Mr. MELCHER. You were afraid of physical violence at that time? Mr. GROSNICK. I personally had no fear of physical violence for myself.

Mr. MELCHER. I mean physical violence being exercised and the situation worsening?

Mr. GROSNICK. Yes.

Mr. MELCHER. Was there any discussion or any consideration given, if there were threats of physical violence, of removing the women and children from the building?

Mr. GROSNICK. There was no threat of violence to the women and children. By now most of the employees had left the building and the confrontation that ensued occurred between a group of Indians and the nine members of the Federal Protective Service who were located in that particular police office.

Mr. MELCHER. Do you think the threat of physical violence had lessened or that there wasn't any threat of physical violence that would be possibly injurious to the women and children in the building?

Mr. GROSNICK. If, for example, the uniformed men had penetrated through the inner doors and had confronted with the 75 or 100 Indians who were milling about those doors, I am sure that we would have encountered a lot of personal injury, both to the officers and to the Indians.

I neglected to mention that on my way down the stairway, the stairway leading from the auditorium from the first floor to the second floor was crowded with women and children and some Indian was yelling a number of them, rather "All women and children to the third floor."

There was quite an amount of dislocation on the first floor. The people had assembled in the auditorium to, as I understand it, consider the proposition that Mr. Loesch had left with them before he departed the building and that was that the Labor Departmental Auditorium was available for the use of these Indians providing they left the BIA Building.

Mr. MELCHER. Did you discuss that afternoon and early evening then with Secretary Loesch his intentions for clearing the building? Mr. GROSNICK. His final instructions to me our conversation came after he had his meeting with the negotiating group and he said in effect that he had offered the use of the Labor Departmental Auditorium to the Indians and that he was considering arranging a meeting with the negotiating group and some representatives with whom they wanted to meet. He would then call me and advise me as to what the decision was and what course of action we would thereafter pursue. Mr. MELCHER. That was early in the evening?

Mr. GROSNICK. That was probably around 4 o'clock, 4 to 4:15, yes, sir.

Mr. MELCHER. Did you have any further discussion with Secretary Loesch or anybody from the White House?

Mr. GROSNICK. The only conversation I had then, after the confrontation downstairs, was in Mr. Crow's office, because I left and went up to Mr. Crow's office with Lieutenant Rutherford and our sole intention then was to try to restore some semblance of order within the building. We met with a number of leaders in Mr. Crow's office and subsequently the turmoil in the building subsided.

Mr. MELCHER. At approximately 10:30, as Mr. Casselman says, you were informed that the Indians would be permitted to remain in the building overnight?

Mr. GROSNICK. May I also give a parenthetical explanation to that statement? About 7:55 Lieutenant Rutherford and I left the BIA Building with a group of negotiating Indians to go to the Interior Department, where a meeting was scheduled to occur at 8 o'clock. I sat in that meeting most of the time; both Lieutenant Rutherford and I.

It was approximately 10:30 when Mr. Loesch came out of a conference room and advised me that the Indians would be permitted to remain in the building overnight and that they would be evicted the following morning between 8 and 9 o'clock if they did not leave voluntarily.

I might also add, on my way out of the Interior Building I talked to Mr. Russell Means and I asked him whether or not they were going to leave the building voluntarily and he admitted to me that they would leave the following morning.

Mr. MELCHER. Mr. Galuardi, you went to court the following day, on Friday, accompanied by Lieutenant Rutherford, is that correct? Mr. GALUARDI. That is correct.

Mr. MELCHER. What was your function?

Mr. GALUARDI. I provided the information to the U.S. attorney's office for the purposes of swearing out the temporary restraining order.

Mr. MELCHER. Were you in the BIA building?

Mr. GALUARDI. I was in the building at 3 o'clock in the afternoon before the act of violence occurred.

Mr. MELCHER. Then the two of you provided information to the court, to what effect?

Mr. GALUARDI. Lieutenant Rutherford provided the names of the individuals against whom the restraining order was to be issued because I was not personally aware of who the individuals were, and I gave evidence to the effect that some damage had occurred to some of the material within the building, and based upon the testimony of Lieutenant Rutherford, after the violence, that severe damage had occurred to the furniture. The barricades had been constructed and so forth.

Mr. MELCHER. Did the question come up as to why the building had not been cleared the previous day? Was that discussed?

Mr. GALUARDI. No, sir.

Mr. MELCHER. It wasn't discussed why the building had not been cleared?

Mr. GALUARDI. Why, at closing time

Mr. MELCHER. Or at the time Secretary Loesch discussed with the Chief here

Mr. GALUARDI. I was called at 3 o'clock in the morning to come. in and give whatever information I had to the U.S. attorney's office and by that time the Indians had complete control and possession of the building.

Mr. MELCHER. There was no discussion of why the building hadn't been cleared?

What time did you go to court? Are you telling me you went at 3 o'clock in the morning?

Mr. GALUARDI. I went to the U.S. attorney's office at that time. We were to appear in court at 9 o'clock in the morning but the Indians had another case on with Judge Corcoran and we were expecting to be heard by Judge Corcoran and it was 3 o'clock in the afternoon when they made a change of judges from Judge Corcoran to Judge Pratt.

Mr. MELCHER. It was never discussed why the building hadn't been cleared the previous day which would have been the normal occurrence?

Mr. GALUARDI. I think it was quite evident the Indians were in control.

Mr. MELCHER. The court was aware of that, is that it, without you telling him?

Mr. GALUARDI. That is my understanding; yes, sir.

Mr. MELCHER. Were you questioned on that, Lieutenant Rutherford?

Lieutenant RUTHEFORD. As to why the building was not cleared? Mr. MELCHER. Yes.

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. The reason it was not cleared, because we did not receive instructions from the officials on the scene at that time. Mr. MELCHER. Was that discussed before the court?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. No.

Mr. MELCHER. That matter wasn't brought up in seeking a restraining order?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. No.

Mr. MELCHER. Was it a real rapid procedure in securing the restraining order? There wasn't much questioning by the court?

Mr. GALUARDI. The U.S. attorney made the presentation to Judge Pratt. There was some questioning of the U.S. attorney by the judge. I was not called as a witness before the judge.

Mr. MELCHER. The questioning of the U.S. attorney wasn't to the effect as to why the building hadn't been cleared?

Mr. GALUARDI. Not to the best of my recollection; no.

Mr. MELCHER. You were present, both of you. It just wasn't discussed. Or was it described why a restraining order was being sought then?

Mr. GALUARDI. I don't know if I have the information here, but we said that the Indians were in possession and control.

The temporary restraining order says:

It further appearing to the court that in spite of repeated requests to vacate and quit the scene by the plaintiff through its duly authorized officers and agents the defendants, in active concert participation with them jointly and severally, have refused and are refusing to comply with said request.

Mr. MELCHER. It seems like a peculiar situation to me, but the normal procedure would have been to clear the building and if the court was going to take a step in addition to what would be normal police action, would want to know the circumstances on why normal police action wasn't followed, but I gather from the testimony of both of you this morning that the court simply didn't look into that or didn't question that.

Mr. ASPINALL. If my colleague would yield.

Mr. MELCHER. I would be glad to yield.

Mr. ASPINALL. It is true the representative of the Justice Department made his case before the court, is that right?

Mr. GALUARDI. That is right.

Mr. ASPINALL. That wasn't up to you; that was up to the Justice Department representatives?

Mr. GALUARDI. Yes, sir.

Mr. ASPINALL. The Justice Department representative refuses to appear before this body in order to answer our questions because of the fact, according to them, that they are investigating further and they also are perhaps planning some future action. So they think that this would be "inappropriate and possibly prejudicial" to their case and they have used this as their reason for not being available as witnesses.

Mr. MELCHER. My point in this line of questioning, Mr. Galuardi, is to get right at what was said and I gather that it wasn't discussed before the court because you were present, both of you were present, and if it were discussed you would have heard it.

Mr. GALUARDI. I have looked at my affidavit and this is what I advised the U.S. attorney. I am not sure what he talked to the judge about, but he didn't read this whole thing before the court.

Mr. MELCHER. I would appreciate it if you would make your affidavit a part of the record.

Mr. GALUARDI. Yes, sir.

Mr. HALEY. You have heard the request of the gentleman from Montana. Are there objections?

The Chair hears none. It is so ordered.

(The document follows:)

IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF
V.

TRAIL OF BROKEN TREATIES, AND ITS OFFICERS, INCLUDING RALPH WARE, ROBERT BURNETTE, BOB ROBERTS, RUSSELL MEANS, TED MEANS, ROBERT FOREE, WITA COLLINS, CLYDE BELCOURT, SID MILLS, JOHN VIGIL, CHIQUETTI, LEONARD DOG, WASHUK, PHILLIP DEER, VERN BELCOURT, CARTER CAMP, EDDIE BENTON, DEFENDANTS. AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN F. GALUARDI, ACTING COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC BUILDINGS SERVICE, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

John F. Galuardi, being duly sworn, depose and say:

1. That he is the Acting Commissioner, Public Buildings Service, General Services Administration.

2. On the morning of November 2, 1972, a group of American Indians, claiming to represent an organization described as the "Trail of Broken Treaties" entered the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) building, 1951 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. for the alleged purpose of discussing Indian grievances with officials of that Government agency.

3. At approximately 4:00 p.m. during such discussions, Deputy Commissioner John O. Crow, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Assistant Secretary Harrison Loesch, Department of Interior, advised the Indian delegation that the building would be closed at 4:30 p.m. in accordance with normal practice. The Departmental Auditorium at 12th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. was offered as a meeting place for the group on a 24 hour basis.

4. At approximately 4:30 p.m., GSA Federal Protection Service officers arrived at the Bureau of Indian Affairs building to secure it. The aforementioned American Indians forcibly ejected several officers from the building and barricaded the entrances with furniture and other movable property. Efforts by

Deputy Commissioner Crow and two officers to negotiate the removal of the Indians were unsuccessful.

5. During the early evening on November 2, 1972, the Indians removed all officers and personnel from the building. All entrances were completely barricaded, and the building was occupied by a group of Indians estimated at 200–500 persons.

6. In the course of the occupation of the building extensive damage has resulted to furnishings, windows, office machinery, and doors. File cabinets were opened and public documents and files were removed or destroyed. Food supplies in the building's cafeteria have been taken.

7. As of 6:30 a.m. November 3, 1972, the building remains occupied by Indians. All entrances continue to be barricaded.

8. By reason of the foregoing facts, an order was issued by Commissioner Louis R. Bruce, Bureau of Indian Affairs, directing all employees of that agency who are normally assigned in that building not to report for work until further notice.

JOHN F. GALUARDI.

Subscribed and sworn before me this 3rd day of November, 1972.
AUDREY ANN CRUMP,
Notary Public.

Mr. ASPINALL. I yield to the gentleman from South Dakota for 5 minutes, at which time we will recess.

Mr. ABOUREZK. Getting back to Thursday, November 2, how many of you sitting at the table were around the building during the day of November 2? Lieutenant Rutherford and Mr. Grosnick?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. Yes.

Mr. GROSNICK. I arrived at 2 o'clock in the afternoon and remained until about 7:55.

Mr. ABOUREZK. Was anybody else there?

Mr. GALUARDI. I was there at approximately 3 o'clock for about 15 minutes.

Mr. ABOUREZK. In the afternoon.

Mr. GALUARDI. Yes.

Mr. ABOUREZK. Did any of you take part in the negotiations that were going on with the TBT people?

Mr. GROSNICK. No, sir; I did not, except for the 8 o'clock meeting which occurred over in the Department of the Interior building and I sat in on that one.

Mr. ABOUREZK. How about earlier in the day, did any of the rest of you?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. I was in the meeting at the auditorium with Mr. Loesch after 10:30, on November 2, 1972.

Mr. ABOUREZK. In the morning?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. Right.

Mr. ABOUREZK. What I am trying to find out, Lieutenant, or anybody else is, what incident, or what might have happened that precipitated the attempted takeover at 4:30 or the total change in whatever was happening at 4:30 that afternoon? Was there any argument or anything that was said by the BIA people or the Interior Department officials?

Lieutenant RUTHERFORD. There was no argument, but there were some demands they had made which had not been met. They felt until they got food, housing, and some medical assistance that they would remain there.

Mr. ABOUREZк. The Indian people intended to stay unless their demands were met?