Fremont County v. Moore
| Decision Date | 20 September 1888 |
| Citation | 3 Wyo. 200,19 P. 438 |
| Parties | FREMONT COUNTY v. MOORE |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Appeal from district court, Fremont county.
Action by one Moore against Fremont county to recover taxes paid by him. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Defendant, Moore, is the post trader at Fort Washakie, in and upon the Shoshonee Indian Reservation. As such post trader, he resides upon said Indian reservation, and is engaged in merchandising. He is also the owner of some horses and cattle, which feed upon the reservation. The county commissioners of Fremont county, within whose geographical boundaries the reservation lies, assessed Moore's property for taxation, and the tax so levied was paid by Moore under protest. He thereupon began an action in the court below to recover back the taxes so paid. The court below rendered a judgment in favor of Moore against the county commissioners, who are now seeking to reverse that judgment.
The Shoshonee Reservation was erected and created by a treaty between the United States and the Shoshonee Indians, ratified by the senate, February 16, 1869. Article second of this treaty provides: "And the United States now solemnly agrees that no person, except those herein designated and authorized so to do, and except such officers, agents, and employes of the government as may be authorized by law to enter upon Indian reservations in discharge of duties enjoined by law, shall ever be permitted to pass over, settle upon, or reside in this territory." The act creating the territory of Wyoming was approved July 25, 1868, and provided a government for the section of country which comprised this reservation. There is no exception in this act as to the territorial jurisdiction of the territory over any of the country within the territory, except in so far as the language of section 1 of the act would be construed as a limitation: "Provided, that nothing in this act shall be construed to impair the rights of person or property now pertaining to the Indians in said territory, so long as such rights shall remain unextinguished by treaty between the United States and such Indians." There is nothing in the treaty with the Shoshonee Indians which withdraws from the scope of country covered by their reservation the jurisdiction of the territory. The provision in the organic act, therefore, can only operate as a limitation upon the jurisdiction of the territory; and this limitation, as the United States supreme court has said in Langford v Monteith, 102 U.S. 145, 26 L.Ed. 53; Railway Co. v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Noble v. Amoretti
...that case the taxing power of the State over property on such reservation was denied. The same conclusion was reached in Fremont County v. Moore, 3 Wyo. 200, 19 P. 438. both cases not only was the right denied to tax the merchandise of an Indian trader, but also the authority to tax other p......
-
Powder River Cattle Co. v. Board of County Com'rs of Johnson County
... ... the case was submitted upon the merits, without question as ... to the method of procedure. Fremont Co. v. Moore, ... (Wyo.) 3 Wyo. 200, 19 P. 438. [ 1 ] Although eminent counsel ... were represented in the case, the point as to the right to ... ...
-
Torrey v. Baldwin
...of which the Indians have the usufruct. The property of the Indians cannot be taxed. It is true, as stated in the case of Fremont Co. v. Moore, supra, that "the jurisdiction tax and the jurisdiction of the courts are not necessarily co-extensive." But, the general jurisdiction being concede......
- Carter v. Territory