The Ratified Treaty of the Willamette Valley, and its Connection to the Members of the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon

Transcription

1 The Ratified Treaty of the Willamette Valley, and its Connection to the Members of the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon Presented for Tribal Council Legislative Action Committee Meeting April 30 th, 2014 Prior to 1999, A Treaty was Legal as a Record of Grand Ronde Members This presentation describes the applicable laws and precedents governing the decision of whether or not the Willamette Valley Treaty may be considered a record of Grand Ronde members prepared by the Department of the Interior prior to the effective date of the Grand Ronde Constitution (original version from 1984). This is a requirement for membership set forth by the Grand Ronde Constitution, ratified in 1984 after the Grand Ronde Restoration Act was passed by Congress in The treaty is a record based on applicable law, evidence, testimony, and historical records of the United States Department of the Interior (DOI), then the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and finally Grand Ronde.

2 Disenrollment of Descendants of Chief Tumulth, Treaty Signer Through potential disenrollment, a large number of tribal members are facing termination once again. Their blood quantum and lineage are not in question, instead the valid decision of past committees and tribal councils are being deemed illegal after decades of precedent being set. Due to misinterpretation of the complex nature of how the treaty is connected to Grand Ronde, the valid enrollment decades ago of descendants at Grand Ronde, has now come into question. This presentation is based on an extensive paper written to help Tribal Council understand how the connection is made. The paper along with this complementary presentation are presented to Tribal Council as new evidence not covered in the family s hearings. Basic Concepts Must be Understood The established precedent set forth by Grand Ronde tribal elders is cast aside and dismissed as an error. The current notion that the signatories of the seven treaties of Grand Ronde are not entitled to citizenship for their descendants prior to 1999 has been fully contrived. This is due to a lack of understanding for what a record is under federal law, and how to apply it under the current situation at Grand Ronde. We must delve into the specific documents of Grand Ronde history in order to make an educated decision for the question at hand.

3 What is a Treaty? A treaty is an agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely between sovereign states, or nations. Legally Binding Treaties can be compared to contracts because both are means of willing parties assuming obligations among themselves. A party to either failing to live up to their obligations can be held liable under the law. How does NARA Define a Record? (National Archive and Records Administration) Records are defined in various statutes, including the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act. The definition that follows is from the Federal Records Act that governs agencies' records management responsibilities. Records include all books, papers, maps, photographs, machinereadable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Government [emphasis added] under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the informational value of the data in them (44 U.S.C. 3301). (From NARA s Website, recommended by Enrollment Dept.) mgmt/faqs/federal.html#record

4 All the specific criteria of a record are met by the Treaty with the Kalapuya (also known as the Confederated Tribes of the Willamette Valley Treaty) It was received by an agency of the United States Government under Federal Law in connection with the transaction of public business, and has been preserved by that agency as evidence of activities of the Government. Agency = BIA. The Federal Laws = the 1850 congressional acts authorizing the US Government to enter into treaties with Indians in the Oregon Territory, the 1855 Willamette Valley Treaty, the 1857 executive order, and the 1983 Grand Ronde Restoration Act. The connection with a transaction of public business is obvious; in that gaining majority control of the Oregon Territory from Indians was certainly public business of the United States. The preservation of the treaty by the agency as evidence of activities of the Government is also obvious; in that the treaties have been reestablished as the supreme law of the land under the Grand Ronde Restoration Act of Treaties are preserved living documents which dictate activities of the Government to this day. They have been determined worthy of preservation by both the US and the Grand Ronde governments. The treaty is a record of Grand Ronde members listing Indian people by name and tribal affiliation The question of whether it is a record of Grand Ronde members is then answered through evidence of what interpretation has been applied in the past, as well as the fact that Treaty lists the leaders of the tribes and bands that now make up the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. To further clarify, the annuity payments required by the Willamette Valley treaty were made to the Grand Ronde Reservation. Who was eligible for membership, and so entitled to the negotiated terms of the treaty, was based entirely on affiliation with a treaty tribe either by blood or by adoption. The connection between the existence of Grand Ronde and the treaty affiliation is in all available records of the BIA and of Grand Ronde, and brings the signatories of the treaties forward as recorded members automatically and without question.

5 What are Indian treaty rights? According to the BIA: (next slide included) ANSWER: From 1886 to 1871, the Unites States relations with individual American Indian nations indigenous to what is now the U.S. were defined and conducted largely through the treaty making process. These contracts among nations recognized and established unique sets of rights, benefits, and conditions for the treaty making tribes who agreed to cede millions of acres of their homelands to the United States and accept its protection. Like other treaty obligations of the United States, Indian treaties are considered to be the supreme law of the land, and they are the foundation upon which federal Indian law and the federal Indian trust relationship is based. What is the Federal Indian Trust Responsibility? ANSWER: The federal Indian trust responsibility is a legal obligation [emphasis added] under which the United States has charged itself with moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust toward Indian tribes (Seminole Nation v. Unites States, 1942). This obligation was first discussed by Chief Justice John Marshall in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831). Over the years, the trust doctrine has been at the center of numerous other Supreme Court cases, thus making it one of the most important principles in federal Indian law [emphasis added]. The federal Indian trust responsibility is also a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation on the part of the Unites States to protect tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources, as well as a duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages [emphasis added]. In several cases discussing the trust responsibility, the Supreme Court has used language suggesting that it entails legal duties, moral obligations, and the fulfillment of the understandings and expectations that have arisen over the entire course of the relationship between the United States and the federally recognized tribes [emphasis added].

6 How can we apply this today? The confederations of tribes that make up the Grand Ronde are all equally entitled to membership, recognition, and to the obligations of the US Government. It is especially important to note that the answer above says that the duties and obligations to fulfill the expectations of the treaties have arisen over the entire course of the relationship between the two sovereign nations. This tell us that the responsibilities established by the treaties have existed since the very beginning. Specifically in the case of Grand Ronde, the treaty and the executive order are part of that same entire course of the relationship under which the responsibilities of each party exist. What is the risk of violating Treaty Rights? Treaties are not necessarily permanently binding upon the signatory parties. If a state party's withdrawal is successful, its obligations under that treaty are considered terminated, and withdrawal by one party from a bilateral treaty of course terminates the treaty. If a party has materially violated or breached its treaty obligations, the other parties may invoke this breach as grounds for temporarily suspending their obligations to that party under the treaty. A material breach may also be invoked as grounds for permanently terminating the treaty itself. This also undermines the credibility of our Tribal Leaders and the position of the Tribe as a leader in Indian Country. Scrutiny and involvement of the BIA in sovereign matters is a possibility through breach of treaty obligations, and lack of due process.

7 Treaties of Grand Ronde From the Thirty First Congress of the Unites States, Chapter XIV, signed June 5 th, 1850 the US government authorized the president to proceed with entering into treaties with several Indian Tribes in the Territory of Oregon, for the extinguishment of their claims to lands lying west of the Cascade Mountains. Joel Palmer, as the Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the Oregon Territory, entered into negotiations with the Chiefs and Headmen of those tribes and bands. The Chiefs and Headmen were the heads of state, officially representing and signing on behalf of the entire tribe or band. The resulting Treaties ceded ancestral homelands in Oregon and Washington to the Unites States. the Treaty of September 19 th, 1853 by the Cow Creek band of Umpqua Indians the Treaty of September 10 th, 1853, by the Rogue River Tribe the Treaty of November 15 th, 1854, by the Rogue River Tribe the Treaty of November 18 th, 1854, by the Chasta, Scoton, and Grave Greek band of Umpquas the Treaty of November 29 th, 1854, by the Umpqua and Calapooia bands the Treaty of January 22, 1855, by the Kalapuya, Etc (also known as The Willamette Valley Treaty and the Dayton Treaty); the Treaty of December 21 st, 1855, by the Molala Tribe.

8 The Creation of the Grand Ronde Reservation As required by the January 20 th, 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc., the Grand Ronde Reserve was created by executive order on June 30, The executive order was signed by President James Buchanan. The continuation of the promises made in the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty, where the Chiefs and Headmen are listed on the treaties by name and by tribe or band. The peoples associated with the treaty were provided a permanent homeland to replace what had been given up to the United States government. The treaties are records of Grand Ronde people. The Treaty is an Official DOI Document listing Indians of Grand Ronde By the very nature of a treaty being similar to a legal contract, it must have signatories from both parties. The obligations of the Indians are clearly separate from the obligations of the US government and are not omnipresent for all signatories. This well established fact is apparent from the wording itself The Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc. Many Native American people were illiterate and could only provide their signature by marking an X on a given document. Until much later, it was always the government officials who wrote down the names of the people on the rolls and records. Every Grand Ronde census roll and tribal roll assembled by the BIA has a US government official who signs the document in order to make it official, just like the treaties. In no way has their presence on the rolls and records documents ever entitled them to membership, in the same way that the treaties do not entitle the counter signatory from the US government to membership with Grand Ronde.

9 One cannot dismiss the connection of the treaty signatories to Grand Ronde simply because the treaty is not a pure document containing only Grand Ronde members. The January 22 nd, 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya, Etc: Also known as the Willamette Valley Treaty. It was signed by many chiefs and headmen ceding a vast area of land to the United States. By agreeing to and signing the treaty, Chief Tumulth ceded lands extending between Cascade Locks in the Columbia Gorge through the modern day Sandy River, extending through the Portland International Airport and most of Southeast Portland. It includes notable landmarks such as Multnomah Falls, and Blue Lake Park. This area is very important territory to the Grand Ronde Tribe which has continually asserted and defended territorial claims of status and influence in the area. The justification is based on the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty, and the descendants of Tumulth being part of the Tribe today.

10 Key Concepts from The Treaty First, the language of the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty specifically refers to the people having become party to it as [t]he above confederated bands of Indians. This means the group of Indians that would were confederated by the act of signing the treaty together. This important fact shows that the confederation was established from the very beginning and is more evidence that the treaties are originating documents of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde establishing membership from that point forward. Key Concepts from The Treaty Second, the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty provides specifically for the people to remain within their ceded lands until a suitable district of country shall be designated for their permanent home. The people that signed the various treaties associated with Grand Ronde were not disavowed of their rights and connections to Grand Ronde simply because there was a lapse between when the treaties were signed and the Reservation was created. The fact that the treaties have tied all of the peoples and descendants of the signatories to Grand Ronde has always been understood to take precedence. All available historical records from the US and Grand Ronde government support this fact. As of yet, there has been no evidence produced by the Tribe s Enrollment Department, the Tribal Council, or the Legal Department to counter it. Nothing can be shown to prove that treaty may not be considered a record of Grand Ronde members.

11 Key Concepts from The Treaty It is extremely important to observe the practices and interpretations of both the BIA and of the Enrollment Departments and Tribal Councils of Grand Ronde. Prior to 1936, it was the BIA s responsibility to collect and retain documentation on the membership of Grand Ronde. Later it became a more sovereign and sacred responsibility of the Grand Ronde Tribe itself. The documentation and practices of the Tribe have always been guided by past practices of the BIA. If one examines only the most readily available historical documentation of Grand Ronde, it is very clear that the connection with any of the treaty tribes by association alone has been legal and sufficient to qualify people for membership prior to Tumulth s Story Chief Tumulth was wrongfully executed at the Hands of the US Army, preventing him from being removed to the Grand Ronde Reservation. Approximately one year after the signing of the 1855 Dayton Treaty (March 1856), Chief Tumulth was captured and unjustly accused by Lt. Philip H. Sheridan of participating the 1856 Indian attack at Fort Cascades. Shortly thereafter he was tried under military commission and executed (hung) by Col. George C. Wright. As a result of this injustice, Chief Tumulth could not be relocated to the new permanent homeland promised in the January 1855 Dayton treaty (i.e. the Grand Ronde reservation). The fact that he had been executed and never made it to Grand Ronde was well known at the time of the enrollment of the first Tumulth descendants after Grand Ronde Restoration. Subsequent enrollments used the same justification as long as those people were all tied back to the treaty signatory as an ancestor on a record of Grand Ronde members. The Reservation was created to fulfill the promise made to him for his people, and for the rest of people making up the newly formed confederation established under the Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc.

12 Tumulth s People Within days of Chief Tumulth s death (April 1856), some of Chief Tumulth s Cascade people were escorted to the Grand Ronde encampment by the DOI Superintendent Joel Palmer (see Palmer diary reference). Palmers removal of these natives to the Grand Ronde encampment in early 1856 represented the US government s legal obligation under the January 1855 treaty that the signatories be removed to their permanent home (the Grand Ronde reservation). This also represented the intent of the US DOI to assign Chief Tumulth s band to the future Grand Ronde Reservation, approximately one year before the 1857 Executive Order Establishing the Grand Ronde Reservation. The Executive Order Establishing the Grand Ronde Reservation On June 30 th, 1857 at the request of the secretary of the US Department of the Interior (Jacob Thompson), James Buchanan signed the executive order establishing the Grand Ronde Reserve. This was over two years after the ratification of the January 20 th, 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc. Boxberger acknowledges for Tribal Council: Although other treaty tribes were placed on the Grand Ronde Reservation the Executive Order is specific as to which groups the reservation was meant, particularly for the Willamette tribes, parties to the treaty of January (Sourcebook he prepared for Tribal Council titled The Heirs of Succession to the Willamette Valley Treaty. )

13 The Executive Order Establishing the Grand Ronde Reservation The executive orders establishes the Grand Ronde Reservation be withdrawn from sale and entry, and established as an Indian reservation for the colonization of Indian tribes in Oregon, and particularly for the Willamette tribes, parties to the treaty of January, 1855 [emphasis added]. Due to this fact, the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty is and always has been considered an applicable record of Grand Ronde members. The 1855 executive order is a record, and is formalized by concurrence and signature of US President. The Executive Order Establishing the Grand Ronde Reservation The specific mention of the Dayton treaty in the body of the executive order, and not of any others is noteworthy by employed scholars and experts of the Tribe. The legal connection between the treaty and the executive order that created the Grand Ronde Reservation is critical when considering the question of lineal descent from the ancestors who signed these treaties, especially prior to 1999 when this was allowed by the Grand Ronde Constitution. By specifically calling out the Willamette Valley treaty (Kalapuya Etc. Treaty) on the executive order creating the reservation, the legal connection is unequivocal.

14 The 1857 Executive Order, like the January 1855 Kalapuya Etc. Treaty, is also a record of the Grand Ronde members prepared by the US Department of the Interior. The Executive Order is both a US Department of the Interior record of the Grand Ronde members as well as a record that simultaneously established the Grand Ronde reservation site (i.e. Townships 5 and 6 south, of range 8 west, and parts of townships 5 and 6 south, of range 7 west ) for the members. Even though no names validly appear, it is still a record of Grand Ronde members by referencing the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty which does list members. The legal connection to carry a multitude of tribes and bands into a confederation under the treaty, then onto the executive order fulfilling the obligations to the treaty peoples (especially the signatories) is clear. Kalapuya Etc. Treaty and the Executive Order Establishing the Grand Ronde Reservation Taken together, the 1857 Presidential Executive Order, in view of its linkage to the January 1855 Dayton Treaty, is also legally seamless with the earlier January 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc., and as a result both the 1855 and 1857 records are considered to be one legal entity. This clearly establishes the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty, joined to the 1857 Presidential Executive Order, as one collective US Department of the Interior record of the Grand Ronde members, which includes Chief Tumulth and his descendants.

15 Grand Ronde Cannot have it Both Ways It is not possible to selectively combine the January 1855 Dayton Treaty and the 1857 Executive Order (records) for claiming rights to ceded lands, and at the same time view the January 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc. as a stand alone record without the 1857 Executive Order to justify disenrolling descendants from a treaty signer. Arbitrary and Capricious The BIA and subsequently Grand Ronde have both acknowledged in many official documents that the treaty connects specific people to Grand Ronde as eligible members. Therefore the Grand Ronde Enrollment Department s and Legal Department s aforementioned rational for disenrolling the Tumulth descendants is unprecedented and meritless, perfectly fitting the definition of arbitrary and capricious.

16 Historical Records Governing Membership from Allotments and Treaty Payments: The treaties are the original records of Grand Ronde membership prepared by the US Department of the Interior, and were also the original founding documents determining the subsequent rolls and census records of Grand Ronde from that time forward. Collectively, the treaties of Grand Ronde are a record of which tribes belong at the Grand Ronde Indian Reservation. To claim that any of the rolls of records of Grand Ronde members may exist without the connection to a Grand Ronde treaty is not credible and has no basis in historical fact, or even simple logic. The treaty is the standard for the definition of record of Grand Ronde members, prior to The work of Oliver C. Applegate The so called Applegate Reports provide many examples of how the treaties have been used as records of Grand Ronde members by the BIA. Today Daniel Boxberger and other scholars of Grand Ronde repeatedly use these DOI documents as official evidence of Grand Ronde history. The BIA needed to quantify the numbers of Indians associated with Grand Ronde. This was in preparation for issuing the payments from trust requirements set forth in the treaties, more specifically regarding land being taken from Grand Ronde and sold as surplus. It was in the interest of the BIA to have an accurate head count of who would be paid. The records clearly show that the treaties were what the BIA used to establish who did and did not belong.

17 DOI Letter from the Commissioner to Applegate The letter the Acting Commissioner of the Department of Interior dated April 1, 1905, describes Mr. Applegate s objectives pursuant to the Act of Congress Approved April 28 th, 1904 (33 Stats., 569) amending and ratifying the agreement of June 27 th, 1901 with the Indians belonging to the Grand Ronde Reservation in Oregon. The charge by the commissioner was that some Indians claimed there were people at Grand Ronde who had been allotted land, but who did not have a right to it because they were not members by blood or adoption of any of the Tribes whose right to the reservation is secured by treaty [emphasis added], and that the fact that some of them had been allotted land does not confer upon them the right to share in the proceeds of the sale of the unallotted portion of the reservation. DOI Considers Treaty a Record of Grand Ronde Members The Commissioner clearly ties membership to connection with the treaty by blood or adoption, using the work member. Many years after the reservation was established, the treaties were still being used to determine lineage and membership, taking precedence over the rolls as records of Grand Ronde members. The roll they are discussing is acknowledged to have potential inaccuracies, and the deciding factor in correcting the inaccuracy was the connection with any one of the Grand Ronde Treaties.

18 Applegate: Eligibility for membership historically tied to the treaties that created the Grand Ronde Tribe. Throughout the many pages of interviews and testimony, Grand Ronde ancestors repeatedly referred to how people belonged there due to their relation or descent from a treaty signer, or their affiliation by blood or adoption with a treaty tribe. On the first page of testimony Peter Cheekee talks about how his ancestors signed the Treaty with the Kalpuya Etc. and that his band, the Wapato Lake or Chehalem band, had ceded lands that extended to the Columbia River but not east of the Willamette. On the second page of Peter Cheekee s testimony the question What Indians were east of the Willamette River? He answers why the Clackamas and the Tum Water Indians and some other Indians along the Columbia River, between the mouth of the Willamette and the Cascade Falls. David Leno on page 23 talks about treaty tribes and how William Baker Batemen did not belong to any of them implying he did not belong because of he was not from any Treaty tribe. Throughout the testimonials treaty affiliation comes up 30 or more times to qualify whether or not a person has legal ties to Grand Ronde. Applegate: Treaty Blood and Adoption People have been included on the rolls and records of Grand Ronde members by virtue of their connection with treaty blood. As stated by the Commissioner of the Department of Interior, simply being from a treaty tribe was enough to qualify a person for valid membership. If not of treaty blood as long as a person was adopted by the people, and the Chief (or Chiefs) recommended they be enrolled, the agent would oblige and enroll them no matter where they were from or their lineage. Specific cases are cited in the paper.

19 Applegate: Half breeds This is noted here to demonstrate the blood quantum was likely considered full, even though people came to Grand Ronde as half breeds. The practice of martialing blood had always been allowed, even up until the point of the Grand Ronde constitution being amended in People from non treaty tribes were married into the Tribe and their Indian blood quantity assumed as all coming from Grand Ronde, and as such became Treaty blood. The indication is that the treaty had overarching determination on what affiliation a person had under many different circumstances. The inherent right of enrollment based on treaty connection extending to all bands should not be confused with the notion that one or more bands can be removed from the confederation. Applegate: Half breeds Testimony of Henry Wallace (page 19) regarding half breeds cited James Winslow and David Leno as being such. David Leno s father was a Spaniard according to multiple testimonies recorded by Mr. Applegate, including that of David Leno himself (page 21). The testimony also describes how Susan LaChance and her people were mixed French people who were never adopted (page 20). As described by testimony of James Winslow, Louis LaChance was the father of Susan LaChance and that Louis was a white man, and her mother a Wasco. They had followed Telma, the daughter who married David Leno. On page 58 under the testimony of David Leno he describes Mary Langley s father was a white man, a French Canadian, and her mother who is still living, Susan LaChance, is a half breed. She claims, as I understand it, that her father was an American and her mother an Indian woman from the Warm Springs Agency, of the Wasco tribe, I think. My wife Telma is also a daughter of Susan LaChance. Mary Langley was next to the oldest of Mrs. LaChance s daughters. This is a prime example of how intermingled the various Tribes are at Grand Ronde. Many Grand Ronde people carry blood quantum that is not from the Grand Ronde Treaty Tribes, nevertheless these families are given status of their full blood quantum as if it did, because they became affiliated with the treaty tribes.

20 DOI/BIA Control of Membership In the testimony of John Wacheno on page 37 there is discussion regarding how John opposed Sam Chantelle receiving an allotment but the allotting agent Col Collins said he could allot land to whom he pleased and threatened to put John in jail if he interfered. This is important, demonstrating how the Indian Agent and the DOI (BIA) had authority over the Grand Ronde council and the enrollment of Grand Ronde members. Once Grand Ronde assumed authority over determining membership, the Tribe adopted the previous documents and established notions for membership requirements from the BIA and took over their administration. The governing documents of Grand Ronde after Restoration also acknowledge this. The Grand Ronde Constitution from the 1980s includes acceptance of rolls and records of Grand Ronde members created by the BIA before the constitution existed. Applegate: Migration for Salmon It is known that other bands such as the Cascades held the same practices and were known to return to the river and then back to the Oregon City area while the temporary reservation was there, and then later back and forth to Grand Ronde after major settlement had taken place there. On pages 53 and 54 under the testimony of Edward Franklin (or Tebeau) he describes how he and his family would go back and forth to the Columbia to fish for salmon. This is also confirmed later by Henry Wallace (page 57) who goes on to say [t]hey came in when all from our part of the country came in. There were five bands. The Wakansisee and the Cascade bands of Columbia Indians, the Clackamas and Oregon City band and the Klamaths. The Cascade band of Columbia Indians is another name for Wathlala whose first Chief was Tahona Tumulth.

21 Applegate: Spelling of Names On the first page of testimonies, Peter Cheekee describes how his name has been altered by the white people due to issues with pronunciation. They just wrote it down how they could pronounce it, so it became Cheekee from Chefean. This is a common occurrence in historical records. Well known Chiefs such as Chief Joseph Sangretta and Chief Tumulth had numerous spellings of their names. Names are spelled differently depending on who wrote them down, and which source the reference is from. This issue is important when considering that rolls and records will inevitably show variations in spelling for the same person or family as the records are reviewed. Applegate: Summary Descendancy from a person who signed the Treaties creating the Grand Ronde Tribe has always been a hallmark in determining which people belong. The concept of adoption was centered on becoming affiliated with a Treaty Tribe. There are many different Indian Tribes mixed in with Grand Ronde lineages, which occurred throughout the history of the Tribe. Those who married into the Tribe became the Tribe. Even non Indian people were counted as being Indian as long as they were accepted in some official capacity and adopted. The records throughout history show the same people with many different spellings of their names. Multiple historical accounts also place the Cascades as having been present on the Grand Ronde reservation.

22 Tumulth Descendants have Clear Standing Based on the Documentation Provided The descendants of Chief Tumulth have provided a great deal of evidence, along with oral history showing that their ancestor Chief Tumulth signed the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty. Tumulth s first wife Susan Tumulth (Tomolcha), mother of Mary Will wy ity was listed on the 1872 census roll of Grand Ronde. The requirements for both rolls and records have been met under the Grand Ronde Constitution prior to Daniel Boxberger In his sourcebook prepared for Tribal Council, Boxberger writes: By 1860, when the first complete census was made at Grand Ronde, members of all of the signatory tribes were present, except for [the Cascades]. It could be that the [Cascade] members were listed as Clowewalla since both were designated as Tumwater. Testimony in the 1905 Applegate Report indicates that the Columbia River tribes came to Grand Ronde, [Cascades] must have been among them." LOGIC In fact Susan Tomolcha, widow of Chief Tomolch, appears on the 1872 Grand Ronde census roll listed with the Appersons. This is consistent with Boxberger s finding that the Cascades must have been at Grand Ronde dispersed among other closely related bands of Indians. He knows this from the preponderance of the evidence, Applegate, Palmer, Etc.

23 Termination of Federally Recognized Status for Grand Ronde The Western Oregon Indian Termination Act, or Public Law 588, was passed in August The act called for: termination of federal supervision over the trust and restricted property of numerous Native American bands and small tribes, all located west of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon. the disposition of federally owned property purchased for the administration of Indian affairs, and for the termination of federal services received by Indians under federal recognition. The Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde were one of the 60 western Oregon Tribes to lose their status as a federally recognized tribe. Restoration of the Federally Recognized Status for Grand Ronde: Efforts to restore Grand Ronde s federally recognized status began in the 1970s. On November 22, 1983, with the signing of Public Law , the Grand Ronde Restoration Act, the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde became a federally recognized tribe once again. The people never stopped being a distinct confederation of Indians, and their perseverance lead to recognition and status once again.

24 The Grand Ronde Restoration Act The clause of consideration of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community as one tribe is important because it establishes that under the federal law allowing for the restoration of federal recognition, the Tribe is to be considered a single tribal unit. With the restoration of federal recognition, rights, and privileges section, federal acts from the 1930s are reinstated and made once again to apply to Grand Ronde. Most importantly: under restoration of rights and privileges, all rights and privileges of the tribe and the members of the tribe under any Federal treaty, Executive order, agreement, or statute, or under any other Federal authority, which may have been diminished or lost under the Act approved August 13, 1954 (25 U.S.C. 691 et seq. Western Oregon Indian Termination Act) are restored [emphasis added]. Treaty Restoration Through the Grand Ronde Restoration Act, the treaties and the executive order became legally binding once again, and remain the supreme law of the land to this day. The restoration of the treaties is what allows the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde to exist as a sovereign nation under International and United States law. Through the simultaneous restoration of both the January 1855 Dayton Treaty and the 1857 Executive Order, the 1983 restoration itself reconfirmed the right of the Chief Tumulth descendants to be Grand Ronde members. This was entirely consistent with historical precedent.

25 Restoration Act, Constitutionality Since the Grand Ronde Restoration Act is based on the restoration of the rights guaranteed by the treaties, one cannot claim that previous documents and standards of membership cannot be used today, or at a minimum prior to 1999 when the constitution allowed for the use of treaty connections to establish lineal descent. Grand Ronde Law The connection of the descendants of treaty signers to Grand Ronde membership has never been countered in any law or official position of Grand Ronde. Even after 1999 there are no known provisions in tribal law stating a treaty is not a record of members or that it may not have been used in the past.

26 Constitutionality Prior to 1999 the descendants of Chief Tumulth were enrolled based on the Grand Ronde Constitution ratified November 30 th, It stated that descent from a member of the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon shall include lineal descent from any person who was named on any roll or record of Grand Ronde members prepared by the Department of the Interior prior to the effective date of this Constitution. [emphasis added] Constitution Requires Ordinances The constitution requires that for [a]ll final decisions of the Tribal Council on matters of general and permanent interest to the members of the Tribe shall be embodied in ordinances. The ordinances are required to govern these matters of interest to the members, one of which is the enrollment ordinance. The constitution grants authority to the enrollment ordinance. The language of the enrollment ordinance prior to 1999 specifically grants the enrollment committee and the enrollment department the right to determine the forms of documentation deemed adequate for qualification of membership.

27 1986 Enrollment Decision for the Williams Family Members In the meeting minutes titled RESULTS OF ENROLLMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Held January 10, 1986 at 2 p.m. the following is transcribed: The Enrollment Committee and the Enrollment staff examined the enrollment applications for Ida (Williams) Altringer, Arthur Williams and Charles Williams. The Williams family were not previously enrolled at Grand Ronde, nor were their ancestors. The documentation that was submitted by the Williams family proved that they would have been eligible for enrollment prior to termination. This documentation included: a copy of the Treaty made with the Kalapuya s in 1855 that the Williams ancestor signed; 1986 Enrollment Decision for the Williams Family Members This assertion of the treaty connection by those who had authority to make the decision in the past, clearly shows how Tribal officials believed at the time of enrollment, that the treaty is a record of the Tribe s members. If member files need to be corrected to include all of the information that was used to justify enrollment of the Williams family into those of their relatives who have the same lineal descent, then it should be done and no further consideration to the matter should be needed.

28 Without Precedent Nothing within the written law of the Grand Ronde Constitution, or tribal ordinances excludes the use of a treaty as a record of Grand Ronde members. Constitution not provide guidance for the allowable documentation of the various ways people were previously granted enrollment. Constitution makes no distinct inclusionary or exclusionary list of what can be used as a roll or record of Grand Ronde members. No provisions are made anywhere for going back and cancelling the decisions of the past. Constitution directs us to seek guidance from the enrollment ordinance which places that authority with the enrollment department whose recommendations were to be confirmed or denied by Tribal Council. Past Decisions Were Legal The Kalapuya Etc. treaty can and has historically been determined to be record of Grand Ronde members by previous enrollment committees and Tribal Councils. This was especially due to its origins of creating the tribe and having been derived from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is an agency of the Department of the Interior listing the Chiefs and Headmen by tribe and band. The fact that the treaty connection is acknowledged in the official documentation from the enrollment committee in 1986 proves that there was not an error in enrolling the descendants of Chief Tumulth and that it was entirely constitutional. The requirements in the constitution at the time were met.

29 Disenrollment Hurts Grand Ronde In exchange the signatory chiefs, their corresponding tribal/band members, and their descendants were to be provided present and future consideration. This included removal to a permanent reservation with land allotments and other compensations. The Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc., during the 159 years of its existence, has been a permanent Grand Ronde centerpiece. It has been utilized for establishing Grand Ronde ( ) and then in 1983, restoring the Grand Ronde Tribe. Because the Grand Ronde associated treaties and their ancillary documents have always been the overreaching legal basis for the general existence of Grand Ronde, it is both hypocritical and disingenuous for the Grand Ronde government officials to selectively use these important historical records for one purpose, but not for purposes relating to rightful membership in the present day tribe. Reinterpretation by Current Enrollment Department The current claim is that the enrollment of the descendants of Chief Tumulth was unconstitutional based on a new interpretation for the meaning of rolls or records of Grand Ronde members. The treaties have been excluded from the list retroactively, ignoring the Tribe s documented history of inclusion. The CTGR Enrollment Department and the Legal Department contend that somehow, because the Grand Ronde Reservation was created in 1857, that this precludes the signatory parties of the January 1855 Treaty with the Kalapuya Etc. from rightfully claiming membership in the present day tribe. By claiming a treaty was not a record of Grand Ronde members, the Grand Ronde tribal government is attempting to discredit previous findings of the Tribe s Enrollment Department and of Tribal Council, and that the tribal government of the past made multiple mistakes enrolling them time and time again. In all known cases until 1999, the votes have been unanimous to include the descendants of Chief Tumulth.

30 Misinterpretation by Current Enrollment Department At the time of signing in 1855, there was no identified location for the reservation. According to this current interpretation; the lineal connection from the signatory of a Treaty is not valid unless those people were on a roll of Grand Ronde created after the reservation was established. This requirement is not established anywhere in Grand Ronde law. This incorrect interpretation ignores the other available avenue for lineal descent provided by the words or record of Grand Ronde members. It also ignores the fact that Grand Ronde would not exist if not for the existence of the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty and the confederation of Willamette Valley Tribes it created. Those who have leveled charges against the descendants of Chief Tumulth are not just accusing them of not belonging, they are accusing the past members of the enrollment committees and tribal councils who made the decisions to enroll them of violating the Tribe s Constitution decades after the actions took place. The people who made the decisions to enroll the descendants of Chief Tumulth were intimately involved in the restoration of Grand Ronde. They knew how the constitution should be interpreted. Misinterpretation by Current Enrollment Department One cannot argue that Grand Ronde members did not exist until the executive order that created the reservation was adopted without acknowledging the rewriting of history. All available evidence is contrary to this assertion. Rolls and records did not start the moment the Grand Ronde Reservation was created. There were documents and records of members established prior to that, by the treaties among others. A treaty is not a roll, because it is not a comprehensive list of all people associated with Grand Ronde. A treaty is a record of Grand Ronde members established from the legal connection to the creation of the reservation and its continual use throughout history.

31 Just Interpretation The reversal of past interpretation is not based on evidence or existing law. Connection with the signatory of the Grand Ronde treaties has always been considered a valid connection for the descendants to be recognized as members. Treaties have always been the overarching legal basis for the existence of the Grand Ronde, and the connections of its people there. The treaties are the standard established by the BIA for rolls and records of Grand Ronde members. There is also a very strong example of the word member being used by the DOI Commissioner when describing people associated with the treaties and their rights to inclusion as members based on the treaty connection. (Official DOI correspondence to Oliver Applegate) The modern tribe after Restoration has acknowledged and heavily relied upon the treaty connection to assert itself into official dealings with state and federal governments regarding influence over Grand Ronde ceded lands in the Columbia Gorge. General and Permanent Interest The disenrollment of the descendants of Chief Tumulth as valid people of Grand Ronde is not possible without disbanding the confederation formed by the ratification of the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty. The withdrawal or forced exclusion of one or more bands of Indians from the original confederation is not possible because remaining parties of the treaties would have to renegotiate the terms. By attempting to lay claim to the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty as whole for the benefit of the General Council of Grand Ronde, while disclaiming the direct descendants of one of its signatories could have far reaching ramifications for the Tribe and its legal ability to claim the Treaty and influence within its ceded lands. Certainly disowning an entire band of Indians from the list of over 27 Tribes and Bands which comprise the CTGR qualifies as a final decisions of the Tribal Council on matters of general and permanent interest to the members of the Tribe. Any change in how the Tribe establishes its record of connection will have consequences that extend far past that of enrollment and could potentially impact the Tribe s legitimacy and claims.

32 Public and Inter governmental Relations The Cascade Indians, Chief Tumulth and the Treaty connection have openly and publicly been cited as the justification for Grand Ronde presence and influence in the Columbia Gorge. It is not ethical or allowable for Grand Ronde as a tribe to claim access to the treaty rights established by a specific people, and then deny those people membership even though their lineage is not in question. Disenrollment, in this case, could severely harm the Tribe s connections and interests within its ceded lands by establishing a lack of connection from the Kalapuya Etc. Treaty to the Grand Ronde Tribe during an internal legal hearing. It is unconstitutional and unjust to try to reverse the decisions of our elders, many of whom have walked on. The reversal of interpretation seems to have been contrived in a way that severely impacts a limited number of Tribal Members, and could have deleterious effects to the Tribe s claim to the Treaties and the ceded lands. The message to other tribes governments in the region is that Grand Ronde cares for the treaties only when it is convenient to asserting some claim over territory, but not when it comes down to the people tied to those treaties. As such Grand Ronde can no longer credibly assert influence and demand consultation regarding matters within the lands ceded by Chief Tumulth. The Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon s Tribal Council has the ability to clearly and solidly show the connection of the Treaties to the Tribe. Any findings which claim the Treaty is not a record will have an adverse impact on the Tribe to the extent of which is not fully visible today.

33 Conclusion Treaty is a valid Record of Grand Ronde Members used for enrollment prior to Descendants of Chief Tumulth facing potential disenrollment were all enrolled prior to Nothing in written law, precedent or oral history excludes the Willamette Valley Treaty from being accepted as a record of Grand Ronde members. The Kalapuya Etc. Treaty, the Executive Order creating the Grand Ronde Reservation, and the Grand Ronde Restoration act all exist because of the founding members of the tribe who s signatures are on the treaty. The legal connection of the treaty signatories to current members is shown trough volumes of evidence and past precedent. Conclusion (Finally) It is perfectly acceptable for the Grand Ronde Tribal government to say that a treaty may no longer be used to qualify membership after It is not appropriate or legal for the Grand Ronde Tribal government to rewrite history and change past decisions affirming the treaty connection to current members. If current laws and wording of the Constitution were changed, this would be the only way disenrollment of this kind could be considered legal. In the interest of the General Membership and the duty to uphold Grand Ronde laws of today, the Tribal Council must vote to acknowledge the valid decisions of our tribal elders to enroll the descendants of Chief Tumulth. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS