Document: 351 U.S. 1 76 S.Ct. 611 100 L.Ed. 883 Clark SQUIRE, Collector of Internal Revenue for the District Washington, Petitioner,v.Horton CAPOEMAN and Emma Capoeman, his wife. No. 134. Argued Jan. 19, 1956. Decided April 23, Mr.Charles F. Barber, D.C., petitioner. Mr. John W. Bragun, respondent. Chief Justice WARREN delivered opinion Court. The question presented is whether proceeds sale by United States Government standing timber on allotted lands Quinaielt Indian Reservation may be made subject to capitalgains tax, consistently with applicable treaty statutory provisions Government's role as respondents' trustee guardian. 2 When white men first came Olympic Peninsula, in what now State they found Tribe Indians their neighboring allied tribes occupying a tract country lying between Coast Range Pacific Ocean. This vast tract, exception small portion reserved exclusive use, was ceded Quinaielts neighbors exchange protection tutelage July 1, 1855, January 25, 1856, 12 Stat. 971. According this treaty, were have use reservation 'and no man shall permitted reside thereon without permission tribe * *.' Article II. Years later, Congress passed General Allotment Act 1887.1 Thereunder, reservations not exceed 160 acres grazing land or 80 agricultural land,2 25 years after allotment allottees receive discharged trust under which had theretofore held them, obtain patent 'in fee, said free all charge incumbrance whatsoever',3 though President might extend period.4 3 Respondents, husband wife, born reservation, are described full-blood, noncompetent Indians. They lived lives time served respondent Armed Forces during World War 4 Pursuant 1887, from treaty-guaranteed 93.25 received patent5 therefor dated October 1907.6 During tax year here question, fee title still him, alienation encumbrance except consent Government, never been given. forest land, covered coniferous trees one hundred several old. It adaptable purposes, little value cut. 5 In 1943, Bureau Affairs Department Interior entered into contract respondent's total price $15,080.80. sum $8,418.28 behalf that year.7 6 Upon demand petitioner, respondents filed joint income return 10, 1947, reporting long-term capital gain year. Simultaneously, paid taxes shown due. Thereafter, timely claim refund contended federal taxation because such would violation Treaty, patent, Act. denied, action instituted. Court unlawfully collected ordered refund. 110 F.Supp. 924. Appeals, agreeing but recognizing conflict case decision Tenth Circuit Jones v. Taunah, 186 F.2d 445, affirmed. 9 Cir., 220 349. Because apparent conflict, we granted certiorari. 350 816, 58. 7 urges us view an ordinary regard relevant statutes, congressional policy concerning Indians, guardian-ward relationship these particular argues: 8 'As citizens taxable broad Sections 11 22(a) Code 1939, imposes net every individual, derived any source whatever. There exemption Act, taxing statute, other legislation dealing taxpayers' affairs. 'Even if it assumed prohibited imposing direct taxpayers, there would, nevertheless, prohibition against since same income, land.'8 10 We agree affairs life, governed treaties remedial legislation, payment citizens. also that, valid, exemptions laws should clearly expressed. But cannot taxability circumstances unaffected courts below imposition inconsistent promise transfer 'free whatsoever.' Although provision expressly couched terms nontaxability, has 'Doubtful expressions resolved favor weak defenseless people who wards nation, dependent upon its good faith. Hence, words Marshall: 'The language used construed prejudice. If of, susceptible more extended meaning than plain import, connected tenor considered only latter sense.' Worcester Georgia, Pet. 515, 582, 483.' Carpenter Shaw, 280 363, 367, 50 121, 122, 74 478. 13 Thus, general 'charge incumbrance' well sufficient include taxation. Congress, amendment gave additional force position. Section amended proviso— 14 'That Secretary may, discretion, he authorized, whenever satisfied allottee competent capable managing her at cause issued simple, thereafter restrictions sale, incumbrance, removed liable satisfaction debt contracted prior issuing *.'9 15 argues directed solely permitting state local indication legislative history so limited.10 fact antedated seems irrelevant. literal proviso evinces intent allottee. This, turn, implies until issued, taxes, both those being future enacted.11 16 Attorney touching seemed construe exempting restricted allotments.12 And even clear basis exemption, later advised was— 17 '(U)nable, implication, impute our Acts impose benefit Federal property nation; management control rests largely hands officers charged law responsibility duty protecting interests welfare people. words, lightly intended ward guardian.'13 18 Two opinions published Treasury Decisions.14 On decisions, series district circuit court Felix S. Cohen, acknowledged expert law, 'It accorded tribal extends directly therefrom.'15 These relatively contemporaneous official unofficial writings entitled consideration. makes much subsequent General's opinion,16 overruled earlier opinion,17 authority Superintendent Five Civilized Tribes, etc. Commissioner Revenue, 295 418, 55 820, 79 1517. 19 That distinguishable hand. involved characterized 'income investment surplus land',18 Cohen termed 'reinvestment income.' purpose system protect Indians' interest 'to prepare take place independent, qualified members modern body politic.' Board Commissioners, Seber, 318 705, 715, 63 920, 926, 87 1094. To end, necessary preserve therefrom, exempt reinvestment burdens. noteworthy did involve attempt 'surplus.'19 20 wisdom embodied manifested facts instant case. Respondent's constitutes major land. determines conditions cutting made.20 Once logged off, value.21 longer serves set aside ancestors, him. can adequate needs serve bringing him finally competency independence. Unless preserved respondent, go forward when declared chance economic survival competition others. guaranteed afforded solemn undertaking patent. unreasonable infer enacting limit undermine undertaking. below, 'at least, sorry breach faith Indians.'22 21 judgment Appeals 22 Affirmed. 23 REED, dissenting. 24 My excess market March 1913, gain, tax. 445. Cf. Choteau Burnet, 283 691, 51 598, 75 1353; like annual crops. HARLAN took part consideration 388, U.S.C. § 331 et seq., U.S.C.A. seq. 331, 331. Id., 348. Ibid. period regularly Executive Order. See note following 348, see 462, provides: existing periods placed restriction thereof hereby continued otherwise Congress.' term 'patent' inadequately describes interest. 'Congress careful avoid investing instance, reality certificate Monson Simonson, 231 341, 345, 34 71, 72, 58 260. pertinent part, 'Now know ye, America, premises, allotted, presents does allot, unto Horton above described, declares will hold thus (subject restrictions) twenty-five years, sole Indian, expiration convey whatsoever, followed pattern generally adopted selling allotments. Huge areas put up competitive bids lumber companies. tracts individual allotments, councils allottees. successful bidder required make immediate advance large proportion estimated tract. Since 640 million board feet sold time, requirement economically infeasible largest companies submit bids. uncertainties scale operations, carried over 25- 30-year periods, coupled quality accessibility variables, resulted substantially lower prevailing some instances, sellers comparable two three times Transcript November 28, 1955, Joint Hearing Subcommittee Legislative Oversight Function Senate Committee Insular Public Works Resources House Operations, 2151—2217, passim. Brief Petitioner, pp. 7—8. 349, S.Rep. 1998, 59th Cong., 1st Sess.; H.R.Rep. 1558, Sess. relied Judge Phillips, dissenting 449. Op.Atty.Gen. 275, 281 (1924). id., 302 439, 445 (1925). ruling 35 cf. 107 (1926). T.D. 3570, III—1 Cum.Bull. 85 (1924); 3754, IV—2 37 Handbook Law, 265. He distinguished cases unrestricted lands, income. 265—266. Chairman Assistant Solicitor Department. foreword Harold L. Ickes, then Interior, printed Printing Office. 39 (1937). 439. page 421, 822. relies 1353, controlling, status Indian. Such specifically authorized Eastman, 118 421. 350. answer Court, admitted 'are unsuitable purposes R. 31.

Category: 1