Viewing page 5 of 9
It looks like you're using a mobile device. We recommend using a physical keyboard for transcription entry.
National Congress of American Indians WASHINGTON BULLETIN Vol. 2, Number 3 JULY-AUGUST 18 Pueblos Sign N.C.A.I. Treaty of Peace and Mutual Assistance The World Can Take One More Lesson From The Indians "Father, you have asked your children to live in peace and as brothers. Today, Father, you have seen one group of your children try to follow your words." This benediction, pronounced by Father Patrick Veale, marked the close of the first ceremony, held on April 11, 1948, of the signing of the treaty of peace and mutual assistance among the tribes adopted at the N.C.A.I. Convention at Santa Fe, New Mexico last December. (For full text of the treaty see our Washington Bulletin, January-February 1948 issue.) It is especially appropriate that the Pueblos should be the first Indian groups to sign the treaty for behind these Indians is a tradition of organization. They learned the value of unified action out of the bitter need to defend themselves against threatened destruction. Today, when Indians in Alaska and all over the United States face the same kind of threat to their very existence, not only as Indians but as human beings, it is essential that the Indians of the United States and Alaska work together for a better day for all Indians everywhere. The ceremony of the signing of the treaty was held at Albuquerque Indian Scholl. It was characterized by that dignity which is typically Indian. Abel Paisano, a Laguna and Chairman of the All-Pueblo Council, presided over the events of the day and gave the address for the Pueblos. N.C.A.I. President, N.B. Johnson, was one of the chief speakers. Jesse B. Milam, Chief of the Cherokees, was an honored guest at the ceremonies. The actual ceremony featured the presentation of the traditional peace pipe and the scroll upon which the original treaty is inscribed. Secretary of the Interior Krug sent a telegram giving official sanction to the treaty about to be signed. This was read by John Bainer, a Taos Pueblo Indian, Secretary of the All-Pueblo Council. Alvin Warren, Chippewa, Supervisor of Education, United Pueblo Agency, read the treaty to Pueblo Governors in council circling the stage and to the assembled audience. The Governors then moved forward to sign the treaty in the order listed below: Gov. Martin Pino for Acoma Pueblo; Gov Jose Carpio for Isieta Pueblo; Gov. Guadalupe Fragua for Jemez Pueblo; Gov. Pete Martin for Laguna Pueblo; Gov. Moises Pena for Nambe Pueblo; Gov. Jose Rey Leon for Santa Anna Pueblo. Gov Alfonso Narando for Santa Clara Pueblo; Gov. John Ray for San Felipe Pueblo; Gov. Antonio Martinez for San Ildefonso Pueblo; Gov. Alcario Cruz for San Juan Pueblo; Gov. Ramon Martinez for San Lorenzo (Picuris) Pueblo; Gov. Esquipula Chavez for Sandia Pueblo. Gov. Juanito Medina for Zia Pueblo; Gov. Tony Maribal for Taos Pueblo; Gov. Candido Herrera for Tesuque Pueblo; Gov. Leopoldo Eriacho for Zuni Pueblo; Gov. Santiago Pena for Santo Domingo Pueblo (signed later), Gov. Jose Suina for Cochiti Pueblo (signed later) Continued on next page Arizona And New Mexico Indians Win Right To Vote Proofreading of this issue of the Bulletin was interrupted by a Western Union messenger bearing the following telegram: "NEW MEXICO DISFRANCHISEMENT HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL. DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT INJUCTION ISSUED. signed Felix S. Coben." On the day after attorneys had completed their argument in the case of Trujille V. Garley, the Federal Court held that NEw Mexico Indians must be given the right to vote, and ordered the clerks of the state to cease refusing to register them. A similar victory was won by Arizona Indians in the case argued by Congressman Harless when the Arizona State Supreme Court held that Indians are not "persons under guardianship" within the meaning of a provision of the Arizona constitution and statutes denying the right to vote to persons so described. The Arizona Decision made special mention of the NCAI brief and accepted many of the arguments our attorneys presented. The New Mexico case was sponsored by NCAI and the American Civil Liberties Union. These ar two great victories for NCAI. They establish a basis for a further victory in our fight to secure. These are two great victories for NCAI. They establish a basis for a further victory in our fight to secure Social Security benefits for the Indians of these two states. At the NCAI convention we were advised to sue the courts and the legislative halls of the white man to defend ourselves against injustices with the same fervor and determination as our forefathers used the how and arrow for the same purposes. These victories prove that it was good advice. Opposition to H. R. 4725 Effective H. R. 4'/25, a bill to subject Indians on reservations to the criminal laws of the states in which their reservations are located (reported Washington Bulletin, March-April issue) failed to pass the Senate although vigorourly pushed by its proponents. Instead of this bill, subjecting all Indians on all Reservations to state laws, irrespective of the wishes of the Indians or their demonstrated ability to police themselves, the Senate passed three bills referring to individual reservations. One S543, gave the states of North and South Dakota jurisdiction over crimes committed on the Standing Rock Reservation, and was recommended by the Department of the Interior with the approval of the tribe. Another, S. 1820, gave jurisdiction to the State of Iowa over crimes committed on the Sac and Fox reservation This bill was recommended by the Department over the opposition of the tribe, but with the finding that the tribe had not taken the necessary steps to preserve law and order on the reservation. The third bill, S. 1683 confers jurisdiction on the State of New York on Indian reservations in that state. This bill as well as two others affecting the New York Indians was strongly protested by those Indians who all sent delegations to Washington to testify against it. The New York and Iowa bills became law but the Dakota bill did not pass the House. While Congressmen grapple with the question, Indian groups are going ahead under the authority vested in them to settle their own law and order problems. Some groups, like the Standing Rock Sioux p[[missing]]hat (Continued on Next Page)
Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact email@example.com.