Compare revisions: OIA_Roll-418_0231
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
We further learn that it had not yet been decided who should pay this expense, whether it should be paid by the Gov<sup>t</sup> or by the Removal Contractors. | We further learn that it had not yet been decided who should pay this expense, whether it should be paid by the Gov<sup>t</sup> or by the Removal Contractors. | ||
| − | It is against this latter part that we desire <u>most earnestly</u> to object and to <u>protest</u>. Notwithstand. it was and now is the opinion of the Suprt of Indian Affairs that the rations should only ^ <sup>be</sup> issued once in 30 days, yet we see this synecure office, for the purpose of | + | It is against this latter part that we desire <u>most earnestly</u> to object and to <u>protest</u>. Notwithstand. it was and now is the opinion of the Suprt of Indian Affairs that the rations should only ^ <sup>be</sup> issued once in 30 days, yet we see this synecure office, for the purpose of peculation, requiring, under orders or sanction of his father, the sub agent, during the whole of the first year ending on 5<sup>th</sup> Nov<sup>r</sup> last, the issues to be made once every five days--wholly un called for by the Indians--and done for the express purpose of increasing the per diem to this uncalled for office. |