So it comes that through "the
technicalities of law, hundreds of
individuals on this zeservation
Will SufffAv Privation and Wan t,
let alone the criminal Waste of turn*
ber that might be utilized IU&4S86
We here would ask, Can there
not be some construction of the
law which would, at leaBt, remove
this agency from the restrictions
Much as it seems to us hinges
upon the status of our realty hold
ing, it is held by the government,
though invariably denied by the
Indian, that the fee to reservations
-IS"-
ia in the government. This seems
to be bused upon the old theory of
possession by nations under the
law of conquest and discovery. It
is held (logically enough if this
theory be true), that the Indian's
title is simply that of oeoupaney,
and should it be so desired, at any
time, the Government may acquire
actual possession by the removal
of the Indian peaceably or other*
wise. I'^vv tj^:i.\:
SERVED TO INDIANS FOE THEIB
HOME it is a
"'']':Vt^t^f
RBMXTANT
We maintain that it is not a
reservation proper, and conse
quently that all departmental rul
ings and court decisions as to res
ervations have no bearing here
whatever. Consequently the ap
plication by Att'j Gen'l Garland
of the law governing the cutting
of timber upon reservations is er
roneous and should have no
weight.
The government can exercise
authority here only under the
Relation of Guardian and ward
and should restrict timber cutting
only as A MATTER OF PRUDENCE.
And prudence, it ought to be plain,
should IMPEL THE PUSHING OP EFa
FORTS to sa\e to the community
the large quantities of fallen and
dead trees now going to waste.
Shows and Demoralization.
