OCR Text |
Show and the approval of the allotment by the Secretary gave Mr. Gheen snfficient cause to rely on the good faith of the Government. The cau-cellation of this application upon the ground only that the applicant is a mixed blood would be an injustice to him, and especially so as he has made affidavit that he applied for the land as a home and intends to live upon it and to make it his home in the future. In cases similar to his, where the applicants have acted in good faith, settled upon, cultivated, and improved the land applied for, their appli-cations or allotments should not now, in the opinion of this office, be declared to be unauthorized or ineffectual, and especially so if injury or wrong would occnr to an innocent party. The office is not willing to admit that it is either morally or legally right now to cancel applica-tions of this class on the simple ground that the applicants are the children of white fathers and Indian mothers, especially as agents and other officers of the Government have not only encouraged but assisted such mixed bloods to take allotments. In view of the foregoing it is not believed by this office that it was the intention of the Department in its decision made August 3, 1896, to interpret the fourth section of the general allotment act in such manner as to bring hardship and injustice upon an Indian allottee. It is held that rights acquired nnder existing construction of the law will not be impaired by a later and different interpretation. (See Pnblic Land Decisions, Val. 8, pp. 109 aud 399.) Also that a changed construc-tion of the law will not impair rights acquired under a former interpreta-tion of the same law. (See Public Land Decisions, Vol. 6, pp. 146,217, and 225.) And that an erroneous construction of a statute promulgated as a ruling has all the force of law until changed, and rights acquired or acts done under it must be regarded as legal. (See Public Land Decisions, Vol. 2, p. 711.) It is earnestly contended, therefore, that the applications or allot-ments of Indian women and mixed bloods above designated should not be canceled solely upon the ground that the former are married to white men, oitizens of the United States, and that the latter are mixed bloods, the offspring of such marriages. A11 applications made by or allotments to suoh persons who have complied with the law and the rules and regulations relating to allotments on the public domain shonld be allowed to stand. Reference is also made to the doctrine laid down by the Supreme Court of the United States to the effect that usage is evidence of the oonstruction given to the law, and must be considered binding on past transactions. (U. 8. u. Macdaniel, 7 Pet., 1.) And that the acts of the legislature ought never to be so construed as to subvert the rights of property, unless its intention to do so shall be expressed in such terms as to admit of no doubt and to show a clear design to effect the object. (Rutherfordv. Greene,2 Wheat., 201,andU. S. u. Arrcdondo,6 Pet., 732.) It appears to this office that such applicants or allottees have suoh a |