United States v. Sandoval

• Decision Date: 22 July 1912
• Docket Number: 14.
• Citation: 198 F. 539
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. SANDOVAL.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico

198 F. 539

UNITED STATES v. SANDOVAL.

No. 14.

United States District Court, D. New Mexico.

July 22, 1912

Syllabus by the Court.

Stephen B. Davis, Jr., U.S. Atty., and Herbert W. Clark and Leroy O Moore, Asst. U.S. Attys.

Francis C. Wilson, Sp. U.S. Atty., for Pueblo Indians of New Mexico.

Renehan & Wright, for defendant.

POPE District Judge.

The defendant, Felipe Sandoval, has been indicted under Act Jan 30, 1897, c. 109, 29 Stat. 506, for 'introducing liquor into Indian country, to wit, the Santa Clara Pueblo. ' The portion of that act here relevant is as follows:

'That any person who shall sell, give away, dispose of, exchange, or barter any malt, spirituous, or vinous liquor, including beer, ale, and wine, or any ardent or other intoxicating liquor of any kind whatsoever, or any essence, extract, bitters, preparation, compound, composition, or any article whatsoever, under any name, label, or brand, which produces intoxication, to any Indian to whom allotment of land has been made while the title to the same shall be held in trust by the government, or to any Indian a ward of the government under charge of any Indian superintendent or agent, or any Indian, including mixed bloods, over whom the government, through its departments, exercises guardianship, and any person who shall introduce or attempt to introduce any malt, spirituous, or vinous liquor, including beer, ale, and wine, or any ardent or intoxicating liquor of any kind whatsoever into the Indian country, which term shall include any Indian allotment while the title to the same shall be held in trust by the government, or while the same shall remain inalienable by the allottee without the consent of the United States, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than sixty days, and by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars for the first offense and not less than two hundred dollars for each offense thereafter.'

A demurrer has been interposed, which attacks the indictment as stating no offense against federal law. It seems clear that, independent of certain legislation, to be presently considered, surrounding the admission of New Mexico as a state, the demurrer would have to prevail. The precise question was considered by the Supreme Court of New Mexico in United States v. Mares, 14 N.M. 1, 88 P. 1128, being a prosecution under the act of 1897 for selling liquor to a Pueblo Indian, and it was there held, upon what we believe to be adequate reasoning, that the Pueblo Indians are not within the terms of the act of 1897. This much is not seriously contested.

The real controversy arises upon certain provisions of Act June 20, 1910, c. 310, 36 Stat. 557, enabling the people of New Mexico and Arizona to form a constitution and state government. It is therein enacted that the constitution of New Mexico to be framed shall provide--

'by an ordinance irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of said state * * * that * * * the sale, barter, or giving of intoxicating liquors to Indians and the introduction of liquors into Indian country, which term shall also include all lands now owned or occupied by the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, are forever prohibited.'

The act further requires a similar ordinance to the effect--

'that the people * * * forever disclaim all right or title to * * * all lands lying within said boundaries owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes the right or title to which shall have been acquired through or from the United States or any prior sovereignty, and that until the title of such Indian or Indian tribes shall have been extinguished the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition and under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the United States.'

It is further required by the act that the Constitution as framed shall contain an ordinance providing--

'that whenever hereafter any of the lands contained within Indian reservations or allotments in said proposed state shall be allotted, sold, reserved or otherwise disposed of, they shall be subject for a period of 25 years after such allotment, sale, reservation or other disposal to all the laws of the United States prohibiting the introduction of liquor into Indian country, and the term 'Indian country' shall include the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and the lands now owned or occupied by them.'

The Constitution of New Mexico as framed and approved by the President of the United States contains ordinances (declared to be irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of the state) containing in so many words the above-quoted provisions required by the Enabling Act. There is no doubt that those several provisions are broad enough to constitute lands now owned or occupied by the Pueblo Indians Indian country. If, therefore, the terms of the Enabling Act are to be given the effect resulting from its language, the indictment is good; otherwise not.

This brings up for determination the highly important and delicate question of the power of Congress to impose upon the admission of New Mexico the terms above disclosed. The solution of this involves a careful consideration of the status of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and of their land tenure. These questions, while most interesting, are largely fallow field. A long line of decisions has covered the subject. The first case discussing the matter was United States v. Lucero, 1 N.M. 422, decided in 1869. There the defendant was sued for the penalty imposed by Intercourse Act June 30, 1834, c. 161, 4 Stat. 730, for settling on lands belonging to 'the Pueblo tribe of Indians of the pueblo of Cochiti. ' In sustaining a demurrer to the petition, the Supreme Court of New Mexico, speaking through Chief Justice Watts, points out radical differences in character between the Pueblo Indians and what are known as the tribal Indians, saying:

'They (the Spanish adventurers) found the Pueblo Indians, on their advent into New Mexico, a peaceful, quiet, and industrious people, residing in villages for their protection against the wild Indians, and living by the cultivation of the soil.'

As to their land holdings it is pointed out that the Spanish acknowledged their title to the land upon which they were residing, and evidenced this by a written agreement dated as far back as 1689. 1 N.M. 445. The Lucero opinion further shows that so long as the Spanish rule continued in America these titles were respected, and that when Mexico became independent of Spain the Plan of Iguala, of February 24, 1821, conferred citizenship upon these Indians in the following declaration:

'That all the inhabitants of New Spain, without distinction, whether Europeans, Africans, or Indians, are citizens of this monarchy, with a right to be employed in any post according to their merit and virtues.'

It is further pointed out that on September 17, 1822, the Mexican Congress passed a preamble and act carrying into effect the fundamental principles of the Plan of Iguala in the following language:

'The sovereign Mexican constitutional congress, with a view to give due effect to the twelfth article of the Plan of Iguala, as being one of those which form the social basis of the edifice of our independence, has determined to decree and does decree:

'Article 1. That in any register, and public and private documents, on entering the name of citizens of this empire, classification of them with regard to their origin shall be omitted.'

The Supreme Court of the United States in United States v. Ritchie, 17 How. 525, 15 L.Ed. 236, quoted in the Lucero Case, gives the reason for these provisions conferring citizenship upon the Indians without distinction of race as follows:

'The Indian race having participated largely in the struggles resulting in the overthrow of the Spanish power and in the erection of an independent government, it was natural that, in laying the foundations of the government, the previous political and social distinction in favor of the European or Spanish blood should be abolished and the equality of rights and privileges established. Hence the article to this effect in the plan of Iguala and the decree of the first congress declaring the equality of civil rights, whatever may be their race or country. These solemn declarations of the political power of the government had the effect necessarily to invest the Indians with the privileges of citizenship as effectually as had the Declaration of Independence of the United States of 1776 to invest all those persons with these privileges residing in the country at the time and who adhered to the interest of the colonies.'

When New Mexico became a portion of the United States under the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, the guaranties of that treaty were to the effect that the citizens of New Mexico 'can remain in New Mexico or remove to Mexico,' and in either event their property rights are to be 'inviolably respected.' Recognizing the obligations imposed by the treaty, Congress in the eighth section of the act of July 22, 1854 (10 Stat. 308, c. 103), made it the duty of the Surveyor General of New Mexico to--

'make a report in regard to all Pueblos existing in the territory, showing the extent and locality of each, stating the number of inhabitants in the said pueblos respectively and the nature of their title to the land, * * * which report shall be laid before Congress for such action thereon as may be deemed just and proper with a view to confirm bona fide grants and give full effect to the treaty of 1848 between the United States and Mexico.'

The Lucero opinion shows that under this direction of Congress the Surveyor General examined and reported upon the titles of the pueblos of New Mexico, finding 21 pueblos...