Ross v. Eells

56 F. 855, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2127
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington
DecidedJune 13, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 56 F. 855 (Ross v. Eells) 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
Ross v. Eells, 56 F. 855, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2127 (circtdwa 1893).

Opinion

HARFORD, District Judge.

The complainant is engaged in constructing a railroad intended for use as a public highway from the city of Tacoma across what has been heretofore the Puyallup Indian reservation, but the line of the intended railroad crosses only land which has been allotted to the different heads of families in severalty, and for which patents have been issued by the president. The defendant Eells is an Indian agent of the United States, and the other defendants are officers of the United States army. By direction of the president, they have interfered with the building of said railroad, and threaten and intend to prevent the same by force, and this suit is brought for an injunction to restrain them from such interference. The title to the land upon which the proposed road is to be located, and the rights of the parties as affected thereby, can be stated in the most concise manner by copying an extract from the report of the commission appointed by President Harrison in pursuance of an act of congress approved August 19, 1890, (26 Stat. 354:)

“Tbe Puyallup reservation, was set apart under tbe treaty of December 26, 1854, between tbe United States and the Nisqually and other bands of Indians, (10 Stat. 1132,) and executive orders of January 20, 1857, and September 6, 1873. It lies in townships 20 and 21 north, ranges 3 and 4 east of the Willamette meridian; and, as finally established, it contained about 18,050 acres. The treaty of December 26, 1854, contained this provision: ‘Art. 6. The president may, * * * at his discretion, cause the whole or any.portion of the lands hereby reserved, or of such other lands as may be selected in lieu thereof, to be surveyed into lots, and assign the same to such individuals or families as are willing to avail themselves of the privilege, and will locate on the same as a permanent home, on the same terms and subject to the same regulations as are provided in the sixth article of the treaty with the Omahas, so far as the same may be applicable.’ In pursuance of this article the Puyallup reservation was surveyed into lots, and the survey was approved on the 80th of January, 1874, by tire surveyor general of Washington Territory. Up to the 30th day of January, 1886, no lands in the reservation were patented to Indians in severalty; but on that day the president signed 166 patents to individual Indians for tracts, the aggregate quantity conveyed by all of which was a fraction less than 17,463 acres. The recitals and operative clauses in each of said patents were the same as in all the others. To show the terms of them all, a copy of one is here presented, as follows:
[857]*857“ ‘The United States of America, to all to whom these presents shall come, —Greeting: Whereas, by the sixth article of the treaty concluded on the twenty-sixth day of December, Anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four, between Isaac I. Stevens, governor and superintendent of Indian affairs of Washington Territory, on the part of the United States, and the chiefs, headmen, and .delegates of the Nisqually, Puyallup, Steilacoom, Squaqksin, S’Homamish, Stehehas, T. Peeksin, Squiaitl, and Se-heh-wamssh tribes and bands of Indians, it is provided that the president may, at his discretion, cause the whole or any portion of the lands hereby reserved, or of such other land as may be selected in lieu thereof, to be surveyed into lots, and assign the same 1o sucli individuals or families as are willing to avail themselves of the privilege, and will locate on the same as a permanent home, on the same .arms and subject to the same regulations as are provided in the sixth article of the treaty with the Omahas, so far as the same may be applicable; and whereas, there has been deposited in the general land office of the United States an order bearing date January 20, 188(5, from the secretary of the interior, accompanied by a return dated October 30, 1884, from the office of Indian affairs, with a list approved October 23, 1884, by the president of the United States, showing the names of members of the' Puyallup band of Indians who have made selections of land in accordance with the provisons of the said treaties, in which list the folowing tract of land has been designated as the selection of the Ohe-gay-lad or John Towal-lad, the head of a family consisting of himself and Mary Ann, viz. the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of section one, in township twenty north, of range three east of the Willamette meridian, Washington, Territory, containing forty acres: Now know ye, that the United States of America, in consideration of the premises, and in accordance with the directions of the president of the United States, under the aforesaid sixth article of the treaty of the sixteenth day of March, Anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four, with the Omaha Indians, has given and granted, and by these presents does give and grant, unto the said Ohe-gay-lad or John Towallad, as the head of the family as aforesaid, and to his heirs, the tract of land above described, but with the stipulation contained in the said sixth article of the treaty with the Omaha Indians that the said tract “shall not be aliened or leased for a longer term than two years, and shall be exempt from levy, sale, or forfeit ure, which conditions shall continue in force until a state constitution embracing such lands within its boundaries shall have been formed, and the legislature of the state shall remove the restrictions,” and “no state legislature shall remove the restrictions * * * without the consent of congress;” to have and to hold the said tract of land, with the appurtenances, unto the said Ohe-gay-lad or John Towallad, as the head of the family as aforesaid, and to his heirs, forever, with the stipulation aforesaid. In testimony whereof, I, Grover Cleveland, president of the United States, have caused these letters to be made patent, and the seal of the general land office to he hereunto affixed. Given under my hand, at the city of Washingfon, this thirtieth day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, and of the independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.
“‘By the President. Grover Cleveland.
[Seal.] “‘By M. McKean, Seereiary.’
“The reference in the patent to the sixth article of the treaty with the Omahas makes it proper to insert here that article. It is as follows: ‘Art. 6. The president may, from time to lime, at his discretion, cause the whole or such portions of the land hereby reserved as he may think proper, or of such other land as may be selected in lieu thereof, as provided for in article first, to be surveyed into lots, and io assign to snob Indian or Indians of said tribe as are willing to avail of the privilege, and who will locate on the same as a permanent home, If a single person over twenty-one years of age, one-eighth of a section; to each family of two, one-quarter section; to each family of three, and not exceeding five, one-half section; to each family of six, and not exceeding ten, one section; and to each family over ten in number, one-quarter section for every additional five members. And he may pre[858]*858scribe sucb rules and regulations as mil insure to the family, in case of death of the head thereof, the possession and enjoyment of such permanent home and the improvements thereon.

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

Related

United States v. Ashton
170 F. 509 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Washington, 1909)
Guyatt v. Kautz
83 P. 9 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)
United States v. Kopp
110 F. 160 (D. Washington, 1901)
Winston v. United States
63 F. 690 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 F. 855, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-eells-circtdwa-1893.