Joseph Naganab v. Ethan Allen Hitchcock, No. 247
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Day |
| Citation | 50 L.Ed. 1113,26 S.Ct. 667,202 U.S. 473 |
| Docket Number | No. 247 |
| Decision Date | 21 May 1906 |
| Parties | JOSEPH NAGANAB, Appt. , v. ETHAN ALLEN HITCHCOCK, Secretary of the Interior |
v.
ETHAN ALLEN HITCHCOCK, Secretary of the Interior.
Mr. Tracy L. Jeffords for appellant.
Messrs. William C. Pollock and Frank L. Campbell for appellee.
Mr. Justice Day delivered the opinion of the court:
In this suit a bill was filed in the supreme court of the District of Columbia by Joseph Naganab against Ethan Allen Hitchcock, Secretary of the Interior. Complainant brought the suit as a citizen of the United States and a member of the band and tribe of Chippewa Indians of the state of Minnesota,
Page 474
suing for himself and other members of the band and tribe. The bill is quite voluminous, but in substance sets out the alleged right and title of the Indians who had conveyed certain lands under the act of Congress of January 14, 1889 [25 Stat. at L. 642, chap. 24], to the United States, to be administered for their benefit. The bill averred that under the act of Congress the Indians of the state of Minnesota had conveyed to the United States upwards of 3,555,771 acres of land, constituting certain reservations named, all of which lands and reservations were held by the United States under conveyances in trust for the benefit of the Indians; that the Secretary of the Interior had caused the lands to be classified as required by the act, and that approximately 1,500,000 acres thereof were classified as pine lands, 1,855,000 acres as agricultural lands; 600,000 acres of the lands, classified under the said act as pine lands, were situated in certain reservations, to wit, Chippewas of the Mississippi, Leech lake, Cass lake, and Lake Winnibigoshish; that upon said last-mentioned area, there was and is growing a large amount of merchantable pine timber, reasonably worth $10,000,000. The value of the lands classified as agricultural lands, to be sold under said act for $1.25 per acre, is $2,318,750. And it is averred that it is the right of the Chippewa Indians to have certain of the lands sold, the proceeds to draw 5 per cent interest for fifty years, and the interest money to be used for the benefit of the Indians, as provided in the act, and, at the expiration of the fifty years, the balance of the principal sum remaining to be paid to the Indians.
The complaint is of the act of June 27, 1902 [32 Stat. at L. 400, chap. 1157] amendatory of the act of January 14, 1889. It is averred that at the time of the passage...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Mottaz, No. 85-546
...consent for, only actions for allotments." 406 U.S., at 142, 92 S.Ct., at 1466 (emphasis added). See also Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473 (1906) (sovereign immunity precludes suit against United States regarding disposition of Indian lands). That federal courts may have general subject-m......
-
Banco de Espana v. Federal Reserve Bank, No. 370-372.
...446, 3 S.Ct. 292, 27 L.Ed. 992; International Postal Supply Co. v. Bruce, 194 U.S. 601, 24 S.Ct. 820, 48 L.Ed. 1134; Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473, 26 S.Ct. 667, 50 L.Ed. 1113; Louisiana v. Garfield, 211 U.S. 70, 29 S.Ct. 31, 53 L.Ed. 92; Morrison v. Work, 266 U.S. 481, 45 S.Ct. 149, 6......
-
Coffey v. United States, No. CIV 08-0588 JB/LFG
...the Indian Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1505, an act inPage 48which Congress intended to waive sovereign immunity); Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473 (holding that sovereign immunity barred equitable relief for breach of trust); Nero v. Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, 892 F.2d 1457, 1464 (10th Ci......
-
U.S. v. Murdock Mach. and Engineering Co. of Utah, No. 95-4071
...(district court had no power to enjoin United States or its agents from destroying horses owned by Navaho Indians); Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473, 475-76, 26 S.Ct. 667, 668, 50 L.Ed. 1113 (1906) (Chippewa Indians could not require Secretary of Interior to administer certain lands for t......
-
United States v. Mottaz, No. 85-546
...consent for, only actions for allotments." 406 U.S., at 142, 92 S.Ct., at 1466 (emphasis added). See also Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473 (1906) (sovereign immunity precludes suit against United States regarding disposition of Indian lands). That federal courts may have general subject-m......
-
Banco de Espana v. Federal Reserve Bank, No. 370-372.
...446, 3 S.Ct. 292, 27 L.Ed. 992; International Postal Supply Co. v. Bruce, 194 U.S. 601, 24 S.Ct. 820, 48 L.Ed. 1134; Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473, 26 S.Ct. 667, 50 L.Ed. 1113; Louisiana v. Garfield, 211 U.S. 70, 29 S.Ct. 31, 53 L.Ed. 92; Morrison v. Work, 266 U.S. 481, 45 S.Ct. 149, 6......
-
Coffey v. United States, No. CIV 08-0588 JB/LFG
...the Indian Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1505, an act inPage 48which Congress intended to waive sovereign immunity); Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473 (holding that sovereign immunity barred equitable relief for breach of trust); Nero v. Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, 892 F.2d 1457, 1464 (10th Ci......
-
U.S. v. Murdock Mach. and Engineering Co. of Utah, No. 95-4071
...(district court had no power to enjoin United States or its agents from destroying horses owned by Navaho Indians); Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U.S. 473, 475-76, 26 S.Ct. 667, 668, 50 L.Ed. 1113 (1906) (Chippewa Indians could not require Secretary of Interior to administer certain lands for t......