Show 41 1 I FIRST JUDICIAL CWT COMM I 1 T 4 tf I 1 SALV SALT LARK QT cn i A reb feb 10 1851 I 1 r mn MB kimt bear dear sir ravi bad before me at the preset raut sess of the court a few cases caas which I 1 thin think ot ought to be reported I 1 therefore alty I 1 re request quest yu you to publish the report pathe same which 1 I herewith send 3 I 1 very respectfully ular 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 your obedient servant I 1 Z SNOW to the hoc wi alad k I 1 I 1 11 ali I 1 THE STATES court couk YS vs I 1 pedro zeon vt et al 5 sinforia information acim there were eight eases cases of debt ra and 0 ohe ne m i aaion all of chichi depended on the same state i therefore fhe afore report the facts as ap appeared feared from thebes the i testimony in all the casesi case and the result of tb the e same in ope one case of debt a verdict was vvs found mr for ahe the united Stafe staler bm but for defects in the declaration I 1 arrested the flie judgment I 1 I 1 in another case a verdict was found against the united states I 1 I 1 I 1 rh the other cases the dis district trie t attorney entered a I 1 tolle nolle I 1 in the information the facts wre were submitted to 41 me e without the jhb intervention or of a enny I 1 found them a against the claimants zia and condemned the properly motion was then made to open this judgment and grant a hearing rehearing re there beffi being a part pail of odthe the facts abbul which I 1 antei entertained taffies doubts doubli ti I 1 opened the case and re refer ferriA reel the facts to toa a jury which resulted in in a erdlee erd let against the united states tae material facts fact sare are these in september last twenty ei beigh glit spaniards arAs left new mexico on arrad ing expedition with the utah indians in their various localities ilkew mexico mex ico and utah twenty one of the twenty eight inta interested ested in the expedition tion the resi residues duewer were servants amone this company were merethe we rethe the spaniards against ast whom these thele suits were brought beford they 1 left e ft pedr pedra laon obtained a likens from of new hiyi mj co to trade bri wis his own utah in indians I 1 in all their various localities A another bor member of he file company also hf had ld a license given th to wank lank persons by the governor of new mexico the residue were wifton i li cerise they proceeded on their route until they arrived hear the e rio danile ra nile where they elchan exchanged ged with the indians some ho horse with these horsey and mul g be being ing something J r more than on one e hundred 1 they proceeded to green rivet river in this territory sent some five or six of they their leading men to ta this ibis city to see governor young and exhibit to td him their license and andy as the witness said if that was not allgood dod hein beke ther therk to ke get t from him another license governor young not being at home but gone south they i proceeded after afler and found him november ad at sin san pete valley here heie they exhibited to tho governor governor their lice license fise and in farmed lim h m they abey wi nihed bed to sell their horses and moles to tf the utah ih diano land and bv bev indian chi children laren ib fo be takes taken to new mexico mexica gov thery then that the license did not authorize irae ir ae wal thin the indiana in utah they then soi sought I 1 one from him but lie he refused tor give it tor for the reason that they trev wanted to buy indian children for slaves the then demised remised lise d him aim they would not trade with the indians Elon E ut go immediately home twenty of the ni I 1 with about three fourths of the horses and mlle left pursuant at to this premise and have not been heard from since tile the eight who behind alethe men who are pal parties ties to these proceedings I 1 their trouble arose in in this manner according to the testimony bily of two servants among tham m some 0 of f them came to this city to sto buy provi provisions sons for the homeward route awhile while others took charge of the horses borses when at san pete before they 11 ifft ft tile the li in deans being md because they trade t rde w jtb lib them stale stol some esome five or six of their horm hov sebut but tale these w they iet let go without searching se archin for them those nose who came here for provision left this city for santa fe fc about the flie at november ber and went to the spanish r fork sixty miles from this city where aher e they had ax x horses stolen by bv the ln indiana andian dian they then nadean effort to re regain min these but could no find the tham m though th they found the tribe of indians indian which ato stole le I 1 them in their efforts to find these horses they triv I 1 aled to the severe rei and lake then to the canth anth spanish fork forfa parin during abis route they obtained for stolen horses one squaw and three indian calil 3 I 1 atthe at the south spanish fork which is south in the ibe awley at sark R ae oilier gihei indian I 1 child en k were obtained for horses but bia whether this ibis w wis was is a forced forcad trade ot or ia a species of bf spanish aud indian deal did not appear the spanish witness said the spaniards ref refused tved to trade with the indians I 1 but that they came with the children caught the horses and threw down the children sa saying ngoh they V would have the horses whether the spaniards took ahe children or not L the night this look place was about the fifth or sixth of december and bein the first that wai wa heard from the spaniards aft after er they left this thil city some indians went to the city of ef Manti and informed ah the whites in relation to this trad trading inz i I 1 A warrant was by bv a justice of the I 1 of which the 4 we were e arrest id edana band the horses mules squaw and nud seven indian children we were found with them A court of inquiry by the th eustice justice of the peace was then held in mant but the result of which I 1 dj not inquire into al Mant mantione fone horse was given to 0 and another indi indian afi child baleen aken this was dorie done by we the JP pur an alleged agreement to that effect 1 t I 1 while those these going on at manti ames was sent to governor youn at this city informing forem i g him of the affair he dispatched en B 11 rase sub agent to abat to inq inquire aire into matterand the crause the ibe laws to be observed aase anti inti do affidavit before the clerk of these facts and nd obtained a warrant arrant vv the I 1 III marshal to 0 arro arrest the ei eight spaniards ani ards na bog them also 0 to sei seiz e ethe p property found n their posses possession gion the 8 squaw u I 1 and the e e eight indian c children a tam them before e anis i court in obedience to this warrant tb the marshal in company a y W with ith stephen B rose went and arrested the ign spaniards seized ten mules and six horses the squaw and the eight indian children and brought theato them to ans city 1 I 1 tb e spaniards then sent a petition to me stati stating fig that them were in the custody of the marshal on a charge aate of violating the laws of the states and praying tor for a speedy beedy trial I 1 then called a special session of court for their benefit to commence one week only earlier than ihan fhe fee general term the rhe marshal pursuant to an order onier made at the call af ane special session returned the warrant duly endorsed te that a t he had arrested the S spaniards d sa seized the horses horse and mules and indian children and had them in his custody the warrants warrant on examination did not describe the property to be seized but commanded the marshal to seize sei ze the property in the hie spaniards spaniard sl possession S I 1 r F I 1 11 1 the district attorney then filed declarations in debt cidh t a against a ast each of them and pleas were filed in the information was vas also filed and them the court made an order fixing the time of trial tor for the information and directing notice to be given of its pursuant to the eighty ninth section of the act of congress bonges for the collection of the rev revenue P of the united SItt states ites the information alleged the to have been made in the indian country in the te tc rilo y of utah so that if they violated the law in new mexico it was not legally in hl issue jt claimed a forfeiture of the horses and mules and indians as slaves I 1 there was also evidence which showed that for a lo 10 long bg series of years tears the indians in thisie lea valiree 41 es have been in the practice of selling their children 16 spanish traders and stealing and selling children belonging to other tribes to this information the spaniards denied the vi violation 0 of thelah the law and claimed their horses and mules but abandoned au claim to the indian bb children ildren za ana oqual joshua slayton a an attorney attorn eV of thais t Ws court jn on behalf of the indians fa filed i a jaim claim for th theia air relea release the jury ware were instructed instruct eil that if the they y found the claimant without a license the we horses and mule sinto into the usual hunting of the andl indians in t this territory with an intent to fo tr trade ade with t indians their verdict should be foi the united 1 I I 1 states but if they found that the spaniards introduced the horses wid and mules mule into ginto the usual aa ar ranges of the indians i u this terra tory w A an ken intent t I 1 to come here ket get a license 1 cense from the indian abens s here and then and not till fall the i to trade with giai the indians it was not wl thin the act of Coh gess I 1 that if they found that the alle alleged cred wb 1 the indians at the south spanish fo fori k WAS vas fo ced up 1 on the spaniards span ards by the indians this w ild not I 1 re e such a trading as to brin bring it within the act of congress gr q jut b U t if it ww was only a device to wade evade tha law it adli be within ivi the thaw ku I 1 11 I 1 the bases cases atre c andua QI by FM mr 43 ww lair on tile the pal t of ahe UJ mr 81 Slay tall rn eject oje of the indian india MR and mr mi esth ath mr picket swa e I 1 mr r i A on the rrt of the po I 1 mr picket mr I 1 ir smith and mr S Slay I 1 tori ui behalf b of 11 the ie claimants contended I 1 t that thai the ae coultas cour tas not i in n flits AM matter for the fhe i aason haf it has not nol the lel cu custody A ly of the good the same being roi saed ed b byice ma marshal al ou on a writ issued on f fhe ea common mr law side of the aho ic ourt court and not net by virtue virtu of a monition ddn in a am f ralty or exchequer 1 ad that this court has not jurisdiction of I 1 thi the matter for the reason that informs information tion shows the seizure to have been made madean an in the second conid ee j judicial district of the territory of utah Uta band and this court is sitting ti I 1 n in in id ad that by the Til treaty biati of bf guadalope hidalgo the united states obtained this territory Terri territory tor y aase discharged lia ed a of A he the right of occupancy by the indians andlor this s reason breason the territory of utah is not indian coun country within the meaning of the laws of the united states regulating trade wah the indian tribes ath that the settlements in being made alade when Ws this was wa mexican domain and when there was as no law lavi of 1 the he united states in force here the they ind toast 8 t as against the united states he be considered consider eJ leg legal 11 so far atlease at least aswill as will be necessary to pit protect ciet the cit citizens zens from the penal consequences of 91 settling on indian soil ot or trading grading with them in this ten story 1 I I 1 ath that by the att act creating tae y of utah congress in effect recognized the lb legality 4 0 f the white settlements within its entire limits and established the he boundaries of the territory Terri territory tor y as the boundaries ries of the white settlements or country to be under the territorial government I 1 ath M th that the indian country within the meaning odthe of the laws of the united st states a f es regu regulating alti a n trade W with i the indian tribes tubes is and must of feces necessity siv beinder beim be under der the sole and jurisdiction of the united states and add be separate from the country under the jurisdiction jiris ju is didion diction of a state or territory that congress by ci eating the abe territory and giving juri jurisdiction over it to the people here bave beven in essco destroyed destroy ed their exclusive jurisdiction 0 ver over what mi might otherwise be said to be indian country and therefore etore the law creating this supposed forfeiture fo texture ough tuot to be belfeld held tio tobe be applicable bleto to this territory teri atory ath that this territory must be held to be entirely indian country or entirely under the control of the territorial Terr itoi ial government or partly indian an aad 4 partly under the control of the territory that a as bip Sop gress re first created the territory and gave it a legal existence as a branch of the united states and afterwards w ar ds extended extend e d the indian india a I 1 laws avs a vs over it without dafin defining in the boundaries of the indian coup country try and be 1 ilie ili e residue andas and as he laws vs regulating trade with the indians in the indian country countr y are local in in their application the laws regulating trade with the indian ind i an tribes unless they can be tie so construed as to harmonize with the laws which are general in m their ir application must be held to be subordinate to givs b ws ft that inthis ip this case the law aw creating 11 the territory recognized i tile the legality 0 of f these settlements and tile the low law I 1 extending the indian regulations oyer over the territory yin in effe effect ct rendered al 41 settlements here ille gul and trading with mith an indian in a white settlement bvm to selling him a few pounds of flouri flour also illegal to do this subjects the white w lite man to a forfeiture bf f h chiq is goods and a penalty of five hundred dollar a result which cannot be presumed to be inthe in the mind of congress these laws ought therefore etore to be construed st so as to protect not destroy the citizens ath the law creating g r this penalty and forfeiture is a penal enactment it should receive a strict construction st tion every act in iii relation to it if which can reasonably be in favor of should be held not to be within its provisions I 1 in ili this case the testimony shows that these spacia spaniards is came from fi om new mexico to this territory ath some goods horses mules ac through the their oha object act was to come a license to ti trad adb with the indians and then but bitt rift till then trade vilh the indians surely it must he be lawful to ti tiava avel from nw mexico here to obtain a license to trade with the indians I 1 1 I 1 11 ali horses ho sei and mules amies ap not merchandise merchandize dize with n u fhe meaning me anina I 1 of the act of congress mr slayton contended on behalf Cof of the indians 1st ast bial slavery being against human liberty y can not e ex x st liv by implication but it must have the authority of law to sustain it that this law must he deai clear and explicit if must be suph such as shows clearly its ex ad that flip there re was no law in the united St states aties alt n indian slavery nor noi tha teven justified justified it ad enat there is no law law of the Tein tory of utah th that t auth authorizes indian slavery and that for foi these reau reasons sons cons the indian india children ought to ble be adjudged ed to be f diee ce I 1 ai aih h the fact that thai the utah indians indian had bad fo tor some years ears past been in the habit babit of selling elling their chi children ii dren to the aitz Ds of did not change the case nor es tElish indian slave y that indians not being being the subject of property p could |