The daily union., 1852-08-05
CONGRESSIONAL.
DEFERRED DEBATE.
MONDAY. AUGUST 2, 1852
lcoNcLuDED.
SENATE
INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. HUNTER move that the prior orders be post
poned tor the purpose OF taking up the bill "making APP
propr atoms for the current and contingent expenses Of
he Indian department, and Tor fulfilling treaty spula
with various Indian tribes. Tor tue year ending June
30, 1858"
The motion was agreed to- and the Senate proceeded
TO the consideration OF the bill as in committee Of the
whole--she pending question being The amendment
OF the COMMITTEES 10 strike out the following:
"For The payment the Shawnees of moneys due them
and by virtue OF the treaties Of the 7lh November
1925 and S,h OF August, 1884, between the United States
the divisions Of said ibe of Indians The same be-
pp balance tho treasury Tor the sale
OF lands in Ohio, $66 2i6 23 Procded hoatue That
ad tribe Of udians shall inst .s.t assent that the
paymen OF the above shall be made equally 10 The
whole tribe rather than 10 either division thereof
Mr. HUNTER This claim OF the Shawnees is based,
believe, upon The following statement OF facts: The
Missouri Shawnees. they caed-hose located al
Cape GereJeau--heId some sort OF a grant IRON the
Spanish government twenty hive miles square. In 1928
they desired 10 remove on account OF having Trouble
some neghbOrs, and the government were also dis.
po,ed 10 remove them. There also another band
OF Shawnees who lived in Ohio at the time upon res
eryaton OF land that belonged to them. II was slpua-
led in 1925 that tract OF land fifty miles square, or
quantity equal thereto should be set aside Tor these
Shawnees and if that did not suit them, they were to
have like quantity upon The Kansas river. lhis tract
was ceded them in consideration for tract of twenty
five miles square which had been cedeI 10 the Missouri
shawnees At Cape Geredeau with the intention OF re-
moving also the Ohio Shawnees to the same spot that
they might be together. The Cape Geredeau Indians
removed at that time; and IN 1881 treaty was
made with the Ohio Shawnces, by which The government
stipulated that il would seventy cents an acre out
of The sales Of the lands and give them the residue after
deducing certain expenses, making grant OF something
like 30 900, upon which ibe Ohio Shawnees draw
uar interest. They also stipulated to patent 10 them
100 900 OF land to hold long their tribe should
reside upon it, within this reservation OF fifty miles
square formerly given the Missouri Shawnees in 1925
aud which given 10 them not only for the OF the
Missouri, but OF the Ohio Shawneea The Ohio Shaw
nees removed this tract think, in 1882 They lived in
common with the Missouri Shawnees from that time
until about lSt4 which was the first time they ever
IL. nf land Raf,.r at
time their agent Mccoy. had written the Indian de-
partAent that it suitable TO the tastes and
wishes of the Indian tribes 10 live in common than to
have particular portion sci ASIDE altogether from The
Ohio Shawnees. In other words they considered II better
for them to hold, in common with the Missouri Shaw
neas, the 100000 OF land than to have 100000
acres apart, and to lose all right and title TO the resi-
due In pursuance OF this advice in lSIi-althoush
do not discover that obliged to 60 py the
trea,ythe whole 100000 of land patented
TO the Sbawnees with this reservation:
''Subect the right secured the Oaio band of the
Shawnees by the second article OF the and
county Allen, in the State of Ohio the Sh day OF
gust, in the year OF our Lord 1881
So that the treaty OF 1925 reserved the United States
the right to locale the Ohio Shawnees within the 50
miles square and when the patent issued in 1874.
conveying those lands TO the Missouri Shawnees, The
rig ht reserved in the PATENT from which ap
pears that if were desirable tbe United States has
The right under the treaties Of 1925 and 1881 10 patent
these 100 The Ohio Shawnees Blu, accord
ing the information OF McCoy-and it would probably
preferred to bold common right TO the whole l6oo 600
rather than to take separate right 10 the 1000
acres AT any rate, If they desire separate rish il
is in the power OF the United States, under the treaty
1875, give them separate right and il very proba-
bic that The Missouri Shawnees would agree 10 IT, be-
cause they would be better of 10 hold 500 900
their own right than to hold the whole IN with
the Ooio Shawnees Whether that be not, the ut
they demand. il TO me. is that this sepa-
rate reservation shall be patented to them There is moth
ing in our previous transactions 10 prevent that
hrS theV N
the time OF Commissioner Crawford, in 1914 He decided
against them. He decided that the Ohio Sbawnees had
pretence TO Qber lands than those which had been
given them. The demand was again made while Mr..
Lowry acting commissioner, that he should reopen
this claim. but he refused 10 do They again presented
their claim when Mr.. Mccoy acting commissioner,
and be aso refused TO reopen IT, How has come here
al this time, know not. II seems that Il has been re-
opened, and that the claim is estimated for and 10 this
form Appeals before The only ground upon which
this claim has the shadow Of right s-lf were true
the ground which TO have been taken by The
miss,oner-,hat The Usiied States have ncapactaied
themselves from fulfilling the treaty stipulation TO give
them patent the 900 acres The fact is that il
has no, ncapacilaed itself On the contrary, in the treaty
OF 1895. they reserved the tight 10 issue this patent
But sir, in point OF fact, il there any right,
would seem rather belong the Missouri Shawnees,
who gave them Is miles square in excbange<or this land
II anybody has the right 10 complain, is the Missouri
Shawnees because TO their tribe the land ceded,
and might be said that they bought ii for the OF the
Ohio Shawnees and therefore entitled 10 compensa-
uou. believe that in truth neither s entitled TO com.
Pbtauo0. TX was u resefVAuOn naae by Inc Ohileu
States for the benefit OF the Ohio Shawnees IL is 10 be
presumed that The home 10 have been provided by
The United States. Why should the Missouri Shawnees
intervene and take from the United States its obligation
TO provide home for the Ohio ShawDeesl reserva-
ton must have been made By the United States and that
Reservation gwen 10 the Ohio Sbawnees in consid
Grafton for the 10 cents which we obtained when they
formed the treaty. To show claim Of ha, sort there is
apet,ion filed among the papers by the Missouri Shaw
ness in which they clam that compensation should be
given to- them II s that the petition was never pre-.
sented TO the House; bat il sent as understand
10 The chairman Of the Committee on Indian Affairs in
the House OF Representatives, (Mr johnson, OF Akan.
sas,) by responsible man--Coone MITCHELL believe,
formerly OF Minnesota SO appears that this is claim
Of the Missouri Shawnses, made under much prob
able circumstances than those under which the Ohio
Shawnees present their claim. II compensation should
be given TO either il belongs to them but in point OF
iscl believe there is valid claim upon the OF
either tribe There s nothing due to either The Uni-
ted States gave them in exchange Tor their possessory
rights the 25 miles square-and II ! understand 'he
chairman of the Committee Indian Affairs u was not
patent from the Spanards times a. much ands
tract so miles square and then justly added reserva-
ion Tor the purpose Of providing home Tor ihe ONO
hhawnees when they should be removed Not only did
the United States DO that but they went further Than tbey
were bound TO TO- and giving Them t'ie as other In
uahs mad received e Tor lher lands when removed TO
mem, mem, gave them also PATENT BY which they held
highet hue than Indians usually hold TO ands Thus we
went beyond what required OF us in the treaty Of
io<o ohust these circumstances did not seen TO The
Somee ,hal any part OF the Sbawnees could urge any
'esihna'e cam upon this accounts and even II anything
was que, we thought no, proper to pay II now,
hnn " was sseefalned to which band OF Shawnees II
was Que nly owA opinion Is that neither has any Just
clam upon rs
Mr. ATCHlSoN. Mr. President. this question is in.
voived IN doubt and uneertaintv in mo ornion If the