Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs - 1885

Page 72

r , LXVI REPORT OF THE: COMMISSIONER OF .INDIAN AFFAIRS. of the Department and of Congress with reference to the Indians in question. In the oase of the United States u. Ilitchie, decided at the December term, 1854 (17 Howard, 525), iovolring the title of Solano,.a Califoruia Indian, to a tract of land in California, the Court, in speaking upon the subject of the citizenship under Mexico of the Indian race, and referring to certain legislation had by the first Mexican Congress, said: These solemn declarations of the politicel power of the Government had the effect necessarily to invest the Indians with the privilege8 of citizenship as effectually ns had the Declaration of Independence of the United Statea of 1776 to invest sll those persons with those privilege8 residing in the ooudtry st the time, clnd who adhered to theintenst of the colonies. (3 Pet., 99, 121.) The oourt, however, further said : . ~ ! It is conceded that the land8 in queslion do not belong to the class oalled Pueblo , lands, in respect to which we donot intend to express any opinion, either as to the power of the anthoritiea tb paut or tho 1ndi.ans to eoovar. In 1867 Mr. Chief Jnstice Slough, sitting in the United States Court for the first judicial district of the Territory of New Mexico, held, in a lengtlly opiuion delivered in the oase of the United States u. Benigno Ortiz, that the Pueblo Indians should be treated, iLnot as under the pnpilage of the Government, but as eitizel~sn, ot of a State or Terri-tory, but of the United States of America.:' (For full text. of the dcois-ion, see Annual Report of Commissioner of Indian Affairs for 1867, pago 217.) In the case of the United States v. Joseph (4 Otto, 614), the United States Supreme Court held that the Ptiehlo Iudiaus were not Indian tribes within the meaning of the Indiau intercourse act of June 30,1834, and the subsequent act of February 27,1851, extending the trade and intercourse laws then in force with the Indian tribes over the Indian tribes in the Territories of New Nexico and Utah ; but forbore to ex-press any opiuion as to their citizenship until the question judicially : came before it. This case had refereuce to the 111dians' lands, for the protection of which agair~sito truders they were remitted to the statntes of the Territory of New Mexico creating the several pueblos bodies corporate with power to sue and be sued i11 ariy court of law or equity of said Territory for or io respect of any claim, encroachment, or tres-pass on such lands. (Sec. 1504, Kevised Stat., N. hf.) It nevertl~eless appears from the official records, that from the date of the ratification of the treaty of Guadaloope Hidalgo, the Depart. ' , ~l lel to, wiug to the necessities growi~rgo ut of the very exigencies of thr case, and in the exercise of its sul~errisorpc are over the Iaclians, har: ever regarded t,he Pueblo Iniliana as Indians holding puasi tribal rehti'ons, and as such, mitliin tlic liue of the general policy established by the Uuiteil States for the governmtant of other Indian tribes; and that Congress has acquiesced in this view, is n~anifesitn the repeated appropriatious made for their oi\.ilizatiot~a nd support, for the pay of B resident agent, and for educational purposes. So, that it will be seen