Central Utah Project Litigation Documents

Page 76

the plaintiff's 1951 petition. Defendant denied plaintiff's allegations. Both parties introduced evidence on the issue of plaintiff's aboriginal title and the. issue was tried in an adversary proceeding. Far from K«-»ng the result of. agreement or collusion between the p 1 a in t i f fj^gfruns e 1 and-the defendant, the Colonicsion's Finding 23 relating to.the area of plaintiff use and occupancy at the time of the Treaty of Kuby Valley, and Finding 26 relating to the extinguishment of aboriginal Indian title, were bused on issues resolved after hearing before the Commission, and on the con­sideration of oral and documentary evidence. In fact, in the title phase of this case, the area of aboriginal use and occupancy by the plaintiff and the extinguishment of the plaintiff's aboriginal title were fundamental prerequisites in establishing the plaintiff's claim. In the original petition filed in Docket 326 on August 10, 1951, paragraph 23 alleged aboriginal title in the Western Shoshones to a large territory of land in Nevada, including the lands set forth in the Treaty of Ruby-Valley. In paragraphs 25 and 26 of the petition, it was alleged that defendant seized and converted a large part of the plaintiff's lands to the use and benefit of the defendant, in violation of the Treaty of Ruby Valley and without payment of compensation to the plaintiff. In its answer, filed on July 31, 1952, the defendant denied both the allegation of aboriginal ownership in the plaintiff and the allegations of seizure and conversion.