28-1Indian AffairsOn the Relief for H. Heth. [446] Pottawatomie depredations in 1836.1844-6

House of Representatives Report No. 388, 28th Congress, 1st Session (1844)

English

SHAREOK repository

Rep. No. 38S. Ho. oF REPS. HARiE¥ HETH. fTo accompany bill H. R. No. lSl.] MARCH 29, 1844. from \he Committee on Indian Affairs, made the following REPORT: on lr&dian Affairs, to whom was referred House bill (No. of HartJey Beth, for Indian depredations, with accom-relation to the claim of said Heth, submit the follow-from the evidence in this case, that in the year 1836 a band of diaos encamped near Logansrort, in the State of Indiana, ere, destroyed about twenty-one acres of corn, which respecta-testify was worth at least $400. This case was submitted -Uililuio~ner of Indian Affairs, who, on the lOth of August, 1843, be just and reasonable in amount, and accordingly directed the td out oC the annuities due said Indians; but on the 14th of reconsidered his decision, and decided the case did not he provisions of the law passed in 1834, regulating the inter-dtan , because the depredations were committed within the •diailla, and whilst the Indians rflsided there upon lands to which been extinguished. But, from n careful examination concluded with these Indians, 11th of Febrnary, 1837, it ap-ndians then ceded to the United States all their reservations ~~·u~N by them under the treaties of October 26 and 27 in the d stipulated to remove to the southwest of the Missouri river ars after the ratification of the treaty of the 11th of February, the .field of corn was destroyed, the Indians were residing on d, the title to which they had never parted with till the e lhh of February, 1837, and then reserving the right of pos-two years after the ratification of the treaty. state of the case, the Indians actually left their own lands, en-lpgansport, and wantonly destroyed the property of Mr. Heth. had resided within the State of Indiana, not upon lands of their case would not come within the provisions of the intercourse , but as they resided on their own lands, the title to which they with till February, 1837, the committee cannot see any this case does not come within the provisions of the law · unquestionably left their own lands, although within State of Indiana, and destroyed the property of Mr. Heth; 2 Rep. No. 388. yet, the very fact of the Indians leaving their own land, and committing the trespass upon the property of Mr. Heth: clearly, in the opinion of the committee, brings this case within the intercourse law. The evidence is full and complete that the Indians did destroy the field of corn ; and the papers also show that Mr. Heth has made oath that he has neither himself, his rep-resentative, attorney, nor agent, has violated the provisions of the intercourse law of 1834, by f.eeking or attempting to obtain private satisfaction for said claim, &c. The committee, therefore, report back the bill for the relief of Harvey Heth, without amendment, and recommend its passage. 

Harvey Heth

https://shareok.org/bitstream/11244/36357/1/House-28-1-Report-388-Serial-446.pdf

Harvey Heth

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

SHAREOK repository