The Native American Embassy Website is updated daily!
Every day, hundreds of American Indian and American Indian related laws, treaties & photos are
added from our archives numbering in the tens of thousands!
![[Dividing Line Image]](Images/div.gif){kind=small}
|
|
Compiled and edited by Charles J. Kappler. Washington : Government Printing Office, 1913.
During the seven years since the publication of the foregoing treatise on the law of Indians in 22 Cyc. numerous cases have been decided. The opinions of these cases have been examined, and the law relating to Indians contained therein has been incorporated in the Permanent Annotations to Cyc. (1901-1913) as shown below.
The way to use these Annotations is, after having first consulted the treatise, to refer to the Annotations and there find in the margin in italic figures the same page and note number (being always careful to use the page numbers in brackets [ ]). The first of such italic numbers corresponds with the same page of Cyc. as to which additional matter is desired, and the italic number after the dash connects the particular text and note with the additional matter in the Annotations.
The word “New” at the beginning of any paragraph in the Annotations denotes that the matter so labeled is a principle of law not within the compass of the text of the original treatise. Such “new” matter in the Annotations is placed where it logically would have fallen had it been available for the preparation of the original treatise.
112–2. See Reg. v. Howson, 1 N. W. Ter., 492.
112–4. S. v. Nicolls, 61 Wash., 142; 112 P., 269.
This rule has been changed, however, in the construction of certain statutes such as those prohibiting sale of liquor. P. v. Gebhard, 151 Mich., 192; 115 N. W., 54.
Half-breed who has “taken treaty” is an Indian. Reg. v. Mellon, 5 N. W. Ter., 301.
113–5. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883; 889 [quoting Cyc.]. See Beam v. U. S., 153 F., 474.
113–6. S. v. Nicolls, 61 Wash., 142, 144; 112 P., 269 [quoting Cyc.]; Waldron v. U. S., 143 F., 413.
113–8. Compare In re Intermarriage Cases, 203 U. S., 76; 27 S. Ct., 29; 51 L. ed., 96.
113–11. Under Canadian statutes wife of Indian is an Indian though not of Indian blood. Jones v. R. Co., 3 Ont. W. R., 705.
113. New. Who are members of Indian tribe is primarily to be decided by Department of Interior. U. S. v. Hitchcock, 205 U. S., 80; 27 S. Ct., 423; 51 L. ed., 718.
114–18. Nation v. Appleby, 196 N. Y., 318; 89 N. E., 835.
In New York recent decisions hold that Indian does not possess citizenship. Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y. Supp., 639.
114–21. See U. S. v. Allen, 179 F., 13; 103 C. C. A., 1 (effect of grant of citizenship).
114–22. Wis.–S. v. Morrin, 136 Wis., 552; 117 N. W., 1006 (has both State and Federal citizenship).
U. S.–Ex p. Savage, 158 F., 205; U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907.
114. New. Power conferred upon Dawes Commission and Federal courts with reference to determining citizenship of members of Indian tribes, legislative and administrative, and their judgments may, before rights are vested under them, be affected by subsequent congressional action. Wallace v. Adams, 204 U. S., 415; 27 S. Ct., 363; 51 L. ed., 547; 143 F., 716, 74 C. C. A., 540. Compare Wallace v. Adams, 6 Ind. Ter., 32; 88 S. W., 308 (act establishing court constitutional); Dick v. Ross, 6 Ind. Ter., 85; 89 S. W., 664.
115–23. U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907.
115–27. Contracts by natural guardian.–Necessity of approval of court see Beck v. Jackson, 23 Okl., 812; 101 P., 1109.
Statutory requirements with respect to execution must be satisfied. Smith v. Martin (Okl.), 115 P., 866.
115–29. Contra, S. v. Wolf, 145 N. C., 440; 59 S. E., 40.
116–33. See Frazee v. Piper, 51 Wash., 278, 283; 98 P., 760 [citing Cyc.].
116–34. P. v. Rubin, 98 N. Y. Supp., 787 (application for habeas corpus); Smith v. Mosgrove, 51 Or., 495, 497; 94 P., 970 [citing Cyc.]. Compare Nation v. Appleby, 196 N. Y., 318; 89 N. E., 835.
116–42. See U. S. v. Mill, etc., Co., 171 F., 501 (employment by Government of private counsel in such action).
117–48. See Adams v. Murphy, 165 F., 304; 91 C. C. A., 272.
117–50. In New York, etc. Compare Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y., Supp. 689.
117–55. Minder v. Bank, 22 S. D., 14; 114 N. W., 1094. Compare In re By-A-Lil-Le, 12 Ariz., 150; 100 P., 450.
118–67. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883.
119–76. Okl.–Cyr v. Walker, 116 P., 931.
U. S.–Smith v. Bonifer, supra.
Can.–See Reg. v. Nan-E-Quis-A-Ka, 1 N. W. Ter., 211.
Marriage, performed according to customs of Indian tribes, recognized. Ortley v. Ross, 78 Neb., 339; 110 N. W., 982; P. v. Rubin, 98 N. Y. Supp., 787; Reg. v. Nan-E-Quis-A-Ka, 1 N. W. Ter., 211.
119–77. Cyr v. Walker (Okl.), 116 P., 931.
119–81. Terrance v. Crowley, 62 Misc., 138, 116 N. Y. Supp., 417; De Graffenreid v. Land, etc., Co., 20 Okl., 637; 95 P., 624; Parr v. U. S., 153 F., 462, 468 [quoting Cyc.]; Meekor v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216. See Bodle v. Shoenfelt, 22 Okl., 94; 97 P., 556 (laws of Creek Nation construed); Irving v. Diamond, 23 Okl., 325; 100 P., 557; Pourier v. McKinzie, 147 F., 287. Compare Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y., Supp. 689.
120–84. Peacemakers’ court.–Jurisdiction as to decedent’s estates see Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y. Supp., 689.
121–90. See Ligon v. Johnston, 164 F., 670; 90 C. C. A., 486; Adams v. Murphy, 165 F., 304; 91 C. C. A., 272.
121–93. Nation v. Jimeson, 62 Misc., 91; 114 N. Y. Supp., 401.
121–95. See Chisholm v. Herkimer, 19 Ont. L. R., 600; 14 Ont. W. R., 919.
121–97. See Chisholm v. Herkimer, supra.
Contract with attorney does not make attorney officer of Indian nation. Adams v. Murphy, 165 F., 304; 91 C. C. A., 272.
121–98. Time of taking effect.–See Baker v. Hammett, 23 Okl., 480; 100 P., 1114 (Creek supplemental agreement at date of proclamation of president).
122–1. Ward v. Race Horse, 163 U. S., 504; 16 S. Ct., 1076; 41 L. ed., 244; In re Race Horse, 70 F., 598.
Rule not applicable if conflicting State legislation has been authorized by act of Congress subsequent to treaty. Ward v. Race Horse, 163 U. S., 504; 16 S. Ct., 1076; 41 L. ed., 244 [r. 70 F., 598] (effect of act admitting State to Union).
122–4. Wadsworth v. Boysen, 48 F., 771; 78 C. C. A., 437. See S. v. Morrin, 136 Wis., 552; 117 N. W., 1006.
122–6. De Graffenreid v. Land, etc., Co., 20 Okl., 687; 95 P., 624; Winters v. U. S., 143 F., 740; 74 C. C. A., 666. See Waldron v. U. S., 143 F., 413. Compare Shulthis v. MacDougal, 162 F., 331.
In ascertaining intent relation between Indians and United States considered. Winters v. U. S., 148 F., 684; 78 C. C. A., 546.
122–8. See U. S. v. Crook, 179 F., 391.
122–12. But see U. S. v. Crook, supra.
123–15. Claim under treaty with Cherokees see U. S. v Cherokee Nation, 202 U. S., 101; 26 S. Ct., 588; 50 L. ed., 949.
123 New. Payment of annuities under treaty.— Who entitled to; see Indians v. Indians, 220 U. S., 481; 31 S. Ct., 473; 55 L. ed., 552.
123–19. U. S. v. Ashton, 170 P., 509.
123–20. Must be cultivation and improvement. Peters v. Tallchief, 52 Misc., 617; 102 N. Y. Supp., 972.
123–21. U. S. v. Ashton, 170 F., 509. See Terrance v. Crowley, 62 Misc., 138; 116 N. Y. Supp., 417 (application of State laws to lands within reservation).
In New York, etc. Nation v. Appleby, 127 App. Div., 770; 112 N. Y. Supp., 177.
In Canada, etc. Min. Co. v. Seybold, 32 Can. S. Ct., 1; Reg. v. Milling, etc., Co., 10 Ont., 196.
124–24. Nation v. Appleby, 127 App. Div., 770; 112 N. Y. Supp., 177. See Reg. v. Milling, etc., Co., supra (also potential right to becoming owners in fee after enfranchisement). Compare U. S. v. Inv. Co., 156 F., 123.
124–25. Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y. Supp., 689.
124. New. Use of public waters on Indian reservation.—Right of Indians under treaty, to use water of stream for irrigation purposes see Inv. Co. v. U. S., 161 F., 829; 88 C. C. A., 647.
Government entitled to flow of public stream in Indian reservation for benefit of Indians. U. S. v. Inv. Co., 156 F., 123.
124–26. U. S.—See Canning Co. v. Hampton, 161 F., 60.
125–30. Ligon v. Johnston, 164 F., 670; 90 C. C. A., 486; U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. See Conley v. Ballinger, 216 U. S., 84; 30 S. Ct., 224; 54 L. ed., 393 (interest in cemetery).
Grant to Choctaw Nation pursuant to treaty of 1830 was to endure only so long as the Choctaws existed as a nation. Fleming v. McCurtain, 215 U. S., 56; 30 S. Ct., 16; 54 L. ed., 88 (no trust created in favor of individual members which could be carried out after dissolution of nation).
125–31. Compare Jenson v. Tel. Co., 186 N. Y., 493; 79 N. E., 728.
Limitation upon amount of land held in possession.—Right of Choctaw Indians. See Fisk v. Arnold, 7 Ind. Ter., 526; 104 S. W., 824.
125–32. See Hayes v. Barringer, 168 F., 221; 93 C. C. A., 507.
126–41. See Min. Co. v. Seybold, 32 Can. S. Ct., 1.
126–44. Vanvleck v. Stewart, 19 U. C. Q. B., 489.
126–45. See U. S. v. Cedar Co., 154 F., 263.
126–47. Vanvleck v. Stewart, supra.
127–55. Jemsen v. Tel. Co., 186 N. Y., 493; 79 N. E., 728. See Good v. Keel (Okl.), 116 P., 777.
127–57. Compare Jemson v. Tel. Co., supra.
127–58. N. Y.—Terrance v. Crowley, 62 Misc., 138; 116 N. Y. Supp., 417.
Okl.—See Garrett v. Mission Soc., 116 P., 921.
Wash.—Jackson v. Thompson, 38 Wash., 282; 80 P., 454.
127. New. Sale of Indian lands by Government.— Terms of private sale see U. S. v. Raley, 173 F., 159.
Registration of unconditional assignment of interest in lands necessary under Canadian statute. Bridge v. Johnston, 6 Ont. L. R., 370; 2 Ont. W. R., 738; 8 Ont. L. R., 196; 4 Ont. W. R., 36.
128–60. Nation v. Appleby, 127 App. Div., 770; 112 N. Y. Supp., 177 (sale must be approved by Government).
128–62. U. S.—See Lumber, etc., Co. v. Crabtree, 166 F., 738; 92 C. C. A., 400.
128. New. Leases of coal lands of Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians.—Power of Secretary of Interior to make certain regulations concerning see U. S. v. McMurray, 181 F., 723.
130–81. Lumber, etc., Co. v. Crabtree, 7 Ind. Ter., 635; 104 S. W., 862.
130. New. Remedy to recover value of improvements placed on Indian land see Sharrock v. Kreiger, 6 Ind. Ter., 466; 98 S. W., 161.
Extent of town sites in Creek Nation determined by Secretary of Interior. Stanclift v. Fox, 152 F., 697; 81 C. C. A., 623.
130–84. U. S. v. Ashton, 170 F., 509. See Ont. v. Can., 42 Can. S. Ct., 1 [r. 10 Can. Exch., 445]. Compare Wisconsin v. Hitchcock, 201 U. S., 202; 26 S. Ct., 498; 50 L. ed., 727.
Construction of treaty as to annuity to be paid in consideration of conveyance see Indians v. Indians, 220 U. S., 481; 31 S. Ct., 473; 55 L. ed., 552.
Cession, etc., in Canada see Tew v. Routley, 31 Ont., 358.
130–85. Dick v. U. S., 208 U. S., 340; 28 S. Ct., 399; 52 L. ed., 520.
Reservation of water rights see Winters v. U. S., 207 U. S., 564; 28 S. Ct., 207; 52 L. ed., 340; Inv. Co. v. U. S., 161 F., 829; 88 C. C. A., 647.
130. New. Contests between claimants of town lots.—Jurisdiction of town-site commissioners see Ross v. Stewart, 25 Okl., 611; 106 P., 870.
131–86. U. S. v. Ashton, 170 F., 509; Tew v. Routley, 31 Ont., 358. See Dick v. U. S., 208 U. S., 340; 28 S. Ct., 399; 52 L. ed., 520; Conley v. Ballinger, 216 U. S., 84; 30 S. Ct., 224; 54 L. ed., 393 (reservation for cemetery purposes). Compare Ont. v. Can., 25 Can. S. Ct., 434.
131–89. Winters v. U. S., 143 F., 740; 74 C. C. A., 666. Compare U. S. v. Ashton, 170 F., 509 (disclaimer by State of claim to Indian lands held not to operate as grant or conveyance).
131–90. See U. S. v. O’Brien, 170 F., 508.
132–96. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883; 166 F., 846; 92 C. C. A., 604.
132–97. U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. See Walker v. Roberson, 21 Okl., 894; 97 P., 609; U. S. v. Fairbanks, 171 F., 337; 96 C. C. A., 229 (effect of Steenerson Act 1904); Oakes v. U. S., 172 F., 305; 97 C. C. A., 139 (allotment to Chippewas).
Action of Congress conclusive and can not be revised by courts. Ligon v. Johnston, 164 F., 670; 90 C. C. A., 486.
132–98. See Ross v. Wright (Okl.), 116 P., 949.
132. New. Effect of allotment on status of Indian. Bond v. U. S., 181 F., 613.
132–2. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883; 166 F., 846; 92 C. C. A., 624; Le Clair v. U. S., 184 F., 128 (Indians adopted into tribe held entitled to allotments). See U. S. v. Fairbanks, 171 F., 337; 96 C. C. A., 229 (rights of Indian born after passage of allotment acts). Compare Oakes v. U. S., 172 F., 305; 97 C. C. A., 139.
133–3. Indian woman married to white man regarded as head of family. Waldron v. U. S., 143 F., 413; Bonifer v. Smith, 166 F., 846; 92 C. C. A., 604.
133–6. See Ballinger v. U. S., 216 U. S., 240; 30 S. Ct., 338; 54 L. ed., 464; Young v. U. S., 176 F., 612 (jurisdiction of district courts of Territory of Oklahoma).
Decision of land department, as to status of one claiming to be tribal member, not conclusive. Waldron v. U. S., 143 F., 413.
133. New. Rights of white persons intermarrying with citizens of Cherokee nation. Boudinot v. Morris, 26 Okl., 768; 110 P., 894. See In re Intermarriage Cases, 203 U. S., 76; 27 S. Ct., 29;51 L. ed., 96.
133–7. In order to invoke this rule lands must be selected before beginning suit. Reynolds v. U. S., 174 F., 212; 98 C. C. A., 220.
133–9. See Oakes v. U. S., 172 F., 305; 97 C. C. A., 139 (necessity of making allottee party); Young v. U. S., 176 F., 612 (misjoinder of causes and parties).
133. New. Rights of Indian before allotment.— Right merely personal and does not descend to heirs. Woodbury v. U. S., 170 F., 302; 95 C. C. A., 498. See Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216. Rule applies to Indian who has applied for allotment and failed to secure it, the Government not being in fault. Woodbury v. U. S., 170 F., 302; 95 C. C. A., 498.
Matters determined in action to determine right to allotment.—Right of adverse claimant joined as party defendant may be determined. U. S. v. Fairbanks, 171 F., 337; 96 C. C. A., 229.
Appeal from decision as to allotment.—Effect see Brick Co. v. Barker, 26 Okl., 144; 109 P., 72.
Cancellation of allotment.—Failure to notify grantee of allottee does not render void the proceedings to cancel. Sorrels v. Jones, 26 Okl., 569; 110 P., 743.
Suit by Government to cancel certificate of allotment or patent to allottee.—Limitations see Le Clair v. U. S., 184 F., 128. Appointment of receiver see U. S. v. Whitmire, 188 F., 422.
133–10. Patent simply locates land. Francis v. Francis, 203 U. S., 233; 27 S. Ct., 129;51 L. ed., 165.
133–11. Okl.—Hooks v. Kennard, 114 P., 744.
U. S.—Guyett v. McWhirk, 154 F., 784.
133–13. Hooks v. Kennard, supra. See Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216.
133. New. Presumption in favor of patent, though issued to Indian, other than one to whom land allotted. Meeker v. Winyer, 48 Wash., 27; 92 P., 883.
Indian woman married to white man, held to be head of family within act of Congress of 1885. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883.
Conflicting rights of Indian allottee and grantee of State see Nation v. Appleby, 127 App. Div., 770; 112 N. Y. Supp., 177. Allottee of Indian reservation land held entitled under disclaimer by State. Corrigan v. Brown, 169 F., 477.
134–21. U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. See Minder v. Bank, 22 S. D., 14; 114 N. W., 1094 (proceeds not subject to execution); U. S. v. Auger, 153 F., 671; Hayes v. Barringer, 168 F., 221; 93 C. C. A., 507 power to dispose by will).
Congress has power to impose restrictions on alienation of lands, though prior restrictions have expired. U. S. v. Shock, 187 F., 870.
Under treaty with Choctaws and Cherokees members take equitable title sufficient to maintain ejectment. Sorrels v. Jones, 26 Okl., 569; 110 P., 743.
134–22. U. S. v. Moore, 154 F., 712. See Shulthis v. MacDougal, 162 F., 331; U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907; Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216.
134–24. Smith v. Bonifer, 154 F., 883. See Ballinger v. U. S., 216 U. S., 240; 30 S. Ct., 338; 54 L. ed., 464 (power of Secretary of Interior); Bonifer v. Smith, 166 F., 846; 92 C. C. A., 604.
134–25. Terrance v. Crowley, 62 Misc., 138; 116 N. Y. Supp., 417; U. S. v. Moore, 161 F., 513; 88 C. C. A., 455.
134–27. Bond v. U. S., 181 F., 613; U. S. v. Bellm, 182 F., 161. See De Graffenreid v. Land., etc., Co., 20 Okl., 687;95 P., 624; Beam v. U. S., 162 F., 266; 82 C. C. A., 240; U. S. v. Rundell, 181 F., 887. Compare McKay v. Klayton, 204 U. S., 458; 27 S. Ct., 346; 51 L. ed., 566.
Judgment against Indian during period that fee remains in United States not lien on inherited lands. Beall v. Graham, 75 Kan., 98; 88 P., 543.
Devise before expiration of trust inoperative. In re House, 132 Wis., 212; 112 N. W., 27.
Trust attaches to proceeds on sale without consent of Government. Bank v. Anderson, 147 F., 87; 77 C. C. A., 259.
134–28. See U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907.
134–29. See Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216.
134. New. Relation between United States and members of five nations.—United States can not merely, because of restriction upon power of allottee to alienate, sue to avoid conveyance by allottee in violation of such restrictions. U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907.
135–31. Ind. Ter.—Goodrum v. Buffalo, 7 Ind. Ter., 711; 104 S. W., 942.
Mich.—S. v. Land Co., 160 Mich., 680; 125 N. W., 770.
N. Y.—Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y. Supp., 689.
Okl.—Inv. Co. v. Tiger, 21 Okl., 630; 96 P., 602; Baker v. Hammett, 23 Okl., 480; 100 P., 1114; Hancock v. Trust Co., 24 Okl., 391; 103 P., 566; Blackmore v. Johnson, 24 Okl., 544; 103 P., 554; Jefferson v. Winkler, 26 Okl., 653; 110 P., 755 (right of minor); Simmons v. Whittington, 27 Okl., 356; 112 P., 1018; Kirkpatrick v. Burgess, 116 P., 764. See Barnes v. Stonebraker, 113 P., 903.
S. D.—Simonson v. Monson, 22 S. D., 238; 117 N. W., 133.
U. S.—Shulthis v. McDougal, 170 F., 529; U. S. v. Allen, 179 F., 13; 103 C. C. A., 1; U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347; U. S. v. Land Co., 188 F., 383; Harris v. Gale, 188 F., 712. See Goudy v. Meath, 203 U. S., 146; 27 S. Ct., 48; 51 L. ed., 130.
135–32. Okl.—Inv. Co. v. Tiger, 21 Okl., 630; 96 P., 602.
U. S.—Shulthis v. McDougal, supra; U. S. v. Land Co., 188 F., 383.
Removal of general restrictions.—See Godfrey v. Land, etc., Co., 21 Okl., 293; 95 P., 792; Landrum v. Graham, 22 Okl., 458; 98 P., 432.
Indian may convey prior to issuance of deed to him if right to allotment has vested. Inv. Co. v. Livingston, 22 Okl., 884; 98 P., 914.
President, merely by virtue of his office, no power to impose restrictions. Francis v. Francis, 203 U. S., 233; 27 S. Ct., 129; 51 L. ed., 165.
135–33. N. Y.—See Pharaoh v. Benson, 69 Misc., 241; 126 N. Y. Supp., 1035 (retrospective effect of constitutional provision).
Okl.—Inv. Co. v. Kistler, 22 Okl., 222; 97 P., 588.
Wash.—Jackson v. Thompson, 38 Wash., 282; 80 P., 454 (right to devise also barred); Frazee v. Piper, 51 Wash., 278; 98 P., 760; Starr v. Long Jim, 52 Wash., 138; 100 P., 194.
U. S.—Hayes v. Barringer, 168 F., 221; 93 C. C. A., 507 (disposition by will); Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216; U. S. v. Allen, 179 F., 13; 103 C. C. A., 1.
Disability to convey runs with land.—Goodrum v. Buffalo, 162 F., 817; 89 C. C. A., 525.
Sale of timber, consistent with beneficial use of land by Indian, not within restraint upon alienation. U. S. v. Lumber Co., 206 U. S., 467; 27 S. Ct., 697; 51 L. ed., 1139. But restriction extends to sale of timber where land of no substantial value without timber. Starr v. Campbell, 208 U. S., 527; 28 S. Ct., 365; 52 L. ed., 602.
135–34. Sayer v. Brown, 7 Ind. Ter., 675; 104 S. W., 877; Hayes v. Barringer, 7 Ind. Ter., 697; 104 S. W., 937 (conveyance of homeostead by Chickasaw); Bragdon v. McShea, 26 Okl., 35; 107 P., 916; Simmons v. Whittington, 27 Okl., 356; 112 P., 1018; U. S. v. Bellm, 182 F., 161; U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. See Tate v. Gaines, 25 Okl., 141; 105 P., 193; 26 L. R. A. N. S., 106. And a repeal of restriction does not validate deed made before passage of repealing act. Nelson v. John, 43 Wash., 483; 86 P., 933; Starr v. Long Jim, 52 Wash., 138; 100 P., 194; Harris v. Hardridge, 166 F., 109.
Agreement to convey made before restriction removed, void. Howard v. Farrar (Okl.), 114 P., 695.
No rule of estoppel can prevent assertion of invalidity under act of Congress 1902 as to lands allotted to Creek nation. Alfrey v. Colbert, 7 Ind. Ter., 338; 104 S. W., 638.
135. New. Indian, basing claim to allotted land on improvements made thereon, may abandon claim in favor of another Indian for money consideration. Williams v. Bank, 216 U. S., 582; 30 S. Ct., 441; 54 L. ed., 625.
136–35. Goodrum v. Buffalo, 162 F., 817; 89 C. C. A., 525.
Rule applicable to white persons adopted into tribe. Reed v. Clinton, 23 Okl., 610; 105 P., 1055.
136–36. Such fact does not affect Federal supervision over proceeds from timber on allotted lands. Tomkins v. Campbell, 129 Wis., 93; 108 N. W., 216.
136–37. Kelly v. Harper, 7 Ind. Ter., 541; 104 S. W., 829. See Harris v. Hardridge, 7 Ind. Ter., 532; 104 S. W., 826.
136–38. Harris v. Hardridge, 166 F., 109.
United States may sue to avoid consequences of void conveyance by allottee. U. S. v. Dooley, 151 F., 697; U. S. v. Leslie, 167 F., 670; U. S. v. Bellm, 182 F., 161 (though sale is under order of court); U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. Contra, see U. S. v. Allen, 171 F., 907. Partiesin action to cancel transfer see U. S. v. Rundell, 181 F., 887.
136–39. U. S.—U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347.
136–40. But see Harris v. Lynde-Bowman-Darby Co. (Okl.), 116 P., 808.
136–41. Alfrey v. Colbert, 168 F., 231; 93 C. C. A., 517.
136. New. Written consent by Indian to sell not affected by his death. Prichard v. Jacobs, 46 Wash., 562; 90 P., 922.
United States can not sue on behalf of allottee to recover value of timber purchased from him in good faith and paid for. U. S. v. Cedar Co., 154 F., 263.
137–42. Moore v. Sawyer, 167 F., 826; Alfrey v. Colbert, 168 F., 231; 93 C. C. A., 517.
Deeds held sufficient to pass title.—Taylor v. Southerland, 7 Ind. Ter., 666; 104 S. W., 874.
137–43. U. S. v. Leslie, 167 F., 670; U. S. v. Aaron, 183 F., 347. See Maharry v. Eatman (Okl.), 116 P., 935; Harris v. Hardridge, 166 F., 109; Alfrey v. Colbert, 168 F., 231; 93 C. C. A., 517; U. S. v. Oil, etc., Co., 187 F., 674 (requirement of bond as condition of approval); U. S. v. Land Co., 188 F., 383.
137. New. Acknowledgment or recording of transfer of possession not necessary. Blocker v. McClendon, 6 Ind. Ter., 481; 98 S. W., 166.
137–47. Blackburn v. Land Co., 6 Ind. Ter., 232: 91 S. W., 31 (lease for five years, possession to be taken in futuro, not void under statute); R. Co. v. Bond, 6 Ind. Ter., 515; 98 S. W., 335 (to citizen of United States good until allotment under statute): Williams v. Williams, 22 Okl., 672; 98 P., 909: Eldred v. L. & T. Co., 22 Okl., 742; 98 P., 929; Sharp v. Lancaster, 23 Okl., 349; 100 P., 578 (oil and gas lease). See Land Co. v. Mullins, 7 Ind. Ter., 189; 104 S. W., 586; 165 F., 179; 91 C. C. A., 213; Krull v. Rose, 88 Neb., 651; 130 N. W., 271; Dev. Co. v. Green, 22 Okl., 237; 97 P., 619; Whitham v. Lehmer, 22 Okl., 627; 98 P., 351; Wattenbarger v. Hall, 26 Okl., 815; 110 P., 911 (sublease); Moore v. Sawyer, 167 F., 826; Shulthis v. McDougal, 170 F., 529 (necessity of recording and time and place of record); U. S. v. Abrams, 181 F., 847.
But occupation under void lease ground for action for mesne profits. Phillips v. Reynolds, 79 Neb., 626; 113 N. W., 234.
137–48. Okl.—Barnes v. Stonebraker, 113 P., 903.
U. S.—U. S. v. Abrams, 181 F., 847.
137–50. Morrison v. Burnette, 154 F., 617; 83 C. C. A., 391; U. S. v. Abrams, 181 F., 847. See Kolachny v. Galbreath, 26 Okl., 772; 110 P., 902; Fisk v. Arnold, 166 F., 744; 92 C. C. A., 406; Turner v. Seep, 167 F., 646.
137. New. Lease of Indian lands.—Termination of lease and recovery of possession by lessor see Fisk v. Arnold, 166 F., 744; 92 C. C. A., 406. White lessees of Indians can not acquire title by possession as against their lessors. Lumber, etc., Co. v. Crabtree, 166 F., 738; 92 C. C. A., 400. Power of Secretary of Interior to authorize assignment see Oil Co. v. Turner, 179 F., 74; 102 C. C. A., 368. 137-51. Reese v. Harlan, 77 Neb., 485; 109 N. W., 762; Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y., Supp. 689; In re Brown, 22 Okl., 216; 97 P., 613; Irving v. Diamond, 23 Okl., 325; 100 P., 557; Parr v. U. S., 153 F., 462; Wheeler v. Petite, 153 F., 471; Shulthis v. MacDougal, 162 F., 331; 170 F., 529; U. S. v. Land Co., 188 F., 383. See Beam v. U. S., 153 F., 474.
Dower.—Noncitizen widow of allottee of land of Creek nation entitled to dower. Hawkins v. Stevens, 21 Okl., 849; 97 P., 567;Peters v. Tallchief, 121 App. Div., 309; 106 N. Y. Supp., 64.
138–52. See Hooks v. Kennard (Okl.), 114 P., 744.
138–53. See Woodbury v. U. S., 170 F., 302; 95 C. C. A., 498. Compare Meeker v. Kaelin, 173 F., 216.
138–54. De Graffenreid v. Land, etc., Co., 20 Okl., 687; 95 P., 624. See Wesley v. Diamond, 26 Okl., 170; 109 P., 524; Shulthis v. McDougal, 170 F., 529. Compare Parr v. U. S., 153 F., 462; Beam v. U. S., 153 F., 474; 162 F., 260; 89 C. C. A., 240; Shulthis v. MacDougal, 162 F., 331; 170 F., 529.
Act of Congress of 1910 provides for ascertainment by Secretary of Interior of legal heirs of allottee who dies without having disposed of allotment by will. Bond v. U. S., 181 F., 613.
138. New. Descent according to act of Congress.– Bruner v. Sanders, 26 Okl., 673; 110 P., 730 (application of statute to Seminole tribe).
Children of allottee, legitimate or otherwise, inherit. In re House, 132 Wis., 212; 112 N. W., 27; Smith v. Smith, 140 Wis., 599; 123 N. W., 146.
138–55. U. S.–U. S. v. County, 143 F., 287; 74 C. C. A., 425; U. S. v. Shock, 187 F., 862. See U. S. v. Shock, 187 F., 870.
Proceeds of such land inherited by Indian heirs exempt.–U. S. v. County, 143 F., 287; 74 C. C. A., 425.
138–56. Gleason v. Wood (Okl.), 114 P., 703; Choate v. Trapp (Okl.), 114 P., 709; alexander v. Rainey (Okl.), 114 P., 710; English v. Richardson (Okl.), 114 P., 710; U. S. v. Shock, 187 F., 862. See Goudy v. Meath, 38 Wash., 126; 80 P., 295 (effect of act removing power of alienation); U. S. v. Shock, 187 F., 870. Compare Re Mathers, 7 Manitoba, 434.
Congress may exempt such land, but intent must be clear. Goudy v. Meath, 203 U. S., 146; 27 S. Ct. 48; 51 L. ed., 130.
138–57. Totten v. Truax, 16 Ont., 490.
138–59. See Stephenson v. Lohn (Minn.), 131 N. W., 1018 (money arising from sale not exempt).
139–67. Patterson v. Lane, 6 N. W. Ter., 92.
139. New. Trust and treaty funds belonging to Indians, being moneys due them for lands ceded, may be used for their education in sectarian schools if they so desire. Suick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U. S., 50; 28 S. Ct., 690; 52 L. ed., 954.
140–77. Gearlds v. Johnson, 183 F., 611. Compare U. S. v. Boss, 160 F., 132.
140–80. See Gearlds v. Johnson, supra.
140. New. Regulations concerning liquor.–Conflict between general law and statutes relating to Indians see Re Metcalfe, 17 Ont., 357. Repeal of provisions of treaty of 1855 with Chippewas see Gearlds v. Johnson, 183 F., 611.
141–85. See U. S. v. Sutton, 215 U. S., 291; 30 S. Ct., 116; 54 L. ed., 200.
141–87. U. S. v. Exp. Co., 180 F., 1006.
141–89. See Rainbow v. Young, 161 F., 835; 88 C. C. A., 653.
Authority to detain in confinement after such removal see In re By-A-Lil-Le, 12 Ariz., 150, 100 P., 450; U. S. v. Crook, 179 F., 391 (authority of military forces).
142–5. Authority of Indian agent with respect to protecting allottees or their heirs in possession see Land, etc., Co. v. Fears, 22 Okl., 681; 98 P., 904.
143–9. Compare U. S. v. Hoyt, 167 F., 301; 93 C. C. A., 53.
143–14. See Fidelity, etc., Co. v. U. S., 150 F., 550; 80 C. C. A., 446.
143–15. U. S. v. Pierson, 145 F., 814; 76 C. C. A., 390.
144–19. Rex v. Beboning, 17 Ont. L. R., 23; 12 Ont. W. R., 484.
Larceny, etc.–Reg. v. Fearman, 10 Ont., 660 (cutting and removing timber is a criminal offense under Canadian statutes).
Robbery, etc.–Punishment for offense in Territory fixed by court. Glover v. U. S., 6 Ind. Ter., 262; 91 S. W., 41.
Indians upon reservation subjects to same punishment as white persons. U. S. v. Cardish, 145 F., 242.
Arson.–Punishment same whether committed by or against white person or Indian. U. S. v. Cardish, 145 F., 242.
Incest.–Not punishable where both parties Indians and crime committed in reservation. Ex p. Hart, 157 F., 130.
Polygamy.–Tribal custom no defense. Reg. v. Bear’s Shin Bone, 4 N. W. Ter., 173.
Purchasing cattle from Indians see U. S. v. Anderson, 189 F., 262.
145–20. Burch v. U. S., 7 Ind. Ter., 284; 104 S. W., 619.
145–21. Taylor v. U. S., 6 Ind. Ter., 350; 98 S. W., 123 (agent soliciting orders within statute). See S. v. Mamlock, 58 Wash., 631; 109 P., 47; 131 A. S. R., 1085; S. v. Nicolls, 61 Wash., 142; 112 P., 269.
145–22. Rex v. Hughes, 12 Brit. Col., 290; Reg. v. Farrar, 1 N. W. Ter., 306; Reg. v. Mellon, 5 N. W. Ter., 301. See Ex p. Goodine, 25 N. Brunsw., 151; Ex p. Hill, 31 N. Brunsw., 84.
The penalty, etc. Reg. v. MacKenzie, 6 Ont., 165.
145–24. See U. S. v. Zumwalt, 186 F., 596.
145–27. P. v. Gebhard, 151 Mich., 192; 115 N. W., 54; Reg. v. Howson, 1 N. W. Ter., 492. See Rex v. Hughes, 12 Brit. Col., 290.
Pueblo Indians of New Mexico not included. U. S. v. Mares, 14 N. M., 1;88 P., 1128.
146–28. S. v. Nicolls, 61 Wash., 142; 112 P., 269.
146–29. In Canada, etc. Rex v. Hughes, 12 Brit. Col., 290.
146–30. See Ellis v. U. S., 6 Ind. Ter., 291; 97 S. W., 1013; U. S. v. Buckles, 6 Ind. Ter., 319; 97 S. W., 1022; U. S. v. Sutton, 215 U. S., 291; 30 S. Ct., 116; 54 L. ed., 200; U. S. v. Boss, 160 F., 132; U. S. v. Exp. Co., 180 F., 1006 (effect of admission of Territory to statehood).
Lands allotted to Indians in severalty not “Indian country” within statute. U. S. v. Sutton, 165 F., 253.
147–36. See Good Shot v. U. S., 104 F., 257; 48 C. C. A., 525 (holding that 29 U. S. St. at L., 487 [U. S. Comp. St. (1901), p. 3620], repealing 23 U. S. St. at L., 385, c. 341, § 9, as to rape, did not repeal the same as to murder).
147–37. Compare Hollister v. U. S., 145 F., 773; 76 C. C. A., 337.
That Indian has become citizen of State in which reservation is does not necessarily defeat Federal jurisdiction. U. S. v. Celestine, 215 U. S., 278; 30 S. Ct., 93; 54 L. ed., 195; U. S. v. Sutton, 215 U. S., 291; 30 S. Ct., 116; 54 L. ed., 200.
Tribal Indians.–After obtaining individual patents to land, no longer wards of Government. Ex p. Savage, 158 F., 205.
Burden on Indian in prosecution in State court to prove that offense committed on reservation. S. v. Jack (Nev.), 96 P., 497.
147–38. Consent of South Dakota to trial by Federal court of any person committing offense on Indian reservation. Hollister v. U. S., 145 F., 773, 76 C. C. A., 337.
147–39. U. S. v. Kempf, 171 F., 1021. See U. S. v. Sutton, 215 U. S., 291; 30 S. Ct., 116; 54 L. ed., 200.
147–40. U. S.–Ex p. Savages, 158 F., 205; U. S. v. Hall, 171 F., 214.
Can.–Rex v. Hill, 15 Ont. L. R., 406, 415; 11 Ont. W. R., 20 [quoting Cyc.].
148–45. See Brown v. U. S., 146 F., 975; 77 C. C. A., 173 (jurisdiction of district court of Territory of Oklahoma).
148–46. See Leftridge v. U. S., 6 Ind. Ter., 305; 97 S. W., 1018.
148–47. Under Nevada statute Indian subject to same laws in respect to crime as white man. S.v. Johnny, 29 Nev., 203; 87 P., 3.
148–48. Justice of peace may issue warrant. Roberts v. Brown, 43 Tex. Civ. App., 206; 94 S. W., 388.
148–51. S. v. Jack (Nev.), 96 P., 497.
148–53. Sufficiency of allegations see S. v. Niblett, 31 Nev., 246; 102 P., 229.
149–56. See U. S. v. Buckles, 6 Ind. Ter., 319; 97 S. W., 1022 (sufficiency of indictment charging introduction).
149. New. Evidence held sufficient to show that person to whom sale of liquor made was within statute prohibiting such sale to Indian, not ward of United States. S. v. Niblett, 31 Nev., 246; 102 P., 229.
149–65. Peters v. Tallchief, 121 App. Div., 309; 106 N. Y. Supp., 64 (where there is no Indian tribunal from which relief might be sought). See Garrett v. Walcott, 25 Okl., 574; 106 P., 848 (equity jurisdiction in regard to allotment of lands).
In New York surrogate has no jurisdiction over estate of deceased Indian. Matter of Jack, 52 Misc., 424; 102 N. Y. Supp., 383.
Congress may, on admitting State to Union, reserve control over Indian reservation lands and jurisdiction of action by tribal Indians relating thereto. Peano v. Brennan, 20 S. D., 342; 106 N. W., 409.
149–66. State courts no jurisdiction of controversy relating to title and right to possession of Indian allotments while same held in trust by United States. McKay v. Kalyton, 204 U. S., 458; 27 S. Ct., 346; 51 L. ed., 566.
149–68. Deragon v. Sero, 137 Wis., 276; 118 N. W., 839. Compare Tynon v. Hall, 22 Okl., 684; 98 P., 895.
149–69. Compare Hayes v. Barringer, 7 Ind. Ter., 697; 104 S. W., 937; 168 F., 221. Contra, Matter of Printup, 121 App. Div., 309; 106 N. Y. Supp., 64; Hatch v. Luckman, 64 Misc., 508; 118 N. Y. Supp., 689.
149–70. See Maharry v. Eatman (Okl.), 116 P., 935.
149. New. In New York special tribunal created which is given exclusive jurisdiction of controversies between individual Indians as to lands in reservation. Jones v. Gordon, 51 Misc., 305; 99 N. Y. Supp., 958.
Jurisdiction of Territorial courts see Young v. U. S., 176 F., 612.
150. New. Claims on amount of depredations charged against annuities due to Indians. In re Indians, 208 U. S., 561; 28 S. Ct., 352; 52 L. ed., 621.
156–41. Sanderson v. U. S., 210 U. S., 168; 28 S. Ct., 661; 52 L. ed., 1007.
|
|