Simeon Hallowell v. United States

Citation209 U.S. 101,28 S.Ct. 498,52 L.Ed. 702
Decision Date23 March 1908
Docket NumberNo. 175,175
PartiesSIMEON HALLOWELL v. UNITED STATES
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

This case is here upon certified questions by the judges of the circuit court of appeals.

The certified questions and the statement of the case which precedes them are as follows:

'The indictment was returned November 16, 1905, and charged that the defendant, on August 1, 1905, in the district of Nebraska, introduced whisky and other intoxicating liquors into the Indian country, 'to wit, into and upon the Omaha Indian Reservation, a reservation set apart for the exclusive use and benefit of certain tribes of the Omaha Indians.' The defendant entered a plea of not guilty, and the case was submitted to a jury upon the following agreed statement:

"That the defendant, Simeon Hallowell, an Omaha Indian, is and was, on the 1st day of August, 1905, an allottee of land granted to him on the Omaha Indian Reservation, in Thurston county, Nebraska; that the allotment so made to him was made under the provisions of the act of Congress of August 7, 1882 (22 Stat. at L. 341, chap. 434); that the first or trust patent was issued to him in the year 1884, and that the twenty-five-year period of the trust limitation has not yet expired; and that the fee title of the allotment so made to him is still held by the United States.

"That the defendant, Simeon Hallowell, on the 1st of August, 1905, procured at a point outside the said reservation one-half gallon of whisky, which he took to his home, which was within the limits of the Omaha Indian Reservation, and upon an allotment which he had inherited, and which allotment was made under the provisions of the act of Congress of August 7, 1882, and the title of which is held by the government, as the twenty-five-year trust period has not expired. That he took the said whisky into and upon this allotment for the purpose of drinking and using the same himself, and that he did drink said whisky, and did give some of it to his friends or visitors to drink.

"That the said Omaha Indian Reservation has been allotted practically in whole, and that many of the allotments of deceased Omaha Indians have been sold to white people, under the provisions of the act of Congress of May 27, 1902 (32 Stat. at L. 245, 275, chap. 888); that within the original boundary limits of the Omaha Indian Reservation, there are many tracts of land that have been sold, under the provisions of said act, to white persons who are the sole owners thereof, and that the full title to such lands has passed to the purchaser, the same as if a final patent, without restriction upon alienation, had been issued to the allottee.

"That all of the Omaha Indians who were living in the year 1884, and by law entitled to allotments, received them.

"That the Omaha Indian Reservation is within and a physical part of the organized territory of the state of Nebraska, as are also the allotments herein referred to, into and upon which the said defendant took said whisky. That the Omaha Indians exercise the rights of citizenship, and participate in the county and state government extending over the said Omaha Indian Reservation, and over and upon the allotments herein referred to. That the defendant, Simeon Hallowell, has been, on frequent occasions, a judge and clerk of election, a justice of the peace, and assessor, and a director of the public school district in which he lives. That Omaha Indians have taken part in the state and county government, extending over the reservation, and have held the following offices in said county of Thurston, state of Nebraska: County coroner, county attorney, county judge, justice of the peace, constable, road overseer, election officers, and have also served as jurors in the county and district courts. Defendant is self-supporting, as are most of said Indians. Some of them are engaged in business and most of them engaged in farming.'

'Over the defendant's objection that the matters recited in the agreed statement did not constitute or show an offense against laws of the United States, the court instructed the jury that, if the matters so recited were true, the defendant was guilty of the offense charged. The defendant reserved an exception to this ruling. The jury found him guilty.

'And the circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit further certifies that the following questions of law are presented to it in said cause; that their decision is indispensable to a decision of the cause; and that, to the end that such court may properly decide the issues of law so presented, it desires the instruction of the Supreme Court of the United States upon such questions, to wit:

'1. After the allotment in severalty to the Omaha Indians of practically all of the lands in the Omaha Indian Reservation in the state of Nebraska and the issuance to the several allottees of the first, or trust, patents, under the act of August 7 1882 (22 Stat. at L. 341, chap. 434), and after the provisions of § 7 of that act and of § 6 of the act of February 8, 1887 (24 Stat. at L. 388, chap. 119), had become effective as to such allottees, did Congress retain or possess the power to regulate or prohibit the introduction of intoxicating liquors upon such allotments, while the title to the same should be held in trust by the United States, or while the same should remain inalienable by the allottee without the consent of the United States?

'2. Do the facts that the tribal relation of these Indians is still maintained, and that part of the lands in said reservation...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Wheeler v. Pilgrim's Pride Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • December 15, 2009
    ... ... No. 07-40651 ... United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit ... December 15, 2009 ... ...
  • United States v. Julius Mayer
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • November 16, 1914
    ...51 L. ed. 875, 878, 879, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 559, 214 U. S. 492, 53 L. ed. 1058, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 514; Hallowell v. United States, 209 U. S. 101, 107, 52 L. ed. 702, 705, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 498; The Folmina, 212 U. S. 354, 363, 53 L. ed. 546, 551, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 363, 15 Ann. Cas. 748; Baltimor......
  • Triplett v. Lowell Mantle Lamp Co of America v. Aluminum Products Co
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1936
    ...the basis of the questions certified. See White v. Johnson, 282 U.S. 367, 371, 51 S.Ct. 115, 75 L.Ed. 388; Hallowell v. United States, 209 U.S. 101, 107, 28 S.Ct. 498, 52 L.Ed. 702; Jewell v. Knight, 123 U.S. 426, 435, 8 S.Ct. 193, 31 L.Ed. 190; Enfield v. Jordan, 119 U.S. 680, 7 S.Ct. 358,......
  • Hanes v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • December 31, 1998
    ...federal treaties to determine whether, on the facts of this case, Hanes may be convicted of a crime. See Hallowell v. U.S ., 209 U.S. 101, 28 S.Ct. 498, 52 L.Ed. 702 (1908). Mixed questions of law and fact are treated as questions of law on appeal, and so we review this issue de novo. Taylo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT