United States v. Old Settlers Old Settlers v. United States

Decision Date03 April 1893
Docket NumberNos. 1,031 and 1,032,s. 1,031 and 1,032
Citation37 L.Ed. 509,13 S.Ct. 650,148 U.S. 427
PartiesUNITED STATES v. 'OLD SETTLERS.' 'OLD SETTLERS' v. UNITED STATES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Petition by Bryan, Wilson, and Hendricks, under Act. Feb. 25, 1889, (25 St. at Large, p. 694,) for themselves, and as commissioners of the 'Old Settlers,' or 'Western Cherokee,' Indians, to recover moneys alleged to be due from the United States. A decree was given for petitioners. Both parties appeal. Modified and affirmed.

Statement by Mr. Chief Justice FULLER:

The original petition was filed March 8, 1889, and the substituted petition, January 23, 1890, and thereby the petitioners, Bryan, Wilson, and Hendricks, purporting to act for themselves, and as the commissioners of the 'Old Settlers,' or- 'Western Cherokee,' Indians, represented that the latter are that part of the Cherokee race of Indians which formerly composed the Western Cherokee nation, and which subsequently became known as the 'Old Settlers,' and that for the purpose of prosecuting their claims against the United States government they had appointed Bryan, Wilson, and Hendricks as their commissioners to represent and in their names and for their benefit to do and perform any and all acts and things necessary and proper to be done by them in the premises. That the suit was brought under the provisions of the act of congress approved February 25, 1889, entitled 'An act to authorize the court of claims to hear, determine, and render final judgment upon the claim of the Old Settlers, or Western Cherokee Indians,' (25 St. p. 694,) and which is as follows:

'Section 1. That the claim of that part of the Cherokee Indians known as the 'Old Settlers,' or 'Western Cherokees,' against the United States, which claim was set forth in the report of the secretary of the interior to congress of February third, eighteen hundred and eighty-three, (said report being made under act of congress of August seventh, eighteen hundred and eighty-two,) and contained in executive document number sixty of the second session of the forty-seventh congress, be, and the same hereby is, referred to the court of claims for adjudication; and jurisdiction is hereby conferred on said court to try said cause, and to determine what sum or sums of money, if any, are justly due from the United States to said Indians, arising from or growing out of treaty stipulations and acts of congress relating thereto, after deducting all payments heretofore actually made to said Indians by the United States, either in money or property; and, after deducting all offsets, counterclaims, and deductions of any and every kind and character which should be allowed to the United States under any valid provision or provisions in said treaties and laws contained, or to which the United States may be otherwise entitled, and after fully considering and determining whether or not the said Indians have heretofore adjusted and settled their said claim with the United States, it being the intention of this act to allow the said court of claims unrestricted latitude in adjusting and determining the said claim, so that the rights, legal and equitable, both of the United States and of said Indians, may be fully considered and determined; and to try and determine all questions that may arise in such cause on behalf of either party thereto, and render final judgment thereon; and the attorney general is hereby directed to appear in behalf of the government; and, if said court shall decide against the United States, the attorney general shall, within sixty days from the rendition of judgment, appeal the cause to the supreme court of the United States; and from any judgment that may be rendered the said Indians may also appeal to said supreme court: provided, that the appeal of said Indians shall be taken within sixty days after the rendition of said judgment, and said court shall give such cause precedence: provided, further, that nothing in this act shall be accepted or construed as a confession that the government of the United States is indebted to said Indians.

'Sec. 2. That said action shall be commenced by a petition stating the facts on which said Indians claim to recover, and the amount of their claim; and said petition may be verified by the authorized agent or attorney of said Indians as to the existence of such facts, and no other statement need be contained in said petition or verification.'

And it was thereupon averred that under the provisions of certain treaties, made and entered into in 1817 and 1819, the Western Cherokees, or Old Settlers, sold, ceded, and relinquished, and there was conveyed to the United States, all their right, title, and interest in and to all the lands belonging to them situated in the states east of the Mississippi, and in consideration thereof the United States sold them certain lands, situated in what is now the state of Arkansas. That, in consideration of the subsequent sale and cession of the lands in Arkansas to the United States, and in further consideration of the removal of the Western nation of Cherokees from the state of Arkansas, under the provisions of the treaties of May 6, 1828, and February 14, 1833, between the Western Cherokee nation and the United States, the latter bargained, sold, ceded, relinquished and conveyed, solely and exclusively to the Western Cherokee nation, subsequently known as the 'Old Settlers,' all the lands situated in the now Indian Territory, and described in the treaties of 1828 and 1833, and solemnly guarantied the lands to them forever. That while in the peaceable and undisputed possession and enjoyment of the tract of land, in the now Indian Territory, the United States, under the color of a pretended treaty with the Eastern Cherokee nation in 1835, made and entered into without the knowledge or consent of the Western Cherokee nation, and to which it was not a party, and from the provisions of which it was prevented from protecting itself by force and fraud on the part of the United States, granted to the Eastern Cherokees the same lands that were sold and conveyed to the Western Cherokee nation, without the consent and against the wishes and in fraud and violation of the rights of the latter, and removed the Eastern Cherokees, against their will and by force of arms, from their homes east of the Mississippi, and located them upon the lands belonging to the Western Cherokees, thus depriving them of the sole use, right to, and interest in the lands as guarantied by treaty, and reserving to them only an interest in proportion to their numbers, they being but one third of the whole Cherokee people. That from that time, and continually thereafter, the Western Cherokees protested against and resisted this invasion of their rights, until in 1846, when, acting under duress of life, liberty, and property, advantage being also taken by the United States of the fiduciary relations existing towards the Western Cherokees, and also of the condition of extreme impoverishment, destitution, and want to which the Western Cherokees had been reduced by the United States, they were forced to make and enter into an agreement with the United States, fraudulent in character, by the terms of which the consideration they were to receive was grossly inadequate to compensate them for their right to and interest in the lands, of which they had been unjustly deprived by the United States, and for the property destroyed and lost to them through the wrongful acts of the United States, and its default to comply with its treaty obligations It was further alleged that the land so bargained, sold, relinquished, and conveyed to the Western Cherokees by the treaties of 1828 and 1833 contained in all 13,610,795.34 acres, and that the Western nation of Cherokees formed but one third of the whole Cherokee race, the Eastern nation forming the other two thirds; and that the amount of land owned by the Western nation, which was appropriated by the United States and granted to the Eastern nation of Cherokees, under the provisions of the treaty of 1835, was the same part of the whole body of land as was the Eastern nation of the whole body of the Cherokee people; and that, therefore, the United States took from the Western Cherokees, and deprived them of the sole use, right, title, and interest in and to two thirds of 13,610,795.34 acres, amounting to the sum of 9,073,863.56 acres, and converted the same to the public use and benefit; the land being worth at the time it was so taken and converted the sum of $5,671,164.72 1/2.

Petitioners further alleged that after the Eastern Cherokees had been forcibly removed into the country of the Western Cherokees through the wrongful acts of the United States, and because of its failure to protect the Western Cherokees according to treaty stipulations, property of great value was lost to them to wit, of the value of $30,000; and, further, that the only payments made to the Western Cherokees since the appropriation of their lands and the destruction of their property were the sum of $532,896.90, appropriated by act of congress of September 30, 1850, (9 St. 556;) a one-third interest in the sum of $500,000, given by the United States to the whole Cherokee people in common, by the treaty of 1835; and a one-third interest in 800,000 acres of land sold in common to the Cherokee people by the United States in the treaty of 1835, which was made exclusively with the Eastern Cherokee nation, for the sum of $500,000, at which valuation the Western Cherokees have been and still are held charged by the government for their one-third share.

It was further alleged that under the provisions of the treaty of 1846 the sum of $5,600,000, which had been provided by the treaty of 1835, and a supplementary treaty thereto of 1836, was adopted and taken by the United States as a basis of settlement of the claims of the Western Cherokees against the United States, from which amount certain sums were to be first...

To continue reading

Request your trial
57 cases
  • Dames Moore v. Regan
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 2 Julio 1981
    ...Oral Arg. 39-42, 47. We agree. See United States v. Weld, 127 U.S. 51, 8 S.Ct. 1000, 32 L.Ed. 62 (1888); United States v. Old Settlers, 148 U.S. 427, 13 S.Ct. 650, 37 L.Ed. 509 (1893); Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States, 534 F.2d 889, 209 Ct.Cl. 446 (1976). Accordingly, to the extent peti......
  • Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Claims Court
    • 14 Abril 1976
    ...by a treaty, and is analogous to a case arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States. United States v. Old Settlers, 148 U.S. 427, 468-69, 13 S.Ct. 650, 37 L.Ed. 509 (1893). A case arises under the Constitution or laws of the United States whenever its decision depends upon t......
  • Cherokee Nation v. Nash
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • 30 Agosto 2017
    ...in removal, and to pay for improvements adding to the real value of the lands ceded." United States v. Old Settlers , 148 U.S. 427, 435–36, 13 S.Ct. 650, 37 L.Ed. 509 (1893) (statement by Fuller, C.J.) (reciting statements made in the preamble to an 1817 treaty between the United States and......
  • Baker v. Carr
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 26 Marzo 1962
    ...51 S.Ct. 220, 222, 75 L.Ed. 640. 42. See also Fellows v. Blacksmith, 19 How. 366, 372, 15 L.Ed. 684; United States v. OldSettlers, 148 U.S. 427, 466, 13 S.Ct. 650, 666, 37 L.Ed. 509; and compare Doe v. Braden, 16 How. 635, 657, 14 L.Ed. 1090. 43. This case, so frequently cited for the broad......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • An historical analysis of the binding effect of class suits.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 146 No. 6, August 1998
    • 1 Agosto 1998
    ...part)' who is: (a) [t]he trustee of an estate or interest of which the person is a beneficiary."). See also United States v. Old Settlers, 148 U.S. 427, 480 (1892), discussed in Strickler, supra note 28, at 79-80, in which the Court sustained a judgment where the representation of members o......

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