Omaha daily bee., 1903-03-20

II NVuNA hAUllAH NuGIt Is SOME lOIEe 10
the arguments used, but that It was evil
IDENTIFY not the intent to exclude saloon
keepers from the privileges OF running a
bowling alley because OF the character Of
the latter. but to prevent the evils result
ing from operating one in connection with
a drinking place. What Keopke did was a
criminal ohense and he must suffer the
consequences.
The conviction of Albert McNutt in Cedar
county OF %robbing the store Of Henry u.
Spork and Lloyd X. speilman Of a lot OF
jewelry is also affirmed as being justified
by the evidence and no error having been
committed by the trial court. Technical
objections to the information were urged
by McNutt's counsel.
smith Gets New Trial.
Raymond Smith was charged in the dis
trict court OF Sheridan county. says the SUI
preme court. upon an information which
is a bad one, and the case is reversed.
There we're two counts in this information.
One sought to charge him with burglari-
ously entering and breaking into the home
Of Hanna Swanson with the intent and for
the purpose Of ravishing her. and the Sec
ond charged burglary. The latter was dis
missed, and Smith pleaded guilty to the
first count and was sentenced to a year.
An arrest in judgment was at once taken
and the appeal to the supreme court per-
fected. The attorney general did not try
to Justify the information, which the court
says was defective in that It did not state
what overt acts Smith committed to show
his intentions toward the woman.
Decfder Indian Case.
A decision Of very great importance to
the people OF Thurston county is that in
the case Of Daniel Porter against Ne-da-we
Parker. involving the application or non
application OF the Nebraska law of descent
to Indians. There are some 1900 Indians
In that county and there are 100 or more
cases resting upon the decision in this one.
The facts and the contentious of both par
ties thereto we're stipulated to the court
recently, and an early decision asked for,
as many titles depended upon the final de-
cree of the courts. The decision is that
the law OF descent applies to Indians just
as well as TO white men. 1t says:
IAN ~allottee and patentee of lands in
severality pursuant to an act of congress
entitled an act to provide for the sale OF
a part Of the Omaha reservation to the
state of Nebraska, is seiTed of an equitable
estate in fee, which, upon his death, be-
fore issuance of the final patent therefor
by the United States desccnds to his heir
or heirs-at-law according to the laws of
inheritance OF this state"
Upon one side OF the case was the father
of the patentee, on the other his widow,
and the question was whether or not the
nearest kin takes the use and possession Of
the allotment SO made free from the dover
or other life estate Of the widows. Philip
Porter, or as he was known in the tribe,
Mehaska, took his allotment and patent for
a quarter section OF land in 1882. The law
in force at that time, an act of congress,
provided that the United States should. hold
in trust for the Indians for a period Of
twenty-five years these allotments, and at
the end of that time to convey 1t to him
or his heirs absolutely. This was done so
that the Indians could not at once after
receiving the allotment sell 1t to some
white Spectator and after living up the
proceeds become a dependent upon the
government; in other words, the purpose
was to encourage industry and thrift among
the tribesmen.
Porter died in 1889, leaving a daughter,
Tainenga, and a widow, Me-da-we. The
daughter afterwsrd died, and the widow
has continued in possession of the land.
Daniel Porter, his father, laid claim to 1t
on the ground that the Unbeatable char
dClGT u lHt pIOptTNg Dttdme buSptHutu ny
the fact that the fee title was not in him,
but In the government, and would not pass
till the end OF the twenty fve-year period.
The widow insised that she acquired an
interest under the patent, that when her
husband died the daughter inherited his
rights and estate, which in tuIn descended
to her upon her daughters death.
The court holds with the widow. It
says that Porter had an equitable estate,
that is, one that he could enforce in law,
at the end of the twenty-five years, and
that his daughter first, then his wife, in
herited this estate, and not his next OF
kin. The question OF dover is not passed
upon, as the widow inherited II all through
Tainenga, but attorneys say It will follow
that a widow OF an Indian. as the laws of
descent apply equally, will get dover just
the same as the relict OF a white man. 1t
holds, too, that II this did not apply the
father would be in M better position, as,
should he die before the end of the twenty
FIVE year period. assuming his position to
be correct. the estate would either go to
collateral heirs or escheat to the state.
Proceedings of Supreme Court.
The following causes were argued and
submitted in the supreme court March II:
First National bank Of Edison against
Tompkins; Hanson against HansOn; New
man Grove State bank against Linderholm;
Gatzmeyer against Peterson; Hess against
Lell; Crouch against Pyle; German Ma
tional bank Of Beatrice against Beatrice
Rapid Transit and Power company Howell
against Ross; Strowbridge against Miller
Curtiss against McCune; Bowler against
| Mccarthy. Western Union Telegraph COM
pany against Nye & Schneider; White
against Whitney; Baker against Gillian;
Hackney against First National bank of
Lincoln; Schick against Whitcomb; Keith
| county against Big Spring Land and Cattle
company; Rhea against Brown; Story
against Gammell; Roblee against Union
Stock Yards National bank; Adams against
Miller; Linton against Gathers; Emory
against Hanna; Leisenring against La
CroiX: School District of Omaha against
Mcdonald; Burlington railroad against Gift
| fen; Anderson against Hall; Hunter against
Omaha; Clark against Commercial National
= bank; 'First National bank of Holdrege