By force of the Clapp Amendment of 1906-1907, chaps. 3504, 2285,
34 Stat. 353, 1034, lands in the White Earth Reservation allotted
and patented in trust to an adult mixed-blood Indian belong to him
with all the rights and incidents of full ownership by persons of
full capacity, including the right of alienation, and when he
conveys them, the United States cannot maintain for his benefit a
suit to annul the deed upon the ground that it was procured by
fraud.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Page 243 U. S. 455
MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the court;
This case is here upon a certificate from the Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, from which it
Page 243 U. S. 456
appears that the United States brought a suit in the District
Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota for the
purpose of cancelling and annulling a warranty timber deed from
Ah-be-daun-ah-quod and Ah-sum, Indian allottees on the White Earth
Reservation in Minnesota, to Mamie S. Waller, dated November 4,
1907, and a certain warranty deed from the same Indians to L. S.
Waller, dated January 6, 1908. The district court dismissed the
bill on the ground that the plaintiff had no capacity to maintain
the suit, and upon a further ground that the court had no
jurisdiction to hear and consider the same.
The court of appeals certifies the bill upon which suit was
brought in the district court, wherein it is alleged that the
United States brought the action upon behalf of Ah-be-daun-ah-quod
and Ah-sum, Indian allottees in the White Earth Reservation in
Minnesota. The acts of Congress under which the allotments were
made to the Indians named are set forth, and it is averred that
these acts provided that the lands in question should be held in
trust by the United States for a period of twenty-five years; that
the Indians for whom the suit was brought were Chippewa Indians of
the White Earth Reservation, residing on the reservation, and were
husband and wife and adult mixed-blood Indians.
It is averred that, since the establishment of the White Earth
Reservation the United States, in pursuance of its treaties and
agreements with the tribes and bands of Chippewa Indians in the
State of Minnesota, and in pursuance of its laws, has had and
exercised through the Department of the Interior and the Office of
Indian Affairs the function of guardian, protecting and defending
said tribes and bands and the individual members thereof in the
enjoyment and possession of their property rights. That, before the
commission of the acts of the defendants complained of, there were
duly allotted to Ah-be-daun-ah-quod and
Page 243 U. S. 457
Ah-sum certain tracts of land in the White Earth Reservation,
which are described.
That afterwards, in December, 1907, the defendant Lucky S.
Waller, negotiating with these two Indians for the purchase of a
portion of the timber upon their allotments, paid to them $50 as
partial payment for such timber, and caused them to sign a certain
paper, produced by him, by placing their thumb marks thereon. That
as an inducement to procuring the execution of this paper, Waller
falsely and fraudulently stated that it was merely a receipt for
the payment. That neither Indian could read or write, and each was
obliged to rely on Waller for understanding and knowledge of the
contents of the instrument, and that, so relying upon him and upon
his false statements, they believed the instrument to be but a
receipt for the money paid.
That, in January, 1908, a further payment of $75 was made by
Waller to the two Indians, and another paper executed by them under
similar circumstances and representations. That, in June, 1910, and
December, 1911, sums of $10 were paid by Waller to the Indians;
that such sums, aggregating $145, were all paid with the
understanding and belief on the part of the Indians that they were
part of the purchase price of a part of the timber upon the lands,
and that no other or further moneys have been paid by Walter to the
Indians.
That in December, 1911, the Indians for the first time learned,
and plaintiff was thereafter advised, that the land records in the
offices of the registers of deeds of Mahnomen and Clearwater
Counties, Minnesota, showed that there had been filed for record in
said offices, respectively, two instruments in writing: one, an
instrument purporting to be a warranty timber deed from
Ah-be-daun-ah-quod and Ah-sum to Mamie S. Waller, dated November 4,
1907, reciting the consideration for the property therein conveyed
to be $500, and purporting to convey the timber
Page 243 U. S. 458
upon the lands patented to the Indians with the exception of one
parcel, and the other an instrument purporting to be a warranty
deed from Ah-be-daun-ah-quod and Ah-sum to L. S. Waller, dated
January 6, 1908, reciting the consideration paid to be $200, and
purporting to convey all of the lands patented.
That the instruments so recorded were the instruments executed
by the Indians, by their thumb marks in the custom of Indians
unable to read or write, and that the instruments which the Indians
executed in December, 1907, and January, 1908, were not in truth
and in fact the receipts which the defendant Waller falsely and
fraudulently represented them to be, but were the instruments so
recorded, which the Indians signed in ignorance of their contents,
nature, and effect, and in reliance upon the false and fraudulent
representations in regard thereto made by the defendant Waller, all
of which was well known to the defendant.
That Mamie S. Waller is the wife of defendant Lucky S. Waller,
and the person mentioned as the grantee in the timber deed; that
she gave no consideration for the timber deed or the property
purporting to be conveyed thereby; that the deed was caused to be
taken in her name as grantee for the mutual benefit of the
defendants; that she pretends to have and claims the title to the
property therein described by virtue of said timber deed, and
thereby seeks to avail herself of the benefit of the fraud
perpetrated in securing the timber deed from the two Indians.
That the Indians never had any negotiations with either of the
defendants, directly or indirectly, as to the sale of the lands or
of any timber thereon, or in any respect other than as set forth in
the bill; that they never intended to sell the lands and never did
sell them or any part thereof, and that they never knowingly signed
or executed any instrument conveying or in any manner alienating
the
Page 243 U. S. 459
lands or any part thereof or interests or rights therein, or any
timber thereon. That the instruments which were executed and
recorded had and have the apparent legal effect of vesting the
title to the lands and the timber thereon in the defendants, and of
devesting the Indians of whatever right, title, and interest in and
to said lands and timber were intended and provided for them by the
laws of the United States. That the sum of $145, paid by Waller to
the Indians, is grossly inadequate and disproportionate to the
value of the lands and of the timber thereupon, and that the value
of the lands is not less than $2,500, and of the timber not less
than $2,000.
The prayer of the bill is for surrender and cancellation of the
warranty timber deed and the warranty deed for the lands. The case
was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit, which court has certified to this Court the following
question: has the United States capacity to maintain the suit in
question on behalf of the Indians named?
The answer to the question propounded depends upon a
consideration of the acts of Congress relating to these Indians.
The controlling act is the so-called Clapp Amendment of June 21,
1906, 34 Stat. 325, 353; March 1, 1907, 34 Stat. 1015, 1034.
Before dealing with its interpretation, it is necessary to have
in mind certain matters which are well settled by the previous
decisions of this Court. The tribal Indians are wards of the
government, and as such under its guardianship. It rests with
Congress to determine the time and extent of emancipation.
Conferring citizenship is not inconsistent with the continuation of
such guardianship, for it has been held that even after the Indians
have been made citizens, the relation of guardian and ward for some
purposes may continue. On the other hand, Congress may relieve the
Indians from such guardianship and control,
Page 243 U. S. 460
in whole or in part, and may, if it sees fit, clothe them with
full rights and responsibilities concerning their property, or give
to them a partial emancipation if it thinks that course better for
their protection.
United States v. Nice, 241 U.
S. 591,
241 U. S. 598,
and cases cited.
To Comprehend what Congress in tended to accomplish by the act
in question, it is necessary to have in view the previous
legislation upon this subject. Its history was given in
United
States v. First National Bank, 234 U.
S. 245, and may be briefly summarized here.
By the Treaty of March 19, 1867, 16 Stat. 719, creating the
White Earth Reservation, the Chippewas of the Mississippi ceded all
their land in Minnesota, except certain described tracts, to the
United States, and the government set apart the White Earth
Reservation for their use, and provision was made for the
certification to each Indian of not to exceed 160 acres of land in
lost of 40 acres each, upon the cultivation of ten acres, provided
that the land should be exempt from taxation and sale for debt and
should not be alienated except with the approval of the Secretary
of the Interior, and then only to a Chippewa Indian. Under the
General Allotment Act of February 8, 1887, 24 Stat. 388, provision
was made for the allotment of lands in the Indian reservations in
severalty, and it was provided that, upon the approval of the
allotments, patent therefor should issue in the name of the
allottees, which should have the legal effect and declare that the
United States held the land for twenty-five years in trust, for the
use and benefit of the Indian to whom the allotment was made, or,
in case of his death, for his heirs, according to the laws of the
state or territory where the land was located. At the expiration of
that time, the United States was required to convey the same to the
Indian or his heirs in fee, discharged of the trust and free of
encumbrances, provided that the President of the United States
might, at his discretion, extend the period. Conveyances or
contracts
Page 243 U. S. 461
touching the lands before the expiration of the trust period
were declared null and void. The Nelson Act of January 14, 1889, 25
Stat. 642, provided for the relinquishment to the United States of
that part of the reservation remaining after the allotment, the act
to become operative only upon the assent of a certain number of
Indians being obtained. By the Act of February 28, 1891, 26 Stat.
794, the allotments were limited to eighty acres to each Indian,
but by the Act of April 28, 1904, 33 Stat. 539, the maximum
allotments of the White Earth Reservation were made 160 acres.
While the lands were thus held in trust and subject to the
provisions of the Act of February 8, 1887, the Clapp Amendment was
passed, 34 Stat. 1015, 1034, which provides:
"That all restrictions as to the sale, encumbrance, or taxation
for allotments within the White Earth Reservation in the State of
Minnesota, heretofore [amended March 1, 1907, the work 'heretofore'
being substituted for the word 'now'] or hereafter held by adult
mixed-blood Indians, are hereby removed, and the trust deeds
heretofore or hereafter executed by the Department for such
allotments are hereby declared to pass the title in fee simple, or
such mixed bloods upon application shall be entitled to receive a
patent in fee simple for such allotments, and as to full-bloods,
said restrictions shall be removed when the Secretary of the
Interior is satisfied that said adult full-blood Indians are
competent to handle their own affairs, and in such case the
Secretary of the Interior shall issue to such Indian allottee a
patent in fee simple upon application."
As stated in the certificate, the Indians involved are adults of
mixed blood, and the lands in question were duly allotted and
patented to them (by trust patents, counsel agree) before the deeds
in controversy were made. We cannot escape the conviction that the
plain language of this act evidences the intent and purpose of
Congress
Page 243 U. S. 462
to make such lands allotted to mixed-blood Indians subject to
alienation with all the incidents and rights which inhere in full
ownership in persons of full capacity.
The act deals with two classes: first, adult mixed-blood
Indians, as to whom all restrictions as to sale or encumbrance are
removed and the trust deeds declared to pass title in fee simple,
or, upon application, such mixed bloods are to receive fee-simple
patents for their allotments; and, second, full-blood Indians, as
to whom the restrictions are to continue until the Secretary of the
Interior is satisfied that such Indians, "are competent to handle
their own affairs," at which time they are to receive patents in
fee simple. This distinction between the qualifications of adult
mixed and full-blood Indians is one which Congress has not
infrequently applied.
Marchie Tiger v. Western Invest.
Co., 221 U. S. 286,
221 U. S.
306-308;
United States v. First Nat. Bank,
supra, at
234 U. S.
260.
The act thus evidences a legislative judgment that adult
mixed-blood Indians are, in the respects dealt with in the act,
capable of managing their own affairs, and for that reason they are
given full power and authority to dispose of allotted lands. This
may be a mistake of judgment as to some cases, and if the
allegations of the bill set forth in the certificate in this case
are true, it is quite evident that the Indians here involved were
incapable of making an intelligent disposition of their lands. But
Congress dealt with general conditions, and with these classes of
Indians as a whole, and, with authority over the subject, has given
to adult mixed-blood Indians the full right to dispose of the lands
in question. It is not for the courts to question this legislative
judgment.
In this view of the legislation and the particular act in
question, we are unable to find any authority in the United States
to maintain this suit in behalf of the Indians named.
In
Heckman v. United States, 224 U.
S. 413, it was held
Page 243 U. S. 463
that the United States could maintain a bill to cancel
conveyances made by members of the Cherokee Nation in violation of
restrictions imposed by acts of Congress. That case differs from
the present one, in which there has been no disposition of the
lands in violation of restrictions imposed by Congress upon
alienation by the Indians. In the case now before us, in whatever
other respect the government of the United States may continue to
hold these Indians as wards, needing and receiving protection from
its authority over their persons and property, as to the land in
question, the United States, in the passage of the Clapp Amendment,
evidenced its purpose to grant full power and control to the class
named. As to them, the government has no further interest in or
control over the lands.
It does not follow that the Indians are without remedy in proper
actions brought by themselves or their guardians, if there be such,
for the protection of their rights. In
Dickson v. Luck Land
Co., 242 U. S. 371,
this Court had occasion to deal with rights concerning lands
allotted and patented under the Clapp Amendment to adult
mixed-blood Chippewa Indians, and, speaking of the effect of the
removal of the restrictions, this Court said at
242 U. S. 375:
"With those restrictions entirely removed and the fee-simple
patent issued, it would seem that the situation was one in which
all questions pertaining to the disposal of the lands naturally
would fall within the scope and operation of the laws of the state.
And that Congress so intended is shown by the Act of May 8, 1906,
c. 2348, 34 Stat. 182, which provides that, when an Indian allottee
is given a patent in fee for his allotment, he 'shall have the
benefit of and be subject to the laws, both civil and criminal, of
the state.' Among the laws to which the allottee became subject,
and to the benefit of which he became entitled, under this
enactment, were those governing the
Page 243 U. S. 464
transfer of real property, fixing the age of majority, and
declaring the disability of minors."
We reach the conclusion that, in this suit, the United States
was without capacity to bring the action for the benefit of the
Indians named, and it follows that the question propounded must be
answered in the negative.
And it is so ordered.