-i.^' .!. 
 
 4 O 
 
 .0 
 
 
 
 . s - A 
 
 i^v 
 
4 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 k'v x,^" :mM' \>.^" -*: 
 
 
 A'^ 
 ^ -^ 
 
 V ^ 
 
■Jy-^, 
 
 ■.*' 
 
 'yl/^^' 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ■10^ 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
< 
 
 'ri^' 
 
 A- 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 -^•f 
 
THE 
 
 NAVAJO INDIANS 
 
 A 
 
 STATEMENT 
 OF FACTS 
 
 BY 
 
 (REV.) ANSELM WEBER, O. F. M., 
 
 ST. MICHAELS. ARIZONA 
 
AUG 5 1914 
 
t 
 
 THE NAVAJO INDIANS. 
 
 For several years past there has been agitated the question of 
 allotting lands in Arizona and New Mexico to the Navajo and 
 other Indians and throwing open to settlement and entry under 
 the public land laws the unallotted balance of lands now em- 
 braced in Indian reservations. The cry has been loud that these 
 reservations are too large and are not needed by the Indians. 
 Unfortunately some members of the Delegations from these 
 States have appeared to be influenced by exaggerated and untrue 
 statements upon this question, and as the Indians are absolutely 
 dependent upon the Federal Government for their rights, I have 
 tried hereinafter to sho^ why these reservations should not be 
 reduced in area. 
 
 Congress, as a whole, is responsible for the Indian policy and 
 may not conscientiously shift responsibility to Delegations from 
 States in which the Indians in question live. Is not the Nation, 
 as such, through its representatives, responsible for the wards of 
 the Nation? May I not truthfully say some Members of Con- 
 gress represent constituencies or rather some active, aggressive 
 constituents who are enemies of the Indians and their welfare? 
 THEY have responsive representatives in Congress in such 
 cases; but who represents the Indians? Without a vote, placed 
 under Federal jurisdiction, he is not a part of the State "con- 
 stituency" ; he is often fought by the constituency and its repre- 
 sentatives. The Indian has no representation unless Congress 
 as a whole espouses his cause. Too often, however, Congress as 
 a body relies implicitly upon the Delegation from such States for 
 information, guidance and action, and such Delegations are, at 
 times, misinformed by interested constituents. I am stating 
 the case as mildly as possible. 
 
 A CASE IN POINT 
 
 is found in the Congressional Record of June 17, 1913, pages 2317- 
 2321 : "Within three months the Indian Department has located 
 137 renegade Navajos in Socorro County, New Mexico, 250 miles 
 from the Navajo Reservation, where they have unallotted 
 12,211,300 acres." 
 
 Not 250 miles, but 54 miles, as the bird flies, from the Navajo 
 Reservation. 
 
 "Including the Navajos who are off the reserve and the Nav- 
 ajos who are not, there are 1,100 acres to every Navajo, man, 
 woman and child." 
 
 This is a simple question of census, acreage and arithmetic. 
 According to the Census of 1910 the Navajo tribe numbers 
 22,455 people. To my own personal knowledge a large number 
 
 3 
 
of Navajos were not enumerated in that census; but let us 
 accept the figure of the last census. Let us also assume 
 12,000,000 acres as constituting the Navajo Treaty Reservation 
 and the various Executive Order Reservations, and a simple 
 example of arithmetic will show that, instead of 1,100 acres, each- 
 member of the tribe would have but 534 acres. 
 
 However, to be more accurate: The Navajo Reservation em- 
 braces 11,887,793 acres, of which approximately 719,360 acres 
 belong to the Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Company, and approxi- 
 mately 55,400 acres to the State of Arizona, leaving 11,113,033 
 acres. Consequently, if you take the very conservative figure of 
 25,000 Navajos and 11,113,033 acres really belonging to them, 
 you would have 444 acres to the person. 
 
 "These 137 Indians (of Socorro County) happen to represent 
 the renegades of the tribe, who would not stay home and work, 
 but have been leading a nomadic life for several years in the 
 mountains of New Mexico, existing by fishing and stealing. 
 Those are the Indians who have been located among the citizens 
 who are compelled to pay the taxes." 
 
 It is true, some of these 137 Navajos are renegades, or rather 
 descendants of renegades, but in a peculiar acceptation of the 
 word.- The Navajos call them "Dine Ana'i," i.e., "Navajo ene- 
 mies." Years ago, before the Navajos were subdued and taken 
 to Fort Sumner, in 1862, when raids between Mexicans and 
 Navajos were of frequent occurrence and about 1,500 Navajos 
 were held captives by the Mexicans, the Mexicans employed 
 "renegade Navajos," "Dine Ana'i," as thieir guides in raiding 
 the Navajos; some of those 137 are descendants of such, and the 
 Navajos would not care to receive them on the reservation. 
 
 "For several years in the mountains." Why, many of them 
 have been born right there in Socorro County; at any rate, I 
 have a paper before me, dated June 23, 1894, written by the 
 Archbishop of Santa Fe, signed by forty-three persons of Socorro 
 County, testifying to the good character and good intentions of 
 these Navajos of Socorro County. Furthermore, the records of 
 the Santa Fe Land Office show that settlement was made by 
 some of these Indians in 1870, and homestead entries in 1883 and 
 1888. As early as 1886 Judge McComas of Albuquerque tried to 
 dispossess the Navajo, David Torres, claiming the land to be 
 coal land. 
 
 "Existing by fishing and stealing." 
 
 They have small herds of sheep and goats and work as herds- 
 men for the Mexicans. The records of the District Court for 
 Socorro County for the last fifteen years does not show that any 
 Navajo was indicted for any crime during that period. Fishing! 
 I doubt if there is a live fish within fifty miles of their habitat. 
 Besides, fish are tabooed by the Navajos. Organize a fish 
 
 4 
 
brigade, armed with fishes tied to switches, and you can drive 
 the Navajos residing- off the reservation back to the reservation 
 much easier than with several regiments of soldiers equipped 
 with modern firearms. 
 
 "I want to say to the Senator (Bristow) that possibly he 
 does not understand the conditions as they exist in our 
 country. Possibly he is not aware of the fact that every year, 
 two or three times a year, these Indians are allowed to go 
 from their immensely rich reserves to interfere with white men, 
 American citizens, on the public domain, causing the killing of 
 anywhere from one to a dozen people. This is an unfortunate 
 condition of affairs. I can say to the Senator that we people, 
 down in our section of the country can deal with these conditions 
 if we are compelled to; but this sometimes becomes a question 
 of all a man has — of his property rights, of protection to his 
 family and his children. Any white man, any American citizen, 
 will then use such force as is necessary in protecting his family. 
 All that we seek to do is to restrict the further location of these 
 Indians upon the public domain until Congress can act again. 
 The committee is being appointed, and I presume this matter 
 will be investigated. It has been investigated before, and re- 
 ports made, and no action taken. But this must cease; it must 
 stop ; and I tell the Senator from Kansas that it will stop." — 
 (Congressional Record, June 17, 1913, page 2320.) 
 
 I regret that a Senator made this statement. I have been 
 among the Navajos for sixteen years, and I know of not one 
 single instance where a white man was killed on account of 
 Navajos leaving the reservation, or on account of any grazing 
 or land disputes. If every year the killing of from one to a 
 dozen is occasioned by Navajos leaving their reserve, how is it 
 that no one knows anything about it? 
 
 Furthermore, is it true that every year two or three times a 
 year, these Indians are allowed to go from their immensely 
 rich (?) reserves to interfere with white men? Navajos living 
 on the very border of the reservation naturally graze their flocks 
 on and off the reservation. (The reservation line is, as a rule, 
 not known to them.) But Indians who live and have their range 
 within the reservation do NOT leave it. When the small treaty 
 reservation of 3,225,600 acres was created, in 1868, the Navajos 
 returned from their Babylonian captivity to the homes they had 
 occupied before their abduction to Fort Sumner; they did not 
 leave the reservation ; they had never been on the reservation. 
 At a recent council with Indians off the' reservation, 193 heads 
 of families attending, each one was asked and each one asserted 
 most emphatically that he had never lived on the reservation and 
 had never ranged his stock thereon. 
 
One more quotation : "In 1893 * * * a board of army 
 officers, under a resolution of Congress and by direction of the 
 Secretary of the Interior, made a thorough examination of the 
 entire Navajo reserve. They made a voluminous report, which 
 was transmitted to this body and to the other House, in which 
 it was shown that with the expenditure of $65,000 additional to 
 the amount of $20,000 which they then had on hand, a total of 
 $85,000, the Navajo Reservation could be placed in a condition, 
 by the opening of water holes and the development of small 
 streams of water, so that it would amply support every Navajo 
 Indian, man, woman and child, on or off the reserve, and that the 
 9,000 off the reserve could be taken back to the' reserve where 
 they belonged and no longer interfere with the citizens living on 
 the public domain. Congress refused to act; it refused even to 
 appropriate $65,000 for the purpose reported by this board of 
 army engineers. The fault, therefore, lies, to some extent, with 
 Congress."- — (Congressional Record, June 17, 1913, page 2317.) 
 
 No, Congress did NOT refuse to act. The following yeai 
 Congress DID appropriate $60,000 for that purpose. What be- 
 came of the money? Ask Mr. Vincent. What became of the 
 subsequent appropriations for development of water? Ask the 
 respective Superintendents of Irrigation. Very little water has 
 been developed by the Government — the suggestions of those 
 army engineers have been carried out to a very, very limited ex- 
 tent. This report has been repeatedly referred to. I have a 
 copy before me. It shows how conditions were then, twenty- 
 two years ago. On page 28, the Hon. Commissioner of Indian 
 Affairs, J. T. Morgan, writes : "The relations between the Nav- 
 ajo Indians of New Mexico, Arizona and Utah and their white 
 neighbors have been much strained for some time. The Nav- 
 ajos, on account of lack of water and grass on their reservation, 
 located in the Territories named, have been forced to go beyond 
 its boundaries to sustain their flocks and herds. * * * In a 
 letter dated July 16, 1892, Gen. Alex. AIcD. McCook, U. S. Army, 
 commanding the Department of Arizona, in reference to the con- 
 dition of affairs on the Navajo Reservation, submitted for my 
 consideration certain recommendations based upon what he 
 deemed an immediate necessity, with a view to settling the dif- 
 ferences between the Navajos and the whites upon the borders 
 of their reservation,, with a statement that it was reported by 
 the Navajo Agent that 9,000 of these Indians were without the 
 limits of the reservation from necessity ; that they had large 
 flocks and herds ; that there was no water or grass within the 
 official limits of the reservation to maintain them, and give suffi- 
 cient water even for limited agricultural purposes to the 18.000 
 Indians said to constitute the Navajo Nation. * * * fhe 
 General stated in his said letter that it would, in his judgment, 
 
 6 
 
be inhuman to drive the Navajo Indians, with their large flocks 
 and herds, back to the reservation as it now is." 
 
 And on page 50, he states : "Should the appropriation be made 
 and the water developed and irrigation established as proposed, 
 it is believed that the roving, non-reservation Navajos could be 
 returned to the reservation and induced to remain thereon, and 
 that the reservation Indians themselves could be restrained from 
 going beyond the official limits of their reservation for the pur- 
 pose of securing water and grass for their flocks and herds." 
 
 I wish to call attention to the fact that this statement embodies 
 only the opinion of the then Indian Commissioner. Nowhere in 
 their report do the army engineers make any similar statement. 
 But let that pass. 
 
 The appropriation was made ; water was NOT developed and 
 irrigation, as proposed, was not established to a very appreciable 
 extent. Even if, at present, all the recommendations of said 
 army engineers were carried out, the same conclusion could no I: 
 be reached now, after twenty-two years ; or is it reasonable to 
 assume that conditions now are the same as twenty-two years 
 ago? Since that time the Navajos have increased by seven or 
 eight thousand, and their stock has more than doubled. 
 
 OPENING OF THE NAVAJO RESERVATION FOR 
 SETTLEMENT. 
 
 In discussing this question, the character of the country and 
 its capacity to carry a certain number of stock and to support a 
 certain number of people must be taken into consideration ; also 
 the number of stock and the number of people it is actually 
 supporting now. 
 
 According to the Census of 1910, our 
 
 APACHE COUNTY 
 
 has a population of 9,196 on its 11,379 square miles, i.e., 0.8 of 
 a person to the square mile. How does the Indian population 
 compare with the white (American, Mormon and Mexican) popu- 
 lation in this county? Whilst the 5,247 square miles of the 
 Navajo Reservation support 5,687 Navajos, i. e., i person to the 
 square mile, the rest of the county, 6,132 square miles, supports 
 but 3,510 (whites and Indians), i. e., 0.6 of a person to the square 
 mile. Furthermore, in the townships south of the reservation, 
 occupied by whites and Indians, the population averages one 
 person to the square mile, but the portion occupied exclusively 
 by whites averages but 0.5 of a person to the square mile; hence 
 the "Indian country" supports just twice as many people as the 
 
 7 
 
"white country" in the same county. Then, why should the 
 Indian country be opened to settlement, since it .IS settled al- 
 ready doubly as densely as the white country ? Practically every 
 Navajo is a stock raiser, though he may practice, in addition and 
 on a small scale, dry farming and farming by irrigation where it 
 is feasible, but, of the 3,510 whites of Apache County, 1,929, i. e., 
 more than half, live in the towns of St. Johns, Concho, Egertown 
 and Springerville ; that leaves 0.3 of a person per square mile. 
 What per cent of these town people are stockmen, I do not know. 
 After enumerating the population in four towns, twenty-two 
 townships and the reservations, the census bulletin states : "Re- 
 mainder of county 392." Exempting the four townships in 
 which the four towns are situated, that "remainder" comprises 
 3,288 square miles, i.e., o.i of a person to the square mile. If 
 the 5,686 Navajos on the reservation in Apache County could be 
 removed as by magic, how many stockmen would that country 
 support? Where over a thousand Navajo families make a living 
 at present, possibly a few dozen absentee cattle and sheep men 
 would enrich themselves. But the Navajos cannot be brushed 
 aside by a magic wand. To open the door to these cattle and 
 sheep men would ruin an already overcrowded range and ruin 
 the Navajos besides. Wlien the rest of Apache County is as 
 thickly settled as the Navajo Reservation, it w^ill be time enough 
 to consider the opening thereof. 
 
 NAVAJO COUNTY 
 
 with its area of 10,300 square miles and its 11,471 people, num- 
 bers I.I person to the square mile. The Navajo and Moqui 
 reservations, with an area of 4,662 square miles and an Indian 
 population of 4,371, numbers i person to the square mile; on the 
 Apache Reservation 1.3 persons to the square mile, and off these 
 reservations 1.2 persons to the square mile; but if you deduct 
 the population of the railroad town of Winslow, with its 2,381 
 inhabitants (not to mention Holbrook, numbering 609 inhab- 
 itants), you have only 0.7 of a person to the square mile, as 
 compared to i person to the square mile on the reservation. 
 Within this county is the so-called 
 
 BUTTE COUNTRY, 
 
 east of the Leupp, west of the Navajo, and south of the Moqui 
 Reservation, a tract of land 24 by 39 miles, which, on May 13, 
 1908, was withdrawn from sale and settlement for allotting pur- 
 poses. The 523 allotments, made in 1908 and 1909, are not yet 
 approved. The odd numbered sections in the west half of this 
 tract belong to the St. Louis and San Francisco Railway Com- 
 pany, whilst the odd numbered sections on the east half belong 
 
to the Santa Fe Railway Company. The chairman of the Ari- 
 zona State Land Commission and others demand that this tract 
 be restored for entry and selection. Is this tract unused and 
 unoccupied? Like the balance of Navajo County (deducting the 
 population of Winslow). outside of reservations, it numbers 0.7 
 of a person to the square mile, though the southwestern portion 
 of the tract is absolutely barren. Within this tract, on 14 town- 
 ships, carefully canvassed, 335 Indians are allotted, and they 
 have 50,549 sheep, 1,124 cattle, and 1,869 horses; consequently 
 they have five acres to the sheep, oi" their equivalent. Deduct 
 the railroad and school lands, and they have but two acres per 
 sheep. Is there room for whites within this tract? The railroad 
 lands of several townships, among them T. 23 N. R. 18 E. have 
 recently been leased to white men. Two of the three springs 
 within this particular township belong to the railroad company, 
 and one to Charles L. Day. Will it be possible for the Indians 
 to remain on this township and retain their allotments — with two 
 acres to the sheep and no watering place? 
 
 COCONINO COUNTY 
 
 with its area of 18,238 square miles and its 8,130 people, numbers 
 0.4 of a person to the square mile ; but the Leupp, Western 
 Navajo and Moqui reservations in this county, with an area of 
 5,163 square miles and 2,722 Indians, number 0.5 of a person to 
 the square mile. 
 
 Deduct the 2,900 inhabitants of the lumber and commercial 
 towns of Flagstaff and Williams, and Coconino County outside 
 of these reservation numbers but 0.2 of a person fo the square 
 mile. In other words, the Indian population on these reserva- 
 tions is more than doubly as dense as the white population in the 
 "white country," i. e., there are 3.200 acres to every white person 
 living outside of Flagstaff and Williams, and 1,280 acres to every 
 Indian living on the reservation. 
 
 In the 
 
 LEUPP RESERVATION 
 
 within this country eight families, seventy-seven people, having 
 6,400 head of sheep and goats, are living permanently along 
 Canyon Diablo and on the southwest part of the reservation 
 south of the Little Colorado River; 8 families are living along 
 the banks of the river, and 8 families are living north of the 
 river, more especially around the "Lake" and the "Cornfields." 
 These Indians, living permanently on the Leupp Reservation, 
 have 13,400 head of sheep and goats, 103 head of cattle, and 219 
 head of horses, whilst 5 families, numbering 37 people, and hav- 
 ing 2,800 head of sheep, no head of cattle and 75 head of horses, 
 part of the year, are living on this reservation. 
 
 9 
 
SAN JUAN COUNTY, 
 
 with its area of 5,476 square miles and its 8,504 people, numbers 
 1.6 persons to the square mile. The Navajo Reservation (in 
 1910, when the last census was taken and before the extension in 
 New Mexico was opened) with its area of 2,384 square miles and 
 its 2.693 Indians, numbers i.i persons to the square mile, whilst 
 the population off the reservation numbers 1.8 persons to the 
 square mile. 
 
 Deduct the urban population of Farmington and Aztec (1,294 
 inhabitants) and such as exclusively follow horticultural and 
 agricultural pursuits through irrigation along the San Juan and 
 Animas rivers, utilizing a comparatively small area of land 
 (there are 706 irrigated farms in this county), and the rest of 
 San Juan County will not average 0.7 of a person to the square 
 mile, whilst the Navajos on the reservation average i.i. 
 
 McKINLEY COUNTY 
 
 with its area of 5,506 square miles and its 12,964 people, numbers 
 2.4 persons to the square mile. 
 
 The Navajo Reservation in McKinley County (in 19 10), with 
 its area of 3,060 square miles and its population of 5.527, numbers 
 1.8 persons to the square mile. The population outside of the 
 Navajo Reservation numbers 7,437- Of these, 1,752 are Zuni 
 Indians, occupying 264 square miles in McKinley County, i. e., 
 5.2 persons (Zunis) to the square mile; 4.222 live in the town of 
 Gallup and the surrounding mining towns, which leaves a popu- 
 lation of 1,463 people living on 2,181 square miles, i. e., about 0.6 
 of a person to the square mile as to 1.8 on the Navajo Reserva- 
 tion. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 In the district covered by Apache, Navajo, Coconino, San Juan 
 and McKinley counties, taken as a whole, a given area supports 
 through agriculture and stock raising two Indians to one white 
 man; in other words, the strictly rural population living exclu- 
 sively by farming and stock raising is twice as dense on the 
 reservations as the strictly rural population of the whites living 
 in the same counties in exclusively white districts. Then, why 
 should these reservations be opened up? Because the propor- 
 tion, two to one, is too small? Must three or four Indians make 
 a living where but one white man could subsist? That an In- 
 dian can and does make a living where a white man would starve 
 does not prove that an area which supports one white person can 
 support an indefinite number of Indians. Or, should the reser- 
 vation be opened to stock their unused area? How does the 
 stocking and grazing and farming on the Navajo Reservation 
 compare with the rest of the States of Arizona and New Mexico? 
 
 10 
 
COMPARATIVE STOCKING AND GRAZING. 
 
 According to the last census (1910) : 
 
 Arizona has 1,226,733 sheep 
 
 246,617 goats 
 824.929 head of cattle, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 3,299,716 sheep 
 
 99.579 head of horses, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 398,316 sheep 
 
 3,963 head of mules, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 15,852 sheep 
 
 7,104 head of asses and burros, equal, in 
 
 their effect upon the range, to. . 14,208 sheep 
 
 Total: 5,201,502 sheep 
 
 Acreage of Arizona 72,838,400 
 
 Acreage under cultivation 350,i73 
 
 Acreage controlled by mining in- 
 dustry 138,963 
 
 489,136 
 
 which leaves for grazing purposes 72,349,264 
 
 Dividing this acreage by 5,201,502, the number of sheep, or 
 their equivalent, you have 13.9 acres per head of sheep. 
 According to the last census (1910) : 
 
 New Mexico has 3,346,984 sheep 
 
 412,050 goats 
 1,081,663 head of cattle, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 4,326,650 sheep 
 
 179,525 head of horses, equal, in their ef- 
 fect upon the range, to 718,100 sheep 
 
 14,937 head of mules, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 59,748 sheep 
 
 11,852 head of asses and burros, equal in 
 
 their eft'ect upon the range, to 23,704 sheep 
 
 Total: 8,887,236 sheep 
 
 Acreage of New Mexico 76,467,103 
 
 Acreage under cultivation 1,467,191 
 
 Acreage controlled by mining in- 
 dustry 467,626 
 
 1,934,817 
 
 which leaves for grazing purposes 74,532,286 
 
 Dividing this acreage by 8,887,236, the number of sheep, or 
 their equivalent, you have 8.4 acres per head of sheep. 
 
 11 
 
Now, the Navajos have 1,781,900 head of sheep and goats 
 43,000 head of cattle, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 172,000 sheep 
 
 87,000 head of horses, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 348,000 sheep 
 
 3,795 head of mules, equal, in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 15.180 sheep 
 
 5,440 head of burros, equal in their effect 
 
 upon the range, to 10,880 sheep 
 
 Total : 2,327,960 sheep 
 About one-third of this number, i. e 775,986 
 
 are off the reservation, leaving 1,551,974 
 
 head on the 11,807.793 acres of land on the reservation, i. e., 7.6 
 acres to the head, as compared to the 8.4 acres to the head in New 
 Mexico as a whole, and as compared to the 13.9 acres to the head 
 in Arizona, as a whole, or as compared to ii.i acres to the head 
 in Arizona and New Mexico combined; in other words, the 
 Navajo Reservation is stocked almost twice as heavily as the 
 rest of Arizona and considerably more than one-third heavier 
 than the rest of the States of Arizona and New Mexico combined. 
 In all Arizona there are but 9,227 farms, including cattle and 
 sheep ranches. Of these, 4,841 are irrigated farms, leaving 4,386 
 cattle and sheep ranches; 3,206 are mentioned as Indian farms 
 or ranches, leaving but 1,180 ranches to white men, showing that 
 the number of Indian families supported through stock raising is 
 almost three times as large as the number of white families sup- 
 ported by the same industry. 
 
 RANGE IN NEW MEXICO AND ARIZONA OVER- 
 STOCKED. 
 
 It is universally admitted that the range in Arizona and New 
 Mexico is overstocked and run down and in danger of being 
 •uiied, hence the Kent Leasing Bill, H. R. 10,539. 
 
 Mr. J. J. Thornber, of the Arizona Agricultural Experiment 
 Station, states: "The present condition of our stock ranges is 
 hi hly unsatisfactory to everybody. The production of forage, 
 wh' h ^; best, is uncertain on account of the climatic conditions, 
 * * has been reduced to such an extent over much of the 
 -:■ u -try by continual overgrazing that the grazing industry is of 
 - e-si y carried on under most adverse conditions to the stock- 
 . "-—(Bulletin No. 65, page 354.) 
 
 Dut the Navajo Reservation is stocked heavier and its range 
 is more overgrazed and run down than the range in other parts 
 of the e States. 
 
 12 
 
Mr. E. O. Wooton, of the New Mexico Agricultural Experi- 
 ment Station, makes the following statement regarding the Nav- 
 ijo Reservation and lands occupied by the Navajos in New 
 Mexico : "That part of the Territory lying northwest of Grant 
 Detween_ the Santa Fe Railroad and the Colorado and Arizjna 
 3orders is a region of rather poor carrying capacity, and has been 
 3adly overstocked by sheep for years. It is now able to carry 
 lot more than about sixteen head to the section, or an a\erai^e 
 :apacity of about 40 acres per head." — (Bulletin No. 66, page 28.) 
 
 :ONDITION OF RANGE ON NAVAJO RESERVATION. 
 
 On February 8, ion, Mr. Matoon, Forest Supervisor, wrote 
 ;o the District Forester: 
 
 "CONDITION OF RANGE." 
 
 "Due to past overstocking of range during many years, .he 
 -ange is exceedingly overgrazed throughout the portion of the 
 ^uni National Forest included within the Navajo and Zuni reser- 
 vations. As a result, the soil is eroding badly in many placcb 
 md the sheep belonging to the Indians make a scanty living. 
 Dver considerable areas in the eastern division of the Navajo 
 iistrict very little plant life is left except sagebrush and scrub 
 uniper and pinon. The former heavy stand of grama grass 
 Dver much of this region is nearly extinct." 
 
 In regard to this very tract of land Mr. Reeves, of the Indian 
 Dffice, made the statement: "In Arizona the State Land 
 ![!ommission and the cattle men and others have insisted 
 )n the office carrying out that provision (Act May 29, 1908), 
 because they want the surplus lands restored to the public do- 
 nain so they can use them for grazing grounds." 
 
 Where is the "surplus" in this overgrazed district? Allot this 
 ;ract of land and open it up, and you will ruin the range and the 
 Indians, both. The attitude of white stockmen toward each 
 )ther is described by Prof. J. J. Thornber as follows: "Since the 
 country was practically all public domain, each man was free to 
 ^raze as much stock on it as he was able to possess, without 
 ■estriction, and without any consideration as to the carrying 
 ;apacity of the grazing areas. Besides this, there were those 
 rom the outside who drove in herds from time to time to graze 
 )n the same and adjoining areas, thus sharing further the range 
 vith those already using it to its fullest carrying capacity, and, 
 n addition, continually adding to their herds. With this 'free- 
 or-air scramble for grass into which conditions finally developed 
 ;ach stockman sought to get all he could while it was yet to be 
 lad, for what was left by one lot of stock was sure to be eaten 
 )ff by another. The nominal possession of a well-managed range 
 vas simply an invitation for others to come in and graze it off 
 
 13 
 
closely without any regard whatever for the moral rights of the 
 settler or squatter, who might desire to make a home there. No 
 thought was given concerning the maintenance of the range, nor 
 its permanent settlement later, which, above all else, were the 
 things to be most desired. That which was free for all to use 
 came to be regarded as free for all to despoil. The very domam 
 that should have been carefully guarded as a heritage for future 
 <renerations, was being ruthlessly destroyed by a mere handful of 
 persons in the absence of any laws regulating its proper use. 
 The above state of affairs led not infrequently to recourse to 
 arms, especially between cattle men and sheep men, of which 
 instances our local histories are unfortunately replete."— (Bul- 
 letin 65, page 336.) 
 
 "It would be considered very poor business management, in- 
 deed, for A, to improve the public grazing lands adjoining his 
 holdings, however much he desired, so long as B, C, and D, his 
 neighbors, could share equally with him all the advantages and 
 none of the expense, and F, and G, tramp sheepmen, could drive 
 in their herds from another section of the country, and appropri- 
 ate the last mouthful of grass, if necessary, for their own use. 
 The above is but one of a number of conditions which obtains 
 under the empty and deceiving terms, 'free grass,' 'free grazing' 
 and 'free range.'"— (Bulletin 65, page 341-) 
 
 "If the stockman has water and grass on the public domain 
 for a thousand cattle, no matter how long he has been a resident, 
 another stockman, and perhaps a non-resident, can put down 
 there beside these cattle another thousand head of stock, and 
 the resident stockman can have no recourse. He must share, 
 and share alike, his losses with the intruder, regardless of his 
 improvements and his foresight."— (The Practical Application 
 of the Kent Grazing Bill, pages 4 and 5.) 
 
 In view of this statement, may I venture the question what 
 the attitude of white stockmen will be towards Indians after 
 opening up the reservation? And what the condition of the 
 range will be within a few years? 
 
 It is true, there are some portions of the Navajo Reservation 
 which are not overstocked, due to lack of water. Development 
 of water in these districts would relieve the overgrazed portions 
 of the reservation. The following statement of Mr. E. O. 
 Wooten, in Bulletin 66, shows that the same conditions obtain 
 among the whites in New Mexico: "The average carrying ca- 
 pacity is still further diminished by the absence in some well- 
 grassed regions of sufficient water to render the forage available. 
 This condition may be changed by developing water." 
 
 14 
 
OPEN, UNRESERVED LANDS IN ARIZONA AND NEW 
 
 MEXICO. 
 
 The clamor of these two vast, undeveloped states for opening 
 the overstocked and overgrazed Navajo Reservation seems 
 rather ludicrous. According to Bulletin No. 66 of the New 
 Mexico Agricultural Experiinent Station, in 1908, only two and 
 a half millions of acres were held under patent from the United 
 States Government, obtained as homesteads, desert claims, min- 
 eral claims, etc., i. e.. about one-thirty-ninth part of the Terri- 
 tory was patented land and 55,000,000 acres of unreserved pub- 
 lic lands were subject to entry. 
 
 Why should the reservation be opened, since at least 50,000,000 
 acres ARE open to settlement in New Mexico and are WAIT- 
 ING? In addition, on A'larch 30, 1914, 5,009,412 acres of State 
 land were still unleased and unsold. 
 
 In Arizona there are, according to Mr. Carl Hayden (Con- 
 gressman from x*\rizona), "39,529,195 acres of unappropriated 
 and unreserved public lands. 
 
 Hence, if anyone urges the opening of the Navajo Reservation, 
 let him advance other reasons than a lack of unappropriated lands 
 in these states. 
 
 AMOUNT OF LAND NEEDED IN NEW MEXICO AND 
 ARIZONA FOR SUPPORT OF ONE FAMILY. 
 
 Assuming that the lands of the Navajo Reservation, as a whole, 
 are neither better nor worse than the rest of New Mexico and 
 Arizona, I proceed to quote competent authorities as to the quan- 
 tity of land required for the support of a family. 
 
 Bulletin No. 66 of the New Mexico Agricultural Experiment 
 Station, page 29: "If forty acres be sufficient to carry one cow, 
 and the rate of increase be 50 per cent, and the yearling be sold 
 at $15, what has the stockman gotten from the forty acres? The 
 gross receipts are $7.40 for the forty acres, but from this must 
 be deducted the interest on the proportional part of all money 
 invested in the cow, fences, pumps, troughs, corrals, buildings, 
 etc., the cost of all service necessary in caring for the cow and 
 yearling, and all other running expenses." 
 
 Page 33 : "The land is good only for grazing, and its carrying 
 capacity is so small that from 2,500 to 7,500 acres of land (4-12 
 sections) would be necessary to support a family expending 
 $1,000 a year, assuming cattle worth $15 per head, and that the 
 normal increase of such stock would be 50 per cent (carrying 
 capacity 20-60 acres per head)." 
 
 Bulletin 65 of the Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, 
 pages 346 and 347 : "Under the Texas grazing laws, the advan- 
 tages are pre-eminently with the permanent settler and the small 
 
 15 
 
holder. He may purchase not more than four sections of grazing 
 land at $i per acre, and lease ten other sections for a period not 
 to exceed five years. * * * The absolute lease district com- 
 prises practically all of Western Texas, in which country condi- 
 tions are quite similar to those in Arizona." 
 
 On page 349, the Australian Lease System is quoted in com- 
 mendation, as follows : "There are a number of classes of leases 
 to fit the various conditions. Pastoral leases are unlimited as to 
 area, but of 28 years tenure. * * * As an alternative of the 
 pastoral lease is the homestead lease, which is limited to 10,240 
 acres and to 28 years time. * * * Scrub and inferior land 
 leases apply to their respective types of country, which might 
 otherwise remain unoccupied and unproductive. Their terms 
 are for 28 years usually, and the maximum area obtainable under 
 either of them is 20,480 acres. One or the other of these may be 
 held in addition to a pastoral or homestead lease." 
 
 The author of this bulletin, in his speech before the National 
 Live Stock Association, Denver, Colo., makes the statement 
 (page 7) : "There is little grazing land in the Western and 
 Southwestern States that has a stock-carrying capacity such that 
 even four sections of it would maintain a family in ordinary com- 
 fortable circumstances. To make this bill acceptable, the entries 
 must be much larger." 
 
 Mr. A. A. Jones, First Assistant Secretary of the Interior, 
 makes the statement : "A bill introduced in the House of Repre- 
 sentatives (H. R. 6637) proposed to provide for a grazing home- 
 stead of not less than 640 acres and not exceeding 1,280 acres in 
 area. The bill * * * is not designed to apply to or provide 
 for the entry of lands suitable only for grazing. The maximum 
 area permitted to be entered thereunder, and even the maximum 
 area described in H. R. 6637, would be wholly insufficient for the 
 support of a homesteader and his family upon lands of that 
 character." 
 
 Mr. Kent, author of H. R. 10,539, states: "It is obvious that 
 a home supported by the production of live stock is to be 
 gauged not by area, l3Ut by the test of the number of head of 
 stock that can be produced. Vast areas, indeed most of our 
 grazing country, would not carry sufficient stock on two sections 
 of land to support a family, so that without some certainty of 
 tenure of adjoining public lands there could be no assurance of 
 a livelihood from that source." 
 
 On March 9, 1914, the Albuquerque Morning Journal had the 
 following editorial : 
 
 " Better Land Laws." 
 
 "A bill proposed by Congressman Fergusson for a 640-acre 
 homestead is a distinct improvement over the present law. 
 
 16 
 
Better still is the bill which has the hearty support of Mr. 
 Fergusson. The proposition by Mr. Jones is for an expert ap- 
 praisement of the lands open to homestead. Where the apprais- 
 ers find a quarter section sufficiently valuable, let that be the 
 size of that homestead ; where 320 acres, 480 acres, or 640 acres 
 are enough to afiford a living for a homesteader, set that amount 
 aside for entry. Should the land be such that with reasonable 
 economy a man cannot make a living on less than ten or twenty 
 thousand, or even a hundred thousand acres, give him the right 
 to enter such an amount. Such law as proposed by Mr. Jones 
 has in it absolute fairness and unassailable good sense. * * * 
 The Journal states without hesitation and with full knowledge 
 of the subject that quarter section homesteads were taken up in 
 South Dakota, for example, during the past quarter century 
 worth more by far than any ten thousand acres now open to 
 entry in New Mexico. We will make it a little stronger and say 
 that more than a thousand homesteads have been taken up in 
 South Dakota, during the past twenty-live years, any one of 
 which was worth more than any twenty-five thousand-acre tract 
 now open to entry in this State. 
 
 "What is true of South Dakota is equally true of the public 
 lands that have been taken up in North Dakota and Montana 
 during the like period. In making this statement the under- 
 ground water, which may be used for irrigation by pumping, in 
 New Mexico, is given full consideration." 
 
 In another issue the same paper made the statement : "But 
 there are other millions of acres in the arid Southwest which 
 never can be irrigated and where it would be impossible for a 
 settler to make a comfortable living on less than 50,000 acres." 
 
 In the face of all this, what do you think of people who urge 
 the allotment of 160 acres of such grazing lands to the person 
 and then the opening of the SURPLUS or balance to settle- 
 ment? Permit me to quote Mr. Reeves again: "In Arizona 
 the State Land Commission and the cattle men and others have 
 insisted on the office carrying out that provision (Act of May 29, 
 1908), because they want the surplus lands restored to the 
 public domain so they can use them for grazing ground." 
 
 If it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of New Mexico 
 and Arizona to open the Navajo Reservation, let it be done after 
 adequate homestead and leasing and grazing laws have been 
 passed and after the allotment laws have been modelled after 
 these prospective land laws, and after the United States has 
 educated the Navajos and placed them in a position to cope with 
 their white neighbors. 
 
 17 
 
THE TRIBE UNEDUCATED. 
 
 Aside from the children attending the different schools, there 
 are not over 400 members of the whole tribe of over 25,000 who 
 understand and speak the English language well. Twelve years 
 ago they had but one Government Boarding School for the 
 whole tribe ; before that time the children were not kept long 
 enough in school to be benefited. Even now there are no school 
 facilities for 5,000 Navajo children. 
 
 THE POLICY OF ALLOTTING RESERVATIONS 
 
 to Indians may be a good one where the reservations are agri- 
 cultural in character. With the exception of a few favored places 
 where irrigation is practicable, the Navajo Reservation is good 
 for grazing purposes only ; and large tracts of land are not even 
 good for grazing purposes for lack of water. Allotments for 
 agricultural purposes means, as a rule, allotments for dry farm- 
 ing; and, in places, bottom lands are so scarce that the allotting 
 agents had been authorized to allot in ten-acre tracts for agri- 
 cultural purposes, the balance of the 160 acres allowed to be 
 allotted somewhere else for grazing purposes. A large percent- 
 age of Americans have abandoned their "dry farms" because they 
 could not make a living on them. Shall we expect an Indian to 
 make a living on a ten-acre or even on an eighty-acre tract where 
 an American fails on his homestead of 160 or even of 320 acres? 
 These small tracts of bottom lands will help along; in good 
 years the Indian can raise his corn, squashes, potatoes, etc., on 
 them to help support him ; but his main support comes, and, in 
 a country like this, must come from his stock. A Navajo Indian 
 cannot, as a rule, make his living from his allotment for agri- 
 cultural purposes ; much less can he make a living from his 
 allotment (160 acres) for grazing purposes. That is obvious to 
 anyone who is familiar with this country. On many a quarter 
 section even a half dozen goats would starve. 
 
 Worse than lack of sufficient grazing is the lack of water. 
 Let the Indians who are fortunate enough to have water on their 
 allotments insist upon their right of exclusive control, and self- 
 support will become impossible for the vast majority of the 
 Navajos. These are some of the reasons why the allotting and 
 opening up of reservations in this part of the country are im- 
 practicable and fatal to the progress, if not, ultimately, to the 
 very existence of the Navajos. 
 
 x^s to certain parts of the reservation where lack of water has 
 prevented overgrazing, I wish to state that it is absolutely im- 
 possible for the Navajos, on account of the very deep snow, to 
 winter their stock on top of mountain ranges and even at the foot 
 of the mountains where the altitude is high. These Indians must 
 
 18 
 
have a different winter range ; and in winter, when there is some 
 snow on the ground, which obviates the necessity of watering 
 the sheep, they take their stock into the low lands. Hence, 
 where you find good grass late in summer and fall, you will find 
 it grazed off in spring when the Indians take back their flocks 
 to the mountains. There is hardly any place on the reservation 
 which the Navajos do not use during some season of the }^ear; 
 and their cattle and horses roam over this country all year round. 
 
 Now. if water were developed in these places, it would be a 
 help to the Indians, since they could use the range longer and 
 during winters when there is no or hardly any snow. 
 
 But as to developing water in such a country, in view of plac- 
 ing Indians there to stay and graze all year round, that would 
 ruin the range completely. The soil in these desert lands is more 
 loose and sandy, the grass does not form a continuous sod ; only 
 scattering bunches and spears of grass ; continuous grazing 
 would transform that country into an absolute desert. Lack of 
 water, however, is not the only reason why some places are not 
 grazed even during winter; but lack of protection against storms 
 in large, open tracts of country, and lack of fuel as well. 
 
 Even if all the springs and lakes and reservoirs and the best 
 land should be allotted before opening up the reservation, Amer- 
 icans and Mexicans will find a place where to build a reservoir 
 and dig a well, and secure it by homesteading, through Desert 
 Act, or by buying or leasing railroad or State lands, and come 
 in with thousands of sheep and cattle and control the country for 
 miles around. Where a number of Indian families made a living, 
 you will have one sheep man and a few herders. 
 
 The Government is preventing overgrazing in forest reserves 
 by granting permits to stockmen for a certain number of stock, 
 giving the preference to actual occupants and keeping others 
 out. Why not pursue the same policy in regard to Indian reser- 
 vations in a country like this? Why should Mexicans and Amer- 
 icans be permitted to intrude and overgraze and "eat out" the 
 original occupants? 
 
 The aim of the Kent Grazing or Leasing Bill is the same : to 
 protect the range and to protect the original occupants. That 
 aim is obtained by retaining the reservations intact. 
 
 In the Outlook of October i8, 1913, Mr. Roosevelt writes: 
 "Among those at the Snake Dance was Fr. Weber, of the Fran- 
 ciscans, who have done much good work on the Navajo Reser- 
 vation. Fr. Weber has attained great influence with the Nav- 
 ajos because of his work for their practical betterment. * * * 
 Fr. Weber, like every competent judge I met, strongly protested 
 against opening or cutting down the Navajo Reservation. I 
 heartily agree with him. Such an act would be a cruel wrong 
 and would benefit only a few wealthy cattle and sheep men. 
 
 19 
 
* * * On my return from this dance (Aloqui Snake Dance) I 
 met two of the best Indian Agents in the entire service. The 
 first was Mr. Paquette, a Wisconsin man, himself part Indian by 
 blood. The other was Mr. Shelton. * * * Messrs. Shelton and 
 Paquette explained to me the cruel wrong that would be done 
 to the Navajos if their reservation was thrown open or cut down. 
 It is a desert country. It cannot be utilized in small tracts, for 
 in many parts the water is so scanty that hundreds, and in places 
 even thousands, of acres must go to the support of any family. 
 The Indians need it all ; they are steadily improving as agricul- 
 turists and stock growers ; few small settlers could come in even 
 if the reservation were thrown open; the movement to open it,, 
 and to ruin the Indians, is merely in the interests of a few needy 
 adventurers and of a few wealthy men who wish to increase their 
 already large fortunes, and who have much political influence." 
 
 MR. FRANCIS E. LEUPP, 
 
 former Commissioner of Indian Afifairs, wrote once upon a time : 
 "The Navajos have learned that thrice blessed is he who has 
 nothing, for from him can nothing be taken away. Denizens of 
 a desert too forbidding to tempt white cupidity, they have es- 
 caped pillage because nobody believed the booty would be worth 
 the trouble of robbing them." 
 
 But in spite of the fact that thousands of acres of this reserva- 
 tion have not vegetation enough to founder a humming bird, the 
 reservation as a whole is stocked one-third heavier than the rest 
 of Arizona and New Mexico, resulting in overstocking and over- 
 grazing of those portions of the reservation that are blessed with 
 vegetation, yet the reservation is to be allotted "because THEY 
 want the SURPLUS lands restored to the public domain so 
 THEY can use them for grazing grounds." 
 
 OPENING OF EXTENSION IN ARIZONA. 
 
 In "Hearings Before a Subcommittee on Indian Affairs," I see, 
 on page 12, that the Indian Office has asked for an appropriation 
 of $43,000 to survey the 43 townships in the Navajo Extension 
 made November 9, 1907, preparatory to its allotment. In justifi- 
 cation it is stated that the Act of May 29, 1908, requires the 
 President to restore the surplus land to the public domain after 
 the Indians have been allotted. In explanation, I must say that 
 Mr. Andrews, then Delegate to Congress from New Mexico, had 
 this Act passed regarding the extension in Arizona and New 
 Mexico. The extension in New Mexico has been allotted and 
 opened up — and the consequent conditions are certainly not en- 
 couraging. There may have been some reason for the Act of 
 1908 as far as the extension in New Mexico was concerned, since. 
 
 20 
 
American cattle men and Mexican sheep men had been using 
 portions of that tract, but at that time the extension in Arizona 
 was and always had been in the exclusive possession of the Nav- 
 ajos, hence there was no justification for said Act as far as the 
 extension in Arizona was concerned. 
 
 On page 20 of said "Hearings," Mr. Reeves states that the 
 Arizona State Land Commission and the cattle men and others 
 have insisted on the office carrying out' that provision (Act of 
 1908), because they want the surplus land restored to the public 
 domain, so they can use it for grazing ground. Would there be 
 a surplus? The paragraph on Apache County illustrates exist- 
 ing conditions considered by themselves and as compared with 
 the conditions obtaining among the whites in our county. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF EXTENSION IN ARIZONA. 
 
 In describing this tract of land (those 43 townships of the Ex- 
 tension of 1907, in Arizona) I shall include seven adjoining 
 townships to the north — a former extension — just south of the 
 Treaty Reservation. These two extensions in Arizona contain 
 a large tract of very valuable timber land, about 12 townships 
 having been embraced within the Zuni National Forest. The 
 grazing on this tract is above the average of the Navajo Reser- 
 vation. 
 
 It also embraces a number of extensive valleys used by the 
 Indians for agricultural purposes — more especially : 
 
 1. Bonito Valley, along Black Creek, extending from Fort De- 
 fiance, the Agency, 22 miles to the south, and being under the 
 Red Lake irrigation system. 
 
 2. The valley along the Pueblo Colorado wash, on which Gan- 
 ado and the Cornfields Day School is situated, running through 
 seven townships, i. e., 42 miles north and south. Part of this 
 valley is to be irrigated by the Ganado Irrigation Project now 
 being constructed at a cost of $60,000. 
 
 3. The LeCroix Valley, along Cottonwood wash, extending 
 through five townships, 30 miles to the southwest. These are 
 the principal, though by no means the only valleys within this 
 tract, used and needed more especially for agricultural purposes. 
 
 The scarcity of agricultural lands makes it absolutely neces- 
 sary to retain all the lands in the fertile valleys for them, and as 
 to the grazing lands on this tract, I shall quote again a letter, 
 dated February 8, 191 1, from Forest Supervisor, Mr. Mattoon, to 
 the District Forester: 
 
 " Condition of Range." 
 
 "Due to past overstocking of range during many years, the 
 range is exceedingly overgrazed throughout the portion of the 
 Zuni National Forest included within the Navajo and Zuni reser- 
 
 21 
 
vations. As a result, the soil is eroding badly in many places 
 and the sheep belonging to the Indians make a scanty living. 
 Over considerable areas in the eastern division of the Navajo 
 district very little plant life is left except sagebrush and scrub 
 juniper and pinon. The former heavy stand of grama grass 
 over much of this region is nearly extinct." 
 
 For the year 1912 the Forest Department authorized the graz- 
 ing of only 18,500 head of sheep and goats, and 1,050 head of 
 horses and cattle on the Navajo and Zuni division of the Zuni 
 National Forest Reserve; but the Navajos are grazing, not their 
 proportion of the 18,500 head allowed by the Forest Department, 
 l3Ut they are grazing 40,000 head of sheep and goats on the Nav- 
 ajo division of said forest reserve embraced w^ithin the tract, i. e., 
 on the 12 townships here described. This proves conclusively 
 that the Navajos are in need of every acre of land within this 
 tract. 
 
 RAILROAD AND STATE LANDS. 
 
 But half of this land, i. e., 576,000 acres, in actual possession 
 and use by the Navajos, belong to the Santa Fe Railway Com- 
 pany, whilst 55,040 acres belong to the State of Arizona. The 
 Navajos are in possession and cannot get along without these 
 lands if they are to remain self-supporting. The same may be 
 said of the 17 townships in the Extension of 1884 in New Mexico. 
 
 I am not urging an exchange of lands, but the purchase of the 
 railroad and State lands from the proceeds of the Navajo timber 
 sales. 
 
 IN THE INTEREST OF THE RAILROAD COMPANY? 
 
 Of late I have heard and read so many innuendos, intimations 
 and open assertions that the recent extensions of the Navajo 
 Reservation — Western Navajo, Leupp and the Extension of 1907 
 in New Mexico and Arizona — were made at the instigation and 
 in the interest of the Santa Fe Pacific Railway Company, that I 
 am afraid the sentiment thus created might militate also against 
 the purchase of the railroad lands I am advocating; hence a few 
 statements of fact: Major McLaughlin, for years Inspector of 
 the Interior Department, a gentleman of sterling qualities, is re- 
 sponsible for the Western Navajo Extension; the Rev. Mr. John- 
 ston is, I am quite certain, responsible for the Leupp Extension. 
 A few months ago the Land Commissioner for the Santa Fe Rail- 
 way Company was not acquainted with him. 
 
 Besides: Western Navajo was created on June 8, 1900, and 
 Leupp on November 14, 1901, whilst the law permitting ex- 
 changes and lieu selections was passed three and four years later, 
 on April 21, 1904. Where is the connection? Some people owe 
 an apology to these two gentleman. 
 
 22 
 
And the extension in Arizona and New Mexico, created on 
 November 9, 1907, and corrected January 28, 1908. For about 
 five years previous the Navajo Indians living off the reserva- 
 tion had been agitating the question of an extension. About 
 two years previous Mr. Brosius, the Agent for the Indian 
 Rights Association, made a trip from Farmington, New Mexico, 
 to the south over the country east of the Navajo Reservation and 
 recommended, among other things, as may be seen in the report 
 of the Indian Rights Association, that an allotment agent be sent 
 to allot those lands to the Navajos. Mr. Keepers was sent and 
 had been allotting lands to the Navajos on the east side of the 
 reservation. In consequence of Mr. Brosius' trip of investigation 
 the Indian Department sent two of its officials to investigate and 
 report on lands off the reservation occupied by the Navajos. 
 Previous to that, Supervisor Frank Mead, accompanied by Harry 
 Curley, made a trip to the east and south of the reservation in 
 New Mexico to ascertain and report conditions to the Indian 
 Office. The matter was brought to a crisis, however, when the 
 Santa Fe Pacific Railway Company leased to American cattle 
 men several townships containing lakes and springs improved 
 by the Navajos and used by the Indians. When the Indians 
 found themselves despoiled of their homes and barred from 
 their watering places, they began to raise a fund for traveling 
 expenses to send several of their head men to Washington to 
 see the President. The money collected was placed with a 
 well-known Indian trader. Things having come to such a pass 
 that serious trouble was feared, their Superintendent, Mr. W. 
 H. Harrison, found it necessary to make a trip to that country 
 to council with the Indians, asking me to accompany him. 
 Both, Mr. Harison and myself, advised them not to continue to 
 collect money to send a delegation to Washington ; we deemed 
 such an expenditure utterly useless, since it was the avowed 
 policy of the Department not to extend reservations. A few 
 weeks after these councils the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
 the Hon. Francis E. Leupp, came to Fort Defiance, and the In- 
 dians made use of that opportunity to place their grievances and 
 their requests before him. They told him they had been urging 
 this matter more especially for the last five years; one inspector 
 and one agent after the other had made trips over their country 
 and had reported conditions to Washington. Whilst their 
 agents, when writing on small and trifling matters, always re- 
 ceived their reply,- it seemed that just these important letters had 
 been lost somewhere between Fort Defiance and Washington, 
 since they never received an answer to them. They did not ask 
 the Government for any assistance; they did not wish to ap- 
 proach the Government, like the worthless Ute Indians, begging 
 for a piece of meat and a loaf of bread ; they wanted to be self- 
 
 23 
 
supporting; but to be and remain self-supporting they needed 
 the lands they now occupied; all they begged of him, was, 
 opportunity to make a living, and protection against such as 
 would deprive them of this opportunity by depriving them of 
 their homes and watering places and grazing lands. 
 
 Mr. Leupp told them that those important letters had not gone 
 astray ; they were in his possession at Washington ; but that it 
 was necessary to deliberate a long time over such an important 
 matter; besides, the Government was large and moved slowly, 
 like the big freight wagon they saw before them. When he re- 
 turned to Washington he would tell the President all they had 
 said to him. He did so, and the reservation was extended. 
 
 Then a cry went up through all Israel from Dan to Bersabee. 
 A petition to the President to have the extension rescinded circu- 
 lated in five counties in New Mexico, letters and telegrams of 
 protest were sent to the President, to the Governor and to the 
 Delegate of Congress, and indignation' meetings were held. The 
 opposition was directed against the Extension in New Mexico 
 partly because some Americans had leased some of the railroad 
 lands and others had made application to lease several hundred 
 thousand acres, and partly because some Mexicans were wont to 
 graze their herds on this section of the country, especially in 
 winter. None of these Mexicans or Americans were LIVING 
 on this tract; they simply ranged their sheep and cattle on it, 
 whilst the several thousand Navajos had their homes on it and 
 were depending upon it for a living. 
 
 Part of the land was allotted and the Extension in New Mex- 
 ico thrown open. 
 
 Unfortunately, the extension did not prevent Americans from 
 leasing railroad lands on the reservation ; in consequence there 
 was more stock owned by Americans on the extension when it 
 was thrown open than there had been when it was created. It 
 is true, the Indians leased a few townships of railroad lands, but 
 not enough to adequately protect themselves. At this time the 
 Indians have five townships of railroad sections leased from the 
 Santa Fe Railroad Company and two from the Frisco, in order 
 to retain control of a portion of the range they need. The Indians 
 could not be made to see the advantage of securing leases of 
 other townships until the white men had secured the leases. 
 Some of the stockmen are trying to keep the Indians out of the 
 townships they have leased or within the limits of their allot- 
 ments; this, of course, no Indian can do, as the only value any 
 of the allotments have is the amount of range they can control 
 surrounding their respective allotments. Recently, one man 
 from Chama leased all the Santa Fe lands in San Juan County 
 except half a township, which a Navajo had leased, and he has 
 
 24 
 
brought in approximately 30,000 head of sheep. It can easily be 
 seen that these Indians are facing one of the most grave ques- 
 tions that has ever confronted them. 
 
 In absolute control of the leased railroad lands, with equal 
 rights on the unalloted public domain, the privilege of renewing 
 their leases and of leasing more railroad lands — the advantages 
 of the large stockman over the numerous Navajos whose small 
 herds do not enable them to lease the railroad lands they need, 
 are apparent, and the outlook not encouraging. 
 
 Off the reservation, in McKinley County, south of the reser- 
 vation, the Navajos have leased seven full townships and five 
 fractional townships. One of these townships had been leased 
 by a white man, who promptly bombarded the Interior Depart- 
 ment with petitions and protests against the "renegade" Navajos 
 whom he wanted moved back on the reservation; he prosecuted 
 them under an old law forbidding anyone to herd his sheep 
 within nine miles of a ranch house, and boasted that he would 
 have these Indians ousted from that township within a year. 
 And he would have succeeded had I not induced the railroad 
 company not to renew its lease to him under the circumstances, 
 but to lease it to the Navajos. In other localities the whites have 
 eliminated them from whole townships through the leasing of 
 railroad lands. 
 
 Such conditions as described on this and the foregoing pages 
 have been, and are, responsible for the efforts to eliminate the 
 railroad lands from the Navajo country, whether by exchange or 
 purchase. 
 
 In the But'e Country, as mentioned before, the railroad lands 
 of several townships, among them T. 23 N. R. 18 E., have re- 
 cently been leased to white men. Two of the three springs 
 within this particular township belong to the railroad company, 
 and one to Charles L. Day. Will it be possible for the Indians 
 to remain on these townships and retain their allotments— with 
 two acres to the sheep and no watering place? 
 
 In the southwes;:ern part of the Navajo Extension in Arizona 
 Americans leased a towmship some years ago, developed water 
 and placed improvements on it costing over $5,000 and applied 
 to buy the railroad lands of this and two more townships. The 
 two townships east and the towmship south of the one contain- 
 ing these improvements have been leased by the Navajos to 
 prevent further encroachments by the cattle men. In the last 
 three years leasing" or purchasing applications for five different 
 townships in that part of the extension, and for two townships 
 adjoining the extension, were made by as many cattle men. 
 
 The Navajos are in possession of these railroad lands and use 
 them and need them. They realize if they do not secure the rail- 
 
 25 
 
road lands, they will, eventually, not only lose half of their hold- 
 ings to white men, but the other half will be rendered useless 
 through overgrazing — and they will have to "move." 
 
 The Indians on and ofif the reservation pay annually some two 
 thousand five hundred dollars lease money for their protection. 
 
 They are unable to raise $8,000 annually to lease all the rail- 
 road lands on the reservation, and about again as much to lease 
 the railroad lands occupied and used and needed by theni ofif the 
 reservation. Even leasing all the railroad lands would give them 
 no protection if the railroad company should begin to sell its 
 holdings to white men. 
 
 TIMBER SALE AND PURCHASE OF RAILROAD LAND. 
 
 Realizing all this, the Navajos have signed the following pe- 
 tition : 
 
 "We, the undersigned Chiefs and Headmen of the Navajo 
 Tribe, respectfully request that an appropriation, reimbursable 
 from our timber sale, be made to buy the railroad lands which 
 are in actual use and occupancy by the Navajo Tribe on and ofif 
 their reservation." 
 
 It is true that Article XIII of the Treaty of 1868 provides, 
 "If any Navajo Indian or Indians shall leave the reservation 
 herein described to settle elsewhere, he or they shall forfeit all 
 the rights, privileges and annuities conferred by the terms of 
 this treaty" ; furthermore, that Section 7 of the Act of June 25. 
 1910 (Stat. L.. 855). provides, "That mature living, dead and 
 down timber on unallotted lands of any Indian reservation may 
 be sold under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of 
 the Interior, and the proceeds from such sales shall be used for 
 the benefit of the Indians of the reservation, in such manner as he 
 may direct." * * * But the Indians are of the opinion that 
 their consent, expressed through their aforementioned petition, 
 supplemented by an Act of Congress embodying the words, "To 
 buy the railroad lands which are in actual use and occupancy by 
 the Navajo Tribe on and off their reservation," would eliminate 
 these limitations. 
 
 Considering the fact that their timber, except four million 
 feet, is on the treaty reservation on which there are no railroad 
 lands, their action might seem ultra altruistic, were it not for the 
 fact that the Navajos on the treaty reservation realize that their 
 brethren will gradually be forced on to their already overcrowded 
 and overgrazed reservation unless the railroad lands are secured 
 for them. 
 
 Roughly estimated, the timber on the treaty reservation 
 amounts to about 2,600,000,000 feet, whilst the timber on the 
 extended Navajo Reservation amounts to about 800,000,000, half 
 
 26 
 
of which belongs to the Santa Fe Railway Company. The 
 Navajos ask that the timber be sold through the Forest De- 
 partment 
 
 NOT FEASIBLE? 
 
 I have been told that two things militate against granting this 
 petition : 
 
 1. The law of 1904 permitting exchanges of land — rendering a 
 purchase unnecessary ; 
 
 2. On account of the large area of land held by the Navajos, 
 Congress could not be induced to make such a reimbursable ap- 
 propriation. 
 
 As to the first, if the Department of the Interior wishes to avail 
 itself of the law of 1904 in spite of the vigorous opposition of the 
 Delegations from Arizona and New Mexico and of Mr. Mulford 
 Winsor, State Land Commissioner of Arizona, the Indians would 
 not object, I am sure. 
 
 If Mr. Mulford Winsor needs all the available good lands in 
 Arizona, also those on the Navajo Reservation, as it would seem, 
 to make selections for the State, the following passages, taken 
 from the St. Johns Herald of January 8, 1914, sound rather 
 strange : "Seven or eight million acres of land in Arizona, out- 
 side Forest Reserves and Indian Reservations, is reclaimable by 
 irrigation. This is the estimate of the State Land Commission. 
 The Commissioners have now been in office long enough to have 
 visited practically every township within the borders of Arizona. 
 They declare that the public has absolutely no conception of the 
 vast number of reservoir sites, or of areas of land which can be 
 cultivated profitably with pumping water." 
 
 "There are not hundreds of reservoir sites, but thousands of 
 them. Only a few have been withdrawn under the United States 
 Reclamation Act. Along every stream in the State is at least a 
 small site, the Commissioners say. In some sections of 'dry' 
 Arizona there is more water, if conserved by storage, than there 
 is land. Numerous sites are found along the Little Colorado, 
 Gila and Santa Cruz Rivers. One of the largest in the State is 
 on 'Bill Williams' Fork. There are several on Cataract Canyon, 
 in Coconino County. Several vast valleys in Mohave County 
 can be irrigated from the Colorado or from reservoirs in smaller 
 streams. Cochise County has many sites in the Swisshelm, 
 Whetstone and Dragoon Mountains. Greenlee has more sites 
 than land." 
 
 As to the second point, it has been the object of this paper to 
 place facts and figures before the members of Congress and oth- 
 ers interested and to make them acquainted with the character of 
 the land, grazing conditions, etc., in the Navajo country. I need 
 not repeat. 
 
 27 
 
REIMBURSABLE APPROPRIATION. 
 
 The reimbursable appropriation ought to be made in the near 
 future. After the railroad lands have been partially leased and 
 partially bought by white men, and the Indians have lost their 
 homes and watering places and grazing grounds — the means to 
 make an independent living- — it will be too late. 
 
 The same holds good regarding State lands. If their timber is 
 sold, the State Land Commissioners will be able to dispose of 
 the State lands within the Navajo country to the Navajos much 
 sooner than they could sell to the whites in other parts of the 
 State. 
 
 Whether the money thus appropriated will be reimbursed in 
 the near future, lies with the Government. The ripe timber is 
 there in abundance awaiting a purchaser. There are other uses 
 to which the proceeds of the timber sale could be put after the 
 necessary lands have been purchased : educational and sanitary 
 purposes, the development of water, upbreeding of their stock, etc. 
 
 If this method is neglected, the Indians and their friends are 
 forced to urge the only alternative : exchange of lands. 
 
 Dead assets are of no use to anyone. It would seem in accord 
 with our business administration to bring this dead capital to 
 life to help the Indians and to save direct appropriations out of 
 the pockets of the taxpayers. 
 
 TIMBER SALE FOR MESCALERO APACHES. 
 
 A similar point in question is the timber on the Mescalero 
 Reservation. Whilst their timber is estimated at several million 
 dollars, the Indians — no, they are not starving, but there is a 
 condition bordering on starvation when, through lack of food, 
 the system is so enfeebled that any sickness will carry them off 
 to the Happy Hunting Grounds. 
 
 The 187 Fort Sill Indians — brought to Mescaler .—are receiv- 
 ing rations until next October. What then? The son of Vic- 
 torio told me they were used to getting enough to eat; they 
 could not subsist on one full meal every second day — like the 
 Mescaleros ! Does anyone imagine that they can make a living 
 by raising oats in the clouds of Whi:;e Tail? 
 
 There may not have been a contract; but the Mescaleros re- 
 ceived the Fort Sills to full tribal rights of land, money and other 
 benefits, and the Fort Sills accepted this offer, both under the 
 supposition that their timber be sold and the proceeds used to 
 stock the reservation for both, the Mescaleros and the Fort Sills ; 
 but, instead of that, on January 26, 1914, S. 4187 was introduced 
 to convert the Mescalero Apache Reservation into a National 
 Park "for the benefit and enjoyment of the people of the 
 United States" — without any provision for timber sale (except 
 
 28 
 
 RD 148 
 
"for the protection or improvement of the park") or purchase of 
 the timber by the Federal Government to indemnify the Indians, 
 to enable them to buy stock and make a living. The free grazing 
 granted to the Indians by that bill means nothing to them if they 
 ha\-e no stock to graze. 
 
 I hope Congress will not create "pleasure grounds for the 
 benefit and enjoyment of the people of the United States" amid 
 an Indian population of whom Mr. Meritt, Assistant Commis- 
 sioner of Indian Affairs, makes the statement: * * * "While 
 they have great potential resources, they are really SUFFER- 
 ING much of the time for WANT of sufficient SUBSISTENCE 
 and CLOTHING." 
 
 The attempt to relieve this deplorable condition through a 
 direct appropriation was defeated during this session of Con- 
 gress. The item in the Indian Appropriation Bill providing 
 $200,000 to buy stock and other means of support for them was 
 passed by the Senate, rejected by the House, and lost in Con- 
 ference. 
 
 It is hoped that these facts and figures will command the 
 thoughtful consideration of Congress and other friends of the 
 Indians, so that the justice of the contention of the Navajos and 
 their friends may be properly understood and appreciated: that 
 their reservation should remain intact and that they be enabled 
 to acquire title to the railroad and State lands occupied by them. 
 
 (Rev.) ANSELM WEBER, O. F. M., 
 
 St. Michaels, Arizona. 
 July 25, 1914. 
 
 29 
 
'^^ 
 
 "^ 
 
 ^ 
 
.0' 
 
 .0' 
 
 ^o V^ 
 
 ^° 
 
 
 ■^^p" 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 t- ^ ^^A^ ^ , 
 
 
 <5> 
 
 B , 1 
 
 , V 
 
 'o. -> 
 
 
 
 lt 
 
 
 '<^> 
 
 
 K * 
 
 '-fu. 
 
 0^ 
 
 
 f " 
 
 •3 
 
 o^ 
 
 
 *"/ 
 
 -<> 
 
 o 
 
 v''* 
 
 
 "^'v' 
 
 :'^j 
 
 
 
 •\\ 
 
 •^ 
 
 ,4 9. 
 
 ^. .^• 
 
 #^ 
 
 
 ':^ ^.^^ ^^^^ "^^cf 
 
 -^^0^ 
 
 "o V^' 
 
 
 -^i-- 
 
 
 ^Q 
 
 ^0' 
 
 
 1^: 
 
 ^^■ 
 
 M*^ 
 
 
 -^^.^c 
 
 <>:>-;:-■ 
 
 
 •i^ 
 
 r, " = , <> Q V » >• ' s , '^Q Oy .. " = ^ <> 
 
 •^, 
 
 K^ 
 
 4 9. 
 
 

 o 
 o 
 O' .. -^ 
 
 
 v: 
 
 
 
 CaSSS BROS. -3 ^o 
 
 , ST. AUGUSTINE 
 ^^ FLA.