The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1891-07-19
Commissioner Morgan Declares that
They Should No Longer Receive Aid.
Father Chappelle, Vice-President Of the Mission
Bureau, Informed that His Schools Are
Contrary to the American Idea.
Letter from Cardinal Gibbons Asking
for a Reversal of the Decision.
The Indian Commissioner Holds TO His Posi-
tion in Reply That Recites the Secret
History OF the Entire Controversy.

WASH1NGTONs July lo.-ln letter Co
Father Chappelle. vice-president of the
Catholic Missions Bureau. giving the rea-
sons which influenced his action in no
longer making contracts with that bureau,
Commissioner Morgan says:
On entering on my present duties ! ex-
pressed my preference for the government
rather than the contact system as being
more IN harmony with the American idea
OF education by means of the public
schools. At the same time / stated that
the schools maintained by the govern
ment for the education of the Indians
should be strictly non-sectarian aid nom
partisan: and further, that the apprOpria-
ton of public funds to sectarian institu-
tions was. in my opinion, contrary 10 the
spirit. 1t not the letter. of the Constitution.
and opposed to public policy. said, how
ever. distinctly and repeatedly, that 1t
waSnO my purpose or wish to interfere In
any way with the contract schools then ex-
listing, unless for good and sufficient rea-
sons. expressing. however. determination
not to authorize any new contract schools.
My position on the question was vlO-
lently assailed by your bureau. False
charges were preferred against me, and the
most determined but futile efforts were
made to prevent my confirmation and to
secure my displacement. An employee whom
i discharged for cause from this office was
immediately given employment by your
bureau. where he is still retained. and dur
ing the entire two years the bureau has,
both directly and indirectly, in season and
out OF season, publicly and privately.
through newspapers and personal inter
views, through official correspondence
and IN the lobby of Congress, assaIled
the policy of the administration and at
tempted to defeat the extension and sue
cessful operation of the government schools.
Those In your employ In the field and 9th
ers. instigated apparently by the attitude
OF the bureau, have endeavored, directly
and indirectly. to hinder the efforts of the
government in it's work through it's apprO-
priationb. These influences emanating
from your bureau have been in some re-
spects, at least. hurtful. and it is certainly
not Its fault that the government schools
have not been crippled OF even destroyed
FATHER CHAPPELLE's INGRATITUDE.
while drawing hundreds of thousands
of dollars of government funds TO build mp
and sustain the mission schools under your
charge, your bureau has thrown the whole
weight of its influence against the govern
ment upon whose bounty it has subsisted
Your attitude of hostility, criticism and
aggressive antaaonism has rendered official
intercourse between your bureau and this
office. very difficult and harassing,
largely increasing it's work and
hindering and delaying the general cause
of Indian education. During this period of
time the president of your bureau. Rev.
j. A. Stephan. has never. so far as known.
taken any pains to bring about pieasanter
relations with the Indian Office; has never
spoken to me, or, so far as am aware been
in the Office. and is entirely unknown to
me even by sight"
The Commissioner then complains of the
bureau for inspiring an article asserting
that the trouble with the MOqui Indians i'm
Arizona was due the Commissioners pig
headed opposition to. contract schools.
and: continuing. says: Receiving no
explanation or apology from you there
fOTs. as l had night TO expect.
sen You word that would be glad to see
you in reference to it, and in full confer
enCe. you expressed yourself as being dis
pleased with the offensive article. dis
claimed all responsibility for il, and said
that you had reprimanded the employees of
your bureau from whom it emanated. You
admitted that he was the person who had
been dismissed from this office for cause,
and who was ut once taken into your en-
plOy. where he still remains. and pointed
out to you that he had been the promoter
of discord during the last two years. and
that In my opinion, there could be no har-
mOniOus relations while he continued
in your service.e l further main
tanned that no employee OF your bureau,
sustaining the relations it does to his office,
has right to make these assaults, and
suggested, in the interests of harmony,
that this man be Immediately discharged
from your bureau. To this proposition you
would not consent, although repeating
with emphasis your disapproval of his
action. stating that it was unwarrantabIe
and that be had used your name without
authority. and that you were both panied
and shocked.
IL have reflected very carefully over this
matter, taken high counsel regarding It.
and must reluctantly feel constrained to
say that the Office declines to enter into
contract with your bureau for the educa-
tlon OF Indian youths"
BEGGING THE QUESTION.
Commissioner Morgan has received. uD-
der date of July s. letter from Father
Chappelle in reply to that sent by the Com
missioner. giving notice that the Indian
Office declines to enter into u further con-
tract with the Bureau for the Education of
Indian children. The letter shows that
the officers OF the bureau requested per-
sOnal interview with the Commissioner on
the subject of the contents of the Commits
siOner's letter. and that the Commissioner
cation in writing from the bureau. but that
he failed to see that any thing would be &C.
compllshed by O personal interview. The
letter then says, in effect that the bureau
expresses its deep regret. but its exceed
ing great astonishment that the head of
should decline to hold personal interview
with persons having important public
business to transact. The letter then says
that each and every member Of the bureau
declared that he had no knowledge of any
kind relative to the newspaper article re-
tiecting on the Commissioner which the
latter had said emanated from the bureau.
The article, the letter said, was discussed
by the bureau in the presence of Mr.. Cor
man, an employe of the bureau, and the
person alleged to have inspired it, and the
conclusion was reached that no mem Der or
employe of his, as such member. had the
right TO make such assaults upon the In
dian Office or upon any other public Office.
The latter declares that should any mem.
bers OF the bureau so far forget themselves
as to publicly criticise the government.
the bureau could not and should not
be held officially responsible there
for unless it officially Endorsed
such criticism. Mr.. German, IL says,
thereupon resigned his position in the
bureau. The letter then calls the attention
monious relations always existing between
the bureau and the Indian Office, and adds
that this ia the first instance in which the
Commissioner has felt called npon TO declare
that friendly relations between it and the
bureau do not exist The bureau is of the
opinion that the causes alleged to exist by
che Commissioners as the reasons for his in
tention to sever heretofore existing rela.
tions are chiefly. If not entirely. of per.
sonal character on the part of the Commits
sioner and that there does not
stantially sever Official relations,
In conclusion the letter says the bureau re-
spectfully submits To the Commissioned
that the poliey of Conuress ma IL undar-