Mr. CARTER. It does not remove the restrictions completely from the lands of any of these people except those who are less than half Indian blood. Now, do you not think that that class of Indians of less than half Indian blood are as competent as the other citizens around over the State?

Mr. HILL. Of less than half Indian blood?

Mr. CARTER. Yes; not even the half blood, but less than half Indian blood.

Mr. HILL. There are many competent Indians; but to say they are competent in the same proportion as the white man is going too far. I doubt it.

Mr. CARTER. Have you ever thought what it takes to constitute a less than half-blood Indian? It is absolutely necessary for that child to have two parents with white blood in them; and I think you will admit that it is a fact that no child with a parent of less than half blood, or with two parents of less than half blood, has been raised in any manner as an Indian.

Mr. HILL. Here is what brought about this necessity for this legis lation: It is, as I told you, that speculators and companies-individuals and companies

Mr. CAMPBELL. I think we have been over that.

Mr. HILL (continuing). Have gone and secured these contracts, and they have secured them by means of imposition upon the Indians. Mr. CARTER. What contracts are those?

Mr. HILL. These deeds that have been put upon record.

Mr. CARTER. There is nobody who has any sympathy with those at all.

Mr. HILL. That is all this bill is seeking to do.

Statement of Chief Moty Tiger, of the Creek Nation.

(Chief Tiger testified through an interpreter.)

Chief TIGER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, you permitted me to speak to you some few days ago, and I am very glad you have given me another opportunity. I regard myself in this light: You take up a criminal and put him in jail, and finally you take him out and try his case and bring in a verdict of guilty, and he is to be hung, but before you hang him you bring him up and ask him why he should not be hung. I feel somewhat in that situation. [Laughter.] I have heard a good deal of talk here, but I do not understand English, and I do not know exactly what you have been talking about, but I have heard this English word "restrictions" and the phrase removal of restrictions" all the while, and I have absolutely got so that I understand that much, and I am going to address myself to that particular subject.

Mr. CARTER. My understanding was that the chief wanted to address himself to the petition that was filed asking for his removal. Mr. CAMPBELL. He can occupy his time as he sees fit. Chief TIGER. In the first place I am opposed to the removal of restrictions, and I am going to address my talk to that subject. I have been born and reared in the Creek Nation, among the Indians, and I have an idea that I know pretty well the desires and wants of those people, of the full-blood Indians. Not very many months ago my predecessor, who was chief of our nation, called an extraordinary session of the Creek council, some time in the latter part of July or the first part of August, to consider whether or not they were in favor of what was known as the "McCumber bill," and it was pretty well understood by the Indians that that protected them from the sale and incumbrance of their lands. The matter was taken up-that is, the question as to whether or not the Creek council indorsed the McCumber Act that was supposed to protect the Indians from the sale of their lands for twenty-five years was taken up and of course in such a large council as that you could hardly expect all to think one way.

So this matter was taken up and thoroughly discussed by the members of the Creek council. During the discussion of that question by the Creek council, people gathered to the council from all parts of the nation, especially from the little towns, the various towns in the nation, and they came there and argued on the outside with the members not to agree, or not to indorse this McCumber Act, and in doing so they even brought intoxicating drinks and endeavored to work upon the members of the council in that way in order to get them to decline or refuse to indorse the McCumber amendment. But these people who went there in order to get the council to say nothing, to have nothing to do with this McCumber amendment, failed completely, and a very large majority of the Creek council indorsed what we call the Me Cumber amendment, which, as we understand, protects the Indians from the sale and incumbrance of their land for twenty-five years, and after the action of the Creek council indorsing the McCumber amendment, those who were working on the outside--and then we had some members in the council who favored having nothing to do with this McCumber amendment--that small minority were very much displeased; and I would say here, too, that a large proportion of these people were white people from the various towns in the nation. They went away displeased and discontented, and I wish to say, too, in reference to the paper that was read here the other day as a protest by some Creek citizens against the work of the delegation here, a large proportion of those who signed that paper were among those people who went to that council for the express purpose of seeing that the council did not take the action that it did take. The people who opposed the McCumber amendment at that time were not people who were friendly to what we conceive to be the best interest of the Indians proper of the Creek Nation, and many of those whose names we saw signed to a paper here the other day are some of the same people who operated with those grafters at that time. I did not wish to say any thing about these citizens of mine; I do not think it is a thing that I ought to talk about; but as I go on with my subject it naturally comes to these people, and I just make that passing remark about those citizens of the country.

I was asked here the other day by the committee, "Do you think you are speaking for the majority of your people?" and I said I did, and I still think I am now representing the interests and the desires of the majority of my people, and I will explain why I think so. The Creek people have had a constitution and laws for a great many years. Their constitution provides how an election of the head of the nation shall be held, and I ran some years ago as second to the chief now deceased. and I got more votes from my people than anybody else who ran during that general election. Our constitution provides that when the chief shall become unable to carry on the work of the chief of the nation his

second shall come into power; and you yourselves also made a law whereby your chief, the President, should appoint a chief down in that country in the event that the chief acting is not able to carry on the work of his office. Our chief died, and in consonance with our constitution and in consonance with the laws, the President of the United States appointed me, and I have been endeavoring to carry on the work of the United States, with such little power as we have got, as best I can, up to the present time, and this makes me know that, having gotten more votes than any of the other people who ran for office at that time, I am here representing the large majority of our people. As to the matter of law, I am not a lawyer and not accustomed to appearing before juries and people and talking law, nor am I versed in statistics and things of that sort, but if you would care to interrogate me on any point that I am conversant with, I will be glad to give you whatever information I can.

Mr. MCGUIRE. Have you had read to you H. R. 15641-that is the bill under discussion-or have you heard it? That bill provides only as to the mixed-blood Indians, and makes no provision for the alienation of the land of the full blood except in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior. Is that provision, if it is there, satisfactory? Chief TIGER. What blood do you speak of? We have got a lot of niggers down there, and we have got people mixed with the white blood. Mr. MCGUIRE. When I speak of those not interfered with, and left entirely to the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior as to whether any restriction shall be removed, I refer to what is known as the fullblood Indians.

Chief TIGER. That is just the thing we want. We want our fullblood Indians not interfered with at all-for the present, at any rate. Mr. MCGUIRE. That is just what this bill provides. Would that be satisfactory to you?

Chief TIGER. We have an agreement with you whereby you have promised us protection, and we claim that protection. We want that protection continued, and if now your bill does that for the full-blood Indians, we can not object to it.

Mr. MOTT. Might I ask this, Mr. MCGUIRE? I want to know if the chief understood, that is all. I know the chief. I do not want the chief to be taken advantage of. It might be pleasant to some, but not to Mr. MCGUIRE or myself. [Laughter.]

Mr. CAMPBELL. We will give you an opportunity after the interpreter and the chief are through.

Chief TIGER. I do not see anything to laugh about in this matter. I say that I want no restrictions removed from the full-blood Indians' lands, and if that is what my interpreter has told you, I see nothing very funny about it.

Mr. CARTER. We were laughing at Mr. Mott, and not at the chief. Chief TIGER. Of course the Members from the State are here, and they have expressed their wishes and desires in this respect, and we understand that. When we build a home, a house, after having built it we find very many other things we need to furnish to make this house habitable. These Members of Congress from Oklahoma have built a home down there; they have built a State, and having gotten that State in readiness for occupancy, they find they are needing a great deal more, and in order to make it habitable they are trying to get something out of these Indians in order to make their home habitable and pleasant.

Mr. MCGUIRE. We think you have been misinformed.

Chief TIGER. I do not think I am. I think I know what I am talking about. Now, having gotten the State down there, you want to remove the restrictions from the property of the full blood and other Indian citizens down there, in order that you may tax it, and therewith run your State government, and that is what we are not wanting. Mr. CAMPBELL. Have you been informed that this bill, or that this committee, was proposing to remove restrictions from full-blood Indians? Chief TIGER. I have so understood.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Did you learn that after you came here or before you came?

Chief TIGER. I have known that for quite a number of months, since quite a while ago.

Mr. MCGUIRE. Do you know when the bill was introduced, and did you know that when the bill was introduced?

Chief TIGER. Why, I understood that that was the object, in this way. When the gentlemen were running for Congress in that country it was told me that they promised the voters that they would see to it that this Congress removed the restrictions from the Indians' lands, and that is how I came to believe that that was the object of some of the people there, before I came here.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Have you asked anyone who was in a position to find out, since you have been here, if this bill did not protect the full

blood Indian?

Chief TIGER. I am probably at some disadvantage in that partic ular case. I do not think I have had that particular bill read and interpreted to me.

Mr. CARTER. Of all those fellows who ran for Congress on a plat form of removal of all restrictions, including the full-blood Indians' homestead allotment, was a single one elected? Do you know of any one elected to Congress or the United States Senate, who advocated the removal of restrictions on the full-blood Indians' homestead? Chief TIGER. I do not.

Mr. CARTER. As a matter of fact, I may state that there were several fellows who ran on that ticket, but none of them was elected. Chief TIGER. A drowning man will even grasp at a straw, and I wrote to my brother, John Brown, the Seminole chief, and he answered me, and I would like to have his answer read at this time. The Creeks have made their statement as to their beliefs and their desires in this matter, and I would like to have this incorporated in the report of the committee, if it be proper. The letter referred to, which was written in English, was read aloud by Mr. Grayson, as follows:

Hon. MOTY TIGER,

SASAKWA, IND. T., March 18, 1908.

Chief Creek Nation, Washington, D. C. DEAR FRIEND AND BROTHER: I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 14th instant, just received. I greatly appreciate the gravity of the situation and the strenuous efforts being put forth by the Okla homa delegation in Congress for the removal of restrictions on Indian lands, in which those of Indian blood are the most active, if that be possible, but I hope they will be compelled to accept much less than they would like. I have lately supplemented my efforts made in Washington before the Department with letters to Secretary Garfield and Senator CURTIS, and have satisfactory acknowledgments. I am assured that my representations will be made known to the committee in charge of the matter, before whom I felt sure my ideas and representa

tions would be in consonance with those made by you and your delega tion for the Creek people. I know that our appeals have gone unheeded for generations. It is a cry now from the graves of helpless thousands and ought to excite some pity; enough, I hope, to stay the executioner for a day at least.

Anything, Chief, that you can and will say to me at any time along this line will meet a sympathetic chord, ready response, and hearty Cooperation in any way yet open to us. You are most welcome. word "intrusion finds no place in my heart.

Your friend and brother,

The

JOHN F. BROWN, Chief of Seminole Nation.

Mr. MCGUIRE. Is Chief Brown, who wrote this, a full-blood Indian? Chief TIGER. I do not know.

Mr. MCGUIRE. Do you not think a man who can write a letter like that is capable of transacting his own business?

(The question was not answered.)

Mr. MOTT. Now, before the chief takes his seat I would like to say a word. He can not understand me any better than he can any member of the committee. I know him well, and I just wanted him to get right on the record, and I am sure the chief, if it is explained to him after it is over, will be very much dissatisfied that it was left in the record that he was not entirely and clearly understood. Mr. MCGUIRE asked him a question, whether this bill was satisfactory, and it does not matter whether it is satisfactory to me or not, the attorney of the nation, but he understood, when he was answering, that it was satisfactory as to the full bloods. He did not mean nor want to be understood that it was satisfactory as to the whole bill. Mr. CAMPBELL. The committee heard just what he said, and heard both the question and the answer.

Mr. MOTT. Will you put a question to him at my request?

Mr. CAMPBELL. What is the question?

Mr. CARTER. I want to ask him a question before that.

Mr. MOTT. I want to ask if he wants the restrictions removed from the homesteads of any class of the citizens.

Mr. CAMPBELL. That question was asked two weeks ago. I remember very well he said that he did not.

Mr. CARTER. I want to ask the chief if has been told that this committee was at this time considering any bill for the removal of any restrictions upon full-blood Indians?,

Chief TIGER. I have not been told that the committee at this time was endeavoring to remove any restrictions from the full-blooded Indians, and I did not have reference to anything of that sort. Mr. CARTER. I would like very much to know how the chief got the idea that we were considering any such thing.

Mr. JOHNSON TIGER. Pardon me for interrupting, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to say a word in explanation of what the chief has said. I am the son of the chief. On the 13th of March Mr. CARTER introduced a bill proposing the removal of restricitons on all lands of the Five Civilized Tribes except the homesteads of full bloods, and the chief was under the impression that in the consideration of the committee of these bills this bill of Mr. CARTER was a part of what was under consideration.

Mr. CARTER. He did not say that, Johnson. I asked him, and he did not say that.

Mr. JOHNSON TIGER. He had read the bill removing all the restrictions on all lands except the lands of the full bloods, and I think he understood that it was under consideration before the committee here. Mr. CARTER. That bill has never been considered here at all. Chief TIGER. My time is up now, I presume. There are some things I could say, but if my time has expired I will cease.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Is there anyone else who has not been heard who has something that he wants to say particularly? If so, we can take a few moments more. Otherwise I assume that we shall regard these hearings as concluded at the adjournment of the committee this even

ing.

Mr. WOODRUFF. Mr. Chairman, I think this has been touched on enough, but two things were said. One was, why attepmt by this legislation to remove the cloud as to the titles of the full bloods, inasmuch as their lands are not to be opened up for sale. The other was that there seemed to be some kind of an understanding in that jurisdictional bill as to continuing to follow them up after the restrictions I presume those things were clear to the committee. Mr. CARTER. The original jurisdiction bill, if you will remember, allowed suits to be brought on the lands on deeds given after the restrictions were removed.

were removed.

Mr. FERRIS. That was the first bill. I have not seen that since this bill was brought up.

against an unrestricted member of the Five Civilized Tribes, even if it occurred after his restrictions were removed, on the concurrence of the three of them, the Attorney-General might represent that Indian in an effort to set him right. Without any doubt that the AttorneyGeneral was doing it for the very best, it seemed to the Department as going further than was proper. When Congress sees fit to remove the restrictions, it should remove them so that from that time on that Indian, so far as his unrestricted land is concerned, should depend upon the action of the State courts and his own good sense as to whether he should or should not abide by the contract he has made; and this bill has left any such thought out of it.

Mr., WOODRUFF. In regard to the removal of the cloud from the full bloods' lands, there are two reasons that occur to the Department. One is this very fact that the State courts are entertaining, even in the case of full bloods, suits to quiet title brought by those that have the deeds or conveyances, and the full bloods, not being able to know what is going on, do not come to defend, or get anybody to defend them, and the first thing you know the cloud is made apparently heavier and thicker and harder to remove, because a State judge has passed a decree fixing the title in the man who obtained the deed before the removal of the restrictions. Second I hope that Chief Tiger misunderstand entirely about that- does give a way of removing restrictions from full bloods which seems to the Department very proper and necessary. That is, there are old, aged, infirm Indians who must be taken care of.

did not

The

That was the first point. The

Mr. FERRIS. This land bill has not been introduced yet.

Mr. WOODRUFF. No; just this little short clause I refer to.

Mr. FERRIS. I have not seen that. My remarks were addressed to the former bill.

Mr. WOODRUFF. One thing more. Mr. Zevely asked, as far as minors are concerned in leasing, which amounts to an alienation in regard to oil and minerals, that should be left to the probate courts of the State. Now, an explanation of why the Department believes it should not be left to the probate courts of the State is-with apologies to the State courts and not claiming that they will not do their fair share-that it is something that the United States has kept in its own hands; it is something for which the United States is responsible; it is something which will make it necessary for the United States to bring suits and act, because this often results, even at the best that can be done by anybody, in a way in leaving out of account the minor element of the restricted. Now, while the Federal court was a probate court it may have been proper for the Federal court to hve entire jurisdiction of that, because it was then the United States acting; but now that the State court is to have the probate power, it would seem proper that the United States, through the Department, should have the right to see that this restricted land which has mineral in it should not be wasted, and that the proceeds may go and be done with as the State judge in the best exercise of his judicial conscience may see fit to allow it to be used.

Those old Indians are land poor.
Oklahoma delegation all saw these things and urged them.
lands, and they wish to sell those lands.
They have wild and uncultivated
If at the time they sell these
Not only the aged and

infirm,

means

The thought is

Mr. WARD. Mr. Chairman, I want to approve of one part of the amendment; that is the part allowing the Secretary to approve these leases which are on file when the bill becomes law, whether they be in our offices or in the Indian Territory. We concur in that amendment. The CHAIRMAN. You approve of that amendment here? Mr. WARD. To that extent; just that very first part of it. Mr. ZEVELY. Respecting what the Attorney-General has said about the jurisdiction of the probate courts, I want to call attention to the nature of the act of Congress. The act of Congress did not say, as they are ordinarily designated, "the courts in the Indian Territory" or "United States courts in the Indian Territory," but it said “the proper courts," apparently having in contemplation the very thing which happened-statehood and the creation of probate courts there to take care of the property of minors, as they will continue to do unless this Congress or some subsequent one sees fit to repeal the act of 1906. The CHAIRMAX. If there is nothing else, the committee will stand adjourned. At 4.30 o'colck p. m. the committee adjourned.

lands this cloud is there, it will make it extremely difficult to remove the cloud and give the relief necessary. acres and have a hovel there, and no cattle or horses or other proper but those who are land poor, and who have a surplus of 160 not so much to remove the restrictions as to heap up the restrictions of supporting themselves, must have relief. on the other land by selling a part of the land and adding the proceeds to the land left in the way of improvements, allowing the Indians to negotiations for the building of their houses, nud all that

kind on the

to go after that.

kind of thing. I was anxious that we should have the power, therefore, The only other thing was on the point raised by Mr. FERRIS, and I

think properly.

sent up to him to look over, added a paragraph providing that when the Secretary of the Interior, the Attorney-General, and the President should concur in the opinion that there had been gross fraud committed

The Attorney-General, when the restriction bill was

APPENDIX.

Statement of Richard Glory.

By the Chairman:

Q. What is your name?-A. Richard Glory.

Q. Where do you reside?-A. I live on Spring Creek, out here in the country.

Q. In what nation is that?-A. The Cherokee Nation.

Q. What is your blood?-A. Full blood.

Q. You are a full-blood Cherokee?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, kindly go right on and make such a statement as you care to make to the committee in regard to the matters in which you are interested or desire to speak of to the committee-that is, such matters as in your opinion your people are interested in.-A. Gentlemen, I don't come before you as the Pharisees did, but I do come before you as the publican did, and I do not wish to talk with you or detain you any longer than is absolutely necessary; therefore I believe that with a very few words I will be through. I am here before you, gentlemen, representing the full-blood element of my people, and what I shall say upon this subject will be based upon experience and observation as to the feeling and condition of my people.

I wish to impress upon you gentlemen composing this special Senate committee that you are down here on a mission the chief purpose of which is to hear the different opinions of the people. You are here for the purpose of receiving these views, and I am here before you now for the purpose of presenting my views and the views of the people I represent. In the original agreement that was made there was a provision in that agreement that we could sell our land within five years from the adoption of that agreement. Only the surplus land could be sold, of course, and the homestead was reserved. Only last winter the Congress of the United States enacted laws to the effect that they prevented us from selling our surplus land on any terms for the term of twenty-five years-that is, the laws enacted last winter prevented us from selling or disposing of any of our land, surplus or homestead, for the term of twenty-five years.

Senator LONG. That is, a full-blood Cherokee could sell his land in five years from the date of the first patent, or from the date of the agreement? Mr. GLORY. From the date of the adoption of the agreement. Senator LONG. From the date of the issuance of the patent? Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir.

Senator LONG. Ile could sell in five years from the date of the patent?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir: I think it was on the 7th day of August that the agreement was made.

Senator LONG. Yes, sir; but it was from the date of the patent that the restrictions extended, and they extended only five years from that date, and that did not apply to the homestead. After five years he could sell his surplus land.

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir; and the homestead should be reserved, of

to them, for it is plain that if they are not allowed to do this the majority of them will not do anything toward improving their homesteads. An Indian is not like a white man. I am one of them myself, and I know. They are not as industrious as a white man usually is, and they are handicapped by having a lot of land that they can't do anything with, for they haven't any start, and they won't get a start unless they can dispose of their surplus land, or enough of it to get some money to make improvements on their homesteads. If they could do this they would have a start and something to live on. Another thing: I think that the condition of some of the Indians should be taken into consideration. Some of my own people are getting very old and helpless; they are very mature in years, and they won't be here very much longer. They are getting helpless and they can't work any more, and for that reason I believe it is nothing but right that Congress should act upon that question of sale of surplus lands and let these old people sell it and get money to make them so they would enjoy the few days they have to remain here. I want to emphasize these facts, for the reason that the full-blood Indians-in fact, all of them, but particularly the full bloods-are in a more critical condition than ever before.

There is no doubt in my mind, or in the mind of the more intelligent of my people, that Congress, when they were enacting that law, thought that they were doing a great and good thing for the Indians. I admit it; but still there was a great majority of them that did not know the real condition of the people and their needs, and for that reason I believe that there should be a remedy provided by this coming session of Congress. I believe that if we were to dispose of our surplus lands that it would be a good thing and would do more to relieve the condition of my people than anything else. We are rich in land and poor in everything else. If we could eat the land it would be all right, but we can not. There is three-fifths of my people taking their allotments, and the land is lying idle, for they can not even rent it. If they want to rent some of that land, you have surrounded the attempt to do so with so many complications, for you say that it has to go before the Interior Department

The CHAIRMAN. Is it your opinion that if Congress were to rescind the action of last winter and stand upon the agreement that was made between the tribes and the Government of the United States that the surplus land should be salable after five years, would that meet the difficulty that you speak of-would it meet that difficulty now-going back to the last agreement between the tribes and Congress that gave the right to sell the surplus land at any time after five years-that is, five years after the delivery of the patent? Would that meet the difficulty, or would you consider that more ample legislation was necessary to provide the relief necessary?

Mr. GLORY. Well, I would prefer that Congress should make some legislation in regard to that.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, in regard to what? What I am speaking of is this: If the legislation by Congress at the last winter's session was wiped out, if you went back to the agreement that allowed the Indian to sell his surplus land five years after five years from the date of his patent-would that be sufficient legislation to meet the difficulty you now speak of, or would it require still more liberal legislation? Mr. GLORY. Well, I believe that still more liberal legislation would be required. That would do if we could not get better; but if we could get something more liberal, it would be better.

Senator BRANDEGEE. How do you think it ought to be done? Mr. GLORY. Well, that is for you gentlemen to say. Senator BRANDEGEE. Well, that may be so, but my question is what you think about it? I want to know how you think it ought to be fixed? Mr. GLORY. Well, I don't know that Congress would take my advice. Senator BRANDEGEE. Well, we might take it. You don't know-anyway we would like to know what your opinion is about how it ought to be fixed?

Mr. GLORY. Well, since you insist on it. I'll tell you that I think that you ought to make it so these restrictions would be removed-remove the restrictions at once on the surplus lands of the full bloods. believe that the restrictions should be removed as a whole from the full bloods of all Indian Territory.

I

Senator BRANDEGEE. So you think the restrictions should be removed as soon as possible on the surplus lands of full bloods? Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir.

Senator BRANDEGEE. Well, how about the homesteads?

Mr. GLORY. No; not the homesteads.

Senator BRANDEGEE. How?

Mr. GLORY. Not the homesteads.

Senator BRANDEGEE. You mean that you don't think the restrictions should be removed on the full-blood homesteads?

Mr. GLORY. That's it. The restrictions should be left on the homesteads.

Senator LONG. Then you believe that the restrictions should be removed from the surplus lands only?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir. I don't believe it would be wise to remove them from the homesteads. If they were removed from the surplus lands so we could dispose of them it would enable many of us to get something to go on and improve our homesteads.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your occupation or employment or profession now? In other words, what do you do for a living now?

Mr. GLORY. My occupation at the present time is clerk in a store. The CHAIRMAN. Your occupation at the present time gives you an opportunity to observe very closely the condition of the full-blood Indians in your tribe ?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So your occupation now and at other times has furnished you with ample opportunity to observe and become very thoroughly acquainted with the sentiment of the Cherokee people on this and all other subjects that interest them?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir. I was born and raised with them, and I come in contact with them every day.

Senator LONG. You think, then, that the extension of time from five years to twenty-five years was a mistake in the Curtis Act of last winter?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir.

Senator LONG. When we extended the time from five years to twentyfive years you complained of that?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir: I think it is subject to criticism. Senator LONG. And you think it ought not to have been done? Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir; I think that ought not to have been done, and the rest of my people think so, too. It is done, though, and they want it remedied in some other way so that they can dispose of their surplus land as soon as possible-not that all of them want to dispose of it, but we want it fixed so we can dispose of it if we want to and in that way get money with which to go ahead and improve our homesteads. An Indian is not a white man, you understand; on the average he is

not, but I have seen Indians that would average up fairly with white men when it comes to doing things; but, as I say, on the average they don't come up to white men. They are not as capable of starting without anything as a white man is, and making a farm out of the wilderness, but if they could get a start I believe that lots of them would average up well with the white man; but, as I said before, the only way they can get that start the way they are situated is to make the law so they can dispose of their surplus land or whatever part of it they want to dispose of, and use the money they get in that way for improving their homesteads. If they do that, I believe lots of them will get along just about as well as the average white. We would then have something to go on to make a living.

Some of our people are getting very old and feeble, as I stated, and their land is lying idle, and there they are old and feeble and very poor and wanting for the ordinary necessities of life, to say nothing of the comforts, and all the time they are rich in land that they can't sell; and I am sure that you will agree with me when I say that the restrictions ought to be removed from their land so that they could sell it and get something that would be of use to them in their lifetime. The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am inclined to agree with you, for I think that would be a very good thing to do.

Mr. GLORY. That is my opinion.

The CHAIRMAN. But as to the homestead, you would not be in favor of taking the restrictions from that? You think the homestead would furnish enough land to furnish a living even if the surplus land was sold?

Mr. GLORY. Yes, sir; for the Indians, as a general thing, it does. I don't know of one that the homestead would not be all and more than he would want. Of course you understand that all of them who have taken their allotments have both homesteads and surplus lands--children and all.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir; I understand. The full-blood Indians hardly ever make use of more than the homestead?

Mr. GLORY. No, sir; I don't know of any of them using all of that. It is more than the great majority want or ever will need. An Indian don't hardly know what the value of land is, and in disposing of it they should be held under some kind of supervision to see that they get what it is worth; but that is a subject that you gentlemen can easily solve. The CHAIRMAN. Well, we would like to have your solution of it. Mr. GLORY. Well, I don't know that I could fix it right, but I think that somebody ought to have charge of it; the agent or some court or committee should have the looking after it and see that it is sold for what it is worth. An Indian thinks a great deal of his homesteadhis home and they are much attached to it, but they don't care for anything more than is sufficient to supply their simple needs.

Senator TELLER. So they hardly ever make any use of anything more than the homestead?

Mr. GLORY. No. sir; and no more of that than they can handle. Now I am speaking of the full bloods, you understand, all the time. Of course, you take the mixed bloods, there is lots of them would want more than the homestead. I expect there is lots of the mixed bloods that would need more than the homesteads, but the full bloods, they don't need or want any more than the homesteads, and very often they can't use all of that. They don't inclose their land and don't think of doing so only with the little bit they have under cultivation. It has always been customary for them to have under inclosure say 5 or 10 or 15 or 20 acres, and perhaps some of them might have 30 acres, but it would be few of them that would have that much and the homestead is 80 acres, so you see that they don't need even all of the homestead-40 acres might be enough for a homestead-it is now, but they might get so in the future that they would cultivate more, so I think it advisable to keep the whole 80 acres as a homestead.

Q. In effect, their surplus land is so much dead capital, and can't be utilized for any useful or beneficent purpose?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. And so they don't get any revenue from it? A. No, sir; not at the present_time.

Senator LONG. Do you know of many full bloods who have refused to take their allotments, or have refused to select their allotments? Mr. GLORY. Well, there is a considerable number of them that have failed or refused to do so.

Q. The Commission in that case selected their allotments for them? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And arbitrarily awarded them?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in doing this the Commission generally allowed them to remain where they were?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Selected that as their homestead for them?-A. Yes, sir; they selected their homesteads there the Dawes Commission did-but of course they selected their surplus land at different places scattered around the country within the limits of the tribal lands. They are scattered around at one place and another.

By Senator BRANDEGEE:

Q. I understood you to say that the full-blood Indians, or some of them, refuse to take their allotments?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you understand or know the cause or reason for these fullblood Indians refusing to take their allotments either of homesteads or surplus land?-A. Well, of course I have devoted a good deal of study and attention to that subject. I know them very well and go around among them, and I hear them talking about it; and I have come to the conclusion the reason they don't do it is because they expect that they are going to get their old laws and old treaties back again, and that all the land will come back again to be held by the tribe; and I mean by that that they expect that conditions will revert back to what they were in the old days when all the land was held in

common.

Q. What do you mean by "getting the old laws back?"-A. The old conditions that were there. I have not studied this thing in the way of specially and particularly studying it, but I know enough about it to know that that is what they expect.

Q. Well, that is too indefinite. You say the old laws. Do you mean the old treaty of 1832, or the one establishing the homestead-A. No, sir; I mean the old conditions that were here prior to the passage of the last law.

By Senator TELLER:

Q. Do you mean the act of 1866?-A. I mean the laws that were here before the abolishment of the tribal government that they used to have.

Q. Oh, I see. They want the tribal government back.-A. Yes, sir. By the Chairman:

Q. They are hoping that the time will come again when all this land will be held in common?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Just as it was before they voted on the agreement to abolish

tribal government and agreed to take their land in severalty?—A. Yes,

sir.

Q. That is what they are hoping for?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Well, it is a vain hope, a hope that will never be realized.-A. I know it, but you can't make them realize that.

By Senator LONG:

Q. That is the reason they won't take their allotments or accept anything, for they fear that if they do so it will prevent the return of this time which they are looking forward to, when all the land will be held in common as it was in the old days?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there few or many of the full bloods that hold that view?—— A. Well, there are a good many of them.

Q. How many?—A. I could not say; but there are quite a few of them.

Q. Dou think the majority of them hold that view of the matter? A. No, sir; I think not.

Q. Then you think that the majority of the full bloods have taken their allotments? A. Yes, sir.

Q. How about the mixed bloods?-A. They have taken them.

Q. So the majority of the full bloods and all of the mixed bloods have taken their allotments?-A. Yes, sir.

By Senator BRANDEGEE :

Q. You are appearing here for a part of the people of the Cherokee Nation? A. Yes, sir; I am appearing here only for the Cherokee people, or that part of them who have requested me to do so.

Q. And there are how many full bloods in the Cherokee Nation?-A. There is about 7,000, I believe. I won't be positive, but I understand that is the number.

Q. Well, I believe that is the number that is reported officiallyabout 7,000 full bloods and about 26,000 mixed bloods. That is about correct, is it not?-A. I suppose that is about right. They have been enrolled, and I suppose the enrollment is about correct.

Q. And you say that all of the mixed bloods took their allotments?— A. Yes, sir; that is my understanding.

By Senator LONG:

Q. And you don't think the majority of the full bloods refused to take their allotments?-A. No, sir; I don't think they did.

Q. Well, do you mean that they did or did not?-A. I think the majority of the full bloods took their allotments.

Q. And as to those of the full bloods who refused to take or select their allotments, the Commission went ahead and selected them for them? Is that right?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. And left them in the places where they were and had been living? A. Yes, sir.

Q. I mean that the Commission in selecting arbitrarily for them selected the place where they were residing and allotted it to them?— A. As a rule, they did.

Q. And where that was not done it was because of the fact that inasmuch as they had refused to claim it as an allotment, some one else had come in and filed on it?-A. Yes, sir.

By Senator TELLER:

Q. Are there many of your people, I mean your Indian people, who believe it is a crime to divide land and hold it in severalty? A. No, sir: I believe not.

Q. Well, some tribes do hold such a belief.-A. I suppose, of course, there is some that do; but I don't know of any. If they held such a belief they haven't said anything to me about it.

Q. You do not hear that advanced as a cause or reason for their refusing to take their allotments?-A. No, sir; only, as I said before, that they think they will ultimately return to the old original conditions.

By Senator LONG:

Q. You are a full-blood Cherokee?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. How old are you?-A. 37.

Q. You speak good English? A. Yes, sir; fair.

Q. Well, I think you speak excellent English. I suppose you were educated?--A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where were you educated?-A. I went to school in the States. Q. What school did you go to?-A. In the State of Ohio.

Q. I don't like to interfere with the tenor of your statement here, but I would like to have you tell me something about the schools here in the Territory, so far as they apply to your people. I would like to have you tell us about that, if it doesn't interfere with your statement here. What we particularly want to get at is the extent that the children down here go to school, and the extent and character of the school facilities. That is something that I am sure every member of this committee is profoundly interested in.-A. Well, I was going to bring that out in my talk later on.

It

Q. Well, just go right ahead, then, and make your statement in your own way.-A. The circumstances and conditions in our country down here are such that if the matter is not settled definitely and on Some fixed basis very soon there will be a season of great disaster. is bad enough now, but this is nothing to what it will be later. No one knows what the result will be. The land question is a very perplexing one, and it will require all your patience and wisdom, gentlemen, to find out the truth about it and devise a remedy; but we believe you are equal to it, and the way to find out is the way you have taken-come down here and listen and see for yourselves. The great bulk of the land all through the Indian Territory is lying idle and unproductive, and especially is that true of the land held by my people; and of course nearly all of it is held that way. As I stated, the Indians are not capable of cultivating it, and they can not dispose of any part of it to people who know how to cultivate it; and the result of that is that nothing is done with it. This is very bad. The biggest portion of it-of that part of it that is comprised in the holdings of the full-blood Indians-is absolutely unproductive, and, as I have stated, if the full blood was permitted to dispose of his surplus land or a part of it, as the case may be, as I said, he would be able to realize a little capital with which to improve his homestead, or a part of it, and that would be the first step in his advancement. Now, I want to say that Indians, especially the full bloods, are just about like children. They must be taught, and taught intelligently, and if you get them started right they will very often advance and become good, useful citizens. know just how they feel about it.

do.

I am one of them, and I It is hard to make them understand

a thing, but when they understand it no one knows it better than they Of course, the homestead should always be theirs. They should not be allowed to get rid of that at all. They might squander their surplus it is well worth while letting them make a try at it but the

By the Chairman:

Q. About how many acres are there in a homestead in your naIt is owing tion? A. Well, it varies; some are larger than others. to the valuation of the land they select or the grade of the land. Now, I say if these privileges were granted to us-that is, to dispose of our surplus lands-it would enable a place for the good citizens of the United States to come among us and settle among us-people who know how to farm and how to live, and you can depend on it that their presence and example would have a very stimulating effect on the Indians. They would be our neighbors, and they would be all among us, and that is what the Cherokees want. The presence of these white citizens would be of the greatest benefit in every way, for it would have a tendency to persuade the Cherokees, and this I believe would apply to every Indian tribe in the Territory. It would have a tendency to persuade them to go to church and to schoolto send their children to school. I know this from my own personal history, for had it not been for this influence I would probably be just as they are. They are honest and true and loyal. They want to be citizens, good citizens, but they don't know how to set about it. The presence of these white citizens would stimulate them in every way. They would have their example held up daily before them, and they would try to live as they live and emulate their example. This is the most important thing in my opinion in the whole situation-the matter, I might almost say, of supreme importance. Now, I will say that all my people don't think on this as I do, but I know that the result would be as I have put it. I know it by my own case and numerous others I have seen. There could be no other result. My people would drop their old habits and customs insensibly and by degrees and constantly live more and more like their white neighbors. Our children would go to the same school and we would attend the same church, and the civilizing influence could not be resisted. I am looking to the future, and I believe that we should all look to the future and should not be bound by any desire to get a temporary advantage, for it is what the future holds for my people that counts. When children go to school and play together and go to church together and are together in all things there can be no result other than the advancement of the race inferior in the scale of civilization; therefore I believe that an all-wise God has intended we should finally be the beneficiaries of the civilization which is sweeping the world and that my people can no more escape it than they can escape anything else that is inevitable.

I don't think it would be wise to let them go off by themselves and live as they always have lived. If the white man in large numbers could come among us and get this land they would set out their trees, their orchards, and vineyards, and finally the Indian would be impelled to follow their example and do likewise. I have no other object than the upbuilding and benefit of my race. I am not ashamed of my blood or lineage-not by any means-I want my race and the future children of that race to go on and up in the path of civilization until at length they would stand side by side with their white brothers on equal terms in every respect. Now, these are the propositions that I have wished to present to you, gentlemen, and I have done so to the best of my ability. I hope you will take into account my limitations and understand just what I am attempting to point out, and take into your fullest consideration and act on them to the best of your knowledge; and I am in hopes that the session of Congress about to convene will look into these matters carefully and conscientiously and enact such laws as will do away to as great an extent as possible with the evils that at present oppress this country and its people, which are shown to exist by the testimonies which have been laid before you. That is all, gentlemen, unless you wish to question me. Q. Well, what is the present conditions of the schools?-A. Oh, yes, I overlooked that. Of course we have a very good system of schools. This system of schools was devised, worked out, and carried into effect by the Indians all through the Territory many years ago under the tribal form of government, and now that the United States has taken charge of these schools, I can't say that they have been benefited any, nor would I say that they have been damaged, but the fact is that we Indians had devised and put in operation what we considered to be a good system, and this was the opinion of competent whites who examined them; but there are some of my own people who are holding back from them, but they are ones that don't believe in the advancement of civilization.

Q. Have you a claim in that country?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do the children of the full bloods attend these schools?-A. Well, quite a number of them attend these schools.

Q. But all of them don't attend them?-A. No, sir: but a great many of them do. It is a matter that I am satisfied will adjust itself in time, like all things adjust themselves. Now, gentlemen, I wish to point out that the great evil in connection with the educational system here is that it is not compulsory-there is no such a thing here as compulsory education.

By Senator TELLER:

It is a good thing anywhere, and Q. I guess that is what you need. it would no doubt be good here.-A. There can be no question about that. Some of our people live back in the woods and away from school facilities, but of course as schools are established in greater number, the school facilities will be available to more and more of our people, and they send their children to school or not, just as they please. There is nothing regular about the attendance. One day they will go to school, and the next day, if they see fit they will remain away, and this system is demoralizing on account of the lack of regularity. They should be compelled to send the children during stated terms to school every day. This is brought about of course by the fact that their parents don't take much interest in education. Now, this is not universal by any means, for there are some few parents-well, quite a number of them-more than you would probably imagine, who take a very great interest in schools, and are intensely anxious that their children should receive a good education, and use every effort in seeing that they do get it. There are a great many people who take a great deal of interest-full-blood Indians at that-in the building of schools and churches.

By Senator LONG:

Q. What about your restrictions-have you ever had them removed?— A. Yes, sir. Q. By the Secretary?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. How did you get them removed?-A. Through the Indian agent. Q. You made your application to have your restrictions removed, and the Indian agent investigated your case and found or decided that

that your restrictions should be removed and the Secretary removed them? A. Yes, sir.

Q. When was that done?-A. In 1905.

Q. In 1905, a year ago? A. Yes, sir. Now, I wish to say that the majority of my people are capable at least of handling their own affairs if they are given a show or the privilege was extended to them. I believe that the majority are just as capable of doing so as I am.

Q. Well, do you think-really think-that you are capable of managing your own affairs? A. Yes, sir. Now, of course, you will find people now and then that are reckless, but that is not a condition that is peculiar to the Indians, for you will find lots of white people who are not capable of managing their business. I have known white men that were not.

Q. So have I-lots of them.-A. You will find them among all classes of people, no matter what their color, that are not capable of managing their business. Some are more extravagant than others. Now, I don't know that I have anything more to say.

By the Chairman:

Q. I would like to ask you a hypothetical question. Do you believe that a full-blood Indian ever will acquire increased capacity to transact his own business unless he is given an opportunity to experiment? Do you not think it is impossible to say whether he is or will ever be able to do so unless the opportunity is given him to try it?-A. Do you mean by removing his restrictions, so he can transact business?

Q. No; I mean this: Do you think that it can be said of any full blood that he is or is not capable of transacting his own business in a safe and sane manner unless the chance is given him and it is actually demonstrated whether he can or can not? In other words, do you think that it can be definitely said whether or not he is capable of transacting his own business as long as he is held in wardship and is not given the opportunity of transacting any business?-A. I don't know; only this, that if he was given the full benefit of transacting his own business, it could then be seen whether he was or not. I believe that The majority of them, if they were given the opportunity, would show that they are capable of doing business for themselves. I think. as he gained experience, if he was allowed to start in a small way, that he would be fully as capable as the average white man.

Q. You believe if he was given the opportunity that he would grow with his responsibilities or opportunities? Is that what you desire to be understood as saying?-A. Yes, sir.

By Senator LONG:

Q. Are the full bloods of your age able to speak English? A. Yes, sir; quite a number of them are.

Q. But not all of them?-A. No, sir.

Q. They have gone to school-the ones that speak English?-A. Yes, sir; they have been attending school.

Q. Do they teach English in school?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. So it follows that if they go to school they have to learn English? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you mean that they have attended the schools in the States or in the Territory?-A. Yes, sir; in the Territory.

Q. And in these schools they speak English? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And do you think that most of the full bloods of your age are capable of attending to their own business affairs?-A. Yes, sir; most of them are, to a certain extent,

Q. But all of them are not?-A. Well, there is one now and then that might not be.

Q. But the older full bloods, in your opinion, are not capable of attending to their business?-A. No, sir; some of them might not be. Well, I say most of them might not be.

Q. You would not consider it to be a safe experiment to allow them to do so?--A. No, sir.

Q. If the attempt were made the result in some cases might be disastrous? A. Yes, sir; to a good many of them, I have no doubt about it.

Q. And the full bloods of your age have taken their allotments, haven't they, or the most of them have taken them? A. Yes, sir. Q. They are the younger Indians?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. That is all.

By Senator BRANDEGEE:

Q. Had you been attending school here before you went away to attend school?---A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where had you attended school here ?-A. I attended the public schools.

Q. How old were you when you went away from here?-A. I was about 18.

Q. You went to school in Ohio?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was it your own idea to go into another State to school?-A. Well, I can't say that it was. I was raised by a poor mother; she was poor and ignorant, but she knew the value of education and she always tried to impress upon me the value of a good education; she never let an opportunity pass of impressing that on me, and I was impressionable and I never forgot it, so it has always been my effort and desire to learn in every way possible, and she helped me in all ways, and of course I had a hard time of it; I had to work part of the time to get provisions and clothing to live and to get a little money ahead, and when I would get a little money ahead of course I would go to school as long as it lasted, and then I'd go to work again and earn more and go back to school.

I

I want to acknowledge, here, what I owe to her for the way she impressed me, for she always told me to go to school and study hard and learn what I could and, gentlemen, I have never forgotten it. don't want you to understand, gentlemen, that I am the only one amongst my people who is sensible of the advantages to be derived from education, for there are plenty in my nation who have striven in their own way to acquire it, and if they did not succeed it was not because of a failure of their will-it is because they did not go about it as I did. When I had advanced so far, of course, it was my will that I should go elsewhere and finish my education, and though it was hard I managed to do it, and that was the way I acquired what education I have. It is not very much, though; I regret that I haven't more. Q. Well, I must say that you seem to have done very well; you are to be congratulated.-A. Thank you.

By Senator LONG:

Q. Have you ever taught school?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where?-A. In the Cherokee Nation,

Q. What part of it have you sold?-A. I have sold my surplus land. Q. Have you sold all your surplus land?-A. Yes, sir. I have sold all my land excepting my homestead.

Q. And how many acres are there in that?-A. In my homestead? Q. Yes, sir.-A. Thirty acres of homestead.

By Senator TELLER:

Q. Do you live on it? A. Yes, sir.

Q. You live there now?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. It is near the town here, is it?-A. Well, no; it is not very near. It is about 25 miles from town.

By Senator LONG:

Q. You live in town here, don't you?-A. Yes, sir; at the present time, I do.

Q. So you live here in Vinita at the present time?-A. Yes, sir-oh, here in Vinita? No, sir; not here in Vinita.

Q. Well, where do you live-A. I live out here at Pryor Creek, about 25 miles from Vinita.

Q. And you live on your homestead there?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you work it-cultivate it yourself?-A. No, sir; I live there, but I don't work on it. I have a man that cultivates the place; he attends to the place for me.

Q. This man whom you have employed looks after your homestead and you clerk in a store in town?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. When did you sell your surplus land?-A. Immediately after the restrictions were removed.

Q. Did you get a good price for your land?-A. Yes, sir; I got a very good price.

Q. Why did you sell your surplus land?-A. I had to do it in order to make a start. I could not make a start at improving my homestead unless I did it, for there were things that I had to have.

Q. What did you have to have?-A. I had to buy my farming implements and buy my team, and put buildings on my homestead. It was unimproved, and there was no other way of improving it but by selling my surplus land.

Q. In other words, you improved your homestead from what you got or realized from the sale of your surplus land? A. Yes, sir.

By Senator TELLER:

Q. Could you raise enough to support a family on 30 acres of ground? A. Yes, sir; I think so. Wherever there is good tillable land a man can raise enough on 30 acres of ground to support a family all right, provided he kept it in a good state of cultivation.

By Senator BRANDEGEE:

Q. Let me ask you this question: Do the majority of the full bloods in the Cherokee Nation speak and write English? A. Well, you will find quite a good number of them that can speak and write the English language.

Q. Well, can the majority of them do so?-A. I don't know whether the most of them can or not; but there is quite a number who can. Q. But whether or not the majority can do so, you can't say?-A. No, sir.

Q. I understood some witness to say here this afternoon that almost all of the full bloods of the Cherokee Nation both speak and write English. What do you say as to that?-A. Well, that probably is correct. It is true, I think of the younger generation; but now and then you will find one who can't.

Q. Well, now, let me ask you this: Is there any prejudice or jealdusy among the people of your nation against those who can or do manage to get a good education and return to the tribe?-A. No, sir; there is not. I don't believe there is. They don't seem to be any discrimination against such.

Q. They are willing for anybody to acquire as good an education as they can acquire in any way they can acquire it?-A. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. That is all.

Mr. GLORY. Well, gentlemen, I am very thankful for the privilege of appearing here before you, and I hope that in the future these few words that I have spoken may so impress you, or have a tendency to impress you, and through you others, that they will eventually bear

fruit.

Senator LONG. We appreciate what you have said, and I am sure we have all been much interested and instructed by it, and we trust it will. Mr. GLORY. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any others present who desire to address the committee? If there are, we would be glad to hear from them now, one at a time, however. I am informed that Mr. A. Grant Evans, of Muskogee, is present, and if so, we would be very glad to hear from him.

Statement of Mr. W. H. Walker.

By the Chairman:

Q. Where do you live, or what is your post-office?-A. Tahlequah. Q. What is your business?-A. I am assistant secretary to the chief of the Cherokee Nation.

Q. What is your citizenship? A. Cherokee, by blood.

Q. Are you mixed blood?-A. Yes, sir; one-eighth Cherokee.
Q. And the balance white?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. What do you wish to say?-A. I want to speak to the committee on this question of the removal of restrictions for a moment.

Q. Very well; proceed.-A. I can probably illustrate it better by taking my own case. I am one-eighth Cherokee. I have three children that I have allotted for, and one that I have not filed for yet, and there is my wife and myself who have filed also, making in all about 550 acres that my wife, myself, and my family have. Now, there is about 150 acres of that land that is not good agricultural land. It is a cheap grade of land. Now I am illustrating the point I want to make by my own experience. I made application about five months ago to the Secre tary of the Interior to have the restrictions removed from my surplus allotment, and although five months have passed I have never had a hearing on it yet, and there has been no action taken at all.

Q. Well, what do you expect this committee to do?-A. Well, I call your attention to these delays in these matters with the hope that Congress will do something to remove the trouble.

Q. Where did you make your application?-A. Through a representative of the Indian agent's office here who was there at Tahlequah, where they come from time to time to attend to any business there may be for them to do. I requested the Indian agent here, Mr. Kelsey, to make a special recommendation in the case if he would, as he has au

Q. Did he make it special?-A. I am not sure, but I-well, I don't know, and I have not asked him about it. His representative that was over there at Tahlequah, to whom I made the application, told me that he thought he would do it without question.