Montana oil and mining journal. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1931-1953, 1940-06-15

shall not be construed as creating any
right of a legal or equitable natur,
but shall authorize the said indians
to present their claims In this respect
to the court of claims for adjudication
as such claims may exist under treaties
or agreements with the United States.
Door Opened to Huge Claims
In another portion of the bill 1t Is
provided that If the court Of claims
should find that the Indians are en-
titled to any compensation for gold
mined and removed in trespass prior to
the time the lands were coded to the
United States, that the damages for
such minerals shall be One-eighth Of
the minimum amount shown to have
been so mined and removed"
If 1t had been assumed In the be-
ginning that the Indians in their oc-
cupancy of land under treaty agree
ments with the federal government
were entitled to surface rights only, a
different angle on the mining royalty
claims would be presented. But the
door was opened in what Is known as
the Black Hills case in the court Of
claims
F. NJ Goodwin, attorney for the
Araphoe and Cheyenne Indians, touch
eS upon this phase of the claims when
he said that these Indians, under jlris-
dictional bills enacted in 1920 and 1923,
are entitled to intervene in the suit
brought by the Sioux Indians against
the United States in what Is known
as the Black Hills case.
"Inasmuch, however" he declared,
"as only the northern Cheyennes are
made a party to the treaty or agree
ment under which the Sioux Indians
are entitled to maintain such suit. 1t
Is obvious that the claims OF the Arapa-
hoe and Cheyenne Indians cannot be
determined hereunder. This Is espe-
cially true because of the fact that as
yet the reason for including the north
ern Cheyennes in the Black Hills
treaty or agreement has not been as
certained The claims of the Arapahoe
and Cheyenne Indians are predicated
on altogether different treaties and
grounds and do not involve the Sioux
Indians"
Indian Claims Are Vague
1t Is apparent that the preSent-day
Indians have only a vague idea re-
garding these mineral rights, or claims.
In June, 1899, Ed Burns, chairman Of
the tribal business committee, of
Oklahoma, testifying at hearings on
Representative James F. O'Connor's
jurisdictional bill, said that I'VE think
we have got coming recovery Of
moneys due from our lands which we
were almost forced to leave" and in
reply to the question as to which lands,
stated: Lands up In the state Of
different treaties covering 1t. We also
have mineral rights for which we
would also like to be compensated,
that Is for minerals that were taken
out Of our lands"
Jesse Rowlodge, representing the
Arapahoes of Oklahoma, during this
hearing touched upon this phase Of
the claims, and stated: .. we feel
that we have been given some prtvi-
lege at which. time we can express
some of the views of the tribe, some
of whom are much older than we are
that probably actually knew some OF
those transactions back since the year
1851, but there Is not any member
living, however, that has any personal
knowledge about 1t, only by what he
has been taught, that Is by his people,
but, however, since 1851 we have sew
eral members who are still living that
were old enough at the time Of those
transactions Of the government with
the Indians that knew enough Of those
transactions to pass on to the younger
ones. Soon after that treaty there were
mining activities by some whites IN the
territory of Colorado and that has al
ways been commended as a right of the
Indians to share in that according to
0NAAeAst5S
royalties"
Representative Fred C. Gilchrist Of
Iowa, member of the house committee
on Indian affairs In his Interrogation
OF Rowlodge, brought up the matter Of
the Black Hills case.
Does it involve land in the Black
Hills also?" he inquired, after the teS-
timony touched upon other phases of
land occupation by the Arapahoes and
Cheyenne Indians.
"By intervening action of the tribe
made proper" Rowlodge replied.
For instance, the mineral rights In
the Black Hills involves gold?"
Eyes, sir, timber and lands, but
since we are not part of the Sioux
tribe and since the Sioux act does not
extend to other tribes and the court
is not authorized by decree and recog-
nized us Indians. we had the act
amended in 1926, but as say, it was
so mandatorially drawn up that 1t
does not cover the right Of the tribe
to file other claims that they may
have against the United States under
treaties, executive orders, agreements
and the like, and, Of course, for that
ting a jurisdictional bill through"
Has No Personal knowledge
Have you any knowledge OF the
mineral rights outside Of the Black
Hills that are involved In this bill2"
continued Gilchrist.
Personally, I do not have, but then
by repository evidence of the tribe, of
the older members they contend and
we also contend through them that
in the year 1862 there was quite bit
of gold mined in Colorado at the time
that the ArapahoeS and Cheyennes
owned that country, by the treaty Of
1861"
The bill provides, Gilchrist pointed
out, that they should inquire into
and award Judgment for one-eighth Of
the mineral rights If they find there
are any mineral rights, to which Row
lodge replied he understood it TO be
so, and "that Is our contention" and
further: "We expect we would be en-
titled to interest from the time it was