civilized nations in the Indian Territory, opinions on this point are divided. When I visited their Agricultural Fair at Muscogee, two years ago, I found that of the representative men meeting there a minority were in favor of, but a strong majority opposed to, the division of their lands in severalty. This opposition springs in great part from the timid apprehension of the Indians that the division of their lands would, in the course of time, bring upon them the competition of white men, in which they distrust their ability to hold their own; and this feeling is worked upon by the ambitious politicians among them, who aspire to the high offices in their tribes, and who know that the settlement in severalty will be apt eventually to break up the tribal organization and to deprive the politicians of their importance. The friends of the severalty policy, on the other hand, I found to be mostly bright, active and energetic men, some of them full-blood Indians, who trust their own ability to sustain themselves, and are clear-headed enough to foresee what the ultimate fate of the Indian race must be. Among the “wild” tribes now beginning to adopt “the white man's way,” the idea of settlement in severalty appears more popular in proportion. Appeals to the Government from Indians of that class for the allotment of farm tracts to heads of families and for “the white man's paper,” have been very frequent of late, and in many instances very urgent. It is not to be assumed, however, that most of those who make such demands have more than a vague conception of what they are asking for, and that all the consequences of their settlement in severalty are entirely clear to their minds. In treating with uncivilized Indians we must never forget that their thoughts move within the narrow compass of their traditional notions, and that their understanding of any relations of life beyond that limited horizon are mere abstractions to them, and must neces-
