Maricopa Co v. Territory of Arizona
Decision Date | 04 March 1895 |
Docket Number | No. 195,195 |
Citation | 156 U.S. 347,39 L.Ed. 447,15 S.Ct. 391 |
Parties | MARICOPA & P. R. CO. v. TERRITORY OF ARIZONA |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
After the organization of the territory of Arizona, certain land situated within its geographical limits was set apart as an Indian reservation, for the use of the Pima and Maricopa Indians. 11 Stat. 401. The tract is known as the 'Gila River Reservation.' The Maricopa & Phoenix Railroad Company owns and operates within the territory of Arizona 24.16 miles of railroad track, all of which lie within the geographical outlines of the territory, as named in its organic act, but 6.24 miles are within the reservation just mentioned. This portion was constructed under the authority of an act of congress which provided that the railroad should be 'authorized, invested, and empowered with the right to locate, construct, own, equip, operate, use, and maintain a railway and telegraph and telephone line through the Indian reservation situated in the territory of Arizona known as the Gila River Reservation, occupied by the Pima and Maricopa Indians.'
This act moreover contained a stipulation reserving the right to amend, alter, or repeal its provisions. The tax laws of the territory of Arizona provide as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, 3
...ground was that the railway right-of-way had been withdrawn from the reservation, as was held in Maricopa & Phoenix R. Co. v. Arizona Territory, 156 U.S. 347, 15 S.Ct. 391, 39 L.Ed. 447. 1. The salmon trap is described by the Alaska Supreme Court as follows: 'A trap consists of tall stakes ......
-
John King Mfg Co v. City Council of August, 392
...validity of an authority exercised under the United States had been challenged, was indicated in Maricopa & Phoenix R. R. Co. v. Arizona, 156 U. S. 347, 350, 351, 15 S. Ct. 391, 39 L. Ed. 447, and Parsons v. District of Columbia, 170 U. S. 45, 49, 50, 18 S. Ct. 521, 42 L. Ed. 943. The subje......
-
In re Skelton Lead & Zinc Co.
...from Thomson v. Union P. R. Co., 76 U.S. 579. In Utah & Northern R. Co. v. Fisher, 116 U.S. 28; Maricopa & Phoenix R. Co v. Ariz. Ter., 156 U.S. 347, 39 L. Ed. 447, 15 S. Ct. 391; Thomas v. Gay, 169 U.S. 264, 42 L. Ed. 740, 18 S. Ct. 340; Wagoner v. Evans, 170 U.S. 588, 42 L. Ed. 1154, 18 S......
-
State ex rel. Peterson v. District Court of Ninth Judicial Dist., 5242
...make their own laws and be ruled by them, ...' " Kake, supra, 369 U.S. at 74-75, 82 S.Ct. at 570. & Phoenix Railroad Co. v. Arizona Territory, 156 U.S. 347, 15 S.Ct. 391, 39 L.Ed. 447 (1895)-a railway right-of-way through a reservation could be taxed since it had been withdrawn from the res......
-
Surviving Castro-huerta: the Historical Perseverance of the Basic Policy of Worcester v. Georgia Protecting Tribal Autonomy, Notwithstanding One Supreme Court Opinion's Errant Narrative to the Contrary
...cases in this line are Utah & Northern Railway Co. v. Fisher, 116 U.S. 28 (1885); Maricopa & Phoenix Railway Co. v. Territory of Arizona, 156 U.S. 347 (1895); Thomas v. Gay, 169 U.S. 264 (1898); Wagoner v. Evans, 170 U.S. 588 (1898); and Montana Catholic Missions v. Missoula County, 200 U.S......