War of the Rebellion: Serial 106 Page 0540 OPERATIONS ON THE PACIFIC COAST. Chapter LXII.

Search Civil War Official Records

At all events, Governor, you have the whole of those provisions in the latter part of the second article in your own hands, as it provides that "the sale or transfer of said improvements shall be made in the presence of and with the consent and approval of the agent or superintendent. " Therefore your negative on the whole matter is absolute, whatever interpretation may be placed on the language of the second article. Two insuperable obstacles exist to the Indians being disturbed in anyth occupation. One is that it requires their own consent (prior to ratification) and the other is that it requires your consent. The general understanding of all treaties is that they require the ratification of the Senate before they are binding, and any deviation from such notion should have been clearly and fully explained to the Indians. They had to wait four years from 1855 to 1859 before the ratification of the first treaty, and therefore the Nez Perces are wide awake as to the possibility of delay, and are naturally sensitive on such subjects. We have valued very highly the continued and persistent friendship of these Indians. We have lamented that in the search for gold the whites should have thus rudely occupied the old reservation, and I have studiously desired to do all in my power to protect them Therefore this minsuderstanding is very much to be regretted.

I have the honor to be, your Excellency's obedient servant,


Brigadier-General, U. S. Volunteers, Commanding District.

[Inclosure.] HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF OREGON. Fort Vancouver, Wash., Ter., July 22, 1863.


SIR: I desire hereby to rescind the instructions sent to you on the 3rd instant, excepting so much as directs you to co-operate cordially with the Indian Department in the protection of the Indians and the enforcement of the Indian intercourse acts. In reference to the new treaty with the Nez Perces you must be governed by the interpretation placed on it by His Excellency W. H. Wallace, Governor of Idaho Territory, who is also superintendent of Indian affairs. As the interpretation named in my instructions to you of the 3rd instant, placed on the second article of that treaty by C. H. Hale, esq., superintendent Indian affairs, is repudiated by Charles Hutchins, esq., one of the commissioners, and Der. Robert Newell, you must communicate with Governor Wallace and be governed by his views. Certainly there is no authority in that treaty to oust the Indians from their lands or improvements outside of the new boundaries. The only question is whether the whites can now purchase, with the consent on the superintendent or Indian agent and the full and free consenton the Indians, their improvements before the confirmation by the Senate, and occupy the same. Mr. Hutchins denies this interpretation. At all events. I have no doubt Governor Wallace will concur in the important duty of protecting the Indians from being deprived of their improvements and lands before confirmation of the treaty by the Senate. If Governor Wallace is absent, you will so interpret the treaty and so inform the Indians at once. I have to-day written to him at Lewiston, and send the letter by Corporal Gracy, of Company A, Ninth Infantry, who delivers this letter. You will always bear in mind that the sale of liquor to Indians, or its introduction for sale to Indians, can and must be punished, under the act of 13th of February, 1863, wherever the offense is committed, whether within or outside of an Indian reservation. Please