Mr. MURDOCK. I am not sure that I quite understood you. Did you say that if you were a member of this proposed convention that you would favor a per capita distribution of the money, that is, of the $5,000,000 judgement?

Mr. CARDOVA. Yes.

Mr. MURDOCK. But that you did think that some of it should remain for general purposes.

Mr. CARDOVA. Yes.

Mr. MURDOCK. You have no Indian organization or organizations as such in California, no tribal organization or reservation group. They are very proud and are entitled to be proud of their accomplishments. But what you have in mind is a sort of social organization.

Mr. CARDOVA. Yes. This convention bill, as I read it—and as you know, the Indians are scattered throughout the State-and this would provide for them to vote for a delegate. There would be about 400 Indians to select a delegate who would be sent to this convention and that one delegate would represent about 400 in the same sense that I represent something over 9,000 at the present time. I am here speaking on their behalf and so at this convention they will be speaking on behalf of those they represent.

Mr. MURDOCK. That, of course, would be for the purpose of disposing of temporary matters, the distribution of the judgment fund, but what you have in mind would be an organization that did not have political power but perhaps social in the way that it would extend these friendly feeling to other peoples.

Mr. CORDOVA. Yes. As I said, these Indians are scattered from one end of the State to the other. The State is very large; and most of the Indian people do not live on reservations, they do not live on rancheros, they are out at work; and I believe it is a hard matter at the present time now for the Indian people to get together. The Indians of this generation belong to some lodges and one thing or another.

The matter I speak about is whether they will continue to have an organization which is permanent. This provides for having a delegate to the convention.

Mr. MURDOCK. I understood the purpose of this convention is to do a definite thing; it is for a temporary purpose, so that when that object is accomplished the convention has finished.

Mr. CORDOVA. Yes.

Mr. MURDOCK. That was the idea.

Mr. CORDOVA. Yes.

Mr. ENGLE. It sets up an executive committee, Mr. Murdock, which authorizes it to continue to act for the Indians of California. If you will look at page 2, line 13, you will find this language:

That the convention is hereby authorized and empowered to elect an executive committee, consisting of not more than nine Indians of California, to act for it when the said convention shall adjourn; that the executive committee so chosen shall continue to act until its successor members are chosen and qualified; and the executive committee shall have power to act within the limits of rules and regulations adopted by the convention.

So, in addition, it sets up some permanent organization or representative group to speak for the Indians of. California. I think what Mr. Cardova has in mind is that this convention will give a mandate to the executive committee with reference to the distribution of this

fund, and also believes that a per capita distribution should be made, and perhaps a small fund should be reserved for Indian relief, or something of that sort.

Mr. CARDOVA. That is right.

Mr. ENGLE. And I might add that some of us who live in California have been reluctant; that is, some of us who represent the districts in which these Indians reside have been a little reluctant to introduce bills with reference to the distribution of this $5,000,000 because of the fact that we felt that the Indians ought to have some convention set up who could authorize someone to speak for them; after all, this is their money and I assume should be disposed of largely as they want; and we should have their decision in the matter, it seems to me; at least their decision should have great weight as to how it should be done.

Mr. CARDOVA. Mr. Chairman, there is one more thing. As I said in my statement, I travel around throughout California. A great majority of the people want the per capita payment. But, first of all, they want to be set free. We are self-supporting people in California. Mr. D'EWART. Thank you, Mr. Cardova.

Are there any questions?

Mr. LEMKE. I would like to ask the gentleman from California a question or two.

Mr. ENGLE. I shall be glad to yield.

Mr. LEMKE. This gentleman says he represents 9,000, and another witness said he represents 2,500. Does that mean adult Indians, or does it include the children?

Mr. ENGLE. These petitions were signed only by adults or Indians of 18 years of age or over; is that not right?

Mr. CARDOVA. No; I witnessed quite a few signatures. The parents of the children sign their names. The children who go to school sign their names.

As the legal parents of the children, they want the per capita payment, they want some adjustment from this Government, so they sign their children's names also. I witnessed that.

Mr. D'EWART. Does that answer your question?

Mr. LEMKE. Yes.

Can you tell me how many Indians there are in California, young and old?

Mr. CARDOVA. Right now I would not know, frankly, the exact number, but I believe there are around 20,000.

Mr. LEMKE. That means children and all?

Mr. CARDOVA. Yes.

Mr. LEMKE, Do they live on reservations?

Mr. CARDOVA. There are plenty that live on reservations.

Mr. LEMKE. They do not pay any taxes on the land, however?

Mr. CARDOVA. Not on the Government land.

Mr. D'EWART. Are there any other questions? If not, thank you very much, Mr. Cardova.

Mr. CARDOVA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. D'EWART. We will now hear from Mr. Zimmerman, Acting Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM ZIMMERMAN, ACTING COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Mr. Chairman, may I first comment briefly on the California Indian situation as a whole.

Several of the witnesses have stated that there are no tribal organizations in California. I think that is true as to a majority of the Indians, but there are a number of reservations, and a minority of the Indians do still maintain some form of tribal organization-the Hoopa, the Covelo, and the Yuma, for example. At various places there are existing organizations with elected officers who have authority to speak for the groups.

Mr. D'EWART. Are these organized reservations with an agency and all the other things that go with an ordinary Indian reservation?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Not necessarily. There are a number of reservations under a single superintendent, whose residence is at a different point. That is true in the south as well as in the Sacramento area and in the north in the Hoopa area.

Mr. D'EWART. Can you tell us how many acres are in Indian reservations in California, roughly?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I would have to tabulate that, Mr. Chairman. Mr. D'EWART. Can you give us how many were on the census rolls when this census was taken?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. About 23,000.

Mr. D'EWART. It probably has decreased since then.

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I doubt it. My guess is that there are probably

more.

Mr. D'EWART. I was considering this 20,000 figure that has been presented to the committee.

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. May I clarify the testimony of the witnesses as to the situation with reference to education. Practically all of the Indians in California attend public schools. The Indian Service maintains a boarding school at Riverside, Calif., which is primarily a vocational school of high-school grade.

The Indian Service makes, under an annual contract, payments to the State. Those payments this next year, if Congress appropriates the money, will be about $300,000. The State has the responsibility for distributing that fund to certain school districts where the districts would not be able under State law to finance the operation of the public schools. There are a number of those districts, such as Yuma, where there is very little taxable property, and the contribution that the State makes under its distribution plan is not sufficient to enable the district to function. If the Federal district did not make those payments, the schools could not operate as public schools.

Mr. MURDOCK. Did you mention the Yuma Indians?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. MURDOCK. Where do the Yuma Indians attend school?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. There are public schools on the California side, and they are financed in part through this grant made by the Federal Government. There is also a small sum raised locally by taxation, and then the State makes a contribution. All three of those sources are needed to operate the district.

Mr. BARRETT. But the contribution by the Indian Bureau is to the State of California?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. That is correct.

Mr. BARRETT. $300,000?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Approximately that.

Mr. BARRETT. Do they operate this school at Riverside?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. No, sir. The Riverside school is operated by the Indian service.

Mr. BARRETT. It has nothing to do with the $300,000?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. No. Just parenthetically, the cost of operating that school is in the neighborhood of $250,000 a year. The figure which was given by one of the witnesses, of $1,000,000 a year, is approximately the total that is spent by the Indian service in California.

Mr. BARRETT. We have $550,000 here. How is the other $450,000 expended generally?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I cannot give you the exact figures. That is in the maintenance of hospitals. We have contracts with two county tubercular sanatoria, and the balance of the money goes for the administration of the three agencies in the State.

I have testified previously, I think, in this committee and also in other committees, that in the main the Department agrees with the view of some of these witnesses that the time has come when the functions of the Indian service in California should be changed.

We have stated that conclusion to Governor Warren, and at this moment a representative of the Indian service is in California in the hope that by being on the ground he may be able to work out some agreement with the State legislature by which a plan can be put into effect to eliminate or certainly to reduce the Indian service activities in the State. I am very hopeful that that can be done.

I believe that the State is fully able to take over the major part of the responsibility. I do not believe that it would be possible for the Indian service to close all activities forthwith. For example, in my discussions with the former Attorney General, he urged that even if California should take over all responsibility for law and order, he would still want certain Federal officials to remain in the State during the period when the adjustments were being made.

Specifically as to the bill which would revise the roll, as the Department's report on last year's bill indicated, we have no objection to a revision of the roll. The roll was completed in 1933. Many Indians have died since then, and many Indians have been born whose names could probably be added to the roll.

Mr. BARRETT. Mr. Zimmerman, on that point you think there is no question about the legality of extending the roll to those Indians who have been born since then, for participation in the judgment fund?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I have raised that question with the attorneys in our own office and with the Solicitor's office, because the judgment of the court is tied to the roll as made by the Department. The judgment of the Court of Claims says that this money is due to the Indians on that roll.

Mr. BARRETT. Is that the roll that was made in 1928?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. It was made in accordance with the 1928 act and was completed, I think, in 1933.

Mr. BARRETT. The beneficiaries of the judgment are Indians who were on the roll as completed then, in 1933?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. That is what the court said. I am quoting legal opinion now, which is the best I can get. Congress apparently has the authority, so the lawyers tell me, to modify that previous act. Congress could decide that the roll could be revised.

Mr. BARRETT. Even as to the judgment fund?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. That is the best judgment of the attorneys in the Department. The Department is not opposed to a revision, but it is opposed to a complete new roll. All the work that was done in making up any final roll, it seems to me, should stand. That is, the whole problem should not be reopened. There should not be a new influx of claimants from all over the country.

By way of background, let me point out that the 1928 Jurisdictional Act provided a formula and it was expressly limited to residents of California. I was not in the Indian service at that time, but the record is clear that it was the intention of the framers of the act and the intention of Congress to provide some sort of a basis for settlement, even in the absence, perhaps, of legal responsibility.

There was argument, and has been argument over the years, as to whether or not the claims of the California Indians had legal basis or only moral basis. I think there is no doubt that the record shows that this jurisdictional act was framed because at that time there seemed to be no other way of providing funds to rehabilitate the Indians of California. A direct appropriation was considered not possible.

Mr. BARRETT. If you might permit me to make an observation here, Mr. Zimmerman, before we proceed with this legislation I think we should have an opinion from the Attorney General of the United States on that question. There are serious doubts in my mind if the judgment itself is tied in with the census taking under the act of 1928, as completed in 1933. I doubt if the Congress would have the authority to enlarge upon the beneficiaries under that jurisdictional act. At least I should like to be certain that we do have the authority before we proceed. Could that be obtained, Mr. Zimmerman?

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I think we could request it; yes, sir.

Mr. ENGLE. I think it is a good point to do that, because if we are actually bound by the judgment, it means then that the job of the Indian service is to determine who the descendants are of each of the persons whose names appear on the roll now, but who have died. In other words, you still have a big problem to determine who the beneficiaries are.

The only difference is that their share would be different. If we add the names to the roll, of all Indians now qualified, and strike off the names of all those deceased, the difference is the one pointed out by Mr. Lemke, and that is, it is a share and share alike proposition; whereas if an Indian whose name appears on the roll now has died and left 16 descendants, then they get one-sixteenth apiece if the roll is not revised. Of course, some of them may be related to someone else on the roll who has died, and pick up another one-sixteenth, or another eighth, or something else. It is an immensely complicated job.

I think that is why they felt the best thing to do was to bring it up to date and put everybody on it. I would be certainly agreeable to getting an opinion on that from the Attorney General. If it is in