426 INDIAN TRIBES OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY. 



or in part among them. The boundaries of this jurisdiction can be settled by the superintendent, 

 as it is advised that the Indians living within it be for the most part left to the operation of civil 

 law ; the duties of the sub-agent will not be more onerous than can be performed with the 

 necessary attention to his other occupations, and no particular residence need be furnished or 

 designated. 



In the present condition of the Territory there is great confusion as to the applicability of the 

 laws regulating intercourse with the Indian tribes. For certain purposes it is Indian country, 

 while for others it assuredly is not, and in every respect it is desirable that Congress draw the 

 line of distinction. 



The difference between the eastern and western sections of the Territory may require some 

 few differences in legislation. The western portion is as yet the only one where settlements 

 have been made ; it is there that the bulk of the population will continue to be ; but very radical 

 amendments are demanded in the other also. The following have suggested themselves : 



Act of June 30, 1834. Section 2, prohibiting trade with the Indians without license, to be 

 repealed, except, of course, in spirituous liquors, the introduction of which into the Territory 

 east of the mountains may continue to be illegal. West of them, however, the law as against 

 importation is nugatory, and should be repealed. The repeal of sections 3, 4, 5, and 6, will 

 necessarily follow. In case of the settlement of the country by the whites, there will of course 

 be merchants and traders, and the Indians should have the right to purchase where they can get 

 the best and cheapest goods. This they will do in any event, and the section will continue to be 

 a dead letter, even if not repealed. 



Section 7 to be limited to clothing and goods of American or European manufacture. These 

 Indians have few peltries, and look forward to the sale of stock, horses, and potatoes, as a benefit 

 to be derived from the incoming of settlers. 



Section 9 to be repealed, and,.as a substitute, the marking ot cattle, horses, mules, hogs, and 

 other domestic animals, with conspicuous ear or other marks, to be required, which marks, as in 

 the western States, to be recorded in the office of the clerk of the county ; a penalty to be affixed 

 to the effacing of marks, adopting a mark previously recorded, forging a mark, or falsely marking 

 animals. 



Section 20. It is proposed that in lieu of the penalty here affixed, the jury shall impose the 

 fine -not, however, to be less than say $50 for each offence ; and also the term of imprisonment, 

 if that is not repealed. One practical difficulty in the execution of the present law is, that juries 

 are inclined to consider the amount of the penalty as too great to rest upon Indian evidence only; 

 some other changes will follow from the amendment proposed to section 25. 



Section 25. For the purpose of better defining the limits of federal and territorial jurisdiction, 

 it is proposed that the power of the former shall extend to all cases ofyi7o???/, and that of the latter 

 to cases of misdemeanor ; that the federal courts have also power to appoint commissioners in 

 each county, whose duties and powers shall be the same as those of commissioners of the United 

 States courts in other States and Territories, and who shall be entitled to the same fees as 

 justices of the peace in the Territory of Washington. 



As an additional section, it is recommended that in all cases where the military forces of the 

 United Slates shall be employed against Indians, and shall take as prisoners or enforce the 

 delivery of persons accused of any crime, it shall be competent for them to try by court-martial 

 and inflict such punishment as the case may warrant, even to that of death. The object of this 

 provision is, the greater impression upon the tribes produced by a speedy punishment, and the 

 saving of the great expense consequent upon the keeping of prisoners until courts can be con 

 vened at distant places. The rules of the common law, moreover, in relation to evidence, are 

 so glaringly inapplicable to cases where Indian testimony is taken, that a conviction would be 

 utterly impossible in most instances, if depending entirely upon it. 



There is another measure which, under proper regulations, it is believed would prove of essen- 



