Peronto And The Theft of Fargo

In the 1883, the newspaper The Fargo Argus proudly proclaimed that the fair city had sprung up into a rich metropolis in record time. "In 1872," it claimed, "Fargo was the habitation of the wild Indian, and where her numberless business blocks stand today the tepee of the savage was the only indication of humanity's presence." Particularly, at the location of those numberless business blocks lived a Sioux man named Peronto.

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 until the 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 get a pre-emption for land ownership and stake their claim, 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 reimbursing the tribe for the land was allocated, but could not be spent until the tribes ratified the amended version. The tribes accepted the revised version, without pre-emption for indian land ownership, on 19 May 1873, and the amended treaty was confirmed by act of Congress on 22 June 1874.

Francis Peronto was born in 1831 at an indian settlement along the Goose River. He was a half-blooded Sioux, commonly known as a "half-breed" in the contemporary language of the time, and his name would indicate his father was French. In October 1871, at age 40, Peronto and his family settled along the Red River on the Dakota side, approximately where the Main Avenue now crosses the river. Peronto claims he was given the land by the Sioux leaders who had signed the treaty, and was assured that his preemption would remain intact after the reservation moved west.

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 the Red River on the east. Once the treaty went into effect, converting a huge portion of Dakota territory to public lands, Peronto filed his claim with the land office in Pembina and indicated he first settled on the land as of 5 October 1871. His initial filing was rejected: his claim occupied an odd-numbered section, which according to an 1864 Act of Congress, belonged to the Northern Pacific railroad to benefit its expansion across the continent.

The Act of Congress dated 2 July 1864 granted the Northern Pacific Railroad a swath of land along each side of their surveyed path. Once the path of the railroad was settled upon, odd-numbered sections would be turned over to the railroad, and even-numbered sections would be Government lands, available for settlement. The 1864 Act does allow that, if the land the railroad intends to cross has already been claimed by homestead or pre-emption, they were obliged to purchase the land from the settler.

Thus, it makes you a very lucky person when the railroad surveyors laid their chains across your homestead. Small settlements appeared at Oakport, north of the current Fargo townsite on the Minnesota side, 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, grantine industrious Sioux the right to claim lands vacated by the reservation, 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. Given the activity at the Fargo townsite leading up to Peronto's October claim, it would seem that Peronto was not a simple farmer being taken advantage of, but was instead as much of a land speculator as his neighbors.

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 1864, 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.

The lower court found against Peronto's claim. Although Peronto had pushed the land office in Pembina to accept his claim, the claim was cancelled by the court's decision. The court found that when the railroad surveyed the path of the railroad in the fall of 1871, they immediately became next in line for ownership of the odd-numbered sections. Any land ownership claimed as part of the reservation was wiped away with the treaty of 1873; the railroad's claims immediately took effect.

Peronto passed away 30 August 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. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court of Dakota upheld the lower court decision.

On Peronto's behalf, lawyer C.W. Buttz, who was also Peronto's executor, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, resulting in the decision Buttz v the Northern Pacific Railway Company 119 US 55. The US Supreme Court again upheld the decision of the lower courts, and became a often-cited precedent in issues of land ownership regarding the railroad and vacated reservation land.