The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1878-12-11

that there was no Encouragement, and in fact,
no suspicion of any. It was in fact as he had
said, as if angels had descended upon the earth,
doing gentle ministrations among the savages,
to lead them to higher state Of we'll being. 1t
was easy proved this WAS far from being the
case. report of q committee to the House of
Representatives made in 1912, when
the war department bad charge
Of Indian affairs, charged clerks
with objectionable negligence; that accounts
showed an almost total want of method: that
accounts Of expenditure were 30 carelessly kept
ms to furnish scarcely any traces of expenditure
Of very large sums. For several years entries
were made in 60 slovenly manner that the
very clerks themselves could not explain them.
There was not single entry referring to In
dian land, and all the records left by Indian
officers of the war department were scraps of
memoranda pencil notes, etc. To bear out his
statement with respect
TO MALFEAsANCE,
he quoted from the report of Lieut.. Gen.
Hitchcock and sustained the action of the de-
partment in reference to the removal of the
Cherokees. The contract was made at $40 per
head and 10000 Cherokees were removed, but
10000 in excess of actual number were charged
and paid for, making the actual payment $2O4, :
276 in excess or $103 per capita. He also read
q report dated 1884, which showed the exorbi-
tant prices which Indians were charged for va
rious articles, and concluded that from all this
it would seem that the record of the war de-
partments management of Indian affairs was
by no means SO clear as Gen. Marcy tried to
make out. He was not going to pretend that
the civil administration was pure. No such
thing. But he would say they had
r NO SCANDAL QUITE 80 BAD
al the Cherokee affair. He alluded to the diff
culties of supervision of different agencies,
but said many abuses that had formerly existed
were being swept away. With the exception of
the treasury departments prosecution of the
whisky ring, he did not think that any depart
ment had been more active in prosecuting its
contractors when they were once detected.
They had, perhaps, some fifteen or twenty I'M
der prosecution now, and only few weeks ago
one Of these
CONTRACTORS WAS CONVICTED.
Now he should be very slow to assert that
army offic. rs, as such, had dishonest tenden-
cies. He thought the army deserved, as a
whole, it's reputation for honesty, that is to
say, for honest intentions. Yet it would be
absurd to say that such class of men were in
accessible to the bad impulses Of human ma
t4re: Gen; Marcy had stated that while the
administration Of the war department cost
1,800, 900, the Indian department cost IS, 900,
600, a difference of s3,2O0,0OO. Such COM
parisoD was absurd. The Indian business in
1919 was. nothing to what 1t had now be-
come. He read a statement of the
a"ouue kasAu PeH AOO pouAuS OF DeeI ny
the two departments for the Indian bureau and
military, which showed q saving of $644, 600 in
favor Of the former. Gen. Miles had stated
that the transportation of the army cost 81
DOC, 900. while the transportation of wood,
clothing. etc., for Indians only cost 1905, 600.
A glance would show that the department of the
interior got it's transportation at cheaper rates.
He did not attri butte any Of these things
TO DISHONESTY OF THE ARMY,
but rather to their cavalier way of looking at
and dealing with things. Soldiers never
thought of the cost of a thing if it was thought
to be necessary. As an instance he mentioned
that at the close of the Sioux war there were
about 1000 horses, ponies, and mules taken
from the Indians for which COWS were to be
given them, and it turned out that these ponies
and mules cost $l9,4O0 besides the COWS, and
that to sell them cost $5,6s3 additional. This
was an instance Of the cavalier way which was
,, not found in the interior department..
G. G. WATKINS,
| inspector Of the Indian department, followed
Secretary Schurz and opposed the transfer. He
explained the mode of inspection of Indian
supplies. Friend Miles also gave his reasons
| why control of the Indians should not pass to
the war department.