University of California Berkeley 
 
OFFICE OF THE 
 
 INDIAN RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, 
 
 1305 ARCH STREET, 
 
 PHILADELPHIA, April, 1890. 
 
 From the New York Tribune, April 4th, 1890. 
 
 THE UTE INDIANS. 
 
 WHY PEOPLE IN COLORADO WANT THEM TO BE REMOVED. 
 
 DENVER, COL., April 3d (Special). When Governer Cooper 
 remarked to the Tribune correspondent a few days ago that the 
 reason he favored the removal of the Ute Indians was because 
 he wanted them out of the State, he summed up the philosophy 
 of the situation. Such is the only excuse that can be given by 
 any Coloradoan. During the last few days, your correspondent 
 has met residents of all portions of Colorado, and in every 
 instance they desired the Indians removed out of feelings of 
 malice and the usual race prejudice. As far as the Indians 
 themselves are concerned, it makes but little difference to them 
 how often they are asked to change their place of residence. 
 This is accounted for by the bribes offered by the commissioners 
 when appointed and fairy tales sung in their ears. It is a notice 
 able fact that the Southern Utes have taken no interest whatever 
 in their present reservation, owing to the uncertainty as to how 
 long they will be allowed to remain. In case they are removed 
 to Utah, in less than a year the Territorial Legislature will be 
 petitioning Congress to move them into Arizona, while that 
 Territory will never be satisfied until they are dumped into the 
 Pacific. 
 
 Among the more prominent preachers in Denver is the Rev. 
 H. H. Beach, who has spent many years in Southern Colorado, 
 and is conversant on all matters pertaining to the Utes. Mr. 
 Beach is at the present time pastor of one of the principal 
 churches here, and recently directed a letter to Commissioner 
 Morgan, opposing the proposed removal. As this letter attracted 
 considerable attention among the Denver newspapers, its writer 
 
has handed to the Tribune correspondent the following com 
 munication : 
 
 "I need not claim an extraordinary acquaintance with the 
 Southern Utes. Facts commonly and well known East and 
 West not only justify the severest condemnation of the effort to 
 remove them to Utah, but call for the protest of every man who 
 sympathizes with the weak and misused. I refer to such facts 
 as these : 
 
 " i. A fair proportion of the Utes have dug irrigating ditches, 
 even the women and children engaging in the work, and other 
 wise improved themselves farms, established comfortable homes 
 and adopted many of the customs of civilized life. Of course 
 it may be said that they neither form home attachments nor 
 value property as we do, and so may, in perfect justice, be 
 frightened and reduced to the wilderness; but I would not give 
 the statement much weight. 
 
 " 2. Only a small proportion, the more indolent and vicious, 
 such a class as curses every community, was at first willing to go. 
 It was notoriously difficult for the commissioners to gain the con 
 sent of the people. And what were the arguments and means 
 by which they at last accomplished it? Such as make every 
 loyal Coloradoan blush appeals to barbarous instincts, the very 
 elements of character that every magnanimous man would sub 
 due in them, bribery and broad hints of encroachment, perhaps 
 another war (?) and the eventual loss of their property, their 
 homes and their lives. Are we bandits? Adair Wilson and 
 Denver newspapers, particularly The Sundown Chestnut, need 
 not wonder that unbiased people of New York and Boston fail 
 to feel the force of the argument that the Utes very generally 
 consented to removal. History repeats itself. A portion, at 
 least, of the Cherokees, in 1835, consented, but their removal 
 proves to be an indelible stain, not only on Georgia, but on the 
 whole country. The highwayman gains the consent of his 
 victims. 
 
 "3. We want the reservation for ourselves. We covet those 
 ranches and the whole Territory. l School lands will not last 
 'forever. Out with the Utes. ' < But . . . they are lazy and 
 low-lived. ' Have the men who tolerate the low streets of Denver, 
 the saloons, the gambling dens, the many houses of iniquity, and 
 

 the Greasers of Archuleta and Conejos Counties grown suddenly 
 virtuous? Let us hope so. But cupidity is too evident, and, 
 besides, the proposed removal is not reformatory. 
 
 "Is anybody [distressed because one citizen of Colorado has 
 spoken a word or two in behalf of these poor creatures ? Have 
 we not more reason to feel distressed that the human sentiments 
 of thousands of citizens have not found utterance loud enough 
 to ring throughout all the land? If one or forty could prevent 
 the consummation of a heartless scheme they might, I think, 
 enjoy the consciousness of having saved their State another 
 disgrace." 
 
 What Colorado lacks is more candid and outspoken men like 
 Mr. Beach.