Gamel v. United States
United States Court of Claims
On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The court simply found the preliminary jurisdictional facts that the claimant was a citizen and the Kiowa and Comanche Indians were in amity at the times when the alleged depredations were committed, and then remanded the case by the following order: The order of the court is that the case be remanded to the general docket, with leave to both parties to take further evidence upon the merits, and that the foregoing findings…
Read the full summary
On the Proofs. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The court simply found the preliminary jurisdictional facts that the claimant was a citizen and the Kiowa and Comanche Indians were in amity at the times when the alleged depredations were committed, and then remanded the case by the following order: The order of the court is that the case be remanded to the general docket, with leave to both parties to take further evidence upon the merits, and that the foregoing findings of fact be filed as a part of the record in this case. I. At the time of the depredations alleged in the petition the…
1Opinion of the CourtNott, J.
This case does not involve a large amount, but presents two questions of importance — one of jurisdiction, the other of practice. It has been elaborately argued, counsel in other cases — -not now before the court, but dependent upon the questions now decided — having been heard.
*323The first question is whether two great and warlike tribes— the Kiowas and Comanches — were in amity with the United States during a period extending from the beginning of 1866 to the end of 1875. The question is complex, involving not only an ascertainment of the historic facts, but also the judicial determination…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians v. Cherokee Nation WestUnited States Court of Claims · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mascarinas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1897