text:
United States v. Heirs of De Haro/Opinion of the Court

The petition of the heirs of Francisco de Haro represents:

That on the 30th July, 1843, the father of your petitioner made and presented his petition in writing to Alvarado, Governor of California, soliciting for himself the grant of a lot of land in the mission of Dolores, to which he had previously obtained a provisional grant of Jose Ramon de Estrada.

That on the 16th of August, 1843, said Francisco obtained a formal grant of said Alvarado to the lot so petitioned for, and remained in possession thereof up to the time of his decease; and that, from that time up to this day, your petitioners have been and still are in the quiet and undisputed possession of said land.

That said land is situated in the mission Dolores, and in the block known and laid down on the official map of San Francisco as block No. 37, and forms the northeast of Centre and Dolores streets, containing fifty Spanish varas square-which grant has properly been recorded in the archives of California-and that the original documents are herewith submitted to the inspection of your honorable board.

Francisco Sanchez was sworn, as to the genuineness of the grant, and he says: I never saw the paper before, but I have no doubt it is genuine. I am acquainted with the signatures of Francisco de Haro and Juan B. Alvarado, having often seen them write; and I recognise their signatures, as they appear on said document, as their genuine signatures.

There were some old houses on the land at the time of the grant, which had belonged to the mission. These were repaired by Francisco de Haro, and in 1846 he was living in them. The land had been enclosed since by his son-in-law, Charles Brown. De Haro died there in 1848. The house was repaired by de Haro.

Francisco de Haro, over his own signature, represents: 'That being established in the establishment of Dolores, in houses of the name called 'Mayor domos,' opposite the principal house and plaza; and, as I obtained them from the prefect of the 1st district, Don Jose Ramon Estrada, I solicit of your excellency the legitimacy in property, for the expenses that I have to make to repair them, to live therein with my family, in virtue of my services rendered, receiving grace from your excellency, by adding fifty varas eastward of the houses, inasmuch as I beg most humbly, &c.'

MONTEREY, August 16, 1843.

MOST EXCELLENT SIR: Whereas the citizen Francisco de Haro has rendered interesting services to the nation and to the Departmental Government, and in virtue of his being already in possession of the houses solicited by previous consent of the Government, as it is shown by the concession of the prefect of the district, I have concluded by these presents, in conformity and ratifying said concession jointly with the fifty varas to the eastward of said houses, as solicited.

The judge of San Francisco will have it so understood, for the cases that may occur upon informations in relation to the new town of Dolores.

ALVARALO.

This claim was at first held not to be valid, and was consequently rejected by the commissioners. From this decision there was an appeal to the District Court. On this appeal a witness, Candelario Valencia, was sworn, who says he is forty-eight years of age, and resides in the mission of Dolores, San Francisco county, California. The witness first knew Francisco de Haro about thirty years since. He is now dead; he died in 1847 or 1848, at the mission of Dolores, and in the building now occupied by Louis Pruso, which is on the north-east of Centre and Dolores streets. The lot on which this house is situated is a fifty-vara lot.

To the question, who are the heirs of Francisco de Haro? the witness answers: At the time of his death he left eight children one died without issue; the names of those living are as follows; Jsoefa de Haro, wife of James Dennison-she was formerly wife of Guerrera, now dead; Rosalia de Haro, formerly wife of Mr. Andrews, deceased-now wife of Charles Brown; Natividad, formerly wife of Ignacio Castro, deceased, and now of Paul Tissot; Prudencia, unmarried; Candelaria, unmarried; Charlotta, wife of Fish. Dennison, brother of James; and Alonzo, not yet of age. Francisco de Haro lived in the house ten years. It was formerly part of the establishment of the mission, and was occupied by the mayor domos; it fronts upon the plaza of the mission, and also is opposite the principal house of said mission. Since the death of Francisco de Haro, it has been occupied, and is still, by the tenants of his heirs. Dolores and Centre streets have always existed, since the mission was established, but had not their present names; in fact, they had no names. This lot in uqestion had the same position that it now has; a surveyor, without any difficulty, could locate said lot.

The witness says that he has lived at the mission Dolores for the last sixteen years, and has seen all that he has testified to.

The final decree of the Circuit Court before both the judges was as follows:

This cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the proceedings in the board of the United States land commissioners, &c., and upon the proof taken in this court upon the appeal from the decision of the said board, taken therefrom by the complainant; and upon hearing counsel for appellants and respondent, and due deliberation being thereupon had, &c., it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the decision and decree of the said board be, and the same hereby is, reversed.

And it is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the claim of the said appellants to the land claimed by them is valid, and that the same be, and hereby is, confirmed to them.

The land whereof confirmation is made is that certain fifty-vara lot, situated in the mission Dolores, on the northeast corner of what are known as Centre and Dolores streets, on which lot there is a house which formerly formed a part of the establishment of the mission Dolores, occupied by the mayor domos thereof-said lot fronting on the plaza, opposite to the principal house of said mission, and which lot was in the occupancy of Francisco de Haro for some years previous to his death, and has been recently in the possession of one Louis Pruso, as tenant of the claimant, together with and adding fifty varas to the eastward and immediately adjoining said houses.

Subsequently, a notice was served on the district attorney, that the counsel for the complainants will move the court, on the 14th of September, 1857, on that day, or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, that the decree entered in this cause be reformed, by adding to the description of the property confirmed by the said decree, 'together with the parcel of land, fifty varas square, to the eastward thereof. San Francisco, September 10th, 1857.'

Afterwards, on motion of the district attorney of the United States, 'it is ordered that the decree heretofore rendered at this term in the above case be set aside, and that the cause stand for reargument at the next term of this court.'

And the final entry, upon filing and reading the affidavit of B. S. Brooks, and upon inspection of a traced copy of the original grant of title, whereof confirmation was heretofore made, certified in due form from the office of the surveyor general, from which it manifestly appears to the court that the said grant was originally made and dated by Governor Alvarado during his term of office, and that the date which it now bears is an evident alteration against the interests of the claimants, and therefore not to be imputed to them; and upon filing a notice of motion and due proof of service thereof upon the district attorney of the United States, and counsel having been heard for both parties, on motion of Mr. Williams, of counsel for the claimants, it is ordered that the order heretofore made in this cause, setting aside and vacating the decree heretofore made confirming the claim, be, and the same is hereby, vacated, set aside, and annulled, and said decree revived and reinstated.

From this decree there was an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States by the Government.

'It appears that an undisturbed possession of the property claimed has been in the possession of Francisco de Haro and his heirs sixteen years, and it does not appear that any one has claimed or exercised a possession or right of possession over the premises. The copy of the original grant of title, whereof confirmation was heretofore made, certified in due form from the office of the surveyor general, from which it manifestly appears to the court that the said grant was originally made and dated by Governor Alvarado during his term of office, and the date which it now bears is an evident alteration against the interests of the claimants, and therefore not to be imputed to them.' This, being the language of the court, imparts verity to the grant, and would seem to settle all doubt on the subject.

There were some old houses on the land at the time of the grant, which belonged to the mission, but it would seem no longer belong to it.

Upon the whole, we cannot doubt, from the title papers, and especially from the sixteen years' possession which has been enjoyed by De Haro and his heirs-using the property as their own, claiming it under the grant-that the title should be confirmed; and it is hereby confirmed.


text: Talk:United States v. Heirs of De Haro/Opinion of the Court

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1613

 1562 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. II. CHs. 703-705 . 1929 . such lo st or d estroye d cert ificate ; exc ept tha t a du plicate certif icate shall be issued without the requirement of a bond when it is shown If lost before delivery. t o the satisfaction of the director that the original certificate, (1) before delivery to the veteran, has been lost, destroyed, wholly or in part, or so defaced as to impair its value, and (2) after delivery to the veteran, has, without bad faith upon the part of the person entitled to payment thereon, been partially destroyed or defaced so as to i mpair i ts valu e, is capable of ide ntific ation, and is surren dered by such person to the Veterans' Bureau ." Approved, March 4, 1929 . CHAP . 704.-An Act To extend the times for commencing and completing [Public, No . 1032 .] the construction of a bridge across the Missouri River at or near Niobrara, Nebraska . Be it enacted by t he Senate and House of Repr esentatives of the Missouri River . United States o f America in Congress assembled, That the times T ime extended for bridging, at Niobrara, for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge Nebr . across the Missouri River at or near Niobrara, Nebraska, authorized to be built by H . A . Rinder, his heirs, legal representatives, and Ante, p. 708. assigns, by Act of Congress approved May 22, 1928, are hereby extended one and three years, respectively, from May 22, 1929 . SEC . 2. The right to alter, amend, or repeal this Act is hereby expressly reserved . Approved, March 4, 1929 . Issu e without bo nd. Vol.44,p . 1390. Partially etc. destroyed, March 4, 1929. [H. R. 11208.] Amen dment. March 4, 1929. [H. R. 15089.] [Public, No. 1033 .] Int erior for th e fiscal yea r ending Jun e 30, 1930, a nd for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not other- wise appropriated, for the Department of the Interior for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1930, namely Interior Department appropriations, fiscal year, 1930. Secretary's Office. Secretary, Assistants, and o ffice personn el. Provisos. Salaries limited to average rates under Classification Act. Vol.42,p.1488. Ante, p. 776. U.S. Code,p.65. If only one positio n in a grade. Advances for unusu- ally meritorious serv- ices. Restriction not ap- plicable to clerical- mechani cal service. No reduction in fixed salaries. CHAP. 705 .-An Act Making appropriations for the Department of the OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY S ALAR IES Secre tary of the I nterior, $15,0 00 ; Fir st Assistant Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and other personal services in the District of Columbia, $369,000, in all, $384,000 : Provided, That in expending appropriations or portions of appropriations, contained in this Act, for the payment for personal services in the District of Colum- bia in accordanc e with the Cl assification A ct of 1923, a s amended (U. S . C ., pp . 65-71, sees . 661-673, 45 Stat ., pp . 776-785), the average of the salaries of the total number of persons under any grade in any bureau, office, or other appropriation unit shall not at any time exceed the average of the compensation rates specified for the grade by such Act, as amended, and in grades in which only one position is allocated the salary of such position shall not exceed the average of the com- pensation rates for the grade except that in unusually meritorious cases of one position in a grade advances may be made to rates higher than the average of the compensation rates of the grade but not more often than once in any fiscal year and then only to the next higher rate : Provided, That this restriction shall not apply (1) to grades 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the clerical-mechanical service, or (2) to require the reduction in salary of any person whose compensation r

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1614

 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. II. CH. 705. 1929. 1563 was fixed, as of July 1, 1924, in accordance with the rules of section 6 of such Act, (3) to require the reduction in salary of any person who is trans ferred from one po sition to ano ther p ositio n in t he sam e or different grade in the same or a different bureau, office, or other appro priati on uni t, or (4) to preve nt the paymen t of a salar y unde r any grade at a rate higher than the maximum rate of the grade when such higher rate is permitted by the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, and is specifically authorized by other law. When specifically approved by the Secretary of the Interior, trans- fers may be made between the appropriations in this Act under the respec tive juri sdiction of any bu reau, off ice, inst itution, or servic e, in order to meet increases in compensation resulting from the reallo- cation by the Personnel Classification Board of positions under any such organization unit. Any such transfers shall be reported to Congress in the annual Budget. Solicitor's Office. OFFICE OF SOLICITOR Fo r pers onal s ervice s in t he Dis trict of Colu mbia, $128,0 00. Vol.42,p.1490, U.S. Code, p.66. Transfers to another position without re- duction. Payments under higher rates permitted. Tra nsf ers fr om bu- reau, etc., appropria- tions to meet reall oca- tion of positions there- in. Offic e pe rsonn el. CONTINGENT EXPENSES, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Department contin. For contingent expenses of the office of the Secretary and the gent expenses. bureaus and offices of the department ; furniture, carpets, ice, lumber, hardware, dry goods, advertising, telegraphing, telephone service, including personal services of temporary or emergency telephone operators, street-car fares for use of messengers not exceeding $150, expressage, diagrams, awnings, filing devices, typewriters, adding, addressing, and check-signing machines, and other labor-saving de- vices, inclu ding t he rep air, e xchang e, and mainte nance thereo f ; co n - structing model and other cases and furniture ; postage stamps to prepay posta ge on foreig n mail and f or spec ial-de livery and a ir-mai l Traveling expenses, stamps for use in the United States ; traveling expenses, including etc « necessary expenses of inspectors ; fuel and light ; examination of estima tes fo r appr opriat ions i n the field f or any burea u, off ice, o r service of the department ; not exceeding $500 shall be available for the payment of damages caused to private property by department motor vehicles ; purchase and exchange of motor trucks, motor cycles, and bicycles, maintenance, repair, and operation of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles and motor trucks, motor cycles, and bi- cycles to be used only for official purposes ; rent of department garage ; expense of taking testimony and preparing the same in con- nection with disbarment proceedings instituted against persons charged with improper practices before the department, its bureaus and offices ; expense of translations ; not exceeding $500 for news- papers, for which payment may be made in advance ; stationery, in- cluding tags, labels, index cards, cloth-lined wrappers, and specimen bags, printed in the course of manufacture, and such printed envelopes as are not supplied under contracts made by the Postmaster General, for the department and its several bureaus and offices, and other abso- lutely necessary expenses not hereinbefore provided for, $110,000 ; and, in addition thereto, sums amounting to $71,000 for stationery supplies shall be deducted from other appropriations made for the fis- cal year 1930, as follows : Surveying public lands, $2,000 .; protecting public lands and timber, $1,000 ; contingent expenses, local land offices, $2,500 ; Geological Survey, $4,000 ; Indian Service, $42 .000 ; Freed- men's Hospital, $1,000 ; Saint Elizabeths Hospital, $2,500 ; National Park Service, $4,000 ; Bureau of Reclamation, $12,000, any unex- pended porti on of which shall revert and be credi ted to the r eclama - tion fund ; and said sums so deducted shall be credited to and consti- 54835°-29-rT 1-102 Proper ty dama ges. Disbarment expenses. Stationery, etc. Additional from spec- ified app ropri ation s.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1615

 1564 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. II. CI -T . 705. 1929. tute, together with the first-named sum of $110,000, the total appro- priation for contingent expenses for the department and its several bureaus and offices for the fiscal year 1930. Books, periodicals, For the pu rchase or ex change of pr ofessio nal an d scie ntific books , etc. law and medical books, and books to complete broken sets, periodi- cals, directories, and other books of reference relating to the busi- ne ss of the de partme nt by the se veral offices and b ureaus of th e In- terior Department herein named, there is hereby made available from Of fice allot ments. any appropriations made for such bureau or office not to exceed the following respective sums : Office of the Secretary, $600 ; Pension Office, $800 ; Indian Service, $200 ; Bureau of Education, $1,500 ; Bureau of Reclamation, $2,000 ; Geological Survey, $2,000 ; National Park Service $500 ; General Land Office, $500. Printing and bind- PRINTING AND BINDING in g. For Department, bu- reaus, etc. For printing and binding for the Department of the Interior, in- cluding all of its bureaus, offices, institutions, and services in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, except the Alaska Railroad and the Bureau of Reclamation, $295,000, of which $32,000 shall be for the National Park Service, $47,000 for the Bureau of Educa- tio n, and $150, 000 fo r the Geolog ical S urvey, of whi ch lat ter am ount not more than $35,000 may be used for engraving. General Land Office. GENER AL LA ND OFF ICE SA LARIES Commissioner, and office personnel. For Commissioner of the General Land Office and other personal Acting depositary of services in the District of Columbia $717,600 : Provided, That the public moneys. depositary acting for the commissioner as receiver of pubic moneys may, with the ap proval of th e comm issione r, des ignate a cle rk of the Clerk to sign land General Land Office to act as such depositary in his absence. One patents' clerk of grade 1, clerical, administrative, and fiscal service, who shall be designated by the President, to sign land patents. General expenses, G ENE RAL EXP ENS ES public lands. Traveling expenses, For tra veli ng e xpen ses of o ffi cers and emp loye es, inc ludi ng maps, etc. employment of stenographers and other assistants when necessary ; for separate maps of public-land States and Alaska, including maps showing areas designated by the Secretary of the Interior under the enlarged homestead Acts, prepared by the General Land Office ; for Restor ing lan ds in the reproduction b photolithography or otherwise of official plats national forests, etc. of surveys ; for expenses of restraion to the public domain of lands in forest reserves and of lands temporarily withdrawn for Hea ri ngs in la nd entries, etc. forest-reserve purposes ; and for expenses of hearings or other pro- ceedings held by order of the General Land Office to determine the character of lands, whether alleged fraudulent entries are of that character or have been made in compliance with the law, and of Depos ition hearings in disbarment proceedings, $23,000 : Provided, That where eposition fees. depositions are taken for use in such hearings the fees of the officer taking them shall be 25 cents per folio for taking and certifying same and 5 cents per folio for each copy furnished to a party on request. LanOffice maps. For United States maps, prepared in the General Land Office, $15,000, all of which maps shall be delivered to the Senate and House of Representatives, except 10 per centum, which shall be delivered to the Commissioner of the General Land Office for official purp oses. All maps delivered to the Senate and House of Repre- sentatives hereunder shall be mounted with rollers ready for use.

�


text:
United States v. Walker (63 U.S. 299)

THESE three cases were brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama.

They were suits brought by the United States upon a collector's bond; that against Walker being a suit against the collector himself, as collector of customs for the port of Mobile, and the other two being suits against his sureties. They were therefore identical in principle, and were argued and decided together.

The facts of the case, together with the instructions given and refused by the court below, are all set forth in the opinion of the court.

It was argued by Mr. J. Mason Campbell, upon a brief submitted by himself and Mr. Black, (Attorney General,) for the United States, and submitted on printed arguments by Mr. Smith for the defendants in error, and by Mr. Stanberry, who intervened as representing the late collector at Cincinnati, whose case was identical with that of the collector at Mobile.

A detailed report of the arguments of counsel upon both sides, relative to the many statutes involved in this question, would not be interesting to the profession generally, and it is therefore omitted. It may be proper, however, to state the general propositions upon each side.

Upon the part of the United States, it was contended that the only question was as to the true construction of the act of 1841 and its effect upon the act of 1822.

1. The purpose of the act of 1841 was plainly not to increase, but to limit, the compensation of collectors. All over two thousand dollars per annum received from the sources specified in the commencement of the 5th section was to be part and parcel of the public money, and paid over as such, and no cllector was to retain for himself, by the latter part of the section, under any pretence, more than $6,000 per annum, including every possible item of charge or claim. Congress might have aggregated into one all the sources from which collectors could derive compensation, and then limited the amount to be enjoyed from the whole, but it has not done so. It has segregated certain items by the act of 1841, and taken from the collector all but $2,000 per annum of this partial aggregate; and when, in the sentence following, it prohibits more than $6,000 being annually enjoyed under any pretence, no other interpretation will hold than that which makes the sources of compensation, outside of the partial aggregate, separately contribute, if they can, the residue of the amount. The construction put on the act of 1841 by the court below would have been correct, if the section had consisted only of the latter part of it, and its fault consists in ignoring and virtually repealing all that precedes.

2. The true construction of the act of 1841 being ascertained, its operation on the act of 1822 appears at once.

By the 9th section of that act, (3 Stat. at Large, 694,) the maximum compensation of collectors at Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Charleston, Savannah, and New Orleans, is fixed at $4,000 per annum, and by the 10th section of all other collectors at $3,000 per annum, payable, as this court ruled in Hoyt's case, out of the fees and commissions allowed by the act of 1802.

10 Howard, 135.

The mention therefore in the act of 1841 of a maximum of $6,000 from all sources is explained by the fact, that while it limited a maximum of $2,000 as regarded certain particulars, the act of 1822, in regard to the sources of emolument with which it dealt, had already prescribed a maximum of $4,000 for the collectors of the seven ports enumerated in it. But no construction can possibly stand which makes the denial of more than $6,000 per annum to the collectors of ports of the first class, amount to an increase of the compensation of those officers in other ports. The act of 1822 still operates in putting a limit to the collectors' compensation as regards the items which it contemplated, and fixes that limit to $4,000 per annum for the collectors of the seven ports mentioned in it, and to $3,000 per annum for all other collectors, including the collector of Mobile, while the act of 1841 limits all of whatever class to a maximum of $2,000 per annum, from the items specified by it.

The conclusion to which Mr. Smith came, after examining the statutes upon the subject, was the following, viz:

The error of appellant, it is submitted, arises from overlooking the fact, that the several annual acts, made permanent by that of 1840, established a maximum of four thousand dollars for all ports, applicable to then existing sources of income; and hence the error was committed, that the limit of six thousand dollars in the act of 1841 was erroneously supposed to refer to the maximum of four thousand dollars in the act of 1822. The two thousand dollars limited from particular sources, by the act of 1841, added to the limit of four thousand dollars in the act of 1840, makes the six thousand grand limit of the act of 1840. It is impossible to give any operation to the limit of 1840, or of 1841, except upon the construction of the statutes maintained for appellee; for, except upon such construction, the limit of four thousand dollars was as inoperative without, as with, the several annual acts, (made permanent by that of 1840,) and the act of 1841.

The view advanced for appellee is in harmony, too, with the general design of all the statutes on the subject; it meets the growing condition of the country, and establishes a correspondence between labor and responsibility and reward; and pursuing the policy inaugurated in 1822, it adjusts the maximum to the growth of towns and the country, and the spread of commerce; and it finally relieves the question from all the entanglements into which it is drawn by the views of Mr. Attorney General Cushing, in his opinion before referred to, and leaves each and every part and provision of each and every law a field of operation.

If these views are correct, the judgment in the case of the United States v. John J. Walker, and the two following cases against his sureties, must be affirmed, because the record shows: 1. That he did not receive six thousand dollars per annum; and because two thousand dollars of his compensation in no year came from the sources to which this limit applies.

Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court.

title: United States v. Walker (63 U.S. 299)


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1616

 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. I L Cu. 705. 1929. 1565 Surveying public lands : For surveys and resurveys of public Surveying e xpenses. lands, examination of surveys heretofore made and reported to be Ante, p . 1563. defective or fraudulent, inspecting mineral deposits, coal fields, and timber districts, making fragmentary surveys, and such other sur- veys or examinations as may be required for identification of lands for purposes of evidence in any suit or proceeding in behalf of the United States, under the supervision of the Commissioner of the General Land Office and direction of the Secretary of the Interior, Seetion cor ner monu- $762,500, of which amount not to exceed $20,000 may be expended by ments. the Commissioner of the General Land Office, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, for the purchase of metal or other equally durable monuments to be used for public-land survey cor- rrc nisc sP ners where ver p ract icabl e : P rovide d fur ther, That not to exceed Detailed field em- $5,000 of this appropriation may be expended for salaries of ployees. employe es of the fi eld su rveyin g serv ice tem porari ly det ailed to the General Land Office : Provided further, That not to exceed $7,500 Alaska national fore sts. may be expended for topographic srveys in conjunction with Topographic surveys. rectangular surveys in national forests in Alaska, and the amount expe nded under this pro viso durin g th e fis cal y ear 1930 shall be reimbursed to this appropriation from appropriations for the Forest Service which shall be available for such reimbursement : Provided ni°Rg ln oaa a Caleor- further, That not to exceed $15,000 of this appropriation may be used for the survey, classification, and sale of the lands and timber of the so-called Oregon and California Railroad lands and the Coos Bay Wagon Road lands : Provided further, That not to exceed lands, and oil shale $50,00 0 of t his ap propri ation may be used f or sur veys a nd res urveys , under the re ctangu lar sy stem p rovide d by la w, of public lands deeme d to be valuable for oil and oil shale : Provided further, That no part Not available for sur- f vet's in States advanG of thi s appr opriat ion sh all be avail able fo r surv eys or resur veys o f in` ooney ther efor. public lands in any State which, under the Act of August 18, 1894 u. S. Code, p. 13S8. (U . S . C ., p . 1388, sec . 863), advances money to the United States for f such p urpose s for expend iture during the fi scal y ear 19 30 : Pro vided snceYs and reimbure- urther, That this appropriation maybe expended for surveys made able. under the supervision of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, but when expended for surveys that would not otherwise be chargeable hereto it shall be reimbursed from the applicable appropriation, fund, or special deposit. Registers : For salaries and commissions of registers of district Registers. land offices at not exceeding $3,600 per annum each $70 000 to- Reappropriation. exceeding f > > Vol.44,p. 938. gether with $21,000 of the unexpended balance of the appropriation for this purpose for the fiscal year 1928. Contingent expenses of land offices : For clerk hire, rent, and other coat e'p 1563S penses. incident al expens es of the district land of fices, in cluding t he expens es of depositing public money ; traveling expenses of clerks detailed to examine the books and management of district land offices and to assist in the operation of said offices and in the opening of new land offices and reservations, and for traveling expenses of clerks transferred in the interest of the public service from one district land office to an other : Provided, That no expenses chargeable to Expenses limited, the Government shall be incurred by registers in the conduct of local land offices except upon previous specific authorization by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, 161,000, together with Balance available. ~ Vol.44,p.938. $40,000 of the unexpended balance of the appropriation for this purpose for the fiscal year 1928. Timber depreda- Depredations on public timber, protecting public lands, and settle- tions, protecting, and ment of claims for swamp land and swamp-land indemnity : For s Ante, p n1 s 63 laims. protecting timber on the public lands, and for the more efficient execution of the law and rules relating to the cutting thereof ; protecting public lands from illegal and fraudulent entry or appro-

�


text: Talk:United States v. Walker (63 U.S. 299)


text:
United States v. Walker (63 U.S. 299)/Opinion of the Court

This case comes before the court upon a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama. It was an action of debt brought by the United States upon the official bond of the defendant as collector of the customs for the district and inspector of the revenue for the port of Mobile. He gave the bond, with sureties, on the seventh day of September, 1850, conditioned that he had truly and faithfully executed and discharged, and that he would continue truly and faithfully to execute and discharge, all the duties of the office according to law. Neglect and refusal on the part of the defendant to pay to the plaintiffs certain sums of money received by him as such collector before the commencement of the suit, beyond what he was entitled to retain as compensation for discharging the duties of the office, constituted the breaches of the condition of the bond, as assigned in the declaration.

Those balances, as claimed by the plaintiffs, amounted to the sum of thirteen thousand on hundred and eighty-four dollars and forty-two cents; and the charge was, as alleged in the declaration, that the defendant had wholly failed and refused to pay the same. As appears by the transcript, the defendant pleaded the general issue, and that he had fully performed the conditions of the writing obligatory set forth in the declaration.

To maintain the issue on their part, the plaintiffs introduced a certified copy of the bond given by the defendant, and two duly certified copies of transcripts from the Treasury Department, showing that the official accounts of the defendant had been examined and adjusted by the accounting officers of that department. According to those transcripts, the respective balances claimed by the plaintiffs, as the accounts are there stated, had not been paid by the defendant, and remained due and payable at the time the suit was commenced.

No evidence was adduced by the defendant. He was charged in the account against him, as collector of the customs, with all sums collected from duties on merchandise, tonnage duties, hospital money, and for all sums received for rent and storage of goods, wares, and merchandise, stored in the public storehouses, for which a rent was paid beyond the rents paid by the collector. On the other side, he was credited in the account of official emoluments with the sum of three thousand dollars as the maximum rate of the annual salary or compensation allowed to the collector of that port. Further details of those accounts are omitted, for the reason that the charge for rent and storage in the account of customs, and the credit for salary in the account of official emoluments, are the only two items which come in review at the present time.

Reference to the ninth section of the act of the seventh of May, 1822, will show that Mobile is not one of the seven ports enumerated in that provision, and consequently that the maximum rate of annual compensation or salary allowed to the office under that law was three thousand dollars, as limited by the tenth section, which includes all the ports not enumerated in the previous provision. All of the accounts of the defendant were adjusted at the Treasury Department upon the principle that the act of the seventh of May, 1822, was still in force, and that the maximum rate of compensation belonging to the collector was three thousand dollars, as therein prescribed. It was insisted by the defendant that the provision in question had been repealed by subsequent acts upon the same subject, and that the maximum compensation allowed by law to the office was six thousand dollars.

Assuming that the theory of the defendant was correct, then his accounts had been improperly adjusted, and there was nothing due to the plaintiffs. On the other hand, if the charge for rent and storage in his customs account was properly made, and the maximum rate of compensation belonging to the office was only three thousand dollars, then he was justly indebted to the plaintiffs for the whole amount of the respective balances as stated in the transcripts.

After argument, the court instructed the jury, among other things, that 'the act of 3d March, 1841, was the last and controlling law as to the amount of compensation which collectors are allowed annually to retain; and that, under that enactment, the collector of this port was entitled to a compensation of six thousand dollars per annum, provided the same was yielded from the office from commissions for duties and fees for storage, and fees and emoluments, and any other commissions and salaries now allowed and limited by law, or so much from those sources, not exceeding six thousand dollars, as the office yielded.'

That instruction affirmed the right of the defendant, under the act of the third of March, 1841, to a compensation of six thousand dollars per annum, or so much thereof, not exceeding that sum, as the office yielded from commissions of every description, fees and emoluments, including rents and storage, and salaries, as allowed and limited by law. Beyond question, it assumed that the tenth section of the act of the seventh of May, 1822, was repealed. Prayers for instruction were then presented by the district attorney, who was counsel for the plaintiffs. He requested the court to instruct the jury to the effect that the provisions of the act of the seventh of May, 1822, respecting the maximum compensation allowed to collectors of the customs, were not repealed by tha act of the third of March, 1841, or by any other act, but that the same were in full force; 2. That the only effect the act of the third of March, 1841, had upon the former act, in so far as the same applied to a case like the present, was to create a new and additional source of emolument to such collectors, allowing them to retain not exceeding two thousand dollars for rent and storage of goods, wares, and merchandise, stored in the public stores, and for which a rent was paid beyond the rents paid by such collectors. Each of these prayers was separately presented, and separately refused by the court.

Another prayer for instruction was then presented by the district attorney. It affirmed, in effect, that it was the duty of the defendant, as collector, whenever his emoluments in any one year exceeded three thousand dollars, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to the office, to pay the excess into the Treasury, and that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover for all such balances, thus ascertained, as were shown to be due from the evidence. Apply the first and third requested instructions to the facts of the case, and it will be seen that they affirmed the principles adopted by the accounting officers of the Treasury, in restating the accounts of the defendant; and if correct, then the whole amount of the respective balances, as stated in the transcript, was due to the plaintiffs.

Taken rogether, they assume that the tenth section of the act of the 7th of May, 1822, is in full force, and that the defendant had no right, under the act of the 3d of March, 1841, to retain any portion of the amount received for rent and storage. Those prayers for instructions having been refused, the district attorney then prayed the court to instruct the jury as follows:

'That under those acts, it was the duty of the defendant, as collector of the customs, whenever his emoluments exceeded three thousand dollars in any one year, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to his office, to pay the excess, if any, into the Treasury, and the plaintiffs are entitled to recover the amount of any such surplus or surpluses, if any, as may be shown by the evidence; but, in ascertaining the amount of the defendant's emoluments as such collector, the jury must exclude all moneys derived by him from fines, penalties, and forfeitures, and also all moneys derived by him from rent and storage of goods, wares, and merchandise, which may have been stored in the public storehouses, and for which a rent was paid beyond the rents paid by him as collector, unless the proceeds of such rents and storage exceed two thousand dollars; in which event, the excess over and above that sum must be taken into account by them, in computing the value of the annual emoluments.'

That prayer was also refused by the court. To understand its precise effect, it is necessary that it should be read in connection with the first and second prayers, which had previously been presented and refused. When considered together, those three prayers disclose the second theory of the plaintiffs, as assumed at the trial.

Like the one assumed in the third prayer, it affirmed that the tenth section of the act of the 7th of May, 1822, was unrepealed, but conceded that the defendant had a right to retain to his own use the moneys received for rent and storage, to an amount not exceeding two thousand dollars. Under the instruction of the court, the jury returned their verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiffs excepted to the charge, and to the several refusals of the court to give the requested instructions. Three questions are presented in the case for decision, which will be briefly and separately considered:

1. Whether the tenth section of the act of the 7th of May, 1822, is repealed by any subsequent act; and if not, then,

2. What is the true construction of the act of the 3d of March, 1841, so far as the same applies to the present case?

3. Whether, by the true construction of the two acts, the defendants had a right to retain to his own use the moneys received from rent and storage, to an amount not exceeding two thousand dollars.

1. It is insisted by the defendant that the maximum prescribed by the tenth section of the act of the 7th of May, 1822, is repealed, and that, under the law regulating his compensation, the legal capacity of the office he held was six thousand dollars, subject to the condition that two thousand dollars only could be received from rent and storage. Six thousand dollars, he maintains, is the maximum under the law of the 3d of March, 1841, applicable to every collector, and that the compensation of each, within that limit, and subject to the before-named condition, is regulated solely by the amount of labor performed.

To show that the tenth section of the act of the 7th of May, 1822, is repealed, his counsel, at the argument, referred to various acts of Congress, passed subsequently to the tariff act of the 14th of July, 1832, entitled 'An act to alter and amend the several acts imposing duties on imports.'

They are as follows: 1833, 4 Stat., 629; 1834, 4 Stat., 698; 1835, 4 Stat., 771; 1836, 5 Stat., 113; 1837, 5 Stat., 175; 1838, 5 Stat., 264; 1840, 6 Stat., 815, private act; 1841, 5 Stat., 431, sec. 2.

By the first of those acts, usually called additional compensation acts, the Secretary of the Treasury was authorized, among other things, to pay to the collectors, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as would give those officers respectively the same compensation in that year, according to the importations of the year, as they would have been entitled to receive, if the tariff act of the preceding year had not gone into effect. That provision, with certain additions and modifications, which will presently be noticed, was annually re-enacted to the year 1840, when it was made permanent. For the most part, it was inserted in some one of the annual appropriation acts, and was designed to accomplish the precise object which its language describes, and nothing more.

Compensation to collectors, from the organization of the Government to the present time, has been derived chiefly from certain enumerated fees, commissions, and allowances, to which has been added a prescribed sum, called salary, and which is much less than the compensation to which the officer is entitled. Provision for such fees, commissions, and allowances, was first made by the act of the 31st of July, 1789, which also allowed to collectors certain proportions of fines, penalties, and forfeitures. 1 Stat., 64.

More permanent provision, however, was made by the act of the 18th of February, 1793, by the act to regulate the collection of duties on imports and tonnage, passed on the 2d of March, 1799, and by the compensation act passed on the same day. 1 Stat., 316, 627, 786.

By these several acts, certain enumerated fees and commissions are made payable to collectors. They are also entitled to certain proportions of fines, penalties, and forfeitures. Accurate accounts were required to be kept by them of all fees and official emoluments by them received, and of all expenses for rent, fuel, stationery, and clerk hire, which they were required annually to transmit to the Comptroller of the Treasury; but they were allowed to retain to their own use the whole amount of emolument derived from that source, without any limitation. Maximum rate of compensation was first prescribed by the act of the 13th of April, 1802. That limit was five thousand dollars, and it was applicable to all collectors.

By that act, it was provided, that whenever the annual emoluments of any collector, after deducting the expenses incident to the office, amounted to more than five thousand dollars, the surplus should be accounted for and paid into the Treasury. 2 Stat., 172.

Further regulations, as to fees, commissions, other emoluments, and salaries, were made by the act of the 7th of May, 1822, as therein prescribed.

One of those regulations was, that whenever the emoluments of any collector, for seven enumerated ports, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to the office, should exceed four thousand dollars, the excess should be paid into the Treasury, for the use of the United States. By the tenth section, it was also provided, that whenever the emoluments of any other collector of the customs should exceed three thousand dollars, after deducting such expenses, the excess should be paid into the Treasury, for the same purpose. They were also required to account to the Treasury for all emoluments and for all expenses incident to their offices, and those accounts were to be rendered upon oath. Neither of the two last-mentioned acts extended to fines, penalties, and forfeitures. 3 Stat., 695. Under that act, three thousand dollars was the maximum which could be allowed to the office held by the defendant; and it is conceded by his counsel that it remained in full force to the time when the additional compensation acts before mentioned were passed. Large additions had been made to the free list by the tariff act of the 14th of July, 1832, and the rate of duties on imports so far reduced that the sources of emolument to collectors would not yield sufficient to give them an adequate compensation. To supply that deficiency, those additional compensation acts were passed. Much reliance is placed by the counsel of the defendant upon the last proviso, which appears in nearly the same form in several of the acts. Take, for example, the one in the act of the 7th of July, 1838, which is the act that was subsequently made permanent. It provides that no collector shall receive more than four thousand dollars. That sum is the maximum rate of compensation allowed to collectors of the enumerated ports in the act of the 7th of May, 1822; and inasmuch as the limit of three thousand dollars, therein prescribed as applicable to the non-enumerated ports, was not reproduced in the new provision, it is insisted it was repealed, so that every collector, whether of the enumerated or non-enumerated ports, may now claim to receive an annual compensation of six thousand dollars from the sources of emolument recognised by that act, provided his office yields that amount, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to the office. To that proposition we cannot assent. On the contrary, when we look at the language of the new provision, in connection with that of the prior law, and consider the mischief that existed, the remedy provided, and the true reason of the remedy, we are necessarily led to a different conclusion. Commercial ports, where the revenue is collected, were divided by the prior law, so far as respects the compensation of collectors, into two classes, enumerated and non-enumerated. Collectors of the seven enumerated ports might receive an annual compensation of four thousand dollars, provided their respective offices produced that amount, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to the offices, from all the sources of emolument recognised and prescribed by the existing laws.

On the same principles, and subject to the same conditions, the collectors of the non-enumerated ports might receive an annual compensation of three thousand dollars. No one could receive more than that sum, and his lawful claim might be much less.

Ten years' experience under that law, prior to the passage of the tariff act of the 14th of July, 1832, had witnessed but few complaints respecting the classification of the ports, or the standard of compensation to collectors or customs, and had called for no important alteration in the laws upon that subject. Throughout that period, the rates of duties on imports were high, and nearly every article of consumption imported from other countries was taxed. Change of policy in that behalf, as carried out in the legislation of the succeeding year, affected the emoluments of collectors, and reduced the amount of net income from the sources of their emolument below the standard of a reasonable compensation. To remedy that mischief, and restore their compensation to what it would have been if no change had taken place, was the purpose for which those additional compensation acts were passed. They had the effect to change the basis of computation, so as to augment the estimated net income from the authorized sources of emolument to what it would have been if the tariff act had not passed; but they were not intended to make any change, either in the sources from which the emoluments were derived, or the maximum rate of compensation. Mention was made of the largest maximum prescribed in the prior law, not with any view to repeal or modify the other, which was applicable to the non-enumerated ports, but to exclude the conclusion that it was the intention of the provision to increase the compensation of the collectors of the principal ports beyond what it would have been if the free list had not been augmented, and there had been no diminution in the rates of duties on imports.

Suppose there was nothing in the language of the act to qualify the provision, and nothing in the history of the legislation upon the subject to aid in the exposition; still we would not think it so clearly inconsistent with the prior law as to operate as a repeal. Repeal by implication, upon the ground that the subsequent provision upon the same subject is repugnant to the prior law, is not favored in any case; but where such repeal would operate to reopen accounts at the Treasury Department long since settled and closed, the supposed repugnancy ought to be clear and controlling before it can be held to have that affect. Such was the doctrine substantially laid down by this court in Wood v. United States, 16 Pet., 363; and we have no hesitation in reaffirming it as applicable to the present case. Aldridge et al. v. Williams, 3 How., 23; U.S. v. Packages of Dry Goods, 17 How., p. 93; 2 Dwarris on Stat., 533.

All of these additional compensation acts are in pari materia with the several acts prescribing the sources of emolument, and the whole must be construed together. When they are so considered, there is no such repugnancy as is supposed by the defendant. Collectors, as before, were still required to render an account; and the new provision expressly provides that no officer shall receive under that law a greater annual salary or compensation than was paid to him for the year the before-mentioned tariff act was passed.

2. Having disposed of the proposition chiefly relied on by the defendant, we come now to consider the second question presented for decision. That question cannot be understood without referring to the previous legislation upon the subject, and the practice that had grown up under it. Importers were allowed by the act of the fourteenth of July, 1832, to place certain goods in the public stores, under bond, at their own risk, without paying the duties. Duties on goods so stored were required to be paid one half in three months, and the other half in six months; but while the goods remained in the public stores, they were subject to customary storage and charges, and to the payment of interest at the rate of six per cent. Goods thus deposited might be withdrawn at any time in whole or in part by paying the duties on what were so recalled, together with customary storage and charges and the interest. Public stores were accordingly rented; and as the business increased, the storage received by the collector from the importers exceeded the amount paid to the owner of the stores, and there was no law requiring collectors to account for the excess, which was retained by the collectors to their own use, and went to swell the amount of their compensation.

To correct that supposed abuse, the act of the third of March, 1841, was passed. By that act, every collector was required to render a quarter-yearly account in addition to the account previously directed by law. That additional account, as prescribed in the act, was to include all sums collected or received from fines, penalties, or forfeitures, or for seizure of goods, wares, and merchandise, or upon compromises made upon seizures, or on account of suits instituted for frauds against the revenue, or for rent and storage of goods, wares, and merchandise, which were stored in the public stores, and for which a rent was paid beyond the rents paid by the collector. As originally framed, the provision required the collector, in case the sums received by him from all those sources exceeded two thousand dollars, to pay the excess into the Treasury as part and parcel of the public money. After it was introduced, however, it was so amended and changed in its passage, that while it still directs the account to be rendered, it requires no part of the money derived from those sources to be paid into the Treasury, except what is received for rent and storage as aforesaid, and for 'fees and emoluments.' Every collector was required to account for fees and emoluments by previous laws; and as the account to be rendered under this act is expressly declared to be one 'in addition to the account now required,' there is nothing left for that part of the section directing the payment of the excess into the Treasury to operate upon, except the sums received for rent and storage.

By the true construction of the act, therefore, every collector is required to include in his quarter-yearly account, as directed in the first part of the section, all sums received by him for rent and storage of goods, wares, and merchandise, stored in the public stores, for which rent is paid beyond the rents paid by him as collector; and if, from such accounting, the aggregate sums received from that source exceed two thousand dollars, he is directed and required to pay the excess into the Treasury, as part and parcel of the public money. When the sums so received from that source in any year do not in the aggregate exceed two thousand dollars, he may retain the whole to his own use; and in no case is he obliged to pay into the Treasury anything but the excess beyond the two thousand dollars.

It is insisted, in one of the printed arguments filed in this case, that the act now under consideration has the effect to repeal the maximum prescribed in the prior act, and that every collector, under this act, is entitled to six thousand dollars as an annual compensation, provided the office yields that sum from all the sources of emolument, including rent and storage. Collectors of the enumerated ports undoubtedly may receive four thosuand dollars from the sources of emolument recognised in the act of the seventh of May, 1822, and they may also receive two thousand dollars from rents and storage. Those two sums are equal to the new maximum rate created by the act under consideration, which provides that no collector, under any pretence whatever, shall receive, hold, or retain, more than six thousand dollars per year, including all commissions for duties and all fees for storage, or fees, or emoluments, or any other commissions or salaries which are now allowed and directed by law. But it is quite clear that there is nothing in the act having the slightest tendency to show that the prior act is repealed, so far as it is applicable to the collectors of the non-enumerated ports. No now maximum is fixed to their compensation, and there is not a word in the new provision inconsistent with the tenth section of the prior act.

To suppose that the new maximum applies to the collectors of the non-enumerated ports, would be to impute an absurdity to the act, for the reason, that under no possible state of things can such collectors lawfully retain, hold, or receive, more than five thousand dollars as their annual salary or compensation, from all the sources of emolument recognised and prescribed by the two acts. It may be five thousand dollars, or it may be much less than three thousand dollars, according to the state of the importations and the amount received from rent and storage.

3. It only remains to apply the principles already ascertained, in order to determine the third question presented for decision. Collectors of the non-enumerated ports may receive, as an annual compensation for their services, the sum of three thousand dollars from the sources of emolument recognised and prescribed by the act of the seventh of May, 1822, provided their respective offices yield that amount from those sources, after deducting the necessary expenses incident to the office, and not otherwise; and in addition thereto, they are also entitled to whatever sum or sums they may receive for rent and storage, provided the amount does not exceed two thousand dollars; but the excess beyond that sum they are expressly required to pay into the Treasury, as part and parcel of the public money.

Charges against the defendant for rent and storage must be settled in accordance with these principles. It follows, that the instruction given by the presiding justice was erroneous; and we also think that the first, second, and fourth prayers for instruction ought to have been given to the jury.

Suits were also instituted against the sureties of the defendant. Judgment was entered in the court below for the respective defendants in those suits, and the causes were removed into this court by writs of error, sued out by the plaintiffs. Those causes were submitted at the same time with the one just decided. They depend upon the same principles, and must be disposed of in the same way.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is therefore reversed in each of the three cases, and the respective cases are remanded, with directions to issue new venires.


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1617

 1566 SEVENTIETH C ONGRESS. SEss. II. CH. 705. 1929. Vehicles. Fight ing forest fi res. Indian reservations. Opening to entry. Proviso. Reimbursement. In dian Affa irs Bu- reau. priation, adjusting claims for swamp lands and indemnity for swamp lands ; and traveling expenses of agents and others em- ployed hereunder, $410,000, together with $20,000 of the unexpended balance of the appropriation for this purpose for the fiscal year 1928, including not exceeding $35,000 for the purchase, exchange, opera tion, and main tenan ce of mot or-pr opell ed pa ssen ger-c arryi ng vehicles and motor boats for the use of agents and others employed in the field service and including $40,000 for prevention and fighting of forest and other fires on the public lands, to be available for this and no other purpose, and to be expended under the direction of the commissioner. Opening Indian reservations (reimbursable) : For expenses per- ta ining to the openi ng to entry and se ttlemen t of s uch In dian r eser- vation lands as may be opened during the fiscal year 1930, $300 : Provided, That the expenses pertaining to the opening of each of said reservations and paid for out of this appropriation shall be reimbursed to the United States from the money received from the sale of the lands embraced in said reservations, respectively. BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS S ALAR IES Comm issioner, and For the Commis sioner of Indian Aff airs and other perso nal office personnel . ser vices in the Distr ict of Colum bia, $ 400,000. General expenses. GENERAL EXPENSES Transportation, tele- For transportation and incidental expenses of officers and clerks graphing, etc. of the Bureau of Indian Affairs when traveling on official duty ; for telegraph and telephone toll messages on business pertaining to the Indian Service sent and received by the Bureau of Indian Affairs at Washington, and for other necessary expenses of the Indian Service for which no other appropriation is available, $12,000. Supplies. Purchase, transpor- For expenses necessary to the purchase of goods and supplies for tation, etc. the Indian Service, including inspection, pay of necessary employees, and all other expenses connected therewith, including advertising, storage, and transportation of Indian goods and supplies, $600,000 : Precise. Limitation on pay- Provided, That no part of this appropriation shall be used in pay- Mont. ment for any services except bill therefor is rendered within one year from the ti me the servi ce is perform ed. Inspectors . For pay of special Indian Service inspector and two Indian Service inspectors, and traveling and incidental expenses, $15,500. Judges. For pay of judges of Indian courts where tribal relations now exist, at rates to be fixed by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, $18,000 . Poli ce, For pay of Indian police, including chiefs of police at not to exceed $70 per month each and privates at not to exceed $50 per month each, to be employed in maintaining order, and for purchase of equipments and supplies, $163,000. Sup press ing liquor traffic, etc . For the suppression of the traffic in intoxicating liquors and deleterious drugs, including peyote, among Indians, $100,000. Age ncy Construction, For lease, purchase, repair, and improvement of agency buildings, chase, repairs, etc. excl usive of hos pital buildi ngs, i ncludin g the purcha se of necess ary lands and the installation, repair, and improvement of heating, light- ing, power, and sewerage and water systems in connection therewith, $175,000 ; for construction of physical improvements, exclusive of Provisos . hospitals, $75,000 ; in all, $250,000 : Provided, That this appropriation sup ervis ing work. shall be available for the payment of salaries and expenses of persons employed in the supervision of construction or repair work of roads

�


text: Talk:United States v. Walker (63 U.S. 299)/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1618

 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. II. Ca. 705. 1929 . 15G7 and bridges on Indian reservations and other lands devoted to the Indian Service : Provided further, That no money Shall be expended lim ea) construction for new construction at any one agency except as follows : Not to Allotments excepted . exceed $30,000 for an additional water supply, Southern Navajo Agency, Arizona ; not to exceed $7,000 for water and sewage disposal systems, Turtle Mountain Agency and Hospital, North Dakota ; not to exceed $13,100 for water-filtration plant, with storage reservoir at the Standing Rock Agency, North Dakota ; for two employees cottages, Choctaw Agency, Mississippi, $5,500 ; for employee's cot- tage, Blackfeet Agency, Montana, $3,500 ; for office, building, Rosebud Agency, South Dakota, $7,500 ; for employee's cottage, Warm Springs Agency, Oregon, $3,500 ; for o ffic e bui lding, Tom ah A gency , Wis - consin, $3,500 ; for electric system, Consolidated Ute Agency, Utah, $2,500. Not to exceed $150,000 of applicable appropriations made herein for Allowance for main- the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall be available for the maintenance, tenance, repairs, etc. repair, and operation of motor-propelled and horse-drawn passenger- carrying vehicles for the use of superintendents, farmers, physicians, fi eld matro ns, allot ting, irr igation, and othe r employe es in the Indian field service : Provided, That not to exceed $1,000 may be used in the Purchases limited. purchase of horse-drawn passenger-carrying vehicles, and not to exceed $95,000 for the purchase and exchange of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles, and that such vehicles shall be used only for official service : Provided further That the limitation of $400 00 F ormer limit in. ,, c rea sedd in the Interior Department Appropriation Act for the fiscal year 1929 Ante, p. 205 . (45 Stat., p 205) for the purchase of motor-propelled passenger- ca rrying ve hicles is hereby i ncreased to $80,0 00. That to meet possible emergencies, not exceeding $100,000 of the E mergen ce sfrom ante by diversions o appropriations made by this Act for support of reservation and non- specified appropria- re servation schools, for scho ol and ag ency bui ldings, a nd for pr eserva- Lions' tion of health among Indians, shall be available, upon approval of the Secretary of the Interior, for replacing any buildings, equipment, supplies, livestock, or other property of those activities of the Indian, Service above referred to which may be destroyed or rendered uns erviceabl e by fire, flood, or storm : Pro vided , That the l imitat ions Provisos. for new construction contained in the appropriations for Indian ti niulaings construe sch ool, a gency, and h ospita l buil dings shall n ot app ly to such e mer- gency expenditures : Provided further, That any diversions of appro- Report to Congress. pri ations made hereun der sh all be repor ted to Congre ss in the an nual Budget. EXP ENSES IN PRO BATE MATTERS Probate matters. For the pur pos e of det ermi ning the he irs of deceased Indian Determining heirs of allottees having right, title, or interest in any trust or restricted deceased allottees. property, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, $59,000, reimbursable as provided by existing law, of which $15,000 shall be available for personal services in the District of Di trict. in the Columbia : Provided, That the provisions of this paragraph shall not Tribes excepted. apply to the Osage Indians nor to the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma. For s alarie s and expens es of such a ttorney s and other employ ees as Fi ve Civ ilized Tribes and Quapaws . the Secret ary of the I nterio r may, in his discr etion, deem necess ary Attorneys, etc ., fo r. in probate matters affecting restricted allottees or their heirs in the Five Civilized Tribes and in the several tribes of the Quapaw Agency, and for the costs and other necessary expenses incident to suits insti- tuted or conducted by such attorneys, $34,500 : Provided, That no part i~testilied to Civil of this appropriation shall be available for the payment of attorneys Service eligibles. or other employees unless appointed after a competitive examination by the Civil Service Commission and from an eligible list furnished by such com missi on.

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1619

 1568 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SESS. II. CII. 705. 1929. Citizen Commission. Indian lands. EXP EN SES OF INDIAN COMMISSIONERS For expenses of the Board of Indian Commissioners, $12,000, of which amount not to exceed $8,700 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia. INDIAN LAND S Surveying, allotting, For the survey, resurvey, classification, and allotment of lands in mVol. 2 lly, etc. severalty under the provisions of the Act entitled "An Act to provide U. .Code, p.711. for the allotment of lands in severalty to Indians," approved Feb- ruary 8, 1887 (U. S. C., p. 711, sec. 331), and under any other Act or Acts providing for the survey or allotment of Indian lands, Proviso. $35 000 : Provided That no art of said sum shall be used for the Use in New Mexico > > p and Arizona limited. survey, resurvey, classification, or allotment of any land in severalty on the public domain to any Indian, whether of the Navajo or other tribes, within the State of New Mexico and the State of Arizona, Pueblo Lands Board, who was not residing upon the public domain prior to June 30, 1914. Expenses. For carrying out the provisions of section 13 of the Act entitled Vol.43,p. 640. 11 An Act to quiet the title to lands within Pueblo Indian land grants, and for other purposes," ap proved June 7, 1924 (43 Stat., p . 636), $5,000, or so much thereof as may be nec essary, to be immediately available. Advertising land For t he payment of newspaper adv ertisements o f sales of In dians sales . lands, $500, r eimbursable f rom payments by purchasers of costs of sale, under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior Pueblo Indians, New may prescribe . Mexico. For the pay of one special attorney for the Pueblo Indians of Attorney for . New Mexico, to be designated by the Secretary of the Interior, and for necessary traveling expenses of said attorney, $3,700, or so much thereof as the Secretary of the Interior may deem necessary . Five Civilized For payment of salaries of employees and other expenses of survey- Tribes, nses, sales of ing, advertising, and sale in connection with the further sales of eed5 property, from p=°- unallotted lands and other tribal property belonging to any of the Five Civilized Tribes, including the advertising and sale of the land Choctaw and Chick- within the segregated coal and asphalt area of the Choctaw and lands . coal asaw and asphalt Chickasaw Nations, or of the surface thereof, as provided for in the aVol. 41, p. 1107. Act approved February 22, 1921, entitled "An Act author izing the Secretary of the Interior to offer for sale remainder of the coal and asphalt deposits in segregated mineral land in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, State of Oklahoma" (41 Stat ., p . 1107), and of Final settlement of the improvements thereon, which is hereby expressly authorized, tribal affairs. and for other work necessary to a final settlement of the affairs of the Five Civilized Tribes, $10,000, to be paid from the proceeds of sales For t Apa che Re- of such tribal lands and property. of ne rvatio n, Ariz. For the purchase o~ certain land and appurtenances thereto situ- Purchase of land for ated within the exterior boundaries of the Fort Apache Reservation, Indians of. Ante, p. 962. Arizona, as authorized by the Act of May 29, 1928 (45 Stat ., p . 962), $6,2 00, or so much thereof as may be nec essary, payab le from funds on deposit in the Treasury to the credit of the Fort Apache Indians, Homeless Indians in to be immediately available. California. For the purchase of lands for the homeless Indians in California, v Vol . 44,p94 1 s for. including im provements th ereon, for th e use and occu pancy of said Ante, p. 206. Indians, $8,000, together with the unexpended balance of the appro- priation for this purpose for the fiscal years 1928 and 1929, said funds to be expended unde r such regula tions and cond itions as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. Full blood Choctaws For the purchase of lands, including improvements thereon, not in Mississippi. p of lands, exceeding eighty acres for any one family, for the use and occupancy etc., for. of the full-blood Choctaw Indians of Mississippi, to be expended

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1620

 « SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SESS. II. C$. 705. 1929 . under conditions to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior for its repayment to the United States under such rules and regula- tions as he may direct, $6,500. For carrying out the provisions of the Act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat., p . 636), to quiet title in Pueblo Indian lands, New Mexico, and in settlement for damages for lands and water rights lost to the Indians of the Pueblos as recommended in the respective reports of the Pueblo Lands Board thereon, the sum of $1 .35,381 .37, as fol- lows : Santo Domingo, $13,888 .20 ; Sandia, $20,950 .90 ; San Felipe, $20,341 .10 ; Taos $48,497 ; Santa Ana, $5,035 .54 ; Nambe, $26,668 .63 ; all of said sums so to be expended to be immediately available : Pro- vided, That the balance, if any, of the amounts so appropriated for the above Pueblos be placed to their credit on the books of the Treasury at 4 per centum interest per annum, and be subject to future appropriation by Congress : Provided further, That $1,000 of the amount for the Santo Domingo Pueblos be used to purchase thirteen acres of land and water rights for said Indians ; that $3,578 of the sum for the Nambe Pueblos be available to purchase ten and seventy-nine one-hundredth acres of land and water rights, and the sum of $8,500 for irrigating and improving the lands of these Pueblos : Provided further, That all of the sums credited to the Pueblos of Sandia and Taos, respectively, be used for fencing, irrigat- ing, and improving their lands ; that $535 .57 of the amount for the San F elipe Pueblo s be a vailab le for the pu rchase there for of sixte en and eight hundred eighty-nine one-thousandths acres of land and water rights, lying west of the Rio Grande, and that $10,000 of the sum credited to these Indians be available for fencing, irrigating and improving the land thereof. Not more than $18,000 of the funds to the credit of the Tesuque Indians is hereby made immediately available for the purchase of lands and the development of a water supply, and not to exceed $600 is authorized to be used to reimburse the appropriation for encourag- ing industry and self-support among Indians, made by the Act of January 12, 1927 (44 Stat ., p. 942), for the cost of a hay baler and platform scales purchased from said appropriation for the use and benefit of said Indians ; in all, $18,600. For purchase of additional land and water rights for the use and benefit of Indians of the Navajo Tribe, title to which shall be taken in the name of the United States in trust for the Navajo Tribe, $200,000, as authorized by the Act of May 29, 1928 (45 Stat ., p. 899), payable from funds on deposit in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the Navajo Tribe : Provided, That in purchasing such lands title may be taken, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, for the surface only. The unexpended balance of $6,124 .25 of the appropriation of $85,0 00 for the r elief of the Nisqu ally In dians contai ned in the A ct of December 5, 1924 (43 Stat ., p . 684), which unexpended balance was continued available during the fiscal year 1927 by the Act of March 3, 1926 (44 Stat ., p . 174), is hereby made available during the fiscal year 1930 for the purpose of removing the bodies of deceased India ns fro m the old Ni squall y ceme tery to a new locat ion. For payment to the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache Indians, of Oklahoma, under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe $200,000, from the tribal trust fund established by Joint Resolution of Congress, approved June 12, 1926 (44 Stat ., p . 740), being a part of the Indians' share of the money derived from the south half of the Red River in Oklahoma. 1569 Pueblo Indian lands, New Mexico . Vol .43,p. 636. Post, p. 1640. Payment to desig. nated Pueblos. Provisos. Balan ce to credit of the Pueblos. Use for Santo Do- mingo and Nam be Pueblos. Use for Sandia and Taos, and San Felipe Pue blos. Tesuque Indians . Purchase of lan ds etc ., for, from tribal funds. Developing water supply. Reimbursement. Vol.44,p. 942. Navajo Indians. Additional land and water rights for benefit of. Ante, p. 809. Proviso. Title for surface only. Nisqually Indians. Use of unexpende d balance for transferring rem ains to new ceme- tery. V61. 44, p. 174. Kiowa, etc., Indians, Okla. Paymen t to, from oil royalties fund. Vol .44,p . 740. Post, p. 1642.

�


text:
United States v. Widow and Heirs of West

THIS was an appeal from the District Court of the United States for the northern district of California.

The case is stated in the opinion of the court.

It was argued by Mr. Stanton, upon a brief filed by the Attorney General, for the United States, and by Mr. Benham for the appellees.

The principal question was, whether the alteration in the grant vitiated it altogether. Upon this point, the Attorney General said:

I have already said that I think there was a grant issued by Jimeno in 1840, which at the time it issued was honest and genuine. If no claim had been made for more than the league and a half comprehended within the boundaries of that grant. The case would have been a clear one in favor of the claimants. But I insist that a provisional or equitable grant, which may be converted into a legal title upon the contingency of an approval by the Departmental Assembly, and the performance of other conditions, must be regarded as wholly abandoned when the conditions were not complied with, and another and a different claim set up under a forged title.

To this argument, Mr. Benham replied:

The claimants derive title by succession. The grant of the 2d of November is admitted to be genuine. It must be confirmed, to the extent of one league and a half. Its alteration did not divest the rights which vested under it. It is immaterial who made the alteration; although, as a matter of fact, it was not made by the claimants, or with their knowledge or consent.

There is another grant in the archives, which vested the land (the league and a half) in West.

Lewis v. Payn, 8 Cowen, pages 75, 76.

Jackson v. Gould, 7 Wendell, p. 364.

Hatch v. Hatch, 9 Mass., top pages 293, 297, 298.

Doe v. Hirst, 3 Starkie's Rep., p. 60.

Hennick v. Malin, 22 Wendell, p. 391.

3 Preston's Abstracts, 103.

2 H. Blackstone, 263.

Buller's N. P., 267.

The position of Mr. Attorney General, that the alteration of the grant is an abandonment of title, which will prevent confirmation by this court, is not tenable. It cannot be held there was any abandonment when the claimants continued, as they have always done, to occupy the land.

All the conditions imposed by the Jimeno grant were complied with.

Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1621

 1570 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. 1I. CIi. 705. 1929 . Industrial work, etc. INDUSTRIAL ASSISTANCE AND ADVANCEMENT Timber preservation, etc. For the purposes of preservingg living and growing b timber on Indian reservations and allotments other than the Menominee Indian Reservation in Wisconsin, and to educate Indians in the proper care mengscultural eaperi- of for ests ; for the cond ucting of exp eriments on In dian school o r agency farms designed to test the possibilities of soil and climate in the cultivation of trees, grains, vegetables, cotton, and fruits, and Farmers and stock for the employment of practical farmers and stockmen, including - men. $50,000 for the employment of agricultural college graduates scien- Agricultural college tifical ly trai ned and quali fied to direct the a gricult ural ac tiviti es of graduates. the Indians, in addition to the agency and school farmers now employed ; for necessary traveling expenses of such farmers and stockmen and for furnishing necessary equipment and supplies for them ; and for superintending and directing farming and Administering f or e st stock raising among Indians, $435,000 : P rovid ed, That this ap- landsfromtimbersales, propriation sh all be availa ble for the ex penses of adm inistration .to. of Indian forest lands from which timber is sold to the extent only that proceeds from the sales of timber from such lands rarest fire prevail- a tion. re insufficient for that purpose : Provided further, That not to excee d $100 ,000 o f the amoun t here in app ropri ated m ay be used Amo unt fo r soil, etc ., experiments, for the prevention of forest fires on Indian reservations : Provided further, That not to exceed $20,000 of the amount herein appro- p riated may b e used to c onduct exper iment s on I ndian school or agency farms t o test the po ssibili ties of soil and cli mate in the c ulti- vation of trees, cotton, grain, vegetables, and fruits, and for produc- Obtaining employ- ing and maintaining a supply of suitable plants or seed for issue to ment for Indians. Indians : Provided further, That not to exceed $10,000 of the amount herein appropriated may be used for obtaining remunerative employ- men t for Indians and when nec essary for pay ment of trans portation and other expenses to their place of employment, such expenditures ray limitations not a pplicable. t o be refunded when practicable : Provided also, That the amounts paid to matrons, foresters, farmers, physicians, nurses, and other hospital employees, and stockmen provided for in this Act shall not Vol. 37, p. 521. be included within the limitations on salaries and compensation of U. S. Code, p. 692. employees contained in the Act of August 24, 1912 (U . S . C ., p . 692, sec. 58). Timber sale, etc ., ex- pen ses For expenses incidental to the sale of timber, and for the expenses . V of administration of Indian forest lands from which such timber is Reimbursement. sold to the extent that the proceeds of such sales are sufficient for ol.41,a. 41.7zo. that purpose, $210,000, reimbursable to the United States as provided U Klamat . S. Ch Reserva- in the Act of February 14, 1920 (U. S. C., p. 720, sec. 413). tion, Greg. For continuation of forest insect control work on the Klamath o Forest insect control Indian Reservation in Oregon, $25,0 00, payable from funds on deposit in the Treasury to the credit of the Klamath Indians. pressing fires on reser- Emergencies for sup- To meet possible emergencies, not exceeding $50,000 of the appro- vations « priations made by this Act for timber operations in the Indian Service is hereby made available for the suppression of forest fires on Indian reservations, together with the unexpended balance of the appropriation made for this purpose for the fiscal year 1928 from the funds held by the United States in trust for the respective tribes of Indians interested : Provided, That any diversions of appropria- tions made hereunder shall be reported to Congress in the annual Budget. For transfer to the Geological Survey for expenditures to be made in inspecting mines and examining mineral deposits on Indian lands and in supervising mining operations on restricted, tribal, and allotted Indian lands leased under the provisions of the Acts of February 28, 1891 (26 Stat., p . 795), May 27, 1908 (35 Stat., p . 312), March 3, 1909 (U. S. C., p. 717, sec. 39 6), and other Acts authoriz- From tribal funds. Proviso. Repo rt to Congre ss. Geological Survey. Supervising mining operations oleased lands, etc ., by- Vol. . 26, p. 795; Vol. 35 pp. 312, 444, 783. ~U. S. Code, p. 717.

�


text: Talk:United States v. Widow and Heirs of West


text:
United States v. Widow and Heirs of West/Opinion of the Court

All of the documents upon which the defendants rely for a confirmation of their right to the land in dispute, are to be found on file in the archives among the expedientes of the first class. Concerning the genuineness of those which show that a grant for a league and a half was originally made to Marcus West, there can be no denial. They were admitted by the Attorney General to be genuine; but he resists the confirmation of that title, upon the ground that fraudulent attempts were subsequently made to enlarge the quantity intended to be granted, by erasures and interlineations.

West first petitioned for the land, without stating the quantity. In a few days afterwards, General Vallejo certified that the land asked for was vacant, and that it was not within twenty leagues of the boundary to California, nor within ten leagues of the sea shore. On the 30th of October, 1840, a report was made to the Governor, that the petitioner had the qualifications for receiving a grant, and that the land might be granted.

Jimeno was then acting as Governor ad interim. He declared West to be entitled to the land, to the extent of a league and a half, describing particularly its boundaries; and he made an entry of his executive action in the case, in what is termed Jimeno's Index.

We do not regard that catalogue of grants as authoritative proof of grants enumerated in it, or as a conclusive exclusion of grants not so registered, by Jimeno, which may be alleged to have been made whilst California was a part of the Mexican Republic, though they may bear date within the time to which that index relates. But in this case, it may be referred to as an auxiliary memorandum made by Jimeno himself of his action upon the petition of West.

West died before the claim was acted upon by the United States commissioners.

We have only to observe, that the fraudulent attempts to enlarge the grant were made after California had been ceded to the United States; and though the proof of it is undeniable, and was an attempt to defraud the United States, that cannot take away from the wife and children of West their claim to the grant, which was made to him before California had been transferred by treaty.

We affirm the decree of the court below, confirming the grant to West for a league and a half.


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1622

 SEVENTIETH C ON GR ES S. SESS. II. CH. 705 . 1929 . 1571 ing the leasing of such lands for mining purposes, $75,000, or so much thereof as inay be necessary. For the purpose of encouraging industry and self-support among inFnc our a gin selfaru m n-for the Indians and to aid them in the cultu re of fruits, grains, and port. other cr ops, $45 0,000, o r so muc h thereo f as may be neces sary, wh ich sum may be used for the purchase of seeds, animals, machinery, tools, implements, and other equipment necessary, and for advances to In- dians having irrigable allotments to assist them in the development and cultivation thereof, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Inte- rior, to enable Indians to become self-supporting : Pr ovid ed, That e visor. t. the expenditures for the purposes above set forth shall be under conditions to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior for repayment to the United States on or bef ore June 30, 1935, except land s. on irrigable in the case of loans on irrigable lands for permanent improvement of said lands, in which the period for repayment may run for not exceeding twenty years in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior : Provided further, That $125,000 shall be immediately Pima Indians, etc. available for expenditures for the benefit of the Pima Indians and not to exceed $25,000 of the amount herein appropriated shall be trbm tc.to any one expended on any other one reservation or for the benefit of any other one tribe of Indians : Provided further, That no part of this appro- herds o . of tri bal priation shall be used for the purchase of tribal herds : Provided Advances old, etc further, That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized, in allottees. his discretion and under such rules and regulations as he may pre- scribe, to make advances from this appropriation to old, disabled, or in digent I ndian al lottees, for the ir suppo rt, to r emain a charge a nd lien against their lands until paid. Industrial assistance : For the construction of homes for individual Industrial ass istance . Constructing homes, me mbers of the tri bes purchasing farm im- plements, tools, implements, building material, and other equip- lfunds , etc. ment and supplies ; and for advances to old, disabled, or indigent Indians for their support, payable from tribal funds on deposit in the Treasury, reimbursable, to be expended in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior and to enable Indians to become self-sup- porting, as follows : Colorado River, Arizona $25,000 ; Fort Apache, Tribes designated. Arizona, $50,000 ; Southern Ute, Colorado, 50,000 ; Ute Mountain, Colorado, $50,000 ; Fort Hall, Idaho, $50,000 ; Consolidated Chip- pewa, Minnesota, $50,000 ; Red Lake, Minnesota, $50,000 ; Flathead, Montana, $50,000 ; Fort Peck, Montana, $50,000 ; Pyramid Lake, Nevada, $19,V9 .60 ; Jicarilla, New Mexico, $50,000 ; Mescalero, New' Mexico, $25,000 ; Klamath, Oregon, $50,000 ; Warm Springs, Oregon, $25,000 ; Cheyenne River, South Dakota, $50,000 ; Pine Ridge, South Dakota, $50,000 ; Uintah, Utah, $50,000 ; Colville, Washing- ton, $25,000 ; Menominee, Wisconsin, $50,000 ; Shoshone, Wyoming, $50,000 ; in all, $869,479 .60, to be immediately available : Provide-7 s, Re payment. That the expenditures for the purposes above set forth sh all be under conditions to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior for repayment to the United States on or before June 30, 19 35, except in the case of loans on irrigable lands for permanent improve- lan f ds ioans of irrigablo ment of said lands, in which the period for repayment may run for not exceed ing twenty years in the discretion of th e Secretary of the Interior : Provided further, That all moneys reimbursed dur- Credited to moneys ing the fiscal year 1930 shall be credited to the respective appropria- reimbursed. tions and be available for the purposes of this paragraph, and the Be lkna p Inndan . Fo rt unexpended balance of the Menominee and the For t Bel kn ap far Une x pended balances appropriations, for the fiscal year 1929 shall remain available for Ante, p. 208 . the same purposes during the fiscal year 1930.
 * the purchase for sale to them of seed, animals,

�


text: Talk:United States v. Widow and Heirs of West/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1623

 1572 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SEss. IT. CH. 705. 1929. Water supply. DEVELOPMENT OF WATER SUPPLY ranges eteg bydevelg Developing water supply : For improving springs, drilling wells, op ing so ur ces o r, on and otherwise developing an d conserving w ater for Indi an use, in- reservations. eluding the purchase, construction, and installation of pumping ma- chinery, tanks, troughs, and other necessary equipment, and for neces- sary investiga tions and sur veys for the p urpose of inc reasing the available grazing range on unallotted lands on Indian reservations ; Distribution. not more than $27,500 for the Papago Indians in Arizona, not more than $5,000 for the Pueblo Indian lands in New Mexico, not more than $6,000 for the Hopi Indians in Arizona, and not more than $6,600 for dom estic water s upply for the Zuni Pueblo, New Mexico, in all, $45,100. Amount from tribal tunas. Developing water supply from tribal funds) : For improving springs, drilling wells, and otherwise developing and conserving water for Indian use, including the purchase, .construction, and installation of pumping machinery, tanks, troughs, and other neces- sary equipment, and for necessary investigations and surveys for the purpose of increasing the available grazing range on unallotted lands na Resservations desig- o n In dian res erva tion s : For the Mesc aiero Reserva tion, New Mex ico, $10,000 ; for the Consolidated Ute Reservation, Colorado, $3,000 ; for the Navajos on the Navajo Reservations in Arizona and New Mexico, $75,000 ; in all, $88,000, to be paid from funds held in trust for said tribes of Indians, respectively, by the United States . Ir rigat ion a nd dr ain- IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE age. Construction, main- For the construction, repair, and maintenance of irrigation systems, tems ate., or sys- tems of, on reser vatio ns. and for purchase or rental of irrigation tools and appliances, water or rights, ditches, and lands necessary for irrigation purposes for Indian reservations and allotments ; for operation of irrigation systems or appurtenances thereto when no other funds are applicable or available for the purpose ; for drainage and protection of irrigable lands from damage by floods or loss of water rights, upon the Indian irrigation projects named below, in not to exceed the following amounts, respectively Allotments to dis- Irrigation district one : Colville Reservation, Washington, $5,000 ; tricts. Irrigation district two : Walker River Reservation, Nevada, $6,000 ; Western Shoshone Reservation, Idaho and Nevada, $ , 00 ; Shiv wits, Utah, $2,800 ; Irrigation district four : Ak Chin Reservation, A izona, $4,000 ; Chili Chui pumping plants, Arizona, $8,000 ; Coachella Valley pump- ing plants, California, $2,000 ; Morongo Reservation, California, $3 ,500 ; Pala and Rincon Reservations, California, $2,000 ; mis ce l- laneous projects, $4,000 ; Irrigation district five : New Mexico Pueblos, $14,000 ; Zuni Res- ervation, New Mexico, $10,000 ; Navajo an d Hopi, misc ellane ous proje cts, Arizona and New Mexico, $10,000 ; Sou the rn Ute Re ser va - tion, Colorado, $10,000 ; Administration. For necessary miscellaneous expenses incident to the general admin- Supervising engi- ist ration of Ind ian irr igatio n proje cts, in cludin g salar ies of one ch ief vee rs, etc. irr igatio n engin eer, on e assi stant c hief ir rigati on engi neer, o ne sup er- intendent of irrigation competent to pass upon water rights, not to exceed five supervising engineers, one field cost accountant, one Travel, etc., expen- assistant cost accountant and for traveling and incidental expenses ses. of officials and employees of the Indian irrigation service, $85,000 ; Cooperative stream gauging. For cooperative stream gauging with the United States Geological Survey, $850 ;

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1624

 SEVENTIETH CONGRESS. SESS. II. Cx. 705. 1929 . In all, for irrigation on Indian reservations, not to exceed $160,000, together with the unexpended balance of the appropriation for this purpose f or the fiscal year 1929, wh ich is hereby reappropriate d, reimbursable as provided in the Act of August 1, 1914 (U .S.C., p . 716, sec . 385) : Provided, That no part of this appropriation shall be expended on any irrigation system or reclamation project for which public funds are or may be otherwise available ; Provided further, That the foregoing amounts appropriated for such purposes shall be available interchangeably, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, for the necessary expenditures for damages by floods and other unf oreseen exigen cies, but the amount so in terchanged sha ll not exceed in the aggregate 10 per centum of all the amounts so appropriated : Provided further, That the costs of irrigation projects and of operating and maintaining such projects where reimburse- ment thereof is required by law shall be apportioned on a per acre basis against the lands under the respective projects and shall be collected by the Secretary of the Interior as required by such law, and any unpaid charges outstanding against such lands shall con- stitute a first lien thereon which shall be recited in any patent or instrument issued for such lands. For operation and maintenance of the pumping plants and irri- gation syste m for the irr igation of th e lands of the Pima Indians in the vicinity of Sacaton, on the Gila River Indian ReservatioiY, Arizona, $5, 000, reimburs able as provi ded in section 2 of the Act of August 24, 1912 (37 Stat ., p . 522). For all purposes necessary to provide an adequate distributing, pumping, and drainage system for the San Carlos project, author- ized by the Act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat ., p . 475), and to continue construction of and to ma intain and op erate works of that project and of the Florence-Casa Grande project ; and to maintain, operate, and extend works to deliver water to lands in the Gila River Indian Reservation which may be included in the San Carlos project, including not more than $5,000 for crop and improvement damages and not more than $5,000 for purchases of rights of way, $500,000, reimbursable as required by said Act o f June 7, 1924, as amended, and subject to the conditions and provisions imposed by said Act as amended. For improvement, operation, and maintenance of the pumping plants and jr4gation system on the Colorado River Indian Reserva- tion, Arizona, as provided in the Act of April 4, 1910 (36 Stat ., p . 273), $18,000, reimbursable as provided in the aforesaid Act. For operation and maintenance of the Ganado irrigation project, Arizona, reimbursable under such rules and regulations as the Sec- retary of the Interior may prescribe, $3,000. For operation and maintenance of the irrigation project on the San Xavier Indian Reservation, Arizona, $2,000, reimbursable out of any funds of the Indians of this reservation now or hereafter available. For the operation and maintenance of pumping plants for the irrig ation of lan ds on the S an Car los Re serva tion i n Ariz ona, $7,000, to be paid from the funds held by the United States in trust for the Indians of such reservation : Provided, That the sum so used shall be reimbursed to the tribe by the Indians benefited, under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe : Provided, That the funds made available by the Act of March 7, 1928 (45 Stat ., p . 211), for the construction of a transmis- sion line, including substation, from the Coolidge Dam to lands Funds available f4= available for irrigation by pumping on the San Carlos Reservation pumping plants . shall be available also for the purpose of drilling wells and the installation of pumping plants including the purchase of necessary Reimbursements. Une xpen ded balan ce reappropr iated. Ante, p.210. Vol. 38, p. 582. U.S. Code, p.716. Provisos. Use restr icted. Flood damages ex- penses interchangeable. Limitation. Ap por ti onm ent of costs on per acre basis . Unp aid charges a first lie n on property. Gila River Reserva- tion. Irrigating Pima In- dian lands on. Vol. 37, p. 522. San Carlos project, Ariz. Operation, etc. Vol.43,p.475. Delivery of water to lands on Gila River Res ervat ion . Ante, p. 210. Colorado River Re s- ervation, Ariz. Extending irrigation system on. Vol. 36, p. 273. Ganado project, Ariz. Operating. San Xavier Reserva- tion, Ariz. Operatin g pumping pla nts. San Caries Reserva- tion, Ariz. Irrigating tribal lands on. Provisos. Reimbursement. Transmission. line. Ante, p. 211. 1573

�