fully satisfied. The fact that he completed his second entry in the manner described, instead of by the submission of ordinary final five year proof, has no bearing upon the right of Johnson under section 2306. It was the making and not the perfection of his second entry that determined his right. The method of completing the entry was optional with Johnson. His election to accept the terms of the act of May 2, 1890 (supra), and make the payment required, was purely voluntary and was made, as in other cases of commutation, in lieu of residence. The consideration thus exacted was in satisfaction of no other obligation, and the payment by Johnson of the amount required did not alter his position from what it would have been had he completed his entry by furnishing proof of residence and cultivation for the full period of five years, upon which period he would have been entitled to credit for the term of his military service.

The contention that the provisions of section 2 of the act of June 5, 1900 (31 Stat., 267), restored Johnson to the status occupied by him prior to the making of his second entry, is untenable. So far as restoring the purely personal right to make a homestead entry is concerned, this act had that effect, but the limitation imposed prohibiting commutation of entries made under said section 2 forbids extension thereof, by construction, beyond the recognition of a personal right of entry.

Independently of this, however, it is apparent from the language of said section 2306 that nothing more was intended to be granted thereby than a right to acquire title to one hundred and sixty acres of land under the homestead law, and the benefits conferred by said section are fully obtained when the person entitled thereto has perfected a homestead entry for the full area allowed. Any additional right to which he may thereafter become entitled under a special act must, in conformity with the settled interpretation of the general homestead law, and in the absence of any specific language to the contrary contained in such act, be deemed a purely personal privilege.

It is clear therefore that Johnson was not, at the date of his attempted assignment of an additional right of entry, possessed of such right, and the rejection of Stafford's application based upon such assignment was proper.

The decision complained of is accordingly hereby adhered to, and the motion for review denied.

SMITH . DRAKE.

Motion for review of departmental decision of October 21, 1907, 36 L. D., 133, denied by First Assistant Secretary Pierce January 25, 1908.

WHITE EARTH INDIAN RESERVATION-ALLOTMENTS AND ANNUITJESRESIDENCE.

MINNIE H. SPARKS.

Residence upon the White Earth Indian reservation is a condition precedent to the right to an allotment of lands on that reservation under the acts of January 14, 1889, and April 28, 1904.

An Indian entitled to annuities under section 7 of the act of January 14, 1889, does not forfeit his right thereto by removing from the reservation and adopting the habits of civilized life.

Assistant Secretary Wilson to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, (S. V. P.) January 25, 1908. (C. J. G.)

The Department has received your office letter of December 24, 1907, transmitting application of Minnie H. Sparks for reinstatement on the rolls of the Mississippi Chippewa Indians, White Earth Reservation, Minnesota.

The applicant and her daughter, Leila C. Sparks, were enrolled by the Chippewa commission in 1889-" Census Rolls of the Mississippi Chippewa Indians, Gull Lake and Scattered Bands "-under the provisions of the act of January 14, 1889 (25 Stat., 642). From the facts as stated in your office letter it appears that in 1889 a member of the Chippewa commission advised your office that neither Mrs. Sparks nor her daughter had ever resided on the White Earth Reservation; that he had notified Mrs. Sparks at Duluth, Minnesota, where she resided, that the condition precedent to enrollment and allotment was a bona fide residence on the reservation; that he sent her a copy of a departmental decision touching the question of "who is a Chippewa," and notified her that unless she could show residence on the White Earth Reservation her name as well as that of her daughter would be dropped from the rolls and their tentative allotments canceled, the same not having yet been approved. The letter from the Chippewa commissioner addressed to Mrs. Sparks is not in the record, but in her reply, dated September 8, 1899, she stated:

Regarding the legality of my allotment of land and my name appearing upon the pay rolls as a Chippewa " I would say in response to your communication, that I know of no reason why my name should not be dropped if conditions are as set forth in your communication.

In his letter to your office, dated November 7, 1899, the commissioner stated:

I received a letter from her practically acknowledging receipt of my notice to her, and admitting that she never had any residence upon White Earth Reservation, when she says, she knows of no reason why her name should not be dropped."

I inclose her letter which is a reply to my notice sent her on August 7th, 1899, in view of which I recommend that the name of Minnie H. Sparks and her daughter Leila C. Sparks be dropped from the rolls of the Chippewa Indians in Minnesota, and their allotments be canceled.

Your office on November 13, 1899, concurred in the recommendation of the commissioner and thereupon the names of Mrs. Sparks and her daughter were dropped from the White Earth rolls.

The act of January 14, 1889 (25 Stat., 642), after providing in the first section thereof for the appointment of commissioners to negotiate with all the different bands or tribes of Chippewa Indians in Minnesota for the cession of their reservations in that State, except the White Earth and Red Lake reservations, and to make a census of each tribe or band, further provided in section 3:

That as soon as the census has been taken, and the cession and relinquishment has been obtained, approved, and ratified, as specified in section one of this act, all of said Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota, except those on the Red Lake Reservation, shall, under the direction of said commissioners, be removed to and take up their residence on the White Earth Reservation, and thereupon there shall, as soon as practicable, under the direction of said commissioners, be allotted lands in severalty to the Red Lake Indians on Red Lake Reservation, and to all the other of said Indians on White Earth Reservation, in conformity with the act of February eighth, eighteen hundred and eightyseven, entitled "An act for the allotment of lands in severalty to Indians on the various reservations, and to extend the protection of the laws of the United States and the Territories over the Indians, and for other purposes;" and all allotments heretofore made to any of said Indians on the White Earth Reservation are hereby ratified and confirmed with the like tenure and condition prescribed for all allotments under this act: Provided, however, That the amount heretofore allotted to any Indian on White Earth Reservation shall be deducted from the amount of allotment to which he or she is entitled under this act: Provided further, That any of the Indians residing on any of said reservations may, in his discretion, take his allotment in severalty under this act on the reservation where he lives at the time of the removal herein provided for is effected, instead of being removed to and taking such allotment on White Earth Reservation.

Your office in a letter dated October 5, 1893, "touching the question of who is a Chippewa," passed upon the application of one Mrs. Oakes for an allotment on the White Earth Reservation. She was born a member of the Mississippi Chippewa band, resident upon that reservation. Early in life she abandoned her tribe and married a man by the name of Oakes, of St. Paul, where she thereafter resided. After quoting from the foregoing section 3 your office said:

There can be no question then that removal to White Earth Reservation and residence thereon is under the law a precedent condition to the allotment of lands in the case of every Chippewa in Minnesota save the Red Lake Chippewas, and those Indians residing on other reservations who may elect under the last proviso of section 3 of the act to take their allotments on the reservation where they reside "instead of being removed to and taking allotments on the White Earth Reservation." It seems to me therefore that it would be safe to lay down the rule, in cases like that of the Oakes family, that before any such person can be enrolled and given an allotment it shall be shown to the satisfaction of the commissioners that he or she is a Chippewa Indian, actually resident in the State of Minnesota (Decision of the Department of March 26,

1891, heretofore referred to), and has removed to and taken up his or her residence on the White Earth Reservation, with the bona fide intention of permanently remaining there.

The foregoing was concurred in by the Assistant Attorney-General for this Department in an opinion rendered by him May 24, 1895, and presumably is the paper, a copy of which the Chippewa commissioner says he inclosed in a letter addressed to Mrs. Sparks, August 7, 1899, to which she replied September 8, 1899, as hereinbefore quoted. By the act of April 28, 1904 (33 Stat., 539), known as the Steenerson act, allotments were authorized to be made—

to each Chippewa Indian now legally residing upon the White Earth Reservation under the treaty or laws of the United States, in accordance with the express promise made to them by the commissioners appointed under the act of Congress entitled "An act for the relief and civilization of the Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota," approved January fourteenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-nine, and to those Indians who may remove to said reservation who are entitled to take an allotment under article seven of the treaty of April eighteenth, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, between the United States and the Chippewa Indians of the Mississippi.

Mrs. Sparks has on several occasions since her name was dropped from the rolls applied for reinstanement for herself and daughter, and each time your office has concluded that they were not and are not entitled to enrollment on the White Earth rolls. In letter of September 17, 1904, to the Indian agent at White Earth, your office stated:

It seems very evident from your letter that Mrs. Sparks has never established a permanent residence on the White Earth Reservation and in the opinion of this office she is not entitled to enrollment on the White Earth rolls or to an allotment on the White Earth Reservation.

Your office states that since the passage of the act of April 28, 1904, the Indians of the reservation have been jealous of their rolls, protesting against additions being made thereto without their consent. Consequently the practice has been to instruct the agent to present applications for enrollment to the general council of the Indians. Such course was pursued in the case of Mrs. Sparks. Two propositions are advanced in support of her application for reinstatement, viz:

First, that there was no justification for the dropping of the name of Minnie H. Sparks from the rolls of Minnesota Chippewa Indians.

Second, the name of Minnie H. Sparks having been unlawfully dropped from the rolls, without the intervention of the tribal authorities, the same should be replaced on said rolls, and the applicant herein should be reinstated as a member of her original band directly by the same authorities which removed her

name.

Apparently there is no question as to the Indian blood of Mrs. Sparks and she was recognized as a member of the Gull Lake band of Chippewa Indians by the action of the Chippewa commission in placing her name on the original census rolls of that tribe under the act of January 14, 1889. As such member she received annuities from

date of enrollment up to the time her name was dropped from the rolls, a period of ten years. In reference to the statement contained in her letter to the Chippewa commissioner in 1899, upon which action in dropping her name seems largely to have been based, she states in an affidavit that she was mistaken in supposing that she had never lived on the reservation, the fact being as recently ascertained that she lived there until the death of her mother which occurred when the daughter was eight years of age.

The uniform holding has been that a condition precedent to enrollment and allotment of lands on the White Earth Reservation under the acts of 1889 and 1904 is residence on or removal to said reservation. This was the construction placed upon said acts when on June 18, 1904 (Indian Division), the Department rendered decision in the case of what is known as the Sloan family, involving the question of their rights to annuities under the act of January 14, 1889. The Indian agent reported that with few exceptions the members of said family had never resided on the reservation, and recommendation was made that their names be dropped from the rolls. In said departmental decision of June 18, 1904, it was held:

The evident purpose of the act of January 14, 1889, was to gather to White Earth reservation all nomadic Chippewa Indians in Minnesota who had not adopted the habits of civilized life, with view to their civilization and the relief of the white settlements from the annoyance and dangers incident to the presence of these wanderers among them. As a condition to their right to an allotment they were required to take up their residence" on White Earth reservation and allotments were "thereupon to be made to them. Residence therefore became necessary to the taking of the allotment, but the act contained no requirement for continuity of residence by the allottee after obtaining an allotment. All allotments made under the act, whether on ceded lands or on White Earth diminished reservation, to Indians who never resided thereon, were made without authority of law, and should be reported for cancellation, if no patent has issued.

Nor is the condition of residence on allotted land, or yet on the reservation, imposed as to the right to draw annuities of tribal funds. The act of January 14, 1889, is but one of a series of acts having the general purpose to induce the Indian to abandon tribal relations and nomadic habits, and to adopt those of civilized life and to become independent and self-supporting. The act, section 3, makes express reference to the act of February 8, 1887 (24 Stat., 388). That act (ib., 390) provided that:

"Every Indian born within the territorial limits of the United States who has voluntarily taken up, within said limits, his residence separate and apart from any tribe of Indians therein, and has adopted the habits of civilized life, is hereby declared to be a citizen of the United States, and is entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of such citizens without in any manner impairing or otherwise affecting the right of any such Indian to tribal or other property."

* * *

The enrollment of these applicants by the commission presumably shows them to be Chippewa Indians of Minnesota. Being so, they are entitled to the annuities arising from sale of the ceded lands under section 7 of the act of January 14, 1889. No distinction is there made in favor of such only of the