request to talk the matter over with the commissioner. I do not know that I have anything further to say. My only interest is to find out just exactly what their claims are and to see if they have any valid reason to urge why the regularly elected council should not represent them. As I understand, there is some friction there, and I would like to have the mattter cleared up to my own satisfaction.

Mr. ELSTON. That is, it is desired to have the matter fully heard here and testimony given and have an opportunity given to these people here to have a fair hearing.

Mr. CARSS. Yes; that is what I would like to see done.

Mr. ELSTON. I suppose the order now would be to hear from the delegation selected to testify for them.

Mr. MERITT. That is what is expected.

STATEMENT OF LOUIS AYNESNASSUNG, INTERPRETED BY JOHN GOSLIN.

Mr. ELSTON. Whom do you represent?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I represent the various tribes in the State of Minnesota; the balance are those from Wisconsin.

Mr. ELSTON. What are the names of the tribes?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The Chippewa Tribe of Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Mr. ELSTON. Are you chief or elected representative of these Indians?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Yes.

Mr. ELSTON. Of what band?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Fond du Lac Reservation, Minn.

Mr. ELSTON. State what you want the committee to know and what objection, if any, you have to this bill ?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Honorable House of Representatives and Committee on Indian Affairs, I appreciate the opportunity to make my appearance as to the bill that will be presented by the delegates here, which is being proposed to have passed and become legislation. Mr. ELSTON. What have you to say about the bill?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The delegation you see here present at this meeting are members of the Chippewa Tribe, representing the various bands of Indians on the reservations from Minnesota and Wisconsin. I came here with the purpose to look into the interests of the treaty right which we have in common, the treaty that was made in 1842. That was my purpose when I left where I came from, but since this bill has been brought before us I will speak in behalf of the Chippewa Tribe. That is, the delegates from this part of the country do not know any such bill is being proposed by any delegates that are supposed to represent the Chippewa Tribe. We have not heard what the bill was for until we arrived here.

Mr. ELSTON. Are you for or against the bill?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Any bill or any legislation which concerns my tribe where I come from and that I do not know anything about, I oppose it; but if I should happen to be told and consulted about it, well, I will think and consider and do what is right.

Mr. ELSTON. Did you see the bill or hear about it before you came to Washington with this delegation?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I never heard that there was such a bill or ever seen it or ever was given any explanation of it.

Mr. ELSTON. Why did you and this delegation come to Washington? What was your errand?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I came here for the purpose of the treaty that was made between my grandfather and the Government, to find how I could proceed in order to obtain the rights and privileges. given me in that treaty.

Mr. ELSTON. Have you read the bill or had it read to you?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Yes; it was read to me and I have it here.

Mr. ELSTON. What points in the bill or what parts of the bill areobjectionable?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The bill that I have aloft in my hand here is a bill that I do not understand and have not been consulted or given an explanation thereof, and I oppose it for this reason, that any such bill it is the custom amongst the tribes wherever such a bill is proposed to be passed that it is requested that the Government officials consult with the Indians, as I understand, and, therefore, I believe that when such a bill is being proposed, before it becomes legislation, I should be consulted as to what opinion I may have, as it may help me to a certain extent, if explained in a proper manner, and it comes on the basis of a legal principle. I do oppose it for this reason, that the delegates that are supposed to represent my tribes where I come from are not legally appointed by the Chippewa Tribe of Indians. They are not appointed by a legal council. It does not come from the right source, and I have not been notified by these delegates that were sent here to propose this bill.

Mr. JOHN ARTEN, of Superior, Wis. That interpretation of that is absolutely wrong. The interpreter is not interpreting as to what the man says. You asked him what part of that bill he objected to. Mr. ELSTON. Do you represent the other side?

Mr. ARTEN. Yes.

Mr. GOSLIN. I will come to that in a moment.

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Here is where the allotments are to be issued out among the members of the tribes. The competent Indian will enjoy the benefits of allotting these allotments, whereas the noncompetent will not enjoy the same privileges as the present Indians that are enjoying the privilege of competency. It seems to me to be under the control of another party where a competent Indian will be deprived of such restriction.

Mr. ELSTON. Do you expect to be competent or do your people expect to be competent before long, and when they reach their competency will they have the same rights with the others?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I understand the meaning and purpose of this bill, but I say here that it is the right of my people. We do not know the persons that drew up this bill. We do not know their character. We do not know them personally and we do not know them to refer them, do not know their history or their principle, and if I want such a man I want somebody that I know to represent me and do an act that would benefit me. There has been an appropriation made here for all these delegates that have come here from time to time, to defray their expenses and all such as that, but of the appropriation that has been granted to them for their expenses, the remainder of it after the expenses have been defrayed, they have divided among the

few that have been here at Washington. That is what we object to, and I say that if I wanted that man to represent me, I would have the council of mine appoint a delegate that should represent me.

But I

do not know this gentleman or any of the gentlemen that presented this bill and, therefore, I protest against it.

Mr. MERITT. He is now protesting against the $10,000 appropriation carried in the Indian bill for the Chippewa council.

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. After these delegates that have been here have gotten the bill through granting them certain appropriations, the Indian has been deprived of that appropriation and has not received any benefit out of it, only the few that have been here to represent the Indians.

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Who has read this bill to you? You can not read or write English yourself?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. NO.

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Did you have a meeting with your people before you came here in order to explain the bill or have it read over?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Where we stopped or boarded at the place I first saw the bill, and it was read and explained to me there.

Mr. ELSTON. He said that they had no notification of this delegation coming on here; that is, this other delegation. How is that? Was it not made public there in that country and did not most people know that that delegation was coming on here?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. They had a council where they did not notify Indians what his purpose was. In my council I have a council hall where I hold councils and there it is my desire when any tribal matter comes up for discussion that it is the proper place to bring this matter up and tell me what the object of it is, and then I would be satisfied. But where I simply hear that they will only want a certain type of Indians to meet at a certain place, that is where an Indian is barred out again.

Mr. ELSTON. Do you know what the law is with regard to Indian councils? Why do you think this council was not regular in so far as you know about the laws?

Mr. ANYESNASSUNG. The treaty that was laid down for me and the provisions that are in the treaty it states jurisdiction was barred on my reservation. That is the case where I come from; that is the object what they want to do with me, and it is the custom and this custom is law, that not being able to produce anything in writing and not able to speak the English language, it was the proper place for them to explain it to the Indians.

Mr. ELSTON. Are you chief of your tribe by inheritance or election? Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. It comes from away back, my grandfather and great-grandfather have been chief, and my father was chief, and now I am the chief.

Mr. ELSTON. Have you any specific objections to the bill?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The interpreter has read to me these 15 sheets of paper, and some things have been brought out that would conflict with the treaty rights that I have where I come from. I leave it to my interpreter to explain those things to his best ability.

Mr. ELSTON. State what he has told you.

Mr. GOSLIN. Not attempting to speak in his language by interpreting, and to take the full advantage of the time he wants me to explain the rest of it.

Mr. ELSTON. Unless he has told it to you, we will take that up later.

How do you want this thing done if you should have the arrangement of it?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. If I proposed any such a bill to be passed, I would only ask the gentleman to have legislation passed that would not conflict with any of our Indian property or the property that is now my property.

Mr. GOSLIN. He means to say that the Fond du Lac Indians have no authority or power or any title on the White Earth Reservation, and the White Earth Reservation has no power to rule or control the tribes on the Red Lake Reservation.

Mr. ELSTON. Are you satisfied to let things stay as they are now without any legislation?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. Delegates who are here at present were sent here for the purpose of discussing the 1842 treaty for certain rights that they have in the treaty and after their affairs have been settled properly and gotten what their purpose is in coming here, what they were sent here for, they will go back to their people and hold a general council of the tribes included in the treaties, and then they propose to make a new treaty which will settle the standing of their people.

Mr. ELSTON. We thank you for your kindness in coming here. Mr. COLE. I think it would be a good suggestion, if they knew nothing about this bill until brought here, to give them an opportunity to discuss it among themselves.

Mr. ELSTON. What proportion of all the bands or of the total population in all the reservations does this delegation represent? Is it a half or a third or a fourth, or what is the percentage of the total Indian population which this delegation represent?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I can not figure the percentage that I represent. I can furnish you the list of names that I represent here. Mr. TILLMAN. Do you know about the percentage?

Mr. GOSLIN. About 20 per cent.

Mr. ELSTON. You think it is only about one-fifth of the whole Indian population that this delegation represents?

Mr. TILLMAN. Not the Indians here, but those that the delegation represents. What percentage of the whole tribe does the delegation represent?

Mr. GOSLIN. They represent about 75 per cent of the tribe where they come from. The property owners among the Indians are so varied that the agitators are only about 25 per cent of them.

Mr. CARSS. Were these men present when you held the council at White Earth last fall and selected delegates to come down here?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The gentleman standing over there (Mr. Arten), I did not know that he was coming to Washington at all until I saw it in the paper that I get at home. I did not know who elected him to represent the tribe.

Mr. CARSS. Then you were not present at that meeting where these delegates were chosen?

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. The council that compose the Chippewa Tribe, I always hear of such a council going to be held, but the half-breeds, I never heard of their council.

Mr. ELSTON. That is very good. I think we have got his statement.

Mr. AYNESNASSUNG. I was advised by the people I represent here when I left where I come from not to mingle with any other people or any other parties or other delegates that may be here, but since I got here and saw this bill I notified the people right away what was going on here and they told me not to do anything except what they sent me here for. My purpose is to look after the treaty of 1842. Mr. ELSTON. Very well. We will hear the next witness. Mr. MERITT. I think Mr. John Arten ought to be heard now, inasmuch as he represents what is known as the general council. Mr. ELSTON. Of course, there are two sides to this. One side has been heard to a certain extent in explanation of the bill which they are in favor of. If Mr. Arten has any matter in rebuttal in contradiction of what has been said, I think we should hear the direct testimony first.

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN ARTEN, SUPERIOR, WIS.

Mr. ARTEN. I want to have the record show that the gentleman said that he was not there when the representative of the council was elected.

Mr. CARSS. He said he was not notified.

Mr. ARTEN. By the request of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the council elected our delegation. This gentleman (Mr. Aynesnassung) is now under another name. I never knew he had another name until he gave it here. His name is John McCarty, where he comes from. I am from the same reservation that he lives on. He says that he was not there when the delegation for the general council was appointed. He was there; I know he was. He made a statement there. He tells your committee here that he was not notified of these things. Our council, gentlemen of the committee, is handled just like your elections of Congress. We have a constitution, a local constitution governing the councils of local reservations, and a constitution of the general council.

Mr. ELSTON. I think that is a matter for Mr. Meritt to explain to us. This hearing is to hear these particular 20 delegates, and not to consider testimony in rebuttal which can be brought out later. We will be perfectly willing to hear testimony from you people also, but I think we had better finish with this direct testimony of these witnesses first.

Mr. MERITT. Mr. Goslin has a statement to make in his own behalf, not as interpreter.

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN GOSLIN, CHIPPEWA INDIAN RESERVE, WIS.

Mr. GOSLIN. I am a resident of the Lac de Orelle Reservation, Wisconsin. There are certain articles that conflict with the 1842 treaty. We have a title in common that belongs to us, but separately, on reservations, we have no other rights and no other title outside of our own reservation. I am not opposing this bill to the extent that it will be detrimental to the people and to a certain extent beneficial to us, providing that the treaties laid down by our grandfathers, the treaties made with our grandfathers, owing to certain property that they owned, which we demand. We come here for the purpose of looking, and to try to persuade our commissioner to give us a state