but that the proof did not show what part of the value of the lands the Quinaielt Tribe was entitled to recover. Subsequently by the Act of July 24, 1947 (61 Stat. 416), amending the Jurisdictional Act of February 12, 1925 (43 Stat. 886), the Quinaielt Tribe was declared the proper party plaintiff for the purpose of prosecuting the suit to final con- clusion. The only question now before the court is the valuation of the lands in question at the time of taking. The claim in suit grows out of the erroneous survey of the northern boundary of the Quinaielt Reservation in 1892, by which 15,928.27 acres were excluded from the Reservation. Qui- naielt Tribe of Indians, 220.
II. Upon the evidence and the report of the commissioner of the court, it is held that the lands in suit, con- sisting of 15,928.87 acres, were taken on various dates between 1892 and March 1, 1898, and that the valuation of the lands at the time of taking was $25,000. Id.
III. The lands in suit, at the time of taking, were inac- cessible, having no wagon roads, no railroads, and no water transportation. The sole value of the land was the value of the timber but the area was so rough and inaccessible that logging operations were extremely difficult and were not commercially profitable, since there was no way to get the timber to market. Id.
IV. On the amount, $25,000, found to be the valuation of the land at the time of taking, plaintiffs, as a part. of just compensation, are entitled to interest at 5 percent from June 4, 1897, to December 31, 1934. and at 4 percent from December 31, 1934, to date of judgment, January 9, 1951, amounting to $62,988.68, making a total amount of $87,988.68 which plain- tiffs are entitled to recover. Id.
V. Interest begins to run from June 4, 1897, which is the date the remaining lands in the reservation were
withdrawn from public entry; prior thereto only a few acres had been definitely appropriated by defendant. Id.
VI. Under the terms of the Jurisdictional Act (43 Stat. 886), providing that the court shall consider and determine any legal or equitable defenses, set-offs or counterclaims, including gratuities, which the United States may have against any of the plain- tiff bands or tribes; it is held upon the report of the General Accounting Office that the United States is entitled to offset $87,995.62, representing amounts, listed in the findings, spent by the United States for the benefit of the plaintiff tribes and bands under other than treaty obligations. Id.
VII. The offsets exceeding the amount which the plaintiff is entitled to recover, the petition is dismissed. Id.
VIII. Where valuable timber on the reservation of plaintiff tribe, blown down and damaged by cyclone July 1905, was not logged as it might have been, while other standing timber was cut and sold under the authority of the Act of June 12, 1890 (26 Stat. 146); and where after the enactment of a bill specifically providing for the cutting and sale of the blown down timber (Act of June 28, 1906; 34 Stat. 547), no action was taken by the Interior Department to salvage the timber, which was left to deteriorate; and where, thereafter the timber was cut and sold under contracts with private contractors, approved by the Department; it is held that in its manage- ment of plaintiff tribe's blown down timber the Government was negligent, and that as a result of that negligence the plaintiff tribe suffered sub- stantial losses, and under the terms of the Special Jurisdictional Act is entitled to recover the amount of $896,208.76, which consists of $341,436.73 of principal and $560,743.57 of interest, less offsets of $5,971.52, together with interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum on $341,436.73 from January 10, 1951, until the net amount of this judgment
shall be placed in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the Menominee Indians. Judgment entered accordingly. (See 101 C. Cls. 22.) Menom- inee Tribe of Indians, 290.
IX. Under the Jurisdictional Act, which is the law of this case, once the issue of maladministration has been decided for the plaintiff all that remained to be decided, under Rule 39 (a), was the accounting, the ascertainment of the net losses. The fact that in some particulars the business was handled particularly well or particularly badly would have its effect in a final showing of a smaller or greater aggregate loss than would have resulted if it had been handled otherwise, but it would not affect the question of whether or not there was liability. The opinion of February 7, 1944 (101 C. Cls. 22), is reaffirmed. Id.
X. In undertaking the accounting to determine the amount of the net losses resulting from the project, it is held that the blown-down timber as it lay after the storm was capital, which according to customary and accepted principles of accounting, having been used up in the project, should be charged as a cost. The Indians acquired the land and timber by ex- change for a valuable consideration, and owned it. The blown-down timber was their capital. Id. Indians 17.
XI. The fact that the timber was blown down detracted heavily from its value but it was excellent timber. The court concluded that the blown-down timber, as it lay after the storm, had a capital or stumpage value of $2.50 per thousand board feet. Id.
XII. After proper adjustments for overscaling and other elements, the court concluded that the total timber lost or used up in the operation amounted to 38,859,720 feet, to which the stumpage value of $2.50 per thousand feet is applied, amounting to a capital charge of $97,149.30. Id.
INDIAN CLAIMS-Continued 5 XIII. Upon the evidence and the accounting the court concludes that the cost of the blow-down project in capital used up ($97,149.30) and money expended was a total of $693,603,87, less a return in products sold or used amounting to $352,167.14, leaving a net loss on the blown-down timber of $341,436.73. Id.
XIV. The Jurisdictional Act provides for the award to the plaintiff of interest at the rate of 4 percent "from the respective dates of said losses." The court concludes that the interest on the capital value of the timber should run from July 1, 1907; on operating losses other than the additional payments made to logging contractors some 10 years later, from June 15, 1908; and on the additional payments from the mean date of October 25, 1918. Id.
XV. In accordance with Section 2 of the Indian Claims Commission Act (60 Stat. 1049) the court con- cludes that "the date of the law, treaty or Executive Order under which the claim arose" in the instant case was the year 1905, the date of the blow-down, which is the date of the origin of the obligation of the Government, to be enforced by the court's judgment and that offsets under the statute should be allowed from that date. Id.
XVI. The Government has the burden of proving the pro- priety of the offsets which it asserts. In the deter- mination of offsets expenditures for agency and other administrative purposes are disallowed; expenditures for educational purposes, including pay of and to farmers and expenses of agricultural agents are disallowed; expenditures for pay and expenses of field matrons for health and educational purposes are disallowed; expenditures for agri- cultural demonstrations are disallowed as educa- tional. Items listed in the findings amounting to $5,971.52 are allowed.
XVII. On appeal from the decision of the Indian Claims Commission denying the plaintiffs' claim for a
balance of $600,000 asserted by claimants to be owing to the Loyal Band of Creek Indians by reason of an award which the United States Senate, acting as arbitrator, made to the Indians in the amount of $1,200,000 of which amount there has been paid $600,000, the decision of the Indian Claims Commission is reversed and the case is remanded to the Commission with directions to award to the plaintiffs the amount claimed, $600,000, without interest. Creek Indians, 373.
XVIII. Under the provisions of Section 26 of the Act of March 1, 1901 (31 Stat. 861), embodying an agreement between the United States and the Creek Nation that the United States Senate should act as arbi- trator to determine the award to be made to the members of the Creek Tribe, known as the "Loyal Creeks" for the suffering and losses sustained by them by reason of their adherence to the cause of the United States in the war with the Confederate States; it is held that the action of the Senate in 1903 in inserting in the then pending Indian appro- priation bill an amendment, stating that "there is hereby awarded as final determination thereof on the so-called loyal Creek claims", in accordance with the provisions of Section 26 of the 1901 Act, the sum of $1,200,000 constituted the final award under the 1901 Act. Id.
XIX. The refusal of the House of Representatives to concur in the Senate amendment, and the adoption by both Houses of a Conference Committee Report reducing the amount appropriated to $600,000 and providing that this sum should be accepted by the Indians in full payment and satisfaction of the claim and that payment thereof should be in full release of the Government did not destroy the right of the Indians to the full sum, $1,200,000, awarded by the Senate.
XX. It is the generally accepted doctrine that once an arbitrator has made his award the rights of the parties to that award are vested and cannot be destroyed by a later attempted modification. Id.
Arbitration and Award 82 (1).
« PreviousContinue » |