OCR Text |
Show REPORT OF THE $lOMMIBSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. 101 and act of ratification,'and also the opinion of the Supreme Court in United States u. 43 Gallons of Whisky (93 U. S., 188), and said: It should be remembered that the clause in question would prevent sales on only a wmparatively smail. portion of the lands formerly within the Yankton Reservation-that is, only on tracts sold by heirs of deceased allottees. The allotments to Indians cover only a portion of the reservation, the remainder being open to settlement and entry by whites. Only a portion of the allotted lands will be subject to sale as inherited lauds under the act of May 27, 1902 (32 Stat L., 245, 275). Tracts entered under the law providing for the dia- , wsal of unallotted lands, ,and tracts conveyed by allottees after removal of restrictions on alienatioll by issue of patents in fee or otherwise, would not be affected by the clause in the deeds for inherited land; in other mords, the pro-vision in the law attaches to all the land while the clause in the deed wolild attach to only a comparatively small portion. It is doubtful whether, if the clause be inserted in these deeds, it mill of itself give any large degree of pro-tection against the evil aimed at. To prevent sales upon one tract while the traffic may be carried on without let or hindrance upon an adjacent tract would not prove of great benefit to the body of the Indians. Real protection to the Yanktons must be found in the law as it now stands or in some provision to be hereafter enacted affecting the whole body of these lands. Any coddition imposed will naturally diminish the chances of sales and depreciate the price to be obtained by the heirs of decensed Indian allottees for their lands. The injury resulting to this class of Indians from insertion Of this clause in their'deeds should be taken into consideration, and if it out-weighs the probable benefit to the body of Indians the clause should be rejected. As pointed out above, the prevention of sales upon only a small portiou of the land Inhabited by these peoplpe would afford no effective moral protection, while the imposition of the condition most probably would result in a consid-erable financial injury to the individuals whose lnuds will be affected. It would seemingly work disadvantageously to them without any compensating advantage to others. For these reasons I doubt the advisability of inserting this clause in deeds for lands formerly within the Yankton Reservation, or for lands in like condi-tion elsewhere. The Department referred to the Office on January 4, 1906, a com-munication from L. W. Clapp, dated a t Wichita, Rans., December 29. 1905, saying that before this prohibitive clause was required in the deeds loans could be secured on the lands from life insurance com-panies, savings banks, or other investors in farm mortgages, giving material assistance to bona fide purchasers; but that no life insurance company or other careful investor would lend a dollar on any land ' held under a deed or title containing a provision which renders the deed absolutely void as to the grantee and all persons acquiring rights under him in caw any of them should violate the liquor clause; and that should any buyer accept title to a piece of land on the new form of deed he must do so with the full nnderstanding that the property can not be used as security for a loan. Mr. Clapp sug-gested the following amendment to the proviso : And provided further, That the rights of mortgagees in good faith, their heirs and assigns, shall not be ~oidedo r jeopardized by such reversion. |