University of Virginia Library

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.