The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1854-03-25
THE MINES TIA N
At. PAUL. SATURDAY, MARCH ss, 1854.
-Repor, ON the Ramsey Case.

Tbs following is the Report, in full, oil the
Senate Committee Of Indian Affairs upon tne
Ramsey, case. As we stated last week, tne re-
mort had the unanimous sanction OF the Com-
m;ttse.snd was unanimously agreed to by the
Senate The Committee, we beiie'e' Is coh-
posed OF Messrs. Atchison, of Missouri, Jones,
of Iowa, and Sebastian, of Arkansas Democrats;
and Messrs. Cooper, of Pennsylvania, and Bell,
Of Tennessee, Wings
Report of the Committee Indian Affairs, in
the Case of Alexander Ramsey.
February a. 1s-Submltted, considered and agreed to
The Committee on Indian affairs TO ,clom ,cas
referred the testimony taken ty the Commas
sioners amounted By the President OF the
IInited States to Investigate certain charges
n,cEsyred against Alexander Ramsey, late
Gorernor OF, and Superintendent Of Indian
.qfairs for, the Territory of Minnesota, IN
relation to the payments made to the Indians
and Others, in pursuance of the treaties Of
Traverse des Si0ur and Ne d0ta and also
The testimony taken by the said Committee at
Tie last session of the Senate, beg fedre to
report: =,
That they have carefully examined all the
Testimony taken by the commissioners, during
nearly three months which they were In SEES
sion at St. Paul, in the TERRITORY OF Minnesota,
and have arrived at the conclusion that the
conduct of Governor Ramsey was not only
free from blame, but highly eOmmendable anu
meritorious. Not one of the charges preferred
against him has been sustained 10y the testlmo-
nv. On the contrary, the witnesses OF the COM
,,la;nantsthemselves, in almost every instance,
have negatved them-proving conclusiveiy,
that he neither violated the stipulatlons OF the
treaties. as understood by the parties to them,
nor was governed in his conduct by motives
other than such as entitle him to commentator
both as man and an officer.
In the disbursement of the funds arising un-
der the treaties,h he acted in accordance with the
understanding between the commissioners VINO
negotiated them, the Indians, and the traders
for whom provision had been made. The pay
ments of the moneys was made by him under
the direction of, and in strict accordance win,
the views and instructions of the Commissioner
of Indian Affairs.
The payments the propriety OF which have
been questioned, were those made OF that por-
ton of the money which was appropriated IN
pursuance of. the first clause OF the fourth ar
ticle of the treaties Of Traverse DIES Sioux anu
Mendoza respectively. At the time the treaties
were negotiated, at the pressing instance of the
Indians themselves, as appears from the testi-
mony, the commissioners, Governor Ramsey
and Luke Lea, consented to set aside the sum
of S495, 900 mainly for the payment OF the debts
due by them to their traders. The indebted
ness of the Indians to the traders has never
been denied and indeed, they refused to treat
unless provision were made in the treaty for
the payment of their debts
That the Indians fully understood the natGrc
of the provisions made in behalf OF their trad
ers. and were satisfied afterwards with the pay
ments made to them. is clearly apparent from
the testimony. 1t may be true THAT, subse-
quently to the time the payments were made,
individuals among the chiefs. excited by the
hope which interested people encouraged them
to cherish, that their complaints would lie list
ened to ly the Government, may have stated
that their debts were not as large as the traders
pretended. But, however this may be, the
claims of the traders were verified by their
oaths and previously admitted to be just by
the Indians themselves. Under these crcum-
stances, it was the duty of Governor Ramsey,
and he would have been culpa!lc had he neg
lected, to pay the moaey to The traders, for
whose benefit the stipulation contained in the
first clause of the fourth article of The treaty
was principally intended. Had the money been
paid to the Indians, who at all acquainted with
their habits and the influences surrounding
them, doubts that it would have been improve
IDENTIFY used. Indeed. the commissioner, Mr.
Young. admits that this would necessarily hav'
been the case. 1t was, therefore, in the Judg
ment Of the committee, the duty Of Governor
Ramsey to prevent, as far as was in his power
these funds from being diverted from their lie
gitimate object.
Amongst the accounts. vouchers, &c. of Go
vernon Ramsey referred to the committee wer,
those of the chiefs, authorizing the payment 0
the money to the traders. These vouchers arr
signed by the proper chiefs of the respcctiv,
bands, and conferred ample power on Governol
Ramsey to appropriate the money as he did
The committee cannot, therefore, perceive
wherein his conduct has been in any respcc
blameable No wrong was done to the Indians
in this respect: but if the funds designed by
the treaties for the benefit of the traders hat
been paid to the Indians themselves he would
have subjected himself to the just animadver
sion of his superiors.
That provision was made in the treaties fol
the payment of the debts due by the Indians te
the traders, was known to everybody convcrs
ant with the matter. 1t was the subject OF re
mark in the Senate, when the bill making ap
preparations to carry the treaties into effect wa
under consideration and no one, as far as til,
committee are aware, questioned the prophet.
OF such provision nor can the committee see
any improperly now, either in the provision
of the treaties or the manner in which they
were carried into effect ly Governor Ramsey
One Of the charges preferred by the com
plainants against Governor Ramsey was, tina
IN depositng the money received from tn
Treasury in certain banks in the city of New
York and elsewhere, he bad violated the provi
sions of the act passed August G, 1876, com
monty called the subtreasury act. 1t woul,
be sufficient to say in reply to this part of tn
charge, that Governor Ramsey, in receiving
from the Treasury the funds destined fer tn
payment OF debt accidental in its character
and connected in nowise with his ordinary du
ties as Governor or Superintendent of India
Affairs, was not an officer in contemplation
the above-named act, nor subject TO its prov
sions. The committee have however. wor
to say as to the facts come cted with this braHc
OF the case.
While it is true that Governor Ramsey re
ceived draft on the Treasury for which h
might have obtained gold it is also true tina
ne paid neither the Indians or traders in fund
below par. or which the creditors themselye
did not make choice Of For convenience am
security he deposited the draft which he ha
received at the Treasury in New York I'd too
acertliicate of deposit for it, Drafts on Ne,
York. and the notes on New York hanks wcr
at premium in Minnesota Mt the time The nav
ments were made. The Indians were Maid !;
cold. while most of the traders ,,r,f,x.!-