Collins v. Bubb

73 F. 735, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1838
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington
DecidedApril 7, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 73 F. 735 (Collins v. Bubb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Collins v. Bubb, 73 F. 735, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1838 (circtdwa 1896).

Opinion

HANFORD, District Judge.

The complainant, in his bill of complaint, claims the right to locate* a lode claim within the limits of the Colville Indian reservation, and to work his claim, and extract mineral-bearing ores therefrom, on the ground that that part of said Indian reservation which-embraces his mining claim was restored to Use public domain, and thereby thrown open to exploration, and made subject to the rights of prospectors and miners, under the public land laws of the United States, by the provisions of the act of congress of July 1,1892, entitled ‘‘An act to provide for the opening of a part of the Colville reservation, in the stat.e of Washington, and for other purposes.” 27 Hint. t>2. And he complains that the defendant, as agent in charge of said reservation, has threatened and intends to forcibly expel him .from the limits of said reservation, and prevent his mining operations. The object of the suit is to obtain an injunction to prevent the defendant from such interference, and The case has been argued and submitted upon the application for a temporary injunction, and a demurrer to the bill of complaint.

The parts of the act of congress referred to necessary to be considered at this time are the first, third, fourth, and fifth sections, which are as follows:

[736]*736“Section 1. That subject to the reservations and allotment of lands in severalty to the individual members of the Indians of the Colville reservation in the state of Washington herein provided for, all the following described tract or portion of said Colville reservation, namely: Beginning at a point on the eastern boundary line of the Colville Indian reservation where the township line between townships thirty-four and thirty-five north, of range thirty-seven east, of the Willamette meridian, if extended west, would intersect the samé, said point being in the middle of the channel of the Columbia river, and running thence west parallel with the forty-ninth parallel of latitude to the western boundary line of said Colville Indian reservation in the Okanagon river, thence north following the said western boundary line to, the said forty-ninth parallel of latitude, thence east along the said forty-ninth parallel of latitude to the northeast corner of the said Colville Indian reservation, thence south following the eastern boundary of said reservation to the place of beginning, containing by estimate one million five hundred thousand acres, the same being a portion of the Colville Indian reservation created by executive order dated July second, eighteen hundred and seventy-two, be, and is hereby, vacated and restored to the public domain, notwithstanding any executive order or other proceeding whereby the same was set apart as a reservation for any Indians or bands of Indians, and the same shall be open to settlement and entry by the proclamation of the president of the United States, and shall be disposed of under the general laws applicable to the disposition of public lands in the state of Washington.”
“Sec. 3. That each entryman under the homestead laws shall, within five years from the date of his original entry and before receiving a final certificate for the land covered by his entry, pay to the United States for the land so taken by him, in addition to'fees provided by law, the sum of one dollar and fifty cents per acre, one-third of which shall be paid within two years after the date of the original entry; but the rights of honorably discharged Union soldiers and sailors, as defined and described in sections twenty-three hundred and four and twenty-three hundred and five of the Revised Statutes of the United States, shall not be abridged, except as to the sum to be paid as aforesaid.
“See. 4. That each and every Indian now residing upon the portion of the Colville Indian reservation hereby vacated and restored to the public domain, and who is so entitled to reside thereon, shall be entitled to select from said vacated portion eighty acres of land, which shall be allotted to each Indian in severalty. No restrictions as to locality shall be placed upon such selections other than that they shall be so located as to conform to the congressional survey or subdivisions of said tract or country, and any Indian having improvements may have the preference over any other person in and to the tract of land containing such improvements, so far as the3r are within a legal subdivision not exceeding in area the quantity of land that he or she may be entitled to select and locate. All such allotments shall be made at the cost of the United States, under such rules and regulations as the secretary of the interior may from time to time prescribe. Such selections shall be made within six months after the date of the president’s proclamation opening the lands hereby vacated to settlement and entry, and after the same have been surveyed, and when such allotments have been selected as aforesaid and approved by the secretary of the interior, the titles thereto shall be held in trust for- the benefit of the allottees, respectively, and afterwards conveyed in fee simple to the allottees or their heirs, as provided in the act of congress entitled ‘An act to provide for the allotment of land in severalty to Indians on the various reservations, and to extend the protection of the laws of the United States and territories over the Indians, and for other purposes,’ approved February eighth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, and an. act in amendment and extension thereof, approved February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and ninety-one, entitled ‘An act to amend and further extend the benefits of the act approved February eighth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, entitled “An act to provide for the allotment of land in severalty to Indians on the various reservations, and to extend the protection of the laws of the United States over the Indians, and for other purposes:” ’ provided, that such allotted lands shall be subject to the laws of eminent domain of the [737]*737stale of Washington, and shall, when conveyed in fee simple to the allottees or their heirs, be subject to taxation as other property in said state.
“Sec. 5. That all Indians residing in the lands hereby vacated and restored, shall have the right, if they so prefer, under the direction of the Indian agent, to occupy and reside upon such portions of the Colville Indian reservation not hereby vacated as are not occupied by or in the possession of any other Indian or Indians.”

The defendant contends that the above act did not restore the tract described to the public domain for any purpose whatsoever, but that the entire tract is still a reservation, and must continue to be a reservation for the Indians until the allotments to the Indians in severalty therein provided for shall have been made, or until the end of the period limited for the making of selections, after the president’s proclamation.

The main question now to be decided is whether the tract described was, by the positive words in the first section, restored at once to the general mass of public lands of the United States, and from the date of the act ceased to be an Indian reservation, or whether the purpose of the law as expressed in its title remains to be accomplished at such time in the future as the president may select for issuing his proclamation removing all restrictions upon the rights of citizens to obtain titles by settlement and entries.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 F. 735, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-bubb-circtdwa-1896.