The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-11-15


OF the secretary Of the interior, which
deeds shall operate as a complete convey
sEce OF tire land upon payment o. the pur-
chase money thereof. and TO carry Out the
provisions OF the act approved March >.
1893. relative to The land CT the Puyalinp
Indian reservation, Washington. as set
forth on pages E53 and 81. OF volume 80 OF
the revised statutes. s. DHa
The former PuyaIIup commissioners were
relieved from duty on December ! last,
and all the Official papers. documents. etf-,
III their hands were turned over TO me SUI
perfntencens Of the Puyailup Indian school,
who was acting Indian agent He mas
made collections OF some 0s!eTec pay
ments due on certain lands sold, both al
io,teA lands ard also agency tracts, lots
ard blocks. and has reported the same 10
this Office for distribution among the par
ties entitled
Clinton A. snowden, Of Tacoma. has been
appointed Puyailup commissioner. IN
structions for his guidance. prepared py
this Office and approved by the depart
mens. were transmitted to him on the 9th
OF July last.
Owing TO the had times, and consequent
depreciation OF real estate values In that
section OF the country. the Puyaliup lands
have sold at very low price. Ii Is ex-
pected that better sales win soon be made.
The deferred payment on sales already
made will be collected as they become due
and other lands viii be offered for sale
from time TO time. If they fall below the
appraised value all bids will. OF course. De
rejected.
Leases of Indian Lands.
On the Colville agency one grazing lease,
covering non-reservation allotment No. I.
has been approved The term is three
years The consideration Is 50 Is cents per
acre per annum.
On the Nez Perces agency, Idaho, TWEEN
ty-eight farming and grazing leases. two
business leases and two mining leases
have been approved The term Is from
one to three years for farming and graz
ing leases; three and ten years for bust
ness leases and ten years for mining
leases. The prevailing price for farming
and grazing leases is $50 per acre per an
mum. though some pieces are leased as low
as IS cents per acre, while a few are
leased as high as $3.50 per acre. The
prices paid for business leases are Sl00
for one and one-Quarter acres, and $40 for
ten acres per annum. The terms are three
and ten years. respectively. The consid-
Grafton paid for mining leases is Is per
cent. OF the products of the mines.
On the Puyaiiup reservation. Washing
ton. six farming and grazing leases have
been approved. The term is for one and
two years. The consideration is 81 So 81 s..
$S.11, Se.2 and SO per acre per annum.
One farming lease has been executed up
on which no action has been taken.
Fisheries I'm Washington.
A report TO the attorney general. dated
March Is. 1897 from William III. Brlnxer,
former United States attorney for the dis
frict OF Washington. states that upon the
request of certain Indians of the Lummi
tribe he was directed by the department
fsf in to L
and McCord In the commencement and
prosecution Of suit against the Alaska
Packers Association ct al. to prevent in
reference by that association with the
fishery rights of the I.ummi Indians at
the ancient fishery located on the reef at
Point Roberts, Wash, which We're Sc
cured to them by the treaty of January q.
lSas- A suit was commenced 10 ensoin the
defendants from interfering with the In
dians in fishing at such fisheries: a large
amount of testimony was taken and the
case was finally submitted 10 the United
states district court upon the pleaiings
ana proofs. The court, on March 1s 1897,
decided the case. finding that the charges
In the bill had not been sustained, and that
the defendants were licensed under the
laws OF the state of Washington to fish
in those water and that no rights of the
Indians had been interfered with.
MIR. Rrinker considers this a very impor-
tant case. which should not be permitted
To rest upon the decision OF a mere risi
prius court There Is another case pend
Ing In the southern division of his district
entitled. The United States vs. winans
Bros. for violation OF the fishery rights
OF the Yakima Indians secured to them by
a treaty of June q. 1856 and therefore a
large number of Indian tribes in WASH
'ngton with which treaties have been
made frSm time 10 time by the govern
ment concerning whose rights under the
treaties there Is liable TO be more or less
litigation. He. therefore, thinks IL i'm
porsant that this case should be appealed
and an authoritative decision constituting
these treaties rendered which would he
binding on all parties; especially so as the
provisions of the treaties upon fishery
questions are all substantially the same.
ana construction OF one treaty nv the
supreme court would, perhaps, put an end
10 further litigation.
Mr.. Brinker disagrees with Judge Ham
ford upon his construction of these treaties
ana insists that the language OF the treaty
with the Lummi Indians~-"that there Is
hereby secured 10 said Indians the rights
10 take fish I'm ALI accustomed 6shinv
places means something more than the
mere right 70 fish In all the waters af the
stale In common with other citizens. thar
II was intended 70 secure 10 Them in all
events the right 70 fish ~ their us1fal and
accustomed fishing piaces Otherwise the
provision 81 the treaty would he meaning.
less, aud The consideration stated therein,
Yer the eessson Of their claims and right 70
/ the country then occupied by them would
he no consideration al all For II this
treaty Old not secure to them scne prefer
ence rights In the accustomed fisheries
I which the government should protect al
least 20 the extent Of preventing m unfair
exclusion Of the Indians from such fish
cries, then It gave tho Indians 10 rights
that are rot Possessed by every irhahitant
OF The United States-namely. the rich.
10 Fish In public waters Hence the ~essior
by The Indians 81 their possessary right "a
the soil and fisheries would have been Oh
taiaed by means of fraud practlcess upon
them bv The agents OF The government
Mr. Rrinker cites The fact that the SUI
Prene court has more than once said that
treaties should he construed In the uwht
In which they were understood by the par.
Ties ~ ;he tins and especially hr the In
diaus, ami that &c case ~ treaties vyltf,
Indians n very liberal construction should
he placed upon them. Ua lays down the
principle that the treaty 81 question i
contract, that the government considers
tire Indians rs possessing the capacity -
contract. and 50 contracted with shso,,
tina, the fundamental ruie in constituting
sSd enforcing AL contracts is that thev
must be enforced seeord.re 20 the {nten-
ton ard understanding ~ the parties AZ
the .iTns they we're made He is OF the
opinion sAat Judge Hanfcrd's decision re
verses this rule by holding that. while the
Indians are bound by .ho contract ana the
nFPnHF long my throat was