United States v. Wildcat

Citations

• 244 U.S. 111
• 37 S. Ct. 561
• 61 L. Ed. 1024
• 1917 U.S. LEXIS 1617

Syllabus

<p>Acting under the enrollment provisions of the Curtis Act of June 28, 1898, and the Creek Agreement of March 1, 1901, the Dawes Commission was a quasi judicial tribunal, and enrollments made by it and approved by the Secretary of the Interior are presumptively correct; and, unless impeached by very clear evidence of fraud, mistake or arbitrary action, they are conclusive.</p> <p>Whether or not a person alleged to be a member of the Creek Nation was living on April 1, 1899, is one of the questions going to the right of such person or his heirs to have his name enrolled under § 28 of Agreement of March 1, 1901, which the Dawes Commission was' competent to decide; it is not a jurisdictional question, and an incorrect determination of it does not necessarily render the enrollment void. Scott v. McNeal, 154 U. S. 34, distinguished.</p> <p>In enroiling members of the Creek Tribe in 1901, the Dawes Commission was authorized' to presume that a person enrolled as a member of the tribe on the tribal rolls of 1895 was living on April 1, 1899, in the absence of proof of his death before that day or of circumstances indicating that he had died before the commission acted.</p> <p>The evidence in the case examined and found wanting in proof of such arbitrary action 'on the part of the Dawes Commission as would establish a mistake of law or fact warranting the impeachment of its action in enrolling the Indian in whose name, the allotment in .question was made and patented.</p> <p>An attempt of the Secretary of the Interior to set aside the enrollment and allotment of a deceased Creek Indian by striking his name from the rolls without notice to his heirs is ultra vires and void.</p> <p>When a Creek citizen dies after April 1,1899, and an allotment is after-wards made, and deeds issued, in his name, the title is vested in his heirs by § 28 of. the Agreement of March 1, 1901. Skelton v. Dill, . 235 U. S. 206-208.</p> <p>Under the Creek Agreement of March 1, 1901, § 3, it was permiss