The Kootenai herald. [volume] (Kootenai, Idaho) 1891-1904, 1896-02-29
The Bonnerport Case.


The following is letter from the
commissioner Of the general land
Office, in which he renders the de-
cision in the Bonnerport townsite
case:
Register and Receiver, Occur dAlene, Idaho
Sirs:-July 10, 1895, J. f. Cook,
Jr, as chairman of the board of trus
tees Of the village of Bonnerport,
Kootenai county, Idaho, applied to
purchase for townsite purposes a
tract of land in section 81, township
81 north, range l east, comprising
about ten acres lying along the left
bank or south bank of the Kootenai
river, being a portion of lot 6 or
southeast half of northeast quarter,
and a portion of lot 6 or northeast
quarter of southeast quarter of said
section 27, and on the same day
notice was given by publication
that on the 9th day of August fol-
lowing proof would be made in
support of said application, to which
the Northern Pacific railroad COM
pany protested, on the ground that
said land falls within the primary
limits of the grant to said company
made by the act of congress ana
approved July 2, 1864 (13 Stat.
1861, as shown by the map of def
mite location of its road filed De-
cember y, 1882.
With the proof submitted on be-
half of the townsite application is
certified copy Of a REIMBURSEMENT
executed on the 10Th day of Sep
TENDER, 1898, by Catherine B. Fry,
an Indian of the Kootenai tribe, on
behalf of her minor Indian child,
Arthur Fry, of allotment applica
ton No. 9, made on the Goth of
July, 1891, under the provisions of
section 4 of the act of congress APP
proved February s, 1887 GA Stat.
1861, comprising tract of land at
that time unsurveyed, described by
metes and bounds, and as indicated
by the plat of survey of township
81 north, range l east, received at
this office February 7, 1894, en-
braces a considerable part if not all
of the tract applied for by the vii
lage of Bonnerport.
Said allotment application was
cancelled by reason of said relin-
quishment, March 10, 1894.
The contention, on behalf of the
townsite application is that at the
date of definite location of the rail
road all the lands in the Kootenai
valley, including the tract now in
question, were occupied by the
Kootenai tribe of Indians; that
while no reservation was ever set
apart for them, restricting them to
defined limits, the Indian bureau
of the department of the interior
have always recognized their rights
to these lands.
AS far as | have been able tC
ascertain the only right said Indians
have to these lands other than the
traditional one which they have, il
appears, enjoyed for many years
going with undisturbed possession
is that of severalty, or the right tc
take by allotment, land under the
terms of the act of February s
1887, supra facie.
Allotmentapplication No. 9 above
referred to, is not prima facie, sufll.
Gent, in my opinion, to except the
land embraced therein from the
operation of the grant to the com
pany.
The right of these Indians by
virtue of long, unmolested posses
sion to these lands, they never hav
ing been set apart by executive
order, or in any other manner, fol
the exclusive use and occupation o
said Indian, does not in my judg-
ment create bar to the attachmen
of right thereto of the railroad com
pany at the date of definite loca
ton of its road, | must therefor
reject said application, subject t.
the right of appeal.
Respectfully,
S. j. LAMOREUX,