Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-11-06
THE INDIAN LANDS.
IMPORTANT OPINION HANDED
Down IN UNITED STATES COURT.
GOVT CONTROLS CHEROKEE AFFAIRS.
The south Carolina Dispensary Case
VIII Not he Advanced on the
Docket-Argument Concluded I'm
the Maphattan Insurance Cause.

The United States Circuit Court oil
Appeals was in session yesterday morn
ing and afternoon. Judges Con, simon
ton, and Purnell presided at the open
ing session, and Judges Goff and Pur-
nell In the evening.
An opinion was handed down In the
case OF the United States. appellant
VS.. d. l.. BOYD. ct al, and the Eastern
| Band of Cherokee Indians. appellees
! The case was appealed from the Circuit
| Court, Western District Of North Caro-
lima The opinion. which is written by
| Judge Goff, -everses the judgment OF the
lower court and remands the case.
This is a suit in equity against ID. l..
Boyd, Harry Dickson. w. T. Mason. and
the Eastern Band Of Cherokee Indians,
the complainants being the United
States of America, Sampson Owl, Lewis
III. Smith, Comeback Wolf, and all other
Of the Cherokee Indians who may
choose to come in and make themselves
party plaintiffs.
HOW THEY BOUGHT THE LAND.
1t is set forth in the bill that William
III. Thomas and wife conveyed by deed,
in fee sample, to the Eastern Band OF
Cherokee Indians large tract of land
containing many thousand acres, stu
ated in the State of North Carolina, and
known as the Qualla Boundary; that
subsequent to the execution of the deed
the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
entered into the possession OF the lands,
which were necessary to their support
and maintenance; that in said deed was
inserted the following clause, to-wit:
'To have and to hold the aboye-de-
scribed premises with the appurtenances
thereunto belonging. unto the said East
ern Band of North Carolina Cherokee
Indians, their heirs and successors. for
ever, but without power Of alienation,
except by and with the assent of their
Council and the approval of the Presi-
dent Of the United States; that after
the band of Indians had entered into
the possession of the land, some OF
them, with the approval and assent or
their Council, entered into a contract
with the defendant, ID. i. Boyd, by
which all the timber In and upon a part
Of the land, containing about 5000 acres,
known as the Cathcart tract, was sold
to him for the sum Of $4,000, payable in
three instruments of 5000 each; that
Immediately after the execution of the
contract Of sale. Boyd made sub-con-
tract with the defendants, Dickson and
Mason, and they took possession of the
land with a large force OF men, who
to cut and destroy the tim
Der and make arrangements to ship the
same 70 market.
THE INDIANS DISAGREE.
That many of the Indians Of the
Cherokee band are opposed to said con-
ract. and think 1t is not for the best
interest Of the band; that the contract |
IF sale was never presented to the |
President of the United States for his |
assent, and has never been approved by |
him. but that the Department OF the In |
erior, acting for the United States in |
Is dealings with the Eastern Band OF
cherokee Indians, has refused to ratify |
md approve such contract; that such
contract TO cut the timber from said
and was forbidden by the terms Of the
Iced from said Thomas and wife, unless
he same was assented to and approved
" the President OF the United States,
nd that, as he has refused to ratify
he same, il is absolutely void, and that,
therefore,, the action of the defendants
n cutting, destroying, hauling, and re-
moving said timber is unwarranted and
7ithout legal authority.
A great amount of evidence was SUBJ
litted and a number of authorities con-
idered. The court decides that the
United States has the power 10 super
ise and control the affairs of these In
ians, as far as said land is concerned.
OTHER CASES.
In the case Of the Manhattan Life In
lrance Company of New York, VS..
gnes S. Carder argument was con-
uded and the cause submitted.
No 227. Sloss Iron and Steel Com
any, plaintiff in error, VS.. South Caro-
ma and Georgia Railroad Company, de-
,ndant in error. Error to Circuit Court
South Carolina. GAUGE argued by A.
I. Lee and Augustine II. Smythe, OF
s. c., for the plaintiff in
'ror, and by j. w. Barnwell and j. L.
urke for the defendant in error.
THE DISPENSARY LAW CASE.
In the case of ]. c. Strobel VS.. NJ.
ersts Sons & Co., involving the South
arolna dispensary law, the court re-
sed to advance the case, unless coun-
i consented to the same.
j. W. Barnwell, of Charleston, S. c., 7
as admitted as an attorney of the
urt,