presto Chang[o], and You Done it Yourselves.

Did You Ever Think of It?

Some of Us Copper Colored People's Wants.

Somewhere in the neighborhood of 240 acres of land each. And, again; isn't there a lot of money due us copper colored people in the U.S. Treasury? That might come in handy now. Also moneys for school purposes and some territorial form of government with a home rule, if we are not entitled to statehood.

Did You Ever Think of It?

We have men here in the Territory who can fill any office required in a territory. White, black, red, republican, democrat or any other political party.

Did You Ever Think of It?

We are being ruled to-day as if white, black and red were wards of this U.S. Why not give us a governor and let us do the balance, and brace up and be somebody and be done with it.

The Creek Treaty

It has been tampered with too much. It is like the Curtis bill.1 Every one in congress seems to have been experts with Indians. If the Indian is going to be taxed on 120 acres for five years before he can realize anything off it, of course he will oppose the treaty. Who could blame them for doing so. The Indians are poor and are not able, all of them, to pay the taxes and hold on to this 120 acres. Of course if we are U.S. citizens, the government has the right to tax her citizens on some of our property, yet it is forbidden by the same power, that the 120 acres must not be conveyed by contract otherwise.

Who ever heard of such laws. The taxes on 120 acres of good land will amount to something in five years. What fullblood is going to be able to pay taxes on say 720 acres for five years. Be it ever so small a tax it will amount to several acres of the 720 acres in five years which land will be sold for taxes, of course. Yet the Indian must not be allowed to realize anything on each 120 acres belonging to his family say of six.

We hear some little talk from the full-bloods. They say "why, the white people are trying to box us up so they can get a revenue on our lands, but do not let us, the owners, get anything out of it." Why not wait the five years and then make a treaty that will give us a deed to our lands at once. Why not give us a deed and allow us to dispose of say 80 acres for each one or our families. The proceeds of which might enable every Creek Indian citizen to build up and fence, in good shape, the remaining 80 acres to each Creek citizen man woman and child.

Is it not better to have 360 acres of well fenced and well cultivated land for six persons than 720 acres of unfenced and uncultivated land? The other 360 acres which the Indian will dispose of, will, or course, go into the hands of parties who will at once go to work to raise a revenue for Uncle Sam one way or another. It is not the object of the U.S. in making treaties with nations of Indians for the aforesaid lands to remain blank on the face of this North American continent. Any man can see that with his hands tied behind him. There has been too many Indian experts. They have the Indian problem in such a tangle that the U.S. is like the man who caught the wildcat. She would like for some one to help let go the cat.

We are not an Indian expert, but we believe if the five year clause had been left off of the Creek treaty, that it would have had easy sailing through the Creek council. Reserve the 40 acres for each individual Creek citizen and let them do as they please with the 120 acres as it was in the agreement and we will feel that it would be right and if nothing more, would have been according to the Creek agreement anyway.

3. Passing of Creek Lands

(from Indian Journal, June 21, 1901)

Chas. Gibson Tells of the Passing of the Last Stomping Ground.

For twenty-five years there has been hatched without number, all leading in one direction, some way to gobble up this, the last resting place, the last home of the red man.

Now that the Creek treaty has been ratified, was it the lick or feather that broke the Creek citizens back?

He is declared a citizen1 of the United States of America. Does he know what that means, does know what that is, being a citizen of this great U.S.? How will he know when his rights are being trespassed upon? Who will advocate his cause? Must he not speak for himself? As long as he does not say, I am a citizen of this great government and that the world of men must respect, his nose will be kept to the grind stone. As some old pelican said in olden times, "the watch word of all citizens of the Indian Territory should be 'give me statehood and liberty or give me home rule at least.'"

There are men, white, red and black, who are as able, in the five tribes, to look after the affairs of this country as they have in any little old state. But no, congress has rashly promised us more laws than any little province on the face of the earth. Here among the five tribes we have a slight touch of the Arkansas law;2 we have some Curtis laws, we have some Creek, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw and Seminole laws; we have no peace and order. That is what the Indian Territory is accused of at any rate.

What this country would need, right now, is statehood in short order. Get a new broom and foreverlasting sweep these half dozen remnants of disjointed rules and regulations off the face of the Indian Territory.

If the five tribes are U.S. citizens why not they be recognized as such and give them home rule as their rights demand?

All the agreements and treaties go on to say we will endeavor by strict laws to keep all intoxicants out of the Indian Territory. Why have such stuff in a treaty? If there is anything that an Indian likes it is whiskey. And if there is any production that a white man loves to sell it is red whiskey. Whiskey selling to Indians is like hanging for murder--the idea of stopping either is preposterous. As the fellow said, that little thing can't be did, and furthermore, history repeats itself. It is always essential to have whiskey very handy when Indian lands are on the market. It makes an Indian feel rich enough to sell his land. It is whiskey that he wants then--it is not land or money--Mr. Injun is now a great pet. His fur is being rubbed down the right way. He is a bully good fellow now. A cigar and a social drink don't cost him anything. Just now he is gulping down great tubs full of flattery. Why? Well, you know. But say five years from now the place that knew him once will not be apt to recognize him any more because by that time he will have worried down his throat enough red whiskey to overflow his 160 acres of land. Then he will wake up to find himself a befuddled Indian pauper.

Thus will end the Indian's interest in this beautiful garden spot of the United States.

Chas. Gibson

P.S.--The writer is Indian but don't drink, hence the scorching and advice is given free of charge.

4. Government Offices

(from Indian Journal, February 14, 1902)

There is, or should be, another government office, but we suppose there is no one in congress with any poor relations that could fill the place;1 therefore, it has been overlooked. There is room, or would be, for three offices; that is, three interpreters for the three districts. Indians are being constantly tried, some for murder. This crime is one that consumes a great deal of the time of the court and the English language itself is put to the test in order to convict or release a prisoner, white or black.

Now, when we look at a case of a white or black man being tried in the United States court we wonder what chances there is for hearing an Indian case where all parties are Indians. This thing of interpreting a murder trial is not the interpreting of a sermon, or a contract, or a conversation between Indians and whites.

We are almost satisfied that many a criminal is turned loose and many an innocent man convicted all on account of incompetent interpreters.

We have lived long among the Indians and whites, understand the Creek language perfectly and know some English, and we know that it takes one knowing both to know what awful mistakes can be made in trying to convert English into the Creek language, and what a job it is to convert Creek into English. A mistake is made so easily, but one who is interpreting is never allowed to go back and explain the mistake on the account of rush of business of the court. Being a court of justice it cannot be too careful in having a first class interpreter, which animal is a very rare article, in other words, good interpreters in any of these five nations are very scarce. You can take our best educated Indians as a general thing, and they will tell you that they are very poor interpreters.

We believe congress, or someone who has the power, should have as a regular salaried officer, a good interpreter, who should be paid enough to leave his home and attend the courts. In all of these nations the government pays out a great deal of money to parties undeserving, yet she spends no money on an interpreter for her courts, which, we think, is very essential. He is allowed very little pay for his work.

Each commissioner should have an interpreter as well as the court and he should be paid like other petty officers of the United States.

5. Red Whiskey

(from Indian Journal, July 18, 1902)

Some time ago there came to town from the mountainous district of the Creek nation one of the knowing ones, as he is called, or in other words, a bad medicine man. He proceeded to tank up on what Bill Shakespeare calls "that which cheers, the sad revives, the old inspires, makes merriness forget her toils and furor her danger." He was of the kind that can track his enemy at night and make himself visible or invisible at will in battle. He was all this, yet he had a weakness for the white man's red whisky. Now, the presence of this thing, whiskey, in the Indian Territory is contrary to all treaties the U.S. government has rashly and without aforethought made with the Indian people. So the great medicine man in question got a little more than the law allowed him to stand up under and was summarily placed behind the bars. But, by virtue of his great knowledge of medicine, he escaped and got a citizen of the town to make bond for him. Then he left and, of course, his bondsman had to foot up for his bond.

Now, we don't know how this whiskey business is handled by the authorities, but it seems they handle it very carelessly. In fact, it is getting so far along that red whiskey can be bought in any territory town by the drink, bottle or jug; and the men who introduce, sell and give it away go scot free.

For years Congress has been bombarded with petitions for more laws, more courts, etc. And these have been promised. Now, whether or not Congress will impose a tax on red whiskey and make the sale of same legitimate business in the Territory remains to be seen.

6. The Indian's Beliefs and Disbeliefs

(from Indian Journal, October 10, 1902)

He does not believe there is a happy hunting ground for him or any other race; but he does believe that people bob up after death in another state. He believes that the individual enters a new life in some shape or fashion--maybe as a deer. He does not believe that there is a heaven or hell; but he does believe that there is a supreme law, being or power to be adored and which he has named, The One Looking Over the Indian.

The Indian never takes this name in vain. He does not believe in doing so, and had he a mind to do so, he lacks the language.

There is no natural Indian an infidel. He believes that when he has committed a wrong he shall in some way suffer for it, but he does not believe in expiating his misdeeds in jail. Nor does he believe that he should suffer for crimes committed while intoxicated, or be called to account for handling intoxicating liquors, having had nothing to do with its manufacture.

The Indian believes that all treaties which he has made with the general government have been highly detrimental to his welfare. He believes that the white man is quick to promise but slow to fulfill; that he himself is quick to follow the vices of the white man but slow to take on his virtues.

He believes that the Indian was not created to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow, especially since bread has been on his bill of fare but a short time.

He does not believe that it is right for monied men to rule the country. He would rather that a committee of good men, well-tried and worthy, be delegated to say who shall be ruler. Money or no money, he believes in the equality of men before the law.

He believes that there are too many seekers after place in the Indian Territory.1

He believes that his country is too good a place for broken down politicians from the north and the east. He believes that affairs in this country would prosper just as well without so much out side help.

He believes that if his country is not good enough for some people there are many ways out of it without being kicked out of it.

He believes that the land buyers will buy all the land in the country if the Secretary of the Interior does not come down and put them in jail for contempt or some other charge.

He believes that if the Territory was annexed to Oklahoma or Arkansas, or to a chicken coop, some rooster would be governor and that the old hens would gobble up all the offices before the Indian could say scat!

7. As To Statehood

(from Indian Journal, November 21, 1902)

It is an old saying that politics makes strange bed fellows. However that may be, most of the newspapers of the B.I.T. seem to have lots of politics on hand. Some want single statehood and others hunger for double statehood.1

Now, all this sort of business is entirely new to the Five Civilized Tribes. They are rushing along so swiftly in the full current of progress that the majority of them have never given a single thought to the affairs of the white man. But it seems to us that the actual owners of this Indian Territory ought to be allowed a word in the matter of single or double statehood when the proper time comes, which is not soon--1906. To a raw recruit, all this scramble to get in the statehood band wagon seems a little premature. For if the Indian Territory has as much trouble getting statehood as other territories that have been admitted into the union, fifteen or twenty years hence will be time enough to tackle this great question.

It is said that all citizens of the Indian Territory are United States citizens, but when the claim is tested things are not what they seem. For instance, an Indian cannot sell a foot of his allotment, deed or no deed, price or no price, without the consent and approval of the secretary of the interior. Go way back yonder in Newton county2 and buy a bed of flint rocks or red clay from a citizen of that county and see if he asks the approval of any body but Liza Jane3 to consummate the trade. The citizen of Newton county is a citizen of the United States. He has a deed to his land and a right to sell it whenever he feels like it without anyone's consent except Liza's. When she touches the pen, that settles it. But that practice does not obtain it in the Creek nation. Any Indian can touch the pen, but it is no go. So it can be seen that there is a great gulf yawning between the citizen of Newton county and the citizen of the Creek nation.

The citizens of the Five Civilized Tribes are not allowed to exercise their rights as United States citizens. In fact, we are allowed nothing but a small slice of self government and that for only a limited time. Yet, however small the slice, it might not mix well with single or double statehood. One fourth of our lands are non-taxable and that would not, perhaps, suit either Oklahoma or Arkansas. We cannot pool school funds with either of these counties as yet. Our agreement says no moneys belonging to the tribe shall be appropriated without the approval of council, and the agreement provides that the council shall live until 1906. So it seems to us that it will be time enough to talk statehood when we are United States citizens for keeps. Then we are not acquainted anyway with those fellows on our borders.

It also appears to us that after five years there will be no room for a scramble; for by that time all the people from our border states will have flocked into the Indian Territory and taken up permanent abode. Annexation then will be useless. The wants of all will then have been satisfied and any kind of statehood will do--single, double or treble.

8. The Great Powwow

(from Indian Journal, December 5, 1903)

The great powwow of the Five Civilized Tribes at Eufaula1 came to an end last Saturday evening just as the sun went down. To an outsider, it looked like the last grand and final rally of the Indians of the Territory.

We looked over the representative body at roll call and were somewhat at a loss to locate the Choctaws, the Indian blood having been about bleached out of them. It looked to us like a convention of white Indians. But upon a second survey we succeeded in seeing a few old faces that said Indian to the core--the faces of Col. Kacher Homahtee2, Old Soggy3 and perhaps three others, who could lay claims to being full blooded American Indians without objection.

Now, these delegates from the different nations were very able men, however white or red their complexion. They did good work for their constituents. But they had so much to look after in so short space of time that we of the ignorant class regret that they did not give enough time and thought to one little resolution that was offered and turned down.

This little resolution proposed that since there is an element of whites and blacks among the Indians opposed to being hooked up in the traces with Oklahoma, let us see how much of this element we can get to help us in warding off the threatened blow of annexation.

Now, we believe in union; that is, we like lots of help. In fact, if we can get the other fellow to go ahead and do the necessary work in our stead we are for enjoying the fruits of his labor. But the convention did not look at it that way and so turned the little resolution down as we have stated.

In our judgement, it should not have been done. These whites and blacks who are in sympathy with the Indians in opposing annexation with Oklahoma or any other country are good people and believe that the Indians' interests are theirs also. They have friends in congress as well as those that seek union with Oklahoma. They would help put up a strong fight. How much more effective would have been the work of the convention had it invited the help of these people! Especially when some of our own people are taking sides against us and appear to be on the winning side. We believe the convention made a great mistake in not extending an invitation to outside friends to join hands with the Indians in the struggle.