[1] THE DECISIONS OF THE Supreme Court of the United States AT OCTOBER TERM, 1899. *RAY W. JONES, Appt., บ. PATRICK MEEHAN and James Meehan. (See S. C. Reporter's ed. 1-32.) Buit to quiet title-lands derived from Indian chief-effect of treaty as grant. 1. A good title to parts of the lands of an Indian tribe may be granted to individuals by a treaty between the United States and the tribe, without any act of Congress or any patent from the executive authority of the United States, if such is the intention of the treaty. 2. A treaty with Indians must be construed, not according to the technical meaning of its words to learned lawyers, but in the sense in which they would naturally be understood by the Indians. 5. 6. 7. 8. A reservation of lands "set apart" by the treaty of October 2, 1863, art. 9, between the United States and the Chippewa Indians, made "upon the urgent request of the Indians," for their chief, constituted a present grant to the chief of an alienable title in fee, subject only to the selection of the land in due form and to the definition of its boundaries by survey and patent. An amendment of the pleadings may be al lowed, even on appeal, if Justice appears to require it. The right of inheritance in land of a member of an Indian tribe whose tribal organization is still recognized by the government is controlled by the laws, usages, and customs of the tribe, and not by the law of the state in which the land is situated, nor by any ac tion of the Secretary of the Interior. An atidavit by an Indian, signed by mark, in which he states that others besides himself are heirs of his father and entitled to share with him in the estate, is not conclusive against his right to be the sole heir, when the afidavit was procured from him by the Indian agent, under direction of the Secretary of the Interior, to show who were entitled to the distribution of certain rents, and was evidently considered by him when he made it as a mere matter of form, with which he was obliged to comply in order to get any part of the rent. 8. The omission of the words "any Indian" from the prohibition of purchases and leases "from any nation or tribe of Indians," as contained in the act of Congress of June 30, 1834, chap. 161, § 12, while the former statutes had extended the prohibition to purchases or leases from "any Indian," shows an intention of Congress to remove the general restriction upon the alienation by individual Indians of sections of land reserved to them respectively by a treaty with the United States. 4. A reservation to a chief or other member of a tribe of Indians, of a specified number of sections of land, whether already Identided or to be surveyed and located in the future, when made by the United States in a treaty with the tribe and as part of the consideration for a cession by the tribe of a tract of country to the United States, converts the reserved sections into individual property, and, Argued April 27, 28, 1898. Decided Octoif unaccompanied by words limiting its effect, Is equivalent to a present grant of a complete title in fee simple, which is allenable at the pleasure of the grantee, unless the United States, by provision of the treaty or of an act of Congress, has expressly or impliedly pro hibited or restricted its alienation. 175 U. S. U. S., Book 44. 4 9. The rights of lessees of the heir of an Indian to whom title to land was granted by an Indian treaty cannot be devested by any subsequent action of the lessor or of Congress or of the executive departments. [No. 7.] ber 30, 1899. APPEAL from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Dis trict of Minnesota in favor of the plaintiffs in a suit to quiet title to lands claimed un 49 |