{"character_count": 4701, "word_count": 856, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9764000177383423], "ccnet_perplexity": [2063.89990234375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Indian Affairs, submitted the following
REPORT:
! On the 9th Of July, 1912, the House Of Repre-
sentatives adopted a resolution in the following
words


Resolped That the Committee on Indian fairs be
and hereby are, instructed to inquire the contrac
for the removal of the Cherokee Indians the west
the Mississippi river the amount ced for the
moval the amount actually paid ; how and by wha,
officer the account of the contractor settled
allowed; whether there any appeal from such
t'ement, and the decision the appeal, und whether
the appeal final not by what officer and by wla
authority the reopened and finally settled
and allowed and out of what fund such account was
paid, and on what authority also to inquire whether
any and what other offers had been made for their re.
moval, and why not accepted and whether any fur.
ther and what further action of Congress should be
for the protection of the Cherokees guard the pub
lie Treasury and that the said committee have power
20 send for persons and papers. +
The Committee Indian Affairs, in pursuance of the


Gboue resolution, report:


That the inquiries directed by the same are
hereinafter stated and answered in their order:


lst. What was the amount contracted to be
paid per head forthe removal of the Cherokees
10 the west Of the Mississippi?


By a contract made on the I'd of August, 1888,
by General Scott, as agent of the United States,
with John Ross, Elijah Hicks, and others. on the
part of the Cherokees, the sum Of $G5 SO was
stipulated to be paid per head for the removal OF
the Cherokees to the country assigned them be-
yond the Mississippi This price Gen. Scott re.
garded as extravagant.


K. +. Clements, who was examined as wit.
this subject, states that 4" he considers the
price paid TO John Ross. agreeably his contract
as having been exceedingly extravagant.' He
says, further, that I" there were persons on the
ground every way able and competent to carry
out the contract who would have taken it for less
than one hail the amount agreed to be paid to John
Ross" Gary Hinant, another witness, states tha,
he was citizen of the Cherokee nation, and re-
moved himself; that he was fifty-f days on the
route; that he moved at his ease. stopping when
necessary for rest and refreshment, and that his
expenses after starting were less than $50 per
head. The distance was about 500 miles,


The treaty party offered to remove themselves
for $40 per head; and Watson & Co. offered to
do it at $50 per head. The Secretary Of War
estimated the cost of removal at $50 per head.


I'd. What amount was actually paid for the re.
moval of the Cherokees.


The amount actually paid was $l03 25
per head. The amount contracted 10 be paid, as
before stated, was $65 SO, or. with small allow
ance which was made for soap, $G6 "a. The
whole amount due Ross, estimating at S66 "a per
Head, was SIZE, ,39S 90, which was paid 10 him BY
SaP,ain Page, the disbursng agent Of the Govern
fSr, on the 18th November, 1888. The whole
ciSm of Mr. Ross was S ,263, 1888 3S, or at the
ratof $lO3 25 per head.


~ How was this claim settled, and by what
ohcS Swas it allowed?


IhSclaim presented by John Ross to the com.


missiotr OF Indian Affairs as before stated, a
moun'eNo ST ,263. 1888 3S. OF this claim, $776
oso 9S nd been paid, and was allowed; the re-
mainder, mounting to ss4S6,939 So was reject.


ed. IhisSmount is and above the contract
and Is elaIted on the ground that what is term.
cd Inc contAct was mere estimate, and the a
mount mentlNed in the sane liable to be increas
ed or din,lnlstd accordingly as a greater or les:
time should beScupied in the removal. .


4th Was the an appeal from, the decision o
the Comnissonetof Indian Affairs; 10 what Off
GER; and what WI the decision on the appeal?
When the amott of ss4S6, ,939 3S was rejected
!, by tho Commlssiorr of Indian Affairs; an appea
;. was taken by John Sss to the Secretary of War
who affirmed or appAed the decision of the Com
f missioner. The casSwas then brought before the
President, and the dession of the War depart
ment affirmed. AfteAa on the 7th,of Jan
ua-y, lS4l, this matteryas again brought before
/ the President, (Van BtAn.) by the counsel Of
) John Ross, with arequeS that he would review


his former decision but lis he declined, stating
. tha, he regarded his formeNecison as final. !
5lh. Was the settlement Z this claim opened
J. oy what authority wasit opeed; and how was il
fnally disposed Of? @
i, the decision of the Commisonor on this claim
5 mode on the Sth of August, NO, and affirmed
: oy the President of the UnitedStates on the 2o


september, lS4O, was opened, bjthe direction Of
n stne present Chief Magistrate, spe time in the


