FIELD
The past forty years we have had statistics on Indian advancement in the
Secretary of the Interior and Indian Office reports. Until late years,
these were not detailed, but presented in condensed form the opinions of
Agents, Superintendents and employees.
In 1908 the United States Board of Indian Commissioners published a
table containing answers to twenty-six questions. The information is
valuable and was of service to the Government in handling Indian
problems. I do not reproduce the table here for the reason that
excellent though it was, it omits protection of property, and vital
statistics. Under my chapter devoted to health I have discussed, in a
general way, the health of the Indians, but have not presented tables
for the reason that I do not wish this book to become too statistical in
character.
Feeling that none of the statistical and other reports submitted by
Superintendents, Special Agents, Inspectors—or even the Honorable
Commissioner himself—emphasized the phase of the situation which in my
eyes seemed the most important, I have prepared a table of my own.
Two general questions might be asked every man and woman in the Indian
Service, every educated Indian, and every person living in, or near,
Indian communities. These are:
_First._ “Is the Indian citizen treated as the white citizen, or is he
discriminated against?”
_Second._ “Has his moral, physical, financial and general well being
increased or diminished, the past twenty years?”
On these two very pertinent and important questions hang the entire
future of the American Red Race.
After some thought, I decided to obtain opinions from those who knew at
first hand how our wards were progressing. The information I desired
must cover all of the United States, where Indians now live. Naturally,
it was confined to the region west of the Mississippi, with the
exception of tracts in Wisconsin and Michigan.
The excellent table prepared by Commissioner Sells in his report of 1913
is based upon statistics sent in by Superintendents, teachers and
physicians. Of necessity, it could not include statements or opinions of
missionaries and other observers. It presents the views of employees in
the Department.
After deliberation, a series of fourteen questions were prepared and
addressed to upward of 300 men and women representing every reservation,
Indian community, or school. Nearly half of these replied, and on pages
345 to 358 I have presented their comments grouped under these various
questions. I have tried to make the questions sufficiently elastic to
cover every phase of the subject. Specific requests applied to one
section of the country, might be out of place in another. For instance,
a series of questions concerning the Navaho, might not be answered
intelligently if applied to the Ojibwa of Wisconsin.
In studying the table of statistics, one observes that the answers
indicate a wide difference of opinion. This is quite natural. As an
illustration; at Pine Ridge, Major Brennan—a competent Superintendent,
who has been in charge of the fighting Sioux for many years—thinks that
there is less sickness and more progress than formerly; whereas a
prominent missionary takes the opposite view. Another missionary offers
a compromise as between Major Brennan’s view, and the opinion of his
worthy co-laborer. This difference does not reflect on the report of
Major Brennan, but is an honest difference of opinion. Missionaries and
their assistants go about among the Indians of a certain part of the
reservation more than does the Agent, who is engrossed in many official
duties.
Not a few of the answers are lengthy, and extremely interesting. Were it
possible, all of them should be reproduced in this chapter.
A number of answers were received promptly, others have come to hand a
few at a time, the past four months. Others are still arriving. It must
be remembered that these people are all earnest workers, whether
employed by the Government or benevolent organizations—hence the delays.
Beyond question, many will reach me too late to be included in the
table. There is also a class of excessively timid persons, who seem to
think that to answer the questions, may involve them in controversy, or
cast reflection on the Interior Department. It is quite surprising that
so many correspondents should take this view.
The differences of opinion in nowise affect the table as a whole. On a
large reservation, the Indians in one section may be rather backward.
For instance, there will be more sickness at Pine Point, White Earth
reservation, than about White Earth agency. Hence, the priest at Pine
Point would report a worse condition among his Indians than the Agent at
White Earth. In the great Indian area of eastern Oklahoma, near the
schools conditions are satisfactory, whereas back in the hills, there is
much suffering and distress. Also in Oklahoma, near the towns will live
Indians who drink and gamble. Therefore, if such facts are taken into
consideration, many of the apparent discrepancies in my table will be
readily understood by readers. Upwards of a hundred of my correspondents
have been very frank, and many of their recommendations and suggestions
are purposely omitted for the reason that to incorporate them would seem
like criticizing the present administration. This is not my purpose, as
has been frequently pointed out in this book. All I desire to do is to
present facts, and include sensible remedies suggested by correspondents
on the ground.
[Illustration:
From “_Indian Blankets and Their Makers_”
by George Wharton James.
A. C. McClurg & Co., Publishers.
OLD BAYETA SADDLE BLANKET
]
If we average up the entire table and allow for the progress in the
sections wherein are located schools; where Superintendents, through
efficient farmers and teachers, have brought about advance of Indians,
we will find that in many parts of the country there is a distinct
advance. In other portions of the United States the natives are either
at a standstill, or have retrograded. The best showing is in the Navaho
country, where good work has been done by all the Superintendents and
missionaries, by Rev. Johnson, and by the Agent at Shiprock, Mr. W. T.
Shelton—where now the desert blossoms like the rose. The general policy
as carried out by Major Peter Parquette, Superintendent of the Navaho,
and his able assistants, has been to let them alone and permit them to
work out their own salvation under a slight supervision. As the Navaho
are today the largest body of Indians speaking the same language, and
chiefly full-bloods, in this country, the Navaho statistics are
sufficiently strong in the point of progress to appreciably raise the
entire tone of Indians in the United States. This should be a lesson not
lost on our Congress. While this is true and other communities, such as
Tulalip Agency, Washington, show a marked gain, the general tone of
Indian communities as to advance in the arts, health, etc., is not
satisfactory. The table clearly indicates this. We must take into
account two important factors in studying the reports of my
correspondents. First, the Superintendents, very naturally, wish to
present their wards in as creditable a manner as possible. They do not
exaggerate, for they are all honest and competent observers. But they
rather minimize the sad side of the story. The teachers, missionaries,
priests, and the doctors rather lean toward a pessimistic view of
conditions.
In our final analysis we find that a majority of the correspondents
realize the difficulties under which the Indians labor, being
discriminated against in their respective communities. That is, that
although we claim citizenship for the Indians, all the facts point to
the conclusion that the citizenship is not effective. While we claim to
care for the health of the Indians, we have an insufficient number of
doctors and hospitals. While we build many irrigation plants, prepare
model farms, etc., we do not provide the Indians with sufficient seed,
stock, implements, wagons, etc., whereby they may become
self-supporting. Most important of all, where we have given the Indians
deeds to their property, the majority of them lose the property. It is
not pertinent in the table of statistics to enter into the question
whether the Indian or the white man is at fault in this respect. The
bald facts are to the effect that Indians lose their property.
The statistics indicate that education is advancing, and allotting of
lands has far advanced. In education alone, the Indians certainly have
advanced to a marked degree. Practically all Indians under fifty (save
those referred to on page 27) have had some schooling.
For various reasons the names of the correspondents are omitted,
although their original communications are preserved in my files. In
various chapters throughout the book, I have incorporated partial or
complete statements from these same correspondents. In the table, the
answers to the questions have been presented in a few words. Many of the
sentences are actual quotations, but others present in condensed form
the opinions of the writers. Many correspondents have devoted an entire
page to answering one question. Frequently, after answering the
questions, the correspondent has written several pages in order to
present his views concerning the Indian problem. Others have selected
such questions as appeared to them to be of primary importance, and have
answered these at considerable length. A majority of the correspondents
realize that the protection of the Indian’s property, the safeguarding
of his health, and the relation between the two races constitute the
essentials of the Indian problem, and that all other considerations are
secondary.
TABLE OF STATISTICS
═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════
Correspondent │Is there more │Are children │Have many
│tuberculosis and │discharged from │children the past
│trachoma among │the schools │ten years, been
│your Indians now │because of │dismissed from
│than ten years │diseases, │the schools?
│ago? │properly treated │
│ │at home? │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
ALASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1. Nulato │Tuberculosis not │Not generally, │Very few, if any.
│very much │but occasionally,│
│increased, but │seldom properly │
│ten times as much│treated at home. │
│trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 St. │No. │Not one. │Not one.
Michaels │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 │Yes. │No. │Yes.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
ARIZONA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Less tuberculosis│No. (No diseases │Few, government
Defiance │and trachoma. │treated properly │regulation.
│ │at home). │
│ │ │
No. 2 Parker │Records do not │No. │Eight, in last
│show it. │ │three years.
│ │ │
No. 3 Phoenix │Increased, I │ │
│think. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Sacaton │No reliable │Not generally. │Not able to
│statistics. │ │state.
│ │ │
No. 5 St. │No. │No diseases │Few; tuberculosis
Michaels │ │treated at home. │cases.
│ │ │
No. 6 Tucson │Cannot answer. │Yes and No. │Very few.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 │There is. │Tuberculosis, │Many.
│ │discharged. │
│ │Trachoma, treated│
│ │in schools. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
CALIFORNIA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Banning │No. │Yes, sent home to│Not many.
│ │die. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Campo │No. │No proper │One case on
│ │treatment at │account of
│ │home. │sickness.
│ │ │
No. 3 Covelo │No. │No. No treatment │Comparatively
│ │at home. │few.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 El Cujon │No. │No. │No.
│ │ │
No. 5 Greenville │I think not. │No. │Probably about
│ │ │twenty.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Likely │Yes, much more. │No. │No.
│ │ │
No. 7 Pala │There is much │ │Percentage very
│more than five │ │small.
│years ago. │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Ukiah │Not to my │ │
│knowledge. │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Yuma Yuma │No. │No. │No.
│ │ │
No. 10 N. │I would say not │By law, must be │Not many.
California │so prevalent. │sent home. │
│ │Necessary in few │
│ │cases. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
COLORADO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Navaho │No data. │No treatment at │No data.
Springs │ │home. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Elbowoods │We have looked │No. │No tuberculosis
│into the │ │or trachoma cases
│condition more, │ │admitted.
│that is all, I │ │
│think. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Elbowoods │Yes, I believe │ │None of late.
│there is. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Ft. Yates │Less frequent │No. │Few.
│now. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Standing │Greatly │Not sent home │
Rock │increased. │soon enough. │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
SO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Cheyenne │I think so, at │I think not. │Not a great many.
│least more of it │ │
│is known. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow Creek │I do not think │No. │
│so. │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Flandreau │More │ │
│satisfactory. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Greenwood │About the same. │No treatment at │Not many.
│ │home. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 McLaughlin │Yes. │Only when case is│Yes.
│ │hopeless. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Mission │Both very bad. │In some cases. │
│ │ │
No. 7 Oahe │I think not. │Not as a rule. │Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Pine Ridge │No. │Few given proper │Twenty-three from
│ │care. │non-res’n schools
│ │ │none from
│ │ │reservat’n.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Pine Ridge │So it seems to │ │Few.
│me. │ │
│ │ │
No. 10 Rosebud │Less. │Not allowed to │Few.
│ │attend. │
│ │ │
No. 11 Rosebud │Not so much. │Yes. │None except for
Ag. │ │ │infectious
│ │ │diseases.
│ │ │
No. 12 Sisseton │No. │No. │Sick children,
│ │ │because of lack
│ │ │of room.
│ │ │
No. 13 Sisseton │No. │Some are. │Scarcely any.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 14 Sisseton │Probably less │No. │Diseased ones not
│tuberculosis, │ │taken.
│more trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 15 St. │Tuberculosis │ │Not so very many.
Francis │same, Trachoma │ │
│better. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
IDAHO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Fort Hall │Yes. │No. │Aver. 31 per
│ │ │year.
│ │ │
No. 2 Ft. Lapwai │I think there is │No. │Yes, but taken to
│more. │ │hospital.
│ │ │
No. 3 Lapwai │Less, it has been│Examined before │Few.
│stated. │admitted. │
│ │ │
No. 4 Slickpoo │Yes, more │Yes, for │Yes.
│tuberculosis. │contagious │
│ │diseases. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
IOWA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Toledo │Not on the │They are not. │No data.
│increase. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
KANSAS │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Baxter │Yes, among some │No. │No.
Springs │families. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Powhattan │No. │Not well cared │Comparatively
│ │for at home. │few.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
MINNESOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Winnebago │No, not so much. │No. │None from our
│ │ │school.
│ │ │
No. 2 Beaulieu │More │None. │
│tuberculosis, │ │
│less trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Cass Lake │I should judge │No. │Not many, they
│so. │ │are examined
│ │ │before admitted.
│ │ │
No. 4 Cloquet │Not more than ten│Very few. │Few.
│years ago. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
MONTANA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Browning │No. │In many cases. │No data.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow Ag’cy │No. │Not a great many.│No.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Poplar │Tuberculosis │ │About ten a year.
│same, more │ │
│trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Jocko │No. │No. │No
│ │ │boarding-school.
│ │ │
No. 5 Lame Deer │Yes, more. │Not properly │Not many.
│ │treated at home. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Lodge Grass│No. │No. │Two in ten years.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 St. │At least as much.│Tuberculosis │Twenty-five in
Ignatius │ │cases sent home, │ten years.
│ │trachoma treated │
│ │at home. │
│ │ │
No. 8 Wolf Point │I do not think │No. │No.
│so. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEBRASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Santee │Less tuberculosis│Very few. │No.
│but possibly more│ │
│trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Santee │I think not. More│ │Cannot say.
│notice is made of│ │
│it. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEVADA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Nixon │No. │No. │Four.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Schurz │Yes. │No. │Twenty to thirty.
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEW MEXICO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Albuquerque│Apparently there │No. │Yes.
│is more. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Gallup │I do not think │No. │No record.
│so. │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
OKLAHOMA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Anadarko │Probably more is │Not as a rule. │Do not know of
│known. │ │many.
│ │ │
No. 2 Anadarko │About the same. │No. │No, not very
│ │ │many.
│ │ │
No. 3 Anadarko │On the increase. │Not as a rule. │Ninety-six not
│ │ │admitted, 25
│ │ │dismissed from
│ │ │1300 this year.
│ │ │
No. 4 Atoka │I think so. │No. │Do not know.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 Bacone │No data. │No. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Carnegie │Less │ │Not many.
│tuberculosis, │ │
│trachoma same. │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 Checotah │Yes. │No. │A good number.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Darlington │Less │Not here. │Yes.
│tuberculosis, │ │
│trachoma unknown │ │
│ten years ago. │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Durant │Considerably │Are not admitted.│
│less. │ │
│ │ │
No. 10 Durant │No increase. │No. │No.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 11 Eufaula │Not increasing. │No. │Six this year.
│ │ │
No. 12 Hobart │No. │Yes and no. │No.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 13 │There is. │No. │I do not know.
Holdenville │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 14 Hugo │More. │Discharged for │Not many.
│ │outdoor exercise.│
│ │ │
No. 15 Hugo │Less │Very few. │Do not know.
│tuberculosis, │ │
│trachoma same. │ │
│ │ │
No. 16 Lawton │Less │Cared for in the │Very few.
│tuberculosis, │schools. │
│more trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 17 Mountain │Less │Not treated at │A good many, I
View │tuberculosis, │home. │think.
│more trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 18 Muskogee │More satisfactory│ │
│conditions. │ │
│ │ │
No. 19 Pawhuska │Less │ │None.
│tuberculosis, │ │
│more trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 20 Pawhuska │No, I think not. │In most cases, │I think not.
│ │no. │
│ │ │
No. 21 Sapulpa │Tuberculosis │Not treated at │Not as many as
│more, trachoma │home. │should have been.
│common 10 years │ │
│ago. │ │
│ │ │
No. 22 Shawnee │We think not. │One or two cases.│Very few.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 23 Watanga │Less │Not given proper │Allowed to go
│tuberculosis. │care. │home if diseased.
│ │ │
No. 24 White │I do not think │Not as a rule. │Very small
Eagle │so. │ │percent.
│ │ │
No. 25 Wyandotte │I do not think │Few. │Three.
│so. │ │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
OREGON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Klamath │About the same. │Not given proper │Yes.
│ │treatment. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Pendleton │More │Few. │
│tuberculosis. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Roseburg │No data. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Warm Spring│More trachoma. │No. │No record.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
UTAH │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Salt Lake │No data. │ │
City │ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEW YORK │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Gowanda │No. │No. │No.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
WASHINGTON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Bellingham │No. │Yes. │Five.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Bellingham │No. │Never treated │A good many.
│ │properly at home.│
│ │ │
No. 3 Marysville │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Neah Bay │More │Yes. │Do not know.
│tuberculosis, │ │
│less trachoma. │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 No. Yakima │Perhaps not. │Not treated │Cannot say.
│ │properly at home.│
│ │ │
No. 6 Nespelem │More prevalent, I│Not as a rule. │Cannot tell.
│think. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 St. Mary’s │No. │Never properly │Quite a few.
│ │treated at home. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Takoma │More │We discharge only│Twenty from our
│tuberculosis, │when very sick, │school.
│less trachoma. │and take charge │
│ │of them. │
│ │ │
No. 9 Tulalip │No. │Occasionally. │Five percent or
│ │ │less.
│ │ │
No. 10 Wheeler │I think there is │No. │Taken to
│more. │ │government
│ │ │hospital.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
WISCONSIN │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Adanah │No. │No. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Ashland │No record of, ten│No, children not │Some.
│years ago. Plenty│cared for at │
│now. │home. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Bayfield │I think not. │They get better │
│ │treatment at the │
│ │schools. │
│ │ │
No. 4 Carter │There is some │No school at │No dismissals.
│here. │Agency. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 Kesbena │No. │Yes. │Thirty, but some
│ │ │have been
│ │ │transferred.
│ │ │
No. 6 Kesbena │No. │Yes, or not │No record.
│ │admitted. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 Tomah │I think there is │No. │About fifteen.
│more. │ │
─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────
═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════
Correspondent │In your opinion, │Are the Indians │Is the general
│has there been a │holding their │condition of the
│high percentage │allotments, or │Indians as a body
│of deaths among │are the white │more satisfactory
│the children, │people procuring │than ten years
│suffering from │the same? │ago?
│tuberculosis, │ │
│sent from the │ │
│schools to their │ │
│homes the past │ │
│ten years? │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
ALASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1. Nulato │No. │Indians ready to │Rather less so.
│ │sell regardless │
│ │of consequences. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 St. │ │No white men │Much better.
Michaels │ │here. │
│ │ │
No. 3 │Uncertain. │None here. │No.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
ARIZONA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Yes. │Holding their │Yes, much better.
Defiance │ │allotments. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Parker │Yes. │Keeping their │Decidedly so.
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Phoenix │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Sacaton │Do not know. │No allotments │Need water to
│ │made. │improve.
│ │ │
No. 5 St. │Yes. │Holding │Yes.
Michaels │ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Tucson │Cannot answer. │Holding their │Cannot answer.
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 7 │Yes. │Allotments held │It is.
│ │by the │
│ │Government. │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
CALIFORNIA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Banning │There has not. │No allotments. │Decidedly better.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Campo │No children sent │No allotments. │Fifty per cent
│home. │ │better.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Covelo │Only healthy │No allotment held│More farming,
│children │by white men. │morals very
│enrolled. │ │little improved.
│ │ │
No. 4 El Cujon │No. │No allotments. │Yes.
│ │ │
No. 5 Greenville │Yes. │Few allotments │Yes.
│ │sold to best │
│ │interest of │
│ │Indian. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Likely │No. │Holding them. │No, much worse.
│ │ │
No. 7 Pala │All sent home │Holding them by │Much better.
│have died │law. │
│(seven). │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Ukiah │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Yuma Yuma │No. │Holding them. │No.
│ │ │
No. 10 N. │No. │Just received │Yes, decidedly.
California │ │allotments. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
COLORADO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Navaho │Yes. │No allotments. │Yes.
Springs │ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Elbowoods │Yes. │Holding most of │Yes.
│ │them. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Elbowoods │Yes, from │Indian holds │Yes.
│non-reservation │land. │
│schools. │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Ft. Yates │About 2%. │Holding them. │No.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Standing │ │Holding them. │
Rock │ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
SO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Cheyenne │No. │Some are, others │No.
│ │want to sell. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow Creek │Percentage high. │Cannot dispose of│No.
│ │lands. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Flandreau │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Greenwood │No. │Two-thirds of │In some respects
│ │land now in hands│yes.
│ │of white people. │
│ │ │
No. 5 McLaughlin │Very high. │Very few sales. │Not much.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Mission │High. │Some sell. │Yes and No.
│ │ │
No. 7 Oahe │Yes. │Holding │Yes.
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 8 Pine Ridge │One hundred │In most cases. │Much better.
│percent from │ │
│enteric tuber’s, │ │
│none from other │ │
│tuber. │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Pine Ridge │Per cent. not so │Holding │Poorer.
│high. │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 10 Rosebud │ │Very slow sale. │Better.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 11 Rosebud │No. │Holding own, but │Yes.
Ag. │ │selling heirship │
│ │lands. │
│ │ │
No. 12 Sisseton │Not a high │Indians want to │Some improvement.
│percent. │sell. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 13 Sisseton │Two percent. │Forty percent │Yes, great
│ │holding own. │improvement.
│ │ │
No. 14 Sisseton │Yes. │Whites, as soon │No.
│ │as they can. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 15 St. │No data. │Not allowed to │Yes, in some
Francis │ │sell. │respects.
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
IDAHO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Fort Hall │Almost 100%. │None sold yet. │I think so.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Ft. Lapwai │Do not know. │Whites are buying│Yes.
│ │heirship lands. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Lapwai │Many deaths. │Largest percent │Better.
│ │held by Indians. │
│ │ │
No. 4 Slickpoo │Yes. │Whites buying │I think not.
│ │from half-breeds.│
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
IOWA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Toledo │No. │Unallotted. │Yes.
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
KANSAS │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Baxter │No. │Yes, until │Yes.
Springs │ │restriction is │
│ │removed. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Powhattan │Yes. │Majority are. │Yes, except for
│ │ │morals.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
MINNESOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Winnebago │Not from our │White people rent│No.
│school. │or buy fast. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Beaulieu │ │Only 15% will │No.
│ │hold allotments │
│ │in 6 years. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Cass Lake │Percentage high. │Whites get all │No.
│ │they can. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Cloquet │Thirty percent. │Holding their │No.
│ │allotments. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
MONTANA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Browning │High percent. │No allotments │Yes.
│ │made. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow Ag’cy │High percent. │Sell patents in │Yes, decidedly.
│ │fee and heirship │
│ │lands. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Poplar │Percentage is │Indians just │Far better.
│above the │received them. │
│average. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Jocko │No. │Full-bloods are, │Yes.
│ │the others sell. │
│ │ │
No. 5 Lame Deer │High percent. │No allotments. │Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Lodge Grass│No, the reverse │Prefer to sell │Yes, decidedly.
│is true. │when they can. │
│ │ │
No. 7 St. │Very high │Holding them. │No.
Ignatius │percent. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Wolf Point │No. │Holding │Yes, much.
│ │allotments. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEBRASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Santee │Very high │Holding them │Yes.
│percent. │fairly well. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Santee │Cannot say. │Many pass into │Yes.
│ │white hands. │
│ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEVADA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Nixon │No. │No allotments │Yes, very much.
│ │made. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Schurz │Yes. │Holding │Yes.
│ │allotments. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEW MEXICO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Albuquerque│Yes. │Holding │Yes, slowly.
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Gallup │No. │Holding │Yes.
│ │allotments. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
OKLAHOMA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Anadarko │Yes. │Some Indians │Yes.
│ │sell. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Anadarko │Yes. │Those who can, │Yes.
│ │sell. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Anadarko │No. │Dispose of them │Yes.
│ │whenever they │
│ │can. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Atoka │Yes. │Whites getting │No.
│ │many. │
│ │ │
No. 5 Bacone │Yes. │Whites getting │
│ │many. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Carnegie │Yes. │Whites getting │No.
│ │many. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 Checotah │Yes. │All unrestricted │No.
│ │are sold. │
│ │ │
No. 8 Darlington │Very high, but │Both are true. │Yes.
│reducing. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Durant │ │Selling as fast │Yes.
│ │as they can. │
│ │ │
No. 10 Durant │Nearly all die. │Whites getting │Indian says, no.
│ │them. │I say, yes and
│ │ │no.
│ │ │
No. 11 Eufaula │Not high. │Whites try to. │Yes.
│ │ │
No. 12 Hobart │ │Holding │Yes.
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 13 │ │They sell all │Yes.
Holdenville │ │they can. │
│ │ │
No. 14 Hugo │ │Holding │Indian not
│ │allotments. │satisfied.
│ │ │
No. 15 Hugo │High percentage. │Few Indians hold │Yes.
│ │all their │
│ │allotments. │
│ │ │
No. 16 Lawton │High percentage. │Very few sell │Yes.
│ │their lands. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 17 Mountain │No. │Holding them. │Yes.
View │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 18 Muskogee │ │ │Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 19 Pawhuska │No. │Whites buying all│No. Decidedly.
│ │they can. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 20 Pawhuska │Nearly all have │Very few sales │Yes.
│died. │made. │
│ │ │
No. 21 Sapulpa │Yes. │Whites hold large│Yes.
│ │per cent. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 22 Shawnee │Three fatal │Holding │Marked
│cases. │allotments. │improvement.
│ │ │
No. 23 Watanga │ │Little demand for│Better.
│ │land. │
│ │ │
No. 24 White │Very low. │Nearly all │Better.
Eagle │ │holding lands. │
│ │ │
No. 25 Wyandotte │One has died, │Whites hold a │Better.
│there has not │little less than │
│been. │one-half. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
OREGON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Klamath │Yes. │Sales just │Yes.
│ │beginning. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Pendleton │ │Full-bloods hold,│
│ │mixed-bloods │
│ │sell. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Roseburg │ │ │Yes.
│ │ │
No. 4 Warm Spring│Yes. │Holding them. │Yes.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
UTAH │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Salt Lake │ │ │
City │ │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
NEW YORK │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Gowanda │No. │Holding them. │Yes.
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
WASHINGTON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Bellingham │All die. │Indians hold │Yes.
│ │lands. │
│ │ │
No. 2 Bellingham │ │Whites getting │Yes.
│ │lands. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Marysville │ │ │Naturally better
│ │ │on account of
│ │ │selling land.
│ │ │
No. 4 Neah Bay │No. │Sold lands off │Yes.
│ │reservation only.│
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 No. Yakima │ │Whites swindle │Yes, but losing
│ │lands. │lands.
│ │ │
No. 6 Nespelem │No. │Not over 10% have│Yes.
│ │passed into white│
│ │hands. │
│ │ │
No. 7 St. Mary’s │Some have. │Just now. │Worse on account
│ │ │of whiskey which
│ │ │they get all the
│ │ │time.
│ │ │
No. 8 Takoma │Seven died. │Only few hold │Yes.
│ │lands after │
│ │reservation is │
│ │opened. │
│ │ │
No. 9 Tulalip │Yes. │Whites │Generally, yes.
│ │encroaching. │
│ │ │
No. 10 Wheeler │Do not know. │White people │Yes.
│ │buying heirship │
│ │lands. │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
WISCONSIN │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Adanah │No. │Cannot sell. │Yes.
│ │ │
No. 2 Ashland │Yes. │Indians holding │Hardly.
│ │them. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Bayfield │ │Whites not │Yes.
│ │getting much. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Carter │Cannot answer. │Indians hold no │Conditions
│ │allotments. │improved since
│ │ │Agency was
│ │ │established.
│ │ │
No. 5 Kesbena │No. │Yes, whites buy │No.
│ │when they can. │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Kesbena │No. │Large number at │Very much so.
│ │Stockridge have. │
│ │Menominees not │
│ │allotted. │
│ │ │
No. 7 Tomah │No. │Indians holding │More
│ │them. │satisfactory.
─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────
═════════════╤══════════════╤═══════════════╤════════════╤════════════
Correspondent│Is immorality,│Which of the │Are the │Do the
│in your │two classes are│white people│Indians who
│opinion, due │in the better │crowding │are trained
│to the │condition, the │your Indians│near their
│presence of │mixed-blood or │and taking │homes do
│low whites, or│full-blood │advantage of│better than
│because of the│Indian? │them? │Indians who
│Indian │ │ │are educated
│himself? │ │ │at a
│ │ │ │distance and
│ │ │ │return?
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
ALASKA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Nolato │Both, former │Not much │Yes, to some│There is no
│about five │difference. │extent, but │difference.
│times as much │ │Indian │
│as latter. │ │retaliates. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 St. │Low whites. │ │ │Better,
Michaels │ │ │ │(Yes).
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │Low whites. │Both in poor │Not much. │
│ │shape. │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
ARIZONA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │A little off│Yes.
Defiance │himself. │ │the │
│ │ │reservation.│
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Parker │Due to old │Few │They are │Yes.
│customs. │mixed-bloods │not. │
│ │same condition.│ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Phoenix│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Sacaton│Cases due to │Few │Yes, in │Yes.
│Indian. │mixed-bloods, │regard to │
│ │these not │water. │
│ │impr’v’d. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 St. │Due to Indian,│Mixed-bloods, │Yes, off the│Yes.
Michaels │because of │only a few, │reservation.│
│customs. │however. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 Tucson │To Indians. │Very few │Among the │I think so.
│ │mixed-bloods. │Papagos but │
│ │ │not the │
│ │ │Pimas. │
│ │ │ │
No. 7 │Low whites. │No mixed │Yes, if │Most
│ │bloods. │possible. │assuredly.
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
CALIFORNIA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Banning│Little │Mixed-bloods. │No. │About same.
│immorality. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Campo │Indian │Few │No. │About same.
│himself. │mixed-bloods, │ │
│ │these are │ │
│ │better. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Covelo │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │Not │Yes.
│ │ │crowding, │
│ │ │but taking │
│ │ │advantage of│
│ │ │necessities.│
│ │ │ │
No. 4 El │Very few │ │No. │Few of them.
Cujon │cases. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 │To both. │The │To no great │No.
Greenville │ │mixed-bloods. │extent. │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 Likely │Low whites. │Full-bloods. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │ │
No. 7 Pala │Little │Very few │No. │Yes, much
│immorality. │full-bloods │ │better.
│ │here. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 8 Ukiah │ │ │ │Yes.
│ │ │ │
No. 9 Yuma, │Indian │Very few │No. │Same.
Yuma │himself. │mixed-bloods │ │
│ │here. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 10 N. │Low whites. │Full-bloods. │No. │
California │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
COLORADO │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Navaho │No whites │No mixed-bloods│No. │Yes.
Springs │here. │here. │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
NO. DAKOTA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Indian │No difference. │No not much.│No
Elbowoods │himself. │ │ │difference
│ │ │ │noted.
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │Indian │Full bloods. │No. │Yes.
Elbowoods │himself. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Ft. │Low whites and│Mixed-bloods │No. │Home
Yates │mixed-bloods. │financially. │ │training
│ │ │ │seems best.
│ │ │ │
No. 4 │To Government,│Full-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Standing Rock│because Indian│ │ │
│cannot marry │ │ │
│until │ │ │
│eighteen. │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
SO. DAKOTA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Cheyenne │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Crow │Indian nature │Mixed-bloods. │No. │Little
Creek │(himself). │ │ │difference.
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │ │Mixed-bloods a │No. │
Flandreau │ │little. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Greenwood │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 │Both. │Mixed, │Only a large│Yes.
McLaughlin │ │materially, │cattle │
│ │otherwise │company. │
│ │full-blood. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 Mission│Low whites. │Same. │Often. │Yes.
│ │ │ │
No. 7 Oahe │Low whites. │Not much │Not to any │Yes.
│ │difference. │extent. │
│ │ │ │
No. 8 Pine │Indian │Mixed-blood. │No. │Yes.
Ridge │(Mixed-blood).│ │ │
No. 9 Pine │Low whites. │Mixed-blood. │No. │Yes.
Ridge │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 10 │Both. │Both in some │No. │Yes.
Rosebud │ │respects. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 11 │Indian │Mixed-blood. │Not much. │Yes.
Rosebud Ag. │himself. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 12 │Indian │Hard to say, │Yes, when │Cannot tell.
Sisseton │himself. │full-blood in │they can. │
│ │health. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 13 │Low whites. │Little │Some try to.│Yes.
Sisseton │ │difference. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 13 │Indian mostly.│Little │When they │Little
Sisseton │ │difference. │can. │difference.
│ │ │ │full-bloods
│ │ │ │decreasing.
│ │ │ │
No. 15 St. │ │Mixed-blood. │Some. │Yes.
Francis │ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
IDAHO │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Indian on sex,│Not much │No but would│Yes.
Hall │Low whites on │difference. │like to. │
│liquor. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Ft. │Low whites. │Full-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Lapwai │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Lapwai │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │Not │Yes.
│customs. │ │generally. │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 │Both. │Mixed-bloods │Yes, as much│Much better.
Slickpoo │ │little better. │as they can.│
│ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
IOWA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Toledo │They keep │No noticeable │Whites │
│aloof from │difference. │encourage │
│whites. │ │them, but │
│Indians │ │few prey on │
│themselves. │ │them. No. │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
KANSAS │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Baxter │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │When they │Yes.
Springs │himself. │ │get a │
│ │ │chance. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │Indian │Mixed-bloods, │Yes. │No.
Powhattan │himself. │except morally.│ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
MINNESOTA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Low whites. │Not much │Yes, to a │Yes.
Winnebago │ │difference. │great │
│ │ │extent. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │Low whites. │ │ │Yes.
Beaulieu │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Cass │White man 90%.│Full-blood. │Yes. │Yes.
Lake │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Cloquet│Low whites. │Mixed-blood │No. │Yes.
│ │financially; │ │
│ │full-blood │ │
│ │morally. │ │
│ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
MONTANA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Low whites. │Mixed-blood as │No whites │Cannot say.
Browning │ │a rule. │here. │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Crow │Indian nature.│Full-blood, but│No. │No
Ag. │ │little │ │difference.
│ │difference. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 Poplar │Early low │Mixed-blood. │Few whites │Yes.
│whites. │ │here. │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Jocko │Indian │Mixed-blood. │Some trying │Yes.
│himself. │ │to. │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 Lame │What little │Both the same. │No. │Same.
Deer │there is, is │ │ │
│due to Indian.│ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 Lodge │Low whites │ │No. │No.
Grass │helped. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 7 St. │Low whites. │Mixed-bloods │Trying to. │Yes.
Ignatius │ │materially, │ │
│ │full-bloods │ │
│ │morally. │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 8 Wolf │Both. │Full-bloods. │No. │Yes.
Point │ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
NEBRASKA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Santee │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │No, not to │Yes.
│himself. │ │any extent. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Santee │Both. │Full-bloods │Yes, when │Yes.
│ │generally. │they can. │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
NEVADA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Nixon │No whites │Full-bloods. │No. │Yes.
│here. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Schurz │Both. │Full-bloods. │Not on the │Yes.
│ │ │reservation.│
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
NEW MEXICO │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │A certain │No.
Albuquerque │himself. │ │class does. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Gallup │Indian │No │No. │No.
│himself. │mixed-bloods. │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
OKLAHOMA │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │Both. │Same. │Some whites │Same.
Anadarko │ │ │are. │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │Largely to low│Same. │Yes, when │Yes, as a
Anadarko │whites. │ │they can. │rule.
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │Indian │Full-bloods. │No. │Yes.
Anadarko │himself. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Atoka │To low whites.│Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │No.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 Bacone │Both, mostly │ │Very much. │Yes.
│to whites. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 │Low whites. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Carnegie │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 7 │Low whites. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │No
Checotah │ │ │ │difference.
│ │ │ │
No. 8 │Low whites. │Full-bloods, │No. │Cannot say.
Darlington │ │exceptions │ │
│ │favor mixed. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 9 Durant │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │Many try to.│No.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 10 Durant│Low whites. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │No
│ │ │ │difference.
│ │ │ │
No. 11 │Early low │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │
Eufaula │whites, now │ │ │
│Indian. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 12 Hobart│Both. │ │When they │Yes.
│ │ │can. │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 13 │Low whites. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │I don’t
Holdenville │ │ │ │know.
│ │ │ │
No. 14 Hugo │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │When they │Same.
│ │ │can. │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 15 Hugo │Low whites. │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 16 Lawton│Low whites. │Little │A certain │Yes.
│ │difference. │class do. │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 17 │Both. │No difference. │Many do. │No
Mountain View│ │ │ │difference.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 18 │Indian │Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │No.
Muskogee │himself. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 19 │Low whites. │Full-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Pawhuska │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 20 │Low whites and│Mixed-bloods. │Yes. │Yes.
Pawhuska │colored │ │ │
│people. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 21 │Both. │Full-bloods. │Yes. │Not if those
Sapulpa │ │ │ │trained away
│ │ │ │are well
│ │ │ │advanced.
│ │ │ │
No. 22 │Both. │Mixed-bloods. │Some try to.│Young
Shawnee │ │ │ │children do.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 23 │Early whites. │Same. │Some try to.│No
Watanga │ │ │ │difference.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 24 White │Both. │Same. │They cannot.│Yes.
Eagle │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 25 │Low whites. │Same. │All they │No
Wyandotte │ │ │can. │difference.
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
OREGON │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Klamath│Indian │Mixed-blood. │No. │I think so.
│himself. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │ │ │ │
Pendleton │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │Both. │Mixed-blood. │Yes. │Yes.
Roseburg │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Warm │Indian (no │Same. │Some do. │No.
Sp. │whites here.) │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
UTAH │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Salt │ │ │ │
Lake City. │ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
WASHINGTON │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 │No low whites │Same. │They cannot.│Yes.
Bellingham │here. │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 │Low whites. │Same. │No, except │I think so.
Bellingham │ │ │gamblers. │
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │ │Materially the │Few. │
Marysville │ │mixed-bloods. │ │
│ │Morally the │ │
│ │full-bloods. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Neah │Indian nature.│All │No, they │In my
Bay │ │mixed-blood. │assist them.│opinion, no.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 5 No. │Low whites and│Mixed-blood. │Yes, in │Do not know.
Yakima │colored │ │every way │
│people. │ │possible. │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 │Low whites. │Mixed-blood. │Yes, in │Yes, as a
Nespelem │ │ │places. │rule.
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 7 St. │Whiskey. │About the same.│No. │I think so.
Mary’s │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 8 Tacoma │ │Mixed, │As soon as │Little
│ │temporally; │they can. │difference.
│ │full-blood │ │
│ │otherwise. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 9 Tulalip│Both. │Mixed-blood. │When they │Yes.
│ │ │can. │
│ │ │ │
No. 10 │Low whites. │Full-blood. │Yes. │Yes.
Wheeler │ │ │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
WISCONSIN │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Adanah │Low whites. │All │No. │Yes.
│ │mixed-bloods. │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 2 Ashland│Both. │Mixed-bloods. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │ │
No. 3 │Low whites │Full-bloods, │Treated as │About same.
Bayfield │mostly. │morally. Mixed │whites. │
│ │financially and│ │
│ │intellectually.│ │
│ │ │ │
No. 4 Carter │Very little │Only │To a small │None have
│immorality. │full-bloods. │degree. │gone away.
│ │ │ │
No. 5 Kesbena│Both. │Mixed-bloods. │No whites │Yes.
│ │ │here. │
│ │ │ │
No. 6 Kesbena│Both. │Full-bloods. │Traders, │Same.
│ │ │outside, do.│
│ │ │ │
No. 7 Tomah │Only to whites│What few │Not here. │Yes,
│when they sell│mixed-breeds we│ │perhaps.
│liquor. │have are │ │
│ │better. │ │
─────────────┼──────────────┼───────────────┼────────────┼────────────
NEW YORK │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
No. 1 Gowanda│Indian │No full-bloods.│Only hotels │No.
│himself. │ │and saloons.│
─────────────┴──────────────┴───────────────┴────────────┴────────────
═════════════╤════════════╤════════════════╤══════════════
Correspondent│Is the │Are white men │Is the
│population │marrying Indian │Government
│increasing │women in order │properly
│or │to secure │protecting the
│decreasing? │property? │Indians?
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
ALASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Nolato │Slightly │No. │Bureau of
│decreasing. │ │Education,
│ │ │yes; laws very
│ │ │bad.
│ │ │
No. 2 St. │Slightly │ │
Michaels │increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 │Decreasing. │ │Not enough
│ │ │protecting.
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
ARIZONA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Slightly │No. │No.
Defiance │increasing. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Parker │Decreasing │No. │It is.
│among the │ │
│full-bloods.│ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Phoenix│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Sacaton│Slight │No. │Yes, but
│increase, I │ │hampered by
│think. │ │law and
│ │ │politics.
│ │ │
No. 5 St. │Slightly │No. │No.
Michaels │increasing. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Tucson │Increasing. │No. │Not as regards
│ │ │land and
│ │ │water.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 │Increasing. │Law forbids │No.
│ │inter-marriages.│
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
CALIFORNIA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Banning│Just holding│No. │Yes.
│its own. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Campo │Slowly │No. │Yes.
│decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Covelo │About same. │Only reprobates.│Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 El │Increasing. │No. │Yes.
Cujon │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 │Holding its │No. │Yes.
Greenville │own. │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Likely │Decreasing. │No. │No.
│ │ │
No. 7 Pala │Very slight │No. │Yes, all it
│increase. │ │can.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Ukiah │ │ │No.
│ │ │
No. 9 Yuma, │Same. │No. │Yes.
Yuma │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 10 N. │Seems to be │No. │Government has
California │on the │ │done very
│increase │ │little.
│now. │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
COLORADO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Navaho │Increasing │No. │Yes.
Springs │three │ │
│percent per │ │
│year. │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
NO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Slightly │No. │More energy
Elbowoods │increasing. │ │needed.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 │Decreasing. │Law forbids it. │Yes.
Elbowoods │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Ft. │Increasing. │Very seldom. │Intentions
Yates │ │ │good,
│ │ │officials bad.
│ │ │
No. 4 │Increasing. │No. │No.
Standing Rock│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
SO. DAKOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Holding its │Yes. │
Cheyenne │own. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow │Vacillating.│No. │Yes.
Creek │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 │ │No. │What is
Flandreau │ │ │necessary.
│ │ │
No. 4 │Increasing. │No. │Yes.
Greenwood │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 │Slight │Very few. │No, in many
McLaughlin │increase. │ │respects.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Mission│ │Not often. │Failure.
│ │ │
No. 7 Oahe │Increasing. │Not to any │Yes.
│ │extent. │
│ │ │
No. 8 Pine │Increasing. │Some. │Yes .
Ridge │ │ │
No. 9 Pine │Mixed-bloods│Some. │
Ridge │increasing, │ │
│full-bloods │ │
│decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 10 │Increasing │Some. │In some ways.
Rosebud │1%. │ │
│ │ │
No. 11 │4500 to │ │Yes.
Rosebud Ag. │5490. │ │
│ │ │
No. 12 │Increasing │Few. │Indians say
Sisseton │slowly. │ │no.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 13 │Increasing. │Some cases. │Indians are
Sisseton │ │ │citizens.
│ │ │
No. 13 │Mixed-bloods│Not now, few. │To some
Sisseton │increasing, │ │extent.
│cases. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 15 St. │Slight │ │Dealt honestly
Francis │increase. │ │with them.
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
IDAHO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Ft. │Decreasing. │Not many. │Yes.
Hall │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Ft. │Don’t know. │Rarely. │Yes and No.
Lapwai │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Lapwai │Increase │No. │Yes, here.
│slightly. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 │Decreasing. │A few. │Not as regards
Slickpoo │ │ │morality and
│ │ │religion.
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
IOWA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Toledo │Increasing │No. │
│slowly. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
KANSAS │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Baxter │Decreasing. │No. │Yes.
Springs │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 │Increasing │No. (Some │Yes, could be
Powhattan │some. │Indians marry │improved.
│ │low white │
│ │women.) │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
MINNESOTA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Stationary. │Not much now. │Indians
Winnebago │ │ │dissatisfied.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 │ │75% increase. │
Beaulieu │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 Cass │Full-blood │ │Government
Lake │decreasing, │ │ineffective.
│Mixed-blood │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Cloquet│Full-blood │Yes, but not │Yes.
│decreasing, │many. │
│mixed-bloods│ │
│on the │ │
│increase. │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
MONTANA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Increasing │Few. │Yes.
Browning │for two │ │
│years. │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Crow │Slowly │Two, but do not │Yes, all
Ag. │decreasing. │know the │possible.
│ │incentive. │
│ │ │
No. 3 Poplar │Increasing, │Few cases. │Yes.
│Indian │ │
│blood. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Jocko │Increasing │Not to any │Yes, all it
│slightly. │extent. │can.
│ │ │
No. 5 Lame │Standstill. │Three marriages │Yes.
Deer │ │to whites in │
│ │eight years. │
│ │ │
No. 6 Lodge │Slight │Very few whites │Yes, but
Grass │increase. │marry Indians. │system wrong.
│ │ │
No. 7 St. │Full-bloods │Yes. │To some
Ignatius │decreasing, │ │extent.
│but the │ │
│population │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 Wolf │Increasing. │No. │Trying to.
Point │ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
NEBRASKA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Santee │Standstill. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Santee │Increasing. │No. │Not in some
│ │ │cases.
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
NEVADA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Nixon │Increasing. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Schurz │Decreasing. │No. │Yes, on
│ │ │reservation.
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
NEW MEXICO │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Increasing. │No. │Yes.
Albuquerque │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 Gallup │Standstill. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
OKLAHOMA │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Increasing. │In a few cases. │Yes and No.
Anadarko │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 │Increasing │Not to any │
Anadarko │slightly. │extent. │
│ │ │
No. 3 │Increasing. │A few. │Everything it
Anadarko │ │ │can do.
│ │ │
No. 4 Atoka │Full-bloods │Not much now. │No.
│decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 Bacone │ │Yes. │Partially so.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 │Increasing. │Some, few. │No.
Carnegie │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 │Full-bloods │Not now. │Trying to.
Checotah │decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 8 │Increasing │Not here. │Not doing all
Darlington │slightly. │ │it can, or
│ │ │should.
│ │ │
No. 9 Durant │Full-bloods │Not as much now.│Doing a great
│decreasing, │ │deal.
│mixed │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 10 Durant│Decreasing. │Yes, low whites │Do not think
│ │are. │so.
│ │ │
No. 11 │Full bloods │Yes. │It is now.
Eufaula │decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 12 Hobart│Increasing. │ │As far as
│ │ │Indian will
│ │ │let it.
│ │ │
No. 13 │Decreasing. │Not now. │No.
Holdenville │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 14 Hugo │Decreasing. │Yes. │Government
│ │ │does not
│ │ │understand.
│ │ │
No. 15 Hugo │Decreasing. │Not as much now.│Yes, but it
│ │ │makes
│ │ │mistakes.
No. 16 Lawton│Increasing │A few have. │Yes.
│15% in ten │ │
│years. │ │
│ │ │
No. 17 │Increase. │No. │As well as
Mountain View│ │ │Indian lets
│ │ │it.
│ │ │
No. 18 │ │Not as a rule. │Making a
Muskogee │ │ │conscientious
│ │ │effort.
│ │ │
No. 19 │Full-bloods │Nearly every │All it can.
Pawhuska │decreasing, │time. │
│population │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 20 │Increasing. │Yes. │As far as
Pawhuska │ │ │possible.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 21 │ │Yes. │
Sapulpa │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 22 │Increasing. │ │Doing
Shawnee │ │ │efficient
│ │ │work.
│ │ │
No. 23 │Mixed-bloods│Two cases in 15 │All it can.
Watanga │increased. │years. │
│Full-bloods,│ │
│standstill. │ │
│ │ │
No. 24 White │Increase. │No. │Yes, but needs
Eagle │ │ │changes.
│ │ │
No. 25 │Slight │Not markedly │All it can.
Wyandotte │increase. │true. │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
OREGON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Klamath│Standstill. │Not yet. │I think so.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 2 │Full-blood │No. │Yes.
Pendleton │decreasing, │ │
│mixed-blood │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 3 │ │Yes. │Yes.
Roseburg │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Warm │Decreasing. │No. │Yes.
Sp. │ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
UTAH │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Salt │ │ │
Lake City. │ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
WASHINGTON │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 │Increasing. │None. │Yes, could be
Bellingham │ │ │improved.
│ │ │
No. 2 │Standstill. │They try. │Yes, but need
Bellingham │ │ │police.
│ │ │
No. 3 │Slowly │Very few. │Yes, at least
Marysville │decreasing. │ │theoretically.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Neah │Some tribes │No. │Yes.
Bay │increase, │ │
│others │ │
│decrease. │ │
│ │ │
No. 5 No. │Holding own.│Yes. │No.
Yakima │ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 │Mixed-bloods│Not very much. │Doing very
Nespelem │increasing. │ │well.
│Full-bloods │ │
│decreasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 St. │About the │They try. │Yes. Lack of
Mary’s │same. │ │police is bad.
│ │ │
No. 8 Tacoma │Increasing. │Hardly ever. │Only on the
│ │ │reservation.
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 9 Tulalip│Increasing │Not to any │Not sure it
│slightly. │extent. │has.
│ │ │
No. 10 │ │Rare. │Yes and no.
Wheeler │ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
WISCONSIN │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Adanah │Standing │Now and then. │Too much red
│still. │ │tape.
│ │ │
No. 2 Ashland│Decreasing. │No. │Yes.
│ │ │
No. 3 │Full-bloods │Occasionally. │Yes.
Bayfield │decreasing. │ │
│Population │ │
│increasing. │ │
│ │ │
No. 4 Carter │Increasing. │No │Done a great
│ │inter-marriages.│deal.
│ │ │
No. 5 Kesbena│Small │No. │
│increase. │ │
│ │ │
No. 6 Kesbena│Increasing. │Not yet. │Here it is.
│ │ │
│ │ │
No. 7 Tomah │Increased a │Indians have no │Yes. Mistakes
│little. │property. │are made.
│ │ │
│ │ │
─────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
NEW YORK │ │ │
│ │ │
No. 1 Gowanda│ │No. │Not in some
│ │ │cases.
─────────────┴────────────┴────────────────┴──────────────