On yesterday morning I received two telegrams as authority from individuals of the tribes, not a tribal authority, but from the chief of the tribe. The first telegram reads as follows: PRESTON A. SHINN, Raleigh Hotel, Washington, D. C.: FAIRFAX, OKLA., February 14, 1923. You are on the ground and you know my and the Osages' wishes in this matter. We would like to get as much money as possible, but we do not want agency supervision at any price. NE KAH WAH SHE TUN KAH. He is chief of the Osage Tribe. The second telegram, received at the same time, reads as follows [reading]: FAIRFAX, OKLA., February 14, 1923. PRESTON A. SHINN, Raleigh Hotel, Washington, D. C.: I want any proposed Osage legislation defeated at this time. You may consider this telegram as your authority for acting as my attorney at any congressional hearing in regard to proposed Osage legislation. NE KAH WAH SHE TUN KAH, Principal Chief. This section, as it stands at this time, was substituted over in the House with a couple of amendments. The first objection that we have, and the suggestion that I would like to make is an amendment which occurs in line 5, on page 9, striking out the words amounts provided for herein" and adding the words "income of such incompetents." 66 By adding the words "income of such incompetents" you have that part of the law as it stands to-day under the act of March 3, 1921. That is the law as it stands now, by making the addition I have suggested and striking out the words amounts provided for herein." 66 The second suggestion that I shall make is at the end of line 12, on page 9. striking out the words "all of," in line 12, and all of lines 13, 14, and 15 up until the last two words, which are " and to." In other words, cutting out the provision with reference to supervision. The Osages were allotted under a law of 1906, and the roll was made up as of July 1, 1907, there being 926 members on the roll. The roll is fixed. The adult members of that tribe drew their income quarterly as it became due until the passage of the law by Congress as of March 3, 1921. From 1916 to 1921 their income was from $4,000 on up to from $5,000 or $6.000; not as much as it is now. But in the act of 1921 Congress provided that they should receive without certificate of competency, $1,000 quarterly, the balance to be invested by the Secretary of the Interior for the benefit of the allottee. The law also provided that this money should be paid to the allottee without a certificate of competency under supervision. It seems to have been the intent of the House committee, or at least the chairman of that committee who drew that bill, that it was not the idea of keeping those so-called incompetency conditions. And they are incompetent simply because they have not been given certificates of competency and have not been willing to sell their lands. They have shown competency by not being willing to sell their lands and by acquiring other lands outside of those they have inherited. But the law provides that they shall receive these payments under supervision. "Under supervision means this, that at the time the competent fellow gets $2,000 or $3,000, and the other fellow will get according to what he is spending, as a couple hundred dollars. He will take a trading order on some store for a large amount due him, and he may afterwards go back and get more money during the quarter. But that is not the kind that will get through the quarter on the money that is coming to him. I brought suit for one of these Indians in the Federal court in December last, in which we alleged that out of this $1,000 due quarterly, that under supervision they had retained in excess of $3,000. The disbursing agent filed an affidavit in that case, when the matter came up for a temporary injunction, in which the exact figures admitted that in July, 1922, they owed him $3,032. Now, that is only a part of what supervision means. They were supervising him under a liquor statute, they said, in the forties, at the time the Indians were under the War Department; at the time the Government was paying out its own money and goods to the Indians, they instructed the party who was paying out the money that if the Indian was intoxicated, or if he was convinced that intoxicating liquors were within convenient reach, that then he could not make the distribution of the goods or make payment. That was in the forties. Now, that has come on down, and these people were given absolute vested rights. And that statute can not have any application to this situation. But that act of 1921 said "the Secretary shall cause to be paid." But in the face of that, in supervising them, they do not pay it. The appropriation bill which has just been approved makes it the duty of the Indian Bureau to suppress the use of peyote among these Indians. A great many of these Indians use peyote in their religious services. But the law and the local people will suppress that the same as they have suppressed them in other matters. They will say, "Now, Mr. Indian, you are entitled to the thousand dollars, but until you can make a proper showing that you are not using it improperly, we will supervise you, and you will not get your thousand dollars." Now, as to the first part of this, that the income shall be paid to the incom petent. That is the present law. And the way it is working out is this way: It is paid $1,000 quarterly. And if there is a guardian, it is to be paid to the guardian. And the guardian, under the court, has been attempting, in most instances, to hold the Indian down to $4,000, but if that was not a sufficient amount to keep him going, they have been allowing him more than the $4,000. The balance of the money has been invested in real-estate loans and the purchase of real estate in the county at an interest of 7 per cent or 8 per cent. It is not only for the benefit of the Indian but for the benefit of the country at large. I am not here to say that these Indians, a large per cent of them, appreciate or rather enjoy being under a court guardianship. They do not. But at present, under the order for the guardianship, they are compelled to go to the agency at all times for the purpose of withdrawing whatever little sum of money they might need. Now, as they received all of their money up to 1921 and got by with it, and as you are retaining that and investing it now, why should they not have the $4,000 to do with as they did then, when you are saving $5,000 or $6,000 or $7,000 a year and investing it for them? Especially when you take into consideration the fact that the full-blood roll was made up of 926 names, according to Mr. Wright's testimony. In May, 1921, Mr. Wright, in testifying before the subcommittee of the House Committee on Indian Affairs, said that the Osage roll was made up as of July 1, 1907, and as to full bloods it contained 308 adults and 618 minors, or a total of 926 full blood; 329 of the full blood enrolled members had died prior to May 11, 1920, the date of the testimony, leaving enrolled 597 full blood as of May 11, 1920. At that same death rate, if the same rate continues until 1944, the full-blood members of the Osage Tribe will have become extinct, two years before the mineral period terminates. Then why should not some of these people be entitled to get this money and spend it? Senator HARRELD. Let me ask you a question: If I understand it, the Osages now get set apart to them, or have paid to them something like $11,000 or $12,000 a year. Mr. SHINN. That varies; this past year it was between $11,000 and $12,000. Some years more, and then it goes back again. Senator HARRELD. And all but the full-bloods are now reduced to the $500 that you speak of, but get the full amount to do with as they please? Mr. SHINN. The Indian who has a certificate, which includes practically all the mixed bloods, only a few of them draw their entire income which, this past year, was practically $12,000. Senator HARRELD. How many Osages are there in all? Mr. SHINN. There were more mixed bloods than full bloods. Senator HARRELD. How many, mixed bloods, and everybody? Mr. SHINN. Originally there were enrolled 2,250 names, on July 1, 1907. Senator HARRELD. How many incompetents do you figure now there are among the 2,250? Mr. SHINN. There is no way of figuring that, without taking all these full bloods, and according to Mr. Wright's testimony on May 11, 1920, there were 926 enrolled July 1, 1907, of which number 329 have died prior to May 11, 1920, which left a total of 597 full bloods then living, including adults and children. Senator HARRELD. Can you tell me how many are not now getting their full allotment of $11,000 or $12,000? Mr. SHINN. The minors, or children, under the law, would not be entitled to the full amount. I take it of adults and minors that probably the adults living at this time would be around 250. Senator HARRELD. Now, your position is that since they have been allowed this $11,000, they ought to be paid this $1,000 a quarter without much restriction on it? Mr. SHINN. Without any restriction whatever. They enjoyed that money and drew it until 1921 without any restriction. Senator HARRELD. How did they handle it during that time? Mr. SHINN. The act required that it should Senator HARRELD (interposing). Did they handle it judiciously? Mr. SHINN. Some of them did, and some did not. Senator CURTIS. Most of them did not. Mr. SHINN. A good many of them dil not. But you are punishing the fellow who does handle his judiciously and who ought to be allowed to enjoy it because of the fellow who is not handling it judiciously. The fellow who is really getting the punishment is the man that would handle it properly, but he is not allowed to have it. The CHAIRMAN. Do some of these Osages draw more than an indivdual share? Mr. SHINN. Oh, yes; I understand some accumulated five shares. But he gets $1,000 a quarter and that is all he gets. The CHAIRMAN. That would really entitle them to draw upward of $50,000 a year? Mr. SHINN. Yes; but he only draws $4,000. What I am asking is that you allow him to draw the $4,000 without restriction. He should be allowed to have this an enjoy it. The CHAIRMAN. At this point we will read into the record the petition of the Osage Tribe of Indians, appearing on the first page of the Congressional Record for February 3, 1923, as follows [reading]: PETITION OF THE OSAGE TRIBE OF INDIANS. To the Congress of the United States of America: We, the members of the Osage Tribe of Indians, in mass meeting assembled, at Grayhorse, Okla., on the 15th day of January, 1923, make the following brief statements: 1. We want our rights as Federal and State citizens as guaranteed us under the Constitution and the allotment act of June 28, 1906. 2. We are now asking that our money be paid to us as it was paid to us under the allotment act of June 28, 1906. 3. We are not in favor of our money being paid to us under supervision. 4. We want our guardian matters to stand as provided for us in the allotment act of 1906. 5. We also object to anyone having a certificate of competency to dictate to us in our meetings, but they may act as proxy for their families. 6. We also hereby protest against any Osage legislation, of whatsoever nature, until a law has been passed that gives to us the money that belongs to us. Submitted to and approved by our principal chief. NE-KAH-WAH-SHE-TUN-KAH. Also a telegram which came to the chairman through the Indian Department from the Osage tribal council, under date of February 13, as follows: PAWHUSKA, OKLA., February 13, 1923. BURKE, Indian Commissioner, Washington, D. C.: Please furnish copy of following Osage Council resolution, adopted unanimously, to chairman Senate committee, also Senator Harreld, before hearing Tuesday morning: "Whereas there is printed in the Congressional Record of February 3, 1923, a petition purporting to have been signed by Ne-kah-wah-she-tun-kah and about 100 members of the Osage Tribe, which petition was read by Senator Harreld and referred to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs; and "Whereas this council is familiar with the method by which the signatures to the above-mentioned petition were obtained, and also familiar with the circumstances leading up to the circulating of said petition; now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That this council by resolution advise the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs that said petition was not circulated by Ne-kah-wah-she-tun-kah or any other member of the Osage Tribe, but was circulated by Charles Evanhce, a white man, who has been working with an attorney by the name of Preston Shinn to obtain contracts from full-blood members of the Osage Tribe; that many of the signatures on said petition are those of women and children, and this council has been advised that the signatures of the same people appear several times on the petition; that representations were made to the incompetent members of the Osage Tribe that if they would sign the petition they would obtain all of their funds without any restrictions thereon; that it is the desire of all of the members of the tribe to have their funds paid to them unrestricted, and that such representations will secure the signature of any member of the tribe to any petition to that effect; that this council is advised by some members of the tribe who saw the petition that at the time it was shown to them no reference was made therein to the matter of the guardianships of Osage Indians; that said petition purports to request that the matter of guardianships be left as provided for in the act of 1906, when, as a matter of fact, the act of 1906 makes no provision for the appointment of guardians; that the council is advised that Ne-kah-wah-she-tun-kah states that he does not desire the present system of guardianship and has not authorized anyone to make such representations on his behalf; and that in general the petition above mentioned was obtained by and for white person upon false representations and does not express the wishes of the Osage Tribe; be it further "Resolved, That the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs be advised that it is the wish of the members of the Osage Tribe that H. R. 13835 be enacted by the Senate as being the nearest approach to their desires that can be obtained at this time. "Done by the Osage tribal council duly assembled at Pawhuska this 10th day of February, 1923. "Attest: "S. S. KENNEDY, Secretary." PAUL REDEAGLE, WRIGHT. Also the following telegrams presented by Senator Owen, as follows: Senator R. L. OWEN, TULSA, OKLA., February 12, 1923. United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Please vote against H. R. 13835, affecting Osage funds. This legislation unsatisfactory to citizens and Indians of Osage County. would like to see this bill defeated. Many people in Tulsa S. R. LEWIS. PAWHUSKA, OKLA., February 12, 1923. Senator ROBERT L. OWEN, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Osage provision in sundry civil omnibus bill in Senate committee soor. County unanimously against it. Please have it stricken. L. F. ROBERTS, Chairman Osage County Democratic Central Committee. PAWHUSKA, OKLA., February 12, 1923. Hon. ROBERT L. OWEN, Senate Chamber, Washington, D. C.: White citizens and Osage Indians practically unanimous in their opposition to section 12, omnibus Indian bill as passed by House. We earnestly request your aid in defeating this legislation at this session and until thorough investigation and hearings can be had. PAUL N. HUMPHREY. 34157-23-3 ROBERT L. OWEN, PAWHUSKA, OKLA., February 12, 1923. United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Osage Indian legislation contained in omnibus bill passed by the House February 3 is very objectionable to both Indians and whites. This legislation should be stricken from the bill, or at least amended so as to permit the guardians of incompetents to receive all money due their said wards. This bill as passed creates a dual jurisdiction and would undoubtedly lead to endless litigation and expense. The people in this community feel that there should be a hearing before the Senate committee on legislation so seriously affecting the rights of many people. C. E. RILEY. ROBERT L. OWEN, PAWHUSKA, OKLA., February 12, 1923. United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Section 13, Indian omnibus bill, passed by the House February 3, applicable Osages, objectionable to large majority Indians and others. Reflection on Oklahoma courts; creates dual jurisdiction; leads to conflict and confusion. Should be stricken from pending bill and comprehensive legislation enacted after full hearings and investigation by Senate Indian Committee. H. P. WHITE. ROBERT L. OWEN, PAWHUSKA, OKLA., January 22, 1923. United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Pending Osage legislation bad for both whites and Indians. Am wiring you as chairman Osage County Democratic Central Committee asking you to defeat Osage legislation. Osage County Democrats are unanimously opposed to it. L. F. ROBERTS. Mr. SHINN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read into the record this statement as a justification for the statements and figures I have given here. contains a great deal of valuable information. The CHAIRMAN. The memorandum may be read into the record. SECTION 12, H. R. 13835—Osages. Before discussing some changes that should be made in section 12 of the omnibus Indian bill I wish to submit the following facts: Mr. J. George Wright, in testifying before the subcommittee of the House Indian Committee on May 11, 1920 (p. 179, vol. 3), said that the Osage rol was made up as of July 1. 1907, and as to full bloods contained: Adults enrolled July 1, 1907_ Minors enrolled July 1, 1907 Total. Full-blood rolled members deceased prior to May 11, 1920 Total full bloods living May 11, 1920_ 308 618 926 329 597 -years-- 13 Then we have: Average full-blood deaths, per years, or 4. +25 Mineral period extended to 1946, or from 1920, date of hearing---years__ 26 600 July 1, 1907, to July 1, 1920__ |