the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation's (Umatilla,
Cayuse, and Walla Walla) petition (four claims) brought before the ICC
of the Umatilla Indian Reservation v. United States of America - No.
(Umatilla) - August 9, 1951 (pp. 1-29 with Appendix A, Treaty with
the Walla Walla, Cayuse, Etc., 1855).
- Minor amendments were made to this petition on
two occasions. The following notes reflect the final amended petition
of March 25, 1958.
No. 1 (pp. 2-15).
- Claim No. 1 sought additional compensation
for the lands ceded to the United States by the Umatilla in
the Treaty of June 9, 1855. The Umatilla requested "...
$8,000,000, with interest from the date of the cession, deducting
therefrom the amount of money and the reasonable value of
other things and services given and paid by the United States
pursuant to the treaty" (pp. 13-14, par. 16).
- This claim is based upon the June 9, 1855
Treaty (1855 Treaty) made between the United States and the
Walla Walla, Cayuse and Umatilla Tribes of Indians. This treaty
was ratified by the Senate on March 8, 1859, and proclaimed
by the President of the United States on April 11, 1859 (p.
3, par. 4).
- The 1855 Treaty's ceded land boundaries
were noted (pp. 3-4, par. 5). A map based upon these boundaries
may be viewed in the Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau
of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian
Institution 1896 - '97, Part 2 (See p. 804, and Number 364
on Washington 1 Map; Royce Map).
- Claim No.
2 [pp. 15-22].
- Claim No. 2 sought compensation for the destruction
of the salmon and eel runs in the Umatilla River system. The
Umatilla requested a judgment of $3,000,000 (p. 21, par. 10).
- This claim was based upon the reserved right
to take fish from the Umatilla River system enumerated in
Article I of the 1855 Treaty (pp. 15-17, par. 2-5).
- Claim No.
3 (pg. 22-25).
- Claim No. 3 sought compensation for the wrongful
exclusion of approximately 85 square miles of land, due to
survey errors, from the Umatilla reservation. The Umatilla
requested a judgement of $2,000,000 (pp. 23-25, par. 3-5).
- This claim was based upon a specific tract
of land described in Article I of the 1855 Treaty that was
to be reserved for the Umatilla (p. 22, par. 2).
- Claim No.
4 (pp. 25-29).
- Claim No. 4 sought compensation for additional
lands in Oregon outside the lands ceded in the 1855 Treaty,
which were alleged to have been owned by Indian title and
to have been taken by the United States without payment (p.
26, amended par. 2). The Umatilla requested a judgement of
$4,800,000 (pp. 27-28, par. 5-6).
Treaty with the WallaWalla, Cayuse,
Articles of agreement and convention made and
concluded at the treatyground, Camp Stevens, in the Walla- Walla
Valley, this ninth day of June, in the year one thousand eight
hundred and fifty-five, by and between Isaac I. Stevens, governor
and superintendent of Indian affairs for the Territory of Washington,
and Joel Palmer, superintendent of Indian affairs for Oregon
Territory, on the part of the United States, and the undersigned
chiefs, headmen, and delegates of the Walla- Wallas, Cayuses,
and Umatilla tribes, and bands of Indians, occupying lands partly
in Washington and partly in Oregon Territories, and who, for
the purposes of this treaty, are to be regarded as one nation
acting for and in behalf of their respective bands and tribes,
they being duly authorized thereto; it being understood that
Superintendent I. Stevens assumes to treat with that portion
of the above-named bands and tribes residing within the Territory
of Washington, and Superintendent Palmer with those residing
1. The above-named confederated bands
of Indians cede to the United States all their right, title,
and claim to all and every part of the country claimed by them
included in the following boundaries, to wit: Commencing at
the mouth of the Tocannon River, in Washington Territory, running
thence up said river to its source; thence easterly along the
summit of the Blue Mountains, and on the southern boundaries
of the purchase made of the Nez Perce Indians, and easterly
along that boundary to the western limits of the country claimed
by the Shoshonees or Snake Indians; thence southerly along that
boundary (being the waters of Powder River) to the source of
Powder River, thence to the head-waters of Willow Creek, thence
down Willow Creek to the Columbia River, thence up the channel
of the Columbia River to the lower end of a large island below
the mouth of Umatilla River, thence northerly to a point on
the Yakama River, called Tomah-luke, thence to Le Lac, thence
to the White Banks on the Columbia below Priest's Rapids, thence
down the Columbia River to the junction of the Columbia and
Snake Rivers, thence up the Snake River to the place of beginning...
[Petition (Umatilla) - August 9, 1951 - Appendix A, Treaty with
the Walla Walla, Cayuse, Etc., 1855].
The original Umatilla petition was
designated as Docket No. 264. Pursuant to an order of the ICC,
dated January 15, 1959, the claim designated in the original
Umatilla petition as Claim No. 2 was separated from this petition
and became Docket No. 264A. Pursuant to an order on the same
date, the claim designated in the original petition as Claim
No. 3 was separated from the original petition and became Docket
264B. The claims in the original petition designated as Claim
No. 1 and Claim No. 4 now comprise Docket 264. All further
references are limited to Claims No. 1 and No. 4 of Docket
(United States) - March 27, 1952 (pp. 1-9).
- With regard to Claim No. 1, defendant
admitted the allegations described in the original petition's
paragraph 5 (a minor amendment was made to this paragraph). Paragraph
5 in the original and amended petition detail the boundaries of
the lands ceded by the Umatilla in the 1855 Treaty (p. 1, par.
- With regard to Claim No. 1, defendant
stated "[t]hat the consideration paid therefor as set forth
in said treaty [1855 Treaty] and agreed to by the chiefs, headmen,
and delegates of the Indian tribes and bands was fair and just
compensation for the right, title and interest of said Indians
in the lands ceded" (p. 7, par. 30).
- With regard to Claim No. 4, defendant
denied all allegations (p. 6, par. 26-27). Additionally,
[d]efendant further says that the land claimed to have been
owned by "Plaintiff members" was not exclusively and
continuously occupied by any one tribe, band, or group of Indians
from time immemorial to the time of the alleged taking thereof
but, on the contrary, was roamed over or temporarily inhabited
by various bands of Indians and not to the exclusive possession
of "Plaintiff's members" (pp. 6-7, par. 28).
- ICC Findings
of Fact, 8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513 - June 10,
- With regard to Claim No. 1, the ICC
found that the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Cayuse tribes exclusively
used, occupied and had Indian title to the following tracts of
- These land boundaries were described for
the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Cayuse tribes (See Indian
Land Areas Judicially Established 1978 Map - Walla Walla #96,
Cayuse # 95, and Umatilla #97). Except for the Walla Walla
tribe's land area, the boundaries conformed to the 1855 Treaty
[8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513, 537]. The discrepancy between the ceded
lands memorialized in the 1855 Treaty (See also Number
364 on Washington 1; Royce Map) and this finding for the Walla
Walla tribe's aboriginal lands appears to have been described
as "... thence down the Snake River to its mouth; thence
southwesterly in a straight line, to the present town of Horse
Haven, Washington; thence southeasterly in a straight line
to the place of beginning" (8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513, 537-538).
- The 1855 Treaty language excluded from the
ICC's aboriginal boundary findings was "... thence up
the channel of the Columbia River to the lower end of a larger
island below the mouth of the Umatilla River, thence northerly
to a point on the Yakama River, called To-mah-luke, thence
down the Columbia River to the junction of the Columbia and
Snake Rivers..." (1855 Treaty - Appendix A of 1951 Petition).
- With regard to Claim No. 4, evidence for aboriginal
usage was found to be insufficient or non-exclusive for the additional
lands in Oregon the Umatilla claimed were taken without compensation
(8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513, 529-534).
- ICC Opinion of
the Commission, 8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513 - June
- The ICC found that at the time of the 1855 Treaty,
the Walla Walla, Cayuse, and Umatilla tribes held Indian title
only to the lands described at paragraph 20 of ICC Findings of
Fact, 8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513, 537-538 (1960) (8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513,
Motion for Rehearing and Amendment of Findings
- December 16, 1960.
Order, Findings and Opinion, 14 Ind. Cl.
Comm. 14 - September 28, 1964.
- The ICC vacated the 1960 decision and
entered new findings of fact, opinion and an interlocutory order.
Ultimately, the ICC determined that the area of land running along
the southern bank of the Columbia River up to the Yakama River,
which encompasses the Kennewick remains' recovery site, was not
exclusively used by any one Indian tribe.
- In Finding 41, the ICC delineated the Umatilla,
Walla Walla, and Cayuse tribes' land areas that were transferred
upon ratification of the 1855 Treaty on March 8, 1859. The delineation
of the Walla Walla tribe's original title at this transfer addresses
the area of land running along the southern bank of the Columbia
River up to the Yakama River, which encompasses the Kennewick
remains' recovery site. According to Finding 41, the Walla Walla's
held original title to
A tract of land located in the States of Oregon and Washington
and described as follows, to wit: Commencing on the Columbia
River at the mouth of Juniper Canyon and running thence up said
Canyon and its south fork to the source thereof; thence northeast
to the Walla Walla River opposite the mouth of Touchet River;
thence up Touchet River to the mouth of Winnett Canyon near
Lamar, Washington; thence northwest to a point on Snake River
which is twenty-five miles above its mouth; thence down Snake
River to its mouth and southwest across Columbia River and along
a straight line drawn from the mouth of Snake River to a point
which is north of the town of Umatilla, Oregon, and ten miles
north of the north bank of the Columbia River; thence southeast
to the Columbia River opposite the mouth of Juniper Canyon and
thence across the Columbia River to the place of beginning (14
Ind. Cl. Comm. 14, 102).
- Finding 41 is inconsistent with the 1855 Treaty
language, excluding "... thence up the channel of the Columbia
River to the lower end of a larger island below the mouth of the
Umatilla River, thence northerly to a point on the Yakama River,
called To-mah-luke, thence down the Columbia River to the junction
of the Columbia and Snake Rivers..." (1855 Treaty - Appendix
A of 1951 Petition). Instead, the finding for the Walla Walla
tribe's aboriginal lands was described as "... thence down
the Snake River to its mouth; thence southwesterly in a straight
line, to the present town of Horse Haven, Washington; thence southeasterly
in a straight line to the place of beginning" (14 Ind. Cl.
Comm. 14, 102).
See also, Infra ICC
Findings of Fact, 8 Ind. Cl. Comm. 513 - June 10, 1960,
at pg 3.
- In Finding 42, the ICC stated that,
With respect to the remainder of the overall areas claimed by
petitioner and not included in Finding 41 (14 Ind. Cl. Comm.
14, 101-102), the Commission finds that the evidence is insufficient
to establish exclusive use and possession for a long time, or
from time immemorial, in any of the three tribes comprising
the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation [the
Umatilla, Cayuse, and Walla Walla] at the critical times in
this proceeding. There is substantial evidence to the contrary
that the three Umatilla tribes, the Wayampam bands, the Nez
Perce tribe, the Snake Indians, sometimes referred to as the
Northern Paiutes an identifiable group of Indians
or the Shoshonean peoples, and other miscellaneous Indians have
traveled, gathered, and hunted over said tribes and bands (14
Ind. Cl. Comm. 14, 102-103).
Therefore, the ICC found that no aboriginal title
could be determined for the area in question under any single tribe
(14 Ind. Cl. Comm. 14, 103).
- Appeal Docket
1-65, brought by petitioner before the United
States Court of Claim - December 28, 1965.
- Findings of Fact
in Compromise Settlement, 16 Ind. Cl. Comm.
484 - February 11, 1966
- Based upon stipulation, Docket 264 (Claims No.
1 and No. 4), Docket 264A (Claim No. 2) and Docket 264B (Claim
No. 3) were consolidated. This stipulation provided for "final
judgement against defendant and in favor of petitioner in
the net amount of $2,450,000" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484, 486).
- "This stipulation and entry of Final
Judgment shall finally dispose of all claims or demands
which the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
have asserted or could have asserted against said defendant
under the provisions of Section 2 of the Indian Claims Commission
Act (60 Stat. 1049)" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484, 487).
- "This stipulation, dismissal of the appeal
and entry of the Final Judgment shall not be construed as an admission
of either party as to any issue for purposes of precedent in any
other case or otherwise" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484, 487).
The Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. §§3001-3013 (1990), seems to
modify this stipulation with regard to determining the ownership
of Native American human remains and cultural items excavated
or removed from Federal lands after November 16, 1990 [See 25
U.S.C. §3002 (C)].
- Opinion of the
Commission, 16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484 - February
- "In January 1966, after more than a year
of negotiation petitioner and defendant filed a joint motion and
stipulation with the Commission [ICC] requesting the entry of
final judgment in accordance with the stipulation of the
parties for the compromise and settlement of all petitioner's
claims, including Docket Nos. 264A [Claim No. 2] and 264B [Claim
No. 3], and defendant's offsets" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484,
- "The stipulation called for a single final
net judgment against the defendant and in favor of the petitioner
in the amount of $2,400,000 (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484, 511).
- "The stipulation was conditional upon the
dismissal of [petitioner's] Appeal 1-65 by the Court of Claims
and the remand of the case to the Indian Court of Claims"
(16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484, 511).
- "On January 21, 1966, the Court of Claims
entered an order dismissing Appeal No. 1-65 and remanding said
case to the Indian Claims Commission" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm.
- "It is ordered that the joint motion of
the parties for entry of final judgment in accordance with the
Stipulation for Entry of Final Judgment will be granted and Final
Judgment will be so entered" (16 Ind. Cl. Comm. 484,
- United States
Indian Claims Commission Final Report, H.
Doc. 96-383 (1980) (pp. 1-137).
- A historical accounting of the Umatilla case
brought before the ICC was provided, which displayed the ICC'c
1964 decision to vacate its findings, opinion, and interlocutory
order of 6/10/1960 (p. 102). Further, the ICC's 1964 opinion and
interlocutory order are listed, which were modified by the 2/11/1966
findings on compromise settlement, opinion and final judgment.
- The "Map Area Index," which displays the ICC
findings relied upon to generate specific tribal land boundaries
on the Indian Land Areas Judicially Established in 1978 Map (pocket
part), indicated that the ICC's 1960 finding, 8 Ind. Cl. Comm.
513 (1960), was utilized to create the Cayuse, Walla Walla, and
Umatilla land areas (pp. 135-136). The use of the ICC vacated
finding and opinion to produce the Cayuse, Walla Walla, and Umatilla
land areas on the 1978 Map is not explained.
Home | Babbitt