June 29, 1973 There is little in the archival material presented by the Tribe concerning the decade following the 1868 Treaty. Of some interest is a report dated 1876 of an archaeological expedition by Jackson, entitled "A Notice of the Ancient Ruins in Arizona and Utah Lying About the Rio San Juan" (Nav. Ex. 137). He reported finding a skeleton which he identified as probably being a Navajo by the type of cloth uncovered with the remains. He stated that the Navajos had occupied the country "within the remembrance of the older persons" and were driven beyond the San Juan by the onslaughts of aggressive Utes. Much of the archival material which can be related to the Aneth area for the years 1879 through 1885 pertains to a settler named H. L. Mitchell, who located a homestead at the mouth of the McElmo Canyon at the San Juan River, and also ran a store and trading post. Reports by military and Indian Office investigators of his alleged troubles with the Navajos bringing their sheep across the river and bothering the non-Indians living at McElmo blamed the troubles upon Mitchell. They indicated he would encourage the Navajos to go off the reservation by giving them "passes" and then complain that the troops were needed so he could sell supplies to the Army (Nav. Exs. 186, 226, 235). By letter of October 14, 1882 Mitchell first complained in 1879 that 75 whites living at McElmo had been threatened by Navajos who brought 20,000 sheep through their homesteads (Nav. Ex. 144). He also complained at that time in behalf of himself and (Nav. Ex. 163), the Indian Agent Eastman, told Mitchell not to give the Navajos permits to go off the reservation, but to let them know they must not trespass on settlers' rights. In a letter of October 31, 1882 (Nav. Ex. 164), Agent Eastman reported to the Commissioner of the Indian Office that Navajos said whites not Mormons-told them to cross the San Juan River into Utah, but the Agent had ordered them back to the reservation. At that time, Eastman gave some passes 50 other "gentiles" that the Indians were friendly with the Mormons but not them, and the Governor of Utah had refused him arms to protect his settlement (Nav. Ex. 145). Military officials investigating the charges were skeptical and seemed to find him getting along well with the Navajos (Tr. 172). They also reported that he stirred up the Indians (Nav. Ex. 178). In 1880, however, his son and another white were killed by Utes or Paiutes (Nav. Exs. 149-53). On December 10, 1883, Infantry Captain Ketchum reported on his expedition in Utah to Bluff, the Montezuma area, and Mitchell's ranch (Nav. Ex. 189). He stated that Mormons were abandoning their ranches close to Mitchell and he had taken care of the incident with the Indians and Mitchell. He ordered the Navajos north of the San Juan to cross the river to their reservation. In 1884 an incident occurred at Mitchel's ranch in which he killed one Navajo and wounded two others. The next day after Mitchell and his family had fled, Utes and Navajos sacked his place and stole everything (Nav. Ex. 199). They also plundered stores belonging to two other whites (Nav. Ex. 200). Later military reports were to the effect that the incident at Mitchell's was not significant, the Navajos were no longer around, and the Utes had returned to their area (Nav. Exs. 205, 206). A subsequent report implicated some Palutes in the Mitchell affair, part of a group of about 40 Paiute "renegades" who lived in the vicinity of the Blue Mountains, and head waters of Montezuma Creek and Cottonwood Wash (Nav. Ex. 207). Another official stated the Paiutes were less to blame, but that they join the Navajo "in deviltry" (Nav. Ex. 208). to a number of Navajo headmen to hunt off the reservation (Nav. Ex. 165). In an earlier letter of September 27, 1881 (Nav. Ex. 155), Agent Eastman reported that Navajos living north and west of the reservation had offered to help 40 "penitent" Paiutes in Utah, as they "used to be friends” and had intermarried with their people, but if the Utes returned to their bad life of "thieving and murdering" the Navajos said they would "hang them." A new Agent, Bowman, in December 1884, in response to complaints by settlers from McElmo about the Navajos, stated that the Navajos had a right to go off the reservation to hunt, but were subject to the same laws as the whites. He stated he would attempt to get the Indian police to try to restrain the Indians against making threats of violence (Nav. Exs. 222-24). By February 23, 1885, Agent Bowman reported on his meetings with settlers and Navajos by the San Juan and stated that all but one problem was resolved, a conflict between a settler who had valuable improvements on the land and an Indian who had none and lived there but part time. He also stated that the whites said only Mitchell caused trouble and made complaints. He indicated that the Navajos were not on the public lands there, but 15 families and their flocks were on the Ute Mountain reservation (Nav. Ex. 227). During the period of 1885 through 1888, a few other complaints were made by residents of Bluff and McElmo concerning the Indians off the reservation.9 Complaints from Utah citizens in 1889 and 1890 concerned Indians in the Blue and LaSal mountains which are north of the area in question here. These complaints involved Utes and Paiutes as well as Navajos.10 In November 1885, 21 settlers at Bluff requested that the Navajos be kept south of the San Juan River as they were crossing in great numbers with their stock and crowding off the settlers' stock and eating their grass (Nav. Ex. 239). In 1887, a trader, Amasa M. Barton, was murdered at Rincon eight miles below Bluff on the San Juan River. Indians later came back and robbed the store. Mormons at Bluff requested a small detachment of troops to capture the murderer and robbers (Nav. Ex. 247). In 1888, 19 petitioners from McElmo complained about Navajos being off the reservation and stealing. The Agent in his letter of December 15, 1888, reported that the Navajos crossed the river chiefly to trade. He suggested a trading post south of the river would keep them there (Nav. Ex. 249). Indian Agent Patterson responded that he would send his Navajo police to the area to keep the Navajos on the reservation. He didn't want them to cross the river (Nav. Ex. 251). 10 In the fall of 1889 the Governor of Utah reported that bands of Navajos and Utes were in the Blue Mountains hunting and alarming the citizens (Nav. Ex. 254). The Commissioner asked the Agent to have the chiefs and headmen return the Navajos to the reservation. The Indian Agent at the Southern Ute and Jicarilla Agency indicated the Ute Chiefs denied any trouble (Nav. Ex. 255). The Acting Commissioner of the Indian Office in a letter of November 7, 1889 (Nav. Ex. 257), to the Secretary of the Interior stated that 75 to 100 Navajos were reported off the reservation in Utah and that he recommended that the Secretary of War have the military return them. In a letter of December 11, 1889 (Nav. Ex. 258), he also ordered the Indian Agent to remove Navajos found within the Ute Agency and to avoid troubles with the whites. The military report of the investigation into the Blue Mountains in 1889 (Nav. Ex. 259), stated the cowboys complained that the Indians ran their cattle out of the mountains and made them wild. It also stated that the Navajos and Utes were hostile with one another. The Navajos would kill deer for the June 29, 1973 In 1893 trouble between the nonIndians and Navajos along the San Juan occurred in an incident at River View, Utah, but primarily involved the Indians in New Mexico, including the murder of a non-Indian there (Nav. Exs. 26989). The new Indian Agent Plummer requested permanent military troops at Fruitland, New Mexico, as the Indians were increasingly stealing cattle and sheep outside the reservation. He requested military patrols to arrest Navajos north of the San Juan without passes, and advised that the Navajos' activities off the reservation should be confined to legitimate trading, because they had driven their sheep through others' pastures, killed cattle, and brought liquor back to the reservation (Nav. Ex. 289). In June 1893 he also instructed a "Farmer," employed by the Indian Agency to help the Indians, to try to keep the Indians on the reservation and to have them trade only with traders a hides only while the Utes would use the meat. The report suggested possible danger to nonIndians, as well, if the two groups fought each other. Except for a "renegade" band of Paiutes, the other Indians returned to their reservations. Trouble also occurred between whites and Indians in San Juan County, New Mexico, resulting in a cowboy killing Navajo. To avoid further trouble the Agent reported he would get 25 Navajo families who were off the reservation to return (Nav. Ex. 260). On March 4, 1890 (Nav. Ex. 262), Agent Vandever reported to the Commissioner that he would enforce the Commissioner's order to return the Indians to the reservation except for those individual Indians off the reservation who had settled upon government land with the intention of complying with the land laws. In 1890, petitions by citizens of Grand County and San Juan County. Utah, complained that roving bands of Utes and Paiutes and some Navajos were stealing their stock, on their side of the river (Nav. Ex. 286). In November 1893 Plummer received complaints from settlers at River View, Utah (close to the Colorado border on the San Juan River) that the Navajos were north of the river depleting the range and killing game (Nav. Ex. 296). He ordered the farmer at Fruitland, New Mexico, to go to Utah and arrest any Indians found outside the reservation without passes and impound their stock. He indicated that he had given a few passes to Navajos to hunt in the Ute and Blue Mountains (Id. and Nav. Ex. 298). He also recommended Bluff as the best place for interested lady missionaries to teach the Indians, as it was located across the river from the reservation and was visited by many Indians throughout the year (Nav. Ex. 297). In the spring of 1894 Plummer oversaw the placing of a teacher for the Indians at Bluff (Nav. Exs. 310, 311). produce from their farms, killing game for hides alone, and causing the settlers to be in fear. This was in the area of the Blue and LaSal Mountains (Nav. Ex. 263). Vandever reported that he had sent his police to get the Indians to come in (Nav. Ex. 264). The Indians told them they had been living on claims from 12 to 21 years and intended to remain there. He declared he was powerless to do anything and they remained on their settlements. A rough draft of a reply to Vandever's report stated it was the policy not to force any Indian who had taken up his residence, separate and apart from his tribe to live on a reservation, that any Indian who had "made valuable improvements upon any particular tract and desires to continue in occupation thereof and obtain title thereto should be encouraged to do so and assisted, but that bands of Indians who merely roamed around with their flocks of sheep and goats should be placed on the reservation" (Attach. to Nav. Ex. 264). That year in response to other complaints from citizens of Utah concerning the Navajos, Plummer sent the "Additional Farmer" from Fruitland, New Mexico, to Bluff to tell the Navajos to stay on their side of the river except when trading, and if they were arrested, he could not and would not help them (Nav. Ex. 314). In the 1890's there was agitation by settlers and others in Colorado to remove the Utes from their reservation in southwestern Colorado and to place them in a reservation in San Juan County, Utah. This proposed new Ute reservation would include land within the 1884 Executive Order addition to the Navajo reservation as well as public lands. Plummer in a letter of March 13, 1894, to the Commissioner (Nav. Ex. 309) strongly protested against the proposal. He pointed out it would give the most isolated portion of the Navajo Reservation to the Utes, that the greater part of liquor traffic with the Navajos was carried out from shelter afforded by the present Ute reservation, and that the opportunity for lawlessness of all kinds would be increased by giving them an almost impregnable asylum.11 An Eastern establishment, the Indian Rights Association, published a report in 1892 (State Ex. 11 He stated that in San Juan County, Utah, 8 Utes had "foiled" about 180 white men, soldiers and volunteers. He indicated that the Navajos living in that section of the reservation so far from the agency headquarters and separated by almost impassable rocky country were the least controlled and the area had proved an asylum for outlaws from all parts of the Tribe. To give these 40), also objecting to the proposal following a tour by its committee of the area. The area is described as a "no-man's land," but no Navajo settlements in the area are mentioned. Citizens of San Juan County, Utah, also objected to the proposal and stated that the Utes were acting insolently and threatening the whites to leave. They suggested people were deceiving the Utes into believing they would be given San Juan County, Utah, as a reservation, and large annuities (Nav. Ex. 313). The Ute Indian Agent responded by letter of July 3, 1894 (Nav. Ex. 312), that the Utes went upon the public domain in Utah for forage because of encroachments on their reservation. The Governor of Utah complained to the Secretary of the Interior that 300 to 500 Indians from the Southern Ute Reservation and 200 to 300 Navajos were in combination to oppose the whites in San Juan County, Utah, and requested troops to prevent conflict and bloodshed (Nav. Ex. 317). The Rocky Mountain News reported that landseekers in Colorado were trying to "kick" the Utes into Utah with the encouragement and aid of Ute Agent Day (Nav. Ex. 325). The Durango Democrat and Durango Herald (Nav. Exs. 321, 323) defended the rights of the Indians to graze in the Blue Mountains, in people San Juan County would be a further outlet where whiskey could be obtained. He believed the proposed Ute reservation in San Juan County, Utah, was not in the best interests of the Navajos, the Utes, the Government and settlers adjoining the reservations (Nav. Ex. 309). June 29, 1973 dicating that whites had used the forage on the Ute reservation. Ute Agent Day supported the Utah proposal and reported to the Commissioner that reports were exaggerated, that the Governor of Utah was wrong, and that the cowboys were the hostile element (Nav. Ex. 327, 328). The Governor of Utah, however, complained to the Secretary of the Interior that Agent Day was causing the trouble by telling the Utes to go out on the public land in Utah (Nav. Ex. 320). Agent Day further reported to the Commissioner on December 14, 1894, that there were no people between Bluff and Monticello, only a few cattle companies and a few Utes who had used the winter range (Nav. Ex. 334). He continued his urgings that the Utah area be made the proposed reservation for the Utes as it was held by a few cattle men and renegade whites "worse than Indians," and that only 117 votes were cast in the last election in San Juan County (Nav. Ex. 339). In a military report, dated December 13, 1894, of the situation, Lieutenant Colonel Lawton stated that trouble between the Indians and non-Indians resulted because it was the first time the Indians had come into the Utah area in such large numbers saying they would stay there. He reported that a band of Weeminuchee Utes under Ignacio were returning to the reservation, but a group of about 95 Utes and about 80 Paiutes under Benoow, who had never resided on the Ute Agency, would not move and it would take troops to move them to the reservation and keep them there (Nav. Ex. 341). In December of 1894, new acting Navajo Agent Williams reported to the Commissioner that the Navajos were in an impoverished condition due to droughts, and had undoubtedly killed non-Indians' cattle and sheep north of the San Juan to keep from starving (Nav. Ex. 329). He stated that a number were off the reservation with their flocks of sheep "trespassing on the impoverished ranges of Utah" and he would order them back on the reservation "although it would be like condemning them and the sheep to death." Id. In January 1895 Williams reported to the Commissioner that 400 to 500 Navajos were destitute and were killing sheep and ponies of others on the reservation and he had received complaints from three places outside the reservation of such killings, that all of the trading posts on the San Juan but one were closed and the one, Noland at River View, Utah (see Nav. Ex. 347), had no trade because the Indians had nothing to sell. He requested food and supplies (Nav. Ex. 344). They were issued (Nav. Exs. 346, 348, 349). A claim by Noland for stock allegedly lost to the Navajos was made (Nav. Ex. 350). In May 1896 Ute Agent Day reported to the Commissioner that Ignacio requested troops to remove Navajos from the west end of the Southern Ute reservation; they had promised to go early in the spring |