Central Utah Project Litigation Documents

Page 73

a large part of the said lands to its own use and benefit, without any compensation to the said Western Bands or com­pensation agreed to by them. Alternatively, thereby defendant has not dealt fairly and honorably with said Western Bands. These paragraphs, describing plaintiff's lands and alleging, among other things, that the United States converted a large part of tfrSlfe lands to its own use and benefit; were denied in the defendant's answer, putting in issue from the outset of this proceeding the question whether the United States converted to its own use and benefit a large part of the Western Shoshone aboriginal lands, including those described in the October 1, 1863, Treaty of Ruby Valley (IS Stat. 689). The quoted paragraphs seem broad enough to support the petitioners' assertions to a smaller quantity of land than the 22,211,753 acres in Nevada to which the Westex-n Shoshones' aboriginal title was extinguished as determined by Findings 23 and 26 in the Commission's adjudication in the title phase of Docket 326-K (11 Ind. CI. Comm. 387, 413-14, 416). Accordingly, we do not agree with the defendant's arguments that the petitioners are attempting to present a new claim barred by section 12 of the Indian Claims Commission Act. In substance, the petition for a stay is a* request that the Commission reconsider basic portions of its findings in the title and valuation proceedings in Docket 326-K relating to the quantity of land in Nevada which the United States acquired from the Western Shoshones, and to the date rs, of. which the Nevada lands should be valued. The parties by stipulation agreed to a date which was approved by Commission order of