St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-07-31

and the effect of this provision was to give
the state courts of Minnesota Jurisdiction
over any of these
INDIANS COMMITTING CRIME
against life or property, and that they might
be arrested, tried and, If convicted, punished
as though they were white men
and as though no reservation existed
Thus the case stood until March 3, 1885.
The last congress passed a law which was ap-
proved on that day March 3, 1850, the eth
section of which reads as follows: That i'm
mediately upon and after the passage OF this
act all Indians committing against the person
or property OF another Indian or other
person, any of the following crimes, namely,
murder, rape, manslaughter, assault with in
tent TO kill, arson, burglary and larceny,
within any territory of the United States, and
either within or without an Indian reser-
walton, shall he subject therefor to the laws
of such territory relating to said crimes, and
shall be tried therefor in the same courts
and in the same manner, and shall be subject
TO the same penalties as are all other persons
charged with the commission of said crimes
respectively; and the said courts are hereby
given jurisdiction i'm all such cases; and all
such Indians committing any of the above
crimes against the person or property of an
other Indian or other person within the
BOUNDARIES OF ANY STATE
of the United States, and "a thin the limits Of
any Indian reservation. shall be subject to
the same ldWS. lfleO III lne Sdlne
in the same manner, and subject to the same
penalties as are all other persons committing
any of the above crimes within
the exclusive jurisdiction OF the
United States" The passage of this
act necessarily repeats the provisions of any
prior statute, of any existing treaty which
are clearly inconsistent Herewith" United
States VS.. Bratney, ia L. s., 623, and Chero-
l1ee Tobacco =, Wall. GIG.
This statute, by repeating all the provisions
of the treaty of March 10, 1867, inconsistent
with ii, gives the exclusive jurisdiction to the
federal courts of Indians committing any of
the several crimes enumerated therein.
i am therefore of the opinion that the dis
trict court of Becker county has no jurisdc-
ton over Indians committing any of the
crimes enumerated, 1885, against the person
or property of another Indian or other person
within the limits of the White Earth reserva-
ton, and that it is not your duty to prosecute
any of those ofienses. The enumeration I'M
cludes every crime that ] now recall against
life; there may be other crimes against prop
erty," and / think the state courts still have
jurisdiction, under the treaty. of any crimes
against property not embraced in the above
list, that may be committed upon the reser-
walton by Indians, and as to any such it
would be your duty to prosecute upon the de-
mand of the agent at your reservation.
sHERIFF's CHARGES.
John Lee of Polk county asked If it were
correct for sheriffs to charge, in addition to
the fees prescribed for time service, the eX-
penSe Of transportation of arrested parties
from the place of arrest 10 the magistrate
before whom the warrant is returnable. The
attorney general said:
have also received letter from the sheriff
of your county enclosing one of the bills in
question, the disputed items of which are as
follows: Paid an officer at st. Paul for max
ing the arrest, So; meals for prisoner, $3.50;
railroad fare to Crookston, Sll.10. l think if
these sums were necessarily expended by the
sheriff in the performance of his duty in
obeying the warrant of the court to arrest
and bring a prisoner before it, that they are
proper charges against the county.
The two items Of railroad transportation
and meals of prisoners are clearly so. As TO
the five-dOllar item, / could not express an
opinion upon the statement submitted; If an
item of legal fees earned by st. Paul officer
his bill therefor should lie rendered, or the
sheriffs bill should show that the fees ad-
vanced by him were legal. The mileage al
lowed by law TO an officer executing process
has been held to be in lieu of his own travel
ing expenses, but could not be held TO cover
transportation and board of prisoner. II
such were not the case, an officer commanded
by warrant to arrest two or more defend
ants and bring them before a court at any
distance from the place of arrest, would be
compelled to pay out more money for keep
ing ana transportation than he would receive
in mileage upon his warrant.
INSPECTION OF BOILERS.
In response to an inquiry from c. A.
Seeley, secretary of the board of boiler in
spectors, the attorney general said that it
was the duty of the inspectors to person.
ally inspect all boilers on steamers to which
certificates are issued, even though they
may be under the supervision of authorized
insurance and inspection companies.