Mrs. WONG. I should have said an hour. Senator METCALF. How long do you want to testify? Senator METCALF. Can you summarize that statement? Mrs. INKS. I think I can read this in 10 minutes. Senator METCALF. I do not think you can because I cannot read that fast. How long will it take you to testify? Mr. TOULOU. I would say about 5 minutes because I just got- How long will it take you to testify? Mrs. HALLENIUS. Frankly, I do not know. I have not read it and timed myself. I expect a half hour. Senator METCALF. Go ahead with yours, Mrs. Toulou. STATEMENT OF HELEN TOULOU, COLVILLE INDIAN ASSOCIATION Mrs. TOULOU. May I respectfully request the committee to intercede for us with the Indian Claims Commission to give us the chance to correct some mistakes made by some people who came here as delegates, including the superintendent, that took place last March 15, 1965, to testify in a case before the Indian Claims Commission involving a compromise settlement in one of our cases. That is all I ask. Will you please do that? Give us a chance to. I am going to recess this hearing in 7 minutes. I have a man from the Cabinet coming up to talk on a matter that is very important to my own State, and this is a long-standing engagement, and if someone wants to testify in the next 7 minutes they can. Do you want to volunteer? Mrs. HALLENIUS. Yes, I will do that. Senator METCALF. Go right ahead. STATEMENT OF ALYCE HALLENIUS, COLVILLE INDIAN ASSOCIATION Mrs. HALLENIUS. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee: I am Alyce P. Hallenius, an enrolled, allotted member of the Colville Confederated Tribes by birth and member of the Colville Indian Association by choice and a trustee by election. We of the Colville Indian Association are in complete accord with termination and have supported House Concurrent Resolution 108 in every instance. I am in favor of section 4 of S. 1413. The authority presently being exercised by the Business Council of the Colville Confederated Tribes is in itself an extinguishing act. The thought of my family brings me to the realization that as far as inheritance goes for them, they are beyond the end of the line. Unless the rolls are closed and the estate of the Colville's is probated, my grandchildren will never share in the property to which they are entitled. I would like to elaborate on the subsection (e) of section 6. It is the right of any citizen of the United States to be able to buy and sell property freely, the Constitution of the United States pro tects this right. The Colville Indians have been denied that right by provisions in a constitution that has been separate and apart from United States Constitution. It has been virtually impossible for an individual to purchase land to have and hold for his own if he needed financing to do it. Under the Homestead Act, the Indian should have been able to acquire additional land but he was never enabled to do it. Under the provisions of S. 1413, any member, wherever he lives, would be able to pledge a part or all of his equity to purchase either a homesite or a business opportunity in the area for which he feels a bond. To the Indian, land gives him a sense of belonging. Many of our members who now reside in crowded cities long for the day whe they can come back to their homeland with the money in their pockets and the wherewithal to accomplish their aims. This is the right of the individual and the association would be failing their people if those rights were not supported. Section 14 of S. 1413 should be amended to read that any guardian should be a bonded guardian and provide further that the shares of those individuals be placed in savings instead of a trust because of the expense involved, that the entire individual estate might be used up by expenses. If it pleases the committee I would like to ask them to intercede for us with the Indian Claims Commission in order that we may be able to appear before them to refute testimony falsely given in connection with a petition for approval for a compromise settlement of some of our claims against the Government. I have one more request that I most respectfully submit to the committee for its careful consideration. In connection with providing for an orderly termination, the Colville Indian Association asks that the committee intercede with the Secretary and request that no more timber contracts be negotiated. The association believes this is necessary in order to protect our forest assets from being dissipated and encumbered by long-term contracts. We feel that the association has made much progress since its organization about 10 years ago. One of its principal objects is an orderly and complete termination of Federal supervision over the lives and property of the Colville Indians. We have supported and elected candidates for members of the tribal council who, by their election have greatly improved the relationship between the tribal members and the tribal council. Recently, the present tribal council caused the Governor of the State of Washington to issue a proclamation declaring that the Colville Indians be subject to the criminal and civil laws of the State of Washington, which was one of the objectives and aims of the association. Also, many of the provisions embodied in this bill, S. 1413, are the conceptions and ideas promoted by the Colville Indian Association. Therefore we support this bill with our suggested amendments. We congratulate the present tribal council for their courage in their efforts to bring about some kind of a termination bill, and certainly they did condition the Colvilles to the idea of termination. I thank you. Senator FANNIN (presiding). Thank you, Mrs. Hallenius. Mrs. WONG. No. I am the one who is going to take 15 minutes. Senator FANNIN. I see. All right. Fine. Mr. Edwards, would you like to testify next? Mrs. WONG. He has given his. Senator FANNIN. I know you have. Norma Inks would be next. STATEMENT OF NORMA INKS, COLVILLE INDIAN ASSOCIATION Mrs. INKS. I am Norma K. Inks, member of the Colville Confederated Tribes by birth, a member of the Colville Indian Association by choice and vice president by election. May I express my gratitude to the committee and those members of the tribal council who made it possible for us to appear before you today. In the past we have not been quite so fortunate as Mrs. Hallenius has stated. Much progress has been made and the relationship between the tribal members and the tribal council has been greatly improved. Our association president, Mr. Edwards, has presented you with a comprehensive report on the most objectionable provisions of S. 1413 and has presented you with our suggestions for amending those sections. So there can be no room for doubt, we assure the committee that the Colville Indian Association is in complete accord with the Congress and its desire to completely terminate Federal supervision over the Colville Indians. It is only the method in which this fact is accomplished that is of grave concern to us. The association has come to the conclusion after studying the miseries and inequities suffered by other Indians caused by other methods of termination, that the only proper termination legislation is that which in effect amounts to a straightforward probate of the Indian estate amongst its heirs. The association's goal is, therefore, a straightforward and orderly termination with each member of the Colville Tribe being vested with his equal share and the association contends that each share should be determined at its full cash value irrespective of the market impact, sustained yield, encumbrances, and so forth. Subsection (b) of section 6 of S. 1413 is the section that would cause us to lose through market impact consideration. Mr. Edwards in his testimony has elaborated upon the market impact and its effect upon the evaluation of each member's equity and has shown the reasons it should be eliminated from S. 1413. And further subsection (f) of section 6 of S. 1413 could cause great loss to the members of the tribe through the Secretary's arbitrary selection of which portions of the reservation assets would be retained for the so-called remaining members and which portions would be sold to satisfy the withdrawing members' share. The business potential of the portions so arbitrarily selected could vary to a great degree. The association also contends that each individual should be vested with the right to manage his own affairs without interference. In respect to the individual being vested with the right to manage his own affairs, we cannot support a so-called remaining clause such as has been embodied in S. 1413, The language contained in this clause is misleading and deceptive, Section 6 (e) of S. 1413 states in part: Give to each member whose name appears on the final roll of the tribes an opportunity to elect to withdraw from the tribes and have his beneficial interest in tribal property recognized by section 5 converted into money and paid to him, or to remain in the tribes and participate in the tribal management plan to be prepared pursuant to subsection (g) of this section. The deception here lies in part in the fact that those who elect to remain are, in reality, electing only to declare themselves incompetent to manage their own affairs. Section 18 of S. 1413 bears out this fact. Section 18 would terminate the Federal trust relationship, make all statutes which affect Indians no longer applicable to the members of the Colville Tribes and make them amenable to the laws of the several States in the same manner of all other citizens or persons. The association is in accord with the intent of section 18 of S. 1413 which is in line with the intent of Congress as expressed in House Concurrent Resolution 108. While we have no argument with section 18 which would establish full citizenship for the Colville Indian people, we do most strenuously oppose the so-called remaining provisions in section 6 (e) and (g) which would impose yet another unsavory type of trust supervision over these persons with results similar to those experienced by the Klamaths. The committee is, without doubt, most sorely aware of the Klamath's predicament and the fact that it grows steadily worse. To begin with, each so-called remaining Klamath received a $400 payment quarterly, today that quarterly payment has been reduced to $200, a reduction of 50 percent and a large portion of that payment is made from the principal. And to add to their woes the costs of administration have gone up. These people now realize that they do not have a chance to break the trust agreement under its present terms and many of them are trying to secure attorneys to take their grievance into courts. Many of these people are poverty stricken, they are not receiving enough money to maintain themselves and their families and the money they are receiving is liquidating their principal. As evidence of what I have here stated, I have some letters and documents which will support my statement and I ask that the same be placed in the record. Senator FANNIN. So ordered. The staff will check these to see if the information involved would be pertinent and it will go in the record. The information referred to follows:) U.S. NATIONAL BANK OF OREGON, HERSHISER, MCMENAMIN, BLYTH AND JONES, Portland, Oreg. (Attention Mr. Robert W. McMenamin.) DEAR MR. MCMENAMIN: In Mr. Lung's absence, our Klamath Falls office has forwarded your letter of July 24, 1964 to me for reply. Mrs. Bates had previously corresponded with Mr. Lung in regard to the recent election concerning termination of the Klamath Indian Management Trust and we are pleased to enclose a copy of his reply. We are enclosing, also, a copy of our letter to all of the trust beneficiaries, setting forth the results of the election. As explained in these letters, the number of ballots cast one way or the other was not of significance in determining the majority which would have been necessary to terminate the trust, inasmuch as it was dependent on percentage of income payments. The ballots, of course, covered all of the fractional interests involved. For 473 full shares, 649 ballots were disseminated, 431 of which were returned; 315 ballots, including fractional interests, were cast for termination, whereas 116 were cast to remain; 218 were not voted at all. As we advised Mrs. Bates, the trust specifically provides that the executive committee, or a designated representative thereof, may inspect the election ballots and compare them with the trustee's records. We feel, therefore, that requests for details concerning the election, other than official results, must be made to the executive committee. Very truly yours, J. A. PERRY, Assistant Trust Officer. JULY 16, 1964. Re 6-06800-04 Klamath Indian Management Trust. Chiloquin, Oreg. DEAR MRS. BATES: We acknowledge receipt of your letter of July 13 requesting detailed information on the outcome of the recent voting by the remaining members. We feel it would not be proper for us to provide a list of the remaining members showing how each individual voted. The trust agreement does provide, however, that the executive committee, or a designated representative of the executive committee, can inspect the ballots or the official election records which are maintained at this office. I think you will appreciate the fact that how a particular beneficiary voted is his concern. As you know, nine of the executive committee members were present at the time the ballots were counted; however, if the Executive Committee desires to recheck the ballots, they are welcome to do so. The U.S. National Bank of Oregon does act as trustee and also guardian for a number of remaining members. Under the terms of the trust agreement, the bank was not authorized to cast the ballots for remaining members where the bank acts as trustee. Rather, the ballots were voted by the parents or person having custody of the beneficiaries. In the case where the bank acts as guardian of estates for minors or incompetents, then the bank was the qualified elector. The voting procedure is set forth in paragraph 15 of the trust agreement, and it was also set out on the official election ballot. The balloting was based on income ownership, rather than number of ballots cast because of the fractional ownership of the shares of the 68 deceased members. In other words, over 600 ballots were mailed representing only 473 full shares. The trust agreement provided that the trust will terminate if ballots favoring termination were cast by persons, who taken together, were entitled to receive more than 50 percent of the last income payment made before the mailing of the ballots. Thus, termination or continuation of the trust was on a majority basis. On March 15, 1964, $189,200 was disbursed to the 473 beneficiaries and heirs of deceased beneficiaries, or $400 per share. In order to terminate the trust, those beneficiaries entitled to receive more than one-half of the $189,200, or $94,600, had to cast their ballots for termination. This figure was not exceeded. Using this method of balloting, fractional shares were recognized for their actual worth-that is, if a full share was inherited by four heirs, each heir would be entitled to a one-quarter vote equalling $100. If all four heirs voted to terminate, then their vote combined would equal one full vote worth $400. We trust the foregoing information answers your questions; however, if you require additional information, we inviite you to stop by this office when we can answer your questions personally. Very truly yours, R. H. LUNG, Trust Officer. Mrs. INKS. There are a number of our people who are under the impression that by electing to remain they will remain in status quo, such as being exempt from paying taxes and from the other responsibilities of citizenship. Some of our members believe that we should permit those who desire to remain, be accorded their wishes and suffer the consequences, but the association is not in accord with such a |