OCR Text |
Show clause to those nations would be to limit or restrict the governmental powers of the nation beyond the modification thereof contained in the agreement, and that consequently that clause would be in conflict with the agreement and be ineffective by the terms of the act. The agreement provided for the continuation of the tribal governments for eight years from March 4,1898, with modifications of the legislative and judicial powers. One of the functions of the governments of the Choctaws and Chickasaws was held by the Attorney-General, in an opinion dated July 14, 1854 (18 Opinions, 34), to embrace the power to regdate the occupancy of the public domain of the nations by the citizens thereof, and as there is nothing in the Choctaw and Chickasaw agreement which modifies this power, the office was of the opinion that it still exists and could be exercised by the nation under the clause of their agreement which continues their government for eight years. Meantime, Inspector Wright submitted a report dated July 10,1899, presenting his views, which were based upon Department regnlations of October 7,1898, relating to the seleotion by citizens of the various nations of their pro rata share, commonly referred to in correspondence aa "preliminary allotments." From this action of the Department the inspector concluded that the clause of section 16 of the Curtis Act relating to the proportionate shares of citizens of the various nations applied in the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations, and that to collect a royalty on the hay cut on tracts occ~~piebdy citizens as their pro rata share would be a violation of the right of the individual nuder the Cur-tis act and therefore void. This conclnsion was borne out by the deci-aion of the Department of May 18, 1899, relative to the tax by the Creeks on cattle introduced into their nation to be held and grazed on tracts claimed by individnals to be their pro rata share. In disposing of the questions presented in Governor McCurtain7s letter and Inspector Wright's report, the Department, in its letter of August 5,1899, to the inspector, stated: It in apparent thst the statue of the governments of the Choataw end Chioksssn nstione is quite different from that of the Creek and Cherokee nations. In the for-mer, by the express provision of law, the governments are continued for a period of eight year8 from the 4th day of March, 1893, while in the Creek and Cherokee nations it is provided thst the laws of said nations ahdl not be enfaraad at lsw or in equity by the oourts of the United States in the India Territory, end their tribal eonrts areaholished. The trihalcourtein theChoctaw andChick-inned with jodsdiction, except as expressly limited in said agreement, and the power of taxation does not appesr to he in anywise limited or prescribed exoept as defined in aeotion 14 of mid act, concerning towns in said nation. While it is true thnt the laws of the Creek and Cherokee nation8 can not be enforced at law or in equity in ths United States conrta, yet it is made the duty of the Seore-tary of the Interior, under the provisions of section lfi, to eallaot the taxea due said nation8 sod pay the same into the Treasury of the United 5te.h to the credit of the tribe to whioh they belong. In parsuanoe of said atstntory raothoritr, rules and regulations were preaorihed by the Department for the collection of said taxes on July 21 snd July 28,1898, and officers heve been appointad by the Swretary of the Interior to enforoe said regulations. |