Swope v. Purdy
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas
This action was brought by plaintiff to recover possession of a section on reserve No. 10, of these lands. Plaintiff offered in evidence the treaty made with the Indians in 1825 [7 Stat. 244], in which a reservation of the lands in controversy was made to one Joseph Butler, who conveyed the same to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This action was brought by plaintiff to recover possession of a section on reserve No. 10, of these lands. Plaintiff offered in evidence the treaty made with the Indians in 1825 [7 Stat. 244], in which a reservation of the lands in controversy was made to one Joseph Butler, who conveyed the same to the plaintiff. Defendant offered in evidence a tax deed for the land in controversy, and deed from Joseph Butter, reservee to R. -S. Stevens, dated August 15, 1800 (to show outstanding title).
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Circuit Justice, held:
1. That the legal title to the land reserved to Butler did not vest in him by the treaty of 1825.
2. That although the first section of the act of 1800 [12 Stat. 21] concerning these reservations, if standing alone, was sufficient to vest a full fee simple title in Butler, with right of alienation, yet by the second and third sections of that act. the right of alienation was taken away and vested in the United States in trust for Butler. The deed of Butler prior to July 17, 1802. therefore conveyed no title. Stevens v. Smith, 2 Kan. 243; Brown v. Belmarde, 3 Kan.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brown v. BelmardeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1864
- Stevens v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1864
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dennison v. Topeka Chambers Industrial Development Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1981
- Wau-pe-man-qua v. AldrichU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1886
- Certain Kaw Indians v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971