| OCR Text |
Show REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. XXXIX are unwilling to part with any of their lands, and that the visit of the Commission was nnsuccessful. A select committee appointed by the Senate to inquire into the con-dition of the Indians in Dakota and Nontana reported a bill (S. 1755) '6 to divide a portion of the reservation 9C the Sionx Nation of Indians in Dakota into separate reservations. and to secure the relinquishment of the Indian title to the remainder," which was amended and passed the Senate April 16, 1884. In the House the bill was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, and reported back with amendments May 31,1884,bnt no further action was had and it remains on the calendar. RIGHT OF INDIANS IN THE INDIAN TERRITORY TO TAX CATTLE AND PROHLBIT THE ENTRY OF INFECTED CATTLE. The right of the Indians in the Indian Territory to tax cattle driven through their lands en route to market, and to prohibit the introdnc-tion of foreign cattle at certain seasons of the year, is a subject of con-stantly recurring trouble to this office. Conflicts are continually aris-ing between cattle men and the civilized tribes, most if not all of whom have prohibitory laws bearing on the subject. The Senate Committeo on Indian Affairs, in a report made June 22, 1874, upon the petition of citizens of the State of Kansas, remonstrat-ing against the imposition by the Cherokee Nation of a tax of 10 cents per head upon cattle driven throngh their Territory from Texas to northern markets, was of opinion that the spirit if not the letter of the law fully justified the Indians in the levy of the tax, and that the De-partment ought to sustain thrm in its enforcement so long as it did not exceed the penalty imposed by the law of June 30,1834 (section 2117, Revised Statutes), for grazing stock on Indian lands, which is $1 per head.* The United statescourt in the western district of Arkansas (Judge I. C. Parker), however, thkes a different view of the subject, and holds that a tax imposed by the Creek Nation on cattle passing through their country is a burden laid upon oomperce between the St,ates, the regu-lation of which beloogs to Congress alone. This decision, until over-ruled, is of course binding upon the Department, but I have thought it proper to call the attention of the Department to the subject, as it is one which affords the Indians constant cause of complaint, and not without show of reason, especially as regards infected cattle. As to these I believe the bordering States, certainly Kansas and Missouri, have prohibitory laws, which are r igidl~e nforced. The Indians, espe-cially the civilized tribes, who have fine herds of cattle, consider that they should be similarly protected. S. Ex. Doo. No. 74, Forty-fifth Congress, second seaaion. |
