Case Name: The State of Washington, Respondent, v. John Alexis, Appellant
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1916-02-04
Citations: 89 Wash. 492
Docket Number: No. 13084
Parties: The State of Washington, Respondent, v. John Alexis, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 89
Pages: 492–493

Head Matter:
[No. 13084.
Department Two.
February 4, 1916.]
The State of Washington, Respondent, v. John Alexis, Appellant.
Indians — Treaties—Curtailment oe Police Powers oe State. Congress, in making provisions by an Indian treaty for fishing rights of the Indians of a territory, could not do so at the expense of the police power of the future state, notwithstanding that the Indians were more or less dependent upon the fish for subsistence (Holcomb, J., dissenting).
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for What-com county, Hardin, J., entered August 17, 1913, upon a trial and conviction of violating the laws relating to the taking of fish.
Affirmed.
Craven & Green, for appellant.
The Attorney General and W. P. Brown and L. L. Thompson, for respondent.
Reported in 154 Pac. 810; 155 Pac. 1041.

Opinion:
Per. Curiam.
This case is identical in all respects with State v. Towessnute, just decided, except that it involves the rights of another tribe of Indians, the Lummi, and a different treaty, the Muckl-teeoh, proclaimed in 1859. The language involved in that treaty is the same as in State v. Towessnute, ante p. 478, 154 Pac. 805, and the same justification is attempted. The lower court in this case held with the state and, under our opinion in the other, did so correctly. This cause having been argued as one controversy with the Towessnute case, it will not be necessary to enlarge upon our opinion already rendered.
Judgment affirmed.