Pilgrim v. Beck

69 F. 895, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2444
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nebraska
DecidedOctober 8, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 69 F. 895 (Pilgrim v. Beck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nebraska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pilgrim v. Beck, 69 F. 895, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2444 (circtdne 1895).

Opinion

SHIRAS, District Judge.

This case was begun in the district court of Thurston county, Neb.,—the petition being filed therein on the 17th day of July, 1895,-—and was thence removed into this court upon the petition of the defendants. On behalf of complainants, it is averred that they are residing upon certain lands, which have heretofore been assigned in severalty to sundry members of the Winnebago tribe of Indians; that after allotment had been made the Indian allottees entered into a contract with the Flournoy Live-Stock & Real-Estate Company for the lease of these lands for the period of five years; that said company was a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Nebraska, for the purpose of bringing under cultivation as many as possible of the reservation lands that were tributary to the village of Pender and Emerson; that, in pursuance of the policy of the company, it was made known to the Indians that the company were willing to lease lands along the-western part of the Winnebago reservation, with the intention of having the same improved and made more productive and valuable, and put in such condition that the Indian owner might obtain a large annual rental therefrom, and, whether successful in this intention or not, they would pay the Indian owner some small annual rental for his land, which rental would be increased in case the company was successful in re-leasing the lands for agricultural purposes; that the company has obtained leases of lands, from the Indian owners, extending over a distance north and south of 1.0 miles, and east and west of 15 miles; that the company has secured, as sublessees, a large number of thrifty tenants, who have broken up a large part of their holdings, so that in the year 1895 there are under cultivation about 25,000 acres, covered with luxuriant crops.

The bill, after setting out the names of the individuals in occupancy of the lands as tenants, and the descriptions of the particular parcels occupied by each named tenant, and that many of them are [896]*896residing on these lands in houses of their own construction, with barns, yards, and other improvements, then avers that William H. Beck is the duly-appointed acting Indian agent at the Winnebago reservation, having charge of the United States property thereon, and the management of the business transactions between the United States and the Winnebago Indians; that said Beck has great influence over and with many of said Indians; that said Beck has appointed others of the named defendants, members of the Indian police, and, through their agency, has already removed some of the tenants from said leased lands, and threatens to remove others; that thereby plaintiffs are put in fear of their lives, and are harassed, annoyed, and delayed in harvesting- their crops, the right so to do being claimed under the leases aforesaid, the validity of which is denied by said Agent Beck. The prayer of the bill is to the effect that a temporary injunction be at once granted, to be made perpetual at the hearing, restraining said Beck, and 'all parties acting under him, from in any manner interfering with the plaintiffs in regard to these lands, or the crops growing thereon; to restrain the defendants from making, or pretending to make, any contracts respecting the occupation and use of said real estate, and from leasing, or exercising any jurisdiction in reference thereto, or from giving any directions to the Indian police in regard to said lands or the crops thereon, or the persons claiming possession thereof. The demurrer presents the question whether, upon the facts recited in the bill, the complainants are entitled to any relief whatever.

The right and equity of complainants are based upon the allegations that the lands in question, being part of the Winnebago reservation, were allotted in severalty to individual Indians, under the acts of congress making provision therefor; that the Indian allottees were induced to lease the lands to the Flournoy Company, who in turn have sublet the same to complainants; that the complainants have put the lands into cultivation, have growing crops thereon, and are entitled to continue in occupancy of the lands until the expiration of their leases, with the right to harvest their crops.

In the case of U. S. v. Real-Estate Co. (pending in this court, and just decided) 69 Fed. 886, it is adjudged, following the ruling of the circuit court of appeals for this circuit in the case of Beck v. Real-Estate Co., 12 C. C. A. 497, 65 Fed. 80, that the leases executed by the Indian allottees of lands in severalty in the Omaha and Winnebago reservations are absolutely void, and therefore convey no title, right, or interest to the lessees named therein. It, of necessity, follows that the complainants herein have wholly failed to show any legal right to the occupancy of the lands described in the bill, and their claim based upon alleged or supposed equities is equally without solid foundation. An examination of the treaty made with these Indians, whereby the United States set apart this reservation for the use, occupancy, and benefit of the Indians, and of the acts of congress providing for the settling of the Indians upon lands allotted in severalty, clearly shows that the object and purpose of the government, operating through the interior department, was and is to train the Indians in habits of industry; to teach them [897]*897Low to cultivate the soil; and thus gradually prepare them for complete personal independence. The performance of this work is primarily committed (o the interior department, which in turn operates through the commissioner of Indian affairs and the Indian agents appointed for the different tribes. 'The primary duty imposed upon the department is to develop the Indian, in civilization; to make Mm self-supporting, and fit Mm for ultimate absorption into the mass of our people; and it is to this end that the lands of the reservation are placed under control of the interior department. In the bill filed herein it is averred that the Flournoy Company is a corporation organized for the purpose of bringing under cultivation as many as possible of the reservation lands that are tributary to the villages of Pender and Emerson. The mode by which this was to be accomplished was by inducing the Indians to lease their lands to the company, which in turn would place in' occupancy thereof persons not members of the tribe. In other words, it is the avowed purpose of this company to lease the lands, so as to place thereon white men, instead of the Indians, thus practically nullifying the main object of allotting lands in severalty to the Indians. If the Flournoy Company should be permitted to carry out the object and purpose for which it was created, according to the averments of the bill, it would result that in a short time all the valuable lands in the reservation would be in the occupancy of white men, and the Indians, instead of being trained in habits of industry, and taught to earn their living by cultivating the soil, would either be reduced to mendicancy, or, if the company should perform its promise to secure the payment of fair rentals to the Indian allottees, would be living on their rentals, in a state of idleness.

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

Related

Nelson v. John
86 P. 933 (Washington Supreme Court, 1906)
Zevely v. Weimer
82 S.W. 941 (Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory, 1904)
State v. Columbia George
65 P. 604 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1901)
United States v. Flournoy Live-Stock & Real-Estate Co.
71 F. 576 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nebraska, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 F. 895, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pilgrim-v-beck-circtdne-1895.