===== page 1 =====

THE MERTAM REPORT AND THE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWAS
IN 1926 COMMISSIONER WORK ASKED THAT A STUDY BE MADE ON THE
CONDITIONS OF INDIANS IN THE UNITED STATES. THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTE
GATHERED A TEAM OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELDS OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, ETC,
WHAT THE REPORT SHOWED, GENERALLY, WAS THAT INDIANS HAD NOT
GAINED MATERIALLY FROM THE ALLOTMENT ACT NOR HAD THEY ADVANCED
SOCIALLY AS INDIVIDUALS.
rhitdee INDIANS ON THE SIX RESERVATIONS HAD AN ANNUAL INCOME
OF $233 S008RON THE AVERAGE, “INCLUDING TRIBAL AND INDIVIDUAL :
HOLDINGS. THERE WERE’ APPROXIMATELY 12,600 CHIPPEWAS ON THE SIX
ALLOTTED RESERVATIONS.
ae
tah
. NATIONWIDE OF THE 188,363 INDIANS SURVEYED, 97.8% OF THEM HAD
INDIVIDUAL INCOMES OF LESS THAT $200.00 A YEAR. OVERALL THERE WERE
NINE RESERVATIONS WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME WAS $50.00 OR LESS
PER YEAR. THE HIGHEST INCOME WAS AMONG THE OSAGES OF $19,119 AND
THE LOWEST WAS AMONG THE INDIANS OF THE CARSON JURISDICTION IN THE
SOUTHWEST. THEIR INDIVIDUAL INCOME WAS $15.00 PER YEAR.
"HE REPORT, ALSO SHOWED THAT AMONG THE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA WILD
-
RICE, HUNTING FISHING, TRAPPING, GATHERING MAPLE SUGAR, AND DRIED
BERRIES 69 A LARGE:PORTION.OF,,THE INDIANS DIET. THE HOMES
WHERE INDIANS THERE;,WAS ins AN “ACCUMULATION. OF FOOD WERE THE EXCEPTION. MANY,
arores =
ey 7 ONE iy ‘
HEALTH AMONG THE. CHIPPEWAS WAS BAD. DUE TO ISOLATION AND POOR
DIET ON THE ONE HAD, AND LACK OF STANDARDS AMONG THE INDIAN HEALTH
OFFICIALS.
.
"THE STATE SUPPORTED PUBLIC HEALTH NURSES AMONG THE MINNESOTA
CHIPPEWA INDIANS ARE MAINTAINED ON HIGHER STANDARDS THAN THOSE OF
THE INDIAN OFFICE, THE WORK AMONG THE INDIANS ON MOST RESERVATIONS
INVOLVES INEVITABLE HARDSHIPS BECAUSE DISTANCES ARE LONG, ROADS
ROUGH, WEATHER CONDITIONS SEVERE, AND THE DEMANDS ON NURSES TIME
NEVER ENDING. IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO BUILD UP AND MAINTAIN AN
EFFECTIVE FORCE UNLESS THE INDIAN OFFICE CAN OFFER SALARIES AND
LIVING CONDITIONS APPROXIMATE TO THOSE FOUND "
NEARLY EVERY TREATY, LAW OR REPORT IN THE CONGRESS HAD WORKED
TO EITHER TAKE WHAT THE INDIANS HAD OR TO BENEFIT OTHERS,
-22-
314


===== page 2 =====

THEY WERE POOR AND HAD BEEN POOR, IN RELATION TO THEIR
NEIGHBORS, FOR MANY YEARS. WHENEVER A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL CAME TO
THE INDIANS IT WAS TO HELP.
UNTIL CERES REOTOHE. THE yrateere ett my 8, _MANY.. PEOPLE MAINTAINED THAT THE
OFTTIMBS“DRUNKENNESS, WAS pg ENTIRELY. OF THE: LED, THE (DOING DLENESS!-AND
TiAT
aM
SOME WHO, MAINTAINED THE INDIANS PREFERRED THIS TYPE OF LIFE TO
THAT OF INDIANS MORE AFFLUENT WHITE NEIGHBOR.
IN THE LATE 1920'S THE GREAT DEPRESSION. HIT AMERICA AND WITHIN
A FEW YEARS MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WERE OUT OF WORK AND
APPROACHING A LIFESTYLE AKIN TO THEIR INDIAN NEIGHBORS. P.W. GRADY,
CHAIRMAN OF THE INDIAN RELIEF COMMITTEE FOR MINNESOTA, WROTE TO
T.0. FAIRBANKS IN 1940 THAT THE ''...WRETCHEDNESS OF THE (LATER)
1920'S, DUE IN CONSIDERABLE MEASURE TO THE FACT THAT THE DEPRESSION
REDUCED THE, WHITES, IN GREAT NUMBERS TO THE PITIABLE STATUS THAT
HAD BEEN THE NORM AMONG THE REDS." FUTURE COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN
-~AFFAIRS JOHN COLLIER WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL INDIAN
RELIEF COMMITTEE.
THERE WAS A FEELING AMONG THESE REFORMERS THAT PERHAPS ONE
COULD LEARN SOMETHING FROM THE INDIANS AFTER ALL. THEY HAD SURVIVED
IN THE AMERICAS BEFORE THE FOUNDING OF THE REPUBLIC.
-23-
315


===== page 3 =====

s~
CHIPPEWAS IN THE CITIES
AND HAD MANAGED TO GET A LIVING FROM THE LAND WITHOUT
WRESTLING WITH IT. : .
- BECAUSE OF LIMITED FUNDS IN, THE EARLY 1920’S VERY FEW
CHIPPEWAS HAD MIGRATED TO THE TWIN CITIES. MERRIAM FOUND OUT THAT
THERE WERE ONLY 94 CHIPPEWAS IN MINNEAPOLIS - ST. ‘PAUL IN 1928 AND
ONLY SIX IN DULUTH. COLLIER’S GROUP COULD SEE THAT INDIANS WERE NOT
"MAKING IT" AS CITY WORKERS EITHER. HIS IDEAS OF TRIBAL GOVERNMENT
DIDN‘T INCLUDE THE CONCEPT OF INDIANS IN THE CITIES. THE REPORT
FOUND, GENERALLY, THAT:
"THE OCCUPATIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF INDIANS IN THIS GROUP OF
CITIES IS SOME WHAT SIMILAR TO THAT OF NEW GROUP OF FOREIGN
IMMIGRANTS IN ANY OF THE LARGE CITIES OF AMERICA. MANY INDIANS,
PARTICULARLY FULL-BLOODS, ARE "ALIEN" TO THE WHITE CIVILIZATION OF
THEIR NATIVE. LAND, AND HENCE ARE ON THE LOWEST RUNG OF THE
INDUSTRIAL LADDER WHEN THEY FIRST MOVE TO THE CITY."
THERE WERE SOME, HOWEVER, WHO HAD ADJUSTED VERY WELL. THE
INVESTIGATORS REPORTED THAT, "SOME OF THE SO-CALLED INDIANS (LIVING.
IN MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL) WERE FOUND TO BE PERSONS GENERALLY
BELIEVED TO BE WHITE, WHO WERE LIVING IN A TYPE OF HOME THAT FAIRLY
PROSPEROUS YOUNG PROFESSIONAL OR BUSINESS FOLK GENERALLY ENJOY."
-24-
316


===== page 4 =====

A SHORT NOTE CONCERNING INDIAN EDUCATION IN 1939
WILLIAM ANYWAUSH, REPRESENTATIVE FROM WHITE EARTH VILLAGE, IN
1938 COMPLAINED ABOUT THE LACK IN NOT ONLY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY
FOR CHIPPEWA YOUTH BUT THE LACK OF CONCERN ON THE PART OF BOTH THE
INDIAN AND THE TRIBE ITSELF.
"WHEN WE GET TO RUN OUR OWN AFFAIRS, I KNOW IT WILL BE A GOOD
THING. WE GOT BOYS IN SCHOOL, YOUNG PEOPLE, GETTING WELL EDUCATED,
STILL I AM SORRY TO SAY THEY ARE LEFT IN THE BUSHES. THEY GO TO
SCHOOL, BUT WHEN THEY GET OUT THEY HAVE NO PLACE TO GO, THEY GOT NO
CHANCE, AND THAN IS WHY I SAY THEY GET LEFT IN THE BUSHES. ALTHOUGH
I WENT AROUND TO SEE WHAT I COULD DO FOR THEM, STILL THEY GOT NO
CHANCE."
INDIAN SCHOOLS SUPPORT FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN 1939 WAS
$250,00. INDIAN SCHOOLS SUPPORT FOR DEAF, DUMB, AND BLIND EDUCATION
FOR INDIANS WAS $1,500.00.
ONE ‘PART: OF THE PROBLEM WAS THAN THE MONEY WAS LOANED TO
oer
STUDENTS. COMING OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL INTO THE RESERVATION ECONOMY
WASN’T A PERIOD USUALLY TO BE ANTICIPATED WITH PLEASURE. ARTHUR 3
FOSTER, US SOCIAL WORKER, WROTE TO PRESIDENT BROKER THAN, "OUR
BOYS AND GIRLS ARE OUT OF SCHOOLS, 90% OF THEM, ARE SIXTEEN,
UNOCCUPIED, PENNILESS, AND IN MANY CASES GETTING INTO
DIFFICULTIES." SOME PEOPLE MAINTAINED THAN INDIANS SIMPLY WOULD
RATHER STEAL AND LOAF AT THAN AGE. IN RESOLUTION 8, AT THE JANUARY
9, .1939 T.E.C. MEETING THE PROBLEM WAS STATED "SOCIAL SURVEYS
INDICATE THAN ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGES MAKING FOR INCREASED
DELINQUENCY AMONG THE INDIAN YOUTH OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY AT THE AGE
LEVEL WHEN COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE IS TERMINATED, OR SIXTEEN
YEARS." YOUNG PEOPLE, AT SIXTEEN YEARS, ARE TWO YEARS AWAY FROM
QUALIFYING FOR FEDERAL WORK PROJECTS.
LOANS FOR EDUCATION WENT FOR THE MOST PART TO INDIAN STUDENTS
ENTERING VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL PURSUITS RATHER THAN HIGHER
.
EDUCATION. .
IN 1937 THE T.E.C. APPROVED $ 15,000 TO BE USED TO EDUCATE
INDIAN GIRLS AT THE ST. BENEDICT MISSION SCHOOL AT WHITE EARTH
OPERATED BY THE CATHOLIC MISSIONS. 120 GIRLS ENROLLED.
EARLY ORGANIZERS WANTED TO ESTABLISH SEPARATE INDIAN SCHOOLS
SUPPORTED BY: THE TRIBE FOR THE TRIBE’S BENEFIT. EDWARD RODGERS,
PAST PRESIDENT OF THE M.C.T., WROTE TO BROKER THAN SCHOOLS SHOULD
BE ESTABLISHED "WHERE PREJUDICE EXISTS AGAINST INDIAN PUPILS, STEPS
SHOULD BE TAKEN TO REMOVE SUCH INDIANS FROM SUCH COMMUNITIES AND
PLACE THE CHILDREN IN OTHER SCHOOLS. WITH THIS END IN VIEW, IT IS
MY OPINION THAN IN EACH INDIAN COMMUNITY A SCHOOL SHOULD BE
ESTABLISHED FOR THE CARING OF SUCH INDIAN CHILDREN." ARTHUR
BEAULIEU WROTE TO PRESIDENT BROKER IN 1935 THAN THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF TRIBAL GOVERNMENT "WILL NECESSITATE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SCHOOLS
TO TRAIN OUR INDIAN BOYS AND GIRLS TO MODERN AND SCIENTIFIC METHODS
SO THAN THEY CAN MOVE ALONG MORE PROGRESSIVE AND SUCCESSFUL
PURSUITS AND BE IN A POSITION TO TRAIN OTHERS.
-25-+
317


===== page 5 =====

(MIKE PETER BURRIS, PERSONAL NOTES--TRANSCRIBED)
PAGE 1
RESERVATION GOVERNMENT CONTINUED:
POWERS:
- NEGOTIATES WITH GOVERNMENT
- SOME DISPUTES
INDIAN AGENT GOVERNMENT:
Bee
-
PROVIDES INCOME & RATIONS (TREATY PAYMENTS) fe
- DISCONTINUED FARMING
- OVERSAW SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT- FORCIBLE ATTENDANCE AT
BOARDING SCHOOLS
- OVERSAW POLICE (INDIAN)
- OVERSAW INDIAN COURTS
~
‘ LESSER OFFENSES
;
- INDIAN JUDGES
- CONTROLLED LAND
~- HEALTH PROGRAMS
- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- FAMILY WELFARE
- IF YOU WANTED SOMETHING, YOU WENT TO THE AGENT.
- “THE GOVERNMENTS PHILOSOPHY WAS THAT THE INDIANS WERE CHILDREN
~ CHIEF’S WERE EITHER USED OR IGNORED.
WAS
- HOLE IN THE DAY, WAS USED WELL ($$)
- SITTING BULL IGNORED
- COUNCIL BUSINESS 1884
- WHETHER OR NOT TO TAKE ALLOTMENTS.
- RED LAKE SAID NO.
- WE MUST HAVE ? TO GIVE TO OUR 2 2 ?
—-26-
318


===== page 6 =====

(MIKE PETER BURRIS, PERSONAL NOTES--TRANSCRIBED)
PAGE 2
T.R.A.
THE FALL
1. TO HOLD?
2. EXTENDS TRUST
3. RESTORE SURPLUS LANDS.
4. PROHIBITS PROMISE OF INDIAN LAND.
5. _? OF INDIAN LAND. ine.
|
6. 2?
7. ADD ? ? ?
.
8. 2 DEALS.
9. APPROPRIATIONS ? OF THESE GROUPS.
10. 2 2 2
11. DO _? LOANS.
_
12. CIVIL SERVICE.
13-15. SPECIFIC TRIBES.
16-17. TRIBAL ORGANIZATION
18. MAJORITY VOTE.
19. DEF. (DEFEATED OR DEFENDED) __? ?
~27-
319


===== page 7 =====

{MIKE PETER BURRIS, PERSONAL NOTES~-TRANSCRIBED)
PAGE 3.
oo
EOL. (RED LAKE)
NEEDLESS TO SAY NOT ALL INDIANS WERE FOR WHEELER/HOWARD.
73 TRIBES VOTED NOT TO ACCEPT. ---- R.L. (RED LAKE)
-WHICH MAN’S GOVERNMENT?
-BUREAU PERSONNEL:
- MUNNELL
- BROKER TRIBES HAD TO VOTE AGAIN
NO VOTE - INCLUSION
~ F.D.L.-30% TURN OUT
~ B.I.A.~COUNTED F.D.L.RES,
ALTHOUGH MOST DIDN/T VOTE 3
MAJORITY OF VOTERS: WERE
ACATINST
CHIPPEWA GENERAL COUNCIL:
- RED LAKE RESIGNED 1918
- TIMBER MONEY-
~ WHITE EARTH GANG.
—~29~
320


===== page 8 =====

THE
SYNOPSIS OF EVENTS LEADING TO PRESENT FORM OF TRIBAL
ORGANIZATION
APRIL 1933 QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO SUPERINTENDENTS SURVEYING
CONDITIONS ON THE RESERVATIONS IN MINNESOTA,
JANUARY 1934 LOCAL MEETINGS TO INFORM POPULACE OF THE COMING
ELECTION TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THE I.R.A. FOR THE
INDIANS IN THE JURISDICTION. THE FIRST MEETING FOR
THE GREAT LAKES REGION WAS HELD IN HAYWARD,
WISCONSIN.
OCTOBER 29,
1934 ELECTION TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THE I.R.A.
JUNE 2, 1935 NOTICE TO ELECT DELEGATES FOR PURPOSE OF FORMING A
CHIPPEWA GENERAL COUNCIL.
JUNE 27 62 DELEGATES MEET IN CASS LAKE FOR THE FIRST TIME.
CONSTITUTIONAL
NOVEMBER 6 J.J. MUNNELL, INDIAN OFFICE EMPLOYEE AND DELEGATE,
AUTHORED DRAFT SUBMITTED TO THE INDIAN
OFFICE.
MAY 23, 1936 ‘COLLIER SIGNS ORDER CALLING FOR ELECTION ON THE
CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS.
JUNE 20 CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS RATIFIED.
JULY 24 "CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY
OF THE INTERIOR. .
OCTOBER 10 FIRST OFFICIAL DELEGATES MEETING HELD IN CASS LAKE.
NOVEMBER 13,
1937 CORPORATE CHARTER ELECTION FOR MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA
TRIBE.
FEBRUARY 22,
1939 ELECTION OF SIX RESERVATIONS FOR OR AGAINST SUB-
CHARTERS.
-29-
321


===== page 9 =====

PRIOR TO OFFERING THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT TO THE
CHIPPEWAS IN MINNESOTA JOHN COLLIER SENT QUT A FORM TO THE AGENCY
SUPERINTENDENTS ASKING THEM TO LIST CONDITIONS IN THEIR
JURISDICTIONS. IN RED LAKE, RAYMOND BITNEY REPORTED THAT THE RED
LAKE GENERAL COUNCIL HAD BEEN IN OPERATION FOR THE PAST FIFTEEN
YEARS BASED UPON THE HEREDITARY CHIEFTAINSHIP SYSTEM. WHEN ASKED IF
WOMEN WERE ACTIVE IN TRIBAL AFFAIRS BITNEY WROTE THAT "THE CHIEFS
DO NOT APPOINT WOMEN AS MEMBERS OF THEIR COUNCIL." THERE WAS, IN
RED LAKE, A BIT OF CARRY OVER, AT LEAST MORE THAT THE OTHER
CHIPPEWAS, OF THE TRADITIONAL CHIPPEWA MODEL OF THE
PREVIOUS CENTURY.
THERE WAS ANOTHER GROUP ON RED LAKE WHICH THE DEPARTMENT
DIDN'T RECOGNIZE COMPOSED OF YOUNG AND MIXED BLOOD INDIANS WHO
FAVORED ALLOTMENT OF THE RED LAKE RESERVATION. THIS GROUP WAS
FORMED OUT OF THE W.P.A. PROJECTS ON AND ADJACENT TO RED LAKE.
IN COMPARISON THE ORGANIZATIONS AND THE ORGANIZATIONAL
PROBLEMS THE CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA FACED WERE TREMENDOUS. THE
ALLOTMENT ACT HAD EFFECTIVELY DESTROYED THE TRADITIONAL POLITICAL
SYSTEM. J.S. MONKS CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA AGENCY SUPERINTENDENT
REPORTED THAT, "HEREDITARY CHIEFS ARE NOT NOW RECOGNIZED BY THE
INDIANS. SUCH CHIEFS WERE RECOGNIZED IN EARLY HISTORY HAD CONTROL
OF THEIR TRIBES AND CONDUCTED THEIR AFFAIRS, OFTEN TO THE EXTENT OF
DESIGNATING WHO SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BECOME A MEMBER OF THEIR
TRIBES." AMONG OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WOMEN HAD BEEN DISENFRANCHISED.
THEY TOOK PART IN TRIBAL BUSINESS MATTERS, THEY VOTED AND HELD
OFFICE.
THERE IS NO TRIBAL ORGANIZATION OF THE CHIPPEWAS IN MINNESOTA,
EITHER AS A TRIBAL COUNCIL OR A BUSINESS COMMITTEE, IN THE SENSE
THAT IT IS THE RECOGNIZED REPRESENTATIVE ORGANIZATION OF THE ENTIRE
TRIBE." REPORTED MONKS. IN FACT THERE WERE VERY FEW RESERVATIONS
THAT HAD ORGANIZATION AT ALL. "THE COUNCILS OF THE LEECH LAKE AND
FOND DU LAC RESERVATIONS, MIGHT BE ASSUMED TO REPRESENT THEIR
ENTIRE RESERVATIONS BUT NOT THE ENTIRE JURISDICTION OR TRIBE... IT
MUST BE KEPT IN MIND THAT COUNCILS ARE NOT ORGANIZED WITH
DEPARTMENTAL SUPERVISION." THIS STATEMENT WAS WRITTEN IN 1933. BY
1936 THE SIX RESERVATIONS WERE TO HAVE A CONSTITUTION RATIFIED, A
SYSTEM OF DELEGATES BASED ON REPRESENTATION, AND A "TRIBAL" SYSTEM
OF MANAGEMENT BASED ON A TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. IT IS
INTERESTING TO NOTE HERE THAT SINCE THE INTRODUCTION OF THE T.E.C.
IT HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE 1934 UNTIL THE PRESENT. IT HAS ALWAYS HAD
TWO REPRESENTATIVES FROM EACH RESERVATION.
-~30-
322


===== page 10 =====

-
IN SHORT HERE IS THE CONDITION OF THE VARIOUS RESERVATIONS
PRIOR TO THE INTRODUCTION OF THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT:
LEECH LAKE .
.
"THIS LOCAL COUNCIL IS VERY WELL ORGANIZED, REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE LOCAL LEECH LAKE BAND AND VERY ACTIVE AND INTERESTED IN TRIBAL
AFFAIRS. AS A WHOLE THERE IS FAIR SATISFACTION (ON THE PART OF THE
BANDS ABOUT THE COUNCIL’S ACTIONS.) .
GRAND PORTAGE
"NO ORGANIZATION OF ANY KIND EXISTS ON THIS RESERVATION."
NETT LAKE
"REPRESENTS ENTIRE RESERVATION LOOSELY RUN, NO CONSTITUTION,
NO PROPER NOTICE FOR MEMBERS OR SET TIME FOR MEETINGS NOR ANY
REGULAR MEETINGS."
FOND DU LAC
"THIS IS NOT A RECOGNIZED COUNCIL OF THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS A
VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION CREATED BY THE INDIANS WITHOUT AUTHORITY BY.
THE DEPARTMENT. CRITICISMS ARE RAMPANT (CONCERNING COUNCIL ACTIONS)
AROUSED BY FAILURE OF CERTAIN INDIANS TO RECOGNIZE MAJORITY RULE."
WHITE EARTH
"THERE WAS A WELL ORGANIZED GROUP KNOWN AS THE MINNESOTA
CHIPPEWA ASSOCIATION OPERATING IN THE PONSFORD AREA. THEIR OBJECT
IN ORGANIZING WAS TO "MAINLY COOPERATE WITH THE INDIAN OFFICE OR
CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRAMS." THEY, HOWEVER, WERE NOT A_ TRIBAL
ORGANIZATION NOR DID THEY ASSUME TO PRETEND ANY AUTHORITY.' THIS
GROUP WAS SMALL, COMPOSED OF STUDENTS 18 AND OVER.
ON THESE FIVE RESERVATIONS OVERALL THERE WAS NO COMPENSATION
PAID TO OFFICERS, NO SPECIAL TIME FOR MEETINGS, GENERALLY THEY ARE
CALLED, ASSEMBLED, AND ELECTED BY THOSE PEOPLE ATTENDING THE
MEETING. .
ADMINISTRATIVELY, THE MILLE LAC RESERVATION DID NOT EXIST IN
1933.
323


===== page 11 =====

WHEN ONE TALKS OF THE LEECH LAKE RESERVATION ONE AT THIS POINT
DOES NOT SPEAK OF THE LEECH LAKE BAND AS WELL. IT SHOULD BE KEPT IN
THAT THERE "ARE SEVERAL BANDS WITHIN THE RESERVATION
BOUNDARIES. IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE ADVENT OF THE GRANTING OF THE SUB~
CHARTERS IN 1937 THAT THERE APPEARED A WHITE EARTH "BAND" OF
CHIPPEWA INDIANS REPRESENTING THE ENTIRE RESERVATION. WE MAY SEE
HERE THAT CHIEFTAINSHIP FOR THE CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA HAS BEEN
TWICE BURIED. ONCE BY THE ALLOTMENT ACT AND ONCE AGAIN BY THE
REDEFINITION OF "BAND".
IT IS INDEED CURIOUS THAT MONKS WOULD REFER TO THE FORMER
CHIPPEWA GENERAL COUNCIL IN THE FOLLOWING TERMS.
"THE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHIPPEWAS IN MINNESOTA WERE
STRONG, WELL ORGANIZED TRIBAL COUNCIL HAD EXISTED FOR MANY, YEARS
be
BUT WITHIN THE LAST TEN YEARS HAVE CEASED ACTIVE WORK AND DISBANDED
WHEN THE INTELLIGENT AND PROGRESSIVE MEMBERS OF THE TRIBE CEASED
ACTIVE PART."
THIS STATEMENT IS QUITE CONTRARY TO THE FACTS. THE C.G.C. DIED
“FOR TWO REASONS: 1) IT HAD SUPPORTED ALLOTMENT AND THE FEE PATENTS
(OR SALE OF SAME) HAD ENDED AND 2) RED LAKE HAD WITHDRAWN ALONG
WITH A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF DELEGATES FROM THE OTHER RESERVATIONS
AND THE C.G.C. COULD NO LONGER MAINTAIN THE PRETENSE OF A TRIBAL
ORGANIZATION WITHOUT LOCAL SUPPORT.
LOSS OF LAND WAS THE CAUSE OF TRIBAL DISORGANIZATION. IT WAS
THE “DIRECT CAUSE OF THE BREAKDOWN OF TRADITIONAL SOCIAL
ORGANIZATION AMONG THE CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA. AND WITH A PAGAN
RELIGION BASED ON A BELIEF IN THE SACRED EARTH IT WAS RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE DISINTEREST BY INDIANS IN NATIVE RELIGION.
IN FEBRUARY 1934 SUPERINTENDENT BURNS REPORTED TO COLLIER THAT
"AT WHITE EARTH, WHERE OVER 8,000 FEE PATENTS WERE ISSUED ONLY
ABOUT 100 STILL HAVE THEIR LANDS." IT WILL BE REMEMBERED THAT ALL
CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA HAD ALLOTMENT, OR AT LEAST THE MAJORITY OF
ALLOTMENTS ON THE WHITE EARTH RESERVATION.
BECAUSE OF THE CHICANERY ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY THE
PREVIOUS TRIBAL ORGANIZATION THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE OPPOSITION TO
,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.
-32-
324


===== page 12 =====

EARLY ORGANIZING PROBLEMS IN BRINGING THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION AcT
TO THE CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA
THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT NEED TO BE STRESSED BEFORE WE
PROCEED, A FEW THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WHEN READING THIS ACCOUNT OF
THE ORGANIZATION OF TRIBAL GOVERNMENT. ONE IS THE RAPIDITY WITH |
sak
WHICH TRIBAL GOVERNMENT EMERGED FROM ITS HUMBLE BEGINNINGS SHOWN IN
THE PREVIOUS SECTION. IN THE SPAN OF FOUR YEARS THE INDIAN OFFICE
BEGAN WITH PRACTICALLY NO LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS AND BUILT A TRIBAL
-
ORGANIZATION TO REPRESENT THEM. THE SECOND THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS
THAT THE TRIBAL ORGANIZATION WAS BUILT FROM THE APEX DOWNWARD.
FIRST THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ORGANIZED THEN THE RESERVATIONS
WERE ORGANIZED INDIVIDUALLY.
IT IS CURIOUS THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA
TRIBE ISN’T ELECTED BY POPULAR VOTE IN A SYSTEM OF REPRESENTATION
SUPPOSEDLY BASED ON DEMOCRATIC MODELS. NONE OF OUR TRIBAL OFFICIALS
WHO HOLD POSITIONS ON THE TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE GOT THOSE
POSITIONS BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ELECTED THEM TO THOSE OFFICES.
IT MUST ALSO BE KEPT IN MIND THAT THE WORDS TRIBE, BAND, AND
RESERVATION DO NOT CONFORM TO ANY SOCIAL DEFINITION. AS THEY ARE
USED IN THIS REPORT THEY ARE ADMINISTRATIVE DEFINITIONS DESIGNATING AN
AND ORGANIZED GROUP OF INDIANS RESIDING ON DESIGNATED TRACTS OF
LAND. ONE DOES NOT SPEAK OF A TRIBAL ORGANIZATION TECHNICALLY, ONE .
SPEAKS OF A TRIBAL CORPORATION.
325


===== page 13 =====

ORGANIZATION PROBLEM NUMBER ONE: HOW THE STIX RESERVATIONS WERE
BROUGHT TOGETHER TO FORM THE M.C.T.
ON THE BEGINNING, AS THE SAYING GOES, THERE WAS A QUESTION.
COULD THE CHIPPEWA INDIANS RESIDING ON THE SIX RESERVATIONS
OF RED LAKE ORGANIZE AS A "TRIBE" UNDER THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION
ACT AND DID THEY DESIRE TO?
THE LANGUAGE OF THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT SEEMS TO
DEFINITELY EXCLUDE INDIANS LIVING ON SEPARATE RESERVATIONS TO
ORGANIZE A "TRIBAL" GOVERNMENT. SECTION 16 SAYS:
ANY INDIAN TRIBE, OR TRIBES RESIDING ON THE SAME RESERVATION,
SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE FOR ITS COMMON WELFARE."
MINNESOTA REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD KNUTSON MET WITH ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER ZIMMERMAN REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE ORGANIZATION
OF THE CHIPPEWAS ON HIS STATE. ZIMMERMAN WROTE BACK TO HIM ABOUT 5
THE AFOREMENTIONED QUESTION: : AS
“SEVERAL DAYS AGO, YOU TALKED WITH ME ON THE TELEPHONE ABOUT
THE DESIRABILITY OF ORGANIZING ALL THE CHIPPEWA INDIANS UNDER
A COMMON CONSTITUTION. ON THIS CONNECTION, I AM SENDING YOU A
COPY OF A LETTER TO ACTING SUPERINTENDENT MONKS WHICH MAKES IT
CLEAR THAT UNDER THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT IT WILL BE
- NECESSARY TO ORGANIZE THE CHIPPEWAS ON EACH RESERVATION. I CAN
SEE NO REASON WHY THE CHIPPEWAS SHOULD NOT ORGANIZE A GENERAL
FEDERATION OR GENERAL COUNCIL, PERHAPS MADE UP OF
REPRESENTATIVES FROM EACH RESERVATION." .
COMMISSIONER COLLIER ON JUNE 22, 1933 VOICED A SIMILAR OPINION TO
,
THE PONSFORD DELEGATE FRANK CLARK:
“SINCE THE CHIPPEWAS OF MINNESOTA DO NOT RESIDE ON THE SAME.
RESERVATION BUT ON SEVERAL RESERVATIONS, IT IS.OUR OPINION
THAT THE SEVERAL BANDS WILL HAVE TO ORGANIZE INDIVIDUALLY,"
THAT WOULD SEEM TO END THE QUESTION OF ORGANIZATION. WRONG. AS SOON
AS THIS OPINION WAS VOICED AMONG THE INDIAN OFFICIALS ON
WASHINGTON, OPPOSITION WAS HEARD. TECHNICALLY, FROM A STRICTLY
ORGANIZATIONAL STANDPOINT DRAFTING CONSTITUTIONS, RUNNING
ELECTIONS, ESTABLISHING COOPERATIVES, RUNNING REHABILITATION
PROJECTS AND PROVIDING EXPENSES FOR VISITING TRIBAL OFFICIALS COULD
MEAN A TERRIFIC AMOUNT OF DUPLICATION OF DEALING WITH INDIVIDUAL
RESERVATIONS. THERE WAS ALSO THE PROBLEM OF DIVIDING TRIBAL ASSETS
SHOULD THE RESERVATIONS ORGANIZE INDIVIDUALLY. SO FROM THE INDIAN
— —
OFFICE’S STANDPOINT -ONLY_SEE_CONFUS -OF -THEM+— =
326


===== page 14 =====

BESIDES ON SOME RESERVATIONS LIKE GRAND PORTAGE WHERE NEARLY
THE ENTIRE RESERVATION HAD TO BE BOUGHT WITH LAND ACQUISITION FUNDS
AND WHERE THEY HAD NO LOCAL ORGANIZATION GRANTING A CHARTER WOULD
SEEM FUTILE SINCE MANY OF THE INDIAN OFFICE’S PROJECTS WERE
DESIGNED FOR A LANDED GROUP. ONE HAD TO HAVE LANDS TO BUILD HOUSES
ON FOR REHABILITATION, ONE HAD TO HAVE LANDS TO USE THE ROAD
CONSTRUCTION MONEY AND AN ORGANIZATION THAT COULD TAKE’ LEGAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOANS. ONLY A FEW OF THE RESERVATIONS HAD AN
ADEQUATE LAND BASE OR POLITICAL ORGANIZATION TO APPLY FOR A
CHARTER.
IRONICALLY ENOUGH THE VERY THING THAT FORCED THE CONSOLIDATED
‘CHIPPEWA FROM THEIR BROTHERS THE RED LAKE CHIPPEWA WAS TO PROVIDE
A MEANS TO THE INDIAN OFFICE TO ORGANIZE THE CONSOLIDATED CHIPPEWA
AS A "TRIBE" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION ACT.
an
ON THE SURFACE IT WOULD SEEM THAT ONLY HARRY HOUDINI COULD ESCAPE
THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE ACT.
THE TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN BRINGING ABOUT A
CHANGE IN THE OFFICES THINKING WERE JACOB MUNNELL AND EDWARD
RODGERS. JACOB MUNNELL WAS BOTH AN INDIAN OFFICE BUREAUCRAT AND
DELEGATE TO HIS TRIBE. COMING FROM THE LEECH LAKE RESERVATION
MUNNELL WORKED HIS WAY UP THROUGH THE RANKS OF THE INDIAN SERVICE
TO A POSITION OF AUTHORITY BY THE TIME THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION
WAS TO BE IMPLEMENTED. HE WAS ALSO THE PRINCIPAL AUTHOR OF THE
TRIBAL CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS. EDWARD RODGERS WAS THE CASS COUNTY
ATTORNEY. A POSITION HE HELD SINCE 1912. HE HAD SERVED ON
COMMITTEES IN THE CHIPPEWA GENERAL COUNCIL PRIOR TO 1920.
THESE TWO INDIVIDUALS WERE WELL INFORMED ABOUT RESERVATION
PROBLEMS ENUMERATED ABOVE. THEY REALIZED THAT IF THE RESERVATIONS
ORGANIZED INDIVIDUALLY IT WOULD BE SOME TIME BEFORE A CENTRAL
TRIBAL GOVERNMENT COULD BE ESTABLISHED. MUNNELL WAS PART OF THE
ORGANIZATIONAL TEAM FORMED BY SUPERINTENDENT .BURNS TO -EDUCATE THE
INDIANS ABOUT I.R.A. If WILL BE REMEMBERED THAT PREVIOUSLY LOCAL
INDIANS DISTRUSTED THE IDEA OF FORMING AN INTRA-RESERVATION COUNCIL
BECAUSE WHITE EARTH WOULD DOMINATE IT THE SAME WAY THEY DID THE
LAST ONE OR SO THEY THOUGHT. MARGARET FISHERON OCTOBER 3, 1935 SENT
A PRELIMINARY REPORT TO COLLIER ABOUT TRIBAL ORGANIZATION. IN THE
FIRST PART FISHERON SAYS THIS IS "... THE FIRST TIME THE CHIPPEWAS
HAVE BEEN WILLING TO PULL TOGETHER AND ALONG COMES THE OFFICE AND
SAYS NO, ORGANIZE AS RESERVATIONS. I CANNOT EMPHASIZE TOO STRONGLY
WHAT A MISTAKE I THINK THAT IS." FURTHER ALONG IN HER REPORT SHE
EMPHASIZES THE POTENTIALITIES FOR USE OF THE CHIPPEWA IN MINNESOTA
FUND INTER-RESERVATIONALLY AND THE COMPLICATIONS OF DIVIDING THE
FUNDS. APPARENTLY AIDED BY THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM. "...iIT HAS
BECOME FINALLY FIXED IN THEIR MINDS THAT THIS (FUND) IS TRIBAL AND
NO SINGLE RESERVATION IS ENTITLED TO ANY OF THAT MONEY FOR ITSELF,
THAT KEEPS THE TRIBAL UNITY CONCRETELY. BEFORE THEM."
-35-
327


===== page 15 =====

“UNDER THAT TREATY (I.E. ALLOTMENT ACT) WE WERE RECOGNIZED AS
COMPRISING ONE TRIBE AND TREATED AS SUCH BY THE UNITED STATES.
WE WERE JOINTLY INTERESTED IN LANDS AND OTHER TRIBAL PROPERTY
ACQUIRED BY OUR JOINT EFFORTS AND WE HAVE BEEN TREATED AS ONE
NATION SINCE THAT TIME."
oo
HAD APPROVED OF THE IDEA OF FORMING COLLECTIVELY IN
A CENTRAL GOVERNMENT BASED NOT UPON RESERVATIONS BUT COMMUNITIES.
IN THE FIRST CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS THE T.E.C. WAS TO BE ELECTED
BY A MEETING OF TRIBAL DELEGATES WHO REPRESENTED THE COMMUNITIES OF
THE SEVERAL RESERVATIONS. THESE DELEGATES SELECTED AMONG THEMSELVES
BY OPEN VOTE TWO COMMITTEE MEN :'TO THE T.E.C. THE CONCEPT OF
RESERVATIONAL REPRESENTATION HAD NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO FULLY SURFACE.
IN FURTHERING THEIR ARGUMENT RODGERS AND MUNNELL POINTED OUT THAT:
'...WE ARE NOT RESIDENTS OF ANY ONE RESERVATION. THAT WE HAVE
NOT ORGANIZED BAND, AND THAT UNDER THIS REORGANIZATION ACT WE CANNOT
INCORPORATE SEPARATELY WE DECIDED THAT THE CHIPPEWAS OF MINNESOTA
SHOULD BE INCORPORATED UNDER ONE ORGANIZATION AND WE TRUST THAT YOU
WILL APPROVE OF THE ACTION TAKEN."
BEFORE PROCEEDING ON TO THE ALLOTMENT ACT AND HOW IT WAS USED
TO ORGANIZE THE RESERVATIONS INTO A "TRIBE" A LITTLE DIGRESSION IS
NEEDED.
,
RESIDENCE OF A TRIBAL MEMBER ON A RESERVATION WAS A BUILDING
BLOCK MUNNELL AND RODGERS USED TO SUPPORT THEIR CONTENTION.
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS ' HAD CHANGED DRAMATICALLY SINCE THE
INTRODUCTION OF I.R.A. ‘THE CHIPPEWA HAD TO VOTE ACCORDING TO
RESERVATION USING THE ABSENTEE BALLOT IF THEY WERE VOTING AWAY FROM
H
THERE RESERVATION. IN VOTING TO SEND DELEGATES TO FORM A
CONSTITUTION THE INDIAN OFFICE MADE A REGULATION TO GOVERN INDIAN
PARTICIPATION IN THEIR SELECTION. ,
u,..WITHIN THE LEECH LAKE RESERVATION THERE ARE-A LARGE
,
NUMBER OF INDIANS RESIDING IN SAID VILLAGE WHO ARE NOT MEMBERS
OF THIS RESERVATION BUT ARE ENROLLED ON OTHER RESERVATIONS OF
CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE FROM THIS VILLAGE. THEY SHOULD
PARTICIPATE IN THE ELECTION OF DELEGATES IN THIS VILLAGE."
THIS IS IN KEEPING WITH THE I.R.A. DEFINITION OF INDIAN IN SECTION
19. .
"THE TERM "INDIAN" AS USED IN THIS ACT SHALL INCLUDE ALL
PERSONS OF INDIAN DESCENT WHO ARE MEMBERS OF ANY RECOGNIZED
INDIAN TRIBE NOW UNDER FEDERAL JURISDICTION, AND ALL PERSONS
. WHO ARE DESCENDANTS OF SUCH MEMBERS WHO WERE, ON JUNE 1, 1934
:
. _ en
RESIDING WITHIN THE PRESENT BOUNDARIES OF . ANY_ INDIAN _ - _
_.___ RESERVATION."
328


===== page 16 =====

JOHN COLLIER SAID THAT "THE OBJECT OF THIS DEFINITION IS TO INCLUDE
ALL INDIAN PERSONS WHO, BY REASON OF RESIDENCE, ARE DEFINITELY
MEMBERS OF INDIAN GROUPS, AS WELL AS PERSONS WHO ARE INDIANS BY
DEGREE OF BLOOD." WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT THE INDIAN REORGANIZATION
ACT WAS BASED ON RECOGNIZING INDIAN COMMUNITIES AS THE FOUNDATION
OF INDIAN LIFE. THE MEMBERS OF A COMMUNITY ARE THE ONES WHO
.
DETERMINE WHO IS AND WHO ISN’T INDIAN AND NOT OUTDATED BAND ROLLS
WHOSE DESCENDANTS MAY OR MAY NOT IDENTIFY AS INDIANS.
WE SEE HERE AT ONCE THE APPEAL MUNNELL’S CONSTITUTION HAD FOR
THE ' WASHINGTON OFFICE. INCIDENTALLY THE MUNNELL CONSTITUTION
DEFINED A TRIBAL MEMBER AS... —
“ALL OF THE CHIPPEWA INDIANS DULY REGISTERED ON THE APPROVED
ROLLS OF ANY OF THE ABOVE NAMED RESERVATIONS OR BANDS OF
INDIANS."
THE INDIAN OFFICE AT THIS POINT, HAD A CHANCE TO SAVE ITSELF A LOT
ne
wt
OF WORK IF THE CHIPPEWA ORGANIZED INTO A CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND IT
COULD FOCUS THE INDIANS ATTENTION ON THEIR COMMUNITIES.
-
THE MUNNELL DRAFT OF THE CONSTITUTION EMBODIED THIS CONCEPT OF
A "TRIBE" COVERING SEVERAL RESERVATIONS. NOW ALTHOUGH THIS IDEA WAS
APPROVED BY THE DELEGATES THEY STILL DIDN’T.WANT THE POWER OF THE
"TRIBE" CHANNELED INTO THIS ORGANIZATION. IN A MEMORANDUM FROM
ZIMMERMAN TO BURNS ON MARCH 1936 HE SAID THAT:
"WE UNDERSTAND FROM THE REPRESENTATIVES WHO MET WITH THE
TRIBAL DELEGATES THAT THE TRIBE DOES NOT WISH TO GIVE THE
TRIBAL ORGANIZATION POWER TO CONTROL THE LOCAL RESERVATION OR
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND WISHES TO LEAVE THESE LOCAL
ORGANIZATIONS FREE TO OPERATE IN AN INDEPENDENT WAY AS THEY
HAVE BEEN DOING IN THE PAST, THIS IS ENTIRELY ACCEPTABLE TO
THIS OFFICE, BUT WE ADVISE THE INCLUSION OF A STATEMENT TO
THAT EFFECT IN THE CONSTITUTION TO PREVENT CONTROVERSY IN THE
- FUTURE. SUCH A STATEMENT WOULD CARRY MUCH ASSURANCE TO THE RED
LAKE RESERVATION IN THE EVENT THEY DECIDE TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE TRIBAL ORGANIZATION.
THERE WAS QUITE A NUMBER OF INDIANS RESIDING ON RESERVATIONS
THEY WEREN’T BORN ON AS EVIDENCED IN CHART #8 IN THE BACK OF THIS
REPORT. THE INDIAN OFFICE REGULATION WAS NEEDED OF THOSE INDIANS
.
WERE TO BE GIVEN THEIR SAY IN THE FORMATION OF THE TRIBAL
GOVERNMENT. THE DELEGATES MEETING WAS HELD TO DETERMINE THE TYPE OF
ORGANIZATION DEEMED MOST DESIRABLE TO THE INDIANS. AS IT TURNED OUT
THE REGULATION WAS TO PROVE TO BE THE BASIS FOR DETERMINING FUTURE
RESIDENCE ON RESERVATIONS. IT WAS PERHAPS WELL SUITED TO THE TIMES
SINCE EACH MEMBER OF THE "TRIBE" WORKED AND VOTED FOR THE COMMON
GOOD BUT LATER WITH THE FORMATION OF THE SUB-CHARTERS, WHERE THE
THEME WAS LOCAL BUSINESS, FRICTION DEVELOPED BETWEEN LOCAL MEMBERS
OF THE RESERVATION BANDS AND THOSE WHO HAD COME FROM AFAR.
-347~
329


===== page 17 =====

BACK TO THE ALLOTMENT ACT. AFTER COLLIER RECEIVED THE RODGERS-
MUNNELL LETTER AN THE MINUTES OF THE DELEGATES MEETING HE
SUBMITTED THE QUESTION TO THE ACTING SOLICITOR WHETHER OR NOT THE
CHIPPEWAS COULD ORGANIZE UNDER THE I.R.A. AS THE DELEGATES WANTED
OR WHETHER THEY WOULD HAVE TO ORGANIZE THEIR RESERVATIONS
INDIVIDUALLY. IN” OPENING HIS” REMARKS IN THE AUGUST 27, 1935
MEMORANDUM HE NOTED THAT, "THERE IS NO QUESTION, I THINK, BUT THAT
THE ENTIRE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA TRIBE MAY ORGANIZE UNDER A SINGLE
CONSTITUTION AN CHARTER.'! HE CITED AN OPINION DATED NOVEMBER 7,
‘
1934;
IN MY OPINION THE WHEELER-HOWARD ACT PERMITS THE ORGANIZATION
OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING GROUPS:
(a) A BAND OR TRIBE OF INDIANS WHICH HAS ONLY A PARTIAL
INTEREST IN THE LANDS OF A SINGLE RESERVATION.
(») A BAND OR TRIBE WHICH HAS RIGHTS COEXTENSIVE WITH A
SINGLE RESERVATION.
(c) A GROUP OF INDIANS RESIDING ON A SINGLE RESERVATION,
WHO MAY BE RECOGNIZED AS A "TRIBE" FOR PURPOSES OF
THE WHEELER-HOWARD ACT REGARDLESS OF THEIR FORMER
AFFILIATIONS.
(ad) A TRIBE WHOSE MEMBERS ARE SCATTERED OVER TWO OR MORE
RESERVATIONS IN WHICH THEY HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS AS
MEMBERS OF SUCH TRIBE.
SINCE THE CHIPPEWA INDIANS HAD THE "CHIPPEWA IN MINNESOTA
FUND" THEY DID HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS TOGETHER. ANOTHER QUESTION WAS
WHETHER OR NOT THE CHIPPEWA TRIBE IN MINNESOTA STILL EXISTED OR NOT
SINCE THEY HAD BROKEN OFF WITH RED LAKE AN HAD CEASED TO FUNCTION
AS A UNIT. THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT HELD IN SOLICITOR’S OPINIONS
M. 27381, APPROVED AUGUST 13, 1934 THEY EXISTED.
WAS
THE ACTING SOLICITOR FACED WITH A MORE COMPLEX PROBLEM:
"APPARENTLY IT IS THE DESIRE OF THE INDIANS CONCERNED TO
ORGANIZE NEITHER AS SEPARATE BANDS OR RESERVATIONS NOR A AN
ENTIRE TRIBE, BUT RATHER TO _-INCLUDE IN THE GENERAL
ORGANIZATION ALL THE BANDS OF MINNESOTA CHIPPEWAS OTHER THAN
RED LAKE BAND."
NOW THE UNITED STATES HAS RECOGNIZED RED LAKE AS A BAND
_
INDEPENDENT OF THE REST OF THE CHIPPEWAS IN MINNESOTA. IN THE COURT
CASE IN WHICH RED LAKE WAS SUED BY THE CHIPPEWA GENERAL COUNCIL IN ~
AN EFFORT TO PARTITION RED LAKE’S ASSETS (THE CHIPPEWA INDIANS OF
MINNESOTA VS. UNITED STATES, THE RED LAKE BAND OF INDIANS OF
HELD SOLE OWNERSHIP
MINNESOTA, INTERVENERS, NO. H-76, DECIDED JANUARY 14, 1935) THE
COURT THEY HAD OF THEIR RESERVATION AN ITS
_ — --— _- a
,_
ASSETS eae Oe -——_— -—
THE SECOND MAJOR REASON FOR THE INDIANS OF THE CONSOLIDATED
CHIPPEWA AGENCY TO BASE THEIR CLAIM WAS THE ALLOTMENT ACT (AcT OF
JANUARY 14, 1889 25 STAT. 642).
330