STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS EXTENSION
Monday, December 17, 1979
U.S. Senate, Select Committee on Indian Affairs, Washington D.C.
The committee met pursuant to notice at 10:15 a.m., in room 1202, Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Senator John Melcher (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Melcher, Inouye, DeConcini, Hatfield, and Cohen.
Staff present: Max Richtman, staff director; Peter Taylor, special counsel; Virginia Boyland, staff attorney; John Mulkey, professional staff member; and Michael Cox, minority counsel.
Senator Hatfield [acting chairman] The purpose of the hearing this morning is to determine the status of work of the Department of the Interior and the Department of Justice in identifying and processing claims of Indians and individuals that arose before 1966.
Prior to 1966, there was no limitation on the time in which the United States could bring an action for damages either for itself or on behalf of an Indian tribe. In 1966, the Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. 2415 to establish a time limit of 6 years for claims based on contracts and 3 years for damage claims for most torts. Six years was allowed for trespass or conversion damages affecting lands. There is no limit on time for actions to establish title to lands. In 1972, at the request of the Departments of Interior and Justice, this statute of limitations was amended to extend by 5 years the time in which the United States could bring an action on behalf of an Indian tribe or individual for a claim arising before 1966. In 1977, this statute was again extended by 2 ½ years to April 1, 1980. The purpose of these extensions was to allow Interior and Justice to identify and process outstanding Indian claims and provide some for negotiations of settlements outside of court, where possible.
[What is the current status-August 25, 2010, of 28 U.S.C. 2415, Individual Indian, Pre-1966 Blackfeet Allottee-tribal claims to title not subject to statute of limitations and related tort claims subject to statute of limitations?]
There are 1,200 total estimated Blackfeet tribal members forced fee claims and other identified claims on the Official List of BIA Forced Fee Patents issued on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation by the Blackfeet Agency BIA].
The Interior Department and Bureau of Indian Affairs officials expressed concern for white people holding “void” title to allotted lands on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation: “The Bureau of Indian Affairs acknowledges that many of the claims are dealing with regaining [Blackfeet] title to property under circumstances in which defendants through no fault of their own are holding by void title,[statement not true as whites on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation obtained their title to Blackfeet allotments and minerals through the illegal cancellation of Blackfeet trust patents by BIA officials in the forced fee patents conspiracy to allow local white land grafters to place liens and county taxes on the trust lands of the Blackfeet Indians].
“The title issues in these claims [forced patents, secretarial transfers, and old age claims] are not subject to the statute of limitations as are the tort claims.”
Many prospective defendants are Indians. Other prospective defendants are immune from suit, such as Indian tribes and the federal government. In some instances defendants are corporate entities [Great Northern Railroad, James J. Hill, Louis Hill, The Texas Company [Texaco], The Sherburne Mercantile Company of Browning, Montana, the Browning Mercantile Company, the state, county, individuals, corporations and companies.].
ORIGINS OF THE BIA-INTERIOR DEPARTMENT, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS PROGRAM
STATEMENT OF FOREST GERARD, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE OVERSIGHT HEARING, DECEMBER 17, 1979.
“Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee, it is a pleasure to appear before you to discuss matters relating to the statute of limitations claims program. I would like, in my testimony today, to describe the scope of the task, our efforts to carry out the task, and some of the problems we have encountered since the extension was granted in 1977.
I will not burden you with a detailed background of the program. That history has been stated in the various reports relating to previous extensions. It will be helpful, however, to mention some points that may place in proper perspective the situation that we face today.
The program began developing after July 28, 1966 the date of the statute of limitations first went into effect. The statute limited to six years the time in which the United States, in carrying out its trust responsibility to Indians, could sue third parties for damages to the property of Indians arising out of tort or contract. In 1972 the six-year limitation was extended five more years, or until July 28, 1977, as to claims which accrued before July 28, 1966, the date of the first act.
In 1977, in testimony before this committee on the then pending extension bill, we stated that we had identified several hundred pre-1966 claims, and that we anticipated well over a thousand nationwide. We were then given a two-year and 8-month extension, until April 1, 1980.
For fiscal 1978, we went as far as we could with existing resources. The Department formulated a comprehensive plan of action during FY 1978 and aggressively sought funds to implement such a plan. Immediately after extension was granted, work began on the formulation of a claims processing plan and on the preparation of a budget request. By February 1978 the plan was initiated with existing resources at the field level with an intensive training phase. The plan included claims processing procedures, time limits, direction on communication channels, recommended forms, suggested publicity, and improved liaison with the Justice Department. Our plan was put into action during FY 1978, and while we did process some of our backlog it was clear we needed funding if we were to meet the needs of the claims problem.
[Note from Bob Juneau: This is a common tactic used by politicians and government officials to deny funding for issues feared by politicians or to cover up legitimate claims against the government for depredations of Indian property committed by whites and corporations and states, and by who ever. Sometimes that whoever leaks over into tribal affairs such as the stonewalling and threats local BIA superintendent and tribal chairman Old Person used on us in 1980, to keep the Blackfeet forced fee patents claims “under wraps.”]
[Blackfeet history note: In the early part of 1914 Superintendent McFatridge acted to encourage the Indians to agree to the sale of the reclamation lands and oil fields on the Blackfeet reservation declared “surplus lands” by the Interior Department after the first allotment of reservation lands held in common in 1907. A tribal meeting elected Robert Hamilton, Wolf Chief, Young Man Chief, and Big Plume to go to Washington D.C. to represent the tribe, but McFatridge wrote the Commissioner of Indian Affairs asking him to deny the Indians delegation because they were against the land sale. A month later he arranged a delegation of his “own” that included the most prosperous half-breeds [1/64th Indians]. Inspector Linnen reported at a general meeting of the Blackfeet Indians, attended by over 300 Indians, all but 8 voted against the sale of the northeast portion of the reservation containing oil fields and irrigated reclamation lands, and among these eight half-breeds are said by the other Indians to be profiting from the use of Indian lands not their own or to be acting in harmony with the wishes of the whites who desire to acquire such lands. These eight half-breeds owned 95% of the cattle on the reservation by their political influence with bureau officials, while McFatridge leased the Indian allotments for 10 cents an acre to local white stockmen. The full-blood cattle ranchers, prosperous men before the conspiracy, now were in the breadline with the others for their generous sharing of their cattle herds to feed their starving neighbors, it being a custom among them to share their food down to the last bite.
Senator Walsh of Montana and the Interior Department then introduced a bill in Congress to allot the reservation and open up the surplus lands left over after allotment to white settlement. Commercial clubs in Cut Bank, Conrad, Shelby, Great Falls, Valier, and Choteau wrote impassioned letters of support for the land sale saying how good it would be for the Indians to sell their farm lands to the whites. To their chagrin and embarrassment in 1919 the entire reservation was allotted leaving no surplus lands for the border-whites, and so the border-whites and BIA crooks began the forced fee patent conspiracy to defraud the Blackfeet Indians of their land and oil wells, which claims we are still fighting today]
[Statement of Forest Gerard Continued] Specific funding to implement our statute of limitations claims program was first provided for FY 1979. Just as we were launching our program at the beginning of FY79 we were slowed for six months by a hiring freeze. When the thaw came in March it left us with about a year to process a then existing inventory of about a thousand claims. In addition our plans called for an all-out search for unidentified claims and the referral of all worthwhile claims to the Department of Justice no later than November 30, 1979. The reason for the November date was that the Department of Justice needed at least 4 months to prepare and file the claims in court. By December, 1979 there were 9,768 claims identified potential claims and another 5,000 claims in the field not yet inventoried.
Our claims program has affected a significant number of our citizens in this country. In many instances hardships may result as a result of our suits. In many of these same instances we are dealing with regaining title to property under circumstances in which defendants through no fault are holding by void title. [void title in the forced fee patents means the border-white’s titles to the Blackfeet allotments have “no legal force or effect, is without legal efficacy.” Peter Taylor, the senate committee lawyer told us in 1980 that the border-white’s land titles on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation were Interior Department land certificates canceling Indian title and not worth the paper they were written on. This means that only the political power of the State of Montana and BIA-tribal council stonewalling complicity [partnership in crime] holds in place the fraudulent Blackfeet titles held by reservation whites.] The titles in these claims are not subject to the statute of limitations as are the tort issues.
Many prospective defendants are Indians. Other prospective defendants are immune from suit, such as Indian tribes and the Federal Government. In some instances defendants are corporate entities.
In any case, under the time constraints we face, we are unable to give the vulnerable defendants time to work out amicable settlements. [In 1980 the Committee lawyer, Peter Taylor, told us the committee would probably settle with the Blackfeet by restoring all of their land titles and oil wells and $300,000,000 in settlement compensation, but no! Chairman Earl Old Person and the tribal council went with the BIA and stonewalled our claims and ran us out of tribal government]. Forest Gerard continued his testimony: “The United States, of course, has a trust responsibility to the heirs of trust patentees and deceased Indian claimants just as it does to recognized tribes, bands or groups.” The Blackfeet Allottees and tribal cattle ranchers Agree!
Monday, December 17, 1979
U.S. Senate, Select Committee on Indian Affairs, Washington D.C.
The committee met pursuant to notice at 10:15 a.m., in room 1202, Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Senator John Melcher (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Melcher, Inouye, DeConcini, Hatfield, and Cohen.
Staff present: Max Richtman, staff director; Peter Taylor, special counsel; Virginia Boyland, staff attorney; John Mulkey, professional staff member; and Michael Cox, minority counsel.
Senator Hatfield [acting chairman] The purpose of the hearing this morning is to determine the status of work of the Department of the Interior and the Department of Justice in identifying and processing claims of Indians and individuals that arose before 1966.
Prior to 1966, there was no limitation on the time in which the United States could bring an action for damages either for itself or on behalf of an Indian tribe. In 1966, the Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. 2415 to establish a time limit of 6 years for claims based on contracts and 3 years for damage claims for most torts. Six years was allowed for trespass or conversion damages affecting lands. There is no limit on time for actions to establish title to lands. In 1972, at the request of the Departments of Interior and Justice, this statute of limitations was amended to extend by 5 years the time in which the United States could bring an action on behalf of an Indian tribe or individual for a claim arising before 1966. In 1977, this statute was again extended by 2 ½ years to April 1, 1980. The purpose of these extensions was to allow Interior and Justice to identify and process outstanding Indian claims and provide some for negotiations of settlements outside of court, where possible.
[What is the current status-August 25, 2010, of 28 U.S.C. 2415, Individual Indian, Pre-1966 Blackfeet Allottee-tribal claims to title not subject to statute of limitations and related tort claims subject to statute of limitations?]
There are 1,200 total estimated Blackfeet tribal members forced fee claims and other identified claims on the Official List of BIA Forced Fee Patents issued on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation by the Blackfeet Agency BIA].
The Interior Department and Bureau of Indian Affairs officials expressed concern for white people holding “void” title to allotted lands on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation: “The Bureau of Indian Affairs acknowledges that many of the claims are dealing with regaining [Blackfeet] title to property under circumstances in which defendants through no fault of their own are holding by void title,[statement not true as whites on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation obtained their title to Blackfeet allotments and minerals through the illegal cancellation of Blackfeet trust patents by BIA officials in the forced fee patents conspiracy to allow local white land grafters to place liens and county taxes on the trust lands of the Blackfeet Indians].
“The title issues in these claims [forced patents, secretarial transfers, and old age claims] are not subject to the statute of limitations as are the tort claims.”
Many prospective defendants are Indians. Other prospective defendants are immune from suit, such as Indian tribes and the federal government. In some instances defendants are corporate entities [Great Northern Railroad, James J. Hill, Louis Hill, The Texas Company [Texaco], The Sherburne Mercantile Company of Browning, Montana, the Browning Mercantile Company, the state, county, individuals, corporations and companies.].
ORIGINS OF THE BIA-INTERIOR DEPARTMENT, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS PROGRAM
STATEMENT OF FOREST GERARD, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE OVERSIGHT HEARING, DECEMBER 17, 1979.
“Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee, it is a pleasure to appear before you to discuss matters relating to the statute of limitations claims program. I would like, in my testimony today, to describe the scope of the task, our efforts to carry out the task, and some of the problems we have encountered since the extension was granted in 1977.
I will not burden you with a detailed background of the program. That history has been stated in the various reports relating to previous extensions. It will be helpful, however, to mention some points that may place in proper perspective the situation that we face today.
The program began developing after July 28, 1966 the date of the statute of limitations first went into effect. The statute limited to six years the time in which the United States, in carrying out its trust responsibility to Indians, could sue third parties for damages to the property of Indians arising out of tort or contract. In 1972 the six-year limitation was extended five more years, or until July 28, 1977, as to claims which accrued before July 28, 1966, the date of the first act.
In 1977, in testimony before this committee on the then pending extension bill, we stated that we had identified several hundred pre-1966 claims, and that we anticipated well over a thousand nationwide. We were then given a two-year and 8-month extension, until April 1, 1980.
For fiscal 1978, we went as far as we could with existing resources. The Department formulated a comprehensive plan of action during FY 1978 and aggressively sought funds to implement such a plan. Immediately after extension was granted, work began on the formulation of a claims processing plan and on the preparation of a budget request. By February 1978 the plan was initiated with existing resources at the field level with an intensive training phase. The plan included claims processing procedures, time limits, direction on communication channels, recommended forms, suggested publicity, and improved liaison with the Justice Department. Our plan was put into action during FY 1978, and while we did process some of our backlog it was clear we needed funding if we were to meet the needs of the claims problem.
[Note from Bob Juneau: This is a common tactic used by politicians and government officials to deny funding for issues feared by politicians or to cover up legitimate claims against the government for depredations of Indian property committed by whites and corporations and states, and by who ever. Sometimes that whoever leaks over into tribal affairs such as the stonewalling and threats local BIA superintendent and tribal chairman Old Person used on us in 1980, to keep the Blackfeet forced fee patents claims “under wraps.”]
[Blackfeet history note: In the early part of 1914 Superintendent McFatridge acted to encourage the Indians to agree to the sale of the reclamation lands and oil fields on the Blackfeet reservation declared “surplus lands” by the Interior Department after the first allotment of reservation lands held in common in 1907. A tribal meeting elected Robert Hamilton, Wolf Chief, Young Man Chief, and Big Plume to go to Washington D.C. to represent the tribe, but McFatridge wrote the Commissioner of Indian Affairs asking him to deny the Indians delegation because they were against the land sale. A month later he arranged a delegation of his “own” that included the most prosperous half-breeds [1/64th Indians]. Inspector Linnen reported at a general meeting of the Blackfeet Indians, attended by over 300 Indians, all but 8 voted against the sale of the northeast portion of the reservation containing oil fields and irrigated reclamation lands, and among these eight half-breeds are said by the other Indians to be profiting from the use of Indian lands not their own or to be acting in harmony with the wishes of the whites who desire to acquire such lands. These eight half-breeds owned 95% of the cattle on the reservation by their political influence with bureau officials, while McFatridge leased the Indian allotments for 10 cents an acre to local white stockmen. The full-blood cattle ranchers, prosperous men before the conspiracy, now were in the breadline with the others for their generous sharing of their cattle herds to feed their starving neighbors, it being a custom among them to share their food down to the last bite.
Senator Walsh of Montana and the Interior Department then introduced a bill in Congress to allot the reservation and open up the surplus lands left over after allotment to white settlement. Commercial clubs in Cut Bank, Conrad, Shelby, Great Falls, Valier, and Choteau wrote impassioned letters of support for the land sale saying how good it would be for the Indians to sell their farm lands to the whites. To their chagrin and embarrassment in 1919 the entire reservation was allotted leaving no surplus lands for the border-whites, and so the border-whites and BIA crooks began the forced fee patent conspiracy to defraud the Blackfeet Indians of their land and oil wells, which claims we are still fighting today]
[Statement of Forest Gerard Continued] Specific funding to implement our statute of limitations claims program was first provided for FY 1979. Just as we were launching our program at the beginning of FY79 we were slowed for six months by a hiring freeze. When the thaw came in March it left us with about a year to process a then existing inventory of about a thousand claims. In addition our plans called for an all-out search for unidentified claims and the referral of all worthwhile claims to the Department of Justice no later than November 30, 1979. The reason for the November date was that the Department of Justice needed at least 4 months to prepare and file the claims in court. By December, 1979 there were 9,768 claims identified potential claims and another 5,000 claims in the field not yet inventoried.
Our claims program has affected a significant number of our citizens in this country. In many instances hardships may result as a result of our suits. In many of these same instances we are dealing with regaining title to property under circumstances in which defendants through no fault are holding by void title. [void title in the forced fee patents means the border-white’s titles to the Blackfeet allotments have “no legal force or effect, is without legal efficacy.” Peter Taylor, the senate committee lawyer told us in 1980 that the border-white’s land titles on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation were Interior Department land certificates canceling Indian title and not worth the paper they were written on. This means that only the political power of the State of Montana and BIA-tribal council stonewalling complicity [partnership in crime] holds in place the fraudulent Blackfeet titles held by reservation whites.] The titles in these claims are not subject to the statute of limitations as are the tort issues.
Many prospective defendants are Indians. Other prospective defendants are immune from suit, such as Indian tribes and the Federal Government. In some instances defendants are corporate entities.
In any case, under the time constraints we face, we are unable to give the vulnerable defendants time to work out amicable settlements. [In 1980 the Committee lawyer, Peter Taylor, told us the committee would probably settle with the Blackfeet by restoring all of their land titles and oil wells and $300,000,000 in settlement compensation, but no! Chairman Earl Old Person and the tribal council went with the BIA and stonewalled our claims and ran us out of tribal government]. Forest Gerard continued his testimony: “The United States, of course, has a trust responsibility to the heirs of trust patentees and deceased Indian claimants just as it does to recognized tribes, bands or groups.” The Blackfeet Allottees and tribal cattle ranchers Agree!
No comments:
Post a Comment