up their homes in Mississippi, sell the little property they had, and go to the West without knowing whether they would be identified or not.

I therefore insisted upon that provision and it was obtained by an amendment in the House providing they might have six months after identification. Under that amended section there were enrolled and allotted 1,643 persons Mississippi Choctaws. There were quite a few who did not move-there were 500 identified who did not move and there were 500 of the original schedule of March 10, 1899, who were not reidentified. So that altogether on the identified roll of March 10, 1899, there were a thousand who were dropped out-500 because they did not move and 500 because they were not reidentified upon an investigation as to their rights to identification.

Now, that was the status. Therefore, when this matter came up afterwards on the floor of the Senate, representing the Choctaw and Chickasaws west, I found it not in the least inconsistent with my previous position as advocate of the Mississippi Choctaws to say that after this compromise adjustment of 1902, and after the Choctaws and Chickasaws west had bought their peace in this controversy by allowing the admission of 1,643 Mississippi Choctaws who were taken at the pro rata shares and had granted a very large property, estimated between $10,000,000 and $15,000,000, to these Mississippi Choctaws that they ought to have their peace and ought not to be asked to reopen this roll, especially as Congress had closed this roll peremptorily on March 4, 1907, after having had the rolls open for 11 long years. I had part of my own family left off the Cherokee rolls even-members who were born in the Cherokee country-because they had moved into Virginia and had not reestablished residence, under the rule of Congress in the Curtis Act of 1898 which precluded all those who had not established bona fide residence prior to June 28, 1898.

It was the universal rule established by Congress with regard to the Cherokees and the Seminoles, the Creeks, the Choctaws, and Chickasaws, except only the Mississippi Choctaws, and as their attorney I demanded that exception. I pointed out that they were entitled under the fourteenth article and that they ought not to be precluded for not having established residence before June 28, 1898, since the fourteenth article contemplated that they might retain residence in Mississippi, and so that single exception was made in Congress in 1898, and it was nine years after that exception was made that the rolls were finally closed on March 4, 1907. They have now been closed nearly eight years. I have not thought it inconsistent that the Choctaws and Chickasaws, having bought their peace by this adjustment in 1902, ought not now to be asked to open the rolls again. In the last year there were found by the Interior Department some 300 or 400 persons-I have forgotten just what the number was of individuals who by error, mistake, or oversight had some equitable right to enrollment, and on my advice they were enrolled. The CHAIRMAN. They were enrolled last year.

Senator OWEN. We enrolled them last year upon my request and upon the acquiesence of the Five Civilized Tribes.

Mr. HARRISON. Senator, none of those Choctaws were Mississippi Choctaws.

Senator OWEN. Only a few.

The CHAIRMAN. There were a few; maybe a half dozen.

82833-VOL 1-15- 6

Mr. HARRISON. There were about 20 of the Choctaws who were in that lot that were enrolled.

Senator OWEN. The Interior Department reported on all that had any equitable right remaining and we enrolled them. With that exception there has been no change since Congress fixed the roll in 1907, closing the rolls peremptorily.

Mr. HARRISON. May I ask you in that connection: You really thought after the act of July 1, 1902, was enacted that it restricted the rights of the Mississippi Choctaws, did you?

Senator OWEN. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. HARRISON. You contended all the time that the Mississippi Choctaws did not have the right to move under their treaty rights, did you not?

Senator OWEN. I made that argument that they ought not to be compelled to remove, but it was decided by Judge Clayton and the Dawes Commission, and practically by congressional action, so that nothing remained for me to do except to acquiesce in it.

The CHAIRMAN. I take it, Senator, that you are satisfied with this provision in the bill as passed by the House?

Senator OWEN. Yes; I am.

The CHAIRMAN. It is on pages 26 and 27-beginning with line 23 of page 26.

Mr. HARRISON. Would you object to letting it go before the Court of Claims?

Senator OWEN. I do not think I could agree to that, representing Oklahoma, or acquiesce in any way to opening this matter.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Harrison, do you desire to be heard further on this proposition?

Mr. HARRISON. I do not desire to take up the time of the committee further, and I am very much obliged to the committee for its courtesy. I would like to have the permission of the committee to put into the record just a few things. Would the Senator object if I should put in the record his views with respect to how the rights of the Mississippi Choctaws were restricted by the law of 1902 ?

Senator OWEN. I will state it, if you would like me to do so. Mr. HARRISON. I mean what Senator Owen said as attorney for them. He couched it in such magnificent terms at that time and presented it so much clearer and more forcibly than I could possibly present it, and if the Senator has no objection and the committee will permit, I would like to embody that language of Senator Owen. Senator OWEN. After your very complimentary reference, I do not see how I would have the face to object.

The CHAIRMAN. You may incorporate that in the record, and anything else that you desire.

(The following are the views of Mr. Owen, as attorney for the Mississippi Choctaws, as expressed by him three or four years ago in a brief and hearing respecting the unfairness and injustice of the acts of June 28, 1898, and July 1, 1902:)

He says:

In the meantime Mr. Charles Curtis, a Representative from Kansas, prepared various bills (H. R. 4214 and II. R. 6702) for the protection of the people of Indian Territory, and for other purposes, which were perfected and introduced as H. R. 8581, Fifty-fifth Congress, second session. This bill subsequently became a law, called the Curtis Act. This bill, when being perfected in the committee, provided, among other things, that the Dawes Commission, in making the rolls of citizens of the Five Civilized Tribes, should observe the following rule:

"No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in good faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship.

Mr. A. S. McKennon, of the Dawes Commission, prepared the above as an amendment and it was adopted by the committee. It would, by legislative enactment of Congress, have barred the Mississippi Choctaws absolutely from enrollment. (Rec., 500.) The petitioner, Owen, who was exclusively engaged in the duty of looking after the claim of the Mississippi Choctaws to citizenship, was exceedingly disturbed at this provision, and immediately appealed to the Senators and Representatives from Mississippi to protect the Mississippi Choctaws against this provision. The petitioner, Owen, personally dictated an amendment to the McKennon amendment, above quoted, as follows:

“Provided, however, That nothing contained in this act shall be so construed as to militate against any rights or privileges which the Mississippi Choctaws may have under the laws of or the treaties with the United States."

And had a number of carbon copies of this provision made which he furnished to different friends as a basis of cooperation in protection of the Mississippi Choctaws.

The committee adopted the amendment above stated, as prepared by plaintiff Owen, and the perfected bill, introduced as H. R. 3581, contained said provision and thus protected the Mississippi Choctaws from the ruinous rule drafted by A. S. McKennon and which the Dawes Commission at first proposed to be put upon them.

The petitioner, Owen, moreover insisted, in pursuance of the report of the Dawes Commission which provided that the Mississippi Choctaws would have to be identified by some competent tribunal, that the commission should be directed to identify the Mississippi Choctaws and by the assistance of the Representatives from Mississippi, particularly of Mr. Williams and Senator Walthall, and Mr. McKennon, of the Dawes Commission, which had made the favorable report declaring the necessity of identifying the Mississippi Choctaws, Congress was convinced and passed the following provision as an amendment to the Curtis Act:

"Said commission shall have authority to determine the identity of Choctaw Indians claiming rights in the Choctaw lands under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded September 27, 1830, and to that end they may administer oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all other acts necesBary thereto and make reports to the Secretary of the Interior."

Messrs. Winton and Owen both appealed to Senator Walthall, and Senator Walthall had a conference with Mr. Mc Kennon in which Mr. McKennon agreed to draft an item to protect the Mississippi Choctaws. Mr. McKennon drew this item and submitted it to Senator Walthall for his approval, and Senator Walthall did approve it, but the draft submitted to Senator Walthall was as follows:

"Said commission shall have authority to determine the identity of Choctaw Indians claiming rights to Choctaw lands under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation concluded February 27, 1830, and to that end to administer oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all other acts necessary thereto; and if they find such persons have removed to and in good faith become residents upon the lands in the Choctaw Nation and are entitled to enrollment under said article, they shall place their names on the rolls made by them." (Rec., 537.) When Mr. McKennon submitted this matter to the committee the latter and vital part of the very important provision was struck out-that is, the words

"And if they find that such persons have removed to and in good faith become residents upon the lands in the Choctaw Nation, and are entitled to enrollment under said article, they shall place their names on the rolls made by them"

were stricken out and there was inserted in lieu thereof the following words: "and make report to the Secretary of the Interior." (30 Stats., 503.)

It will thus be seen that there was a secret underhanded opposition to the Mississippi Choctaws, because it must be remembered that this roll of identification, made by the Dawes Commission March 10, 1899, and submitted by "report to the Secretary of the Interior" was pigeonholed for eight years and then disapproved without notice. This policy was ruinous, for many of the Mississippi Choctaws, full-blood Indians, relied upon the Interior Department to advise them when their identification was complete, so that they might move to the Chotaw country with safety. The Interior Department held those identified on this roll of 1899 in ignorance and uncertainty until it was too late to move and then disapproved the roll. The gross injustice of this procedure is manifest, and no pretense can be made that the controlling officials of the Interior Department really entertained any genuine sympathy with the enrollment of the poor full-blood Mississippi Choctaws.

The Secretary also refused to approve any plan proposed to finance the removal of the Mississippi Choctaws, who were too poor to remove themselves, although plaintiff Owen urged that it be done, from 1900 to 1903.

Mr. Winton thereupon went to Mississippi, and with the greatest possible activity urged the Mississippi Choctaws to appear in person before the Dawes Commission, and on March 10, 1899, Mr. McKennon made his report. (See Ex. 1, p. 509, R. L. O. Dep.) In this report the commissioner made a schedule of 1,925 Mississippi Choctaws, whom he identified as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to citizenship by treaty rights, and stated that in Leake, Neshoba, and Newton Counties there were from three to five hundred full-blood Mississippi Choctaws who did not appear before the commission. The report declares that the Mississippi Choctaws were poor, ignorant, and helpless. This report in behalf of the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, signed and submitted by the Dawes Commission, was disapproved eight years later by Mr. Secretary Hitchcock on March 4, 1907, without notice or warning, so that no person upon this roll ever knew for eight years whether he was so far identified as to be entitled to remove as an identified Mississippi Choctaw, and finally the entire schedule was rejected without notice. Against this treatment of the Mississippi Choctaws the petitioner, Owen, from time to time vigorously protested, but in vain. It was obvious that although this report showed that at least 2,500 full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, fourteentharticle claimants, were entitled to identification, they were poor, ignorant, and helpless, and it also demonstrates the fact that the Dawes Commission, which was expressly charged by law to identify these helpless, ignorant people, never did discharge their full duty in the premises.

The commission itself only gave 30 days to identify the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws in Mississippi and then the Interior Department pigeonholed this report and disapproved it eight years afterwards, thereby striking from the roll hundreds of acknowledged full-blood Mississippi Choctaws without hearing or notice, showing that the Interior Department and the Dawes Commission, while claiming to be the only friends the poor, ignorant Mississippi Choctaws had, were in reality pursuing a policy extremely injurious both to the final identification of the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws and to their actual enrollment and allotment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. When the Dawes Commission had agreed with the Choctaw authorities in the Choctaw-Chickasaw agreement of February 7, 1901, section 13, whereby the schedule dated March 10, 1899, was to be recognized as a final identification and that all full bloods should be identified, a mode of identification Petitioner Owen strongly favored and urged, the Interior Department demanded that this agreement recognizing the schedule of March 10, 1899, and the identification of all full bloods should be changed by making a radical change in section 13, striking out the recognition of the schedule of March 10, 1899, and striking out the "full-blood rule of identification."

and

The Choctaw and Chickasaw commissioners and the Dawes Commission agreed with the Interior Department and made this ruinous change in section 13, striking out the schedule of March 10, 1899, and the "full-blood rule of identification inserting a technical rule "duly identified," which would have barred 95 per cent of the Mississippi Choctaws under departmental interpretation.

This provision, as to recognizing the schedule of March 10, 1899, and the recognition of the "full-blood" Mississippi Choctaws, as entitled to identification (for whom Petitioner Owen had been fighting from 1896, nearly five years) was entirely acceptable to Petitioner Owen and to Winton and his associates. This was all they had desired on this point, except that the children of such full bloods should be identified and allotted also. It was felt when this was agreed to by the representatives of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes and by the Dawes Commission that a final triumph had been won, with the exception that Winton and his associates did not approve the requirement submitted in the fourteenth article of the agreement (p. 12, H. R. Doc. 490; p. 235, Ex. 1, R. L. O. Dept.), which proposed to require "all Mississippi Choctaws as herein defined to remove 'within six months after the ratification of this agreement. Petitioner Owen objected to the requirement that the Mississippi Choctaws should be denied citizenship unless they removed within six months from February, 1901, because the laws of Mississippi made it impossible for them to move within the crop season and comply with this proposed requirement. It was desired that they should not be required to remove until within at least six months after final identification, for the reason that until they were finally identified they had no certainty of being accepted when they did remove. Owen and Winton maintained that they should not remove at all unless they pleased. Owen defeated this agreement of 1901.

The attention of the court is earnestly called to this action on the part of the Interior Department to demonstrate the fact that Petitioner Owen had not only to deal with the opposition of the Choctaws west and their attorneys-McMurray, Mansfield, & Cornish who had a contingent fee. finally fixed at $750,000, to defeat all claimants for citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, but had the secret and powerful hostility of officials in the Department of the Interior, who were influenced by McMurray

and who did not defend these helpless Mississippi Choctaws, nor carry out the law to properly and fully and finally identify them on the common-sense principles laid down in the report of the Dawes Commission of March 10, 1899—that is, the fullblood rule of evidence and that therefore the Mississippi Choctaws had peculiar need of representation by attorneys who would with fidelity and diligence protect their interests. (P. 511, Ex. 1, R. L. O. Dep.)

The provision that was stricken out read as follows:

66

And if they find that such persons have removed to and in good faith become residents upon the lands in the Choctaw Nation, and are entitled to enrollment under said article, they shall place their names on the rolls made by them."

That was stricken out and this was inserted:

"And make report to the Secretary of the Interior."

"It will thus be seen'

Says Mr. Owen:

"that there was a secret underhanded opposition to the Mississippi Choctaws, because it must be remembered that this roll of identification made by the Dawes Commission March 10, 1899, and submitted by 'report to the Secretary of the Interior' was pigeonholed for eight years and then disapproved without notice. This policy was ruinous, for many of the Mississippi Choctaws, full-blood Indians, relied upon the Interior Department to advise them when their identification was complete, so that they might move to the Choctaw country with safety, The Interior Department held those identified on this roll of 1899 in ignorance and uncertainty until it was too late to move and then disapproved the roll. The gross injustice of this procedure is manifest and no pretense can be made that the controlling officials of the Interior Department really entertained any genuine sympathy with the enrollment of the poor full-blood Mississippi Choctaws.

The Secretary also refused to approve any plan proposed to finance the removal of the Mississippi Choctaws who were too poor to remove themselves, although Plaintiff Owen urged that it be done, from 1900 to 1903.

"In this report the commissioner made a schedule".

Here he is talking about the report of McKennon that was authorized under the Curtis Act

"Of 1,925 Mississippi Choctaws whom he identified as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to citizenship by treaty rights, and stated that in Leake, Neshoba, and Newton Counties there were from 300 to 500 full-blood Mississippi Choctaws who did not appear before the commission.

"The report declares that the Mississippi Choctaws were poor, ignorant, and helpless. This report in behalf of the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, signed and submitted by the Dawes Commission, was disapproved eight years later by Mr. Secretary Hitchcock on March 4, 1907, without notice or warning, so that no person upon this roll ever knew for eight years whether he was so far identified as to be entitled to remove as an identified Mississippi Choctaw, and finally the entire schedule was rejected without notice.

"Against this treatment"—

Says Mr. Owen

"of the Mississippi Choctaws the petitioner, Owen, from time to time vigorously protested, but in vain. It was obvious that although this report showed that at least 2,500 full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, fourteenth-article claimants, were entitled to identification, they were poor, ignorant, and helpless, and it also demonstrates the fact that the Dawes Commission, which was expressly charged by law to identify these helpless, ignorant people, never did discharge their full duty in the premises." He goes further and says:

"The commission itself only gave 30 days to identify the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws in Mississippi, and then the Interior Department pigeonholed this report and disapproved it eight years afterwards, thereby striking from the roll hundreds of acknowledged full-blood Mississippi Choctaws without hearing or notice, etc."

I read in that connection from page 2496 of the testimony of Mr. Owen, in the

same case

"I do not recall writing any letter to an individual Mississippi Choctaw, and do not think I did so, but I did write to Charles F. Winton and advised him that, in my opinion, the roll made by the Dawes Commission, dated March 10, 1899, had been made by an authorized tribunal, not subject to review by the Secretary of the Interior; that the decision in favor of the individuals on that roll by a tribunal duly authorized by Congress was a finality and constituted a favorable judgment in behalf of the individual Mississippi Choctaws who had been so enrolled; that they would put themselves in jeopardy if they voluntarily reappeared before the Dawes Commission for a reconsideration of their claim. Upon this advice Mr. Winton advised those who