New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-10-09
THE DEADLOCK OYER THE SIOUX TREATY.
LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE Ma
TIoNAL INDIAN DEFENCE ASSOCIATION.

To the Editor Of the Tribune.
Sir: In your semtweekly Of the 25th inst. find
the following from The Pioneer Press" of st. Paul
Mimi The fact IS proven beyond question
that the entire opposition to the bill Sioux BIN has
been instgated by the Indian Defence Association as
letters from It's officers chiefs have been secured
The Indians are urged 10 reject the billr
The foregoing statement assumes blindness TO their
own interests the part of the Indians altogether
unwarranted By the facts and credits the Indian Dc
fenco Association with degree of influence 1t has
dreamed of laying claim to. 1t is quite pos
sbe that letters from officer OF the association 10
one of the Sioux chiefs have been secured, but we
assure the public that they contain nothing whatever
TO Justify tile assertion Of Tho Pioneer Press III Is
matter Of history that trc Sioux have always opposeu
a division of their reservation on terms offered by the
Government. An attempt to secure their consent OH
terms similar to those offered was made In ISL
Just such Presidential Commission as IS now az worn
was sent out then. This Commission was oblsea 10
report failure TO obtain the signatures necessary 10
give validity to the bill but It had the audacity 10
recommend that the Senate disregard the refusal OF
The Indians 10 sign and proceed II the requisite
three-quarters of all the signatures had been CD
tanned
The Senate refused to accept the report and ap
pointed a committee, OF which Senator Dawes was
chairman, investigate tho whole matter Inc ioi
lowing from the printed report of that committee WIZ
serve To show how the Sioux regarded the proposal OF
the Government at that The conclusions OF the
committee are that at the present time the SIOUX
Nation IS practically unanimous In It's opposltoh 10
this proposed agreement Indeed the committee uu no'
find among all the Indians at the different agono''s
and called into council by the agents more than one
or two Indians whose opposition to this agreement i
not now outspokcn and decided. In this opposition
the very Indians whose names are appended 10 thc
agreement seemed to take the Lead
We beg the public to take note at this point tha'
the National Indian Defence Association was not then
in existence Yet the Sioux Nation was practically
unanimous in its opposition to this scheme Oh o'i-
SION according to the report Of this committee Dc
snte this fact however the committee thought that
measure differing I'm no important respects In us
value TO the white man, could be so drafted as 10
secure the necessary OF the Indians Inc Dll
now waiting for THIS consent Is the measure PROPOSED
This association was called into being by inc lnulais
need OF defence against such Ubiquitous legislation
have honestly tried 10 aid the Indian In his unequal
contest with the organized forces SEEKING 10 uespui
HIM of his lands. We have known his wishes anu Ms
rights and have done what could TO fufther ,ne Vnv
and maintain the other But his opposition 70 the Nh
now seeking his consent Is not OF our procuring
are happv TO say that have done what we coubi
to encourage HIM to believe that the GoVetnhien.
would not take his land without his CONSENT ana We
have urged him to act on that supp0stlon We mum n
n would be creditable to our whole p'oph II ~
would unite with US in justfyng to the indian TINS
belief and hope. Ai-f.AAN Dr.is "A .-Sst..to,
President of the National Indian Defence AsSocatoh
Washington ID. c., Sept. %, 1858.