The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-04-20
THE oTE RENoYkl BlLL.

lhE III DGMOV AL DALI
Somebody has had printed and is circu- |
lating among members of Congress in |
Washington twenty one page pamphlet
embodyipg the views of those opposed to
the removal of the Colorado Utes to this
territory. The paper covers the ground
fairly and should be the means of prevent
ing the passage of the bill referred to- The
protest first calls attention to the fact that
in 1850 the Uncompahgre Utes agreed to set
tie on agricultural lands on the Grsnd river
in Colorado, but were not permitted TO do
SO; istead they were brought into Utah,
where / ,912, 800 ocres of land were set apart
! for them. The White River Utes were
afterwards brought into Utah, and twelve
million acres of land in Colorado returned
to the public domain, whilst nearly two
million acres were taken for their use in
Utah. The Southern Utes, by the same
agreement, were to be settled upon unoc-
cupied land in the La Platte valley, Colo
RADIO, their reservation being confirmed to
them by act of Congress July rs. 1852. Now
it is proposed to send these Indians across
the state line, taking 100000 acres of
Utah land for a reservation, and giving
them 100000 acres more for hunting
privileges, in order that Colorado may have
the l, 100000 acres comprised in the present
reservation.
The pamphlet recites the memorial
against the removal adopted by the late
legislature of this territory, and follows
with vigorous protest signed by Delegate
GAME and Ex-Governor WEST. These
| oh hat o1r Tpdi
have been brought into Utah from
Colorado. and that the two reservations in
this territory comprise 1922, 4S0 acres.
They say the removal would be an unwise
and unjust discrimination in favor of one
community over another. They call atten-
ton to the great expense attending the re-
moval, to the undesirableness of the
Indians as occupants and ueighbors, and to
the fact that private property to the
amount of $4,000, exclusive of mining
claims, is held within the proposed reserva-
ton. The protest concludes thus:
Out territory has had its own local troubles,
and for years. through much contention and
strife. it has been seeking and moving towards
a settlement of them. We can with confidence
assure the country of the happy removal of all
causes occasioning past strife, and that we are
confidently and hopefully looking to bright
future. We only ask an equal chance with our
neighbors
Then follow much matter bearing on the
question, as the protest of more than eight
hundred residents of Colorado and Utah,
whose interests will be jeopardized by the
removal; the remonstrance of $50
miners who have established claims on
the proposed reservation; the remonstrance
of 10 taxpayers living on the reservation,
etc. 1t is shown that the removal
: would be violstive of the policy of the gov
, eminent which is to allot lands in severalty
open the door to citizenship and abolish the
old Indian regime. The history of the pro
posed removal is recited in detail. showing
:, that it is a scheme to free Colorado from
: the burden and annoyance of an Iudiar
q population, and permit Durango to boon
= her town property. The conclusion il
\ reached from the showing that
II To remove the Southern Utes from Colorado
now would be to turn them back fifty years il
civilization The United States has handle,
:. these people and spent large sums o
IL money on them since 1S49. Their remova
e to the proposed reservation in Utah woul
d
g barbarism, and the influence OF all the past ex
~ penditures of money and efforts 10 control b
I entirely lost The Indian is quick to detec
evidences of weakness, or admissions of failure
= and such moments would be seized upon by tn
10 bad element among the Utes and used by the1
as against civilization and Indictment TO reyol
and bloodshed in the future. Al nomads wis
to roam and they will greedily clutch at TIA
chance given them under the provisions of TIL
10 bill for their removal.
y 1t is asked if Utah were state, could o
IF would Congress have the power, althoug
e. owners of the soil, or would it have tn
g right to place dangerous or useless popu
tn lation within its boundaries? The write
ne says that a territory may be at The nero
s. of Congress; but Utah within year ma
IN be state, and have the sovereign rights
re as has Colorado or any other state Is
ct not unfair to make territory the dumpin
d. ground for the refuse population of an at
,e. joining state!
be THE HERALD has no knowledge of tt
hit authorship of this pamphlet, but whoevt
nd he may be he has performed genuine SCI
" vice for Utah, and if Congressman can |
ID. induced TO read what has been presente
be Colorado will be forced to hold on to ht
as troublesome Utes and no more of this te
mt ritory will be allotted TO Indisns.
as If the passage of the bill by this ConEre
e. can be prevented, the danger will be owe
Id for it now seems certain that Utah w
n have some votes and some influence
to future Congresses.