INDIAN HOME, ONONDAGA RESERVATION, NEW YORK
The increases are due to growth of the mixed-blood elements, to white men marrying Indian women.[[3]] The allotment plan, the accumulation of tribal funds, the increase in property values—all these factors induced many persons to “get on the Indian rolls” and thus swell the numbers; while the pure-blood Navahos are increasing, I doubt if other tribes show growth—save in the mixed-blood element referred to above.
Certainly these two maps present us with facts for serious study. They indicate the rapidity with which the Red Race’s property is being legislated away. Many reservations have been abolished, and the Indians allotted land in severalty. If the Indians held such lands as white men hold their farms, the whole Indian area today would be as large as formerly, even though reservation lines are abolished. Some do hold their lands. But most of them sell, lease, or mortgage; the maps, after all, tell the sad truth, and the erasure of governmental lines usually means the blotting out of Indian titles.
| Table 1.—Indian population of the United States from 1850 to 1913 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Year | Authority | |
| 1850 | Report of H. R. Schoolcraft | 388,229 |
| 1853 | Report of United States Census, 1850 | 400,764 |
| 1855 | Report of Indian Office | 314,622 |
| 1857 | Report of H. R. Schoolcraft | 379,264 |
| 1860 | Report of Indian Office | 254,300 |
| 1865 | do | 294,574 |
| 1870 | Report of United States Census | 313,712 |
| 1875 | do | 305,068 |
| 1876 | do | 291,882 |
| 1877 | do | 276,540 |
| 1878 | do | 276,595 |
| 1879 | do | 278,628 |
| 1880 | do | 322,534 |
| 1881 | do | 328,258 |
| 1882 | Report of Indian Office | 326,039 |
| 1883 | do | 331,972 |
| 1884 | do | 330,776 |
| 1885 | do | 344,064 |
| 1886 | do | 334,735 |
| 1887 | do | 243,299 |
| 1888 | do | 246,036 |
| 1889 | do | 250,483 |
| 1890 | Report of United States Census | 248,253 |
| 1891 | Report of Indian Office | 246,834 |
| 1892 | do | 248,340 |
| 1893 | do | 249,366 |
| 1894 | do | 251,907 |
| 1895 | do | 248,340 |
| 1896 | do | 248,354 |
| 1897 | do | 248,813 |
| 1898 | do | 262,965 |
| 1899 | do | 267,905 |
| 1900 | do | 270,544 |
| 1901 | do | 269,388 |
| 1902 | do | 270,238 |
| 1903 | do | 263,233 |
| 1904 | do | 274,206 |
| 1905 | do | 284,079 |
| 1906 | do | 291,581 |
| 1907 | do | 298,472 |
| 1908 | do | 300,412 |
| 1909 | do | 300,545 |
| 1910 | do | 304,950 |
| 1911 | do | 322,715 |
| 1912 | do | 327,425 |
| 1913 | do | 330,639 |
| Table 2.—Indian population of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, June 30, 1913 | ||
|---|---|---|
| (Figures compiled from reports of Indian School superintendents, supplemented by information from 1910 census for localities in which no Indian Office representative is located.) | ||
| Grand total | 330,639 | |
| Five Civilized Tribes, including freedmen and intermarried whites | 101,216 | |
| By blood | 75,253 | |
| By Intermarriage | 2,582 | |
| Freedman | 23,381 | |
| Exclusive of Five Civilized Tribes | 229,423 | |
| Grand total | 330,639 | |
| Indian Population by States and Territories, 1913 | |
|---|---|
| Alabama | 909 |
| Arizona | 41,505 |
| Arkansas | 460 |
| California | 16,513 |
| Colorado | 870 |
| Connecticut | 152 |
| Delaware | 5 |
| District of Columbia | 68 |
| Florida | 600 |
| Georgia | 95 |
| Idaho | 4,089 |
| Illinois | 188 |
| Indiana | 279 |
| Iowa | 365 |
| Kansas | 1,345 |
| Kentucky | 231 |
| Louisiana | 780 |
| Maine | 892 |
| Maryland | 55 |
| Massachusetts | 688 |
| Michigan | 7,512 |
| Minnesota | 11,338 |
| Mississippi | 1,253 |
| Missouri | 313 |
| Montana | 11,331 |
| Nebraska | 3,890 |
| Nevada | 7,756 |
| New Hampshire | 34 |
| New Jersey | 168 |
| New York | 6,029 |
| New Mexico | 21,725 |
| North Carolina | 7,945 |
| North Dakota | 8,538 |
| Ohio | 127 |
| Oklahoma | 117,274[[4]] |
| Oregon | 6,414 |
| Rhode Island | 284 |
| South Carolina | 20,555 |
| South Dakota | 20,555 |
| Tennessee | 216 |
| Texas | 702 |
| Utah | 3,231 |
| Vermont | 26 |
| Virginia | 539 |
| Washington | 11,335 |
| West Virginia | 36 |
| Wisconsin | 9,930 |
| Wyoming | 1,715 |
It will be observed that between 1850 and 1887 there is wide difference of opinion as to the number of Indians. In 1886 there were 334,000 Indians, whereas in ’87 the number is given as 243,000. This must be due to faulty enumeration, or to estimating rather than counting. The gradual increase from 1898 to 1913 is for the reason assigned, page [21].
In the table presented by Commissioner Sells it will be observed that the Indians have made some progress along various industrial directions. As he has grouped under a total valuation of $22,238,242, all the horses, cattle, hogs and sheep raised by the Indians, it is difficult to compare this table with those of 1879–1881. I present tables of those years prepared long ago by the Board of Indian Commissioners and published by them February 1st, 1882. It will be seen that the number of acres under cultivation are about the same thirty-two years ago as at the present time. In 1881 there were over 2,000,000 head of stock owned by Indians. The value of sheep would reduce an average of $10 per head, horses and cattle would raise it. Some horses might be worth as high as $50, most of them would average $15. Cattle would range from $15 to $25 per head at that time. Mules would be higher, while hogs might be averaged at $8 per head, and sheep, $2. We might strike an average of $10 per head, which would amount to $20,000,000. In view of the present increased value of livestock, the $22,000,000 worth of property and livestock at the present time cannot amount to more than 2,000,000 head. (See [page [29]])
I think the slight increase noted in the 1912 table is due to the progress of certain Indian tribes (notably the Navaho) and the increased money value per head of stock. It does not mean that the Indians own more “live” property today than they did in 1881.