| OCR Text |
Show difflcultof solution. For a time thethreatenedinterfereneeby the officers of the United States district court for the eastern district of Texas with the renioval of intruders by the agent caused some embarrassment and uneasiness, but au nuderstanding has beeu reached by which his jur-isdiction will be recognizedand upheldin the future. There seems to be rlo reason to fear now that any serious trouble will result from their removal which should be effected this fall. Although there are piaid to be more than twenty thousand non-citizens in the Choctaw Nation, less than five hiladred are regarded as intrude.rs, and most of these are Glenn, Tucker, et al., whose claims to eitizen-ship are now being considered by the Department. This perhaps is due to the liberal acd hospitable laws of the nation relating to permits, . . andto the fact that intruders find it easier to com]?ly with them thau to sleek to evade the.m. The insoffioiency of the present laws of the United States to prevent intruders who are removed from returning to the Indian country has . . given some concern, and may to a great extent operate to make the eJforts of the Government in that directio~la nseless expenditure of time and money. The law (sec. 2148 Kevised Statutes) provides that- If any person who has been removed from the Iudizn couutry shall thereafter at any time return or be found within the Indian country, he shall be liable to a.peus1t.y of one thousand dollars. This law, Agent Bennett says, in a letter of June 19,1800, is rendered i1ioperative.b~re ason of the financial irresponsibility of the persons who comprise the great army of intruders, and who rerj often after their removal return to the reservation in advauce of the officer who removed them. If the la* were amended so as to impose a punishment of imprisonment or fine, or both, it would be more effeetire in accom-plishing the object desired, and in my report of July 20,1890, I had the honor to transmit the following draught of a bill, which I hope will be adopted: Thai section 2148 of the Revised Stntntea be, and the same'is hereby, amended 80 as to read as follows, namely: "If any person who has been remored from the Indisnoountr~shaitlh ereafter a t any time return orbs found within the Iudian couutry, hesbnll bepunishable by imprison-ment for not less than thirty days nor more thau ninety days,or br a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor roore than five huudred dollars,or both,in the discretion of the court: Pt.ovided, That oyou def%nlt of paYN0Ut of fine the samo ahall be servcd out in imprisonment at the rate of one dollar par day until paid: B,td pvovided furlher, That if any person who shall here been fined or imprisoned as pro-vided in this act ehall be foond within the Inrlian couutry after the expiration of twenty days front the date of his release from imprisonmeut, or the date of his pay-ment of fine in oases where the penalty of imprisonmeut is not imposed by the court, anoh permn shall be liable to the same finea and penalties as herein provided for the punisl~meut of persons retornlug to the Iudian oountryafter their remaval." b Notwithstanding the deficienoy in the law, I am of the opinion that, in view of the positive and definite promises which the United Stater has made in its treaties with the several tribes in the Indiau Territory to |
