OCR Text |
Show Many cases were cited And it was further said: "We can not doubt, therefore, that Congress has the power to make grants of lands below high-water mark of navigable waters in any Territory of the United States whenever it becomes necessary to do so in order to perform international obligations, or to effect the improvement of such lands for the pro-motion and convenience of commerce with foreign nations and among the several States, or to carry out other public purposes appropriate to the objects for which the United States hold the Territow." The extinguishment of the Indian title, opening the land for settlement and preparing the way for future States, were appropriate to the objects for xhich the United States held the Territoq. And surely it was within the competency of the nation to secure to the Indians such a remnant of the great rights they possessed as "taking fish at all usual and accustomed places." Nor does It restrain the State unreasonably, if at all, in the regulation of the right. It only fixes in the land such easements as enables the right to he exercised. The license from the State, which respondents plead to maintain a fishing wheel, gives no power to them to exclude the Indians, nor was it intended to give such power. It was the permission of the State to use a particular device. What rights the Indians had were not determined or limited. This was a mat-ter for judicial determination regarding the rights of the Indians and rights of the respondents. And that there might he an adjustment and accommodation of them the solicitor-general concedes and points out the way. We think, however, that such adjustment and accommodation are more within the province of the circuit court in the first instance than of this eunrt. Decree reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. The solicitor says that by the concluding passages of the opinion further proceedings are necessary to define the rights and adjust the respective claims, and that the court indicates with a certain approval his suggestions on that topic. For this reason he transmitted copy of his brief, wherein is found, on pages 54 to 56, the points and sug-gestions involved in the composition of the Indian right with the patent title. He stated that he did not know whether the executive branch of the Government could further the settlement; that is, whether this Office was in a position to help take care of the Indians in respect to their attached privileges, but that he had directed the United States attorney for the eastern district of Washington to take this matter up and obtain a suitable decree, md he requested this office to instru@ the proper officer of the Indian Department to confer and cooperate with him to this end. In compliance with his request full instructions were given on June 8, 1905, to the superintendent in charge of the Yakima Agency. It is trusted that the Yakima Indians will not only recover their fishery rights on the Columbia River under this opinion, but that they will also be accorded the privilege of exercising them. BALE OF LANDS ON THE YAKIMA RESERVATION IN WABHINQTON, I Section 2 of the act of December 21, 1904 (Stat. L., 595), pro-vides for allotments in severalty to such of the Yakima Indians as |