Source: https://www.legalcrystal.com/case/93355/rex-vs-united-states
Timestamp: 2017-04-24 07:34:21
Document Index: 702172024

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2156', '§ 17', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2156', '§ 17']

Rex Vs United States - Citation 93355 - Court Judgment | LegalCrystal
Save as PDF Add a Tag Add a Note Semantics Visualize Rex Vs. United States - Court Judgment	LegalCrystal Citationlegalcrystal.com/93355CourtUS Supreme CourtDecided OnJan-02-1920Case Number251 U.S. 382AppellantRexRespondentUnited StatesExcerpt:.....of claims over all claims for property of citizens taken or destroyed by indians belonging to any band, tribe, or nation in amity with the united states.
rev.stats. § 2156. act of june 30, 1834, c. 161, § 17, 4 stat. 729, 731. the appellant's intestate filed his claim, but on june 13, 1898, the court of claims held that the blackhawk band of utes was not in amity with the united states, and dismissed the petition. the present petition relies upon the act of january 11, 1915, c. 7, 38 stat. 791, amending the first section of the act of 1891 so that, in all claims for property of citizens or inhabitants of the united states taken or destroyed by indians belonging to any tribe in amity with and subject to the jurisdiction of the united states, &c.;, the alienage of the claimant..... Judgment:
Rex v. United States - 251 U.S. 382 (1920)
The primary intent of the Act of January 11, 1915, c. 7,38 Stat. 791, amending the Indian Depredation Act, was to remove the defense of alienage, and it is only cases dismissed on that ground that it provides for reinstating. P.
251 U. S. 384
Assuming that, by omitting the word "band" from § 1 of the original act, the amendment recognized claims for depredations by hostile bands of friendly tribes, a claim of a citizen previously dismissed because the depredating band was hostile, though the tribe was not, is not subject to reinstatement under the amendment, and, treated as a new claim, it is barred by the three-years' limitation of the original act.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims dismissing the appellant's petition upon demurrer. The claim is for depredations committed on June 10, 1866, by a band of the Ute tribe of Indians, known as Blackhawk's band. The Act of March 3, 1891, c. 538, § 1, 26 Stat. 851, gave jurisdiction to the Court of Claims over all claims for property of citizens taken or destroyed by Indians belonging to any band, tribe, or nation in amity with the United States.
Rev.Stats. § 2156. Act of June 30, 1834, c. 161, § 17, 4 Stat. 729, 731. The appellant's intestate filed his claim, but on June 13, 1898, the Court of Claims held that the Blackhawk band of Utes was not in amity with the United States, and dismissed the petition. The present petition relies upon the Act of January 11, 1915, c. 7, 38 Stat. 791, amending the first section of the Act of 1891 so that, in all claims for property of citizens or inhabitants of the United States taken or destroyed by Indians belonging to any tribe in amity with and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, &c.;, the alienage of the claimant shall not be a defense to said claims, with provisos to be mentioned. The present petition, filed September 21, 1917, alleges that the tribe of Utes was in amity with the United States.