White River Agency, Colorado
July 10, 1879
Sir: I wish to be informed as to whether Ute Indians from Uintah and Los Pinos Agencies are to be considered “visiting Indians” such as referred to in circular No. 10, prohibiting the issue of annuity goods to any but “Indians belonging to this agency.” Now, a considerable number reside at the other two agencies. It was the practice of previous agents to issue supplies and annuity goods to all Utes who appeared, because they belong to the Utes, for whom a common appropriation was made. I have endeavored to avoid this, but have not been successful, except by way of protest and discouragement How to refuse making issues to some of those whose names are on our books I do not clearly see the way; still, it should be done, for, in the ase of annuity goods, unless a common day is fixed for issue, it is easy for some to get double amounts of goods, and this because, in addition, no Ute has been considered a “visiting Indian.” I don’t know as the matter is important, since the money appropriated belongs to all; but if important and exact distribution is to be secured, I would like a rule for action as to those whose names are printed.
The old practice of issuing to Utes because they are Utes, if continued, is likely to work badly at present, providing Ford 3 is not put in operation as Los Pinos, for some of my Indians went thither last week, and I hear now that a good many more are going. If they find the old system in practice, they will charge me with changing the issue I required them to work, while at Los Pinos there was no such requirement. If, however, they find the issue the same there as here, they will surrender.
Respectfully,
N.C. MEEKER
Indian Agent
HON. E.A. HAYT,
Commissioner of Indian Affairs,
Washington, D.C.