OCR Text |
Show Treaties and Agreements - 668 Hammond informs the commissioner of his participation ( on the night of Oct. 14, 1888) in the negotiations between the Utes and the commission. He says he advised the Ute chiefs that they should sign the agreement because the proposed reservation was superior and they " ought to secure $ 100,000 to boot." Hammond informed the Ute chiefs that if they did not accept the agreement the government " would take them in hand and forcibly remove them, possibly to Florida, or to some other very undesirable location." Hammond feels that the Utes signed the agreement because of his advice. Hammond suggests that a sum not less than $ 200,000 would be fair compensation to settlers for their improvements made on the proposed reservation. Jan. 17, 1890 Carlisle, H, and F. A. Hammond Letter to Commissioner of Indian Affairs The two men, who " are both personally acquainted with both reservations" ( the present and proposed reservations for the So. Utes), state that the proposed reservation is in agriculture, fruit raising, and grazing purposes " very much superior" to the present reservation. NA, RG 75, BIA/ 1637 Jan. 23. 1890 Bishop, Bennett, and John Reid, Durango, Colorado Statements made to Blair Bunwell, notary public Bishop and Reid describe the proposed reservation, the number of cattle and sheep presently grazing there, and the good quality of the farm land. Bishop testifies that the large groups of So. Ute Indians come to the purposed reservation every fall as the winters are less severe than on the present reservation. NA, RG 75, BIA/ 3844 Feb. 17, 1890 Hammond, F. A., Patchogue, Long Island, NY Letter to Morgan, Commissioner of Indian Affairs Hammond forwards to the commissioner Kumer's letter, dated Jan. 14, 1890, and requests that he |