Peronto And The Theft of Fargo

The City of Fargo, North Dakota was initially settled in 1871, in conjunction with the construction of a railroad crossing over the Red River of the North.

Before settlers were given broad legal permission to settle the Northern Plains, large portions of Dakota Territory were used as indian reservations. The land that the city of Fargo now occupies was within the Sisseton, Wahpeton, Sioux, and Bannock Indian Reservation. The reservation was still present at the time of initial settlement of the lands now occupied by the City of Fargo, but an 1873 treaty released the land to settlers. According to the original 1872-drafted agreement, indians interested in cultivating the land rather than moving to Devils lake could homestead, with similar rules as the white settlers, and get up to 160 acres of land if they cultivate at least 1/8 of the land "upon any particular location" for five years. On 14 February 1873, however, the US Government struck out the portions of the treaty which allowed land grants for homesteading. The first of ten $800,000 payments was allocated, but could not be spent until the tribes ratified the amended version. The tribes accepted the amended version on 19 May 1873, and the amended treaty was confirmed by act of Congress on 22 June 1874.

The land that Peronto claims was due to him were the north half of the northeast quarter and the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of section 7, township 139, range 48. This land is roughly a seigneurial system long-lot-style river plot, approximately outlined by NP Avenue on the north, 10th Street on the west, 3rd Avenue South, and 2nd street on the east.

Peronto was not, however, a member of the tribe whose land he settled upon, although he had obtained the tribe's permission to settle there. Peronto claimed he was given permission to own the land and that the tribe intended to give him title to the land once the treaty converted the tribal property to public lands.

Speculators had been trying to stay one step ahead of the railroad surveyors, in hopes of staking their claim on property that would soon become very valuable. Small settlements appeared at Oakport, north of the current Fargo townsite, and at the mouth of the Elm River. In June 1871, an agent of the Lake Superior and Puget Sound Company settled at the Fargo townsite, and soon attracted the attention of other settlers. Oakport and Elm River were quickly abandoned, and all attention moved to what is now Fargo. Township lines had been surveyed in 1870, and section lines were first drawn in the Fargo area in November 1871. In September 1871, a post office had been established as "Centralia", and marks the first establishment of a town at the site.

Peronto, then, was late to the game. Knowing that the railroad was entitled to every odd-numbered section along their route, the other settlers had already laid out their claims on the even-numbered sections. Peronto's claim to the land on Section 7 was no doubt undisputed, because an attempt to claim the land would mean to be removed from the land when the railroad proceeded. The original treaty removing the indian reservation claim would seem to be what Peronto's hopes were riding upon. The treaty originally specified that any indians who wished to retain their land could make a scrip claim, provided they improved it and cultivated it as a homesteader would. If the treaty superseded the railroad's claims, Peronto's claim would become great indeed.

He may have been on the right track, though. His case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the decision weighed heavily on the treaty which opened the territory to settlement, and the original Act granting the public lands to the railroad. The railroad's grant was given in 1865, and thus was the 2nd claim to the land after the indian tribal claim, granted upon whatever land the railroad surveyed for their tracks. When the treaty removed the reservation's claim, and thus any assignment of land established by the tribe, the land surveyed by the railroad in the fall of 1871 reverted immediately to the railroad. There was no gap of time between the two in which a claim could be made, so the odd-number sections could not be squatted upon as was possible across other public lands. Had the treaty left open the window for indians to remain on land that they were cultivating, Peronto may have had a valid argument to retain his odd-numbered section of land.

Peronto passed away in early September, 1883, at the Cass County hospital. At this time, Peronto's case was being heard by the territory's supreme court. Peronto was survived by a daughter who, if the case was won, would inherit the disputed part of Fargo.

After Peronto's death, the appeal continued through the courts, being heard by the US Supreme Court as Buttz v the Northern Pacific Railway Company. Buttz was Peronto's lawyer and executor.