93.) 3 Mohawk topics from a 1929 U.S. Congressional Hearing. 1.)"St Regis Indians" own 2 million acres in the state of Vermont-Mohawk Chief. 2.)"No historian has ever been successful in determining just who the Seven Nations were"- Assistant NYS Attorney General. 3.) Chief can not sell portion of reservation to NYS without Council and taking it up with the "tribe" first.- Mohawk Chief .(20 min. read)

A reasonable person would think that before a sovereign indigenous nation extinguishes all future land claims, that they would find out first, if there may be land that belongs to them, that they don't know about. This is the reason why extinguishment agreements for all future land claims should never be agreed to or signed. Even in 2024, the history of land claims is still murky. Check out what they were saying in 1929.

This is another reason why the U.S./NYS is pushing sovereign indigenous nations to extinguish all future land claims, quickly. While indigenous nations may have forgotten or are not aware of lands they own, the U.S. government and New York State know there are many valid outstanding land claims.

The following two excerpts are from exchanges given during testimony in a 1929 U.S. Congressional Hearing. The following is from a government document titled :

"The Survey of Conditions of the Indians in the United States. Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Indian Affairs United States Senate", 1929. Volume V., New York Indians, part 12. You can locate an online copy at Hathirust Digital Library.

This first excerpt of testimony explains topic 1.)- that the Mohawks own 2 million acres of land in Vermont. And that a Chief's Council can not sell land without the "tribe" knowing about, as per a Mohawk Chief.

The second excerpt of testimony explains topic 2.)- That no historian has ever been able to successfully determine who the Seven Nations were, or where they come from. And that "six nations was adopted by New York State in 1848. Before that they were not. Originally they were an offshoot of the runaway Mohawks", And questions about the validity of a series of treaties involved in 1 million acres of land in New York State that belong to the Indians in question, as per the Assistant Attorney General of New York State. 

Also in this excerpt is topic 3.)- that no Chief can sell land without Council first and can not sell land, if it is unknown to the people.

Again, you would think that before a sovereign indigenous nation extinguishes all future land claims, that they would take into consideration that there may be lands out there that belong to them, that they don't know about. Kept hidden from them on purpose. This is yet another reason why the U.S. is pushing all sovereign indigenous nations to extinguish all future land claims, quickly.

How many people from this sovereign indigenous nation, know about this Vermont land claim, the unknown origin of the Seven Nations and that Chief's's council can not sell land without the tribe knowing: all being hashed out in a U.S. Congressional Hearing  in 1929. This is an official record of the U.S. government.

Statement of Mohawk Chief Julius Herne, Hogansburg New York. Starts on page 5101. Here is the excerpt from his statement starting from page 5105 regarding the land in Vermont. It also talks about "Chief Council" cannot sell a portion of the reservation to New York State without talking with the "tribe".

It is recommended that the reader locate the entire statements for both excerpts from these testimonies in this U.S. Congressional Hearing, so the reader can make their own determination about what is being said. As these excerpts may be taken out of context from the entire statements. The full names and titles of people making statements, will follow at the end.

Here is the first excerpt from Mohawk Chief Julius Herne's testimony:

"Mr Grorud. Do you know anything about some alleged claim that the St. Regis Indians have against the State of Vermont?

Mr Herne. Yes.

Mr Grorud. Will you tell the committee what you know about that, if anything?

Mr Herne. Well, we always heard we had a claim over there, and I had a book about it, but I lost that, so Mitchell and I took a lawyer with us to Montpelier and we got the record and we copied it out. That is all I can give you. There were 2 million acres there that belong to us. That was never sold or leased or anything; it is there. They tell me they held a meeting after the Vermont flood and they wrote a book. They had a council after the flood. I suppose. I have seen the book and I have read it. One of them, in their meeting spoke up and said, 'the best thing we better do is to give the Indians their land back'. Another one spoke up and said 'not by a jug full'. So they must know that we have a claim over there.

The Chairman. Are there some of your Indians living over there in vermont?

Mr Herne. No; not that I know of.

The Chairman. Is there any further statement you want to make to the committee?

Mr Herne. I want that 6 mile square back. That is what I want.

The Chairman. Of course, that was through treaty with the state of New york, on the payment of money or for other lands.

Mr Herne. Where is the money that was paid for the 2000 acres? We got $60 a year for it; that is all.

Senator Wheeler. That was sold a long time ago.

The Chairman. That was taken out by treaty, the Attorney General says.

Mr Herne. Taken out?

The Chairman. Yes; taken out - sold by the state by treaty, and the Indians were paid for it at that time, so the Attorney General says. Wasn't that what I understood you to say, Mr Manley,

Mr Manley. That is right. It is my understanding that all of those properties were covered by one or the other of these treaties.

Mr Herne. All that land was disposed of. They never held a council for that before they sold it, never.

Senator Wheeler. How do you know that?

Mr Herne. I don't remember of any, and I am a pretty old man - 78.

Senator Wheeler. 78 years old.

Mr Herne. I never heard from older people than I, who are dead and gone now, that they ever held any council. They sold it unknown to the tribe.

The Chairman. Does your Chiefs Council have the right to sell a portion of the reservation here to the state of New York without taking it up with the tribe?

Mr Herne. They can't

The Chairman. They can't do it?

Mr Herne. They can't do it.

Mr Grorud. How about the 3 acres of land that was sold some time ago, which was supposed to be sold for 5 gallons of whiskey? Do you know anything about it?

Mr Herne. Yes.

Mr Grorud. Can you tell the committee something about that?

Mr Herne. I have got the history down home.

The Chairman. How long ago did that take place?

Mr Herne. I think it was 1812 - after the war

Mr Grorud.. After the war of 1812?.

Mr Herne. Yes; they came and squatted there.

The Chairman. Is there anything further?

Mr Manley. Is the history of that transaction in a book?

Mr Herne. Certainly.

Mr Manley. And you have a copy of that book?

Mr Herne. Certainly.

Mr Manley. Do you know the name of the book?

Mr Herne. History of St. Lawrence county.

Mr Manley. Written by Franklin H. Huff? Or do you refer to Sriver's history?

Mr Herne. The first reservation they made for us was 10 miles down here. It was 20 miles wide and 20 miles long, west, to the St. Lawrence, then it comes down, up to Messina, where we gave them the Mile Square here. For $3 an acre they agreed to survey it, and after they surveyed it if there was anything coming they would pay it.

The Chairman. But there was never anything coming?

Mr Herne. It was never surveyed.

Senator Wheeler. I think that is all.

The Chairman. The next witness is Mose White."

(End of quote starting on page 5105-5106)

*****************************************

Here is the second excerpt from the testimony of Henry S. Manley, Assistant Attorney General State of New york, Albany N.Y.. Pages 5092-5094.

"Senator Wheeler. Why do you say whatever may be thought of their status?

Mr Manley. Why, the status of these treaties has been the subject of a lawsuit involving directly the Messina mile square, in a suit entitled Deere against the St. Lawrence River Power company. James Deere was a member of the St. Regis tribe and prepared to sue on behalf of all the St. Regis indians. He sued the the St Lawrence River Power Company and many other defendants to recover the Mile Square at Messina upon the theory that the treaty under which that was released by the Indians and all similar treaties were illegal, not having been done under the authority of the United States nor confirmed by the United states. That suit was started in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York in 1925. It was dismissed by the District Court and its appeal was taken to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals.

Senator Wheeler. Upon what grounds ?

Mr Manley. That the Indians had no capacity to sue, or that there was no question in the case giving jurisdiction to the Federal courts. The Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that decision last May. The opinions are available in the Federal Reporter. Unless you have some questions to ask, I think that covers it.

Senator Wheeler. This is the Treaty of 1796  [holding the original of said document in hand]?

Mr Grorud. Yes, sir.

Senator Wheeler. And the receipts for money paid to the Indians are endorsed down here [indicating]?

Mr Groud. Yes, sir.

Mr Manley. This is a very interesting document. This ought to be photostated. At least, a photostat ought to be preserved carefully someplace.

Senator Wheeler. Now, they got their title originally, did they, from the State of New york?

Mr Manley. No; the theory was that the title to the land was in the Seven Nations of Canada. No historians, to my knowledge, has ever been able to determine who were the Seven Nations of Canada, but there was a set of Indians who descended upon New York State about the year 1796 and were successful in persuading the authorities that they had some rights, which were protected by a treaty.

Senator Wheeler. Upon what theory did the courts hold that the Indians didn't have the right to go into court and start suit?

Mr Manley. There was no question of citizenship involved and there was no question of law arising under a treaty or the laws of the United states. The courts couldn't tell from the original complaint whether there was any treaty necessarily involved or not.

Senator Wheeler. The court didn't hold that the Indians couldn't come in collectively as a tribe, or that someone couldn't come in on behalf of all of them, setting forth that there were too many of them to bring suit?

Mr Manley. No; the court didn't have occasion to pass on that issue, or to raise it.

Senator Wheeler. The federal courts have held that labor unions can bring suit.

Mr Manley. I suppose that an organization which has a collective capacity should sue in a collective capacity.

Mr Grorud. How was the title extinguished with reference to the land belonging to the St. Regis Indians, particularly with reference to the power site at St Regis?

Mr Manley. I can't say which particular one of these treaties covered that. But the site at St Regis, what do you refer to? Do you refer to this power site here?

Mr Grorud. Yes; Right here.

Mr Manley. Yes; this should be more particularly described as the site at Hogansburg.

Mr Grorud. The site at Hogansburg.

Mr Manley. I can't say which particular treaty related to that, but it is one of that particular series of treaties?

Mr Grorud. Has the United States government extinguished this Indian title?

Mr Manley. The United States government didn't participate in any way. I might also say that the United States government didn't make any sort of treaty with the St. Regis indians. The United States Geological Survey was mapping the St. Regis reservation for Geological Survey purposes gives full effect to these treaties.

Mr Grorud. How about the mile square at Messina Falls, where the aluminum plant is situated? How was that Indian title extinguished, if you know?

Mr Manley. By the same series of treaties.

Senator Wheeler. The question comes up, under the Constitution of the United states, as to whether or not the Indian title can be extinguished in any wise except by the United States.

Mr Manley. We have perhaps a million acres of land in that same situation. I understand some other states have the same question.

Senator Wheeler. This reservation was originally set aside to the Indians by the state of New york.

Mr Manley. It was originally set up under the treaty which you have there indicating. That treaty apparently proceeds upon the theory that the Seven Nations of Canada of whom the St. Regis Indians were a part, own a great deal of land in Northern New york, and that they released their rights except as to this particular reservation and consideration for having this reservation definitely set aside for them and for a certain money consideration which I think also appears by treaty.

Mr Grorud. Are the Seven Nations the same as the Six Nations of New York?

Mr Manley. No; they are a very different group. As I say, no historian has ever been successful in determining just who the Seven Nations were. It is clear that they were separate from the Six Nations.

The Chairman. Was the Six Nations part of the state of New York?

Mr Manley. By adoption in 1848. Before that they were not. They are originally an offshoot from the runaway Mohawks."

(End of quote from pages 5092-5094.)

******************************************

Persons listed from both quotes:

Mr. Herne- Mohawk Chief Julius Hearn, Hogansburg N.Y.

The Chairman- Senator Lynn J. Frazier, North Dakota.

Mr Manley-Henry S. Manley, Assistant Attorney general, State of New york, Albany, N.Y.

Mr Grorud - Albert A. Grorud, special assistant to the subcommittee

Senator Wheeler- Burton K. Wheeler, Montana

*And afterthought, there is testimony from every Haudenossunee Territory in New York State in this government document from 1929.