V v^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 y '^, -; 
 
 \» o 
 
 ^^ 
 
 v%€^,/\ -^^^^^'^ ^m^^/% •-„,. 
 
 0* 
 
 4 O 
 
 'oK 
 
 .-Jv" . 
 
 r'. 
 
 
 -u ^^ .^>SfA\ V.s^" ^^^fe: 
 
 ^v 
 
 ^^'^- 
 
 
 4 O 
 
 ^^% \./^ ^^^^ "^^^^ ^ 
 
 n_i -««<; i^ * /Cy "C** »^' ^?k\r * ^ vP' * 
 
 
 -n^o^ 
 
 
 .^' 
 
 v\ 
 
 .40, 
 
 
 s q. 
 
 
 ^ A 
 
r..--. 
 
 \'^m-\-^' V?^fv %'^^-'/^ 
 
 
 
K^TsrSA. 
 
 The Osage Swindle. 
 
 A. LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 HON. SIDNEY CLARKE 
 
 G-EO. H. HOYT, 
 
 A. 1 1 o 1' n e -y-G e n e r a 1 of It an s ci e 
 
 WASHINGTON : 
 
 GIBSON BROTHERS, PRINTERS, 
 
 1868. 
 
t19 
 .02HS 
 
Hon. Sidney Clarke, M. C, 
 
 Washington, D. C: 
 
 Sir — My attention has been attracted by a pamphlet enti- 
 tled " The Osage Treaty," signed by I. S. Kalloch, 0. Rob- 
 inson, A. N. Blackledgo and one William Babcock. It is a 
 noticeable fact that no statement therein is verified by oath ; 
 that Messieurs Kalloch and Robinson are ''Directors" of Mr. 
 William Sturges" company — " the Leavenworth, Lawrence 
 and Galveston ; that A. N. Blackledge was Secretary, and 
 a sort of Quartermaster, to the Commission ; and that " Wm. 
 Babcock" is an "outsider" from Illinois, whose only dis- 
 coverable interest in this treaty may be inferred from hi^ 
 close intimacy with Mr. Sturges and his " Directors. " 
 
 It is not my purpose in opposing this treaty to journey 
 beyond the record for the object of criticising the persons 
 who composed the Commission, or those individuals, who, 
 having been entertained at the Osage Council by the Com- 
 mission at the expense of the Q-overnment, are here under- 
 taking the defence of this, the latest and dirtiest, "job" of 
 the Indian office. In that spirit, I will only refer to the 
 signers of this pamphlet, as interested yiarties, strongly 
 biased in favor of the grant to Mr. Sturges, who have sum- 
 moned, to sanctify and corroborate their statements, the 
 Rev. Dr. B. Peyton Brown, of Washington, who was Chap- 
 lain to the Commission and who abandoned the Indian 
 country and the Commission at least two days before the 
 Indians were induced to sign the treaty, and M. W. Rey- 
 nolds, editor of a Lawrence paper, who is one of the attesting 
 witnesses of the treaty, and signs himself "Reporter" to 
 the Commission. 
 
 The bias or interest of these gentlemen is not, however, 
 singular, except it becomes so by their extraordinary effort 
 to whitewash the Commission and the treatv. 
 
I desire to ask your attention to the following pretences of 
 these gentlemen : 
 
 First, You are charged with having made a secret and 
 one-sided investigation, as temporary chairman of the House 
 Committee of Indian Affairs, and neglecting to call before 
 your committee " the signers " of the pamphlet and others, 
 persons known to you as having been cognizant of the nego- 
 tiations connected with the treaty, including Mr. Commis- 
 sioner Taylor, Mr. William Sturges ct id omne genus. 
 
 In justification of your course as temporary chairman ox 
 that committee, I desire to sa}' that the author of this accu- 
 sation and pamphlet, I. S. Kalloch, Director of the L. L. 
 and Gr. road, was notified b}' you, in person, of the meeting 
 of the committee, and requested to notify the friends of the 
 treaty. 
 
 Inasmuch as he was then, as lie now is, the open advo- 
 cate of its ratification, and one of the chosen agents of Mr. 
 Sturges to secure that deplorable result, he should be the 
 last person to whine because he failed to appear before the 
 committee and face the honest settlers who were there pro- 
 testing against it. I will add that I heard you give this 
 notice to Mr. Kalloch, and I certainly understood him to 
 respond to your request, that he would notify Mr. Sturges 
 and the friends of the treaty. 
 
 It is probably true^ in this connection, that the "friends 
 of the treaty (in the words of Mr. Kalloch, page 1 of hi?; 
 pamphlet,) have been silent under repeated assaults which 
 have been made upon it in newspapers, in pamphlets indus- 
 triously circulated, and in resolutions and speeches before 
 the House of Representatives, because they believed the Sen- 
 ate of the United States ti> be tlie properly constituted 
 authority to consider the merits of tlie treaty, and because 
 they believed the Senate had the ability and integrity, icith- 
 out any external interference, to discover whether there was 
 anything wrong, fraudulent, or unworthy of confirmation 
 in it." 
 
 Denying the authority of the " House " to investigate the 
 treaty^ this ardent pamphleteer gets virtuously enraged 
 
because the "House" did not compel the Commission and 
 the friends of the treatj^ to attend the sessions of its com- 
 mittee. " Hinc nice lachrymxe." 
 
 Second, Before proceeding to refer to the treaty and the 
 I'acts charged in the report of the House Committee of Indian 
 Affairs, I desire to further call your attention to another 
 piece of hypocrisy and special pleading in this pamphlet. 
 
 You are charged vvitli submitting a protest, (Document 
 "A" of the report,) from tbe State officers of Kansas, against 
 this treaty, and with neglecting to "secure the informa- 
 tion, from the author of the document itself, that it was 
 framed at Topeka entirely on the strength of the statements 
 of General Blair, and that further information had con- 
 vinced him that the "document" was, in many important 
 respects, incorrect." 
 
 You may be assured, sir, that this accusation is utterly 
 without foundation in truth. 
 
 I was present in Topeka when that prot&st was framed 
 and signed, and was requested to and did sign it upon infor- 
 mation laid before the Governor and myself, reliable in its 
 nature, and which finds corroboration every day. General 
 Blair did not communicate with the State Department in 
 regard to this treaty, and has, up to this day, so far as I 
 know, made no statement whatever to the Governor or State 
 officers of Kansas, excepting, since my arrival in Washing- 
 ton, to me. The truth is, that the protest, of the Executive 
 and other State officers of Kansas, was framed upon the pub- 
 lication of the substance of the treaty by the " reporter " of 
 the Commission in a Lawrence paper, and the representa- 
 tions of a delegation from the settlers upon the Osage lands, 
 who attended the councils of the Commission, were present 
 when the treaty was signed, and faithfully, as was believed 
 then and is believed now by the Governor and State officers 
 of Kansas, reported the action of the Commissioners and 
 the feeling of the Indians and settlers. Not a representa- 
 tion was made to us at Topeka which had its origin in inter- 
 ests which rival those of the company favored by this treaty. 
 
On the contrary, our information came directly from respon- 
 sible and disinterested sources. 
 
 Since allusion has been made by the '^ Director "' to alleged 
 subsequent action by the Governor, I take the liberty to 
 contradict the author of this pamphlet in his statement that 
 the Grovernor authorized the addendum to the protest, in 
 effect, '' that further information had convinced him that the 
 document Avas in many important respects incorrect." 
 
 The facts are as follows : The formal protest was consigned 
 by the Governor to the hands of his private Secretary, who 
 was instructed to proceed to Washington and deliver it to 
 Senator Pomeroy, if he (Pomeroy) opposed the treaty ; other- 
 wise to Senator Wade. Mr. Burlingame (the Secretary) 
 accompanied me to this city, and until after his arrival here, 
 was earnestly opposed to the treaty, and fully intended to 
 obe}^ the directions of the Governor. But, like a certain man 
 who went down to Jericho, he fell among the friends of this 
 treaty, who got to read the protest, and prevailed upon him 
 to withhold it. An attempt was made to induce the Gov- 
 ernor to withdraw it. 
 
 The answers of Governor Crawford were all in effect, that 
 the treaty must be amended so as to protect the rights of all 
 settlers and the scliool interests of the State, or else it ought 
 to be defeated. 
 
 Mr. Burlingame was not authorized to represent the State 
 officers of Kansas in any other respect than to deliver to the 
 Senate, through the hands of Mr. Wade, the protest refer- 
 red to. 
 
 In corroboration of what I say, and to further convict these 
 pamphleteers of misrepresentation, and the '' Indian ring " 
 of tampering with the protest of the State officers, using an 
 employee of the Governor to effect that purpose, I have the 
 honor to submit the following letter received by me this day 
 from our worthy Governor, Sam, J. Crawford, with the 
 remark that his own testimony is quite as reliable as that of 
 his perfidious Secretary who appears before the Senate Com- 
 mittee to impeach his official action : 
 
State of Kansas, 
 Office of Executive Department, 
 
 ToPEKA, June 13, 1868. 
 
 Dear Col.: Your favor of the 23d is received. Immedi- 
 ately upon receipt of Ward's (Burlingarae's) telef^ram, the 
 day after you arrived in Washington, I telegraphed him tu 
 deliver protest and letters with explanation uf circumstances 
 under which it was written — that is, that we had not seen 
 the treaty, but had learned enough of its provisions to know 
 that it should be defeated. Ward immediately answered 
 that the papers, &c., had been delivered. I am very glad 
 to know that you are sanguine of success. 
 
 If you succeed in defeating the infernal swindle, the people 
 of this State, and especially tiiose residing on the reservation, 
 will owe you an everlastiny; debt of *>;ratitude. 
 
 I hope you lolll follow it up until it is dead and buried. 
 
 Say to Mr. Julian that tlie j^eople of Kansas fully appre- 
 ciate his services in their behalf, and recognize in him a true 
 friend and an honest and fearless defender of their rights. 
 
 -t- 4- * -,;: ;!< * * :i; 
 
 If you think necessary, Prol'essor McVickar (Superintendent 
 of Public instruction) will go to Washington. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 S. J. CRAWFORD. 
 Col. G. II. HoYT, Washington. 
 
 It is hardly necessary for me to add that the protest, as 
 submitted by you in the report assailed by this pamphlet, is 
 the protest signed by the State officers, none of whom have 
 consented to its modification or change. 
 
 Third, I ask your attention to that part of the "Direc- 
 tor's " pamphlet, (page 11,) wherein he declares " this treaty 
 is a pure treaty." "If it were not, would not some news- 
 papers have been hushed to silence r* If it were not. would 
 not persons have been bought, who, it is known, can be 
 l)ought, and who, it is known, can make a loud noise if they 
 are not bought ? If it were not, would there have been sucli 
 violent denunciations of it from certain quarters?" etc., etc. 
 
 This wholesale slander of the opponents of this treaty 
 simply illustrates the desperation of its friends. When you 
 reflect that the whole press of Kansas to-day (excepting only 
 the papers edited by Mr. Kalloch and the "Reporter" of 
 the Commission) arc arrayed against it; that the people of 
 
the State in every locality are overwhelmiugly opposed to it ; 
 that it has no friends anywhere excepting those who have a 
 direct pecuniary interest in its ratification ; those who are 
 hired to swell the Sturges lohhy ; write Sturges pamphlets ; 
 prospective appraisers of the land, who wish to get the oppor- 
 tunity to black-mail the settlers ; those who have the promise 
 of a free gift from Mr, Sturges of from two to ten sections of 
 the land — this heartless libel upon the settlers, the people, 
 and State ofticers of Kansas, and upon yourself, begins to 
 appear in its true light. The men who have made these 
 charges hioio their utter falsity. 
 
 So far as General Blair is concerned, it is true he is presi- 
 dent of a company which proposes to construct an important 
 line of railway through southwest Missouri and southern 
 Kansas, running from Sedalia, Missouri, via Fort Scott, 
 Kansas, through the very lands granted by this treaty to 
 another company, in the direction of Santa Fe, New Mexico. 
 It is true that he proposed to buy these lands of the Indians 
 and was refused by the commission, although he offered 
 nearly half a million dollars more than Sturges, and to sell 
 to present and future settlers at .$1.25 per acre, and to convey 
 one section in each township to the State for its })ermanent 
 school fund. 
 
 If making this kind of an offer was such an attempt to 
 share in the "iniquity " as ought to subject him to the low- 
 flung insinuation that ho wanted to be bought, I confess I 
 cannot see it. 
 
 The statement uf General Blair under oath, corroborated 
 as it is by the Commission, is quite as credible as the howl- 
 ing protestations of Mr. Sturges' lobby, unsupported by 
 oath. It is possible that the warm encomiums of the Rev. 
 Dr. Brown upon the Commission and the treaty, are con- 
 sidered (j[uite sufficient to stam.}) "purity" upon this 
 attempted steal. 
 
 Fourth, It is declared by Mr. Kalluch in his pamphlet 
 that ' ' it is not true, as alleged in the statement, that the Indians 
 for over two weelis refused to sign the treaty!" * * * '-^It 
 
» 9 
 
 is not true that one Commissioner, at least, publicly stated to 
 the Indians that their annuity goods, due them by the provis- 
 ions of a former treaty, luoidd not be delivered to them till they 
 signed this treaty!" ''It is not true that they were told that the 
 Government woidd not protect them against the Arrapalioes 
 unless they made the treaty," &c., &c. 
 
 Herewith I have the honor to hand you files oi' the Law- 
 rence State Journal, containing the account (verhatim) of 
 these councils, as reported by tlie official '^ reporter" of the 
 Commission, Mr. M. W. Reynolds, of Lawrence, Kansas. 
 You will observe that the Journal for May 27, 186T, contains 
 a report of the council held I\Iay 20th, and relates the sub- 
 stance of the treaty offered tlie Indians, and that it does not 
 differ in any material sense from the treaty finally executed. 
 It is not strange that this treaty should have been published 
 in an intluential daily paper in Kansas before being trans- 
 mitted to Washington by the official "reporter" of the 
 Commission, but it is strange that the treaty should bo held 
 as a secret paper after its arrival in Washington, and after 
 the people of the entire West are possessed of its contents. 
 Those gentlemen who have amused themselves with the 
 harmless idea that the people of Kansas have been hitherto 
 ignorant of the merits of this outrageous fraud, will not be 
 surprised at their indignation when they are informed that 
 the baleful instrument of wrong and injustice was flung 
 open to the public by the official "reporter" of the Com- 
 mission, long before the document itself reached the Depart- 
 ment of the Interior. You will observe by the dates of the 
 proceedings reported that the Commission was at Chetopah, 
 near the Osage Reserve, on May 11th, and that thereafter 
 councils were held from time to time until the signing of the 
 treaty. May 27, 1868. From the speeches of the Indians, as 
 interpreted, you will perceive the reluctance Avith which they 
 approached the final execution of the treaty. 
 
 By reference to the speech of Mr. Commissioner Taylor, 
 delivered to the Indians May 23d, you will perceive that 
 he threatens the Indians with the displeasure of the 
 
10 
 
 Goverumeut and a withdrawal of provisions if they do not 
 agree to sign this treaty. 
 
 By reference to the remarks of Colonel Murphy, Superin- 
 tendent, and one of the Commission, you will perceive that 
 he promises to make peace between them and their enemies 
 on the Plains if they sign this treaty ; but if not, then that 
 nothing should be done for them. 
 
 By reference to the remarks of Colonel Boone, another 
 Commissioner, you will see the Indians are informed that 
 they can choose between the treaty and fighting the Plains 
 Indians. 
 
 I refer to these officially reported speeches of the Commis- 
 sioners to refute the wholesale charges of falsehood in the 
 report submitted by the House Committee on Indian Affairs, 
 and the affidavits upon which it is based. 
 
 The fact is, as I shall be able in a short time to establish 
 by an overwhelming mass of evidence, the Indians were 
 absolutely intimidated into signing the treaty. In this con- 
 nection I refer you to the affidavit of Z. C. Overman, dele- 
 gated by the settlers on the Osage lands to visit Washington, 
 and to secure the defeat of this treaty ; and to various letters 
 in your possession relating to this subject. When it appears 
 what disposition was made o^ four barrels o/ivhiskei/, which 
 was conveyed to the Osage country about the time the Commis- 
 sion entered it, it may be easy to solve the mystery of the murder 
 of tivo white settlers by the Indians during the sessions of the 
 Council, and reference to which is made by Director Kalloch, 
 as an argument in favor of the treaty. 
 
 Fifth, The Sturges lobby insist that the value of the 
 land is over-estimated. 
 
 I will refer you to the forthcoming report of the Commis- 
 sioner of the Land-Office for 1867, an advance copy of which 
 I have examined. 
 
 On page 43, Commissioner Wilson remarks as follows : 
 
 "The returns of survey of the Cherokee, Neutral, and 
 Osage tracts have been made to the extent of 2,895,966 
 acres — the field operations having been, during the last 
 3^ear, only as far west as the Arkansas river. The soil is 
 
11 
 
 represented to be of the first rate, being extremely produc- 
 tive : the lands having already attracted numerous settlers, 
 who are awaiting the completion of arrangements for the 
 disposal of the premises." 
 
 The pretence that these lands are comparatively valueless, 
 is absurd. All that is claimed for the land is, that of the 
 8,000,000 acres proposed to be sold the Sturges Company, 
 at least half of it^ (that portion east of the Arkansas,) is 
 as good as the average of lands in South Kansas. 
 
 I am liere at the earnest request of the Governor, and, I 
 may add, in accordance with the almost unanimous feeling 
 of the people of my State, to resist the ratification of this 
 treaty by the United States Senate. We are profoundly 
 desirous to get these and all other Indians beyond our 
 borders ; but chiefly for the reason that the vast tracts of 
 valuable land now walled in by Indian rights, are sadly 
 needed for the great tide of immigration which is sweeping 
 into our State. We complain of that treaty, in the first 
 place, that it creates a monopoly of one-fifth of our territory, 
 from which the settler is to be shut out, except he enters 
 upon terms dictated by the caprice, cupidit}^, or necessities of 
 .such as may have control of the Leavenworth, Lawrence, 
 and Galveston road. It grants that company the Osage 
 Trust Land, a strip which contains over three millions 
 of acres, and upon which there are many settlers, who 
 receive protection only when they are located on square 
 ([uarter sections as surveyed. 
 
 It is a matter of fact that the survey of the trust lands has 
 only recently been concluded, and that at the time of 
 the signing of the treaty, not one in twenty was within the 
 rule established by it. 
 
 As a consequence, they do not come within the provisions 
 of this treaty, which should have allowed them to move 
 upon and occupy quarter sections, and pay for them $1.25 
 per acre, if, indeed, any fair provision was intended for 
 them. 
 
 It grants this company, also, the Diminished Reserve of 
 the Osages, amounting to more than four millions acres, and 
 
12 
 
 upou which there are also a large u umber of settlers, for 
 whom no provision is made whatever. 
 
 We complain that this treaty not only does not justly 
 guard present settlers, but it leaves to the mercy of Mr. 
 Sturges all those who hereafter desire to occupy this desira- 
 ble portion of our State. If it is just to protect those who 
 have already occupied the lands, and give them homes at a 
 stated reasonable price, I know of no principle of public 
 policy which does not obtain in favor of those who follow the 
 advance guard of civilization to our frontier. Certain I am 
 that no legislator who cares to foster the growth and devel- 
 opment of the younger States of the far West, will under- 
 take to defend the policy which gives to monopolists, land 
 or railway speculators, the power to stay the advance of 
 settlements and put their own prices on the homes which 
 landless millions are seeking. 
 
 We complain of this treaty, that it is not the best 
 that could have been executed. General Blair^ a gentleman 
 whose reputation, I am sure, asks no eulogy from me, is the 
 president of a Missouri and Kansas R. R. Co., as I have before 
 stated. He, in company with others interested in the suc- 
 cess of that enterprise, attended the Council with the Osages, 
 or at least attempted to, and was near by. His proposition, 
 guaranteed by responsible parties, was to give the Indians 
 lialf a million dollars more than Sturges proffered, to protect 
 the settlers by selling them homes at $1.25 per acre ; and to 
 convey to the State of Kansas the 16th section in each 
 townshi}) for the Permanent School Fund of the State. 
 
 He was refused by the Commission. Indeed, all parties 
 seeking to make terms with the Commission were referred to 
 Mr. Sturges, who seems to have been the ruling spirit of the 
 concern and the predetermined and favored grantee of the 
 lands. This Avas the case, as I am able to prove by the testi- 
 mony of Professor McVickar, our Superintendent of Public 
 Instruction, who applied to obtain some provision for our 
 Permanent School Fund. 
 
 The act of admission gives our State the 16th and o6th 
 sections in each township of public lands for the Permanent 
 
13 
 
 Free School Fund, and guarantees us in iieu thereof an 
 equivalent. It is well known to you that our State contained 
 at the time of admission a large number of Indian reserva- 
 tions — the Kickapoo, Delaware, Wyandott, Shawnee, Pot- 
 tawattomie, Kansas, Osage, Sac and Fox, besides the large 
 tracts consumed by the head rights of various tribes. The 
 Kickapoo reserve went to the Central Pacific, and is being 
 sold now by an agent of the company at prices ranging from 
 $3 to $25. A portion of the Delaware reserve went to the 
 Missouri River Company, and is held at prices ranging from 
 .^12 to $100 per acre. The Shawnee, Kaw, Pottawattomie, 
 and Osage treaties are now pending. Out of all these reserva- 
 tions, which consume more than half the desirable lands of 
 Kansas, not an acre has been withheld to the school fund 
 of Kansas. Ultimately, every quarter section will contain 
 a home, and every home if conducted on proper and correct 
 principles of domestic economy (as all Kansas homes are) 
 will produce children. Of course they will all alike share 
 from the revenues derived from the common fund of the 
 State, but each part of the State should contribute its pro- 
 portion to that fund. 
 
 We ask that these giant monopolies, created by the ques- 
 tionable method of an Indian compact, sanctioned by only 
 one branch of Congress, may be made to contribute from 
 their immense grants a small portion thereof to the educa- 
 tional fund of our young but fast-growing commonwealth. 
 It is certain that this might have been done in every instance 
 where Indian lands have been ceded in Kansas, without 
 injury to the Indians or the General Qovernment. The only 
 class who suffer in this wise event are the speculators, who 
 are compelled to disgorge a part of their enormous gains, 
 and contribute to the grand scheme of free schools for our 
 children. 
 
 I protest against this treaty, that out of this eight millions 
 acres granted Mr. Sturges, the School Fund of Kansas is 
 defrauded of its proportion of lands in one-sixth of the 
 State. While it is true that these were Indian lands and 
 not subject to the disposal of the Government, it is equally 
 
14 
 
 true that the lands are not disposed of without the action of 
 the Senate. It is as fair that the Senate should insist on a 
 recognition of the school interests of Kansas hy forcing a 
 condition upon the grantee of this land as that it should 
 force other conditions upon him. In other words, if this is 
 a sale from the United States, as well as the Indians, to Mr. 
 Sturges, we ask the United States, which has the power to 
 amend this treat}- , to remember its pledge to the State oi' 
 Kansas, and force the reservation by the grantee of this 
 immense portion of that State, of the 16th and 36th sections 
 to the Permanent School Fund, 
 
 So far as the amendments go, referred to by the Sturges 
 })amphleteers, no just protection is offered the settlers. Such 
 as " having the qualifications of preemptors shall take lands 
 where they please, after the adoption of the treaty, hy paying 
 a price fixed hy tliree imp)a,rtial appraisers appointed hy the 
 Government." In other words, no settlers now or hereafter 
 on the Diminished Eeserve can have their homes except 
 they pay the price fixed by the Interior Department upon 
 them. 
 
 If justice is intended for the settlers, why do not those 
 gentlemen, who propose to amend this treaty, offer the lands 
 to them at a fixed price per acre, and not leave them to be 
 blackmailed by '^' appraisers," who have long enough cursed 
 the people of the West by their extortions and abuses. Cer- 
 tainly the difierence between 19 cents and $1.25 per acre 
 ought to be a sufficient margin even for the ravenous appe- 
 tite of the most voracious Chicago speculator. 
 
 The fact is, nothing is intended to-day, nor has been 
 at any previous time since the treaty was draw^n in the 
 office of Tom. Ewing and agreed to by the various parties 
 in interest, from the Head of a Department down to the 
 gentlemen who sneeze when Mr. William Sturges inhales 
 his snuff, but to circumvent justice and successfully accom- 
 plish a huge steal of public lands. 
 
 The persistency with which this treaty, whose revolting 
 details have extracted general denunciation from the press 
 and people of the whole country, has been defended, and the 
 
 jiu I4ttr^ 
 
15 
 
 zeal which is manifested to secure its ratification gives proof 
 that more than common interest inspires its apologists. 
 
 When, among those who defend it, is found some one who 
 is not either hougJd or hargained foi-, there will be some 
 reason for Mr. Kalloch and his copartners to assert that 
 •' the people " of Kansas " want it." Meanwhile, for one, 
 I am interested to learn that "The signers of this pamphlet 
 liold themselves responsible for the treaty.'" 
 
 GEO. H. HOYT, 
 
 Attorney General State of Kansas. 
 

 ^. 
 

 o 
 
 
^^"\^.^::^.\ 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 • k"^ 
 
 \v s • • > 
 
 
 
 
 0.» y<v 
 
 
 ^^ D0S3S BROS. ^ 
 
 >Q LIBRARY BINDING . o « O ^ "^ 
 
 o ^. .<^ .^^^dfel.'. V .-^^ /^ 
 
 
 "^ <^^ "^.S!?^ '' ^'^^ 'y'' 
 
 A 
 
 c , 
 
 
 
 ■' o