The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-04-18
HE COUR rs.
Interesting Proceedings in the United States
Supreme and New York Courts.
Violation Of the Revenue Law-Allsgcd Counter
Seiting- Smuggling silks-Captain samuers
Libel suit-Court Of Oyer and Terini-
ner Tndictments-Ru siness OF
the General Sessions.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
Contesting the Title to 100000 Acres of
Land I'm Kansas.

Coniesting the Title to 100000 Acres of
Land I'm Kansas.
WASHINGTON, ID. c., April II, 1872.
No s64. Holden vs. Joy.--Appcal from the Circuit
Court for Kansas Is n suit In equity to enjOin
the appellant from prosecuting an action of eject
ment against the appellee to recover possession ola
quarter section OF land in Kansas and to quiet the
title OF the complainant. The land In question is a
part Of tract OF about 100000 acres, situated in
the southeast corner OF the State, known as tho
Cherokee neutral lands,n which were acquired by
the United States as part of the 'Iouisiana pur-
chase" from the French republic. The petition
alleges that the defendant claims title under the
pretended authority or the treaty made between the
United States and the Cherokee nation in 1868, and
the supplemental article thereto proclaimed in
1853. That at the time OF the making of the treaty.
and long before, the Cherokee tribe had ceased to
occupy the lands (haying coded them to the Con-
fedcrate Statcsl and had abandoned them and the
title had reverted TO the United States. It is
alleged that Secretary Harlan OF the Interior De.
partmcnt fraudnlentiy conspired with the officers
and members OF the American Emigrant Company
to cell the reservation 10 the company in violation
OF the treaty, for the purpose of defraudinT the
indians ana to prevent the presumption OF the
lands. The defendant, as alleged, procured the
assignment OF the contract between Secretary
Harlan and the Emigrant Company to himself and
afterwards stipulated with Secretary Browning to
purchase the lands according to the Harlan con-
tract, the substance OF which was embraced in the
article Of the treaty made with the Indians, and
proclaimed In 1865 AMI In pursuance of which the
defendant received the patent
1t IL claimed that tile tract having become public
lands of the United States by reason OF the aban-
donment by the tribe the complainant made II
settlement upon the quarter section in question
under the presumption laws, ana has offered proof
and payment to the local register Of the Land
Office but the same have been refused, no instruc-
tiOns having been given to the local land officers by
The petitioner claims that under his settlement ana
Improvement the right To the fec has accrued to
the complainant. aud that the title OF defendant be-
low obtained under the treaty through the Interior
Department Is void az against complainant. The
Court sustained demurrer to the petition, which
set up that 1t failed to make for tile equta-
BILE interpretation OF the Court and that complainant
had his remedy at law.
The appellant here presses the position assumed
below that the Cherokee nation abandoned the
lands 10 the Confederate States, and that there
after they had no title ana the lands were subject
treaties OF 1868 between the tribe and the United
States passed no title did not authorize the sale OF
the lands by the government ana were void
against the right OF pIc-einpOrs, who are protected
by the laws Of the United States.
On the part OF the appellee II is urged that the
original treaty Of 1885 passed the fee to the Cher0
kco nation, the United States having the constitu-
tional right TO convey the public lands by treaty.
that the alleged abandonment amounts To nothing,
because the United States did not insist upon 1t,
and because it was waived by the treaties of 1868
IT Is ALSO cOntended that the treaty which passed
the lands to the Indians In 1885, ana those which in
1868 eytinguslled their title and authorized the
sale OF the lands by the government, have been
recognized rs valid and sanctioned W acts Of Con-
gress. The case will occupy day 81 two In the
argument. William Lawrence and Il. i. Butler for
appellants W. p. Hal! and D. Il. Curtis for appclees.