NATIVES COMPELLED TO SELL FISH TRAPS TO PRIVATE INTERESTS FOR GROSSLY INADEQUATE CONSIDERATION

It will be recalled from the documents previously cited that1. On February 11, 1915, the Secretary of the Interior, upon the recommendation of the Bureau of Education, amended his new rules and regulations for Annette Islands Reserve so as to provide that

natives or associations of natives of Metlakahtla who have secured the approval of the Council of the Annette Islands Reserve be given permits by the Secretary of the Interior to erect salmon traps on the shores of Annette Islands, on condition that they pay to the Secretary of the Annette Islands Reserve, at the close of each fishing season a yearly tax of $25 for each trap

*

2. On March 27, 1915, at the regular meeting of the native council, which was addressed by Edward Marsden, who was then a missionary stationed at Saxman, permits for fish traps recommended by Bureau agents were granted to Roderick F. Davis and Charles Brendible.

3. On May 4, 1916, the day the cannery at Metlakahtla was leased by the Secretary of the Interior to P. E. Harris, William T. Lopp, Chief of the Alaska Division of the Bureau of Education, wrote to P. P. Claxton, Commissioner of Education:

** * The people at Metlakatla are very much prejudiced against fish traps. Therefore we consider it important to have the entire village participate in the profits of all new traps which Mr. Harris assists in establishing. Davis and Brendible owe Linderberger Co. and Alaska Pacific Fisheries about $900 and $600, respectively. Both of these Indians would like to have one or two more traps and sell fish to outside canneries as well as to Harris. It was because of this that I wired you from Ketchikan suggesting that article 5 of the lease be changed to read so as to prevent the natives from selling any but surplus fish to canneries not located on the island. I have assured Mr. Harris, however, that it will be the policy of this Department to insist that Metlakatlans receive no aid from outside canneries in the establishing of traps and that the Metlakahtla cannery shall have the refusal of all salmon caught in the reserved waters. It was with this understanding that Mr. Harris signed the lease today.

It will be readily seen from the documents quoted that after the Bureau of Education had been instrumental in having fish-trap permits granted to certain natives, a situation was brought about which compelled these natives to sell their fish traps for grossly inadequate considerations to the Annette Island Packing Co., the successor of P. E. Harris, the first lessee of the cannery at Metlakahtla.

Referring to the Charles Brendible fish trap, bought from this native for $500 and turned over to the Annette Island Packing Co. by a representative of the Bureau of Education, who at the same time. was drawing a salary from the packing company, Charles A. Burckhardt, president of the Alaska Pacific Fisheries, testified in the case of the Alaska Pacific Fisheries v. United States (248 U. S. 78), that 300,000 fish were caught in this trap during the season of 1915, and that it was estimated that the Alaska Pacific Fisheries would take 800,000 fish from two traps in the waters of Annette Islands during the season of 1916.

Regarding the Roderick F. Davis fish trap which a representative of the Bureau of Education bought from this native for $500 and turned over to the Annette Island Packing Co., letters from Helwig

and Beattie, agents of the Bureau of Education, quoted above, show that during the year preceding the sale this trap caught from 400,000 to 500,000 fish.

As to the value of the fisheries of Annette Islands Reserve, all of which were eventually turned over to the Annette Island Packing Co. under the leases executed by the Secretary of the Interior and his subordinates, the following is quoted from a note appended to a letter dated July 31, 1916, written to Senator W. E. Borah by James M. Shoup, one of the attorneys for the Alaska Pacific Fisheries, a competitor of the Annette Island Packing Co.

It is estimated by persons conversant with the run of salmon that more than 6,000,000 pass within 3,000 feet of Annette Island each year, which shows the enormous value of the exclusive right to catch fish in the public waters embraced in the President's proclamation; 6,000,000 salmon are equivalent to 400,000 cases.

WAR DEPARTMENT RECORD OF FISH TRAP LOCATIONS OF ANNETTE ISLAND PACKING CO.

Not only were the natives of Metlakahtla compelled to sell their fish traps to private interests, but by leases executed by the Secretary of the Interior and his subordinates a complete monopoly of the fishing rights of the reserved waters was given to the Annette Island Packing Co. for a period of more than 15 years, as already shown.

Referring to the records of the War Department, it will be seen that by the end of the year 1921 the Annette Island Packing Co. had reported the locations of 10 fish traps.

On March 4, 1922, the Chief of Engineers of the War Department furnished the following statistics in regard to permits for fish traps in the waters of Annette Islands Fishery Reserve issued to the Annette Island Packing Co. by the War Department, which statistics are based on reports received up to and including the period ended December 31, 1921:

Accompanying the above tabulation is the following notation made by the Chief of Engineers of the War Department:

These traps being located within the bounds set aside by the President for the Metlakahtla Indians are not required to have Territorial licenses.

A permit for the erection of fish traps by the War Department gives no permission to take fish therefrom, but relates solely to the question as to whether or not such an obstruction is objectionable from the standpoint of navigation.

It was for that reason that the Secretary of the Interior said in his letter to the Attorney General on May 20, 1916:

In its letter of March 4, 1916, the War Department informed the Interior Department that under the provisions of section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. 1120-1151), any traps desired to be located in the waters adjacent to Annette Island must receive the prior approval of the War Department.

The Annette Island Packing Co. obtained from the War Department permits for the erection of fish traps in the reserved waters, without objection from the Department of the Interior, but obstructions were placed in the way of Roderick F. Davis, a native of Metlakahtla, to prevent him from receiving a similar permit, although that native had previously received a permit from the council, approved by the Secretary of the Interior, for the operation of fish traps in these waters, as shown by the documents that follow.

Telegram from H. C. Sinclair, agent of the Bureau of Education at Seattle, to William T. Lopp, Chief of Alaska Division of Bureau of Education (then in Washington, D. C.), February 10, 1916:

* Davis intends having site surveyed and asking War Department for permit. File objection immediately.

Letter from Assistant Secretary of the Interior to Secretary of War, February 11, 1916:

Information has been received by the Department of the Interior that application will be made to the War Department by Roderick Davis, of Metlakahtla, on Annette Island, Alaska, for a permit to place a fish trap in the waters adjacent to Metlakahtla.

* *

*

I therefore request if applications are received by the War Department from Roderick Davis or from other persons for permits to locate fish traps in the waters adjacent to Annette Island, that the Department of the Interior be consulted before such permits are granted.

Letter from the War Department to Secretary of the Interior, March 4, 1916:

Referring to your letter of the 11th ultimo regarding fish traps in the waters adjacent to Annette Island, Alaska, I have the honor to inform you that the district engineer officer to whom the matter was referred reports as follows: "No application has been filed by Roderick Davis for any trap location in Alaska. However, applications for the approval of two trap locations on the western shore of Annette Island have been filed by the Alaska Pacific Fisheries, one of which was fished last season by Roderick Davis, an Indian, and probably the person referred to by the Department of the Interior.

* * *

"As other trap locations have been applied for on the shores of the adjacent islands, it seems desirable that the Department of the Interior define the area which it desires to have reserved for the use of the Indians, so that all traps applied for within such area may receive special consideration. * * *.

* *

"It would seem that any traps which the Indians desire to drive in connection with the cannery on Annette Island should receive the prior approval of the War Department, as required by law, section 10, act March 3, 1899 *." Letter from the Acting Secretary of War to Secretary of the Interior, May 13, 1916.

I enclose chart indicating area adjacent to Annette Islands within which it is desirable that Metlakahtlans place traps, in order to avoid the obstruction of navigation. No traps should be placed in the buoyed channel immediately south of Annette Islands nor should access to the anchorages or the wharves at Ketchikan be obstructed. Within these lines indicated it is believed that without undue delay this Department can take action upon the applications of Metlakahtlans for permisison to erect and maintain fish traps, but applications for locations outside of these areas will require further examination to determine whether or not they will interfere with navigation.

The procuring from the War Department of permits for erection of 10 fish traps in the waters of Annette Islands Reserve (which includes the waters of Annette Islands Fishery Reserve) is evidence of the intention of the Annette Island Packing Co. unlawfully to place fish traps in the reserved waters.

Official data on fish traps operated and the salmon caught by the Annette Island Packing Co. has been presented in a previous section.

FISH TRAPS INTRODUCED OVER PROTESTS OF NATIVES

The introduction of fish traps in the waters of Annette Islands Reserve by the Department of the Interior was in opposition to the expressed wishes of the Metlakahtlans and in direct violation of the following principles expounded to the court by an attorney from the Solicitor's office representing the Secretary of the Interior in the case of Annette Island Packing Company v. Hubert Work, Secretary of the Interior, pending in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, in January, 1928:

*** This is not the case of the type of Indians whose acts may all be performed by the Secretary. The courts have considered in connection with this reserve that it is not an ordinary Indian reserve on which the Indians are confined, but it is an Indian reserve to be used for them in such manner as they see fit, in common, subject only to such restrictions as the Secretary shall impose. He has no right, as we view it, to make a lease for them, except insofar as they delegate that authority to him by ordinance.

*

SECTION 66. THE METLAKATLA COMMERCIAL CO. AND THE SWEATING OF THE METLAKAHTLANS

Father Duncan's mission store established and conducted solely for the benefit of the natives. Department of Interior forces Father Duncan to close his mission store. Native enterprises wiped out by monopoly fostered and protected by Bureau of Education. Connection between Metlakatla Commercial Co. and Annette Island Packing Co. History and purpose of the Metlakatla Commercial Co. Combination of native stores suggested and attempted. Loop conceived the cooperative store plan. Natives did not favor cooperative store. Lopp insistent on formation of company. Bureau representatives not authorized to control natives. Bureau representatives seek powers in articles of agreement. Powers of control arrogated to themselves by Bureau agents. Company dominated by Bureau agents and two stockholders. Natives oppressed by profiteering methods. The sweating of the Metlakahtlans. Schemers hold a whip hand over natives. Father Duncan's sawmill unlawfully sold to Metlakatla Commercial Co. Illegal consummation of sale of Father Duncan's sawmill. Marsden's prevarication. Other bidders for sawmill forestalled. Sawmill sold for less than its value. Sale concealed from and misrepresented to superior officers. Confiscation of firemen's lot for benefit of Commercial Co. Financial irregularities of so-called cooperative company. Protests of natives futile. Statement of John Hayward, a native of Metlakahtla. Statement of Ralph Smith, a native of Metlakahtla.

In furtherance of their schemes to gain and hold control of the religious, secular, and educational activities of Metlakahtla, representatives of the Bureau of Education succeeded in putting an end to Father Duncan's mission school and in having him forbidden to operate his cannery and sawmill.

They also induced the seizure and confiscation of his industrial properties by means of which he supported his mission and furnished the natives remunerative employment.

After unlawfully seizing Father Duncan's store building and forcing him to close his store in violation of his constitutional and civil rights, the Bureau of Education set up in Metlakahtla the "Metlakatla Commercial Co.", under the guise of a native cooperative enterprise, which was given a monopoly of the commercial business on Annette Islands Reserve and was used to exploit the natives for the financial benefit of a few individuals who were useful in the schemes of the conspirators.

Apparently without realizing the enormity of their offenses against God and man, the representatives of the Bureau of Education forced the closing of Father Duncan's mission store, because these highhanded conspirators frown upon such activities on the part of missionaries in their efforts to make their holy enterprises self-supporting.

FATHER DUNCAN'S MISSION STORE ESTABLISHED AND CONDUCTED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE NATIVES

While Father Duncan, as a beneficiary of the act of March 3, 1891 (26 Stat. 1101), was entitled to conduct any legitimate business he desired on Annette Islands Reserve, as a matter of fact his store and other enterprises were established and conducted solely for the benefit of the natives.

As officially stated in a report by Howard M. Kutchin, a special agent of the Treasury Department, published as Senate Document No. 113, Fifty-seventh Congress, second session, page 29, all of the industrial and commercial enterprises established and conducted by Father Duncan were adjuncts of "the general scheme of Mr. Duncan's missionary activities" rather than "an independent enterprise. * *

In regard to the establishment and purposes of Father Duncan's store and the manner in which it met the needs of the mission village, the following is quoted from the unpublished manuscripts of Mrs. Matilda W. Minthorn:

While residing in the newly established colony at Old Metlakahtla in British Columbia, it was necessary for the Indians to buy all their supplies from the store of the Hudson's Bay Co. at Fort Simpson, with which they had always traded while living at Nass River.

They usually had furs for barter and the women were the traders, being much more shrewd than the men in trading. Here at Fort Simpson they

secured all their goods for their living and their ammunition.

Mr. Duncan, after establishing himself amongst these people, insisted that "cleanliness is next to godliness" and soap became one of the commodities required by them.

The Hudson Bay Co. required a mink skin worth a dollar for a piece of soap about the thickness of a finger, and asked a pile of mink furs reaching from the ground to the top of the musket as the price of a gun.

Later, not being satisfied with the amount of furs they were getting, the company sent for new muskets with a barrel two feet longer than the old ones, and for the new gun they required the pile of mink furs to reach these two feet higher.

Mr. Duncan went to remonstrate with the company's store because of the exorbitant prices for the necessities of life required by the Indians, and his request for fair dealing with them by the company was laughed at. He replied that if they would not treat his people right, he would start a store in his new colony. To this they returned the boast that he could not do that 26465-39-pt. 35-53