| Show THE BANNOCK HUNTING ruling of the U S supreme court on its limits THE STATE HAS FULL POWER POWE R it can completely control th killing of game and na N 0 treaty with the indians can forestall or ke ite strict the right eight of the state to pass and enforce game laws the federal government clearly contemplated the tha extinguishment ot of tho the hunting rights bights of the indians wyoming must aust necessarily have all rights eights of states correspondence tribune cheyenne wyo ayo june i 4 gov RI illch 0 h cards arda today received recci ved the text of the recent decision ot of the united states court in the case ot of the bannock etc indian john racehorse charged with v violating totaling wyoming game laws the decision Is 13 ot of great interest in III wyoming I 1 ng colorado ut utah ill and montana where here the question of preserving wild name game from the depredations of reservation indians Is one of great importance the text ot or the decision la Is in part piul tho the sole question which the case which Is stated at length presents iq 14 whether the treaty made by the united states with the bannock indians gale them the right to exercise tile hunting privilege therein referred to within the limits of 0 the state ot of wyoming in ill violation of its laws if it gave such nuch right the mere fact that the state had created school districts district j or election districts and had provided for pasturage on the lands could not more ebli acael ous ly IY operate to destroy the right of 0 the indian to hunt on the lands than could the passage of 0 the game law it if on the other hand the terms of 0 the treaty did not refer to lands within a state which were subject to the legislative power of the state stale then it Is equally clear that although the lands were not I 1 in school end and election districts and were not near settlements the right conferred on the indians would be of on avail to justify a i lo Iol lallon atlon of the state law the power of a state to control and regulate the taking of game cannot be questioned the text of article 1 4 of the treaty relied on as giving the right to kill game in wyoming in violation of its laws Is as follows but they shall have the right to hunt on oil unoccupied lands of the united states so eo long as game may be found thereon and so long as peace subsists among the whit whites S and indians indiana on the borders of the hunting districts to prevent this privilege from becoming dangerous to the peace of the new settlements as they advanced the provision allowing the indian to avail himself of it only whilst peace reigned on the tha borders was waa inserted to suppose that the words of 0 the treaty intended to give to the indian the right to enter into att alt leady established states and seek out every portion ot of unoccupied bovein merit land and there exercise the right of hunting in Nio tol violation lation atlon of tho the municipal law would beto be to presume that the treaty was wa so ao drawn as to frustrate tho the very object it lew jew it would also render no necessary co gitary tile the assumption that congress whilst preparing tho the way by the treaty tor for new settlements and new states yet created a provision not only detrimental to their future well being but also irreconcilably IN CONFLICT with the powers of the st states ates already existing it Is undoubtedly true that the place in tile the state of Wy wyoming orning where the game lp in question nas mas killed was at tile time of 0 the treaty in 1803 amb emb 1 aced within the hunting districts therein referred to but this fact does docs not tile the implication that the authorized the continued enjoyment of 0 the right ot of killing game therein tho the territory ceased to be a part of the hunting districts and came within the and jurisdiction ot of a state the right to hunt given by the treaty clearly contemplated the alap 11 ellve va 0 the conditions condl tlona therein else cinch indeed it made the right cle depend on mil whether tether the land in the hunting districts was unoccupied land of the united states this as aa we hive said it tt ft the whole question subject entirely to the will of 0 tile the united states since it provided tit in effect that the light to hunt should cease tile tract inc anent nt the united states perfect parted with tile the title to its land in the hunting districts no restraint was imposed by the treaty on the power of oc the united states to sell although such sale under the settled policy of tile the government was a insult naturally to come from the advance of the white settlements in the hunting districts Is 13 manifest by the act of congress creating the yet low stone palk reser reservation Nation lor for it was subsequently cared caned out of 0 what constituted the hunting districts at the time of the adoption of the treaty and Is a clear indication of 0 the sense 0 ot f congress on the subject the construction st which would anic to the lan ian frage of the treaty any other meaning than that which we have above indicated would necessarily it imply that congress violated the faith of the government erni nent and defrauded tile the indians indiana by proceeding immediately to forbid hunting tit in a large portion of tile the where it Is now a there was a contract light to kill game created by the treaty in favor of like indians tile the argument now advanced in favor of the continued existence of tile hi right to hunt over the land mentioned in the treaty after it had become subject to state stale admits that the privilege would ceale by tile the mere fact that the united states slates disposed of its wt to any of the land laid although such disposition when made to an all individual would give him no authority over game trial and yet the pilvi pi lege continued when tho the united baates had called into being a sovereign state a necessary incident of whose authority was THE COMPLETE POWER to regulate the killing of game within its borders bordera this argument indicates at once the conflict between the right to hunt ut altum t loin the unoccupied lands within the sald eald hunting districts and the assertion of the potter poser to continue the exercise of the privilege in question in tile the state of wyoming in defiance of its laws lawa that it a treaty may a prior act of congress a and nil an act of congress supersede KUper supe cede reede a p prior bior treaty trealy Is elementary the act which admitted wyoming into the union as aa we have said ex cx pressly declared th that at tho the state should have nil all the tha powers ot of other states of I 1 the union and made no reservation whatever in favor of the indians indiana I 1 these provisions alono alone considered would be tit in conflict with tits treaty it if it was construed as to allow the indians I to seek out every unoccupied piece of Goern government ment land and thereon disregard the state law passed in the undoubted exercise of its municipal authority but tile the language of the act admitting wyoming into the union which recognized her coequal co equal rights wast was merely declarant declaratory arat cry of the general rule determining by the light ot of th so sc principles tile question whether tile the provision of 0 the tre treaty ity giving the right to hunt on unoccupied lands of tile the united states in the hunting districts Is repealed in so BO tar far as the harals in such districts are now note embraced with mit h tn in the limits of the state of 0 Wyom trag 1 n h homers ramos ulain that the repeal result from tile hie conflict between the treaty ft arid n d uh thu I 1 act admi admitting t ling tit a t stu t e into I 1 to t the h 0 anlon on the tw two 0 facts acts t the he pi privilege ivi leige conferred anti anil the act of 0 admission tio irreconcilable in the sense that hat the two under no hypothesis call 1111 be construed as an existing coexisting co the power of all the stale tita tott to regal bs late to the killing ot of same game within their borders will not be gain gainsaid said 0 since nce every piece of 0 land I to tile lie united states as ai a i a irl vate onor onnor 1 l so BO long as it IL continued d to be aroc coupled lund land would bo be in title from rom the auth wity rt art the mate mat wyoming then m hlll III have been urmit ell ed into the union not ia as an equal her but its as one shorn ot of a leei power cited in nil the other states of 0 tha union a power lesul resulting ting rini the fact ot of Ste statehood hood land and inci incident dint to its U plenary elii lence the silence of 0 tho the act wyoming into the union as to the res re eri illon allon of rights in favor of 0 the in allano allann la 19 riven given increased significance liy by the tact fact that 4 tit in creating the territory expressly reserved such rights etere the enabling act ot orly or ly contains no expression of 0 the intently Intent ln i of congress Co neresa to continue the hi bourdens in question in the state stale but boat ali n the contrary its intention not to do vo po la Is conveyed by the terms 0 of the act orl 0 for these reasons the of 0 the court below vaa mals irron ErrOn ooin ond and must therefore ther etore be rovers rever arl 1 and the cage to must 1 I 1 at ie be remanded to the court below wi with t ll 11 directions to the writ sit and remand the prisoner to the custody or of the sheriff Slier lir |
