Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1103417
label
Pine Ridge - Treaty Review Commission
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1103417
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Pine Ridge - Treaty Review Commission
citationUrl
collections
Bradley H. Patterson Files (Ford Administration)
Bradley Patterson's Native American Programs Files
subjects
Dakota Indians
Indians of North America
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1103417
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0f72f09a352e4a8b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 5, folder "Pine Ridge - Treaty Review
Commission" of the Bradley H. Patterson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 5 of the Bradley H. Patterson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
September 10, 1976
Dear Louis:
Since the President's memorandum of August 26, designating
me to help in the coordination of Indian policies and programs,
I have reviewed very carefully the papers and background con-
cerning the request of the traditional chiefs and headmen for a
"Presidential Treaty Review Commission". I have gone over
the notes of our two-day meeting at Harper's Ferry in June
and the earlier meeting and luncheon we had with Chief Fools
Crow here at the White House. I have re-read Larry Red Shirt's
letter of June 14, 1976 where, in the attachment, he indicates
he wants the President to "approve and support the concept of
the Presidential Treaty Review Commission".
What I am still trying to get clear -- and I need your help in
doing this -- are specific details about the precise functions
of such a Commission, its authority, responsibilities, member-
ship, funding, reporting deadline and the proposed procedures
for holding sessions.
I must explain that there are very strict standards for staff
work which all modern Presidents impose here within the
White House. Before a Presidential decision is made, a mem-
orandum must go to the President spelling out exactly what is
being requested, the pros and cons of why it is needed, and very
specific descriptions of what the President is being asked to
approve. Laws or other authorities must be indicated to show
that the President has the power to take the requested action
and to show that if he creates some body or institution, even a
temporary one, he has the further authority to fund it.
This may seem a bit elaborate, but I assure you It is an ess-
ential aspect of the modern Presidency. The Congress, the
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
General Accounting Office or the Courts are very quick to object
to any Presidential action which is not within the law; President
Ford insists on making sure, ahead of time, that he is never put
in that position. That means memoranda which are in writing
and which are prepared with great precision.
-2-
My careful review of your proposal for a "Presidential
Treaty Commission" gives me practically nothing on the basis
of which to prepare such a memorandum to the President.
In addition to the questions raised above, there are others
which come to mind about your proposal: would such a Commission
for example, review Indian treaties generally or be limited to
the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty? In either case, what would be
such a Commission's relationship with the elected Tribal leaders,
generally or with those of the Pine Ridge Sioux? What would be
the Commission's relationship with Task Fords I of the American
Indian Policy Review Commission, which currently is reviewing
all the Indian treaties?
What is lacking in Mr. Red Shirt's letter, and in the letter to
the President from the traditional chiefs and headmen of July
24, 1976, are any specifics of this sert.
As you know, Mrs. Kilberg and I have already informed the
traditional chiefs at our Harper's Ferry meeting that n Treaty
Review Commission could not assume a treaty-negotiating role,
since that is prescribed by Congress pursuant to 25 USC 71.
With respect to implementation, specifically, of the Treaty of
Fort Laramie of 1668, you remember that we have called to
the attention of the traditional chiefs and headmen the letter to
them from the Assistant to the President of January 8, 1974. This
letter and its detailed attachment answered a series of fifteen
questions which the chiefs propounded about the 1868 Treaty --
pointing out that the United States has "never disclaimed or
declared invalid the 1868 Treaty as a whole"- but that "portions
have been modified, revoked, superceded or satisfied: -- in most
cases by the Congress or the Courts. That letter was an ex-
haustive discussion of the Treaty of 1868 and its aftermath (other
than the pending Claims Commission action )and I honestly don't
think there is anything the Executive Branch can add to it.
Mr. Richard Parsons, I notice, has also responded to the Lakota
Treaty Council on April 1, 1976 that the President cannot, as
they suggested, stop the Indian Claims Commission action with
respect to the same Black Hills Case.
In view of these facts, my colleagues in the White House and I
are quite unclear as to what the functions of a Presidential
Treaty Review Commission would be that have not already been
handled In laws in Claims cases or in past correspondence.
FORD is LIBRARY 077830
-3-
This letter is therefore a request for your assistance; please
consult with your associates and respond in writing and in
detail about the need, the authority, the make-up, and the
functioning of the proposed Treaty Review Commission. I
assure you in return that we here, together with the Secretary
of the Interior and the Attorney General -- who also would
naturally be consulted by the President on this matter --
will then go over your material carefully and will get a
Presidential decision, as you have requested.
Sincerely,
Bradley H. Patterson, Jr.
Mr. Louis Bad Wound
Pine Ridge Reservation
South Dakota