United States v. Claus

Decision Date31 July 1944
Docket NumberNo. 3615-C.,3615-C.
Citation63 F. Supp. 433
PartiesUNITED STATES v. CLAUS.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of New York

George L. Grobe, U. S. Atty., of Buffalo, N. Y., for plaintiff.

Marvin M. Marcus, Jr., of Buffalo, N. Y., for defendant.

KNIGHT, District Judge.

Defendant herein has been indicted for his failure to appear for induction, contrary to the provisions of the Selective Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 301 et seq. He is an Iroquois Indian, of the Mohawk Tribe, whose reservation is the Grand River Reservation, at Brantford, Ontario, Canada.

Based on his questionnaire wherein he stated himself to be a resident of the city of Buffalo, Erie County, New York, defendant was classified 1A by the local Selective Service Board. Upon appeal the classification was sustained.

Defendant has also registered as an alien, with his residence stated to be at Buffalo. For the last few years he has been employed as a painter by a Buffalo contractor.

Defendant has filed a Plea in Bar which must be denied for the reason that the classification made is final, if it is not arbitrary, capricious and is not a denial of substantial justice. United States v. Mroz, 7 Cir., 136 F.2d 221; Rase v. United States, 129 F.2d 204, 207; Seele v. United States, 8 Cir., 133 F.2d 1015; Falbo v. United States, 320 U.S. 549, 64 S.Ct. 346, 88 L.Ed. 305; United States v. Goff, 4 Cir., 135 F.2d 610; Graf v. Mallon, 8 Cir., 138 F.2d 230; United States v. Messersmith, 7 Cir., 138 F.2d 599. Nor can defendant be granted relief because he, as an Indian, is given particular rights by the Jay Treaty, Article 3, 8 Stat. 117, and is not subject to the provisions of the Selective Training and Service Act, in that he is not an "alien" within the scope of the Selective Service Law. "It is agreed that it shall at all times be free to his Majesty's subjects, and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said boundary line, freely to pass and repass by land or inland navigation, into the respective territories and countries of the two parties, on the continent of America." (The only other reference to Indians on the treaty deals with duty of entry rights.)

Nothing is found in the foregoing excerpt from the treaty that sustains defendant's claim. Even if this or some other treaty did grant alien Canadian Indian registrants an exemption from military service, it would be superseded and abrogated by the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 as amended. "The effect of treaties on acts of Congress, when in conflict, is not settled by the Constitution. But the question is not involved in any doubt as to its proper solution. A treaty may supersede a prior act of Congress, and an act of Congress may supersede a prior treaty." The Cherokee...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • The Extradition of Cheung
    • United States
    • United States District Courts
    • 23 Mayo 2000
    ...1, 16, 8 L.Ed. 25 (1831) (noting the numerous treaties between the Cherokee Nation and the United States); United States v. ClausUNK, 63 F. Supp. 433, 434 (WDNY 1944) (discussing the impact of the Selective Service Act on treaties with various Indian tribes signed between 1784 and 1794). Fr......
  • Cheung v. U.S.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 1 Agosto 1999
    ... . Page 82 . 213 F.3d 82 (2nd Cir. 2000) . JOHN CHEUNG, Petitioner-Appellee, . v. . UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellant. . Docket No. 99-2526 . August Term, 1999 . UNITED STATES ...Claus, 63 F. Supp. 433, 434 . Page 90 . (W.D.N.Y. 1944) (discussing the impact of the Selective ......
  • United States v. Gredzens
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 30 Noviembre 1954
    ......981. The 1940 Selective Training and Service Act was held in Totus v. U. S., D.C., 39 F.Supp. 7, to supersede a treaty between the United States and an Indian Tribe to the extent that the treaty and the service were in conflict. To the same effect see U. S. v. Claus, D.C., 63 F.Supp. 433 and Albany v. U. S., 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 266. In discussing the 1940 Selective Service 125 F. Supp. 872 Act, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in Petition of Moser, 2 Cir., 182 F.2d 734, 738, said: "It seems abundantly clear that this statute was designed to treat ......
  • Albany v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 12 Noviembre 1945
    ......152 F.2d 267 We are of the view that the Green case was rightly decided, and follow it.         The Green decision was found applicable to a Canadian Indian, resident in the United States, by District Judge Knight, in the unreported case of United States v. Delos Earl Claus, D.C., 63 F.Supp. 433, decided July 31, 1944, in the Western District of New York. The ......
  • 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