Bir Form 1905 For Books Of Accounts Only Download ##VERIFIED##
Leo Oquendo
The first form drawn up by the Commissioner asked only for name, age, sex, and family relationship. Since these early Indian Census Rolls contain so little information that they were never considered to be "private" in the same sense as the Federal Decennial Census; there was never any restriction against the release of the information. Gradual changes in the form of the data required and special instructions for the census are documented in National Archives Microfilm Publication M1121, Procedural Issuances of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Orders and Circulars, 1854-1955. This is not currently available online; use the online Microfilm Catalog to learn which NARA archival facilities have copies of this microfilm publication.
The 1885 and later censuses were compiled by the agents using forms sent by the BIA. There was supposed to be only one census for each reservation, except in a few cases where part of the reservation was in another state. The original was sent to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs; multiple copies were not created. The earliest censuses were written in by hand, but typing appeared quite early. Eventually the Commissioner issued instructions on exactly how to type some entries in, and requested that the family names be placed in alphabetical sections on the roll. For a while, a new census was taken each year and the entire roll redone. By 1921 agents were told to list all the people under their charge, and if a name was listed for the first time, or was not listed from the last year, an explanation was required. It was considered helpful to indicate the number for the person on the previous year's census. Persons also could be designated by a number peculiar to that reservation, if it was explained somewhere, or they could be listed as "N.E.", or "Not Enrolled." In the 1930s, sometimes only supplemental rolls showing the additions and deletions from the previous year were submitted. The regular process of taking the Indian censuses was discontinued in 1940, although a few later rolls exist. A new Indian Census was taken by the Census Bureau in 1950, but it will not be open to public use until 2022.
There were no instructions with the earliest census forms, except to include all Indians under the agent's charge, but the Commissioner did occasionally issue a statement about the census. Primarily he urged the agents to get the information and send it in on time, without much comment. The early instructions just said to include family groups with all the people living in each household. The agent was instructed to list the Indian and English names of the head of the household and the names, ages, and relationship of the other family members. The column for Indian Name continued, but in fact, Indian names were falling out of usage and were seldom included after about 1904. A directive in 1902 gave suggestions for how to translate Indian names to English in what would now be termed "politically correct" fashion. The usefulness of having all the family members share the same surname was pointed out, especially for the purposes of property or land ownership, so that children and wives would be known by the names of their fathers and husbands in questions of inheritance. The agents were told not to simply substitute English for the native language. It was suggested that a native name be retained as much as possible, but not if it were too difficult to pronounce and remember. If it were easily pronounced and mellifluous, it should be retained. Names of animals could be translated to the English version, such as Wolf, but only if the Indian word was too long and too difficult. "Foolish, cumbersome or uncouth translations which would handicap a self-respecting person should not be tolerated." Complex names such as Dog Turning Round might be better rendered, for example, as Turningdog, or Whirlingdog. Derogatory nicknames were to be dropped.
It wasn't until 1919 that any clarifying instructions about whom to include were added. The Commissioner directed superintendents and agents in Circular 1538, "In enumerating Indians who are not attached to your jurisdiction, they should be classified by tribal affiliations, in which case they should be designated by approximate blood relationship." He was referring to people living in the jurisdiction, but not from that reservation or tribe, rather than people not present and living off reservation. If they were listed with a family, the agent should tell what family relationship they bore to an enrolled person, and what tribe or jurisdiction to which they actually belonged. The Commissioner pointed out that both parents might not be members of the same tribe, for example, one might be Pima and one might be Hopi. The parents had the right to determine with which tribe the children should be identified, and agents were instructed to show the parents' selection as the first one, with a hyphen and the second tribe, as in Pima-Hopi. Very likely the only thing new by 1919 was to be sure to indicate the formal tribal affiliation of all. Formerly it might simply have been assumed from the census that the grandmother living with the family was actually a member of that tribe and reservation. Or she might not have been listed, because she really did belong with another tribe. Or if more than one tribe resided within a jurisdiction, the distinction might not have been made. In urging accuracy, the Commissioner said in 1921, "It does not seem to be generally appreciated that the census rolls are often the basis of the property rights of the Indian enrolled. An allotting agent looks to the census roll to determine who are entitled to allotments. An examiner of inheritances secures much of his information ... from the census rolls." (Circular 1671). But in many ways it was still the decision of the Superintendent or Agent as to whether someone should be included in the census.
The Commissioner directed the superintendents in Circular 2676 that the "census must show only Indians at your jurisdiction living on June 30, 1930. Names of Indians removed from the rolls since the last census, because of death or otherwise, must be entirely omitted." A later amendment altered this to state, "The census must show only Indians enrolled at your jurisdiction living on April 1, 1930. This will include Indians enrolled at your jurisdiction and actually living on the reservation, and Indians enrolled at your jurisdiction and living elsewhere." The commissioner was still hammering on this theme in Circular 2897, when he said, "Dead Indians reported on Census Roll as was done by some agencies last year will not be tolerated." He also took care to define the meaning of the Superintendent's area of jurisdiction to include "Government rancherias and public domain allotments as well as reservations." The agents were urged to be careful to remove names of those deceased, and to include names of those who were still "under their jurisdiction" but perhaps on a rancheria or public domain allotment. The implication is that the information for previous years could be erroneous. Also it is clear that the jurisdiction did include some people living on allotments in the public domain, whose lands were no longer considered as a part of a reservation. However, spouses of Indians who were themselves not Indian, are not listed. Charles Eastman's wife, a non-Indian, does not appear on the Flandreau census with her husband.
Degree of blood was not required on the early rolls. When it was included, for a short period, blood quantities were artificially compressed into only three categories that may have led to confusion in later years when more specific categories were required. The 1930 Indian census did not allow more than three distinctions to be made in amount of blood because the census was to be tabulated using mechanical reading device. Circular 2676 (1930) said the new census form, Form 5-128,"must be filled out in absolute conformity to instructions on reverse. This ruling is necessary because a mechanical device has been installed in the Office for tabulating the data.... Thus for degree of blood then symbols "F" for full blood; "+" for one-fourth or more Indian blood; and "-" for less than one-fourth. No substitution of more detailed information is permissible in any column." Later, in 1933, the agents were told to use the categories "F", "3/4", "", "1/4", and "1/8." Still later, they were urged to be exact if possible. Thus, if someone used the 1930 blood quantum information in retrospect it could lead to mistakes, since it is not possible to start from an artificially compressed category and then accurately return with greater detail.
NO. The following are the basic services that we can help you pursue (You may qualify for more than one benefit - however, you can only use one benefit at a time). Regardless of the Veterans Educational Benefit you intend on using or may have used in the past, you will also need to apply for admissions to Indiana University Southeast either in person or online. For more information on how to apply, visit the Office of Admissions website.
After you receive confirmation from your councilor that you are authorized the IU Southeast bookstore will check for your valid VA Form 28-1905 before they can credit your books/supplies. At your first opportunity you can register and fill in the Veterans Educational Benefits Worksheet and attach your class schedule. The Worksheet & Class Schedule can be dropped off, FAXed (812) 941-2351, or emailed to kpe...@ius.edu (insure the Worksheet is signed). We will process your semester certification and provide your enrollment information to the Office of the Bursar, Barnes & Noble Bookstore and VA Voc Rehab.
The Russian Revolution of 1905,[a] also known as the First Russian Revolution,[b] began on 22 January 1905. A wave of mass political and social unrest then began to spread across the vast areas of the Russian Empire. The unrest was directed primarily against the Tsar, the nobility, and the ruling class. It included worker strikes, peasant unrest, and military mutinies. In response to the public pressure, Tsar Nicholas II was forced to go back on his earlier authoritarian stance and enact some reform (issued in the October Manifesto). This took the form of establishing the State Duma, the multi-party system, and the Russian Constitution of 1906. Despite popular participation in the Duma, the parliament was unable to issue laws of its own, and frequently came into conflict with Nicholas. The Duma's power was limited and Nicholas continued to hold the ruling authority. Furthermore, he could dissolve the Duma, which he did three times in order to get rid of the opposition.[2]
dafc88bca6