nitial point of 1871, and proceeded to run his line therefrom. The Indians were not satisfied with this and threatened to destroy all monuments set on that line. This fact having been reported to this office, the agent was instructed to confer with the surveyor and see if an agreement could not be reached. Thereupon the deputy surveyor proceeded to run the line as pointed out by the Indians.

1

The Surveyor-General was not satisfied that this line had been run in conformity with the requirements of the treaty; and in accordance with his suggestion a joint investigation of the matter was made by a special agent of the General Land Office and Special Agent Gordon of this office. They recommended a line to commence at the initial point first adopted by McQuinn, but in its prolongation differing materially from either of the surveys theretofore made. In the main this office approved of these recommendations, and they were adopted in view of the fact that it seemed impracticable to obtain a more satisfactory result. But in accordance with instructions issued by the Department, all parties supposed to have knowledge of the true location of this line, or of the reasons which had governed the previous locations thereof, have been called upon for any additional information on the subject in their possession. It is extremely doubtful, however, if any conclusion can be reached which will be alike satisfactory to the Indians and the white settlers in the vicinity. But it is important that the boundary should be located and permanently marked at an early date. In no other way can the disputes now constantly occurring on this subject be prevented.

NORTHWEST INDIAN COMMISSION.

The work of this Commission was referred to at length in the last annual report of this Bureau.

During the early part of the present Congress, nine agreements concluded by the Commission with Indian tribes were transmitted to Congress for ratification.

The three agreements with the Indians of the Fort Peck, Fort Belknap, and Blackfeet Agencies, in Montana, were ratified by the act of Congress, approved May 1, 1888 (25 Stat., 113, and page 302 of this report).

The other agreements are still pending before Congress, and are as follows:

With the Chippewas of Minnesota (two agreements). These agreements had also been submitted to the previous Congress.

With the tribes of the Fort Berthold Agency, Dakota.

With the Coeur d'Alène Indians in Idaho.

With the upper and middle bands of Spokanes and the Calispel Indians in Washington Territory.

With the Flathead and other Indians of the Flathead Agency, Montana.

INDIAN DEPREDATION CLAIMS.

The seventeenth section of the act of June 30, 1834 (4 Stat., 731), "to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes and to preserve peace on the frontiers," provides as follows:

That if any Indian or Indians, belonging to any tribe in amity with the United States, shall, within the Indian country, take or destroy the property of any person lawfully within such country, or shall pass from the Indian country into any State or Territory inhabited by citizens of the United States, and there take, steal, or destroy, any horse, horses, or other property, belonging to any citizen or inhabitant of the United States, such citizen or inhabitant, his representative, attorney, or agent, may make application to the proper superintendent, agent, or subagent, who, upon being furnished with the necessary documents and proofs, shall, under the direction of the President, make application to the nation or tribe to which said Indian or Indians shall belong, for satisfaction; and if such nation or tribe shall neglect or refuse to make satisfaction, in a reasonable time, not exceeding twelve months, it shall be the duty of such superintendent, agent, or subagent, to make return of his doings to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, that such further steps may be taken as shall be proper, in the opinion of the President, to obtain satisfaction for the injury; and, in the meantime, in respect to the property so taken, stolen or destroyed, the United States guaranty, to the party so injured, an eventual indemnification: Provided, That, if such injured party, his representative, attorney, or agent, shall, in any way, violate any of the provisions of this act, by seeking or attempting to obtain private satisfaction or revenge, he shall forfeit all claim upon the United States for such indemnification: And provided, also, That, unless such claim shall be presented within three years after the commission of the injury, the same shall be barred. And if the nation or tribe to which such Indian may belong, receive an annuity from the United States, such claim shall, at the next payment of the annuity, be deducted therefrom, and paid to the party injured; and, if no annuity is payable to such nation or tribe, then the amount of the claim shall be paid from the Treasury of the United States: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent the legal apprehension and punishment of any Indian having so offended.

Under the provisions of this law and under various treaty provisions a large number of claimants, both citizens and Indians, have for years been appealing in vain to the Government for pecuniary redress of personal injuries, and for compensation for property taken and destroyed. Prior to July 26, 1866, when section 2097 of Revised Statutes was enacted, prohibiting the application of Indian funds otherwise than as expressly provided by law, a few of these claims were paid out of treaty funds by Indian agents and by special legislation; and since that time, under said act, and section 2098 Revised Statutes, a few more claims have been paid by special appropriations; still leaving more than five thousand petitioners anxiously awaiting some adequate and definite legislation for their relief.

The act of March 3, 1885 (23 Stat., 376), as amended by act of May 15, 1886 (24 Stat., 44), making appropriations for the investigation of Indian depredation claims, is limited in its provisions, and under it, as construed by the Department, the following classes of claims only are entitled to investigation, to wit:

Such claims in behalf of citizens of the United States as may be chargeable against any tribe of Indians by reason of any treaty between such tribes and the

United States, including claims of this character barred by statute, provided such claims were pending in the Department March 3, 1885; and claims that were not oarred March 3, 1885, are included within the claims to be investigated, although filed after the passage of either the act of 1885 or 1886.

This leaves uuprovided for (1) all claims not chargeable against Indians by reason of treaty obligations; (2) claims in favor of Indians against Indians; (3) claims of Indians against white citizens; (4) all claims barred by statute, which have been filed since the passage of the act of March 3, 1885.

Under said act of March 3, 1885, as amended by act of May 15, 1886, the work of investigating these claims has been prosecuted during the year with such a force as the limited appropriation of $20,000 would allow, and such progress has been made in their disposition as was possible under the conditions. Among the large number of cases pending only a very few have been prepared in compliance with Department rules, or even in such a manner as to admit of fair and intelligent action. Generally, the petitions present conclusions instead of facts and circumstances, whilst the affidavits in support thereof are ex parte, brief, and contain the mere opinions of the affiants, deduced from hearsay or otherwise, thus creating the necessity of calling the attention of claimants to these defects, and then of instructing and directing them how to make the necessary amendments.

But notwithstanding the many difficulties presented, 340 claims, involving about $1,025,332, have been examined during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888, by special agents, and have been investigated and acted on by this office. Eight hundred and fifty new applications have been filed by citizens, claiming indemnities in the aggregate sum of $2,070,055, on account of alleged Indian depredations committed between the years 1853 and 1886.

The investigations that have been made by the office and reported to Congress since the passage of the act of May 15, 1886, will be found to contain full statements of all the facts and circumstances presented in the respective claims; such as the places of residence of claimants and witnesses; when, where, how, and by what tribes the depredations were committed; the amount and character of the property lost, and its market value; also a résumé of former action taken upon the several cases, and of the reports made thereon by Indian agents and special agents, together with such findings and recommendations as are be. lieved by this office, upon a careful consideration of the testimony, to be just and fair.

Upon none of the claims investigated and reported to Congress has any action been taken, except that the House has referred them to a special committee which was organized during the last session and given exclusive jurisdiction of this class of claims.

A bill (H. R. 8990) passed the House during the last session, and is now pending in the Senate, providing for the establishment of a court

vested with equity powers to finally adjudicate upon the facts set forth in such claims.

Neither this nor any other action that has been taken by Congress on the subject during the last three years has made provision for the payment of these claims, but it has stimulated holders of claims to greater interest and activity in their prosecution, and has thus increased the correspondence and other work of the office in relation to such claims. Within a reasonable time after these claims originated and were presented payments thereof might have been made out of treaty funds of the Indians without seriously embarrassing the financial condition of the respective tribes; but now, since the claims have assumed such large proportions, except in the case of the Five Civilized Tribes and of the Osages, the payment of these claims out of tribal funds would reduce the tribes to a condition of greater dependence upon the Government.

GENERAL REMARKS.

PURCHASE OF INDIAN SUPPLIES.

Remembering various unfavorable reports and intimations in reference to what is known as the contract system of purchasing supplies for the Indian Bureau, and having in mind certain annoying difficulties recently experienced by this office in the purchase of blankets, I shall briefly describe the method of purchasing supplies, and suggest what, in my opinion, would be improvements thereof.

The process by which goods, supplies, etc., are now obtained for the Indian service is as follows:

(1) Authority is obtained by the Commissioner from the Secretary to make due advertisement inviting proposals to furnish annuity goods, supplies, etc., the quantities thereof required having been previously determined upon estimates submitted to the Indian Office by the sev eral Indian agents.

(2) Sealed proposals, accompanied by samples of the articles proposed to be furnished, are received.

(3) At the specified time the bids are opened in the presence of the Commissioner, a representative of the Secretary, and of the Board of Indian Commissioners, and are read in the presence of the bidders, and are then numbered, recorded, and abstracted. For the names of the bidders numbers are substituted on both abstracts and samples.

(4) With the abstract of bids, and with the samples of goods before them, the Commissioner, the Secretary's representative, and the Board of Indian Commissioners, assisted by the judgment of expert inspectors of the respective articles, award the contracts.

(5) Under these contracts deliveries are made, and the articles delivered are examined and compared with the samples by expert inspectors appointed by the Commissioner. Articles which are by the inspection determined to be equal to the sample are accepted, and those determined

to be not equal are rejected, and in lieu thereof the contractor is required to furnish proper articles within five days. If he fail in this requirement, the office is by said failure authorized to purchase proper articles at the expense of the contractor.

It will be seen that under this process of securing goods and supplies each bidder who offers to supply a certain article, as, for instance, clothing, hats, boots, shoes, blankets, dry goods, or harness, submits a sample of the article he wishes to supply, with the price thereof stated in his proposal. Thus it will be seen that a hundred or more dealers in clothing may each send in a sample overcoat, and a dozen or more dealers in blankets may each send in a sample blanket. Before any award can be made all the samples of an article thus submitted are examined by an expert judge of the goods offered, who determines their relative merits as to quality and price, and after such an examination the Commissioner, the Secretary's representative, and the purchasing committee of the Board of Indian Commissioners select the sample of the articlethe overcoat or the blanket, for instance that they think is best for the service. Thus they often take goods of higher price than some other goods of that sort which have been submitted, because the lowerpriced goods have not the same relative value or will not, in their opinion, meet the requirements of the service. Thereupon lower biddersfor the blanket contract, for instance-charge that the inspector was incompetent or that their low-priced goods were passed over in the interest of some person who made a higher bid for goods of no better quality, and the suspicion of favoritism easily becomes intensified into a charge of fraud. When deliveries commence, as for instance of blankets, and the inspector, after examination, passes or refuses to pass the goods as up to the sample, it may follow that disappointed bidders, partisan maligners, scandal-mongers, and even fair-minded friends of the Indians will allow the suspicion of incompetency or of partiality or of prejudice on the part of the inspector to become a belief in his dishonesty. Thus, the contract system of the Indian service is made in certain quarters a by-word and a reproach, and reputable dealers hesitate to make proposals to supply the service with their goods. Moreover public officers charged with the duty of making the contracts and supervising deliveries thereunder, often require considerable moral courage to do justice to a contractor against whom the hue-and-cry of the party manager, the newspaper reporter, the disappointed bidder, or the personal enemy has been raised.

A better and in every way more satisfactory method of making purchases would be for the Indian Office to fix the standard of the goods it desires to purchase, and have standard samples of the articles required. For instance, specify the quality of the wool, the size, the color, the weight, the threads, the strength, and the finish of the blanket required and provide a standard sample thereof. This method of requesting bids would do away with the large number of samples submitted by bidders every year. In other words, if the Bureau were to

12798-IND 88——vi