Mr. MORGAN. That was 20 or 25 years ago, at least.

Mr. BUCHANAN. There is no data available by which a man can find that out, is there?

Mr. MORGAN. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are these people citizens of other countries, or American citizens living abroad?

Mr. MORGAN. A great many of them are citizens of this country, persons who have come here and gone back to their own country. Mr. LEE. I know of a soldier who fought in France, an American citizen, who fought under the French flag, and he is drawing a pension now from the French Government.

NUMBER OF PENSIONERS ON ROLLS.

Mr. CRAMTON. The number of pensioners on the rolls is 535,932, residing in the United States, and 3,104 residing in foreign countries. What proportion of the 3,104 are not citizens of the United States does not appear, but, on the other hand, it does not appear what proportion of those residing in the United States receiving pensions are not citizens. It might be interesting also to say that there are 62 foreign countries represented, and that of the 3,104 in foreign countries, 1,582, or a little more than half, are in Canada.

The CHAIRMAN. Nobody knows whether they still retain their cititzenship?

Mr. CRAMTON. No.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1924.

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS.

STATEMENT OF MR. EDGAR B. MERITT, ASSISTANT INDIAN COMMISSIONER.

PURCHASE AND TRANSFER OF INDIAN SUPPLIES.

Mr. CRAMTON. Your first item is for the purchase and transportation of Indian supplies, for which you are asking $21,126.28 for 1923, and $9,102.03 for 1922. What about that?

Mr. MERITT. This is the item we come to the committee for a deficiency appropriated every year. We are unable to control this appropriation.

Freight rates have gone up considerably in recent years, and the Budget Bureau has not this year allowed our estimate. In order to avoid a deficiency in this case it would have been necessary for us to close our schools and hospitals, and it was such an urgent matter we felt that if we explained the matter to Congress we would get the necessary appropriation.

This appropriation provides for the transportation expense of goods and supplies to our schools and agencies.

Mr. CRAMTON. As a matter of fact, when you speak about the Budget, for the fiscal year 1923 this committee gave you all you could find in your heart to ask for, did it not?

Mr. MERITT. As soon as we got the appropriation the railroads raised the freight rates.

Mr. CRAMTON. So the Budget was not to blame.

Mr. MERITT. No, sir. For next year we estimated $600,000 and the Bureau of the Budget allowed us $500,000. We hope we will not have to ask for another deficiency, but it is possible we will, because we were not able to get the full amount we requested.

Mr. CRAMTON. You might explain to the committee what this item

covers.

Mr. MERITT. The item covers the cost of the transportation of goods and supplies to our various schools and agencies and other activities.

We also have three warehouses, one in Chicago, one in St. Louis, and one in San Francisco, and we pay the expenses of those warehouses out of this appropriation. We can not estimate this appropriation definitely in advance because of its very nature.

Mr. CRAMTON. Why is it necessary that this should run along two years after the close of the fiscal year?

Mr. MERITT. The railroad people are slow in submitting their accounts. It is the fault of the railroad people. If they would submit their accounts more promptly we would not have this difficulty.

Mr. CRAMTON. Does not that make it very difficult for you to check up so that you can know what you are doing?

Mr. MERITT. It does.

Mr. CRAMTON. It is not feasible for you to put a time limit on it? Mr. MERITT. We have found it impracticable in the past to do that, but we could write to the railroads, insisting that they submit their accounts promptly.

Mr. CRAMTON. What would happen if Congress, not in this bill, necessarily, but in the case of the regular appropriation bill sometime would put in a limitation to the effect that the appropriation should not be available for anything that was not billed within a certain length of time after the close of the fiscal year?

Mr. MERITT. That would help us.

Mr. CRAMTON. Or would it, on other hand, be deemed an invitation to wait that length of time?

Mr. MERITT. Some of them, of course, would defer action to the limit.

Mr. CRAMTON. Suppose you call that to our attention next year, Mr. Meritt, if you remember it.

Mr. MERITT. All right; I will be glad to do it.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to be a very large amount to go over, does it not?

Mr. CRAMTON. The total is about five or six hundred thousand dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. There was a total of $490,000 in 1923 and $571.000 for 1922. It does not seem that they ought to have so much.

Mr. CRAMTON. Manifestly it must be very difficult to guard against mistakes when it gets so old.

Mr. MERITT. This is one of our difficult problems in the Indian Service, and it causes us more worry in connection with appropriations than any other item in the bill.

Mr. CRAMTON. The only thing I can see would be some sort of limitation, but it would have to be in the main appropriation. It would not work at all here.

Mr. MERITT. No, sir. I will be glad to call that to your attention next year.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you have had money enough to pay these bills if they were rendered in time?

Mr. MERITT. No, sir. This appropriation has been short for several years. The freight rates have advanced and we have not been able to get the full amount estimated for, and this year the Budget Bureau, as I stated, cut our estimates a hundred thousand dollars. The CHAIRMAN. This is not this year; this is 1922 and 1923 that we are talking about.

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir; I am speaking about the present estimates. Mr. CRAMTON. The money is available; it was obligated, and so long as the appropriation lasts it is available?

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir.

Mr. CRAMTON. But you have used up the appropriation?
Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir.

COURT COSTS, OMAHA INDIANS V. UNITED STATES.

Mr. CRAMTON. The next item is:

Court costs, case of Omaha Indians against United States (tribal funds): To pay the balance of court costs incurred in the case of the Omaha Tribe of Indians against the United States, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, June 1, 1920, $44.90, payable from the tribal funds of the Omaha Indians.

Mr. MERITT. This is a small amount that the attorneys who represented the Indians in prosecuting this case advanced as part of the court costs. They are asking that they be reimbursed for this amount, and we have no authority to reimburse them. The Indians. acknowledge their indebtedness and have funds to their credit, and we are asking for this authority.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no law that authorizes you to do this? Mr. MERITT. No, sir. We have to have congressional authority to pay out this money.

The CHAIRMAN. This is not legislation, is it?

Mr. CRAMTON. I do not think it is legislation, no; but they have got to have an authorization.

However, the decision of the suit is said to have been favorable to the tribe-a suit by the tribe against the United States. In that case should the court costs be paid by the tribe or by the United States?

Mr. MERITT. They should be paid by the tribe.

Mr. CRAMTON. Why?

Mr. MERITT. Because they brought the suit.

Mr. CRAMTON. They won out on it?

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir.

Mr. CRAMTON. Generally the costs follow the result of the suit. Mr. MERITT. The attorneys charged certain fees, and in connection with their services they advanced the cost of filing certain papers, and they want to be reimbursed.

The CHAIRMAN. That would be a proper charge against the tribe?

Mr. MERITT. I think so; and that is the reason why we are asking this authority.

The CHAIRMAN, That is attorneys' fees?

Mr. BUCHANAN. It is not attorneys' fees, but it is money advanced by the attorneys for the benefit of their clients, and the clients ought to refund it.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. MERITT. We thought so.

Mr. BUCHANAN. It is really a stronger obligation than a fee.

REIMBURSEMENT TO WALTER RUNKE.

Mr. CRAMTON. The next item is as follows:

Reimbursement to Walter Runke: For payment to Walter Runke, former superintendent of the Western Navajo Indian Agency, Ariz., as authorized by the act of February 26, 1923, $3,999.52.

The act referred to, which I have before me, authorizing this uppropriation, was approved a year ago.

Mr. MERITT. This is submitted in compliance with the act of Congress referred to, the act of February 26, 1923. We found that Superintendent Runke expended this amount in defending himself against the charge of murder. At the time he was indicted he was superintendent of the Western Navajo Indian Agency, Ariz. This Indian was killed by other Indians on the reservation and we thought it was our duty to defend Mr. Runke.

Mr. CRAMTON. There was something of a trial. I notice the charge was finally dismissed on motion of the United States.

Mr. MERITT. There was a trial, and there was considerable work connected with this trial, but it was finally dismissed by the court. There was considerable testimony taken and these costs were incurred.

The CHAIRMAN. The charge was murder?

Mr. MERITT. The charge was murder. The Indian policemen went out to arrest this Indian, and they had to kill the Indian. Some friends of the Indian went into court and had Superintendent Runke indicted, and we considered that his action was in the line of duty.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Is this Mr. Runke an officer authorized to make an arrest himself?

Mr. MERITT. He was superintendent of the reservation.

Mr. BUCHANAN. I know that.

Mr. MERITT. He was an officer who had jurisdiction over the Indian police, and he directed those police to go out and arrest this Indian. That was within his authority.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Did he go with them?

Mr. MERITT. I do not think so.

Mr. BUCHANAN. And then they charged him with murder?

Mr. MERITT. Yes; they charged him with murder.

Mr. CRAMTON. The justification here hardly gives you the right impression. It says:

on de

Which charge was dismissed on motion of the United States fendant's plea that the alleged offense was committed in the performance of his official duty.

That would give the impression that there was not much of a contest about it. The authorization, though-the act passed a year. ago-recites:

His alleged offenses having been committed in the performance of his of ficial duties, the charge against him in the first trial having been dismissed after a severance and after acquittal of his late codefendants, and he having been acquitted in the second trial.

So evidently there was some considerable contest in the matter.

Mr. MERITT. There was considerable contest in the courts and there was considerable feeling. This superintendent was more or less persecuted in this matter for a while, because the prosecuting attorney of that district attempted to get him punished.

The CHAIRMAN. Where is he now?

Mr. MERITT. He is out of the service. He resigned soon afterwards.

Mr. BUCHANAN. I imagine this is the only public service in which any compensation or return of money is given to a man for defending himself against a charge of murder. I know of no State service in the Union where a sheriff or any other peace officer if he kills a man in the discharge of his duty gets any recompense. Do you. Mr. Cramton?

Mr. CRAMTON. I have always assumed that that would be the case as to a sheriff. I have had no experience with it.

Mr. BUCHANAN. It would be exactly the same thing, except that the sheriff is required to make the arrest.

Mr. CRAMTON. There are several defendants, Mr. Meritt. Was this $3,999.52 entirely devoted to Runke's defense, or does it include the expenses of the other defendants?

Mr. MERITT. Those other four parties indicted were Indians, and they were without money, and I think Mr. Runke put up most of the money for the defense.

Mr. CRAMTON. Runke really did expend this money?

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir.

Mr. CRAMTON. Is your department satisfied of that?

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir. We required him to submit under oath a detailed statement of his expenditures.

The CHAIRMAN. Did he supply receipts for the money paid out? Mr. MERITT. I do not think we have the receipts, but we have his statement under oath. It has been checked up very carefully, and we feel that this amount is just.

The CHAIRMAN. There was a law passed authorizing this amount? Mr. CRAMTON. There was a law passed authorizing this specific

amount.

Mr. MERITT. It was gone into fully by Congress.

Mr. BUCHANAN. That settles it.

PAYMENT TO INDIANS OF WIND RIVER RESERVATION, WYO.

Mr. CRAMTON. The next item is for payment to Indians of Wind River Reservation, Wyo. That is the payment of an allotment, evidently, to one Indian of $50.

Mr. MERITT. Yes, sir; $85,000 was paid out to 1,700 Indians at $50 apiece. After the money was paid out, some other Indians came in