Investor Presentaiton
H
UNITED STATES V. OREGON
(1969 - US DISTRICT COURT – DISTRICT OF OREGON)
"The Supreme Court has on numerous occasions noted that while the courts cannot vary the plain language
of an Indian treaty, such treaties are to be construed: 'as "that unlettered people" understood it, and, "as
justice and reason demand in all cases where power is exerted by the strong over those to whom they owe
care and protection," and counterpoise the inequality “by the superior justice which looks only to the
substance of the right, without regard to technical rules," 302 F. Supp. 899, 905 citing Choctaw Nation and
Winans.
I "It is our responsibility to see that the terms of the treaty are carried out, so far as possible, in accordance
with the meaning they were understood to have by the tribal representatives at the council and in a spirit
which generously recognizes the full obligation of this nation to protect the interests of a dependent
people.'" 302 F. Supp. 899, 905 citing Tulee.View entire presentation