Viewing page 31 of 41

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

We have now the opinions of Chief Justice Marshall – Chancellor Kent – Chief Justice Faury and Judge Dillon, that an Indian cannot invoke the Jurisdiction of federal courts because he is not a citizen and the subject of a civilized state. Judge Dillon decides that there is no law whereby an Indian can sue or be sued in a civil action in the federal Court.

Does not that petitioner in suing on the writ of habeas corpus institute a civil proceeding? No one will hardly argue otherwise.
Ex parte James Collins 6 Ohio State 58.

The conclusion of our whole argument then is that the Judicial power of the United States as defined in the Constitution does not extend to an Indian, that an Indian cannot claim the privilege of this high prerogative writ of habeas corpus: and therefore the Justice of the federal District Court has not Jurisdiction of this proceeding.

III

If the Justice of the District Court has Jurisdiction to warrant the discharge of complainants on Habeas Corpus?
First: –

A brief history of the policy of the government in its dealings with these Indians
[[margin]] 353 [[/margin]] is found in a statement prepared by the Interior Department to which I call your honor's attention