74179

ANTONIO TAPIA (Pojoaque): Some time ago I wrote this document I have from Spanish to English. It was translated from the English to Spanish by a delegate of New Mexico in 1868 and gives the Indians a full right and possession of their lands, not to be disturbed in any way. It includes all the pueblos of New Mexico. I think this was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States with a seal. To the best of my ability I have translated it from the Spanish to English, and I will read it if you permit me. It may not be exact from Spanish to English, but as nearly as I could translate it I will read it here.

"Department of Interior
Office of Indian Affairs
May 7, 1868.

Your Sir: official as well as Special Agent Vara, has been in this city for some time stopping in company with Alejancro Padilla and Ambrocio Abeita, delegates of the Indian Pueblos of New Mexico over matters pertaining to their people, and having been submitted their soli-citudes by writing and verbally, the Agent Vara and his partners are desirous to return to their country, and Mr. Vara by his letter of April 30th asks such instructions for his management as may be considered necessary.

The affairs of their complaint in regard to the judicial decision of the Superior Judge of the Territory of New Mexico; which it has; they shall be dissolved as pueblo districts and separated and shall be taken away their customs and ancient rights (rites?) as well as they shall have to be deprived of their lands it has been looked with especial interest in question not necessary. Having been taken to the Supreme Court of the United States of what it should be. They are "jactum" (latin-to throw) in the respect referred duty, has to be considered final to the decision of that tribunal. In time coming all the proper protection shall be given in the possession of their propertys, in the observation of their customs of life in which they have been used to.

With reference to their interests of education, agriculture, has been the desire of this Office to express in connection of the Secretary of the Interior, that the Congress ought to make ample provision to supply these pueblos, entitled to help, with schools and implements of agriculture, and does entertain the hope that something shall be done for them, in some day not very far off.

43

74179

You serve to communicate the content or meaning of this
letter to the Agent Vara and the delegates of the
pueblos and tell them that their representations and
supplications should receive the attention deserved
and in what concerns to this Office, it shall do all
that can do to increase your well being and advance,
and you ordered Mr. Vara to return with as little delay
as can be possible to the place of his duty in the New
Mexico, has been placed funds in his hands to appropri-
ate costs of the same, and the delegates that may have
taken part to come to this city for their permanence
here, and the costs that may be necessary for the re-
turn to their houses.

Acting Commissioner.

A.L.E. Webb, Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the
New Mexico present.

I certify that the contents of this paper is a trans-
lation, correct and liberal of an original letter in
the Office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in
the Department of the Interior.

In Washington, D. C.

For Franco Chavez
Delegate from New Mexico
May 12, 1968

So to my views on Mr. Monahan's question I think they
have not lost their right because the Supreme Court
has confirmed it and the full right to the Indians as
they have been recognized.

MR. COLLIER: That is very interesting. Now our engineers
who have to do with water matters will have to leave
before noon to go out to the Navajo meeting at Gallup
and Fort Wingate. It may be that some of you from
those pueblos in the Conservancy District will have
matters to bring up about irrigation or about the
District, and if that is the case I suggest that they
be brought up now so that they will be here when we dis-
cuss them.

44

74179

DIEGO ABEITA (Isleta): Mr. Chairman, may I ask Mr. Tapia one question in regards to what he read. In this meeting there are very many important things to be discussed. While those old things are very interesting I don't see any bearing that they have on the present situation in the Conservancy District pueblos. There are some important things to bring up and Mr. Collier has to go out to the Navajo country and I want to suggest to the members of this council that we have some order in this house as to the material brought up because we are limited in time and can't go into the ancient history of the pueblo. I admit it is very interesting and we like to hear it, but I make a motion that we preserve some order in this house.

MR. COLLIER: I do think this is a very important and interesting document. However, it is a matter that we can consider later after the Engineers have gone.

HARVEY TOWNSEND (San Felipe): Mr. President, Mr. Commissioner, and friends. I have a list here of the damage to our land, our cultivated land, and Mr. Sanchez will tell you how much damage has been done to our farms.

NAT SANCHEZ (San Felipe): Mr. President and friends, Commissioner Collier. As Harvey Townsend said, we have had some damage done to our cultivated land. Now I would say that the Conservancy District has put all the small arroyas into the main arroyo and that is what causes erosion into our cultivated land. Damage has been done in our fields about 40 or 45 acres, I would say. I would like to know if that will be investigated.

MR. COLLIER: Will you first tell us more clearly just what has happened at San Felipe?

NAT SANCHEZ (San Felipe): The floods have damaged our cultivated land and we have lost some crops due to changes in the ditch from the Conservancy District. I mean to say that they built their protection through small arroyos, throwing them into the main arroyo, increasing the amount of water and it has come down and covered our fields and buried our crops.

MR. COLLIER: Will our Engineers talk about that?

MR. NEUFFER: What he says is probably correct. As to the amount of water that was added to the arroyo, it is almost impossible to determine, but the one large arroyo

45

74179

commonly known as the Maria Chavez arroyo, did come down and flood over their lands. The Conservancy District has done some work of controlling this small side one. I have never been able to find out as to the legal responsibility in these cases: It would appear that there would be something, I couldn't say, but as a general proposition it is a matter of law as to the responsibility for controlling these arroyos. I don't think there is any doubt but what the concentration of the water would flood their lands more than ordinarily, but it is something the Conservancy District had to build in order to take care of their canal, etc. This was discussed with the Conservancy District, Mr. Rupkey, and Mr. Towers.

MR. COLLIER: Will Mr. Towers tell us something about this?

MR. TOWERS: The District has asked for time to investigate the damage and when they get through they want another meeting to find out, if they feel they are responsible, how much they are responsible for. That matter is pending. We decided we would wait for their report and get together again and see if we couldn't work it out.

MR. COLLIER: It would seem that damage of that kind is just as much damage as taking their land. It looks that way to me.

JUDGE HANNA: It depends on whether they could prove that this is a result of something that the work of the Conservancy District has done there. Unless they could, there would be no liability.

NAT SANCHEZ (San Felipe): I was not only talking about the Maria Chavez arroyo. There are about two other small arroyos above this that I am pretty sure will cause trouble some day.

JUDGE HANNA: You think the damage is due to the work done by the Conservancy District, and without that work this damage would not have occurred?

MR. COLLIER: I should think the answer then is that there will be some way to get you damages.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA (Santa Ana): I think they are right about that, and again down below the railroad tracks. They haven't done anything to protect the land and besides it is all under dirt and silt and rocks. It is level now. I think the Conservancy ought to do something to

46

74179

the arroyos that pass these cultivated fields. That is
the cause of it. They want to throw all these arroyos
into one before they investigate the work along these
cultivated fields.

MR. COLLIER: You mean they have delayed in building up em-
bankments to protect your fields and the result is your
fields have also been covered? And it filled your ditch
with gravel?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA (Santa Ana); It was caused by the Santa Fe
Railroad doing the same work. They haven't done any
protection work along the ditch and along the fields and
the Santa Anas have lost quite a bit of their wheat crop
this year. There is a family entirely wiped out, nothing
to feed his family with during the winter.

MR. TOWERS: That matter has been taken up with the Attorney
for the Santa Fe Railroad and they wish to investigate
it further before they will make an offer of what they
think they are responsible for. This matter is also
pending. The Santa Fe has promised to have an engineer
investigate it this week for us so that the matter is
being taken care of.

MR. COLLIER: Was it some engineering slip here? A question
of the Conservancy getting out of step, building some
things and not finishing them?

MR. NEUFFER: This storm was something that wasn't expected
at this time of the year. Their official plan on this
arroyo calls for putting dikes on both sides to carry
the water down. The map of the official plans shows
this and they have been willing to follow out those
plans, but there is undoubtedly some land down there
that is permanently damaged. It will be a matter to
work out with the District. I don't think the trouble
here would have been with the plans but the delay in
executing part of the plans.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: I think that you are right because they
plan certain things and they fail to protect the
property of the owner.

MR. COLLIER: All we can do now is to hold them liable and
make them pay damages.

47

74179

PORFIRIO MONTOYA (Santa Ana): Some of the arroyos have been turned into one by the Santa Fe Railroad and probably by the highway. They did do some kind of embankment work for the past years but they failed to keep it up. Two times our ditch has been filled up with silt and stones.

MR. COLLIER: The answer is that the office is following it up with the Railroad and with the District and they will have to pay damages. Of course, you understand that the work they are doing, the District and the Railroad, it might not always be possible for Mr. Neuffer to make them build as fast as we think they ought to build. In any big engineering work there are always accidents of this kind and delays.

DIEGO ABEITA (Isleta): That is the same condition at Isleta and Sandia. This Conservancy District has been operating here for the last few years and they have always stayed aloof as an individual utility firm, unwilling to understand our methods, unwilling to look to the property owner. It seems that they ought to have somebody as a coordinator between the Indian people and the Conservancy District. They ought to put up protection for the Indian property before they put up protection for great jobs, to build levees and embankments for these arroyos. The watershed is something they haven't figured on, but we have in times past advocated certain plans and contacted them on certain things and, regardless of that, they have gone on this project just the way they seem to see fit, without any compromise. We have warned them that there would be damages, and it is interesting to note that after a year or two these damages come up just like we said. There is one instance in Isleta. They put in an intake at Isleta on the west ditch that we told them would silt over in a year unless they eliminated a certain elbow on their drainage canal. They contradicted us and put in more work on that ditch. This week we have put in two or three days labor and the Conservancy still refuses to see that that intake is impractical and that elbow has to be eliminated. We have tried to coordinate with them, and we told them if they saw it that way to allow us to take the water from their drainage canal and divert it to our irrigation ditch and then let us abandon that intake, because this drainage canal is flowing under our irrigation canal. They refuse that. Now

48

74179

they call our ditch an obstruction on their drainage canal. We call it just the opposite because our irrigation ditch was there first, and they have a wrong definition of obstruction, I think. The Sandia Pueblo is in the same way, only worse off. Several years ago, about ten years coming back to that point about the Isleta main canal, they refused to give us that water. After a great deal of argument, they agreed to give that water as a special privilege to Isleta, for 30 days. That is no special privilege, it just falls in the line of their duty to furnish Isleta with water wherever it can be done. I think they ought to modify their policy a little bit and try to see our ways of irrigation. There are no great engineers among us, all the same we have managed to construct irrigation canals through most of the land. All that land lies a certain way so that it can be irrigated from the main canals, and we just want the Conservancy to see our point once.

MR. COLLIER: The Indian Bureau Irrigation office stands, as it was, between the pueblos and the District. What about this complaint? What about all that Mr. Abeita has said?

MR. RUPKEY: It seems to me unfortunate that the entire district cannot be built at one time. This riverside drain that Mr. Abeita referred to was put in for the protection of the Indians and before the irrigation system was put in. That is unfortunate. Of course, the old Indian ditch had to be taken care of for the time being. A new canal is being constructed to take care of this old ditch, but for the time intervening the old ditch has to serve. The District put a flume across their drain to carry water in the Indian ditch and of course this flume is a sort of obstruction in the Indian ditch, but it couldn't be helped. It is a temporary structure. To assist the Indians at this point the District put in a wasteway, which was intended to make the heading even better than before, and it is doubtful whether this obstruction has made the Indian ditch more difficult to keep up or not. The wasteway has probably assisted them more than the flume has harmed. As far as daming up the water in the drain, there was no intention in the official plan of feeding water to the Indian ditch at that point. The drain was built at that point to drain non-Indian land by checking the water out. The District did consent to allow the Indians to check this water out during an emergency, for 30 days, and took a chance that the lands would not be harmed in 30 days, but if left permanently those lands will be harmed through water-logging.

49

74179

DIEGO ABEITA: You remember that at the time they were putting that new intake in we argued with them that it was impractical and that the elbow would fill up our intake and create a lot of work in keeping it open. We advocated a plan where we could lay that flume across straight as the current flows so that the silt would be carried on down through the canal. We warned the conservancy District of that very thing and it has happened now. The only correction the Conservancy can make in that matter is to put that flume in the way we first planned, the way we asked them, straight with the water.

MR. RUPKEY: That would be very expensive. The drain and the ditch are practically parallel. The two lie side by side instead of crossing and the District couldn't make a flume long enough. By changing the wasteway at that point they thought they would obviate any of the difficulty that you thought would come up. It may be true at the curves there is a little additional silt and the District is willing to keep that clean. Unfortunately, your heading there is on the wrong side of the river.

DIEGO ABEITA: You will agree though, Mr. Rupkey, that that is a bad point.

MR. RUPKEY: Those two elbows make a little additional work, and the District is willing to take care of those two elbows.

DIEGO ABEITA: Sandia Pueblo has another complaint to make about these arroyos. About ten years ago there were some levees put in by the Santa Fe Railroad up above their pueblo, and the railroad made it understood to that pueblo that they would maintain those levees, and in case of high water above there would be some flood protection for the pueblo. They have never attended to those levees since. All they did was to divert the water in one direction, they did not consider silt deposits that have been occuring year after year. This year was the breaking point and the levees gave way, as they would some day, consequently taking away I think about seven of the houses in the pueblo. There are about thirty or forty people without a home and it seems that those things ought to be taken care of.

MR. COLLIER: They ought to.

DIEGO ABEITA: If they are going to provide for flood protection they ought to see that their work is

50

74179

followed up, attend to those improvements right along.

MR. COLLIER: Who knows that the Santa Fe did make an agreement that they could be held to.

MR. CORNELL: May I say a few words? In 1929 the arroyo north of Sandia flooded those lands and the Indians came in and I filed suit against the Santa Fe Railroad. By putting in these artificial dikes in 1919 and changing the course of the natural streams down under a bridge it converted the water which had been running over quite an area. We had a case in the District Court and we were turned down, and it is now on appeal in the Supreme Court of the State and we ought to get a decision most any time. Those dikes held in that flood and brought the water down, but the Railroad also put in a box to convey the water of the Indian ditch through that arroyo, but the box was washed out. This flood that occurred this month, from what the engineers tell me, is a little different situation. The water that flooded the village and caused these houses to wash away is not the water from this arroyo, but an arroyo in which the Railroad company did no work and would not be involved. Now apparently the same arroyo came down also, the one that the Railroad worked on, and flooded those same lands, I don't know how much. There is some damage there. I haven't seen the report as to how much damage may be held against the Railroad. That is the situation in that pueblo.

DIEGO ABEITA: Sandia Pueblo contends that it was the arroyo that the Santa Fe damed up that aggravated the flood by emptying into the irrigation canal, it was the dikes that broke. This caused the loss of the houses.

MR. CORNELL: If the Engineers will back them up in that, we have another suit against the Railroad.

DIEGO ABEITA: They say they took that up with the Superintendent, Mr. Cochrane, and Mr. Neuffer, and that you made statements that you would furnish flumes to serve the drainage for that area.

MR. NEUFFER: That's the matter that we have had under discussion, and we discussed that with the Commissioner last Monday. We hope to drain that water out and do some erosion work on the Indian lands there. It all depends on whether we can get the program through.

51

74179

MR. DIEGO ABEITA: What the Sandia Pueblo wants to know is whether the Government is going to cooperate with them in these suits.

MR. COCHRANE: We will if we feel there are any grounds for
it.

MR. COLLIER: How far have investigations progressed? As I understand it, Mr. Neuffer feels that the flooding of the village was not due to the Santa Fe construction, that it was another arroyo. What about the suit that you brought, Mr. Cornell?

MR. CORNELL: This is a private suit, it had nothing to do with the Government.

MR. NEUFFER: He may be right in his view, we haven't had
time to look it over.

MR. COLLIER: Our engineers are not giving a final opinion
and if we can find that the facts are right we will
bring suit. They may find that Juan is right.

DIEGO ABEITA: Juan says that if the Government doesn't see it his way he would like for somebody else who sees it his way, to bring up this matter. They are thoroughly convinced that it is the Santa Fe Railroad.

MR. COLLIER: If he is convinced the Indian Office will no
doubt be convinced after they have looked into it. If
there are grounds for a suit, we will be glad to bring
it. Our Engineers have been terribly busy with this
reforestation work.

DIEGO ABEITA: Mr. Avila asks that the engineers come over
and look it over.

MR. COLLIER: The engineers are going to go. You must under
stand the engineers are terribly busy with the re-
forestation work. Mr. Neuffer has had to tear about
all over the southwest.

DIEGO ABEITA: He says that he considers that too, but that
the evidence is on the ground now, and if they wait too
long the evidence will be rubbed off and be that much
harder for the Santa Fe to prove its case.

MR. COLLIER: But that won't happen in the next two or three
weeks.

52

74179

MR. NEUFFER: Mr. Rupkey will go over there tomorrow and look at it.

DIEGO ABEITA: They wanted a definite statement and they are satisfied.

MR. COLLIER: You will also go over and see the Isleta canal and see if there is a possibility of straightening that flume.

TONY ABEITA: In this connection about the Isleta flume, I wish to state that the Governor of Isleta and the ditch foreman and myself went to see Mr. Nouffer and we told him about this flume. Mr. Nouffer became very interested in the matter and he asked this delegation that went, whether we could prove that there was damage being done on account of this flume, and the Governor told him that we could prove that this flume was an obstruction to the flow of the water. Later Mr. Rupkey came down and looked it over with a Mr. Baker from the Conservancy District office. Mr. Baker said there was hardly any obstruction there and, if I understood Mr. Rupkey right, he couldn't see that there was very much obstruction there, just a little silt. I helped dig that silt out - four feet of it, and it is right in the middle of the flume. There is a 12" obstruction right in mid-stream so that it tends to obstruct the flow of the water. The wasteway that you spoke of doesn't serve as a wasteway at all at our way of looking at it. We are not engineers but have actual experience in running water through ditches, and we can see that that wasteway is not serving its purpose. Before this flume was put in we had our ditch in a straight current flow and the water itself tended to scour out the ditches for miles down. The water itself kept our ditches clean. We didn't have to do as much work as we have had to do this year. About the Sandia case, I was on the ground this morning coming up, and I say also that the Santa Fe or the Conservancy is responsible for this because they diverted this arroyo ten years ago over to another place, and at that time they built a bridge, which was about ten feet high, and just a few years ago the Highway Department drove through there with trucks, now you couldn't hardly crawl through it. I was right in the pueblo. Besides there are five sets of piling under this bridge which will cause the deposit of lots of silt from there on.

MR. COLLIER: Our engineers will go and look it over, and if there is any foundation for a successful suit it will be brought. Are there any other matters about the Conservancy or about irrigation?

53

74179

us. He thought he had the right to do this, but the Indians objected and brought it to our attention. Mr. Howell said he would take that man away and the house, but he wanted a letter from the Governor that the District was relieved from all damages. The idea was to have a man there to attend to the matter of floods and to take care of any emergency. Mr. Howell has one at the dam to do the same thing, and they have a telephone line to his house. It is just a matter of operation and Mr. Howell didn't realize that he was getting into trouble in putting the man there. I took the matter up with the Domingo council and told them of the responsibility, and it was just let stand for a while.

MR. COLLIER: Is it, in your judgement, necessary for the District to watch those works? Is it necessary for the man to live right on the spot?

MR. RUPKEY: Yes, to serve the full purpose that Mr. Howell wants it to serve.

MR. COLLIER: How far is this from the pueblo?

MR. RUPKEY: I would say about three-quarters of a mile.

MR. COLLIER: Now, as a matter of law, has the District a right to build residences on its right-of-way?

MR. RUPKEY: I don't know. I don't know what the legal stand is on that. They have only an easement for operation of their canal, and the house was put there to assist in operation. It is only a shack.

MR. COLLIER: What does the pueblo think about it?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR (Santo Domingo): They don't care to have the white man staying there, and besides that, before building the house the pueblo should have been notified. Since not being notified they don't know what to do right now.

MR. COLLIER: I don't see how the District could take any such position that if they can't build their house at that spot they have no responsibility.

MR. NEUFFER: There might be a misunderstanding on that. This is on the other side of the arroyo at the sluiceway. It is necessary to have someone on that side. It was Mr. Howell's judgement, as head of the Conservancy District, in order to properly take care of the system he must have a man there all the time. He lives right there and in case of trouble he can take care of it, whereas it would probably require the work of three men. They usually come around and say something but this is probably one of those things they forgot about.

55

74179

MR. COLLIER: If the District admits its mistake in not having come to the pueblo first, apologize. What is the position of the pueblo, that they don't want a man there under any conditions?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR (Santo Domingo): Well, as the pueblo feels, they would rather have an Indian on like Water-Master instead of having a white man.

MR. COLLIER: Why couldn't the District employ someone from this pueblo?

MR. RUPKEY: We suggested that at the meeting that night and it was satisfactory. We suggested to the Indians that they appoint such a man to stay at that house, under the same conditions, all the time, and not leave when he felt like it. It was agreeable to Mr. Stevens and I imagine to Mr. Howell, but the Indians didn't act on it definitely that night.

MR. COLLIER: Would that be acceptable to the pueblo, someone for the officers to select to have that job?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: It doesn't call for a house to be built there, does it?

MR. COLLIER: The district thinks that the only way to have things safe is to have a man there all the time. If a man is going to be there he must have a roof over his head.

MR. RUPKEY: It is only a shack and would be there only for the irrigation season.

TONY ABEITA: The Governor of Isleta presents this sketch of just how the flume is put in. (Discussion with Mr. Collier and Mr. Rupkey about sketch)

MR. COLLIER: Can we continue on the Domingo question?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: There is the Galisteo which flows down into the Rio Grande, and we have got a ditch across it and at the same time there is a main canal built by the Conservancy people that branches off on each of the banks of the Galisteo. It seems that some sort of a protection ought to be built in order to protect the branch off and the main canal and the Indian ditch. This arroyo keeps caving in every year and the last three years it overflowed and flooded the church, and if it wasn't for the Indian ditch right above it would

56

74179

have flooded the pueblo. It seems that something ought to
be done to that arroyo in order to protect the three ditches
and the pueblo also. We took the matter up with the
Conservancy people and with the engineers, but they don't
seem to agree to do anything for us.

MR. NEUFFER: In that case the Conservancy ditch is probably 100 to 150 feet from the arroyo bed. It is up to the District. It is not a condition created by the works. It is a natural condition, but one of their ditches is liable to be involved. I think they will take steps to protect their ditches. These other ditches were there previously.

MR. COLLIER: Why is the District hesitating if it is necessary?

MR. RUPKEY: As far as the Conservancy ditch is concerned it apparently is not necessary right immediately. The old Indian ditch is in a more dangerous position.

MR. COLLIER: This means then that in the course of time the District will have to build these works, that in the meantime their purpose is to serve the old Indian ditch further down so that even if it washed away they would have water. It would appear that you are not in danger of any interruption of your water.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: We want this arroyo protection is what we want.

MR. COLLIER: The arroyo protection would not necessarily be the duty of the Conservancy District. How much is involved in the way of cost of this protection?

MR. RUPKEY: It depends upon how much they want to protect. They could protect 1,000 feet of the bank or they could go three-quarters of a mile to protect their lands and ditches. I imagine to protect the Conservancy ditch it would take probably $10,000. It all depends on the amount of protection. They don't want to spend that money now, although I think they are contemplating doing some work there in the near future. It may be next year and it may be this fall.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: They always turn us down on it.

MR. COLLIER: Well it appears that they are going to do something.

JOHN PAJARITO: Why not let the drainage go and put up this protection on the Galisteo? Two or three years ago the flood came over. The banks used to be higher, but every year when the flood comes it washes more of that dirt off,

57

74179

and after the canal went through it seems there was not a thing done on it. Other arroyos have been protected, but this is a very dangerous one.

MR. COLLIER: I recall, I think two or three years ago, when I was talking with Mr. Hagerman about the attitude of the Domingo pueblo toward the Conservancy work, and this was just after a flood. He said the Domingo Indians were feeling differently about the Conservancy because they were putting up protection against flood damage. It is my recollection that some agreement had been entered into by the pueblo and the District about protection work, and I was told the Indians were feeling better about the whole thing. Do you know anything about such an agreement?

MR. NEUFFER: I know of no agreement. I might explain the attitude of the District. They have been petitioned by non-Indians to control these arroyos. They have taken the attitude that they cannot afford to do that. If they did it would cost them about twice as much money as the entire works will cost. The work they want to do is protect the structures they build, and as far as protecting the Indian farm lands is concerned, I doubt if we could get any help from the District in that respect. However, if we could convince them as to the danger of this water overflowing the ditch undoubtedly they will give some assistance.

MR. COLLIER: They say they were told that this work was going to be done. Who remembers correctly about that?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: We were told that they were going to protect this arroya from overflowing and we let the Conservancy come through. Burkholder is in California now and it was in his time.

MR. RUPKEY: There may have been a misunderstanding. The District does protect its structures, but I doubt if the District ever protects the lands from the arroyos. In the present case, they are not even protecting the structure, it appears. The structure is apparently quite safe. They have many more serious places than that need protection and I believe they will spend some money on that.

MR. COLLIER: If they gave these Indians certain promises isn't it common sense for them to go ahead and do something now?

MR. NEUFFER: I don't know who it came from.

58

74179

MR. COLLIER: I do know that something transpired at that time.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: We objected to everything, but they came around several times and that everything was to be protected. They said "no more hard labor for your Indians" so we let them go through. I have been a member of the Council for fourteen years. I have attended every meeting we have had with the Conservancy and your Engineers, and everyone in the room knows me as a member of the Council, and I am representing the pueblo here. I talk for my Council men here and interpret for them everything you say, although it is a very hard job for me to make these old people understand your ways.

MR. COLLIER: How far down would you have the District protect?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: Clear down the river on both sides, he told us.

MR. COLLIER: Who told you?

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: Burkholder himself.

MR. COLLIER: We will certainly take that up with them and find out what we can. I certainly appreciate all the help Augustine has given us on this thing.

JOHN PAJARITO (Santo Domingo): We have been following you engineers around, and it is your agreement, not ours. It is a dangerous arroyo and some protection should be put up, and now you just let that agreement go and forget about it and we have to follow you around.

MR. COLLIER: There is a distinction between Mr. Neuffer's organization and the Conservancy District. Mr. Elkus asks this question. In the original agreement between the Interior Department and the Conservancy District, are any of these items incorporated? Were any of the pueblos given any special considerations for letting the works go through their pueblos?

MR. NEUFFER: Only such plans as are shown on the maps. In the case of the Galisteo they show dikes, but there is nothing shown on this work. As far as I know, there is nothing contemplated in the official plan for this work.

MR. COLLIER: Sotero has just said something to me that is very interesting. Will you repeat that Sotero?

SOTERO ORTIZ (San Juan): I was just saying that the Santo Domingos told me the way they have just said, that they made this agreement.

59

74179

MR. COLLIER: I was told that, so evidently something did transpire or there was some drastic misunderstanding. I recall that Mr. Hagerman told me there were more than two hundred Indians working like beavers and now they would be relieved.

MR. RUPKEY: The District protects their water supply only, but as far as protecting their cultivated lands, I doubt if Mr. Burkholder meant that.

MR. COLLIER: At least they ought to go forward and con-
struct the work that will protect their canals.

MR. RUPKEY: I believe Mr. Howell will be willing to do
some work up there.

MR. ELKUS: How much will it cost to do the complete job?
Would it come within the public works program or as
an erosion project?

MR. NEUFFER: I doubt if we could do it under the emergency conservation program. Under the public works we can do anything we can get under that. An estimate I would give right now would be somewhere from $10,000 to $50,000. I think the District will put in the necessary works to protect their ditch, which will protect the pueblo, but it will not protect the Indian lands below. There are about 75 acres involved and it graduates from the hill down into the arroyo. The arroyo bed is very indefinite. I doubt if $10,000 would do it safely. The District did look it over and while they did not give us a definite figure they said that they were not willing to build the ditch down there unless the Indians would guarantee to take care of it. that they would not attempt to build a ditch there and protect it. It's just almost too much of a job.

MR. ELKUS: I think the thing to do is to get them to do it right away and that ends your problem. We ought to be quite insistent on their doing it at once. Their goodwill with the pueblos should be somewhat effective on whether they do it or not.

PABLO ABEITA (Isleta): We have not much of a fight with the Conservancy. What we would ask the Commissioner and his staff is that the Conservancy officials should be advised that when they do start to do some work within our grant that they should consult the Indians, the pueblo officials as to where they are going to work and what they intend to do. If they put a ditch

60

74179

where every survey is made we would be hunting some place
to live. About a hundred surveys have been made there
and if they put that many ditches there we wouldn't have
any place to irrigate. We are having some sort of trouble
about one ditch, the main canal on the east side right
close to the bosque de Los Pinos. They have argued this
matter with the pueblo officials because this survey is
made through the best cultivated land around that terri-
tory. My understanding was that this ditch was to be
put along a ditch called the Otero ditch, enlarging that
ditch, but the Conservancy officials think that it is a
lot of work and would be too expensive. I don't doubt
that it would be expensive, but I rather think it will
be a lot harder for the Indians to be deprived of the
use of this land than for the Conservancy to go ahead
and enlarge another ditch, it seems to me that it would
be an injustice. There are a bunch of cottonwood trees
to cut down and all that sort of work. We have also
suffered from flood. I don't blame the Conservancy for
that, I don't blame the Government for it. It is through
God's act. But it some of you people would go down there
and look at that place, in places there is probably five
feet of water and what chance is there to raise any crop.
One or two owners of land down there haven't a single
foot of ground on which to raise anything. One of our
foremen, he had six or seven acres and now he has to hunt
around for a job. He has given up his job as foreman.
Other people there have suffered probably more than he
has, but these people have other lands on which to raise
something. I am losing quite a bit of land down there
and a lot of crops, although I have some other land on
which I expect to raise something to keep my family alive.
But I would ask, if possible, why would not the Government
help us with some sort of relief, as least to these two
or three people that have lost their entire crop and are
trying to find something else to make their living. This
has been continuing for three or four years. We have
tried to raise something down there and we work like everything.

MR. COLLIER: Tell us the cause. Why has it been flooded so many times?

PABLO ABEITA: Two big draws coming from the mountains, and every time there is a rain up in the mountains or towards the hills the flood comes down. It is just a natural condition. The Conservancy will probably some day tackle the matter there, but they haven't reached that point yet.

MR. COLLIER: Of course we are now hoping to do work which will stop these floods hereafter.

61

74179

PABLO ABEITA: I understand that, but wanted to ask whether the Government would be merciful enough to give some relief.

MR. COLLIER: That is a question of relief funds. What about it, Mr. Towers?

MR. TOWERS: Our new funds haven't been allotted, Mr. Collier, and I couldn't say about that.

MR. COLLIER: They are going to be mighty small too. I am afraid our relief funds are going to be less than they were last year. That's beyond our control because we were cut. We were not only cut by Congress, but by the Budget on July 1, of four and a half million dollars. May I ask, is this a case where the pueblo or community money might be used to relieve these people somewhat?

DIEGO ABEITA: May I say a word? These people that have lost their land on the other side, we feel every sentiment in the world for them. I have been elected as an employment man between the Conservancy District down there and the Indian people of Isleta, and I sent them word last week that as long as this Conservancy work lasts I would give them first chance at the jobs. The Conservancy is building a dam. I am going to give these people that have lost their crops work as long as that job lasts, which will be about nine months. I sent them word to come over, and that is what we are doing officially to help them out.

MR. COLLIER: What will they get paid?

DIEGO ABEITA: They will get $4 a day with a team, and $2.40 for just a man himself. They will get paid $5 for three horses and $6 for double teams. I am representing the pueblo in this matter and will do what I can in relieving the situation.

PABLO ABEITA: That would probably be all right for two or three men who lost their entire crop, but take an Indian who has other land. If he starts to work for the Conservancy somebody has to work his land. He can't work in both places. I believe that if some relief was had it would sure be a help.

MR. COLLIER: Of course if we are able to get any relief we will do it. But in a case of genuine distress the pueblo might use some of its own community money.

JUAN LENTE (Isleta): The reason we appointed him to act as spokesman, but what we told him to ask was about what Diego has spoke for the Conservancy on the west side of the pueblo, but never mentioned on the east side. The work

62

74179

hasn't been started yet. For about two weeks we have been
discussing between Mr. Rupkey, Mr. Neuffer, and the man
from Belen who is going to do the work and, according to
my understanding, and the Conservancy and the Indians under-
stood that they should put the canal through the land where
they should avoid less damage. And now it seems the Con-
servancy surveyed through the best land on the east side
of the river, but the work hasn't been started yet. We
told them that they must abide by their promises and we
were trying to show where we wanted it. At some places
they agreed and some places they did not. I told Mr. Rupkey
myself when we went down to see the location. There was two
Mexican ditches, three with ours, and there is nothing to be
hurt, no damage. When we come to about two miles south of
the bridge we came to the bosque and there is where we had
arguments. They wanted to put through best land in order
to avoid hard work and in order to save money. That's the
way I look at it. It is easy, anybody would like to do
that. Then part of the way they agreed. We don't oppose
it, we give them the right and that is what we want to
know, whether they are going through where we want them to
go.

MR. COLLIER: What are the facts, Mr. Neuffer?

MR. NEUFFER: This matter has been taken up with the Pueblo
Council and, as I understand it, they have agreed on the
location.

MR. RUPKEY: The District made several changes in the original
plan at the request of the Indians, to cut down the amount
of cultivated lands taken. I thought the location was
finally accepted. There was some argument as to which
people should lose, the people on the west or on the east
side.

JUAN LENTE: According to my understanding you want to go on
the east side and not on the west. We gave our rights on
this condition, that you should take both sides and
follow that west side ditch, that is a Mexican ditch, that
was the agreement. If you follow that ditch we will give
our permission.

MR. COLLIER: Do I understand they do follow that ditch?

MR. RUPKEY: Our right of way takes in that ditch but it has to
be wider than the present ditch. They want to use the
old ditch for a roadway in the operation of the main canal.

63

74179

MR. NEUFFER: The Indians want to divide the amount of cultivated land so that the ones on one side lose the same as those on the other side. Excavation will be three times as great.

JUAN LENTE: The plan was to divide the loss among the individuals on the ditch.

MR. NEUFFER: Of course, they get paid for that land and will also have the right to select other new land to replace that.

MR. RUPKEY: I thought that other location was accepted by the council. (Discussion between Mr. Rupkey and Juan Lente)

JUAN LENTE: They are irrigating these new reclaimed lands and I don't see no reason why they should put that levee through there. I am speaking of the one you aim to put on the east side of that drain. There is hardly any land to be irrigated. Now it is irrigated from our own ditches and the aim was that they should drop into the other Mexican ditch and that ditch can be used to irrigate the Mexican fields. We told Mr. Rupkey they should follow that main ditch to the south boundary line and when they are out of boundary line they can put in as much as they want to. That is for the benefit of the Mexicans and not Indians. There is no necessity of putting more.

MR. RUPKEY: That levee you spoke of was on the official plan to serve both Indians and Mexicans. It would mean that you would have to maintain your laterals to the west, and in the future you would be sorry if you were to change to the south I believe.

JUAN LENTE: Some of the members were agreeable but not all. The majority is not.

MR. RUPKEY: On the official plan it is shown at the present location. It can be changed. If it were changed they would have to maintain their own laterals. The pueblo is willing to do that but I doubt if it is the best thing.

SOTERO ORTIZ: I guess we better adjourn for lunch.

64

74179

JULY 5, 1933

2 P. M.

Meeting called to order by Chairman.

SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman): The meeting is in session. If there is any other pueblo affected by the Conservancy District we want to hear from you.

PORFIHO MONTOYA (Santa Ana): I want to ask a question, whether the District will have to pay for any material they are hauling out of Indian land for the construction. I understand they are cutting down trees for some work along the river. We demanded pay and were turned down.

MR. COLLIER: My understanding is that they have to pay for it. What do you know about that, Mr. Rupkey? Does the Conservancy District pay for its materials?

MR. RUPKEY: They always make some arrangement with the Governor of the Pueblo before taking it out. I don't know what arrangement was made with Santa Ana.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: The first year when they were going to do some river work they had to have some trees for jottees and the Governor told the foreman that he couldn't have the trees until they were paid for. One of the foremen said that he got orders from the office that they would pay for it, but when the work was done and the Governor went to see the Conservancy officials they were turned down. They said they wouldn't pay anything, that it wasn't in the agreement between the District and the Interior Department.

MR. COLLIER: Was this timber taken off the right of way or outside of the right of way?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Outside the right of way.

MR. COLLIER: And there is no such provision in any agreement?

MR. RUPKEY: That controversy had never been brought to my attention.

MR. COLLIER: Who did you take this up with?

PORFIHO MONTOYA: Mr. Towers knows about it.

MR. TOWERS: I haven't heard of this particular incident.

65

74179

MR. COLLIER: Why wasn't this taken up with Mr. Towers or Mr. Rupkey?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: I think the office did know something about it.

MR. RUPKEY: I have known that they have taken trees, but I understood they made arrangements. At one particular time I thought the Indians donated the trees for this work. Cochiti has been paid for cedar brush that's been taken, and Isleta has been paid for some brush that's been taken.

MR. COLLIER: You had better take this up with Mr. Towers, and if your trees were taken on an understanding that you would be paid, or if they have taken them without your consent, they must pay you.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: I think that was taken up, although I see that both offices of the Service don't know anything about it. Right now some of the brush is still laying, they didn't use it all.

MR. COLLIER: You take this up with Mr. Towers and Mr. Rupkey and I will ask them to report to me what they find out.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: We are only asking for the protection of our lands. As the delegate from Isleta said, if there is too much cutting up of our land there will be nothing left for irrigation. At Santa Ana we have very little for ourselves and there must be more for the new generation.

MR. COLLIER: Are they still building ditches up there?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: No, but I think they are about to start new canals through there.

MR. RUPKEY: There is a main canal that must yet go through Santa Ana, and it cuts some farm land. There is something like 500 acres to be brought under this ditch.

MR. COLLIER: How much farm land has Santa Ana now?

MR. RUPKEY: 736 acres, 500 acres of this is farm land.

MR. COLLIER: How much will this ditch take?

MR. RUPKEY: I would say 10 acres of cultivated land. Perhaps not that much.

MR. COLLIER: Is this the last ditch that will be put through?

66

74179

MR. RUPKEY: They expect to put in a small lateral to take care of their needs on all uncultivated lands.

MR. COLLIER: The Conservancy work is bringing in about 500 acres. How many acres have already been taken for ditches?

MR. RUPKEY: Cultivated acres about 3, and probably 15 or 20 acres of uncultivated, so that they won't take more than 15 acres of cultivated land. Originally it would have taken more.

MR. COLLIER: It seems, if this is correct, the District takes about 15 acres altogether of your land and pays for it. The District will bring under cultivation about 500 acres of land not now cultivated, so really it isn't very much land when you consider the amount you are getting.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes, we have hopes, but no telling what it will do. These officials told us that we would have another meeting before the drain started. It started and then the Governor put a stop to it. It went through part way already before they even ask about it.

MR. RUPKEY: He is speaking of an interior drain. They objected to the entire drain. It is a serious question as the Indians have all objected to drying up their vega. The District says we are ready to do it and what are we going to do about it.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: My pueblo thought that the riverside drain was sufficient to dry up what little vega we got, and the District took the position that water was always there, but the Indians always said that it was because of the floods from the Mexican fields.

MR. COLLIER: You thought it didn't need to be drained?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes, if a person went through that piece of ground they would see, but when the Bernalillo ditch starts to run and the Mexican ditch, they are wasting their water.

MR. COLLIER: The Indians think the drain was not needed because of water being wasted by the Mexicans?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes sir.

MR. RUPKEY: This spring, after the Bernalillo ditch had been out of operation, the District went in and made tests and they found the water table one to three feet below the surface - too close to the surface for cultivation.

67

74179

MR. COLLIER: The District says that it is water-logged, although it does not appear right on the surface. If the water table is too close to the surface it isn't any good.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: At any rate, I think the District ought to come back to us and have another talk with us. We understood there would be another meeting before the drain went through.

MR. COLLIER: Who told the Council there would be another meeting?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Mr. Neuffer, Mr. Rupkey, Mr. Towers, and Mr. Cochrane said there would be another meeting before anything was done. We didn't make no final decision that night and were waiting for them to come back and tell us.

MR. RUPKEY: There must have been a little misunderstanding. There was a disagreement on the necessity of the drain all right, and there is another meeting that is still to come up in reference to the main canal, and the Indians probably thought it was that meeting. Mr. Neuffer said it had to go in but we would have another meeting for the main canal location.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: No sir, it was for the other. We finally got on to that new canal subject and we got no where with it, so you folks left and said that there would be another meeting for both subjects.

MR. RUPKEY: I think we thought it was for the main canal.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: No sir, because you made the statement that you hadn't made the final surveys yet.

MR. RUPKEY: That's so in regard to the new canal.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: We didn't pay much attention to that. We were more interested in the drains, but we didn't come to any conclusion.

MR. RUPKEY: There was no argument about the location of the drain.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: We didn't want the drain at all.

MR. RUPKEY: That's true, they haven't definitely decided on that.

MR. COLLIER: Coming back to the merits of the case. What is the reason for not wanting the drain, because you would rather have that land sub-irrigated and graze on it?

68

74179

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: The reason we didn't want it torn up is because we wanted it for pasture.

MR. COLLIER: Was it pretty good pasture?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: It used to be when there was water and grass on it.

MR. COLLIER: Now it has to be cultivated to be any good?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes. The pueblo of Santa Ana hasn't got much grazing pasture. That's the reason it has been the custom of the pueblo to keep that vega for part of our grazing pasture.

MR. COLLIER: Has it been the practice to drain all water-logged land in the district?

MR. RUPKEY: Those drains which are in the official plans the District is endeavoring to do.

MR. COLLIER: In this particular case, what was the idea of draining rather than leaving it as pasture? What was in the minds of the Engineers? There must have been a reason why their official plan was that way.

MR. RUPKEY: They thought it should be cultivated land. That all happened before I came.

MR. COLLIER: Was the question thoroughly threshed out about how much pasture land to leave?

MR. RUPKEY: I don't know.

MR. COLLIER: Did they take away your common pasture from you?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes, two pieces. It leaves a strip on both sides. I can't tell you exactly.

MR. COLLIER: Are there still other areas which are not yet drained?

MR. RUPKEY: Yes sir, there are a good many in San Felipe. There are a number of places at Santo Domingo and at Cochiti also. The San Felipes have objected to draining their land on the same grounds. The Cochitis haven't objected yet.

MR. COLLIER: They object to losing their pasture and they are afraid they might have trouble in getting free water. They give up their area which is free and don't want to pay for water to irrigate that land with?

69

74179

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes sir.

MR. COLLIER: Suppose there wasn't any question about paying for the water and you know that you were going to get your water free for this new land. What would you want then?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: That would be good, but that was never mentioned. I think they will probably set some part aside for pasture. If they get free water for the pasture it would be better. If something like that had been mentioned before the pueblo might have not objected. My people have got to have some place to graze their stock.

MR. RUPKEY: The Sandias have one such place. It is really good pasture.

MR. COLLIER: They haven't got much farm land and have some grazing land. I can see their position. Their amount of farm land is limited. It will be limited even under the new arrangement. They had some grazing land that wouldn't cost anything. To lose the grazing land and to have to pay for the water on the land they are to irrigate is hard. Of course we can't help that now because the drain is built.

MR. RUPKEY: That's one thing, I think the pueblo is still in doubt as to whether or not they want it drained.

MR. COLLIER: I think at this point we better talk about a question that effects all of the Conservancy District which is in the minds of every one of them. It grows right out of what we are saying. It is this whole question about paying for water. Do you want to talk about that now?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Another thing, the District has been too hard on us in getting employment. There are several boys always ready to work, and when there is emergency work to be done they always bring in a truck load of Mexicans to do the work. The Indian boys ought to get first chance.

MR. COLLIER: Is there any labor clause in the agreement?

MR. RUPKEY: There is and we try to enforce it. I don't know exactly, but I have heard there are some cases where they brought in Mexicans.

MR. COLLIER: Even when there are Indians ready to work they bring in Mexicans.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: Yes sir, and we have a border rider all the time to know about things.

70

74179

MR. COLLIER: That looks like some politics. May I ask Mr. Rupkey or the Attorneys what means there are to enforce the clause about preference to Indian labor, if the District wants to violate it?

MR. RUPKEY: We could withhold payments, I suppose, when the time comes to pay the costs.

MR. COLLIER: Judge Hanna, the Conservancy District contract between the Government and the District states that they must use Indians on Indian land. It is alleged that they have violated that clause more than once. What remedy is there if the facts are as stated?

JUDGE HANNA: If the fact is accomplished, if the employment has been had, I think the only one would be damages for breach of contract. It is too late to enjoin it. Then it is difficult to prove the damage.

MR. COLLIER: That is not a feasible remedy. There must be another remedy.

MR. ELKUS: I would follow the suggestion just made. I would hold up the payments. Once you would do that I think they would fall in line. The court remedy is never satisfactory in my judgment.

MR. COLLIER: I think we ought to be absolutely insistent on that and we ought to penalize every case of that kind we can locate. In the case of Santa Ana the facts should be investigated.

MR. ELKUS: Wouldn't it be well, after you find out for sure the dates, number employed, etc. to write them a letter. You have your Attorneys to write letters, and tell them that you are going to insist on that clause in the contract, and if they wish to avoid difficulty in the future to abide by this clause of the contract, and if they don't, the next time a payment comes due, hold it up. They would soon come around then. They won't want to sue for it, meanwhile they will want to be paid.

MR. COLLIER: I would like to have the facts about Santa Ana ascertained to find out whether there was a violation.

MR. RUPKEY: There was a new Foreman once brought some men to do work off the Grant, but when he found that he couldn't use them there, he did go on the Grant with his men.

MR. ELKUS: I wouldn't be surprised if it had nothing to do with the District's policy but with the local foreman, but once the officials know about it they will stop it.

71

74179

MR. COLLIER: Will you kindly prepare a letter referring to these allogations, and simply state that in the future the Department intends for that contract to be rigidly observed and if necessary payments will be withheld. Make it perfectly clear. If you desire to make it stronger, send it on to Washington and we will send it out from there.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: My governor here told me to bring it up because when he stopped the machine from digging that drain, I think Baker and Mr. Rupkey came up and Baker got a little too hot tempered and told the Governor that no Indians would be given work. Mr. Baker is one of the chief engineers of the District.

MR. COLLIER: Do you remember that conversation, Mr. Rupkey?

MR. RUPKEY: Yes, I remember when he said that. It was in regards to some work off the reservation, just off the Santa Ana Grant. They were to use one-third Indians on the basis of that little strip.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: He had one man north of our Grant and he called him down and made that excuse that he would fire that Indian there and made a threat that he would hire no more Indians from our pueblo.

MR. COLLIER: That will be followed up in the future. We will serve notice on the Conservancy District that they have to live up to the contract about employing Indian laborers, and if they don't we will hold the money up.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: I went to the foreman to get a job and he told me there was no chance.

MR. COLLIER: How recently was that?

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: About two or three weeks ago. Rupkey knows when it was.

MR. RUPKEY: I haven't been there since. It was about three weeks ago when they did the work, and I didn't know that Mexicans were employed.

MR. COLLIER: Mr. Rupkey, will you prepare a letter, sending it on to me at Gallup to sign, mentioning these incidents and stating that in the future we are going to be very drastic about it. I think we have covered that as much as we can today. Now we might as well take up a thing that none of you have brought up, but you have brought it up at many other meetings, and it is this question about paying for water on the newly irrigated lands. If this

72

74179

is not a thing that you are thinking about there is no use
of my talking about it now. It is not a thing that has
come yet. If itis, let me know and we will talk about
it now. Unfortunately, I have not got here a copy of the
law and the contract. Mr. Millington, my secretary, has
gone off and taken it with him, so I will have to speak
from memory, and in the record I will correct any
quotations I made by having the document before me. Also,
if I get it wrong will any of our people here correct me
on it? I have to go back to the beginning of the Con-
servancy matter, before there was any Conservancy. At
that time, away back in 1927, the question of the Con-
servancy plan was laid before the pueblos. We have the
typewritten record of the meetings. It was explained
that the way things were then there was not much chance
to get additional water for the Indian lands. It re-
quired a big scheme of impounding the water and high
line ditches that would cost a lot of money. And it was
also explained, and the Indians knew about it, that a
very large amount of good land of the pueblos was in a
condition of being water-logged, and alkali'd, and that
same condition went all up and down the valley, for
whites and Indians alike. At that time, as I recall it,
the pueblos I think were unanimous in saying that they
were willing to have the Conservancy plan go through
under certain conditions. One of those conditions was
that only a limited indebtedness would be placed on the
Indian lands. The total was about $700,000, or perhaps
less than that, about $500. And another condition was
that all of the land now irrigated belonging to the
Indians should have its water free for all time, that
none of the land being irrigated at that time, or at
the time the District might be built, would ever have
to pay for water. The word used was "irrigated" all
the time. At that time the pueblos were satisfied and
the matter went to Congress. The District and the
Indians, and the Indian Bureau, were all united behind
the Bill. The Bill passed the Senate in that form and
then it got over to the House, and on the floor of the
House, Congressman Cranton, who was always rather hard
on the Indians, especially on the Pueblos, made a
motion to strike out the whole Bill and substitute
another Bill he had written. This was in 1927 and your
original endorsement had been given in 1926. I might
say that this whole record is printed in the Senate
Indian Investigation Hearings. There resulted a big
fight because the Bill isolated the agreement with the
Indians, and it had the effect of causing the Indians
to pay nearly twice as much for each newly irrigated
acre. It put on the Indians a double burden. It was

73

74179

unfair and all the pueblos sent in telegrams protesting, claiming that their agreement had been violated by the Department and by the District. There was a very bitter fight over that Bill and finally it was amended in a lot of ways, and among other things, in such a way as to guarantee that the Indians would in no case pay more than the whites for irrigated land, and the language was kept in the Bill which said that the Indians would get free water for all time for their irrigated acreage. Finally the Bill was passed in a compromised form that was on the whole reasonably good. And then the time came when the Interior Department had to prepare the contract between the District and the Government, the contract to carry out the law. There was another long drawn out fight to persuade or compel the Department to make that Contract fair to the Indians. That fight was led by a great lawyer, Mr. Louis Marshall, and in the main the Indians' interests were protected in that contract. Now, as I recollect, the language used by the law was that the Indians would have free water for all of their irrigated lands. It is my understanding that the contract brought in the word "cultivated" land. It construed irrigated to mean cultivated. I find that the Act itself does not contain "cultivated" but only "irrigated". Is that correct? There is a big difference between irrigated and cultivated, you can see. Cultivated means land that is plowed and planted, harrowed and all that. But what about these meadows which were sub-irrigated, are they irrigated or are they not irrigated? The amount of irrigated and cultivated land in the six pueblos was then investigated and I believe that the engineers of the Indian Office were very careful to include all irrigated land, a total of about 8,600 acres, about 1,000 more than the Conservancy had estimated. And how much land of the sub-irrigated type did they find? I believe a total of 5,000 acres. What I am leading up to you will see pretty soon. Anyway the contract was drawn in such a way and signed as to give to the pueblos the free water for the cultivated acreage, which is about 8,600 acres, but it requires that somebody would pay the District a water charge for all of the other acreage, the newly reclaimed acreage and where land had been sub-irrigated as at Santa Ana and was drained and turned into dry land and then irrigated and cultivated. Somebody would have to pay for the water. In that form the contract is now in force. Now you will note that the contract was a contract between the Government and the District. The Pueblos did not sign the contract. Whether the pueblos are parties to the contract I don't know, but the contract is between the Government and the District, and the

74

74179

Government contracts that the District shall receive payment for the water placed on the newly irrigated land. The contract does not say who is going to make the payment. The law, the Act does not say, so we have a peculiar situation. There are two distinct doubts, uncertainties.

MR. ELKUS: From a reading of the contract, I would not say that the contract said that the Government agreed to pay it. The contract says they shall be paid this charge for the supply of water, but it doesn't say who it is going to be paid by. I just wanted to keep the record clear.

MR. COLLIER: The question of who becomes liable is very obscure, whether the Government is liable or the Indian Pueblos, or whether the particular Indian irrigating the new land is liable. All of that is not settled by the contract. And then as I say, the contract takes no account of the sub-irrigated land, does not treat it as being irrigated. The question therefore is, has the contract narrowed the Indian rights to a narrower point than the act intended. Did the Act intend for the Indians to have free water for their irrigated land plus the sub-irrigated, or only for their cultivated lands. All of these questions we discussed in Albuquerque Monday, and our conclusion was that the entire question of what this contract meant must be referred back to the Interior Department, to the lawyers in Washington, in order to be construed, and of course their construction would not be necessarily final. In the long run, if anybody wanted to contest the matter it would have to be settled in the courts, as to whether the Act guarantees free water only for the old cultivated land, or plus the sub-irrigated land and whether it would bind the Indians to pay for water or bind itself only. The condition being what I have described, I think we can't make any very clear statement to you until it has been re-examined by the Solicitor of the Interior Department and until we get an opinion from him, but I would go and say this, that it does seem to me that consideration ought to be given to the sub-irrigated land and something ought to be done either to give the Indians free water for their land that was sub-irrigated, or to take into account what they have lost and give them the water cheaper than the other water. If that decision were reached it would then become necessary to go to Congress and to ask Congress to place upon the United States the liability to pay that water charge to the District and to excuse the Indians from paying it. I at least would be prepared to go to Congress with that proposal. But when you

75

74179

have finished and disposed of all of the sub-irrigated land
and forgotten about it, there still will be newly reclaimed
land belonging to the pueblos which was not in that sub-
irrigated class, and it is perfectly clear that the District,
under the contract, is entitled to receive a payment for
the water. Moreover, I think it is perfectly clear that
the Indians in the beginning accepted the obligation to
pay for that water where land that was dry desert was re-
claimed, and they say that the charge will be something
around $2.00 an acre. There will be some land in any
event where it is perfectly clear that the Indians did
give their consent to be charged for that water. All over
the United States there are Indians with just such prob-
lems. Let me say this in the meantime. After that Act
was passed and the contract made, some very important new
logislation was passed which was called the Leavitt Act.
This Act provided for that all construction charges
against Indian land for irrigation, all charges, all
indebtedness on Indian land as a result of irrigation
works should be suspended in such a way that it would
never be paid as long as the Indians continued to own
lands, and further that all assessments against Indian
land for the cost of constructing irrigation systems were
wiped out by the Act. Now your lands will always be
owned by you. You are not going to give them up, and
the effect of the Leavitt Act was to practically wipe
out the whole construction debt on your land of around
a million dollars.

JUDGE HANNA: Could it be said that that applies only to a
Government constructed project and not a project such as
here. (Discussion with Judge Hanna as to whether
Conservancy was Government project)

MR. COLLIER: I was going on to say that all over the country,
in a hundred places, there are Indians with irrigation
projects which have been built by the Government or
built by irrigation districts, in every part of the
country, and in practically every case, if not in every
case without exception, the Indians are expected to pay
their maintenance charges. They don't always pay them
but are expected to try to pay them. We have just ar-
ranged, for example, with the Pimas in Arizona where
50,000 acres of land are being brought under ditch at a
cost of several million dollars, and the Pimas will own
this land and will farm it. They are agreeing to assume
the water charge, which will be at least $2.00 for every
acre. They are not going to begin paying now, but at a
time in the future, about three, four, or five years
from now, according to the condition in different parts
of the Pima land, and a great majority of the Pimas have

76

74179

been willing to do this. They said when they came to Congress
and asked for the appropriation they would be willing and now
they are prepared to stand by and undertake it so that this
idea of a charge being made for water for the new lands may
come as a new idea to the pueblos, but it is an old idea to
the other Indians having irrigation systems in a hundred
places. I don't know how it is going to be enforceable and
I don't know how the Solicitor of the Courts are going to
construe the Act and the contract in the matter of deciding
who it is that must pay the District, the Government, the
pueblos, or the Indian farming the piece of land. Now what
I have said is not going to be clear to all of you because
it is complicated and very obscure. I have made the statement
more in order to get it into this record, copies of which will
be sent to all of you, and later on when we do get an opinion
from the Solicitor of the Department, that will be mimeographed
and furnished to all of you also. You may at least reply on
the Solicitor to give an opinion as favorable to you where
possible, because the Solicitor is Mr. Margold and the
Assistant is Mr. Fahy, and they are both very strong for the
Indians. Now the question is, does any of this have any
bearing on the things that are close at hand? As far as I
can see, it has a bearing only at one point and that is where
a pueblo has a sub-irrigated pasture or has cultivated land
which is sub-irrigated land that you don't irrigate, but the
corn, etc. gets the water out of the soil. You will want to
know in those cases whether you are simply going to be sur-
rendering your pasture with its free water and then having to
pay for the irrigation of that land if it is drained, and it
is a question which apparently has not been answered by any
of the existing opinions or by the law, or by the contract,
or by any instrument. I can't now go any further than to say
this, that as Commissioner of Indian Affairs, I would take
the position, as I said before, that in those cases where
your sub-irrigated land is given up and turned into dry land
I would make a great effort to arrange that you would get free
water for that land, or at least that the loss of your free
sub-irrigation water would be corrected so that you would get
your water for that area cheap and, if need, be, I am convinced
that we can go to Congress and get Congress to recognize that
point and appropriate the money to pay the District instead
of your paying the District. Of course, I can't promise that
Congress would do that. I can only say that Congress, in
matters of this kind, is disposed to be generous toward the
Indians, but I can't guarantee it. Now if there is any part
of this that I haven't made clear I wish that either Mr.
Elkus, Judge Hanna, or Mr. Cochrane would make it clear, or
that you would ask questions. At the beginning the pueblos
said that they would be willing to pay $500,000 toward the
cost of constructing the irrigation works on their lands
which were then not irrigated. They were willing to do that.

77

74179

way at Sandia, Isleta, and other places. I am not sure whether we will be allowed to do it. I hope to have a telegram today. If we cannot get it that way, we will have to try to get it through putting in a request to the Committee of the Cabinet which has charge of spending the money on public works, the big fund created for public works. I think we stand a very good chance of getting it there. We have two strings to our bow, so I think we will get the money from one place or the other. The Indian Bureau and the Indian Irrigation Service have not got the money and they cannot get it. The appropriation for the Indian Bureau's Irrigation department has been more than cut in half in the past month, so our only hope is to do this through the reforestation camps, or public works. Mr. Ickes is Chairman of the Committee that will have the say as to how this five hundred (?) million dollars of public works money shall be spent. I think we stand a good chance of getting it. This applies equally to the other six pueblos. If we are told that we can't do these jobs under the reforestation program, then it will be necessary to get the projects in shape at once. Will Mr. Towers and Mr. Rupkey prepare a statement as to what they are, what they will cost, getting it on by air mail to Washington in order that they may be included in our request for public works money. I will ask that you both see that that is done.

ANTONIO MIRABAL (Taos): I have a question to ask you all about, our ditch work that was done a while back up in the Lucero Canyon. The tools and all the implements were bought out of our money and we know that a lot of things are missing. Mr. Thompson went up there and I asked him what is going to be done about the tools that are missing. I told him that I was foreman once myself, the man that was my boss got hurt and died, and he turned over to me all the tools. Later they sent up an order from the office saying that I was responsible for all the tools, so then they had to count up all the tools I had in charge and a number of picks were missing. They tell me if I get those picks I don't have to pay. I went and got those broken picks and turned over the whole thing, so then I told Mr. Thompson I think he is in the same position himself, or the other man who was boss. He said that they were only bluffing the person to get the tools and if he didn't bring all of them they can't do anything. I told him I don't think it is fair to bluff one person and make him furnish everything.

MR. COLLIER: When did those tools disappear?

ANTONIO MIRABAL: When they were working up there. I want to find out if it is strictly for an Indian and not a white man, because those things were bought out of Indian money.

MR. COLLIER: What is your understanding, were the tools stolen, lost, or what?

79

74179

ANTONIO MIRABAL: My understanding is since he had charge of the tools I think he has the right and we have to check up whether they are missing, but we know quite a bit is missing. My guess is that they were bluffing.

MR. COLLIER: Your foreman isn't bonded, and if he loses some tools, somebody steals them from him; I don't believe that the Government could hold him. Of course, if you stole them the Government could arrest you, make you pay for them or purchase new ones, of if you had been careless with the tools the Government could have discharged you, disciplined you. Now in the present case, the first thing we ought to find out is what was lost, who lost them, who is responsible. Certainly the tools belong to the pueblo and somebody ought to be held responsible. Is it a little thing or a big thing? If it is a little thing, a hammer or something like that, it doesn't matter. If it is a big thing, that is different.

ANTONIO MIRABAL: We have been waiting for Mr. Thompson to go up there.

MR. COLLIER: I have already written a letter to Mr. Neuffer as well as to Mr. Faris, saying that these tools belong to the pueblo, the trucks, etc., requesting them to deliver them there, and to place them under the custody of what might be worked out between Mr. Faris and the officers. Then after you have found out how many tools are lost, let Mr. Faris know.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA (Santa Ana): I have another proposition to bring up. During the Lands Board session we went over the ground before we went into the hearings, and I find one portion of our land that they tell me lies in Bernalillo, which is outside of our boundary. I want to know just what the outcome of that is. They say we haven't any title to it. This case was brought up before the Lands Board. Mr. Cochrane knows something about it.

MR. COCHRANE: What you mean, Porfirio, is that you don't have any deed, but you have the land. It is included in your suit to quiet title. We couldn't find anybody to make defendants in the suit because we didn't know who owned it, but it is your land and you have as good title as you can ever get to it, only you haven't the deed to it. It was taken up with the Board and reported on.

MR. COLLIER: The land is yours. You got it by court decree, which is just as good as a title.

PORFIRIO MONTOYA: I am glad to hear it now.

80

74179

MR. ELKUS: It should be stopped. I think I would put them off without argument and then argue with them afterward. Use this power of the Government to withhold payments. Probably it is the fault of some new Foreman but it is their business to control their own employees. The highway is another example. Highway Commissions are accustomed to ride rough shod over everybody.

MR. COLLIER: (To Antonio Tapia) In your case, were you consulted at all about the gravel pits?

ANTONIO TAPIA: No sir, they went off about a mile or so to get rock and just load up their trucks and go to the highway.

MR. COLLIER: Will you go to Mr. Faris' office and get a copy of their authority?

VICENTE TAPIA (Nambe): I think just before Mr. Antonio Tapia came to the pueblo there was some kind of an arrangement made between the highway and the Indians. They liked the gravel around there and they were to get it out and make use of it and pay so much a load. Of course I haven't heard the results of it, Mr. Faris hasn't said anything so far.

MR. COLLIER: This thing was probably taken up through Mr. Faris and there would be in the office at Santa Fe a record. Go to the office in Santa Fe and ask to see the agreement or the permit issued the Highway Department and see whether they are violating it or not.

VICENTE TAPIA: We did do that.

MR. COLLIER: How did you try? Whom did you ask about it?

VICENTE TAPIA: We put it up to Mr. Faris in the form of a complaint about some test pits they were digging and he approved of that procedure and advised us that if there was anything to be taken from there it was for the benefit of the pueblo. Of course we haven't had any results so far.

MR. COLLIER: Mr. Cochrane informs me that an accounting has not yet been made for the highway to the different pueblos, but that will be done.

VICENTE TAPIA: The subject of the Conservancy is about over with and I wish to request in behalf of the Pueblo of Nambe about a schoolhouse. There has already been an appropriation for a schoolhouse to be built at Nambe. Everything is put through, the site is already bought, and a well is already dug, but this question about tieing up the money came up and we were left out. The project didn't go through. It was supposed

82

74179

to be started in the early part of this spring but this de-
pression came up. What we want to ask is that you go back
to Washington and see what you can do about it.

MR. COLLIER: On the 28th of March, before I was Commissioner, the Director of the Budget issued an order that all the money for all of these projects was to stay in the Treasury, could not be spent. That affected the construction work of the Indian Bureau all over the country on schools, hospitals and irrigation systems. That order has never been rescinded and the money has now gone into the Treasury forever. We have now laid before the public works committee a request for these appropriations to be made available out of the public works fund, and they will be made available. These are the requests we have made and you can take it for granted they will be obtained: Nambe Day School $8,500; Zuni Day School $10,900; Taos Day School $8,000; Taos Hospital $10,000; New High School at Laguna $100,000; new Junior High School at Isleta $75,000; and in addition $42,000 for improvements and enlargements of the other pueblo day schools, and $105,000 to improve the boarding school at Santa Fe and $20,000 to build a new nurses' home beside the hospital at Santa Fe. In this same request we are asking for $10,000 for miscellaneous irrigation jobs in the pueblos, and $5,000 for stock water at Zuni. Now all of these requests will be granted and I imagine that the money will be available during the month of August, so that the construction can be resumed. In the meantime we can't do a thing.

VICENTE TAPIA: There are a number of youngsters there that should
be in school and preparing for high schools. I hope you will
do all you can.

SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman): We would like to hear from Taos, if they
have anything to say.

ANTONIO MIRABAL: (Taos) We are kinda disappointed in getting such a small amount of money. We organized what is called a School Board in order to keep our boys and girls home as much as possible. They ask us first, how much money do you think you need. We ought to get $20,000 because here is what we got in our mind. We have in our mind to build a building for the purpose of teaching boys silversmith work, and also we have in mind for the boys to be taught woodcarving, and some of them weaving, etc. That's what we had in mind since last Fall when we saw Dr. Ryan.

MR. COLLIER: Are you sure that you need $20,000? We don't want to ask for more than we need because we will get in trouble. It seemed to me that $8,000 was not enough, our plan had

83

74179

been to spend $18,000 altogether and I don't know how it
happened that we asked for only $8,000. It has been my
intention to amend that and ask for the whole amount.

ANTONIO MIRABAL: Our understanding was, Mr. Collier, when we
talked with Dr. Ryan we asked for $18,000 because our
understanding was that we were to get $10,000 last Fall
and then this year we were to get the other $8,000.

MR. COLLIER: Maybe we did ask for the $18,000 and this may be
a misprint. I asked Mr. Faris yesterday and he said
$18,000 and so we will take steps to get the request
changed.

ANTONIO MIRABAL: The only thing I don't understand is that we
did not ask for the hospital.

MR. COLLIER: Well the hospital is too small, there is no qu-
estion about that.

ANTONIO MIRABAL: Yes, but we didn't mention the hospital,
only the school. In addition we asked for a blacksmith
shop.

MR. COLLIER: I don't know the details of that estimate.

ELI BEARDSLEY (Laguna): It is rather a surprise to hear that we Lagunas have been allotted $100,000 for a high school. This high school question has not been thoroughly settled among the Lagunas. We were not quite ready for this school. Certain things have come up during the year and we didn't expect that this had already gone through because there was a lady sent out to gather information regarding whether the Lagunas really wanted that high school and under what conditions. It was our understanding that this school is to be a union high school, including the whites and Mexicans and Indians, to accommodate all the surrounding country in our neighborhood, and that has been under discussion up to last week. We had no idea that the money had been allotted, and it was thought best to leave this out under the present condition, because we thought that the present need of a high school was not right yet.

MR. COLLIER: Why not?

ELI BEARDSLEY: Because there are not enough of our boys and
girls that could attend this high school.

MR. COLLIER: How many would there be of high school grades?

84

74179

ELI BEARDSLEY: It is impossible to state how many there would be. We know there wouldn't be a sufficient number of students to attend the high school. That was found out in checking up with the pueblos and other places. It was cited to us that one of the schools in the near neighborhood had to discontinue on that account so that the pueblo felt that they would just be burdened with a school they can't operate. Of course there are several other things came in to that problem. The State or the County wanted to make up that school and it was difficult for the Indians to understand just what the pro-position would be, and they felt that they were not quite prepared to accept it. Rather than to do that they decided that any improvements to be made, or any additional things to be had was to go and improve on the Albuquerque school, such as more accomodations for the students that would be available to attend the high schools or some of the high educational institutions in Albuquerque.

MR. COLLIER: You have come up against an impossibility. There is not going to be any increase in the size of any boarding school. That is a matter of general policy. There are two reasons for that. The cost of schooling in boarding schools is too great and, in the second place, we are all convinced that when we built up good schools at the home the child is better educated and the family is better helped than at boarding schools. There is no plan to abandon the boarding schools, they are going to be kept, but in no case are they going to be further enlarged. As a matter of fact we are taking out of boarding schools next year about 4,000 children and transferring them to day schools. There is no other way to get the necessary money by which we can provide schools for about 16,000 children without schooling. We do not want to proceed with any school development in Laguna or elsewhere unless the community is substantially ready for it. But unless this money is obtained now you may wait ten years to get it. Our regular appropriations have been cut so heavily that we will not be able to provide for these facilities out of our regular appropriations. We have got to get the money out of the public works bill and we have got to ask for it now. That's true of all the schools, hospitals, and irri-gation projects. Therefore we have requested now from the public works bill for a good many things that we would not have asked for until the next year or after. As a matter of fact, we have asked for ten million dollars for schools, hospitals, and irrigation works, and ten million dollars for roads. It is now or never. Many of the details connected with your school can be adjusted to your satisfaction, but the money must be obtained now if we are going to have it at all.

85

74179

the day school, and in doing this we figure we can save about four million dollars each year. A child in a boarding school costs about $360.00 a year, whereas a child in a day school where lunches and clothing are furnished costs only about $125.00, and so by this we will be able to save about four million. This will be enough to provide schooling for all of the 16,000 Indian children who are now out of school, who have no school to go to, and there don't seem to be any other way to get this money. We announced that we were going to cut down the boarding schools at Genoa, Nebraska, at Salem, Oregon, Rapid City, South Dakota, and the Roosevelt School at Fort Apache; that we were going to reduce them to very few pupils, and then the Congressmen began to arrive in droves, and they went to the President, and they made speeches, and you would have thought that I was a regular ogre out to eat children alive, and in fact I have got to hurry back to Washington in order to go over the whole thing with the President. So the politicians are not asking us to close boarding schools, but to make them bigger.

**DIEGO ABEITA:** I understood it was the politicians who closed Carlisle, and we thought it might be the same here. The Indian children are unfortunate and need to be attended to.

**MR. COLLIER:** By this change we will be able to take care of everyone of those unfortunate children. This is a thing on which we need the understanding of the Indians very much. They are the people concerned and we are having to make the change against the terribly powerful political opposition. The politicians are concerned in keeping these boarding schools because they bring money into the community. Another thing, in the boarding schools there is one employee, and nearly always a white person, for every seven children. That's another reason why the politicians are interested in boarding schools.

**ELI BEARDSLEY: (Laguna)** Just what Mr. Abeita spoke about, I want to ask something for humanity sake. Since the sanatorium has been taken away from Laguna the people have been asking for an emergency hospital. This is urgent, we really ought to have something of that sort. A 20-bed emergency hospital would come in very handy for all the people in the community. The Acomas will utilize it and the Lagunas, which is a big area out there without any hospitalization. An ambulance we have been asking for for a long time. Whenever they have to take a sick person from any of the villages

87

74179

they have to cramp them in a car or something that is in-
convenient, and this is really urgent. The people have re-
quested this to be presented to you and I think it is
really needed. And when the hospital is opened it should
be for humanity sake. I have heard that whenever anyone
is hurt along the highway and they take them to the
hospital for a little treatment, they refuse to give them
first aid. I don't think they should do that. I think
the hospital should be for anyone in case of emergency,
they should be taken care of even if they just have to
wipe the blood off or tie up an injury. I think it should
be open for that.

MR. COLLIER: I have known about this wish of the Lagunas for a long time. I don't say that it cannot be granted, but I just want to explain the situation as our medical officers see it. The roads have been greatly improved and a large base hospital is soon to be opened at Albuquerque. It is going to cost a lot of money to run it. A hospital is a very expensive thing to conduct, as you know. We have not been able to get from Congress enough money to properly run even the hospitals that we have so far. We haven't today got a single hospital that comes up to the standards of the American Hospital Association, and the reason is not that our head men are not able, but that Congress has not been able to give us enough money. Our ability to go ahead and multiply hospitals, and yours would certainly be one of those, is limited by our hope for obtaining appropriations for maintaining them. We could go into the public works bill and ask for a good many more hospitals than we have asked for. We would probably get the money, but what would we do with it when we had it unless we could obtain an increase in appropriations. Just see what we have had to do now. Congress had already taken away eight million dollars, and on top of that the President took four and one-half million dollars more. We were able to save the medical service because we just felt we couldn't cut that down, it is so poor, but we have had to cut everything else to pieces. My judgment is that unless we can see our way to obtain money to maintain hospitals we ought not to build them. It is different from schools. Every day school we build takes children out of a boarding school and we can transfer that money and maintain the day school, but a new hospital doesn't take a patient out of another hospital. It is a new thing with its doctor, its nurses, and its supplies, and its ambulance, so that I think you will have to be patient with our medical division which is still working on a disgracefully inadequate budget. And while I realize that this is perhaps more important than anything else for the Indians, I come into office at a time when

88

74179

they are cutting our appropriations mercilessly and I feel,
and I know that Dr. Guthrie does, that thing thing ought to
be done. A great many more small hospitals on the Navajo
reservation are needed and another base hospital to take
care of the Hopis, Navajos and Zuni's, and there are similar
needs in other parts of the country, but I am not sure we
are going to be able to get the money for maintenance. We
may have to be prepared to enter into arrangements with the
Veterans Bureau and with County Hospitals and hospitals run
by Missionary Boards and pay them to render a more complete
service to the Indians. It may be that our money will not
enable us to do any better than that, but I shall put this
whole thing up once again to Dr. Guthrie and to the medical staff.

ELI BEARDSLEY: One more thing. The money that has been used to loan out to students in the past has been inadequate because we have had boys who have been waiting for over a year now and I want to know whether there has been any preparation made to take care of them this year.

MR. COLLIER: I am sorry to say not. We only have a loan fund of $25,000, which is pitiful, and really in order to get that loan an Indian has to prove so much and sign up so much that it almost pays him not to take it. The only hope I see for meeting that condition right away is this. If we can obtain from Congress when it meets next January, if they will give us the authority to use some of the money which we are going to save out of the boarding schools for scholarships for Indians who want to go into specialized schools or training schools we will have the money. We are going to save enough money so that we will have it, and we are going to ask Congress for that authority, to allow us to transfer a generous amount of money out of the boarding schools into scholarships. I may say that we had that Bill before this Congress, and it was endorsed by nearly all of the men in Congress, and it was endorsed by Secretary Ickes, but we didn't get it because a man over in the Budget Bureau didn't think we ought to have it and threw a monkey wrench into the machinery, so we didn't get it. But we are going to go to the bat for it again next January and we hope we will have it. We ought to have a fund of $100,000 a year for this and we ought to increase it just as fast as we can.

EULOGIO CATA (San Juan): Since I have not yet had a chance to talk for my pueblo, I am going to say a few words. First of all, let me tell you I bring you greetings from San Juan Pueblo and I express my people's goodwill to our new Commissioner, Mr. John Collier. I am old in life but new as an officer of San Juan. Now I like to put before

89

74179

Mr. Collier this, the last six months of my experience, since
the first of January, this is my third time I come here.
The second time I was asked to act as temporary Chairman.
About the 10% Attorney's fees, it was telegramed to Washington
to go ahead. What I was going to say is already said and
explained. We understood it, and I appreciate very much
what the Government has offered for our help. So, as I say,
all I want to say is that we are most in need of is land for
fuel and grazing land, and we know of a piece of land be-
tween Santa Clara and - - - - - Grant that is Government land.
Of course Mr. Collier said yesterday that it is kind of hard
nowadays to get Government land but I guess they will see to
that. Another thing, out of this compensation money we wish
to buy the Sebastiano Martinez Grant. The other things that
I have on the list are useless for me to mention here be-
cause for these things we should go to our Agent or to our
Attorney, so I will not mention them. What worries me is
about the community ditch. The present arrangement is not
satisfactory, that is the Chamita ditch, which is on a
50-50 basis, and we are always behind. I wish it could be
arranged so that we can get a square deal. Maybe Mr. Ortiz
can explain it a little better than I can. About the fencing
and the emergency work, it is already explained, so I won't
go into detail. Thank you.

SOTERO ORTIZ: As he said about the Chamita-San Juan ditch, we have used that ditch, both Mexicans and Indians. We have to work 50-50, in expenses we have to go just the same, and the benefit of the water we have to take the same. The Mexicans have about 335 acres while the Indians have about 300 acres to be irrigated and we have been fighting in the courts. That was in the time when Judge Hanna was Attorney for the Pueblos. That part I think Judge Hanna will explain better than I. It has never been settled by the Court Decree as the way I have said now, equal division. We do not know if that will stay forever or until the Court changes it.

JUDGE HANNA: Are you satisfied with the Decree? There is no
other way to change it.

SOTERO ORTIZ: The reason why we Indians are getting behind is because we have no enforcement and the Mexicans when they fail to go they charge for the day they missed, while we Indians, if an Indian is named to go to work - if he doesn't go they don't do nothing. Isn't there some means of enforcing the orders of the Governor or whoever is in charge? Now the young people today, when they haven't got a piece of land to cultivate they say, "well, I haven't anything to cultivate." In this case what are we going to do?

90

74179

MR. COLLIER: I would like to ask Mr. Cochrane what he has to say about that.

MR. COCHRANE: That problem arises all the time in many pueblos, about the younger men objecting to doing their community ditch work. Now your custom is that they have to do it and I don't see anything for you to do but to enforce that custom. You have to either make them do it or punish them if they don't.

MR. COLLIER: Wouldn't it be possible for a pueblo to institute a system of fines which would have to be paid by those who refuse to do community work? Wouldn't it be within the authority of the pueblo, if a member refuses to do community work, to enforce it by taking some of his property away? Their community work is their taxes. White men who don't pay taxes are punished, property is taken away from them, at least as much property as is equal to the taxes. Where I was born and raised, in the mountains of Georgia, it was the duty of every man to work on the road every year, and it didn't make any difference whether or not he had a horse or wagon. If he didn't work on the road the sheriff went and got him and made him pay $2.00 for every day he didn't work. It seems to me that you have that very same power. As far as the Indian Bureau has the man power to do it, it will help you. Of course, you don't want the Indian Bureau butting into the Pueblo any more than you can help, you don't want the Indian Bureau to take over your responsibilities, but it is our business to back you up on any reasonable enforcement of your customs.

JUDGE HANNA: About ten years ago, in a Taos case, the District Judge held that the Governor and Council were within their rights if they took a bridle rein and spanked some of these boys who refused to do their work. That might help in some of these cases.

PABLO ABEITA (Isleta): We are coming to a point where it is a most important matter that the pueblos should know how much authority or what methods can be used in order to keep law and order in the pueblos. I wish somebody who knows about these things would tell us how much authority our Governor has in maintaining order in the pueblos amongst his people.

ELI BEARDSLEY (Laguna): I wish to say that is not a problem in our pueblo. I believe that each pueblo has full authority to exercise its authority over its subjects, except in criminal cases that should be handled by the

91

74179

Federal Government or some higher authority. In our pueblo,
at Laguna, we do not have that trouble because it is
handled by the authorities. That is our governing power.
They are vested with power that they have full authority
over their subjects, regardless of whether they have any
fields or any home at the pueblo. As long as I consider
myself a member of that pueblo, I am subject to the laws
of that particular pueblo. I think that every pueblo
should take a stand to enforce everything that concerns
its pueblo, its ditch work and anything that pertains to
the village. I am working out at Winslow, Arizona and I
am a member of the Laguna Pueblo. Any work that is extra
work that I do not help with in the village, I have to pay
a fine for that. I am subject to a fine, even if I don't
use water or cultivate anything. I am a member of that
pueblo and I have to pay dues into that pueblo. This is
what each pueblo should do, they shouldn't have any trouble.
Don't let the younger generation get away with this bluff
to the older members. I am subject to everything that goes
on in Laguna. If it is new work I have to pay an assessment.
They assess every member so much and he is under the direct
jurisdiction of that pueblo. There are some things that
are so difficult for the pueblo government, then the State
and Federal Government can help. I would suggest that
each pueblo take a stand and they ought to have by-laws.
We go according to by-laws that our pueblo makes and we
have a system by which all of these things are observed.
It is up to each pueblo and if they have by-laws or
ordinances that are not suitable, it is up to them to
amend or to insert into their by-laws something that would
take care of their community. Law and order should be
kept in every pueblo, that's what we try to do. Of course,
lots of times our Governor can't cope with such things
and then you have the Agent back of you. You have got
the Agent to back you, the Government to back you, you
have got the cane. That is your authority. You recognize
that as authority and I believe by re-organizing you can
make all of your pueblos abide by the laws and regulations
of every pueblo. That is what I wanted to tell the others
because that is the way our Laguna pueblo is carried on.
Even the ones that are away from the pueblo, not there.
We observe the rulings from our Governor. Over in Winslow
we are organized and subject to the Laguna pueblo. We
have no difficulty that way and I think the other pueblos
can institute something like that.

TONY ABEITA: (Isleta): But where does the money go?

92

74179

ELI BEARDSLEY: The money goes to the pueblo. It does to the pueblo fund and we use that money for whatever the pueblo needs, for ditch work, etc.

TONY ABEITA: In our pueblo, when we fail to work on the ditch the money goes to the Ditch Foreman, and it seems that sometimes we have had Ditch Foremen that don't care how many failures there are in the pueblo. It is just money in their pockets. The same way with the Governors. We have had Governors that collect money for failure to work at different places. It might be used for some emergency work. If a man is fined a certain amount and that money goes into the Governor's pocket, what about that? I don't mean this present governor that we have now, but there have been others.

ELI BEARDSLEY: Our government is organized in such a way that all the fines that are paid in, for instance those that become intoxicated we fine a certain amount. All this money goes into the general fund of the Laguna Pueblo. Other things, trouble among families, and court fines, that all goes into the general fund and then we allow so much for the Governor each year and so much for the officers.

MR. ELKUS: Mr. Beardsley outlines a way that you will have to operate on if you want to keep your self-government. In other words, you have to do it on a basis of fairness. Your fines have to be reasonable. You can't take all the land away from a man. Those fines will have to go into a general fund. The moment the pueblo people themselves don't hold on to their pueblo government they are going to be on their way to losing self-government. If they want to keep it they must insist on their people paying the taxes due and doing their work. If a fine is reasonable it will be supported by the Government. If they go to the Courts and try to get sustained on unreasonable fines, then I do not believe they will be sustained in any efforts of that kind. In other words, the fairness of the Government is going to be a test of whether or not what the Government does will be upheld. If they don't do that, sooner or later they will lose their self-government.

PABLO ABEITA: I am not howling about the money. What I wanted to know is how far the Governor can go to exercise his power over his subjects.

MR. COLLIER: I will try to answer that. I want to say that the Governor of Laguna has made a very fine statement of the problem. There are two answers to the problem. One answer is the technical side and the other is the human side. In law, and I wish the attorneys would correct me if I am wrong, each pueblo is as the Supreme Court has stated, a municipal corporation, an organized body of citizens living

IB

93

74179

IB

within a certain territory, and its powers you may say, are
all those things which are inherent, the power to tax, the
power to adopt ordinances governing behavior, the power to
enforce decrees, including penalties for violations of law,
the power to maintain an organization for law enforcement,
power to regulate the life in such a way that it is com-
fortable for every member of the corporation. Those powers
are all inherent and would be sustained by the court and
backed by the Department. There are certain things which
lie outside. If a murder is committed the jurisdiction
over that alleged crime is in the Federal Court. Those
crimes go into the Federal Court. Substantially everything
else is within the power of the local community, which means,
of the governor and his Council, so that the power in law
is a very broad power. Indians are citizens of the United
States, living under the Constitution, and they are entitled
to the amenities which the Constitution grants. There are
the total confiscation of property without cause, taking
property without due process of law, which could be gotten
into the Federal Court to determine the facts, the customs,
and the merits in the case. Even an absolute autocrat in
law hasn't got absolute power, he couldn't do a thing that
the majority of his own people think is unreasonable.
Constitutional amendment with all the power behind it,
wasn't enough to enforce prohibition because the people
didn't think it was reasonable, a great majority of the
people. After it was passed we find people who are
prohibitionists still prepared to give it up because they
found out that so many people didn't agree, and it is the
same way with all kinds of things. A Governor of a pueblo
must not hand out his decrees without bearing in mind what
is humanly possible to enforce, and not attempt things that
are humanly impossible, then the power of his office will
not be hurt. This is the kind of things that happen in
white communities. Our legislators in the State and Nation
are all the time passing laws, and unjust laws, and we
are cluttering up our statute books with laws which the
governors cannot enforce, and that is a very bad practice
among the white people. But, a pueblo that is completely
at peace, united, would be a dead pueblo, and it is not a
bad sign to have factions and disagreements and fights

within reason, only when they go so far that they can't do
business. On the other hand, a family whose brothers and
sisters fight all the time is not a happy family. And I,
myself, am not so distressed about the law and order
difficulties in the pueblos, its behavior of human beings
and they add to the spice of life. If you didn't have
these troubles you have to get other troubles. So
I don't think there is any dogmatic answer. The Governor
of the pueblo is the governor and he is empowered in a
very broad way, he can enforce his order.

94

74179

PABLO ABEITA: My reason for asking this question is because sometimes there is disobedience, they do not comply with the governor's request. In some of those cases we have to punish them by putting them in jail. We were turned down on that matter once by a party who said that was not due process of law, and we wanted to know just what authority the governor has.

MR. COLLIER: The imprisonment of a member of the tribe by a Governor for violation of customary law would be entirely within the Constitution. On the other hand, if the governor were unreasonable, just cruel, and that got into court the court might hold that it wasn't due process of law.

MR. CATA (San Juan): Now I would like to request that our school be improved, that electric lights be installed, they have the wires right there.

MR. COLLIER: That matter should be taken up with your superintendent.

EDMOND TRACY (San Ildefonso): We are from San Ildefonso and you probably heard about our troubles down there. We have two factions there. We have the governor's faction and we have the cacique's faction, and we haven't been together, so while talking about this pueblo we want to bring that question up here. We have had this case up in every way we could and with different friends of ours and they can't settle it for us, so we brought it up with the rest of the pueblos and asked if we can't make some kind of agreement to get back together again, but the other party has refused to get back together again and they are not in here now. The cacique's side is here. And this community money that we've been talking about, the other side has been getting all the rent and community funds, they handle it, and when any business like this comes up we have to pay out of our own pockets.

MR. COLLIER: This is a case which many of you here know more about than I do, and while it is of deep concern to me I can't give you the answer. It is a case, and there are other pueblos in the same situation, where a big part of the whole population stands off from another big part of the whole population and they just can't find out how to unite on anything. You can see how difficult it is from the outside to settle that because whatever you do from the outside will be right for one of the groups and wrong for the other. In this case, I am told, It is a case of the traditional Government over here with a minority of the male adults, and over here a slight majority which will not accept the authority of the traditional Government,

95

74179

and inasmuch as the Indian Office had to do something they
appear to have decided that they would let the majority rule.
Myself, I would like to come in and meet with you for a day
and a night and see if I might be able to persuade the
pueblo to get some way of living together, but I don't see
how any outside power can propose any unification. About
your money and so on, I simply don't know what to say now.
It is a very sad situation because in the long run it will
split up your life, but at the moment I can't say any more
than that it is regrettable.

EDMOND TRACY: Another thing is our water. We have very little water out of the Pojoaque creek and we want some way that we can get water out of the Rio Grande. If that could be done we would like to have a dam or something.

MR. COLLIER: Have they made any recent diggings up there for water?

EDMOND TRACY: No.

MR. COLLIER: All I can answer is that we will have the thing gone into at the earliest time by the Irrigation Service.

EDMOND TRACY: There is plenty of water goes into the well but
by the time it reaches San Ildefonso we lose a lot because
it is on sand.

MR. COLLIER: We are going to have difficulty in financing anything out of the regular Indian Bureau fund. How much money has your pueblo got?

EDMOND TRACY: I don't know.

MR. COLLIER: I think you probably have $30,000 in the Treasury.
The water is feasible to get but it would cost a great deal
to build a ditch.

EDMOND TRACY: Lots of people didn't cultivate their lands this year on account of not having enough water.

MR. COLLIER: Well as soon as it is possible Mr. Neuffer and Mr.
Faris will come up and go over the whole thing.

EDMOND TRACY: Then the three ditches we have, the Mexicans
been getting hold of it. They have a Mexican ditch boss.
The ditch belongs to the Indians but the Mexicans rule it,
and they are taking too much of the water.

MR. COLLIER: That matter will also be looked into.

96

74179

EDMOND TRACEY: Another thing. Quite a few years ago the pueblo got a piece of land on the west in exchange for a piece of land on the east, and we want to find out where the grant runs up.

MR. COLLIER: Go to the Santa Fe office and look at the maps. They will show you.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR (Santo Domingo): I wish the Government employees would make an investigation of the day school. I notice several things that should be checked and corrected. The kids are not attending school all the time, there must be some reason or something wrong. I don't know whether it is the fault of the teachers or what is wrong.

MR. COLLIER: You mean there are some days when there are no children at school?

AUGUSTINE AUGILAR: Yes, and those teachers don't make interest enough for the children to attend. When they should put up some program on some big man's birthday or something like that, nothing has been done. Another thing, some of us here are unable to clothe those kids and they look pretty bad. Some of them haven't a shirt on and tring to attend school. Another thing, I see those kids up there washing their own clothes, overalls and such things like that at the laundry. I would ask you Government employees to make an investigation and see whether clothes can be issued to the day schools.

MR. COLLIER: What do you know about that, Mr. Towers?

MR. TOWERS: We issued all the clothes that we had. They wanted more and we didn't have it. We issued all we had last September.

MR. COLLIER: It just gets back to the question of money.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: There are six teachers up there half the time doing nothing.

MR. COLLIER: Has anybody else observed that? I never heard of a school like that, unless the records the teachers make are not correct.

AUGUSTINE AGUILAR: I have been here and I have seen it. I have been going up to the school.

MR. COLLIER: Have you seen anything so extreme as he mentions, Mr. Towers?

97

74179

MR. TOWERS: The children have been excused for dances and such as that.

AUGUSTINE AUGUILAR: I went and asked why these kids didn't attend school. They say "we haven't enough clothes", and for that reason I think the parents don't allow them to go up to the school.

MR. COLLIER: Well, when the school reopens in September we will investigate that.

AUGUSTINE AUGUILAR: Another thing, about the old ditch of Santo Domingo on the west side. We have trouble with the Mexicans. They put a fence up clear up to the ditch and we have no way of getting in or out when any ditch work should be done. It is our right of way.

MR. COLLIER: Have you taken that up with the Superintendent?

AUGUSTINE AUGUILAR: Yes, I think, long time ago.

MR. COLLIER: How long has this been going on?

AUGUSTINE AUGUILAR: For years.

MR. COLLIER: That matter must be looked into.

ROLAND DYRAN (Picuris): I have three items which the Council asked me to present. The first is, two years ago when the sub-Committee held a meeting at Taos we asked the Sub-Committee if there was any possibility of building or constructing a reservoir about a quarter of a mile from the Picuris pueblo. We wanted this to be constructed and paid under the compensation money but there was no one had gone up there to survey that reservoir, but they made improvements. Right now we have forty acres of wheat, the water supply is very low. During the early part of the spring we have plenty of water and if a reservoir is constructed above the mouth of the canyon we may have enough water to irrigate when the drought comes in July and the first part of June.

MR. COLLIER: We will have that investigated.

ROLAND DURAN: I have another item also. Under this emergency work, they are already pretty near ready to start the work as soon as they are notified, and they are wanting to fence half of the reservation, the north section, and the south section they don't want to have it fenced because there are so many settlers.

MR. COLLIER: You should make that known to Mr. Faris.

98

74179

ROLAND DURAN: Also, under this plan, they wish to fix a road right in the Indian grant, under this reforestation plan.

MR. COLLIER: I doubt if they can build roads under this plan.

ROLAND DURAN: I thought maybe it was for improvements to the pueblo.

MR. COLLIER: You can build a road to get posts out, but that is all.

ROLAND DURAN: Most of the young men enlisted but most of the older men didn't because they had crops to attend to, so they thought it might be possible to have a little work done on the road.

MR. COLLIER: We can't use this money for road building, but to keep fires out of the woods or bring down your posts. If you want a regular road that can't be done, but it can be done under the road money which we are going to get. It may be three months before we have the money.

ROLAND DURAN: Mr. Faris was up there and they were in doubt as to just where to start the fencing and I don't know what they are going to do.

MR. COLLIER: You want to survey the area where title has been quieted, do you? There are new maps which can determine that, the maps that come out of the work of the Pueblo Lands Board. When you get ready for the fencing a man will be sent up to run the line and mark it.

ROLAND DURAN: The Council also asked me to bring this matter up in reference to the compensation money we have. They would like to transfer the fund, which is $112,000, to the trust fund.

MR. COLLIER: I discussed that yesterday with Taos. That will require new legislation. In the meantime we will promise to keep it safe in the Treasury and draw interest at 4%. We can't transfer the money at the present time. You understand the money at present is safe and drawing 4% interest, it wouldn't draw any more anywhere else. I understand they want it for the pueblo, about $12,000 would be for the purchase of land, but in the meantime you can simply leave it in the Treasury and let it draw interest at 4%. The money is perfectly safe there.

ROLAND DURAN: The pueblo also wishes to express their appreciation about our Northern Pueblo superintendent, for what he has done in improving our pueblo. It has been a

99

74179

very difficult pueblo. This pueblo is located up in the
mountains and it never has been attended like Superintendent
Faris has done for us.

ANTONIO TAPIA (Pojaque): Will this 4% be received, will they get it?

MR. COLLIER: Yes, they will get it.

EULOGIO CATA (San Juan): The pueblo of San Juan would like to have some of their land drained. At present some of our lands are getting bad on account of the water.

MR. COLLIER: That matter will be brought under this erosion work you know.

SOTERO ORTIZ (San Juan): I should like to say that we have a very nice superintendent, Mr. Faris. His work has been officially good among the Indians, he does all he can for the benefit of the Indians. It is true, while back some of the pueblos they made a little complaint, but that was nothing to amount to anything.

DIEGO ABEITA (Isleta): My situation at Isleta in regards to the grasshopper epidemic, we have had this for four or five years. Mr. Towers has done all he can to eradicate the situation but it seems like it is a three-county problem, Bernalillo in the center, Sandoval on the north, and Valencia to the south, and unless something is done in a cooperative way we will always have trouble in keeping down this pest. It has been destroying our crop entirely for some years. This year we have lots of them again and we are losing lots of crops. This is a thing that should be carried on in a systematic way. We have tried to control the situation but it does very little good. Something should be done about controlling it.

ALCARIO MONTOYA (Cochiti): The governor would like to ask the Commissioner to have his reservation fenced all around. And then we got a piece of vega on the east side and we would like to keep that vega for a pasture, we don't want it drained because that's where we keep our stock and horses.

MR. COLLIER: These drainage ditches are local, aren't they?

MR. TOWERS: Most of them are local, and I believe the District will do that if they are relieved of the responsibility.

MR. ELKUS: The District would probably want to be relieved under the contract to put in that ditch; in other words it is a part of their construction work. I think that is what's in their minds.

100

74179

FERNANDO BACA (Jemez): We desire to purchase a piece of land.
This grant is called the San Jose Grant. The pueblo has
decided that this should be taken up with either Judge
Hanna or Attorney Cochrane.

MR. COLLIER: The pueblo hasn't any money has it?

FERNANDO BACA: We thought that through an agreement with the pueblo this could be taken up.

MR. COLLIER: How large a fund have you got?

FERNANDO BACA: $23,000

MR. COLLIER: This land would then become available for the whole
community, would it?

FERNANDO BACA: We thought it would be very beneficial for grazing
and cultivating.

MARTIN VIGIL (Tesuque): I want to ask the Commissioner if the school teacher is supposed to stay at the school to do the work. After school hours is the teacher permitted to go out riding?

MR. COLLIER: What would you like her to do?

MARTIN VIGIL: Well, our school teacher, after school hours she goes to Santa Fe and stays until midnight. There's been things lost at the school.

MR. COLLIER: Isn't there a housekeeper at your school?

MARTIN VIGIL: No, we have no housekeeper there.

MR. COLLIER: Well you can't ask the teacher to stay in the school
building all the time. Now it may be that she goes away too
much.

MARTIN VIGIL: I don't think our teacher this year had very much
interest. She has recess every five or ten minutes. We want
a school teacher this year that we know by name of Clara Anna
Clark. Everybody liked her.

MR. COLLIER: Where is this teacher now that you speak of?

MARTIN VIGIL: She's at the Santa Fe school now.
Another thing, what the Laguna delegate stated a
while ago. I am sure glad to hear his statement. During
our fiesta November 12th, I have seen it in other purblos
where I have been too, some pueblos have a policeman and
maybe some day he comes to our place and guide our people

102

74179

or our neighbors that come to visit and have a good time. We want some kind of authority, we don't want no policeman around our pueblo.

MR. COLLIER: You won't have any. The policeman is a sort of a clerk and about the last thing he does is police work. This is one of the great criticisms, that they don't do police work. It is just an old name and they are not policemen. I imagine that is largely true in San Juan and Santa Clara. Anyway, there will be no policeman at Tesuque.

ANASTACIO NARANJO (Santa Clara): Mr. Chairman, Mr. Commissioner. I am interested in schools and we have some problems here that I think all the pueblos will be interested in. We have two what are known as Pueblo schools, but I have figures here that the Albuquerque school has 369 Navajoes and only 270 Pueblos. Now I am not objecting to the Navajos coming into the Pueblo schools at all, but my objection is this, that the Pueblos ought to be preferred for those schools, they are for the Pueblos. I have known of cases when school opens that the Pueblo Indians take their children to these two Pueblo schools and are turned down because they are full. I am sure most all these people here would back me up on this statement. They are filled mostly with Navajos, but the Navajos have their own schools. The Pueblos have only these two large boarding schools and they ought to be preferred and take all the children that want to go to school, then after the Pueblos are all gone, if there is room the Navajos can come in. Another thing, I notice in about twenty-five years work in the Indian Service, a case in Albuquerque where after school closes and most of the students have gone home, a truck load of Navajos is brought in, then of course when school opens in September the school is full and there is no room for the Pueblos. I think that ought to be taken up. I understand that the schools are for all Indians but these two schools were supposed to be for the Pueblos.

MR. COLLIER: Wouldn't you think it a good plan to add to the day schools?

ANASTACIO NARANJO: I think they ought to enlarge the boarding schools because they get better training. You heard a Santo Domingo man say in the pueblos they don't attend school regularly, they have so many dances and things which of course is already mentioned. If they are in boarding schools they have to go to school unless they are sick. That's the reason we pregressives would rather have the boarding schools enlarged. I think that's a

103

74179

better plan. I notice in the papers we are cut seventy-five pupils for next year. That would mean there would be that much less chance for the Pueblos to get in.

MR. COLLIER: I think the line that we have to work on is to improve the day schools, build up the day schools, and after that send them to the boarding schools.

ANASTACIO NARANJO: Mingling with other tribes and being out-of-side of the pueblo they get a better education, while if you keep the children right in the village they won't get very much.

LORENZO MEDINA: (Zia) The Zia people seem to be satisfied very much the way the school has been kept up. I would like to see the Government put the ones that finish the twelfth grade through college, those that are able. We appreciate what the Government has done and we are willing to take up whatever the government can do for the pueblo of Zia from here on. We thank you very much.

ALBERT PAYTIAMO (Acoma): About the boarding schools, it is true that mostly the Navajos are attending the Pueblo schools, and by the way you state that you are going to cut the enrollment the Pueblos will have so many children out of school. Even if you add to the day schools, where will they all go?

MR. COLLIER: If a child can not be put in a day school he will not be taken out of the boarding school. The children are not going to be taken out and not put in day schools.

ALBERT PAYTIAMO: Here's the point. If you add to the day schools they will just learn their school is all, they won't learn their trade. Then when they go to the boarding school they have to start at the bottom with their trades, unless you furnish the day schools with the trades in lines of farming and all that. If they go to the day schools they just learn their language, and if the day school has all the industrial work it would be all right, but it looks pretty hard to do it. The Albuquerque school used to be a Pueblo school, but the Navajos are increasing there all the time, and besides that I heard the Navajos are trying to clean up all the students at Albuquerque. The Pueblos are employed on the Navajo reservation, there are one or two of them who are employed out there. They want to place the Navajos as employees, but they ought to be employed from different tribes and let the Pueblos stay out there. If the Indians could keep together there is no hard feeling or anything. When we graduate from the

104

74179

schools, I graduated from this Albuquerque school and
still I am not holding any job, and that is the point I
want to bring up. They ought to be employed, boys that
graduate from schools. That's what was brought up when
investigators came out here. They agree too that all
graduates ought to be employed in schools, but there
is a lot of others, outsiders employed in things that
the Indians can do just as well as the whites. I think
it is all right to increase the day schools, but the
trouble is that they can learn more in the boarding
school than in the day school.

MR. COLLIER: I am going to have a copy of your statement furnished all officials of the educational division of the Indian Bureau. Our day schools, the way they are now conducted, are not good enough, they don't give enough practical training, and if we are to go ahead and substitute say schools for boarding schools we have got to almost change them from top to bottom and not just give grammar and things like that. We've got to give another kind of education. It can be given in day schools. Down in Mexico there are day schools for the Indians, run by the government, which give as good training in industry, farming and vocation as the best of our boarding schools give today. There is not reason why day schools should not do that, and we will fail if we simply build up day schools of the old fashioned kind, they won't do the work. We have got to build up a new kind of day school. In Mexico these day schools are the most interesting and progressive schools in the world. They are marvelously well run and every teacher in these day schools is an Indian. We are sending each year a large number of our people down to Mexico to study those schools so as to find out how to run our white schools better. Our trouble is that we have not given to you Indians the educational opportunity to prepare you to take responsible technical positions in your own work. It is a heart-breaking thing and a thing that Dr. Ryan sees as clearly as anybody. I hope we can do something about it. We have gotten to a very deep and important question at the end of the day.

ALBERT PAYTIAMO: Another thing, along the line of irrigation. It has been said here at the meeting some things have been done without the consent of the pueblo and it has occurred at my place. Some of these Indians can see as much as the engineers, irrigation places like my place and the Lagunas years back. I don't think they had a surveyor to survey those ditches, they just went out and done their own surveying. There is a dam put up between Acomita and McCarty. That old dam was four feet

105

74179

higher than what it is now, they lowered it four feet, and the ditch on that side it is getting deeper and the banks are getting higher. Every year we have to work that thing. Looks like they are giving us more work to do, like Isletas are doing, instead of giving us less, but that dam ought to be raised up. The dam is four feet below and the water can't pass through to the Lagunas, but if put up higher the Lagunas can use it. I don't know why they put it so low. Every time a flood comes it brings in silt.

TONY LUJAN (Taos): Speaking about schools, we Taos Indians would like to have our day school enlarged. We don't like to send our children to the boarding school. When the children go to school in a well condition they mix with other tribes with a whole lot of disease and they come back home and they bring that disease. And so, for my part, I would like the day school enlarged at Taos, keeping our children until they finish the twelfth grade. They go around the towns and pick up all kinds of disease. I think if they stay in the day school in their own village and finish the twelfth grade it is better for them. So we ask the Commissioner or the Government to give us the higher grades so they can learn the trade and then have a first class job. Now they go out working for people who have money, they go to wash dishes and clothes, and that is not the first class job, getting little wages. I want the children to learn the trade, like these two girls sitting here, getting good wages, they had the school and college. That's the way I wish to see everybody in the pueblos to have that kind of school.

ELI BEARDSLEY (Laguna): Mr. Chairman, Mr. Commissioner. It is very interesting and I believe, regardless of what education we give them in our day schools, it requires a great deal more than that. The thing that the Indian really needs is initiative regardless of how much education you get in day schools. They've got to rub elbows with other people, you have to learn to have initiative, and you can't get along anywhere unless you stand on your own feet. By sending these children where they will mix in with other children they will learn something. You can't learn anything by staying at home, you've got to mix in with others. The trouble that we are having now, there are two sides to it. Some of us believe that these day schools are not coming up to the standard. The objection that the Laguna people made regarding these day schools is that

106

74179

the children will be taken out of the boarding school and
they are going to be in contact with their own people and
will never learn. In the boarding school they make better
progress because they are not immediately connected with
their home life. Of course, we must teach our children
things at home, that's all right, but then in order to
learn like these two girls here, they are examples of what
higher education can do, you have to go out and rub elbows
with other people. I believe there should be higher
institutions where the students can mix in and learn by
competition. You don't get that higher competition in day
schools, and in an Indian school there isn't much competition. I found that out myself. Not until I got out
did I find that I had to work. As I say, there are two
sides to this. I can go on this or on the side on which
Mr. Lujan has talked, but it is left up to us as to what
we are going to make of it. We can't make anything by
simply staying home all the time. You got to go outside
of your own tribe in order to come up like these girls.
These girls didn't stay home and learn all these things
right at home, they had to compete with other students
in order to get ahead.

TONY LIJAN (Taos): I want to say this. The boarding school
has only half a day of school and the other half is work.
I think it is much more important to have the day schools
and have a full day of school.

MR. COLLIER: Friends, I have to go on to Fort Wingate to the Navajo meeting and I am afraid I can't stay with you more than a few minutes longer, although we have just come to the most interesting part of the whole meeting. I want to say a word about the discussion of the schools. It's kind of ridiculous for us whites to be establishing schools for another race because we white people who have thought things over and have had children of our own, we know very well that our own schools are not successful. If there is anything that we are in dispair about in our white life it is our white schools, and we have put across into the Indian schools every one of the stupidities and errors of our white schools, and neither the boarding nor the day school is the kind of school that it ought to be. It is perfectly true, as the governor of Laguna says, that every individual born in the world does need to go out, meet other kinds of people, rub elbows and find the things that he has in common with other people, and to compete with them. Everyone is entitled to that opportunity during this growing period. Remember, though, that the growing period is not up to the age of ten, but twenty, and we have to think of the education of Indians

107

74179

in the terms of twenty years and not three or four years. This
need of outside contact is important, but it is also true that the
biggest thing in life is one's own family and his own home,
his own community and his own tribe. One's family and home and
tribe care is a tremendous thing to give to each person that is
born. I don't know which is the more important, but I do think
that the thing which the home and tribe can give has to come
first in years, that we can't break up a child's relation to his
home and tribe without a fatal loss. That comes first, and then
we will have a child that's been built into his home and tribe and
can move out into the world and not lose his home and tribe. It
seems that our problem is to build up such day schools that
the Pueblo child, through the school, is given the whole wonder-
ful richness and beauty of his pueblo life, because the
pueblo life is something great. White life has nothing as
deep or as precious to give to a Pueblo child as his own
pueblo has got to give. Then it seems to me that we must give
the children the opportunity of advanced education, out among
white people and not only Indian tribes. We have to do both.
We will find that the greater majority will not want to go into
the more advanced courses. There will be a limited number who
will want to on and go very far, and it is the duty of the
Government to provide the opportunity and a genuine opportunity
for these, and at the same time to build up such day schools
as will supplement the pueblo life, help the pueblo life, enable
the child and his home, both of them, to improve their life.
We can't do the job either just one way or the other, we've got to
do it both ways. But the question of money comes in, and that
question is, how can we finance the education for the Indian
children. The only way we can now finance it is by taking out
of the boarding schools those children who are still young and
to whom we can give a good education at the home. That will
set free enough money to provide for the really advanced
education of the children of older years. There is nothing in
our educational work of the Indian people to be proud of: there
is mighty little white educational work in the United States to
be proud of, and I don't know that we can improve it all of a
sudden. I do know this, that the Indian Bureau is in desperate
need of criticism and help from the Indians themselves in the
improvement of the Indian schools. It is the Pueblo communities
which must help show us how to establish good day schools, and it
is the graduates of the boarding schools and the returned
students who ought to criticise and advise us regarding the
method of making these boarding schools better than they are.
I can't say any more about that, and I feel that many of you

108

74179

have been crowded out from saying things that are important
by my talking so much, and yet I have to leave you now. It
is a very hard thing to be in the position that I am now in,
where I have to try to do work connected with the Indians
all over the United States, which means that I can't take
time enough to do in a really good way the work for any of
the Indians. I just have to dash around from one thing
to another. But because my heart is with you and I feel as
though you are my own people--what I mean is that I owe
a debt to the Pueblo Indians that I can never pay--it is
true that I shall always be thinking of you, almost night
and day; and I hope that you will remember this, that while
I can't come very often, you can always write, and I will
promise to give personal attention to the things you send
me. I am going to do my best to keep in touch with the
problems of each of the pueblos, and I want you to exoect
that of me and don't hesitate to scold me and call me to
account if I fail to do that. It's been a very happy time
for me to be with you.

EULOGIO CATA (San Juan Pueblo): We, the people of San Juan,
hope that our problems are understood and our biggest
desire is to work with you towards success. Thank you,

DIEGO ABEITA: (Isleta) The Isleta pueblo wishes to show its
appreciation for your presence and with you cooperation and
support in your administration, and regardless of differ-
ences that may arise we hope to maintain the friendship
as always in the past. We know that you will do the right
thing by us and that your intentions are good. The pueblo
wishes me to repeat that sentiment for them, that they
regard you as a personal friend, one of their members of
the tribe.

ANASTACIO NARANJO (Santa Clara): We wish to thank you and
your staff and friends back there in Congress very
sincerely and with great appreciation. I can not express
just how much we appreciate your help, but in a small way
we wish to thank you and hope to continue being great
friends to you.

ELI BEARDSLEY (Laguna): The Laguna Pueblo wishes to thank you
and to wish you a pleasant journey from here to the Indian
reservations that you are bound for. We certainly ap-
preciate this opportunity of being here and discussing
matters which pertain to all the Indians of the United
States, not only the Pueblos. We thank you for having
such an interest, and the Indians I know have a great deal

109

74179

of faith in the things that you will attempt to accomplish for us. Also, the principal men from the Laguna Pueblo sent their very best regards to you, knowing that you would be here. I am speaking for the whole pueblo. I know that everyone of them has enjoyed your visit with us. There are other matters that we can not go on and discuss, but we hope and live in the hope that we may have the pleasure of seeing you again soon.

HARVEY TOWNSEND (San Felipo): We very much appreciate your talk and wish you a success. It is very interesting that these representatives of each village have brought up very interesting problems, and I suggest to all the members of the Council, let us work together and help the Commissioner in his work. Shall we do that, I ask?

ALL PUEBLOS: Yes.

ALCARIO MONTOYA (Cochiti): I make this motion, that we at least acknowledge receipt of the letter that was sent to the All-Pueblo Council by the Chairman of the Indian Committee of the House. We can make this a verbal message through Mr. Collier. And also to the great President of the United States, thanking him for the appointment, and others that had anything to do with his appointment. Will you do that for us, Mr. Collier?

MR. COLLIER: Yes, I will do that.

TONY LUJAN (Taos): The Taos pueblo wants to thank you and all of the members of your staff for the help you have given us in our lands lost and recovered, they have been placed in our hands again. And to all those men that have cooperated in this work, we give thanks. We welcome you to our pueblo any time.

MARTIN VIGIL (Tesuque): We thank you very much and hope you have a good trip. Ever since this Indian Defense Association started many questions have come to me, whether I am against Collier. I have been with Collier ever since this association started and I will be with Collier as long as he lives. I thank you, Mr. Collier, and all other friends here, also the two girls that have been working here all day.

MR. COLLIER: That organization is going right on with its work. It is not going to stop, but is going to go right on. All of the different branches are going to

110

last? About five years. All of those mixed bloods were
given authority to sell their allotments and they did sell
them, and the result of it is we are scattered all over
the country. Now that would be the result of the Allotment
Act, although they say from that source we acquired what
is called citizenship. They done everything to us. We
were citizens under that Act and some of the boys were on
the front during the war. Now, whether that law will still
apply or be eliminated by this bill, I ask that.

MR. COLLIER: This Bill would correct the law for you too, to
safeguard your Red Lake lands against allotment.

INDIAN FROM MINNESOTA: Mr. Collier, there is a delegation
here from the Mescalero reservation where I am employed.
There are five members here from Mescalero.

MR. COLLIER: The Mescalero reservation has been allotted as
you all know. Any Indians who have an interest in allotted
lands will want to know some details about this Bill that
do not concern the other Indians. Let them, during the day,
meet separately about their allotment problems with me, or
with Assistant Commissioner Zimmerman, or with Solicitor
Cohen from Washington.

DELEGATE FROM MESCALERO: Our reservation is not allotted.

MR. COLLIER: I was thinking you said Jicarilla. Mescalero is
not allotted so all that I will say applies to you.
Superintendent Towers says that some of you are asking
whether this Bill would prevent your getting allotments
out on the Public Domain. No, it would not.

Now, we come to the second thing in the Bill, which
is also contained in Title III, the Land Title.

(Interpreter asked to speak louder)

MR. COLLIER: The second part, which is a part of the land
title, I have explained - how a great many Indians have
lost their land. There are more than 100,000 Indians
that have lost all of their lands and a great many others
who have lost so much that they haven't enough to make a
living. Something must be done to give land back to the
Indians who have lost their land. In the main that means
that the Government must buy land and give it to the
Indians who have lost their land. The Bill sets up an
arrangement for buying land for Indians who need land.
It directs the Secretary of the Interior to find out the
situation of all these Indians, to examine the lands that

9

I think I have given you the main things in this self-
government arrangement and either now or after you have
recessed for lunch you will want to know the thing with
more exactitude. I just give you my own opinion, that
under this title, under this arrangement, the Pueblos can
have every protection and power that they have now, can
have them in a much more secure way than they have them
and, if they desire, can take on more power which, if
wisely used, would be of tremendous benefit to all the
Pueblos.

RECESS OF ONE HOUR FOR LUNCH

The meeting was called to order after recess by
Chairman, Sotero Ortiz. Interpreter Antonio Tapia to be
assisted by Tony Aboita (Islota). Delegates seated to-
gether by pueblos.

SOTERO ORTIZ: During recess time I believe you have con-
sulted what has been explained to us this morning by our
Commissioner. If there are any questions that you want
to bring out we would like to hear from you and the
Commissioner and our friends here will be glad to answer
you. From there on the Commissioner will proceed from
where he left off this morning.

A. B. ORTIZ (San Juan): Mr. Chairman, you could call the
members of the delegates of each pueblo, starting with
Taos, or else begin from the lower end, and maybe in that
way we will get a little better session.

SOTERO ORTIZ: Pueblo of Taos. If there is any question that
you want to ask you can ask it now.

ANTONIO MIRABAL (Taos): I don't know of any questions to ask.
I think that the Commissioner has given us a thorough
explanation, from what I understand.

TELESFOR ROMERO (Taos): There is one other thing that I
would like to have clear in mind, according to the line
of education. When we come to this borrowing money
proposition this morning, in order to have a thorough
understanding and more education among the Indians. Now
that is the very point I wanted to ask and I want to be
clear on that line for the reason, according to this Bill,

21

A. B. ORTIZ (San Juan): It is his.

MR. COLLIER: He can exchange it within the tribe and sell it, can't he? His children inherit it, don't they? So you have private ownership already; you've got it without this allotment scheme. Your land holding system is not changed by this bill. My understanding is that in all the pueblos the man who is using land, who has improved it, owns it according to the community law, and that is unaltered by this Bill.

A. B. ORTIZ (San Juan): Now again. What employees of the chartered Indian government would the community have to pay for salaries, etc.?

MR. COLLIER: That's a good question. The money would be transferred to the community treasury by the Government, the money to pay for those services. That is all made clear on page 14, line 15.

EULOGIO CATA (San Juan): On page 24, lines 18, 21 and 25, there should be more definite wording as to the race of the individual to receive training and then placement in a position. It should say "Indian Individual."

MR. COLLIER: You do not want to say that for this one thing we shall employ Indians only. You have to go back to the self-government part where it states the Indian who qualifies has the preference. Where he can qualify under the examinations, then he has the preference, if his people want him for an employee. Then there might not be any qualified Indian in a given place at a certain time and you wouldn't want the place left open. My answer is that the Bill as a whole covers your point and a great deal more.

EULOGIO CATA: The Bill should state in plain wording the classes of cases to be tried within the reservation, grant or community and before the Indian jury, such as murder, felony, etc.

MR. COLLIER: Do you mean by court, the Indian court or Federal court. There are two courts. There is the local court in the community and the special Federal Court. Are you speaking of the local court or the Federal court?

EULOGIO CATA: I am speaking of what is in this Bill, the Federal court.

26

**DESIDERIO NARANJO (Santa Clara):** About this bill, we don't quite fully understand it. We have to study it over and now we are understanding it as Mr. Collier is explaining to us, but the way we feel right now we have to go back to our pueblo and have a meeting with the rest of the members of the pueblo and then we could decide about the Bill. Another thing, we have some children at Espanola high school and we have been asking for transportation for these children from Santa Clara to Espanola, and now as Mr. Collier is here I want to ask if you could give the children this transportation.

**MR. COLLIER:** That is a question of money. We are already paying the tuition of those children in the high school. Whether we can also supply transportation, I cannot say. After all, it is only two miles, and in many other parts of the country the children have to go ten or fifteen miles and we haven't got enough money to provide even for long hauls. It wouldn't come ahead of everything else. All over this country children are walking two miles to public schools and more. I don't say that we won't do it; it is a question of money.

**SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman):** San Ildefonso, have you any questions to ask?

**EDMOND TRACY (San Ildefonso):** I want to ask a few questions about the bill. Does that Bill give the same privileges to non-chartered pueblos?

**MR. COLLIER:** It will have some of the privileges, but not all. It gets all the protection in the matter of lands, but it does not get these different new powers of self-government.

**EDMOND TRACY:** How about borrowing money?

**MR. COLLIER:** I should say, a preference to handle the loan.

**EDMOND TRACY:** About voting, the Bill says that three-fifths of the adults that come and vote - but does that include women?

**MR. COLLIER:** As the Bill is drawn, it includes women. If the women don't come, they won't vote.

**EDMOND TRACY:** Suppose the vote was so even that they would have to come?

**MR. COLLIER:** You might have a vote where you would be just one short of three-fifths, then a crazy man could cast that vote.

29

**EDWARD TRACY:** About the jurisdiction of this new Federal Court, you stated that there were eight major crimes that come under that. We like to know just what they are.

**MR. COCHRANE:** They are murder, manslaughter, larceny, arson, assault with intent to kill, rape, assault with a deadly weapon, and felony.

**MR. COLLIER:** About those loans, preference would be given to chartered communities. The language of the amendment as introduced makes those loans, this five million dollar loan fund, for chartered Indian communities or its members. The community would have to take out a charter in order to get this loan fund.

**SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman):** Pojoaque is next. Do you have any questions?

**VICENTE PORTER (Pojoaque):** I do not believe there are any questions. All questions have been brought out, and one question I had has been answered by Mr. Collier a few minutes ago, unless the rest of the delegates have anything to ask.

**SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman):** Nambo. Have you any questions?

**DELEGATE FROM NAME:** I have no questions to ask.

**SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman):** Has Tesuque any questions?

**MARTIN VIGIL (Tesuque):** Awhile ago the Commissioner mentioned about land after this bill passed, that the Government would buy us more land in case we are in need of it. Now, are they going to buy land for Tesuque? If the land is going to be bought for the Tesuque Indians and they are not satisfied with it, would the Indians of Tesuque have the right to decide what land they want? The reason I ask this question is because we have land for cultivating and what we want is forest land. The Government should buy us forest land.

**MR. COLLIER:** The Government would buy what the Indians wanted, of course, and the purchase would be a gift. There would be no reimbursable loan features. It is my belief that Tesuque is a pueblo where we must get more land.

30

SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman): Cochiti is next.

DELEGATE FROM COCHITI: No questions to ask just now.

ANTONIO LUJAN (Taos): Mr. Ortiz raised the question awhile ago about land. We from the Pueblo of Taos, we are accustomed to, when a man has a large family, he has a right to give land to his family. What I want to ask is this. If a man dies and leaves his heirs what he has, leaves it in writing; what I want to ask is, from what I have heard, that when a man dies the property returns to the community. For many years we are accustomed to when a man dies, or his wife dies, the property is left to the heirs. I don't think it is right that the property should return to the community. That's what I wanted to ask.

MR. COLLIER: The matter that Antonio Lujan refers to is on page 33, Section 7. It says that when an Indian who has been allotted land dies, then the title goes to the tribe although the heirs may continue to live on the property and use the improvements. This does not relate to tribal lands at all and does not touch the Pueblos. The ownership of land, the use of land, and the inheritance of land in the pueblos is controlled by the pueblo custom law and this Bill would not change that.

SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman): Santo Domingo. Any questions?

JIM CORIZ (Santo Domingo): We don't have anything in mind now. Mr. Collier explained everything this morning. The same questions over and over again take up time. I think he should explain where he left off this morning.

ANTONIO LUJAN (Taos): It is very necessary that we should take time in discussing these matters; we shouldn't be in a big hurry.

SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman): I think we must be a little bit more patient. It makes no difference if we take a little longer time. It is important that this matter be discussed and we want a thorough understanding before we take action on it. San Felipe, next.

FRED TENORIO (San Felipe): Is there any provision in the Bill whereas the Indians are guaranteed to secure jobs outside the Government Service, to be recognized

31.

**LAGUNA:** Laguna doesn't want to take this matter back to the pueblo. We have been authorized to give approval, We are in favor.

**ACOMA:** Acoma wishes to say this. According to what the rest have said, we think this Bill is pretty good, but it has been said by the Councilmen of Acoma to take it back until they discuss it among themselves, the way they told us.

**ZUNI:** Zuni is in favor of the Bill.

**HOPI:** As stated a while ago, there are nine villages among the Hopi people and they are not all represented here, so, while I advocated its passage personally, I cannot speak for the whole tribe, but I can safely say for our pueblo of Oraibi, that we are in favor of it. However, we will take this matter up out there because we can not form any intelligent conclusion until it is taken up.

**ULYSSES PAISANO (Laguna):** Please do not lose this great opportunity. That's all.

**PABLO ABEITA:** There are 20 pueblos represented here. Out of the 20 there are 9 who are voting "yes" and the rest, as I understand it, will take the matter up with their council and the people and will advise Mr. Collier later.

**SOTERO ORTIZ (Chairman):** As I have said before, when I ask you to vote on this Bill, to adopt this Bill, some of the pueblos say they have come with full authority of their pueblo to act on what was going on in this meeting. Many times before the delegates from the different pueblos have been authorized that in the next meeting they would come with authority. The pueblos must select their best men as delegates with full authority so that they can act and have the full power to say what they have to say. Because in this meeting that we have we are supposed to work for the welfare of our pueblos, for our people, for ourselves and for our children. For that reason you have been asked several times to send your best men with full authority. Now, after you go back home, please tell your council men that at another meeting that may be necessary to be called, please come with full authority from your own pueblo so that we may know what we are doing. You have the free privilege to say what is good for you and for your people and what is not good for you and for your people.

54

THIS BOOKLET
IS THE WORK OF INDIAN
STUDENT-APPRENTICES OF
THE HASKELL PRINT SHOP,
HASKELL INSTITUTE, LAW-
RENCE, KANSAS

# Minutes of the Plains Congress

Friday, March 2, 1934

## MORNING SESSION

Opening of meeting by James H. McGregor, Superintendent of
Pine Ridge Agency, South Dakota.

Friends, we will begin this meeting and as is the usual custom
of our Indian people, it will be opened by prayer. Reverend Simon
J. Kirk will open the meeting with prayer. Mr. Kirk.

Invocation by Reverend Simon J. Kirk.

Mr. JAMES H. MCGREGOR: Friends, if you will come to order, the greatest Council (Indian) held in recent years will be opened. Commissioner John Collier will now take charge.

Mr. JOHN COLLIER: Friends, to begin with I am going to speak only of procedure. We have four days for this meeting. That will mean morning, afternoon and evening, if necessary. We have a great deal of ground to cover. I shall in a moment introduce to you other of the men from Washington who will also take part in the discussions. In fact, before I do anything else, so that you may know the other Indian Bureau staff people who have come for this meeting, I will introduce them now and I will ask them to stand up so that you will know all the Indian Bureau officials.

Mr. Walter Woehlke, Field Representative of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Mr. Ward Shepard, Specialist in land policies for the Indian Office.

Mr. Siegel, Assistant Solicitor of the Interior Department.

Mr. Cohen, Assistant Solicitor of the Interior Department.

Mr. Stewart, Chief of the Land Division of the Indian Office.

A complete record will be made of everything said or done in these four days and we hope that the record of each day will be finished, and typed by the next day. In the matter of voting, or taking action on questions, the important matter is for the delegation to act; not for everybody to vote, but Congress wants to know what Rosebud wants, what Fort Peck wants, and so on. I do not say that the meeting may not vote as a whole. But very definitely, this meeting is intended to determine the opinions of each of the delegations, each of the tribes of the reservations. That is what Congress wants and I may add that there will probably not be any voting in the first two days. It is necessary for

1

2

us to transact business with promptness because we have so much
ground to cover, and inasmuch as the matter of casting votes is
a matter of separate delegations voting, and a record being made
of what each one thinks, it is evident that the question of Parlia-
mentary control is not very important.

Now, I first want to ask you, and I will get this by the show of
hands, whether you would like to have an Indian Chairman or
have one of the Government men preside as Chairman. My own
view is that it would be much better if you have an Indian Chair-
man, if you can choose him without taking too much time. On
this we might get a show of hands. Those who favor the election
of one of your own delegates, an Indian, to be chairman, hold up
your hands. (Interpreted by Rosebud interpreter to Indians.)

ROSEBUD INTERPRETER: Mr. Collier, if you will please, I would like to speak in Indian first and then interpret it in English myself. (Interprets.)

This is Mr. Collier's meeting and this is not strictly our meeting. We are here to listen, and therefore I think it is the proper thing to have a Superintendent or some Government official preside over this meeting. We are here as listeners. Each man who is here in a delegation from different reservations are here with the sole purpose of listening and we are not here to pass on questions. We are here to listen and whatever we learn we will take back with us to our own people. Therefore, I think it proper that we should have a Government official to preside over this meeting.

REPRESENTATIVE from FORT BERTHOLD: Mr. Collier I wish to announce that speech to my delegation in Indian. (Interprets.)

Mr. COLLIER: May I say that before the meeting comes to an end there will be questions put to you, to each of the delegations, because we want to know your sentiments. A delegation that does not want to answer the questions is free not to answer. A delegation that wants to answer the questions will answer them. Furthermore, it is possible that this meeting will be the beginning of meetings that will be held hereafter. This may be the first Congress to be followed by other Congresses, in a regular way. It is for these reasons that it seemed well if there was an Indian Chairman, although I do not want to insist on that. (Interpret that for me, please.)

(Rosebud Interprets the above speech to Indians.)

(Fort Berthold interprets Commissioner's speech to his delegation.)

Mr. JOHN COLLIER: Has the interpretation been understood by everybody? If not, then it should be interpreted until everybody understands. (Various O. K.'s heard throughout the hall.) Shoshone? O. K. Blackfeet? O. K.

3

ROSEBUD INTERPRETER: Mr. Collier, please, it was my fault. I left out the most important part of that interpretation, and this is what Mr. Collier said. (Interprets.)

Mr. COLLIER: All who desire that there be an Indian Chairman elected by you hold up your right hands. Is that understood? All who desire that there be an Indian Bureau official for Chairman hold up their right hands. (Interpreted.) There will have to be a count. It is so close. Keep your hands, up all who want an Indian Bureau Chairman. (Count taken—101.) Now, all who desire that there be an Indian Chairman elected by the meeting hold up their hands. (Count taken—67.) 101 for an Indian Bureau Chairman, 67 for an Indian Chairman.

I shall ask Mr. Walter Woehlke at present to serve as Chairman of the meeting.

Mr. WALTER WOEHLKE: My friends, as Mr. Collier pointed out to you, a great deal of business has to be transacted within a short time, yet that short time is twice the time that the Commissioner and his staff can give to any other of the Congresses that follow this one, but the Commissioner will have to leave here on the 5th of March because he has engagements with other Indian Congresses that can not be changed. Therefore, it is exceedingly important that this Congress transact business with as much speed as possible. I would therefore urge that the various delegations make their arrangements for interpreting the remarks and addresses here all at the same time. There are possibly seven or eight different languages represented here and if they interpret it one after the other we would be here by next fall. Therefore it is important that each group select its official interpreter and arrange itself, or arrange the non-English speaking members of the delegation around their interpreter so that the interpreters can go on at the same time all over the room. Will you kindly, these delegations, make that arrangement right now so that we may proceed at once? In each delegation, all those who do not speak English should get near the interpreter.

INTERPRETER from STANDING ROCK: Mr. Chairman.

Mr. WOEHLKE: The gentleman from Pine Ridge.

INTERPRETER: Standing Rock. The major portion of the delegates are Sioux and I believe we would save time by utilizing the services of one interpreter for the entire Sioux group. (Delegates arrange themselves near interpreters.)

Mr. WOEHLKE: I believe the arrangements around the interpreters have all been completed. I would now like to ask you to listen carefully and attentively to the remarks which the Commissioner is about to make. He will explain to you the purpose and the scope and the reasons for the new policy and the new

4

legislation designed to carry out that policy. Mr. Collier will not address you. (Applause.)

Mr. JOHN COLLIER: It will be necessary for me and for others on the platform to do a good deal of talking, but please understand that it is just as important for you to talk as for us to talk. It is important that your views be expressed and put into the record and that any question in your mind be clearly asked and answered by us if we can answer it. The record which is being made will be immediately sent back to Washington where it will be read by the members of the House and Senate Committees on Indian Affairs by high officials of the Government. Before I begin, let me convey to you the greetings of the Secretary of the Interior, Mr. Ickes.

ROSEBUD INTERPRETER: I do not know whether I can remember all of that or not, but I will do the best I can, Mr. Collier. (Interprets.)

Mr. JOHN COLLIER: Also the greetings of Senator Wheeler, Chairman of the Indian Committee of the Senate, and Congressman Howard, Chairman of the Indian Committee of the House. A written message to you by Congressman Howard will be received during the next day and will be read to you.

Now, my friends, I will first beg you to put out of your minds any fixed ideas that you may have brought here, based on previous reports about our policies and about the proposed legislation and that you will have open minds. The questions are of great importance to each Indian. A great deal is at stake for each and all Indians and there should be no hurried, careless thinking or actions. I ask you to believe that our coming to you is because we want and expect you, yourselves, to reach the final decision about these matters. That is why we come to you.

Mr. COLLIER: (Continuing; Sam LaPointe, Rosebud, interpreting.)

(Mr. LAPOINTE: I want to say to any of you English-speaking people that I am open for correction at any time.)

We have not come to you because your endorsement is needed for this or that. That is not why we have come. If we were only concerned with passing a piece of legislation, we would not have to come to you. Legislation put forward by the Interior Department which is also endorsed by the President and which appeals to the common sense of Congress could be put through quickly and quietly if we wanted to do it that way. But, it is the policy and the purpose of the present Indian administration not to do things, even if they are the right things, merely because we think that they are right. We intend to act in partnership with the

5

Indians and we are not going to act unless the Indians are willing to go with us. It also is true that within the last four or five years the members of the House Committee on Indian Affairs and of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs have taken the view that they are representatives of the Indians in Indian matters and that they want to know the views and wishes of the Indians. Hence, it is in behalf of these Committees and their Members, as well as the Administration, that we have now come to meet with you.

Now, it is my belief—I may prove to be mistaken—but it is my belief that the Indians of the United States are going to be practically one hundred per cent in agreement before we are done. I am not speaking of the more than one hundred particular details of this bill when I say that you are going to be, I think, one hundred per cent in agreement. I do believe there is going to be general agreement on this bill, but when I say I believe there is going to be a complete agreement I am not necessarily referring to this bill. I am convinced that there are some things which all the Indians need and that they know those things in order to prosper, in order that their children and their grandchildren may prosper, and in order that they may be free men.

Before the meeting is over, any and all of the details in this bill will come up for discussion, but we would make a mistake if we began by attempting a detailed analysis of this bill, because the bill will, in any event, be amended by Congress and amended in a great many different ways.

Mr. COLLIER: (Continuing; Robert High Eagle, Rosebud, Interpreting.) Therefore, with your permission, I shall not begin talking about this bill at all, but will lay it aside and forget it for the time being. And, with your permission, I shall first talk about the fundamental conditions of your life as I understand it. And what are these fundamental conditions which I shall suggest are wrong conditions and ought to be put right? What are they? They are, first, that the Indians of the United States, including your tribes, have for two lifetimes been steadily losing their property, becoming poorer and poorer on the whole. That is on the side of your property. If you take the United States as a whole, the wealth of the people has been increasing year by year steadily until the depression of three years ago. And, during those same years the wealth of the Indians, instead of increasing, has been melting away. I shall give you the exact facts after a few minutes. They are terrifying facts.

Now, the second big condition is this: That the Indians of the United States are living under a condition which puts them at the mercy of the Indian Bureau.

6

The guardianship of the Federal Government over Indian life which was intended to be a means of making the Indians both prosperous and free, has been having the opposite affect and has been making them poor while they were deprived of their freedom. Therefore, many people and some Indians have risen up and said that the only hope for the Indian is put an end of the guardianship of the Government so that they may stand a chance in living. Some people have said the guardianship of the Government is injuring the Indian, is robbing the Indian, is keeping them in a condition of slavery. Therefore, the responsibility must be brought to an end. You have all heard that line of talk, and I do not hesitate to say I am speaking honestly my own feelings, that if the guardianship of the United States has to continue doing the things it has been doing; if it has to go on the old way, I think it had better be stopped, thrown aside, and the Indian better do without it. But, that is not the answer. The cure for the evils done by the Government is not to abolish but to reform it and make it do good things instead of evil things, and that is true of the guardianship over Indians.

I believe that the Indians would be in agreement with us in saying that the answer to the evils of the past and the present is not to abolish the guardianship and responsibility of the Federal Government but to change it so that it will build up the property of the Indians instead of taking it away. Build up the life, the health and the liberty of the Indians instead of taking them away. The United States in across centuries of time has interfered with Indian life too profoundly, has stamped its stamp on Indian life too deeply for the United States now to withdraw and disclaim its responsibility. The obligation of the United States to the Indian is not discharged. The guardianship should not come to an end. It is still possible for the United States to do the right thing, instead of the wrong thing, and I think it is fair to say, true to say, that the present Secretary of the Interior, Secretary Ickes, and the present Commissioner, myself, hold the positions that we do hold because we are expected to bring about changes and reforms in the Federal guardianship until the change becomes good instead of bad. Both of us have fought for many years for those changes. We were put in office in order to carry them out. (Applause.) But I again go back through these years gone by, almost 15 years, Secretary Ickes, Mr. Ickes as he was, and duty of the Indians themselves to determine what their own life shall be. It is for the Indians themselves to determine what laws Congress shall pass for them. Therefore, we are going ahead and

7

are carrying the case to you before we attempt to procure Legislation. (Applause.)

I now wish to make one more general remark before going to the discussion of things in greater detail. One more general remark. There is a country north of us—Canada. There is a country south of us—Mexico, and there are Indians in Canada and there are Indians in Mexico, and Canada and Mexico both maintain Federal guardianship over their Indians. In Canada and Mexico the Indian wealth is steadily increasing in both those countries. (Interpreted to Indian delegations by Rosebud, Standing Rock, Fort Berthold and Crow Agency.)

Mr. COLLIER: In both those countries individual Indians are receiving every encouragement and liberty for a personal ambition and enterprise while at the same time the property of tribes and individuals is guarded against theft or foolish waste. In both of these countries the Indians and their guardian Government have a happy relationship and there are no charges of bad faith and broken contracts and treaties that are scraps of paper, and in Mexico particularly, the Indians, under the guardianship of Mexico, fill nearly all of the positions in their own Indian Service and receive such educational opportunities that they are at the top of all the professions and technical pursuits and are largely in control of the Government itself. Never in Canada, never in Mexico, do you find Indians rising up in despair to say, "Just let us alone. Quit imprisoning us. Quit driving us. Leave us to our fate." You never hear that in Canada, you never hear that in Mexico. You hear it often in the United States. (Applause.)

Now it must be clear that the United States is honorable, the United States is intelligent, the United States is powerful and there is no reason why the United States, in comparison to Canada and Mexico, should go on disgracing itself in its handling of Indian matters, and it is now the intention of the President and of the Administration, and I think it is perfectly safe to say it is now the intention of Congress, that the United States shall not go on disgracing itself and wronging the Indians. (Applause.)

The United States is not making a mess of its Indian guardianship because its employees are wicked or stupid. That is not the reason. They are not wicked and they are not stupid. But because the guardianship maintained by the United States is carried out under a body of laws which are wicked and stupid and which make slaves even of the Government employees hired to enforce the laws. (Applause.) There was a time when it was the policy of the United States Government to rob the Indians. There was a time when it was the policy of the United States Government to crush Indian life and even to crush the family life of Indians

8

and during that time laws were passed and those laws are still the laws, though it is no longer the policy of the Government to rob you or to crush you, but they are the laws and by them we must work and you must live.

(Rosebud interpreter asks to have last thought repeated.)

Mr. COLLIER: I was saying that it is not the policy of the Government to rob the Indian or to crush the Indian, but those old laws are still the laws.

Therefore, the matter of deciding how to change the laws; what new laws to get, is the fundamental matter before the Indians and the country in Indian matters.

Now try to give me close attention while I talk first about your property.

If we go back to the year 1887, 1887 in our thought, I will tell you about the property the Indians had then. The Indians were the owners, in that year, of 138,000,000 acres of land.

(A gentleman speaks to Rosebud interpreter.) Tell them that means all the Indians, not just the Sioux. (Interprets.)

Mr. COLLIER: I am speaking now about all the Indians. This land included the best land in the United States. It included the richest farming land, the best grazing land. It included much of the land best suited to irrigation farming and it included a great wealth of oil and lead and zinc and other minerals below the surface. In that year, 1887, Congress, over the protest of the Indians, enacted what is called the General Allotment Act. That Act is known as the back bone of the Indian law—the great basic law of Indian Affairs.

Mr. COLLIER: (Continuing; Mr. LaPointe interpreting.)

We come from 1887 to the present day. The amount of land now owned by the Indians is forty-seven million acres, which means that the amount of land which has been lost by the Indians since 1887 is ninety-one million acres. The best land was included in the land that was lost. If you take the forty-seven million acres that the Indians still own, twenty million acres of that land is desert or practically desert land. The facts are very much worse, as I shall now show you. The allotment law was not applied in the southwest Indian country, except in a few cases. The great Navaho tribe was spared from the allotment law. The Pueblo was spared from the allotment law both in New Mexico and Arizona. The Papago was spared and three of the four Apache tribes were spared from the allotment act. These tribes which were spared from the allotment have nearly doubled their holdings since 1887. Instead of losing their land they have nearly twice as much since 1887. Every one of the tribes which was spared from the allotment act has more land now than in 1887. In other

9

words, the losses of land have fallen upon those tribes that were subjected to the allotment act, so that the allotted tribes have lost in land area more than two-thirds of their total holdings since 1887.

(Mr. Red Tomahawk, Rosebud, interpreting.)

If you take the value of the land loss of the allotted tribes, it would be more than eighty per cent, or eight-tenths, or four-fifths of the total value. As you know, the allotment operation was not brought to bear everywhere at the same time. It came sooner some places and later in other places, so that the effects of the allotment system are not equal in intensity everywhere. They are variable. If you take Oklahoma as an example, the amount of land owned by the Oklahoma tribes was twenty-three million acres before allotment—and all of that except three million acres has passed away. You can take individual tribes like the Oneida of Wisconsin and find that pratically one hundred per cent of the land has passed from the Indians to whites and the Oneida are landless. More than one hundred thousand Indians in the allotment areas have lost all their land down to the last square foot and are entirely landless. We will later look at the allotment system in a closer way in order to understand why it has done what it has done. We will look at it closely in order to see what can be done to so change it so as to stop the loss of land. We will examine it in order to answer a very necessary question which is in your minds, so I am going to ask the question right now. The question is—how can this allotment system be changed so as, first, to stop the futile loss of land by Indians; second, increase the amount of land owned by Indians; and, third, protect the rights and equities of those Indians who have not yet lost their land?

Let me state again what we think it is necessary to do under some law to be enacted: First, that the further sale or loss of Indian lands to whites must be stopped; second, that new land —more land—must be procured in large amounts in order to supply those Indians who have lost all of their land and in order to supplement the inadequate land of those who still have some land; third, we may say what we like about the bad results of allotment, we say plenty, but allotment has created individual valid property rights in individuals. That fact is there and has to be dealt with.

(Interpreter asks Mr. Collier to repeat first part of his speech.)

Mr. COLLIER: There must be no more land lost. There must be more land obtained. (Interpreter.)

Mr. COLLIER: In addition, as a result of allotment, thousands of Indians live on or are the holders of parcels of land. They

10

own that land. They were allotted it. It is their right, not only
to continue to own what they own but they have the right to
transmit what they own to their children, to their heirs. This
right is theirs, fundamentally under the Constitution of the
United States and could not be taken away from them no mat-
ter what Congress did. So that, in addition to stopping the loss
of land and getting more land, any change of laws, must protect
these individual property rights in living allottees and their heirs.
(Applause.)

Right here I might as well crash into one misunderstanding
that has come back to us from some Indian reservation. Deal
with it at once. I went down into Oklahoma about three weeks
ago, and met with a lot of Indians and among them were the
Pawnee. Well, I found out that somebody had called together—
I may say that among the Pawnee three out of every four have
lost all of their land—somebody had called a meeting to which
they had admitted only those Pawnee who had some land left.
They didn't let the landless ones in. They had told those who
were allowed to come in that this man Collier and Ickes, they
have a scheme take this land away from you and give it to the
landless ones. So very naturally, the Pawnee came there "red
hot." Of course, I was able to explain to them, as it will be-
come clear to you. First, that anyone with a crazy plan like that
could not put it into effect because the courts would not allow
them to. If Congress had a crazy idea like that and passed a
law like that it would be promptly thrown out by the courts.
If an Indian Commissioner went to Congress with an idea like
that he would just be laughed out of the building. I do not want
too dwell to long on this point. Before you go away you will
rightly insist on understanding clearly how the individual pro-
perty rights are to be held in safety, perpetuated, protected. If
there be among you Indians who are landless, it is just as im-
portant for them to be in the clear about this as for you who
still have land, because if Legislation is passed which over-rides
property rights, which is in violation of the Constitution, the
Courts will prevent the Legislation from being put into effect.
In other words, will be made null and void. In other words,
what we want is Legislation so that the Courts will pass it.

(Interpreters changed; Robert High Eagle from Sanding Rock,
interprets.)

Mr. COLLIER: At this point may I say that the pending bill
will have to pass through the Indian Committee and in addition,
the Judiciary Committee of Congress and if any Indian is worried,
he can rely upon those constitutional lawyers on the judiciary
Committee to see that the due process clause is not violated by

11

any language of the Bill. I might say right here, there is nothing
particularly mysterious or even experimental here. Before I re-
ferred to Canada and I referred to Mexico. They both have worked
this out to the complete satisfaction of all the Indians. It can be
done here. Again, let me partly turn aside now from the main
argument in order to answer another misunderstanding that has
come back from some reservation. We take the position that it
is very necessary for Indians to be permitted to organize, to or-
ganize for many different purposes. It is necessary for Indians to
be allowed to organize to take care of their own local affairs, and
again to organize to do business in a modern business world in
competition with the modern white world. In the world at large,
the white world, the unorganized people are powerless. They are
victims. Only organized groups have power in the white world.

There are many kinds of organization in the modern world.
For example, there are corporations, there are cattle men's as-
sociations and stock associations. There are co-operative societies
to run, for example, creameries, to buy in quantities so as to cut
out middlemen's profits; all kinds of co-operative economic or-
ganizations for mutual benefit. There are town governments which
manage the local affairs of twons.

The ward Indian is shut out from all of these advantages of
organization. He likewise, as you all know to your sorrow, is de-
nied access to credit, financial credit.

Now I am going to say what is almost the heart of our plan we
are going to lay before you.

We are proposing that Indians shall be allowed and helped to
organize for mutual benefit, for local self-government and for
doing business in the modern, organized way. We are proposing
that there shall be set up a new financial credit system through
which the Government will extend financial credit to these or-
ganized groups of Indians. We are proposing that when the Indi-
ans do organize and they will only organize if they want to when
and if they do organize, then their organizations will be instru-
mentalities of the Federal Government. Let this be very clear:
When the Indians organize it will be first under Federal laws
enacted by Congress to enable them to organize, under Federal
laws. Second, the organized bodies of Indians will become Agen-
cies of the Federal Government, instrumentalities, or, if you like,
branches of the Federal Government. The organized Indian body
then organized under Federal law, organized as an Agency of
the Federal Government, would be surrounded by the protective
guardianship of the Federal Government and clothed with the
authority of the Federal Government.

(Rosebud interpreter announces: "Mr. Clement Smith will in-
terpret.")

12

Mr. COLLIER: I repeat, no Indian group will be required to organize, but they could organize if they wanted to. When they organized, they would be what I have told you; Agencies of the Federal Government, existing under guardianship of the Federal Government and clothed with the authority of the Federal Government.

When I say guardianship of the Federal Government and authority, what do I mean? I mean, for example, that the privilege of the Indians to be exempt from taxes will be extended to these organized groups and their operations. I mean again, that in addition to extending financial credit to these groups, the Government would subsidize them—would give them various kinds of financial assistance. This organized group, as an Agency of the Government, would, in one case, be doing one kind of thing and somewhere else would be doing another kind of thing, entirely according to the desires and needs of that Indian group.

Such a chartered Indian organization could, if it desired, take over many of the things that are now being done by the Indian Bureau and the money being spent on those things would be transferred to the organized body of Indians and they would spend the money and they would hire their own employees. (Mild applause.) Now, we will get into the detail of this later, of course. Now I am only telling you enough that I can deal with objections that have come back from some places.

For example, from one of the Pacific Northwest reservations comes in a telegram, "We don't want socialism or communism." (Applause and laughter.) From another Reservation comes in this solemn message, "We don't want anything to do with this new deal because in 1867 the Government promised rations to our people until the water ceased to flow." (Laughter.) Another phase was brought to me by an old friend, a very good friend of mine, who I have known for 30 years. He came to me in New York to see me. He said, "Mr. Collier, I want to ask you a real question." I said, "Go to it." He said, "Are you an athiest?" because he had gotten an understanding that this plan of allowing the Indians to organize the way I have described was some scheme for doing away with Christianity; that it was some kind of thing like they do over in Russia.

It will be clear to you; if it isn't, don't go away until it becomes clear; that in the United States, if you are going to do business and make money and protect yourself, you have got to do it in an organized way. Otherwise you are just out of luck. You don't make any money, you are not protected, and the other fellow eats you alive. (Applause.) You can't govern yourselves, you can't do business, you can't protect yourself, unless you organize. That

13

is true regarding everybody in the United States.

If you look around through the United States you will find some leaders of organizations who are Catholics and some who are Protestants and some who are Mormons, and some who are Republicans and some who are Democrats, but every man who has got any power is organized.

Mr. COLLIER: (Continuing; Rosebud, interpreter.)

Now, away back yonder in the old days of war when the United States was over-riding its treaties with most of you tribes—in those days the Government adopted a policy of forbidding Indians to organize at all. For Indians to organize was made a seditious and illegal act. And that tradition has come down to the present in the minds of many and the laws passed in those old days are still the laws, so that it is still illegal and it can still be considered actually seditious for Indians to organize. In spite of that explanation from history, it does seem strange that there should be anybody in the United States who would want to forbid the Indians from organizing when everybody else is organized. Many Indians have come to believe that the only way they could get power to organize, power to make contracts, power to borrow money, power to do business in the modern world, was for them to pass out of the guardianship of the Government. Indians have been taught that they had to choose between remaining like so many domestic animals being taken care of by the Indian Bureau or else be thrown to the wolves. That is the choice they thought they had to make—so a misunderstanding is natural. It will pass away when everybody grasps the idea which is that the Indians who organize under this plan which we are talking about will organize under federal law, under federal guardianship. This organization will be an agency of the federal government, subsidized by the Federal Government, as well as protected by it. In other words, within the framework of guardianship, it is possible to build up for the Indians freedom as individual men, freedom as human beings, with the power that goes with organization, and there will be more Federal protection at the end than there is now.

(Rosebud interpreter.)

In my remaining words I will not say any more about the details of your problem, because we will come to all that. I want rather to remind you of what is going on in the country as a whole at present under the leadership of President Roosevelt. A great body of fundamental changes are taking place swiftly at Washington and from Washington out all over the country. And, in a broad way it can be said that those changes, those reforms, are dealing with two subjects. We are dealing with what Presi-

14

dent Roosevelt in his campaign speeches called the "forgotten man." That means the rank and file of the plain people, the common people who were staggering under the burden of the rich, carrying a privileged class who ruled the country and ruled the forgotten man. But the big business which rode on the back of the forgotten man was itself blind and didn't know where it was trying to drive the common man, and, therefore, we have the great crash of 1929. And, part of the gigantic thing being done by the President is to get the blind giant off the back of the common man and to work out an economic life through which the common man is his own master and is free.

And, the other part of that thing which is going on in Washington has to do with what you may call the "forgotten land." All over the United States the great stands of timber, the forests, have been wasted by careless lumbering—cut green and burnt up —to the injury of mankind for thousands of years to come. That is being done. All over the country the soil has been neglected, over-grazed, washed away into the rivers—millions of square miles of our grazing and farming land damaged or ruined by erosion, going on every year. At this time great expenditures are being commenced, new laws are being enacted to save our forests, to restore our land, to bring the land and its productions back under the control of the people and their Government. This, what we will call a new deal for Indians, is part of all the rest. The big push that is carrying the country into a new life is the same big push that must carry the Indians into a new life.

Mr. COLLIER: The time will come when the changes will be finished as far as law and Washington are concerned and the country will settle down into a new mold. Perhaps in two or three years. The chance of the Indians is now and not hereafter. It is the chance of all times for you to get whatever you are entitled to. Now and not at some future time. Now is the time of destiny for the Indians. If they will use their best brains in dead earnest on all their problems now, determine what they need, ask for it clearly; present intelligent programs, they can get the utter most far with what they need, but that may not be true two or three years from now. (Applause.) You will understand now why we are going out to the Indians to discuss these questions of your own life.

It is time for dinner.

(Interpreted by Emil Afraid of Hawk, Pine Ridge, Sioux Indian.)

Mr. WALTER WOEHLKE: Chairman: This Congress will convene in this hall at 1:30. At that time photographers will be present to take pictures of this history-making group. For the purpose of that picture we would like to have the heads of the

15

delegations and the chiefs from the various delegations seated along the center aisles and in front where the Commissioner will also be so that they can be plainly seen. We would also like to have the heads of the delegations and the chiefs to get immediately outside to have their pictures taken with the Commissioner—before dinner. The heads of the delegations are requested to obtain copies of the memorandums which explains the Bill at the boys' dormitory. They can obtain enough copies for each member of the delegation there.

The meeting is adjourned.

## AFTERNOON SESSION

Afternoon session, Plains Congress, convened at 1:30 p. m., March 2, 1934. Photographs were taken of the Congress assembled.

Mr. WOEHLKE, Chairman: Will the delegates arrange themselves in the same order as this morning so as to make interpreting easy. Owing to the necessity of having our picture taken we are slightly behind our schedule. I would like to announce that the Congress will convene tomorrow morning at 9:30. There will be another meeting in the afternoon at 1:30 and there will probably be an evening meeting at 7:30. We are also considering the question of holding the Sunday meeting or meetings in the auditorium of Rapid City because it affords far more space than we have here and it would allow many more of the delegates and visitors to hear and listen and talk in the proceedings. The question now is, whether the Congress would like to have a Sunday morning meeting in the Civic Auditorium of Rapid City, and I would like an expression of opinion from this Congress. Supposing that all those who are in favor of holding a Sunday morning meeting in the Civic Auditorium, raise their right hands.

INTERPRETOR from ROSEBUD: I have interpreted what you said and I made this statement. This morning we heard that Mr. Collier had been accused of being an atheist. Now we don't want it to appear that Mr. Collier is an atheist because we are all atheists. There are many of our people that are very religious people. We belong to several different religious denominations. That is sort of a personal right. There are perhaps many of us who want to attend religious services on Sunday morning. There would be no objection to holding a meeting in the afternoon. So I make that motion against your statement. (Applause.)

16

Mr. WOEHLKE: It apparently is the sense of the meeting that we should not have a session Sunday morning in the Civic Auditorium. Is that the sense of the meeting? Let us put it this way. All those who are against holding a meeting on Sunday morning in the Civic Auditorium raise their right hand. (Quite a considerable number raise their hands.) Then we shall endeavor to arrange for a meeting Sunday afternoon in the Civic Auditorium, and as we can not get it at night, probably a Sunday evening meeting here again.

Now, with your kind indulgence, Commissioner Collier will con-
clude his general statement to you. (Applause.)

Mr. JOHN COLLIER: Friends, I do not like to do so much of the talking. When we come to discussion of details I shall yield the floor to various other people, but I suppose that it will save time if I go on myself for a little longer.

I shall speak to you for a while about the most difficult part of
your situation and of our problem; your property.

Without repeating anything I gave you this morning about the
way your land has melted away under the allotment system, not
repeating that, I will go on and discuss the allotment system,
a little further. As most of you know, perhaps all of you, the allot-
ment plan was made with a view to bringing the guardianship of
the Federal Government to an end.

The law clearly intended and declared that the trust period on
the allotment should come to an end after a while, and the in-
dividual who owned the land should no longer be a ward of the
Government, should be subject to the State laws, should pay
taxes. That was the end. During the time between allotment and
the end of the trust period or the declaration of competency;
during that time, the Government was to act as trustee over the
allotment.

It soon became apparent to the law makers that the allotment
law would have to be changed, because the allottee died, the
original allottee, the end of his life came and his land passed into
the heirship status. After the death of the allottee the estate was
probated and the heirs were determined. It then became neces-
sary that the land either be sold and the proceeds divided among
the heirs, or that it be rented and the rental proceeds divided
among the heirs. In comparatively rare cases, the allottees were
children, who died and the heirs were their parents, and then
there was no need of splitting up the equities, because one heir
received the whole allotment.

But, as you know, the usual thing was that there would be a
number of heirs; sometimes a very large number of heirs, and it
frequently came about that one heir had an interest in a large

17

number of estates. Now, if the Government did not sell these
heirship lands, then the Government had to act as trustee over
them; had to act as the real estate agent to sell them or lease
them and handle the proceeds. An example of what happened
has just been handed me by Superintendent Baker of the Sis-
seton Agency.

Here is one estate; that of Joseph Renville, at the Sisseton,
and it is so split up that there are about sixty heirs in this case,
and there are hardly two of the heirs who have an identical or
equal interest.

Mr. COLLIER: (Robert High Eagle, Rosebud, interpreting.)

You can arrive at that by dividing 8,976,600 into 114,307,200.
You can divide 5,200 into 114,307,200. The lowest equities are the
ratio between 5,200 and 114,000,000. (Mr. Collier illustrating at
blackboard.) In other words, one part in about four hundred. Now,
that same heir having the value of a postage stamp in one allot-
ment may have the value of ten postage stamps in another allot-
ment and a dollar in some other allotment.

Now, understand this, every year this gets more complicated.
The shares get smaller, the number of heirs becomes greater, and
the number of individuals having shares in more than one allot-
ment becomes more numerous. Now, in addition, of course, we
can supply the picture that the allotments in question are scat-
tered among a lot of white-owned land-checker-boarded with
white-owned land. And that checker-boarding grows greater all
the time as lands are sold. The lands themselves, because of the
way they are checker-boarded, can not be used or rented to the
best advantage. There are great disadvantages in the matter of
renting the land or using it.

We had hoped to have some giant maps here to show all of this.
We have a number of interesting maps which we would like to
have you look at before we are done. This (indicating map) is,
as it happens, the Cheyenne River.

Mr. STEWART: We have made maps of all the reservations in
this part of the country and we have them here. We will pass
them around sometime during the Congress to all of you. We have
some picture graphs coming by air mail along this line. We want
to explain them jointly with these maps. However, they have not
yet arrived. The color scheme, as I mentioned before, is uniform;
that is, one color—as blue—on one map indicates the same status
on all the maps. Blue represents living allotted land; that is, where
the allottee is still living. On this map, this shade of green—it
is green supposedly—looks like blue so don't let it mislead you.
The blue is these small pieces scattered around. Green represents
tribal land unallotted. Yellow represents deceased allotments where

18

the allotment or land is still held in trust by the Government. Red represents the alienated land or white-owned land. The uncolored section here represents surplus land yet open and undisposed of. I want to qualify that remark, however. A good deal of it is undisposed of, but we have no way of putting a color here to show disposed of areas because our office does not handle that. The General Land Office handles that. This situation is true on all the reservations in this part of the country.

Mr. COLLIER: While Mr. Stewart was talking I corrected my arithmetic and I find that in the case I was giving you, the heir in question has 1.1290 in the allotment. And, if the allotment rents for $50 a year, that heir will get a little less than two and one-half cents a year. Now let us get it clear. Under the allotment law, as it stands, the situation has to get worse every year as the original allottees die. This complicates this crazy quilt as heirships holdings increase year by year. Nothing can stop it because people insist on dying. We can not stop them. Now, I am very anxious to get this situation, as it appears, to the people who control our annual budget and so on. It is very vital.

The Indian Bureau, under the law, is compelled to be trustee and real estate agent for all of these parcels of land on behalf of all of these heirs.

The number of separate equities, in bookkeeping accounts no one has ever counted, but it is probably inexcess of two millions. Probably is nearly ten millions. Not merely is there the bookkeeping job, but all of the probating of heirship and then the job of renting and collecting and distributing the collected money. It does not stop the land from passing out of Indian ownership. It cannot get a good rental or a good sales price because the land is broken up by heirship. The Bureau must go on going through the motion of being the real estate agent for all these millions of acres of land. The result is, that the cost of determining these heirship ship lands not only exceeds the rental yields of these lands, but it often exceeds the capital value of these lands year by year. We have told Congress the truth as we know it, as all of these operations I now describe to you, which do not save the land, which do no good to the Indians, are costing us somewhere around two million dollars a year of money thrown away, wasted. This is another way of saying that it becomes a matter of administrative necessity to sell these heirship lands, no matter how much we regret it.

The person who stands pat on the allotment system has this answer. The answer is, "It was the intent of the allotment act for those lands to be sold and used, Mr. Collier, can save the Government its wasted money by selling the land and then you will not

have to look after the land any more." They would say, "If it is the clear intent for the allotment act for the land to be sold, why don't you go ahead and do your duty, sell the land." They further say that it is the clear intent of the allotment act to declare the Indians competent. The allotment act has lasted 25 years. Now it is 35 years and it has been dragging on year after year so as to keep jobs in the Indian Bureau. They point out that the Secretary of the Interior today has the discretion to terminate the Trust Period. They also point out what the few Indians of the allotted areas need to know, is this, that they point out that the poorest Indians are the ones living in the allotted areas. Where is the highest death rate? It is among the Indians living in the allotted areas. They point out that the Indians in the unallotted areas are costing the Government less money than the Indians living in the allotted areas. It is true, and yet they point out that the Indians in the unallotted areas are getting more service than the Indians in the allotted areas; more human service in the way of health, education and agriculture. The reason being that the Government's money in the allotted areas is so largely used up on these barren trusteeships or unallitted lands. What I am leading up to is something that I will say to you only after a good deal of thought, whether it is wise or not, but it is the truth and therefore I am going to say it. You remember what Secretary Lane and Commissioner Cato Sells did in 1917. They used the discretion, which the Secretary of the Interior has, and they fee patented thousands of Indians in a hurry, forcibly. Those lands immediately became taxable and they were lost in a very few years to the Indians. Now the present administration, while it lasts, is not going to do anything of that kind. As you know we have even gone further and have prohibited the sale of allotted land which is temporarily a stop measure, but we must face the acknowledged fact that the Government's costs are mounting in connection considerably without doing any good; that the heirship lands are increasing year by year and that an administration of the future, it would be of the near future, may submit to the pressure and simply force fee patents on all of you. They can do it and I am going to tell you they will.

This rising cost of administration for the allotted and particularly the heirship lands, which admittedly is doing no good, will stare the administration in the face and will stare the director of the budget in the face more and more every year. The Government itself, as all of you know, is getting horribly in debt as a result of the depression. Before the depression is over, the mere interest charge of the Government's bonded indebtedness probably will exceed a thousand million dollars a year.

19

20

INTERPRETER from ROSEBUD: How can I say a thousand
million?

Mr. COLLIER: A billion.

ROSEBUD INTERPRETER: You know, our arithmetic among
the Sioux is very limited.

Mr. COLLIER: That means that the Government is going to be compelled to economize wherever it can; at every point where money can be saved, from the regular administrative costs, the Government is going to be looking for place in saving money. That has already commenced. The Indian Bureau in the year ahead will not have as much money by $12,000,000 as it had year before last. Right now, for every dollar we get for health, for schools, etc., we have to fight like wildcats. Only last month, in order to get a little more money for our hospitals we had to go to the President himself and it took days of debate before we got an additional $75,000 for hospitals that did not have doctors and nurses.

Now, I must say that you do not need to fear what Secretary Ickes is going to do; what I am going to do. We have our pledge, but we won't be there for ever; not by any means. We might not be there three years from now. And now that Congress knows and now that the budget knows that this administration of these heirship lands is just throwing good money after bad; is a waste of millions of dollars a year of money needed for something else, watch out what the next Secretary of the Interior does. Watch out what the next director of the Budget does, and remember that the States and Counties may be relied on to present all of the arguments for terminating the trust period on your lands because your lands are now tax exempt. If the trust periods were terminated your land would pay taxes. In brief, unless we can modify the land situation, then the Indians of the allotted area are in a dead end passage. There is no way through. They are clinging now to their allotments; such allotments as remain, as a last hold on a feeling of security. That hold will be taken away from them too, because as a matter of economic and administrative necessity, future administrations will carry through the thing that Franklin Lane began. If a way can be found to get out of this dead end passage in such a manner as not to disturb existing possessions, existing ownership, existing rights, in such a way as to make the trust period perpetual, and in such a way as to add land where land is needed, that clearly is the line of hope for the Indians, and that way can be found—a way which will not take away anything from any individual Indian, but which will only increase what any individual Indian has got, while giving something to the Indian who has got nothing.

21

Much of the time later in these sessions will, of course, be devoted to making this clear to you, but I have spoken as I have in the last half hour and told you what I have for a reason. The reason is this: That I am informed that some of your delegations consider that it may be better to do nothing at all rather than to take a risk of changing something; either that you haven't got authority to do anything or that you don't want to do anything at all to meet the situation. I am informed that some of you here, on the strength of things you heard before you came here; things that you read in the newspapers or that people have told you, have crystallized your thinking against any change, and I desire for you to realize what I know to be the truth; that beyond your power, beyond my power, beyond the power of the President himself, the forces are moving which are going to make the change in a way to destroy you unless it is made in a way to save and help you. The allotment system is working out to its predestined conclusion; it will work on and within a comparatively few years it will force the Government into wholesale fee patenting as the only way out of a bad situation.

Now I want to say a word about another phase of the situation still connected with land. Where the land is checker-boarded in the way that you know, on most of your Sioux Reservations; checker-boarded with white holdings; where half or more of it is in the heirship status and split among an ever-increasing number of heirs; under those conditions about all that can be done is to rent the land and to rent it at a disadvantage; to rent it, that is, for rather poor returns.

The Government is not justified and can not be expected to advance large sums of money to capitalize the Indians for the use of land when the land is in that condition. The Government program of capitalizing the Indians, extending loans to them I mean, for the effective use of their land, can not be carried out amid such areas as, for example, the Sisseton Sioux and others that I might mention. This thing so essential for modern life, particularly modern life on the land, of credit, can not be provided unless we find a way out of this heirship land misery.

We have amended this bill now pending before Congress with a new part, which establishes, to begin with, a five million dollar loan fund which the House Committee have stated they will raise to ten million, for capitalizing the Indians in the use of their land. We can get that money. We can establish that new credit system, but it can not be made effective until the land situation is readjusted.

Once more, we propose, that the Government is, first: Buying a large amount of land for landless allotted Indians, and to add

22

to the insufficient land of allotted Indians who haven't got enough
land. That is one of the basic proposals now before Congress.

Mr. COLLIER: (Continuing; Robert High Eagle, interpreting.)

To begin with we are asking for two million dollars to be avail-
able each year for land purchase, that being only a beginning.
In addition to that the Government is starting in to buy up
millions of acres of what they call sub-marginal land, which really
is grazing land, all over the country. We expect to be able to
obtain large gifts of land to Indians and Indian tribes out of that
sub-marginal land in order to withdraw it from farming. But
here again it can be taken for granted by all of you that the
Government will not buy land to get it into the condition of the
allotted lands at present. It will not buy land to spend millions
of dollars in this allotment business and then see it pass back to
white ownership. It will not do it—only, if the Indians can get
an intelligent, successful business-like land-holding system. Only
then may they expect to have more land bought for them or ad-
ditional lands given to them. Now we will make it clear to every-
one while we are here that this improved land-holding system is
necessary to get credit, necessary to acquire new land, necessary
to avert fee patents. We will make it clear that this new system
can be arrived at with almost no visible change from what you
have, with no disturbance of any vested right of any Indian to
anything

I keep coming back to this because of things like this telegram
which I hold in my hands from somebody up at Fort Peck who
protests that nothing must be done to destroy the treaty rights
of the Indians, so nothing must be passed on, he says.

I surely do not blame any Indian or group of Indians for being
like we say the man from Missouri is—he has to be shown. I
don't blame you. There is not one of you tribes, I believe, that
has not had the experience more than once of having high officials
tell you lies. For a hundred years the usual way for the Govern-
ment to dispose of a difficult situation was to tell some lie to the
Indians and get them to sign up for it. Somebody here might
think it is bad for the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to say a
thing like that. I think it is the duty of the Commissioner to tell
the truth and the truth is what I said and everyone in this hall
knows that it is true.

Mr. LAPOINTE, Rosebud, Interpreter: By the way they clap
their hands, I don't think they need an interpreter.

Mr. COLLIER: I, myself, have, for more than ten years before
I became Commissioner struggled with repeated cases where im-
portant legislation was laid before Indian tribes all dressed up in
false statements by high officials of the Government, and it was

23

my business to strip off the untrue and help the Indians find out
what was true.

Therefore, I will know why no Indians anywhere will be willing
to take somebody's word, Secretary Ickes' word, or anybody's word
about these matters. I believe that the facts and the proposed
changes are so clear and the proposals themselves are so simple,
that everyone of you can examine the facts, analyze the proposed
relatives and reach an intelligent conclusion about them. I do
think that this much is true; that in a case where there is an
agreement among people whom you have looked to for advice;
in a case where the President, himself, joins in the assurance;
in a case where the Committees of Congress give close study
and are agreed on, that you can have a certain amount of con-
fidence that you are being told the truth about them. But we have
called these Indian Congresses because we want you to take our
word for it only after you have made your own inquiries and
arrive at your own conclusions. (Applause.) I ought to say that,
which again you will all agree on, and that it is not only of-
ficials of the Federal Government in the times gone who have
mislead and misinformed the Indians. Not only them. There are
others who have done the same thing. There are others who have
had a motive for misleading the Indians and who have mislead
them. Not only Government Officials. There is a group today,
and speaking generally, I have no specific reference—there are
today many thousands of white people living on or near the
Indian owned lands who certainly will not want your lands pro-
tected. (Applause.) There are a great many lessees and cattle men
that want and intend that the Indians shall continue to be at
their mercy. There are parties and groups that do not want the
Indians to get their lands in shape and then have adequate tal-
ent to use their lands instead of renting them for a song. In
other words I am leaving with you now that it will be your own
fault really and truly that you will, and just as I do not want
you to follow blindly, or neither does Secretary Ickes, still less
do I want you to take your information from interested sources
whose sole purpose might be the opposite of what you want. Now,
before I conclude, and I have been a long time talking in general,
and I am going to stop after another explanation to you, I want
to refer to the element of time in the situation. To the speed in
which these matters will have to happen. The Legislation, the
Bill draft, which we have put forward as our own best idea has
been before Congress since February 6th. The House Indian Com-
mittee has held four long record hearings on the bill already.
The Senate hearings have begun. Our power and your power to
secure legislation will be greater at the present session of Con-

24

gress than we can be sure it will be the last. We are pretty
sure we can put through Congress anything reasonable that the
Indians and the Administration agree on. The difficulty with Con-
gress lies principally in getting Congress to embark upon a large
program of expenditure. This five or ten million dollars as the
beginning of an Indian Credit System; this two million dollars
a year as a beginning for the Indian land purchasing and the
five million dollars to be spent for the cost of organizing the
Indian self-government, are very large amounts, but I would say
that we stand a better chance of getting these large grants at
this Congress than we would at the next Congress. That is be-
cause, and I have every reason to think, that the National debt
will continue to roll up at an awful speed. It will increase by
billions.

Again it is impossible to predict, of course, what will happen
at the next Congressional election, which is not very far away as
you know. Nobody knows what is going to happen next fall. I
find that the need of the Indian for relief is very great. Particu-
larly the need of those Indians whose land is gone and who really
are homeless on the face of the earth. Their need is desperate
and pitiful. These are all reasons in favor of moving as fast as
we can, moving safely. They are not reasons in favor of moving
any faster than we can move with reason and safety. Now this
I should also make plain to you; that in the long run it is Con-
gress and Congress alone which determines the passing of any
Bills. First, the Indian Committee are going to take this bill and
look over it very carefully and examine every line of it. Then
the Judiciary Committee of the House and Senate will take their
turn in approving the Bill and then amendent on the floor is
wide open. Any amendment in either the house or Senate. So that
the Bill is somewhat in the form of this paper (displays paper in
hands) as it will come out as a Bill from the House or Committee.
The way a group of Indians can meet that situation, because
all of the whole Indian race cannot come to Washington and
stay there, the way you can meet the situation I will now try
to make clear to you, and I can best explain by an example of
something like this which happened once before. Back in 1922,
that is twelve years ago, there took place a great struggle dealing
with the lands owned by the Pueblo Indian Tribe of New Mexico.
It was a matter that was fully as complicated as the allotment
system. At least that complicated or more so. It was a condition
of ancient grants from Spain and other grants that had been
bought by the Indians; then of white settlers who claimed a
part of the land, and any Bill in order to deal with the situation
had to be a very long and complicated Bill. The Pueblo were

met together and sent delegations from 17 tribes, and they stayed
three or four weeks in Washington and then they came home. It
was evident that the Bill would be in Congress in committee for
quite a long time and they just could not stay in Washington.
Then the Pueblo got together in a Congress of their own.

A regular congress of delegates from every tribe, and after many
days of conference, they found it possible to put in simple lan-
guage in about four printed pages, they put down what they in-
sisted on; what they would take and they would not take any-
thing less than that. They did not try to write a great, com-
plicated bill, with all the legal phraseology. They simply stated
in one paragraph after another, and another one after another
one, what they would stand for; what they demanded; their
platform. Their friends, in and out of the Government, were guided
by that statement. All of the Indians themselves had copies of
that statement which they themselves had drawn up and from
time to time as Congress worked over the Bill and amended it,
the amended drafts were sent back again and again to the tribe,
and they were able to check up on the drafts to see whether it
conformed to their own platform. Finally the act known as the
Pueblo Lands Act was passed by Congress and signed by the
President, and that act conformed to the Pueblo's Platform. It
was not changed in any way but Congress worked it over into
the legal language, and, as a matter of fact, all subsequent legis-
lation; in the past ten years; every line of the subsequent legisla-
tion has conformed to the platform which the Pueblo adopted
in 1924.

I believe that you will find it possible to reduce your own wishes
and ideas to simple statements and then to insist that those ideas;
those principles, be carried over into the legislation. I suggest
also that any expression that you give here before you go away,
shall be regarded as tentative, subject to change after you go
back home, because what is desired; what we want and Congress
wants, is the mature thought of all of the Indian people and we
do not want to take your expressions of today as being binding
upon you.

Mr. WOEHLKE, CHAIRMAN: Before we proceed with the busi-
ness of the Congress, I would like to make an announcement.
There will be a meeting of all Missionary workers, Indian and
white, ordained and unordained, at eight o'clock Saturday mom-
ing. They will gather in this auditorium and proceed to one of
the school rooms.

Major Case has requested the privilege of the floor to make
an announcement to the Sioux delegations. Major Case. (Ap-
plause.)

25

26

Major CASE: Thank you, my friends. I would like to have the delegates from the eight Sioux Reservations. I will name the Reservations: Pine Ridge, Rosebud, Crow Creek, Brule, Cheyenne River, Standing Rock, Santee and the Sioux of Fort Peck of Montana, meet here in this hall at eight o'clock tonight. The Commissioner has very kindly consented to this arrangement and Mr. Staley, the head of the school, has made it possible for us to meet here. This meeting is called so that I may discuss with you the progress made in your tribal and band claims against the United States. I came here to be of service to you and to the Indian Service, and to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, so if you have questions you want to ask me tonight, I will try to answer them.

Mr. WOEHLKE: (Mr. Lapointe, Rosebud, interpreting.)

You have heard the Commissioner's general statement of the broad purposes of the new policy and of the legislation designed to make this policy effective. We now want to proceed with the discussion of the various parts of this program. There are four broad divisions. One of these divisions deals with the proposed new land policy. Another one of these divisions deals with the credit machinery that is necessary to make the land policy effective. Another division deals with the necessity and the means of providing education, and funds for this education, for Indians, to train them for the Indian Service and for leadership. And still another division deals with a matter that is and should be very close to your hearts—the right to run your own affairs. It is a most important division of this policy and I would like to have the Commissioner assign some one on his staff to give you a detailed explanation of the machinery which is set up in this legislation to make self-government possible.

The Commissioner has asked Mr. Ward Shepard to present this matter to you and you will now hear from Mr. Shepard.

Mr. COLLIER: (Mr. Red Tomahawk, Standing Rock Indian, interpreting.)

Before introducing Mr. Shepard to you, may I say a few words about this self-government. I want to get into your minds what your present situation is about handling your own affairs. Your present situation is that you are entirely at the mercy of the Secretary of the Interior and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. By law, we, the officials, have final and absolute power. If you have business committees and tribal councils, they exist because we allow them to. Furthermore, what we do is in most cases final and not subject to review by the courts. That is the fact under existing law which we, ourselves, are powerless to change.

Again, if you look at the Indian Service which served you in the year 1900, that is thirty-four years ago, there were more

27

Indians employed in the Indian Service in proportion to the total employees than there are today. After thirty-four years of education, the proportion of Indians holding positions in the Indian Service is smaller than it was in 1900. That again, in the main, is due to existing law and outside our control, due to the Civil Service, which can be changed by law—and we are proposing to change it.

I am not going on multiplying examples of how little self-move you have. We are powerless to change it in any important respect unless we get new law.

In years gone by, your friends, and that included myself, have tried to get at this situation by legislation and we failed. We failed partly because the administration was against us, but that was not the only reason why we failed. We failed partly because we kept on trying to meet the situation through one blanket bill, when conditions were so varied that one blanket bill could not meet the situation.

We are now laying before Congress and before you a more carefully thought out plan—a plan according to which Indian tribes or groups may develop the kind of self-government that they want, that is fitted to them, and may take on more power or less power as they prefer. You will see that it is a plan which enables an Indian group to take over just as much of the authority of the Government, and I might add just as much of the money being spent on Indian Service, as that group after mature thought wants to take over. The machinery is such that the initiative rests with the Indians, themselves. The Secretary of the Interior is directed by Congress to present and grant the self-government as the tribes ask for it. Should the Secretary of the Interior refuse to obey the mandate of Congress, he must publicly in writing justify his position, and the tribes' appeal goes to Congress—all of this taking place within the guardianship of the Government, which is made permanent.

Now, the actual drafting of this bill, which is before you and Congress, was carried out by representatives of the Solicitors' office in consultation with members of the Indian Office, and I am going to turn over the detailed explanation to them, beginning with Mr. Ward Shepard, who is the specialist in land policy of the Indian Office, and a man who you will discover has great breadth and sympathy.

Mr. WARD SHEPARD: My friends: Before we go into the details of this bill, I want first of all to get a picture of the general principles by which the self-government will be worked out.

First of all, we do not wish Indian self-government to be de-

28

pendent in the future upon the whims of the Indian Bureau. We therefore have started this bill with a declaration by Congress that it is the policy of Congress to grant self-government to the Indians and that those powers of self-government will be con- firmed to the Indians in charters which will be issued by the Secretary of the Interior. We propose, in addition to issuing these charters of self government and business incorporation, to pro- vide for the gradual transfer of the functions and services of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to these organized Indian communities. We propose further, in order to permit the Indians to develop this self-government and to take over these services of the In- dian Bureau progressively and gradually to set up a system of education by which Indians will be educated in all of the admin- istrative and technical functions of their local Government. We propose further that the funds appropriated by Congress for the performance of these services which are gradually turned over to the local Indian communities; that the monies shall be turned over to be disbursed by the disbursing officer of the Indian community. We propose that the monies that belong to the In- dians themselves, the monies that are in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the Indian tribes, shall also be dis- bursed only through the Indian disbursing officers. We propose further that in the future the Indians themselves shall take a part in making the appropriations estimates which go to Congress for the expenditure of federal funds in their own communities, so that they themselves, shall have a part in determining how this money is to be expended for their benefit. Moreover, any money expended by the Federal Government from Congressional appropriations, from gratuity appropriations, can not be made re- imbursable against the Indians without the consent of the In- dians.

Now, let me repeat this last thing to make it perfectly clear. It means in the first place, that Indian money can no longer be spent by the Government without the consent of the Indians. (Ap- plause.) It means further that in the future the Indians will take part in determining what appropriations that Congress will make for their benefit, and that the recommendations of the Indians will go first of all to the Bureau of the Budget and then to the Congressional Appropriations Committee and will receive the same hearing that the recommendations of the Indian Commissioner and the Secretary of the Interior receive.

Now, let us go back to the question of charters. No charters are going to be forced on any Indian community that does not want to take self-government. If any Indian community wants to go on with the present system it is up to them to determine it. If,

29

on the other hand, an Indian community wishes to undertake self-government it has the right to petition for a charter of self-government and to help work out that charter with experts who will be furnished to help and assist them. If an Indian community petitions for charter of self-government, as the Commissioner has told you, and if the Secretary of the Interior should refuse or should lay down unreasonable conditions for the issuance of the charter, then the Secretary must report the facts to Congress and the Indians would have an appeal to Congress.

Now here is an extremely important point. This bill does not set up any one system of self-government. It does not seek to impose on the Indians a system of self-government of any kind. It sets up permission to the Indians to work out self-government which is appropriate to the traditions, to their history and to their social organization.

We do not wish to force on the Indians the white man's system of Government. We want, on the other hand, to build on the old Indian traditions, on your old traditions of self-government, to make this legislation fit those old traditions and your own in- stitutions. If, on the other hand, an Indian community wishes to adopt the white man's system of Government and to enter into the same kind of local Government you already have in your State, this Bill also permits that. This Bill permits traditions from the ancient tribal Pueblo in the Southwest to the most modernized communities. One more final statement. This Bill guar- antees what you really have under the Constitution but which we want to restate and reaffirm—namely, that all Indians shall have freedom of conscience, of worship, of speech, of press, of assembly, and of associations. Now, it is not the intention of this Bill to force upon the Indians a greater responsibility in self- government than they feel that they are able to initiate at the present time, and this Bill is not a means by which the Govern- ment, by which the Indian Bureau wishes to escape its own re- sponsibilities. It is a means of making it possible for the Indians and the Indian Bureau to co-operate in the working out of the future of the Indians. Now this Bill gives a long list of powers which may be granted to an Indian community, and remember, please, that you are to choose in adopting this charter of self- government only those powers that I am going to enumerate which you wish to try to exercise. I will not read all of these powers but I will read the main ones slowly so that the inter- preter may interpret as I read them. First:

1. Making and enforcing ordinances.

2. Electing or appointing their own officers.

3. Determining membership in the community.

30

4. Regulating the use and disposal of property of members of the community and of the community itself.

5. Encouraging art, culture, and education.

6. Administering charity.

7. Protecting the public health.

8. Establishing Indian Courts and enforcing your own laws.

9. Appointing guardians for minors and incompetents.

10. Constructing public works.

11. Levying assessments on members or requiring labor in place of assessments.

12. Acquiring and managing property.

13. Entering into contracts and employing attorneys.

14. To make contracts with the State or with the local State Government.

15. To give to Indians, service in education, public health and such other service as states render to local communities.

16. To sue and to be sued.

17. To compel the transfer from the community of an unsatisfactory Federal employee.

18. To regulate trade and intercourse with non-members of the community.

Now those are the main powers which may be given under a charter to an Indian community and as I said before it is up to the Indians themselves to determine which of these they wish to take over in the beginning. Later on, you will have a chance to take over more of them as you get experience in taking care of your own affairs. This Bill proposes to appropriate five hundred thousand dollars to assist the Indian communities that wish to begin self-government, and that money would be spent to help the Indian communities to organize, to build necessary governmental buildings to carry on their functions of Government and for many other expenses necessary to inaugurate this system so that the Indians themselves would not have to pay the cost of it. Now let me repeat and emphasize that it is not compulsory on any Indian group, either to accept self-government or accept any specified system of self-government. It is up to them.

Now, I want to go on to the second important step in this bill, which is the gradual transfer of the functions of the Indian Bureau to the organized Indian Communities.

Now first of all the Commissioner is required by this law to classify all of the services and functions which may be transferred to the organized Indian community and to set up rules and regulations governing that transfer. But, I want to point out, that as a condition for the transfer of any functions to an Indian community, that community must have individual members who are capable of satisfactorily performing those functions. That does not mean that Indians who wish to go into these services which are to be turned over to the Indian communities, must pass a

31

Civil Service examination. It does mean that the Secretary and the Commissioner will define the qualifications which an Indian must meet in order to be appointed to one of those services. It means also that the Commissioner is directed to furnish financial assistance for the training of Indians so that they may become more and more qualified to take over self-government.

If the Secretary refuses to voluntarily transfer a service which the Indian community feels that it is qualified to perform, the Indians may require the Secretary to transfer that function and may appeal to Congress to require the transfer of that function.

If a service is transferred to an Indian community, that does not mean that the community has to pay the cost of that service, but it means that the money appropriated by Congress for that service, but it means that the money appropriated by Congress for that service will be transferred with the service, itself.

The bill requires that the federal employees of the local reservation must aid and assist the Indian community in every possible way to carry out its local self-government and to administer these services that are transferred. The local Indian officials are required to make regular reports to the Indian self-government and to consult the advice of your Indian officials on all questions of administration and policy. Moreover, if there is a vacancy in the Federal Indian Service on an Indian reservation, even before the services have been transferred to your community, you have a right to appoint an Indian to that vacancy provided he has the requisite qualifications. The Indian Service will continue to administer any functions which are not transferred to the Indian community.

If an Indian community fails to administer properly a transferred service, then the Secretary or the Commissioner may re-assume that service, but must report the facts to Congress. This does not mean the abolition of the Indian Bureau, or the abolition of federal guardianship and responsibility toward the Indians. It means that hereafter the Government and the Indian communities will be partners in working out all of the affairs of the Indians.

And I want to say that this system will remove a great many of the causes of friction that have existed between the Indian Bureau and the Indians. The present system is equally bad for the Indians and for the employees of the Indian Bureau because it leads to constant friction and constant quarreling. This new system will give to the Indians and to the employees of the Indian Bureau a chance to work on a footing of friendly equality. It gives to the Indians a chance to become real citizens in the American community.

32

I think that this explains the general principles and operation of this Bill and it will be now the duty of the Chairman to announce the next proceeding.

Mr. WOEHLKE: (Mr. Red Tomahawk still interpreting.)

A little while ago a lady arose in the back of the room and asked a question. Nobody understood her question. I know from just looking at you that a lot of you are just boiling over with questions. We want to answer those questions, every one of them. I, therefore, suggest that everyone who is full of questions write them out and present them at this table as soon as possible so that we all may go over them at the earliest possible moment, then proceed to answer them. And, we would like it distinctly understood that this privilege of asking questions is not confined to the official delegates—any member of the audience may ask any question and present it here at this table.

At a certain time in the future, during an early session, we shall take up those questions and answer them one by one, if they can be answered.

Now, the next session of this Congress will begin tomorrow morning at 9:30. Before the session opens some motion pictures will be taken and I think it would be a good idea if you would all be here a little early.

WILLIAM BEN, (From a Reservation in Montana): I want to say a few words to the members of the council and other tribes from various States. We are now confronted with a problem affecting us which needs very careful consideration. I want to state a simple fact—that it is a known fact that once a coyote gets into a trap, very often he gets away.

Mr. WOEHLKE: Before we adjourn, the Commissioner will say a few more words.

Mr. COLLIER: What I wish to say will be, perhaps, a repetition of some things Mr. Shepard already has said.

There are in the United States more than 200 communities or tribes of Indians. The laws concerning Indians apply to all of them. Some of these tribes are at one extreme. There are, for example, there won't be any of the grown people who talk English, and where all of the members of the tribe are pure blood. Others will be at the other extreme, where the old native language has been forgotten, everybody talks English, and where the blood is mixed, one-fourth, one-half, and one-eighth Indian blood.

You would all, I think, agree that if there be an Indian tribe which wants to run its own Indian court, to select its own judges, and to control its police; if there is a tribe that wants to do that, the tribe ought to be permitted to do it. (Applause.) Maybe my tribe, your tribe, would not want to, but we would not want to forbid the other fellow from doing it if he wanted to.

33

Again, suppose there is some tribe, maybe not here at all, whose young men believe they could qualify and hold a good many of the jobs of the Indian Service; young men who believe that they could be good foresters and good farmers and good clerks; and suppose those young men and young women are really just as well trained and just as competent as the whites that have got the jobs now. Then you surely would not want to forbid that tribe way off yonder from putting its young men and young women into the jobs.

Now, there might be here not a single tribe that wasn't completely satisfied with all of the Indian Bureau employees on the Reservation. Maybe that is the condition. But if there is a tribe in North Carolina or Oklahoma or California, that would like to take a vote on whether it wants to keep its Superintendent, you would not object to them having that privilege, would you? And just the same way, to turn the tables. If you have got any of these desires; young people that you want to put into the jobs; if you want to have a voice in choosing employees; a voice about how your money is going to be spent, you don't want some Indian in California to say you can't have it.

This arrangement that Mr. Shepard has been outlining is simply an arrangement to allow each tribe, if it wants to, to take on power—if it wants to, and to allow that tribe to take on authority without in any way risking its security as a ward of the government, and the same arrangement would enable the tribe which took over the authority also the money necessary to pay the people to do the work, and if the tribe made the experiment and then was sorry—felt that it had gone too far, the tribe would say so and turn back the authority and the jobs and the money to the Federal Government; to the Indian Bureau. Or, if the tribe made a mess of its undertaking, then Congress would have the power to take it back and put it in the hands of the Indian Bureau to straighten out, but nothing the tribe could do could bring the guardianship of the Federal Government to an end. That is made permanent by the Act.

I should mention certain safeguards. If a tribe; the majority in a tribe; became oppressive toward a minority, violated the constitutional rights of a minority, under this Bill the case would be appealed to the court of Indian Affairs. It would be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior to carry the appeal, or any Indian could carry the appeal. Minority rights are safeguarded by the Bill, especially by the creation of this Federal Court of Indian Affairs.

It is further provided that if there be an Indian who does not want to remain a part of his tribe, of his Reservation, of his com-

34

munity, but wants to go out into the world and break off his connection he may, if he desires, surrender his rights in exchange for compensation. He does not have to but he may. The tribe or the community would be forbidden to alienate land or to waste the capital assets, soil, forests and such. The Bill expressly prohibits the disposal of capital in a wasteful way.

Tribal funds, subject to all treaty protections, would no longer be handled by the Indian Bureau, but by the chartered community when the community got ready to handle them. You may not know this fact, but I will tell you, that even next year, beginning next July, the Indian Bureau is going to use up more than two million dollars of the Indian tribal funds for salaries and upkeep of the Indian Bureau. We are doing that in spite of our loud and continued protesting against being compelled to do it, because the Director of the Budget, who controls our budget makes it necessary that we shall go on using tribal money for Indian Bureau support. This self-government, title one, would put an end to that at once. Wherever a community accepts a charter it would be able to take over the control of the trust funds, and I do not imagine that the Indians would want those monies spent on Indian Bureau salaries. Now, a remark about the coyote in the trap. If the Indian is a coyote he is in the trap now. It has caught his front leg. The only way he can get out is by biting off his own leg like the coyote does sometimes. (Big Applause.) Biting off his own leg by declaring himself competent and starting to pay taxes. (Applause.) This whole scheme is one of opening that trap. Saving what is left of his leg. (I understand the lady in the rear asked whether we wanted them to secede from our Government.) (That is what caused a Civil War.)

Do we want the Indians to secede from the Government? The answer is the same answer as about the coyote. A number of Indians have seceded in that they are worn out by the system under which they have been compelled to live. They have gone and got patents in fee and lost their land. That is the way they have seceded. Thousands of them in years gone by. The point that is being laid before you is intended to bring it about so that Indians will not want to secede from the Government and won't need to.

Question by WILL BENDS, Crow Agency, Montana: The Commissioner himself explained to the Council that when a Bill went to Congress and it is on the floor, it is open to amendment. In that event there is nothing to guarantee to the Indian whereby

35

he could be sure that members of the House and Senate would not change that Bill so that when it came out, it would be the same and contain the same things as when it was sent to Congress?

Mr. COLLIER: That is true. That is a very good question to bring up and it must be answered. I may say this. You have in Congress a very good House Indian Committee and Senate Committee. All Indians who have kept following the course of Legislation in the last three or four years have learned to place confidence in their Congressmen. Howard and his Committee; Senator Frazier and Wheeler and their committees. In Indian Legislation, where the Indian Committee stands solid, practically never does Congress over-ride them. It follows its committees. Particularity when the Interior Department and the Committees are in agreement, Congress would not change the Bill. He could, but it would not, and I could tell you some more which I have not wanted to tell you because I did not want to seem to be persuading you too much.

Mr. COLLIER: (Robert High Eagle interpreting.)

This bill, along with the memorandum accompanying it—that mimeographed memorandum, we have here, went to the President some little time ago. The President has examined the bill and favors it. That announcement was made to the House Committee on Indian Affairs by authority about five days ago. The President knows that we are taking this question back to the Indians. If the bill should become twisted into a wrong shape by Congress, if the bill should be made into something else which does not do what we are telling you but does something different, then I think you may be confident that the President will veto the bill. I have not wanted to talk about the President's part in this because that is almost overwhelming in its influence. But he is going to stand back of this thing.

CHAIRMAN: I believe we will now adjourn until 9:30 tomorrow morning.

Adjourned.

Meeting called at Alex Johnson hotel at 8:00 tonight of all superintendents and field employees.

37

Saturday, March 3, 1934

MORNING SESSION

Mr. Woehlke opened the Congress at 9:50 A. M., March 3, 1934.

Mr. WOEHLKE: (Mr. LaPointe interpreting.) On account of the motion pictures we are a little behind time, so we will have to speed up to regain lost ground. I would like first to read to you a letter we have just received from the Honorable Edgar Howard, Chairman of the House Committee on Indian Affairs, with whom many of you are acquainted. Congressman Howard writes:

Honorable John Collier,
Commissioner of Indian Affairs,
Rapid City, South Dakota.

Great is my regret because of my inability to go with you to the Regional Conference which you have called in the several states where our Indian people largely reside. I wish I might be with you because I feel that I could help you in winning the favor of our Indian people to the new administration's Indian bill. It is a long step in advance of any legislation heretofore offered in behalf of the Indians. If I could talk with the Indians I might admit that there were some features of the bill difficult to understand. But I know I could prove to them that the bill, as a whole, will be for the welfare of the Indians in greater measure than any piece of legislation ever before presented to Congress.

No doubt you will meet in the several localities many Indians who have visited me here in Washington and I will thank you to carry me in good memory to each one of them.

Sincerely,

Edgar Howard.

Mr. WOEHLKE: I have been asked to announce that there will be a meeting of the Cheyenne River delegates at 12:30 in Building No. 2. All delegates are requested to be present, by Luke Gilbert, Chairman of the Council.

Before we open up the preceding sections of the Bill for discussion, I am going to ask two members of the Commissioner's staff briefly to explain the two titles, two sections, two divisions of the Bill—the Court of Indian Affairs section, and the section referring to education. Both explanations will be brief and at the

36

conclusion of these explanations we will take up the discussion of the first three titles.

ROSEBUD INTERPRETER: Mr. Chairman, I wasn't paying much attention to the first part of that. I am very sorry, but I was busy.

Mr. WOEHLKE: The interpreter is fined $20.

INTERPRETER: I will have my friends raise the money. (Interprets.) (Asks Mr. Woehlke, "Law and Order section?")

Mr. WOEHLKE: Court of Indian Affairs.

Before I call on the next speaker I want to ask whether Mr. Joseph W. Brown is in the audience. I have a letter here for him. He may call for it.

Now, I want to ask Mr. Cohen, Assistant to the Solicitor of the Interior Department, to explain briefly the meaning of the Court of Indian Affairs section. Mr. Cohen. (Applause.)

Mr. COHEN: Friends, I realize that the language in the title No. 4 of the bill which you have seen is very difficult and complicated language, but I think that the processes of the Indian Court are very simple and as soon as you understand them you will feel that they are very simple. In the first place, we believe that the Indians are entitled to have a court which is convenient to them, which can settle the many disputes which arise between Indians and whites, particularly in the matters of trespass—whites trespassing on Indian lands, white bootleggers on Indian lands. At present if such a dispute arises between an Indian and a white, it is usually necessary to go to the Federal District Court which is sometimes 100 or 200 miles from the reservation. If you go to the Federal District Court you have to find a lawyer. When you come to the Federal District Court you find that the judges there are not particularly interested in the Indian. You find that the whole procedure of the Federal District court is very complicated and difficult to understand.

What this bill would do would be to create a special court. This court would consist at first of seven judges. Each judge would have a particular region. One judge might run through two or three of the Sioux Reservations in South Dakota. Another might have two or three of the Reservations in Montana and so on. A judge would stay at one reservation for two or three weeks and all the disputes that had arisen in the last month or two would come up before that judge. The procedure before this judge might be very simple. Furthermore this bill provides that ten special attorneys shall be assigned free to the Indian tribes and to the Indians to help the Indians before this court. This court would be of help not only to the Indian communities, which ask for a charter under this act and receive charters, but also to

38

the tribes which do not want charters. We hope that all the
Indians will be given a voice in the selection of the judges. The
judges will be appointed by the President of the United States
with the approval of the Senate. In these ways that I have men-
tioned, the Court will help all Indians, but there are some ways
in which the Court will be peculiarly useful to a community that
wants a charter.

Where a community receives a charter this charter is a pledge
of certain rights which the community may enjoy. The Secretary
of the Interior makes this pledge, but we do not think that the
Secretary of the Interior should be permitted in future years to
interpret this pledge. If a new Secretary of the Interior comes
we do not want to be able to say that this pledge meant some-
thing very different from what the Indians understood. There-
fore, we want every Indian to have the right to go into this
Indian Court and insist on the rights which have been guaranteed
him and his people by the Charter of the Government.

In this Charter of self-government the Secretary will give up
many arbitrary rights which he now has. In this charter the
Indians will be given the right to say what will happen to their
tribal funds. This Charter will be a guarantee that the Secretary
may not put Indian lands under State taxation as he may today
by giving fee patents. These rights which are given to the Indian
community in its charter must be sacred. The Indians must have
the right to go into court and sue the Secretary of the Interior
if he disobeys the provisions which have been laid down in the
Charter. You know that outside of the Indian reservations, if
the Secretary of the Interior or some other Government official
commits an act which is unconstitutional, a private white citizen
can sue that employee of the Government. A private white citizen
can go into a court of the United States and sue a Federal official
and say that something the Federal official has done violates
his constitutional rights. There have been hundreds and thou-
ands of cases in which the Federal Courts have held that some-
thing that an official did was wrong and that the person wronged
should receive compensation for his injury. We want to give the
Indian the same right that the white man has to insist on his
rights in Court. That is why we want to establish this Court of
Indian Affairs. The Charter that you receive from the Secretary
of the Interior is a contract. If the Secretary does not keep his
promises in that contract you can sue him. So too, if the com-
munity does not keep its promise, if it injures minorites within
the community;if it oppresses individuals, then the Secretary
may bring a suit in this court and compel the community to live
up to its contract in the Charter. There is one more thing I

39

must explain. That is, the relation between this Federal Court
and the local Court of an Indian Community.

The Indian community may be given the right to have its
own local court as a community outside Indian reservations has
its own local court. This court, this local court, would take the
place of the present Indian judges appointed by the superinten-
dent. This local court would be elected by the Indians of the
community itself. It would administer the ordinances that the
community had prepared and passed. Its punishments would be
limited by the charter and, in any case, the punishment which
could be inflicted, either on Indian or white, could not exceed
$500 fine or six months, imprisonment. If the Indian community
so desired, the limits of the punishments might be made less in
the charter.

More important crimes and cases could not come before this
local court but would have to come before the special federal
court that has been spoken of. Also in cases before the local court,
particularly if non-Indians were involved, either party could appeal
from the local Indian court to the special federal court. I hope
I have made it clear why we need a special federal court in addi-
tion to the local Indian court. It is because there are many cases
which are too important for a local court to want or to have the
right to handle. It is because you want a court of the highest
authority before which each community and each individual can
bring any grievances that may arise in the administration of the
new policies of the administration.

I ask you to remember when you discuss any provisions of
this bill that wherever there is a provision which seems as if
it might work an injustice on an Indian, that Indian will have
the right to come before this court and insist, first, on his con-
stitutional rights as a citizen of the United States, and, second,
on his special rights as are given him by the charter of his com-
munity.

Mr. WOEHLKE: I want to ask you in the first place not to
get scared if another bulb should fall down. We are not.

I would like to illustrate the statement of Mr. Cohen by an
actual example..

On the Fort Peck Reservation a few weeks ago, a young man by
the name of Brown, the son-in-law of Roger Running Bear, was
arrested on a charge of stealing a mare. The mare was eighteen
years old and worth about $50, but the court fixed a bond of $1500.
The superintendent and I looked over the evidence and we thought
that it was not strong enough to convict him. The superintendent
and I worked for days and days with the County Attorney, with
the white man who preferred the charge and with the sheriff to

40

get that young man out of jail. We finally had to hire an attorney for him and we got his ball reduced and got him out. Now, if there had been a court of Indian affairs, the whole thing would have been settled without any trouble, without any of this waste of time, without having the boy in jail for a month. It would have been settled in three or four days. Roger Running Bear's son-in-law would have been out again. That is what the court of Indian Affairs would have done for him.

Now I want to read you a telegram:

Chairman of the Indian Conference:

Poplar, Mont.

As an elected representative from the joint meeting of three districts on the Fort Peck Reservation I wish to announce that we not agree with the new proposed Indian program which is being studied at the conference now. Reasons will be presented later in our general council.

Roger Running Bear.

Now, my friends, I want to have you listen to one of the great educators of the country; to a man who is internationally known; a man of your own race. I would like to present to you Dr. Henry Roe Cloud who will speak to you on the educational features of the bill. Dr. Roe Cloud. (Applause.)

DR. ROE CLOUD: The chairman has asked to speak to you on the educational features of the bill which I hold in my hand.

Now, for these chartered communities that you have been hearing about, which will be located all over the Indian country, leaders for those chartered communities will be necessary. The Commissioner has anticipated—he has forseen the need of that, and has provided for it in this bill. He is going to give leaders to every tribe. I have talked with various groups last night, and to Indians on the train, and they said, "I like this whole thing very much indeed, but there is one thing that is going to make it fall down and that is, the kind of leaders they are going to set up for this thing." One of them said last night, "We Indians are," and I agree with him, "We Indians are awfully jealous of one another and we don't follow this fellow and that fellow." (Applause.) Now, I think the reason we are jealous of one another is because in the past there have been so few leadership opportunities. Now, the way to do away with jealousy is to put so many leaders, Indian leaders, into the Indian communities themselves, that it will wear away that jealousy. Now, one reason why we have been jealous is because we don't want to follow the man who tells us what he can do, but we want to follow that man who has already done things. Now the Commissioner proposes to bring to us those men and women who have done things; who have accomplished certain things and who have a right to come and lead us. He proposes to give us leaders in education. Leaders in taking care of the

41

health of our people; leaders in those who know how to teach us to live together in groups. They call it social service in the white man's language. Leaders in law and order and not just anybody on the reservation to do this work, but those that have been taught in elementary principles of law and order. Leaders in those who know how to take care of the woods. They call it Forestry. Leaders in grazing; in cattle grazing so that the grass is not eaten off too much. Those who sit at the desk and keep books and write on paper, They call it office work, bookkeeping; keeping of statistical records, etc. I might say that Haskell Institute has lots of those that we can give to you when you are ready. Leaders in public works, road building, and one thing and another, improvements of roads on the reservations, etc.

Now how is he going to do this? Wherever he finds one of our existing schools that will be suitable in any locality for the training of our Indian people, he will open them up and use them, and he will use also the white colleges, the law schools, medicine schools, and engineer schools, where these Indians will be sent to get the white man's technical knowledge, and he is asking Congress for fifty thousand dollars on a reimbursable plan, one half of which will bear no interest when it is paid. One half of it the student does not pay interest on and the other half is a free gift to him. (Applause.) Now in addition to this fifty thousand dollars, the Commissioner himself will have fifteen thousand which he can use to pick out other Indian youths who show special adaptation to leadership. He will select those and give them scholarships to colleges. I might say that the fifty thousand dollars will be fifty thousand a year. Now if your son got one of these monies from the Government, from the Commissioner, he can pay it back only when he is employed. When he is not employed the Government does not ask him to keep on paying. Now we spoke only of men benefiting by this arrangement. We want to emphasize that the girls will get this too. The Government does not "hog-tie" such an individual to go so far as to say in this Bill that no formal contracts will be required.

Now, there is an interesting thing in connection with this, and that is, that the Indian Tribes over all the United States have something big to give to their white brothers over all America, and the thing that he is to give is the thing that he has thought in his mind thousands of years back and passed from generation to generation, and what he has lived thousands of years back, his art, his traditions, etc., and by which the Indian himself is inspired to live. Now the Commissioner comes in this Bill and says to you, look into your minds and look into your heart. You have

42

got great valuable things that you need to give to the world, and the world needs them. And he proposes to put teachers into the Tribes and into the schools who have sympathy with what the Indians have to give, not the white persons that come around to stamp it out and destroy, but those that are in sympathy and will let the fires burn bright in the Indian hearts and in the Indians' mind.

Back of all this in his mind, is to build in us, who are Indians, the idea of our own self-respect and build up the pride of our people; that we feel that we have got a great history and great thoughts and great ideas and inspirations in our hearts, so that we can walk away with our heads up instead of looking down all the time. (Applause.)

Now here is an interesting thing to think about. These leaders will bring to us the white man's way of thinking and doing things in white communities, and then the Indian race will give to the white race their own culture and that will do away to a great extent with this thing called segregation. A white man and an Indian walking down the road, nothing passing between them, the mind of the Indian is segregated. Now, just because all the Indians live in one place together, that is not necessarily segregation. Segregation is a matter of the eyes of the mind looking out all over the world, or closing them, only seeing his own people.

Now I am through. I am just going to say this and sit down. Always interesting to me is how the Navaho, although living all by himself, has made a great success of things that we who belong to other tribes have failed in. He lives all by himself but he has great thoughts and he lives by great inspiration, and I heard one of them say, when I was down there a year or so ago that he even believed that the first man that was created was Navaho. (Applause and laughter.)

Mr. WOEHLKE: Before proceeding I would like to read two announcements. The Rev. L. J. Sheldon, Minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Rapid City, extends to the people attending the Indian Conference in Rapid City an invitation to attend the Church services and worship with us Sunday. Morning worship at eleven o'clock and evening worship at seven-thirty. There will be Catholic services in this auditorium at nine o'clock a. m. tomorrow--at nine in the morning, and an invitation is extended to all Catholics in this conference to attend these services.

Mr. WOEHLKE: (Rosebud interpreter.) We have now finished with the presentation of three of the important divisions of the proposed legislation; namely, self-government, education, and the court of Indian affairs.

There is still left the land division to be discussed, but before we

43

proceed with the consideration of the land problem and the new land policy, we would like to answer the questions that have been asked regarding the three preceding titles. Commissioner Collier will take up a number of the questions that have been asked and proceed to comment on them and answer them.

Mr. LAPOINTE, Chairman of the Rosebud Council: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Collier begins his talk, may I have the privilege of reading the questions written by the Rosebud delegation? We would like to read our questions from the floor to give an opportunity to the audience to know what kind of questions we are presenting. Then we will turn them over to Mr. Collier.

Mr. WOEHLKE: Do they refer to the three preceding sections or deal with the land division?

Mr. LAPOINTE: They do not deal with the land. If any of them do, they can be thrown out.

Mr. WOEHLKE: You may proceed, but make it brief.

Mr. LAPOINTE: Question No. 1, from Rosebud delegation with respect to the ten million dollar credit loan—will that be a loan to the tribe or to the individuals? Will the loans be reimbursable and, if so, when and how are they to be reimbursed?

Mr. WOEHLKE: I will repeat these questions so that the other delegations may have their interpreters translate them. Question No. 1, with respect to the ten-million-dollar credit loan, will that be a loan to the tribe or to the individuals—or will the loan be reimbursable and, if so, when and how is it to be repaid?

The same questions arise with respect to the two-million-dollar item.

Will you translate these questions.

(Various interpreters translate.)

Mr. COLLIER: May I first ask if you all have copies of the bill now. All who have copies of the bill hold up their hands. (Several copies of the bill were distributed.)

I will answer the first question—about the new credit system. The ten-million-dollar fund, we will call it, would be loaned to Indian communities, and through the communities to the individuals of the community. An individual might get the loan, a partnership might get it, a stock association or cattle association might get it.

The money advanced by the Government would become a revolving fund. In other words, it would never go back to the Government. But the man who borrowed from the fund would pay the money back to the fund so that it could be loaned again to another man. The loan would not bear interest. Those who borrowed would not be required to pay interest. The length of time for payment could be made as much as thirty years if the conditions justified it.

44

Now, what about the purposes for which loans can be made—for any purpose to build up the economic life of the individual or the community. For example, the buying of seed, the buying of implements, the buying of stock, the buying of materials to build a house. The money could be loaned to provide the capital for starting an Indian co-operative store, or an Indian co-operative creamery, and Indian saw-mill, or anything like that. And, broadly, the loan could be for any business purpose that would build up the prosperity, the economic life, of the individual or the community.

I will now present a question that was asked me last night. Somebody said, what about the reimbursable loans that are now being made in the shape of seed or implements, and then the Indian pays the Government back? That system, the old reimbursable system, will not be changed, will go on. This is something else in addition. The new credit, the ten-million-dollar fund, would be supplied by preference to those Indians who organized into communities, and it would be supplied by preference to those Indians who got their lands into a condition for good business-like use. This new loan system, this ten-million-dollar fund would be provided as part of the plan for getting Indian lands into a secure condition for effective use. Unless we can get this reorganization of the land system, there will be no chance of obtaining this new fund. And, when obtained, the fund will be used as a means of helping the Indians build up their life on the land. This credit section is not found in the printed bill. It has been put in through an amendment in the House, and it will be put in the records of this meeting which will mimeographed and sent to all of you at the earliest date. Now, the other question was about the two million dollars a year authorized by the Bill for the purchase of land. That two million dollar fund, we will call it two-million-dollars a year, is a gratuity and not a loan, and therefore will not have to be paid back at all. That is a thing which we are going to have to fight for in Congress, I think, to make it a gratuity and not a loan, and our justification is that the land was lost under the allotment system which the Government imposed on the Indians. In other words, the Indian lost his land under Government compulsion. The Government made him lose it. Therefore, the Government ought to buy it back. (Applause.) I may say that what I have just said appears to be agreeable to Congress as far as we have gone. There is no evidence that they will dispute this point of view.

INTERPRETER: The Rosebud delegation want to know about question No. 2, with respect to Section 13 b. What is the meaning of the word reservation? Does it include counties which were

within the reservation in 1889 but which are no longer in the reservation? Why I ask that question is this, there are two words in that Bill that describe—the words Indian and reservation. Will only Indians that are within an organized county be known as Indians? We have three counties on our reservation that are organized and one unorganized. Will they be entitled to come into the community or not?

INDIAN: Mr. Chairman. We would like to make a motion at this time.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Not at this time. Let the Commissioner finish his explanation.

INDIAN: We would like to have all these questions that are submitted and let the Commissioner give an answer afterward. This will be very much appreciated.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Do I hear a second to that motion? (Motion seconded.)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Any remarks to that motion? It has been moved and seconded that all questions be submitted in private to the Commissioner and be answered by him after they have been submitted in writing. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor of the motion lift their right hand. (Majority lift right hands.)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: All those against the motion lift their right hand. (Three or four lift right hand.)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: The ayes have it. The motion is carried.

GENTLEMAN from WINNEBAGO: I move that the last question be carried out by the Commissioner, or whoever else will explain it, and that thereafter they proceed with these questions by the various delegations. We have been killing too much time as I see it.

Mr. WOEHLKE: May I explain for a moment that it is the purpose to suggest meetings with the different delegations this evening for the purpose of conferring with them; having them propound their questions right then, and have them answered on the spot. Would not that cover your idea?

GENTLEMAN from WINNEBAGO: That would. Yes.

Mr. COLLIER: May I suggest this: Some of the questions here are in the mind of everybody. They might just as well be answered to all of you. Some of the questions are in the minds of only one particular delegation. They ought to be answered to that delegation, but some of the questions are fundamental and are of interest to all of you.

Mr. WOEHLKE: I think it would be the best way, to take the written questions that are of general interest to all of you and have them answered in this general session and to take the dis-

45

46

tinctly local questions and have them answered tonight in separate delegation meetings. I believe, with this understanding, we will allow the Commissioner to proceed. I shall, however, follow the suggestion and answer this last question.

Mr. COLLIER: On page 21 of the Bill the term, Reservation, is defined. The act says, "that the term 'Reservation,' wherever used in this Act, shall be construed to comprise all the territory within the outer boundaries of any Indian reservation, whether or not such property is subject to restrictions on alienation and whether or not such land is under Indian ownership." I may say that this is nothing but a repetition of the existing law as to what constitutes an Indian Reservation.

And now, the particular matter that I think is troubling the Rosebud delegation will be answered by Mr. Stewart.

INDIAN: Pine Ridge also.

Mr. STEWART: As I understand the question, the specific question is, whether or not Tripp, Mellette and Bennett counties are to be considered in the Reservation and to be considered Indians. Am I right?

INDIAN: Yes.

Mr. STEWART: The answer is, yes. For this reason. There are two classes of cessions affecting Indian lands. One class is that class where the Indians ceded their title outright. Their title was extinguished and they are paid for that land. The second class is where the Indians had their land opened to settlement under the public land laws, and the United States acts as trustee, and until the Indian lands were disposed of, the Indian title remained unextinguished. We are confronted here with that second class. On page 26 of the Bill, on top, Section 3, you will find your answer. We are going to convert back into the Reservation all that surplus, undisposed of open land.

Mr. DAVIDSON from PINE RIDGE: Mr. Chairman. (Chairman recognizes Mr. Davidson.) I am not a delegate, but I would like to have the gentleman explain the second part of that 26.

Mr. WOEHLKE: Will you submit your question in writing? It has been ruled by the Congress that all questions be submitted in writing. You are out of order.

Mr. DAVIDSON: All right sir, I will present my question in writing this evening.

Mr. COLLIER: There is one further point about the two million dollar fund which I did not make clear. The fund for the purchase of land. That fund would be available only where the new land holding system had been put into effect.

Now, there is a question of general interest. It relates to Section 4 E of title I of the Bill. "What happens to tribal self-government

if all, or a major part of the Indians, decide to withdraw at one time. How are their interests to be paid for; the interests of those who withdraw."

The answer I will try to make simple in this way. Forget about this bill for a moment. If an Indian of any tribe is enrolled in that tribe and therefore has a share of the ownership of the tribal land and tribal funds and goes away, he continues to have his share, even though he has gone away and lives, say, in New York. Sometimes he will get a benefit from his share; that is, if there are per capita payments he will get them, even though he is living in New York. But if there is no tribal income from the property, then he loses the use of it by going to New York. There is no money being paid out on it and he is not getting the use of it.

Now, under the new plan, it would be the same, with one difference that I will state. The individual who wanted to break off his relationship with the tribe and move away permanently could bargain with the community and the community could pay him the value of his holdings and then the community would own the land or whatever there was, and he would go away with the cash. He might make a bargain in such a way that he would get cash down, or he might get installment payments to be paid over a term of years. Now, the question was, suppose there are 1,000 members of the community and 900 of them decided to go away at one time. What then? I would say that in such a case, ordinarily, there would not be enough money to buy them all out at once. They would have to wait until there was enough capital accumulated for the deal to be transacted.

It is just like with any other estate. If a family in Rapid City wants to scatter all over the country and it has got a property here it might not be possible to liquidate that property now. They may have to wait. You can't liquidate an estate the minute you want to. Some tribes have tribals funds they could use to buy out abodes. Some have no tribal funds. The only change in this point from existing law is that the individual who wants to go away is allowed to surrender his equities in exchange for compensation. The community is allowed to buy it. Neither of them is compelled. The individual may go off and keep his equities. The tribe may refuse to buy him out and then he will have to keep his equities.

We are right up against the dinner hour, and what I think I shall do now is to answer the question that is partly asked by one of the written questions. I will just answer it briefly, because it will require explanation later on, because I know it is in the minds of most of you.

47

48

Here I am going over to the land section—title 3. Is the transfer of the individual allottee's title to the community, that is, relinquishments to the community, mandatory or permissable? In other words, it is proposed simply that the allottee may relinquish his title in exchange for an equal interest or compensation—he may do that, and he may accept it; or, is it intended that he must do it and the community must accept? Have I asked the question in such a way that it is the question in your minds?

VARIOUS ANSWERS: Yessir.

Mr. COLLIER: Now, I will answer first just in the language of the Bill as it stands. The language now is as follows: "The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to make the transfer." That would mean, as it stands, that if a case arose where the Secretary wanted to make the transfer and the Indian did not want it, the Secretary would have the power to make it, even without the consent of the Indian. That is the effect of that language now. We have given a great deal of thought before we came here, and since we came here, to the question of whether that language ought to stand or ought to be changed.

Mr. Woehlke has anticipated what I was about to say and I will just pass it on to you. Would it be interesting to have a show of hands to see whether you would like a change? (Applause.) Of course, Mr. Siegel points out that before we invite you to a show of hands we ought to make certain things clear to you. You understand that any transfer of title as planned, on this page 31, would have to be an exchange of title for compensation of a variety of kinds. In all cases adequate compensation. In other words, there hould be no taking of title. There would only be a purchase of it.

SIOUX INTERPRETER: That is one of the hardest phrases to interpret that I have run across yet.

Mr. COLLIER: Let us imagine the Secretary of the Interior is going to start in and transfer your title to the community. Your piece of land. If he does that he must, in the first place, give you in exchange a proportionate interest in tribal or community lands of similar quality. In other words, of equal value. In addition, you would have the right to keep the land you are living on. You would have first preference in the assignment of land; to keep the land you have got and live on it and use it. If you chose not to continue occupying that piece of land by exercising your preferential rights, and take another piece of land, then you would be entitled to be paid for the improvements on your land, as well as getting the new land. Similarly the interests of your heirs would be protected. As a matter of fact, the

49

protection would be so complete and the advantages would be so great that as a rule you would want to make the trade. You would want to relinquish and get in exchange the things that I have described, and because of that fact, because we were confident that the allottee himself would be the one chiefly anxious to effect the exchange, we did not worry about the result, because, as you will see, when we start discussing the land title in detail, the allottee always, would not only keep all he had but he would always get something more than what he has got. But that does not answer the question of what the Secretary of the Interior should be given power to do this, even though the allottee is not persuaded and does not want it and it is on that point that I was going to give you my answer and then the suggestion was that we get a show of hands.

Mr. WOEHLKE: Now, I would like to state the proposition that you are asked to have a show of hands on very briefly. Do you favor giving the Secretary of the Interior the right to force a transfer? That is the question.

Mr. FRANK OHLERKING of Fort Belknap: I object to your motion, Mr. Chairman, because we want to understand the conditions a little better first—the result of that transfer, or the conditions under which this transfer is to be made.

Mr. COLLIER: I think that is a very wise thought. The thing ought to be viewed in the light of all the facts before you vote on it.

Mr. CLEMENT SMITH of Rosebud (Yankton): Owing to the fact that we are defining the law as it is prepared and written and the discussion applies to the authority that the Secretary now has or is going to have, it is an important question to these people, and if we discuss it in that way we are just going to be taking it as a matter of course, and preparing an opinion. The definition in that bill is the question at the present time.

I make a motion to the house that we decide whether or not the Secretary shall have the power to force and coerce any allottee to transfer his property to the community or whether he shall not have that power.

(Seconds are heard from various members of the audience.)

Mr. WOEHLKE: Now, the gentleman from Ft. Belknap has suggested that we postpone a decision on this question until a broader discussion of all the phases of this important point. I am inclined to adhere to his opinion. I believe that the entire question at this time was out of order because we had not yet reached the land subject. Therefore I rule that all motions to this effect at

50

the present time are out of order, and that we shall give more
consideration to this question at the afternoon session. (Applause.)

Just prior to adjournment—and you know that dinner is waiting—I would like to ask to which delegation Ivan Griff and Mike Kieth, if they are members of a delegation, belong. The Superintendent of that delegation is requested to go to the long distance telephone because they are calling him from Deadwood. I do not know why. (Laughter.) I suggest also that any of the delegations or delegates who have not yet received copies of the Bill and copies of the explanation, the mimeographed explanation, come to the Chair here and receive them.

We now stand adjourned.

## AFTERNOON SESSION

Congress opened at 1:45 p. m. on March 3, 1934, by the Chair-
man, Mr. Woehlke.

Mr. WOEHLKE: I recognize the gentleman from Fort Totten,
Charles White.

Mr. WHITE: I make a motion to do away with all Sioux inter-
preters. Practically all of the Sioux speak English. Furthermore,
it confuses our minds between times.

Mr. WOEHLKE: Some are unable to follow the proceedings
completely without the aid of an interpreter and I believe, in fair-
ness to all delegates, we should continue with our interpretation.

(Mr. LaPointe, Rosebud interpreter, translates and requests all
Indians desiring to continue with the interpreter to raise their
right hands.)

Mr. LAPOINTE: These are the non-English-speaking Indians,
so that Fort Totten can see them.

Mr. WOEHLKE: There was no second to the motion. The motion
was lost.

Mr. WOEHLKE: (Mr. LaPointe, Rosebud, interpreting.)

I would like to explain the last ruling of the Chair because
that ruling was not interpreted and a number of the delegates
went out without understanding what the ruling was.

At the time we closed, there was under discussion the land
subject. The order of business at that time called for a conclud-
ing discussion on the three other main divisions of the bill. There-
fore, the Chair ruled that the Commissioner was out of order.

However, it seems that it has been the consensus of opinion
that we should get to the discussion of the land problem at the

51

earliest possible moment. Therefore, I am now requesting the
Commissioner to state the general principles, the purpose and
the objectives of the proposed land policy, and I shall ask him
before he does that, to answer one or two of the questions on self-
government.

Mr. COLLIER: (Rosebud interpreter.) Some questions that
can be answered quickly—if the Bill becomes a law what will be
the voting power of the Indian who has been made a citizen?
Will the Indians lose their franchise and vote?

No, of course not.

A similar question. If the Bill passes can Indians run for office
in a county or state when they are members of an Indian com-
munity? Yes, just as they can do now, except that they will have
more training in the holding of public offices through their
community organizations.

Two or three delegations have said this. Please explain the word "subsidy" as used in Title 2. Subsidy just means the same as grant—a gift of money.

And then the question which is important. As to the control
by Indian Tribes under this Bill over their Tribal funds? The Bill
provides that when an Indian group organizes and takes a Char-
ter, then its tribal monies cannot be spent except by the consent
of the community—of the Tribe. Let me make this clear. This
is not something which may be granted or withheld by the char-
tered members. It is fundamental and goes to all the chartered
communities. Any chartered community will have the veto power
over expenditures of the tribal funds belonging to that community.
In addition, the community may be chartered to handle its funds
completely so that it would not just have the veto power but the
initiative as well. Now, I am glad this question has been brought
up because I desire particularly to make it clear to these Sioux
delegations. There has been opposition against the Bill and against
the vetoing idea on account of this viewpoint giving the Indians
the veto over expenditure of money, and that opposition, I am
advised, has come from groups who are afraid that the Tribe
would not permit certain use of the money, which are good uses.
As you all know, you Sioux and the Shoshone, in certain of the
Mission schools—schools that are run by the churches—the tui-
tion of the children is paid from funds which are called Treaty
funds. Now this Bill would leave it for the Tribe to decide whether
the Secretary of the Interior should continue to make payments
of this kind. That is the case in so far as the payments are made
from Tribal funds. It is my own view, that a fundamental principle

52

is involved in the matter of Indian tribal funds. I believe that the Tribes should be given a veto power over the expenditure of their own funds even if they might be unwise sometimes and veto something that is good. However, I point out that the contention in this matter that affected the Sioux and Shoshone, grows out of a misunderstanding about its funds. The funds in question probably are not tribal funds at all. In the case of the Sioux they are called Treaty appropriations and are made annually by Congress. Actually, they are annual appropriations by Congress made gratuitously because Congress wants to make them, because the Treaty in question expired many years ago.

It is therefore practically certain that these particular funds from which the tuitions are paid in the Church schools are not tribal funds at all and therefore they would not come under the control of the chartered communities. But, if they are tribal trust funds and if it was so decreed ultimately by some court, then they would come under the control of the tribe and if, in fact, they are money belonging to the Sioux Tribe—if they are, which I don't think they are—then I would say the Sioux Tribe should decide how its own money is to be spent. Now, coming to the land question, in Title 3.

I shall, myself, try to outline the facts and purposes as we understand them, and then I shall ask others to take the matter up and carry on the detailed examination of Title 3. What I shall say will be a statement of what we think ought to be accomplished, and if it is not accomplished by the present draft of the Bill then the Bill ought to be changed so that it will accomplish that result and therefore, I am not going to complicate my talk by reference to section, etc. I believe that if you found yourselves in agreement with the purposes and the methods as I shall state them, then either you will find the Bill all right or you would see how to change the Bill to make it all right.

Now, first, this loss of land by the Indians must be sharply stopped. It must be brought to and end—the loss of land. That means that the trust period on all land now held in trust must be made permanent. The power of the Secretary of the Interior to bring the trust period to an end must be taken away from him, and hereafter the trust period must be made permanent unless and until terminated by act of Congress.

Second, in order to make the restrictions effective the exemption of Indian restricted land from taxation must be continued and made permanent until otherwise directed by Congress. You understand, of course, that the power of Congress is necessarily there

53

always and we can not go beyond that. Now, that is No. 1, and very simple and easy to understand.

Now, No. 2. I told you yesterday that there were more than 100,000 Indians who had lost all of their land under the allotment system. Those Indians, if they desire to have land and to use land, should be supplied with the land which they need, and that land should be restricted and exempted from taxation. We do not assume that all of the landless Indians will want to have land and use it. We only say that those who do want it must be given it. There is another class of landless Indians, who have been born since allotment; all of the tribal lands have been allotted before they were born, and so they came too late.

Those Indians, also, if they want land and are prepared to use it should be supplied with land. I do not mean that these landless Indians and children born since allotment should be supplied with land by taking the land that other Indians have and giving it to them. I mean that new additional land can be obtained by purchase or gift and supplied to these landless Indians.

Now, right here, before taking the next step, I am going to make two explanations.

First, about this matter of exempting the new lands from taxation. How are we going to meet the objection of states and counties against taking land which is now on the tax roll and putting it over into Indian ownership where it will not bring in taxes? The answer is—by having the federal government undertake in this act to pay the cost of maintaining the public services on this newly acquired land. It will maintain the schools and the roads and so on.

The other matter is one on which I am not addressing you alone, but the general public, as it were. The question people may raise is this: Why is it the duty of the United States to supply land to these landless Indians? Why is it? The answer is—that these Indians lost their land as a result of a system of land-holding forced upon them or their ancestors by the United States, a system of land holding which, admittedly, was a blunder. It is, therefore, the moral duty of the United States to retrieve the effects and repair that blunder as far as it can. And, that means to supply land and the capital for using the land. People may say why supply the capital as well as the land. The answer is—that when all of the new land is added on and given to the Indians, they will still be getting back only a very small part of what they lost under the allotment system. As for capital, we talk about a ten-million-dollar grant to the Indian communities for a revolving fund for a loan. The United States, since the year 1900, has misappropriated more than a hundred million dollars of tribal

54

funds, has used these funds in ways which were indefensible, which should have been illegal, and which in Canada would have been illegal and indictable.

I am making only the statement that has been made on the floor of the Senate by Senators King, Frazier, and others, and reported in formal reports by its committees and is an incontestable fact. By this misappropriation I mean the diversion of Indian trust funds for the support of the Indian Bureau which ought to have been supported by the general treasury. I mean also the use of Indian trust monies without the consent of the Indians to build through highways for tourists and great irrigation systems for white farmers.

Let the Government give back to the Indians just twenty per cent of this trust money which the Government misappropriated since 1900 and it will be enough capital for the development of the Indian lands. What I am saying is not needed to convince you, but I am saying it to get it into this record so that you may use it to persuade other people—white people.

A final item, while dwelling on this point of what the Government's duty is, is that most of the Indian tribes—I believe everyone of you tribes here—have valid legal claims against the Government for violated treaties. For a long lifetime the Government, by that I mean Congress and the Executive, have been using every method possible to prevent your claims from coming to judgment. The Bill we are discussing has no connection with the matter of Indian claims and I am not speaking of it for that reason. It has no connection at all, but I do say, and I want you to get this, that when a valid, legal claim could and should have been adjusted in the year 1890, and the Government by deliberate delays keeps it from being adjusted until 1950, or, let us say, 50 years too late, that is the same thing as depriving the Indians of the use of their moneys for 60 years, and the interest on a dollar in 60 years is a great deal more than the dollar. This policy of the Government to postpone the settlement adjusting Indian claims has had the effect already of depriving the Indians of more than one hundred million dollars, of interest on trust funds which they would have gotten if the claims had been settled promptly when they should have settled. What I said is the reason why the bad practice ought to be changed, and we are going to try and change it, but it also is a reason—an additional reason why the Government has a moral obligation to give the Indians the land they need and the capital for developing their land.

Now, I go on to the things which as we see it must be done about land. The other things. I have spoken about the policy of

55

the government to give the Indians the new land where they need it and to give them the capital for stocking the land and developing it, but, yesterday, we saw how the existing, the present system of land holding, had cut down the Indian land and was going to reduce them until they were all gone. And we saw, as you will see more fully, later, how the allotment arrangement has broken up the lands so that they can't be used to best advantage. We saw how it had checker-boarded the grazing land with white owned lands. (End of interpretation by Emil Afraid-of-Hawk. Mr. Collier continues, Williem Fire Thunder interpreting.)—and had broken up the heirship allotments into a multitude of individual ownership almost impossible to administer.

And we saw how inevitably the thing will go on until all of the land is in the heirship status and all messed up the way the heirship lands are messed up, and that the cost to the Government for administering the system was always increasing while the land melted away. It therefore is clear, that this business of getting, or providing new land to the landless Indians and more land to the Indians that haven't got enough land; this business can not be carried out within the old land holding system. Neither can any plan of giving large grants of capital to the Indians for developing their land be carried out within this old system. It would be a waste of time to go to Congress or to the President in the matter of new land or of capital for land development if all we have got to offer is that thing on that blackboard. On the contrary, as I told you yesterday, if that is all we have got to offer—that land holding system—we may look forward to a day, 5, 7, 10, or 12 years from now when the Government will simply wash its hands of an impossible situation by fee-patenting the whole business.

Therefore, we propose a change in the land holding system as a means of saving the lands and of getting more land and capital for developing lands. Now, what is it that we have got in mind, if I can put it in lanugage not legal at all, but just simple, plain English? We want, first, to enable the Indians holding these scattered allotments to combine their allotments if they desire, into solid blocks of land so that they can be leased or used in a profitable way. Second, we want an arrangement that will permit an heir who has a little interest in ten or twenty allotments to lump his interest into one lump so that he will have a piece of land which he can use or from which he can get a rental worth collecting that won't cost too much money to collect.

Then, we want an arrangement in the matter of heirship lands that will put an end to this subdivision of the interests until it gets so small that nobody can use the subdivided parts.

56

Then, we want an arrangement which will allow an allotted
Indian to put his title back into the tribe in exchange for a vested
right to use an equivalent amount of the tribal land, or to have
the rental from an equivalent amount of tribal land, as he prefers.

We want him to be in possession of a guarantee, this Bill calls it
a Certificate, which guarantees his property right to that amount
of land, and to that particular land if he prefers to stay on it
rather than to go on to another piece of land. We want him to
be able to transmit this property right of his, represented by this
certificate, to his heirs. We want an arrangement concerning the
new land—the land newly to be acquired—the land to be bought
or obtained in a new way, which will give to every member of the
tribe a share of that new land. This applies not only to the land-
less Indian who comes in, but we conceive of every member of the
tribe having a fundamental equity in the total tribal assets, but
that will not be an equal share to each member of the community.
It will be an unequal share, because, the Indian who transfers his
allotment to the community will be entitled to the full value of
that added on to his equitable share in the new land.

With respect to the descent of poperty, heirship, making of wills.
I first remind you that the Secretary of the Interior has absolute
power over an Indian will at present. He can annull the will, he
can compel the amendment of the will. In so far as he is guided
by law, it is by the accidental laws of the state where the Reserva-
tion happens to be located. We propose to take away from the
Secretary of the Interior that absolute power over Indian wills,
and the determination of heirs, by that proposal, is taken out of
his hands and placed in the Court of Indian Affairs. We propose
that if, in a given case, the State laws governing the descent of
property are not satisfactory to the Indians, those laws, as applied
to Indians may be changed until they are satisfactory to the
Indian.

Mr. COLLIER: (Rosebud interpreter.) I am not stopping on the
details of the Bill. I am trying to give you the complete picture.
We will come back to the details.

Now, I left for the last the one point in this whole program
which I think will continue to be a matter of debate unless it is
changed. That is the feature of the Bill which gives the Secretary
of the Interior authority to transfer the individual title to the
community, even without the consent of the allottee.

I am not yet going to make my own recommendation. I want to
state for your consideration the reason why you might want the
Secretary to have this power. If a community is proceeding by an
exchange and voluntary arrangement to get its grazing lands
blocked for effective use, and still more so if a community is pro-

57

ceeding by exchange and voluntary relinquishment to get its tim-
ber lands blocked so that they may be handled in a business-like
and conservative way, that community might find itself in a posi-
tion of being held up by some one person. A man who might be
willing and anxious to relinquish his land in exchange for benefits,
might see a chance to demand an extortionate price. Then that
community might be glad if it possessed the power, or if somebody
possessed the power, to compel that individual to be reasonable
and to play square.

Now, I do not present that as a reason why this compulsory
feature ought to be kept in the Bill, but rather ah an explanation
why it was put in the Bill as formally introduced. Ordinarily, in
any event, the whole operation would be a voluntary one pursued
by the allottees because it would be greatly to their advantage,
both immediate and in the long run. Here and there, in the ab-
sence of a power of compulsion lodged in somebody, you might get
a hold-up.

If the Indians were tolerant and were unanimous in wanting
that element of compulsion kept in the Bill, then I think it might
do no harm and some good.

On the other hand, Indians might well be afraid of it because
they might fear arbitrary action by the Secretary of the Interior
or unwise action. All of us up here on the platform are agreed
that it is a relatively unimportant point which, if we don't have
it, will not seriously get in the way of the things that you all
want.

So, you might either vote to wipe it out of the Bill, making
the whole thing voluntary, or you might vote that under certain
conditions compulsion would be lodged in the Indian community
with the consent of the Secretary of the Interior. You might, for
example, vote that in a given tribe if four-fifths of the enrolled
members want compulsion to be possible in that tribe, then the
law will permit that tribe to use it.

Now I am going to start my presentation at this point. I am
going to read you merely three questions that have been suggested
to me by Mr. Woehlke. The kind of questions you might put to
yourselves.

1. Do you want Legislation to stop the further loss of your land by stopping allotment and extending the trust period and tax exemptions on your land?

2. Do you want legislation and appropriations for buying land for those hundred thousand Indians who now have no land?

3. Do you want legislation that will enable you to develope your tim-
ber and grazing land, and the checkerboard system, and put your land
in such condition that you can raise more stock on it or get better
rent for it?

58

4. Do you want legislation that will end the loss of land through heirship and place deceased land back into tribal ownership with pro- per compensation to the heirs?

Do you want all of that subject to the condition that the property rights of Indians who now own land shall not be taken away or diminished, and that means that property rights shall be in- heritable and descendable to your children. Those questions mere- ly sum up this land program. If the Indians of the country an- wer them with a yes, then it would be the duty of the Indian Of- fice, of the Secretary of the Interior, of the committees of Con- gress to work over these principles and purposes into legislation that would accomplish these purposes and not other purposes. We would be pledged to do this as a matter of public record-to get this, or get nothing. You will note that from these questions as I have read them to you the element of compulsion has been left out. The entire matter is left as a voluntary thing with the individual Indian and the community of which you are a part. (End of Mr. Collier's speech.)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: With your permission I would like to declare a recess for ten minutes so that we can open the windows and air this place out.

Recess.

Congress convened after ten minutes recess.

Mr. WOEHLKE, Chairman: I think we all enjoyed that re- cess. I almost feel tempted to make it permanent. (Laughter.)

Now, the general session for this evening is called off. In place of the general session we will have individual sessions of the var- ious delegations and I would suggest that all the Sioux Delega- tions meet here at 7:30 in order to discuss their particular pro- blems with the Commissioner and his representatives, ask ques- tions concerning their particular problems, and have them an- wered right there. For the same purpose I suggest that the Mon- tana tribes—Blackfeet, Fort Belknap, Fort Peck, Crow, Rocky Boy delegations—meet in the dormitory of House No. 1, at 7:30 this evening for the same purpose of close, intimate discussion of their problems and of their questions concerning this legislation with the representatives of the Commissioner, and that the other tribes, the Winnebago, and the Shoshoni and the Omaha, and all the rest of them including Turtle Mountain, meet here at 7:30 in one of the school rooms which Mr. Staley will show them and that they be here promptly at 7:30 so that we may get under way, because they will have many questions to ask and it will take time. But, in that way we can speed up the proceedings and we can give various tribes information and replies concerning

their particular problems; so the Sioux delegations will meet here at 7:30 in this auditorium, the Montana Tribes will meet in Dor- mitory of House No. 1 at 7:30 and the rest of the tribes will meet in one of the school rooms here at 7:30. The school room that I mentioned is on the second floor in the northeast corner.

Mr. DAVIDSON: Mr. Chairman. (Is recognized.) I am the gen- tleman that was out of order this morning. Mr. Chairman, I was requested this morning to put my question in writing and I have done so and it is on your table, and I desire that my question be read publicly and explained publicly before this convention con- cerning the second section of the land question.

Mr. WOEHLKE: We have about 110 questions here. We have found it right here on top. Your question will be answered right away.

The meeting tomorrow afternoon will take place in the Civic Auditorium in Rapid City, beginning at 2 o'clock. We expect a very large attendance there and we feel that we should have at least one meeting when this auditorium is available where we can accomodate all those who want to come in and listen or speak and at this meeting tomorrow afternoon we want to do the listening and we want you to do the talking, so I hope you will all be there.

Now, continuing with the discussion of land questions, the Com- missioner wishes to conclude his remarks and to read Mr. David- son's question and give him his reply.

Mr. COLLIER: I will first read Mr. Davidson's question: "Turn to page 26 of the Bill, title 3, beginning of Section 3. Section 3, as you will note, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to with- draw any surplus or ceded land and bring them back into tribal ownership."

The fourth line of the paragraph in question "Such lands shall be re-opened to sale, settlement, and entry." That means these surplus or ceded lands, if it is found that they are not needed, shall be sold under existing law and the proceeds deposited to the credit of the tribe. In order to clear up any possible misunder- standing of the paragraph, these words ought to be inserted on line 11, to read:

"The Secretary of the Interior shall determine what lands, referred to in the above paragraph, lying outside * * *."

In other words, any surplus or any of this land that is already let open for entry, that is brought back and then found that the Indians have no need for it, shall be sold under existing law and the money given to the Indians.

Now, my staff points out that I have neglected to make one

59