OCR Text |
Show - I . REPORT OF THE COMMISBIONEB OF INDIA* AFFAIRS. 35 The same r i ~ hetx ists id the wild Indian, who has the right to partioi- , pate in the government of his tribe amording to its ancient custom. , Pueblo Indians are not oitiiens of the United States.-As before stated, under Spanish iaw a11 Indians wereregarded as having a greater right in the lands held by them under guaranties of treaties than the mere right of occupancy and perpetual possession, that is, they were deemed to have s, right of property in them. As early as 1689, extensive grants of land were made to the several Pueblo bands who even at that early date had reached a degree of civilization far in advance of other trib'es. The treaty , of Quadalupe Hidalgo provided for the proteotion of thdse grants, even if it had not, the United Sbates in acquiring sovereignty territory within which they were embraced would have been bound respect and protect them. In United States u. Ritcbie the Supreme Uourt held that the Pueblos held their lands by a right superior to that !of the United States. That they hold their lands under ancient Spanish grants, which give them rights therein superior to those of the United States ; anti that ,. they are a sober, virtuous, and industrious people, and far in advance of ,: ' .. other tribes in civilization, are strong reasons why Oongress should , , admit them to the enjoyment of all the privileges guarantied by our laws to citizens of the United States; but they do not of themselves . . aonfer the privileges of citizens upon them. While, therefore, it would appear that, on account of their advanced civilized condition, their , - . ' habits and rirtues, the Pueblo Indians are not Indian tribes within the meaning of the intercourse acts * (4 Stats., 730), nor within the mean-ing of the acts of August 15, 1876t (19 Stats., 179), and of March 3 1891 1: (26 Stats., 1014), I am of the opinion that their status as to dti- ., .. zenship in the United States is in no wise different from that of the 7. savage tribes who inhabit other portions of the territory acquired by cession from Mexiw, and who are, I believe, conceded not to be citizens. In expressing this opinion I am not stating what I think ought to be, , but what I think is their politic@l status: that they are not citizens of I the United States, and I trust Congress will enact the legislation neoes-sary to make them citizens. If theseconclusionsarecorreot, then all the tribes within the bounda-ries of the Mexican cession of 1848 (notwithstanding they were at one time citizens of Mexico) hold to this Government, like the other tribes within its terr,itorial limits, only the relations of domestic depend-ent nations, and, like other Indians, are in a state of pupilage, depend-ent npon the United States for protection in their rights as distinct . . political communities. United States*. Joseph, 94 U. S.,614. I t Opinion of the Attorne7-General, July 28, 1891. $ Opinion of the Besistapt Attorney-Generd far the Department of the Interior, Msy 4,1891 (see appendix, page 149.) In thisopinion the Assistant Attorney-General does not direotly pass npon the question of the citizenship of the Pueblo Indians; but tha inference might be drawn that he regarded them as citizens of the United ' :ststen. |