OCR Text |
Show 36 REPORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OR THE INTERIOR. laws giving the Secretary of the Interior discretion to use certain moneys of the Indians held in trust in any way that he might see flt, including assist-ance of sectarian schools, were not repealed, and consequently his discretion remained. * * * This was the legal advice given to you as to your authority to continue the use of the interest on certain Indian trust funds. It appeared In the discussion that some of the Indian trihes desired to make such use of their own moneys, and various reasons were given to show the advantage of continuing to support eel-taln existing sectarian schools on account of their efficient work or special bene ficial inftuence; but with these considerations the Department of Justice was not especially concerned. Accompanying this statement was a "partial list of Indian funds in the Treasury in trust for particular tribes, a portion of the interest on which funds may be used for educational purposes by the Secre-tary of the Interior under authority of the act of April 1, 1880 (21 Stat. L., 70), and other acts, without appropriation by Congress," as follows : (1) Menominee fond: Interest, $7,651.96 per annum. (Treaty of 1848, art. 5, 9 Stat. L., 952.) (2) Menominee log fund: Interest, $76,313.98 per annum. (Act of Mar. 22, 1882,22 Stat. L., 30 ; act of June 12,1890, 26 Stat. L., 146.) (3) Osage fund: Interest, $416,371.95 per annum. (Treaty of 1865, art. 2, 14 Stat L., 687; act of July 15, 1870, 16 Stat. L., 362; act of June 16, 1880, 21 Stat. L., 292.) (4) Sioux $3,000,000 fund: Interest, $150,000 per annum. (Act of Mar. 2, 1889,25 Stat L., 895.) The President, in a communication of February 3, 1905, to the Secretary of the Interior, said: The practice [of making contracts with certain sectarian mission schools] will be continued by the Department unless Congress should decree to the contrary, or, of course, unless, the courts should decide that the decision of the Department of Jvstice is erroneous. And, explanatory of this enunciation of policy and of the grounds on which it was based, he said: The Department of Justice * * * decided * * * that the prohibition of the law as to the use of public moneys for sectarian schools did not extend to moneys belonging to tbe Indians themselves belongnf t.o th e Indians with the esire of the In-they .were sending their question that, lnasmucl~ to grant the request of the Indians, moral right to have the moneys com-of their children at the schools of of course, to see that. any petition by the Indians is genuine, and that the money appfopriated for any given school represents only the pro rata proportion to whlch the Indians making the petition are entitled. But if these two conditions |