OCR Text |
Show ..,. . .. . . 482 OPINION OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL tmct sppliedfor by the non-reservation adult Indians. Orphan children nnder eighteen years of age do not seem to mme within the benefits of this fourth section, inasmuch as '.. . ' the enumerated beneficiaries therein are the Indim settlers md their children. The inquiries of the redata are as follows: "Is it necesary when the head of a family applies for an allotment for his or her minor children, for them to make &davit of sctual settlement? As I understand it, - . heads of families -take allotments for themselves and for each one of their minor chil-dren at the aame time. Is it necessary that the land taken 6hould be contiguous, pm- , viding-there is not enough to fill the dMment? If thequarter section is fractional, and more than 160%res, must the Indian pay the excess anin a homestead entry? Does the Department furnish rr register to reco;d the allotments in? " These inquiries are not confined in terms to any particular section of said act, but the register asks generally "for instructions regmding Indiqn allotments." The Commis-sioner of Indian Affairs, however, it will be observed, regard8 the inquiries an being re-. strieted entirely to the allotments to be made nnder the fourth section. Fmmthe char-acter of some of the qneations asked, I am inclined to think this conclusion somewhat questionable. On September 18, 1887, this Department iasued a circnlar containing rules and regn-latlons in relation to the allotments of lands under the fourth section of mid act, but these do not cover all the caw presented by the register. The circular reauires that an Indian ao~lvinefo r an allotment nuder said section shall make oath that, imong other thinm, hs6& made actual hona fide settlement upon the land? he drsrn,s In ha& ulluttvd -id him. And, if the nppliwut, Lei!): the htad of n family, iz s,:ekiog nllotmentn far hinmiuar children, ha iti requirrd UI $IYL:II to l h e i r a g ~ ~ :~nd "that thvvnrelision unier his ww aod orcrreclion." This lut reuuiretornt would seem to neeat& any id& that an affidavit of Gesidenre by the children, npon the resvecb ire tracta I&, I?. T R ~ U ~ TbyP ~th e Land iJIl3r.e. add. 1 think, ans!;ers the inqulrs on this win!. flestdm, the set nt,ubere erpresrlg demanda such an :ittidavit; and, in the sha e~~oefc such exnress demand. it ia nut to he inferred that CUnzr~si uwudrd in this lnstance to uvwt 'well-settled bw, and require that s minor chi% should have a rujtdrn~.cs eparateknd upnrt irdm tllnl oI ' l~i$pd~cn~I ~th.e miur8 coucur in the cnnclo-aiun nrrlrcd at by the Comn,iariootr uf llldian .\fFHirs, that no u t o d r~t r l~mosnhto old 1,~r.e rluired in the c u e of ullotrnent to minor chaldren nndar the ioonll section. The nrrr i n q ~ r gis , whetlbrr it be newsarp thzt tho lsnd trtkcn ahonld i>e~nt igaous , ifrhere ir nor eoonch togetlbcr to 611 t h ~~. ~llotnocr~Tth' e Cur~uuiasiu~,ocfr Iodian .It-fairs cousld#:r.s that this inquiry ia mad? un1.v in rrlsrion to thr ullurment to millor chll-dren under the tburtl~h ertlon. In th8sI tlaiok he i - miztakm. as thenuesrhotu i,cencrnl in i@ termq and the concluding part clearly refers to allotments to be' made of reserva-tions where there is s, possibility of an insufficiency of land within the prescribed limita ''to fill the allotment." In the administration of the settlement laws it has been the uniform pmtice of the Land Department to require that tracks of land taken thereunder shanld be contiguons to each other. Paedbly there may be BOme exceptions to this role, because of peculiar circnmstance~, hut I do not now recall any such exceptions. But the rule, as stated, has been coexistent with the settlement laws, and wanld seem to be moat wise and in &tire harmony with the theory of thme laws, whilst snv other codd hut result in dis-cord and cont'ipinn. The act Gs itre now considering- is.-in its eaential rlements, s *el-t l e ~ n ~ln*t ~ . It* immediate purpusais to oblikmte tibe tribal reldrioni of the Indisns, so far as cn induce them t ~ b, c wnte individual lu~ld-holdera: thmce. stemine bv an eradations, it is hoped, slanp: the path of civilization into thediznitvof ciQieoihi6. T6 h s k r such act eEe6tivi to ~ w n l i l i 4tlh e ~I I I I )M(i.n view, it \;a3 rionbtlay inceided it alluuld he aclmini*tarecl, so Jar ar practicable, liku any other law based u p n settlement. The Comsmis.ioner of Indian Affnin states that it llas brcn the urxti<e. in recud to allotme& within reservations, to require that the tracts should b; conti&oua.~f pas- ~ilrlal,i ut thal i t W ~ pJer mitted todeptlrt truln this rule in onler tu give tn the nlijttee aduepr.,porr#on oiinrmingnud t imbr r l~ndu,r in order isirlg to di+tributel alb.1 fr18ntisg on wdrvr rourzes. 'Phis dmarturr frotot the rule. iur maov rm6onhs. nl i~hth e nroDer wxth regard to the dwtsion of an Indiinreservatioin, which i"s entirelvunder the &n<wl and *n$crr~rlouo f the lnrllao Clffice. Rut wheo thd questioni6 pr&nted in ronn~,.tiun with t h , alloat~mor ipr t ior~sotfh epnblicdt,main. "not utherwisc ;~ppr~priated.w" ith the V~:III0L1' IIm, ndttioos. tile rea:ons anulicahle to the resermtiun di s :$nu~~anr .d tha-e which h&e s? lone gov;rned the ~ s n bdev artment in the administreiik of the set t le mcnt law ahoold-&ume rootrol. I ran-nut agree wirh the C,!n!#?id.i m?rnf Indian AWiirs that the i#r.wtice,o r "ovanner," tvhirh i~: t i l l~~~s~~Ii,nUtILt(i.~.~~l_eodt lllentw8 ith-in a roierration rhuuld. uoder the nrusisiuna of this act. Ilc aoolied o~~widofe a reservn-tion. Whilst allotments within rbservations may he mhe, asstated. withant regard to contiguity, and whilst in my opinion it is not required that allotments to minor child-. |