235 U.S. 206 (1914), 56, Skelton v. Dill

Docket Nº:No. 56
Citation:235 U.S. 206, 35 S.Ct. 60, 59 L.Ed. 198
Party Name:Skelton v. Dill
Case Date:November 30, 1914
Court:United States Supreme Court
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 206

235 U.S. 206 (1914)

35 S.Ct. 60, 59 L.Ed. 198

Skelton

v.

Dill

No. 56

United States Supreme Court

November 30, 1914

Submitted November 5, 1914

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Syllabus

Restrictions upon alienation of allotments to Creek Indians made under the Act of March 1, 1901, c. 676, 31 Stat. 861, supplemented by the act of June 30, 1902, c. 1323, 32 Stat. 500, apply only to allotments made to living citizens in their own right, and do not apply to those made on behalf of deceased members of the tribe. Mullen v. United States, 224 U.S. 448.

Quaere, who are the true heirs under the above statutes of a Creek Indian child of mixed parentage who was born prior to May 28, 1901, and died before receiving his allotment.

30 Okl. 278 reversed.

The facts, which involve the construction of the Creek Indian allotment statutes and the effect of the provisions regarding restrictions on alienation of allotments and their applicability to allotments made to deceased members of the tribe, are stated in the opinion.

VANDEVANTER, J., lead opinion

MR. JUSTICE VAN DEVANTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

Whether an allotment of lands in the Creek Nation, which was made on behalf of Archie Hamby, a Creek child then deceased, passed the lands to his heirs free from restrictions upon alienation is the federal question in this case. The facts out of which the question arises are these: Archie Hamby was born in February, 1900, and died in

Page 207

July, 1901, being survived by his parents and by at least one sister. His mother was a Creek woman, duly enrolled as such in 1895, and his father was a white man, not entitled to enrollment. Two or three years after the child's death, his name was regularly placed upon the roll of Creek citizens by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, and the lands in question were duly embraced in an allotment made on his behalf. A deed for them was also issued in his name, and this, by operation of law, vested the title in his heirs. In September, 1905, after the allotment was made, his parents, acting through an attorney in fact appointed a few days before, executed and delivered to L. S. Skelton a warranty deed for the lands, and in July, 1906, the parents, apparently ignoring the deed to Skelton, executed and delivered to S. M. Wilson a similar deed. Whatever rights...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP