Pme Coml of T|E I Nto States
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
>»pme Coml of t|e Into States, OCTOBER TERM, 1902. No. , Original. EX PARTE: IN THE MATTER OF AND OTHERS, PETITIONERS. Boply and Brief of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Ma- v tions4»tho Motion for Leave tu File a Puliliuii fur • fru Writo-of riuliibiUoii, Injunction^ and—gertrerSri Affftinst. t.llft fiTiOflH-nr nnd fin" air a g 3 w nitiz^Tighip SaurL GEORGE A. MANSFIELD, JOHN F. MCMURRAY, MELVEN CORNISH, Counsel for the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. JUDD & DETWEILER, PRINTERS, WASHINGTON, D. C. 7157 &?nptmt (Enart nf % Tt&niUb States. OCTOBER TERM, 1902. JVo. , Original. EX PARTE: IN THE MATTER OF L. L. BLAKE AND OTHERS, PETITIONERS. Reply and Brief of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Na- tions to tho Motion for Leave to File a Petition for . Writs of Prohibition, Injmillion, an J Certiorari— Against thp Choctaw nil Clilokkria w Citizenship-— {fourth— STATEMENT. The Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship court was created by the provisions of a treaty entered into on the 21st day of March, 1902, between the United States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, ratified by the act of Congress of July 1,1902 (Stats, at Large, vol. 32, p. 641). Said act pro- vided that the treaty therein embodied should be submitted to a vote of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for ratifica- tion or rejection, and said treaty was so submitted, and by the vote of said nations ratified on the 25th da}r of Septem- ber, 1902. The provisions of said treaty and act creating said court \ which originally rendered said judgment, be transferred to provided that it should pass upon two certain questions in said citizenship court for trial upon the merits. regard to the validity of certain judgments purporting to This has been voluntarily done by the petitioner Joins, admit persons to citizenship and to enrollment as such citi- in tLo mattui1 uf U. 3. Joins,"to) 'piirfe, twirl by all • of tha zens in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations or tribes of In- pntitiinnnrn in thr prr-rml pr^^"1'";;; (J"* <»<<*> I T Ulul'.- dians, rendered by the United States courts for the central •**[ al,).- It is not true, as stated in the petition, that the citi- and southern districts of the Indian Territory under the act zenship court is about to exercise any jurisdiction or take of Congress approved June 10,1896 (Stats, at Large, vol. 29, any step in the test case known as the Riddle case. That p. 321). This the court did in a test case entitled The Choc- court has no existence at this time so far as the exercise of taw and Chickasaw Nations or Tribes of Indians vs. J. T. such jurisdiction is concerned. Riddle et al. This test suit provided for by section 31 of said act was finally decided by the citizenship court and its The jurisdiction of the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship judgment entered on December 17, 1902. court is now and was at the time the motion in the Joins The act did not provide for anything further to be done case was filed limited to trying upon their merits the citizen- by said court in regard to said test case, except to render a ship cases of any of the petitioners who might, within the decision upon the two points submitted by the act. How- time prescribed, apply by petition to that court and pray it ever, at the request of the Commission to the Five Civilized to do so. All of the petitioners have so voluntarily invoked - Tribes, which is engaged in making the rolls of the citizens the jurisdiction of the court, and it is not true that they have of said nations, the citizenship court did, on January 15, done so under protest. 1903, some time before the motion for a writ of prohibition in the case of Ex parte U. S. Joins was filed in this court, Reply of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to the transmit to the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes a Motion for Leave to File a Petition for Writs of certified copy of said judgment annulling and vacating the Prohibition, Injunction, and Certiorari vs. The judgments of the United States courts in the central and Choctaw and Chickasaw Citizenship Court. southern districts of the Indian Territory rendered under the act of Jane 10, 1896 (Stats, at Large, vol. 29, p. 321). To the Honorable the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of At the time the motion in Ex parte Joins was filed in this the Supreme Court of the United States of America : court the jurisdiction of the citizenship court in the matter Now come the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, by leave of the test suit above referred to had totally ceased, and said of this honorable court, and respectfully present that the court had no power to take any steps or exercise any degree motion for leave to file a petition for writs of prohibition, of jurisdiction under the provisions of section 31 of said act, injunction, and certiorari against the Choctaw and Chicka- in so far as said test suit was concerned. saw citizenship court should not be granted— Said act further provided that any person thus deprived 1. Because this court has no power in any case to issue of a favorable judgment should have the right at any time such writs to the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship court, within ninety days after the decision in said test case, which said court not being a district court of the United States was made final, to file a petition in the citizenship court asking within the meaning of section 688 of the Revised Statutes, that the papers and proceedings in the United States court, and not being a court over which this court has any appel- 6. Because Congress has provided that all persons de- late jurisdiction. prived of a favorable judgment by the decree of the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship court, rendered on the 17th day 2. Because it appears from the petition tendered with said of December, 1902, under the provisions of section 31 of said motion that the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship court in act, may have the proceedings in said cause transferred from the matters and things complained of has proceeded in strict the United States court in which said judgment was rendered conformity to the act of Congress creating said court and to said citizenship court for such further proceedings as will defining its jurisdiction; that said court is not a part of the enable that court to determine the " very right of the con- established judicial system of the United States over which troversy ;" that this is an adequate remedy at law of which this honorable court has jurisdiction, but that said court is a all of the petitioners have voluntarily availed themselves, special legislative tribunal, established by said act of Con- and that said cases are now pending in the Choctaw and gress as a part of the machinery devised by it, for the pur- Chickasaw citizenship court for determination at the special pose of overcoming the difficulties encountered by the politi- instance and request of all of said petitioners, and that all cal department of the Government—the Executive and Con- of said petitioners can be relieved of the jurisdiction of said gress—in carrying out the general policy of the United court at any time before final judgment by asking that States to cause the land of said Indians to be allotted among their petitions for appeal be dismissed, and that therefore them in severalty, and ultimately to create a State of the they cannot be heard to ask to be relieved of the conse- Union out of the area embraced within the lands of the Five quences of their own act by the issuance of such writs by Civilized Tribes; that such action is political and executive this court. in its nature and not the proper subject of judicial inquiry or interference. 7. Because the petitioners, who must be regarded as mem- bers of the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nations or nothing for the 3. Because the proceedings complained of in said cause purpose of this proceeding, are bound by the political action No. 1 in said court have been ended by the final judgment of the tribe of which they allege themselves to be members of the citizenship court, and nothing remains to be done by in negotiating and ratifying the treaty creating said court, the court in respect thereto. and are estopped from questioning its jurisdiction. 4. Because the petitioners do not show that they ajjpeared upon the trial of said test suit and filed a plea to the juris- diction of said court. 5. Because the petitioners have an adequate remedy at law and do not show that the proceedings in said court have or will cause them any injury for which a legal remedy does not exist. decision. In that case the court passed upon only one ques- BRIEF AND ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF REPLY. tion and was authorized to pass upon one only—i. e., the constitutionality of the legislation. The petitioners in this proceeding pray for a writ of As stated by the court in that decision, owing to the mag- certiorari directed to the citizenship court and the judges nitude of the interests involved and the unusual means re- and clerks thereof, requiring them to forward and file with quired to enable the United States of America, the guardian, the clerk of this court a true transcript of the proceedings in to discharge its duty to these wards, Congress probably de- said test suit lately pending on the docket of said court, sired, in view of the fact that it might have to proceed fur- cause No.