-9

Indian tribes or alleged tribes,

1/

or the Department of

Justice has indicated that it is prepared to file suits on

behalf of Indian tribes, in the following areas:

Connecticut

Law suits have been filed by the Schaghticoke Indians
to recover 1,300 acres in the town of Kent, by the Western
Pequot Indians to recover 800 acres in Ledyard, and by the
Mohegan Tribe to recover approximately 2,550 acres in
Montville. (Research indicates there may be potential
claims in at least 67 other towns and cities in Connecticut
and there has been some publicity about a potential claim
to the entire state of Connecticut.)

Louisiana

Maine

A lawsuit involving a claim to 7,000 acres of land in St.
Mary's Parish and for $100,000,000 in damages was filed
on July 15, 1977, by a group claiming to be the Chitimacha
Tribe of Louisiana.

The Department of Justice, after considering the advice of
the Department of the Interior, has indicated that it is
prepared to file suit on behalf of the Passamaquoddy and
Penobscot Tribes seeking the return of 12.5 million acres
of land in the State of Maine and the recovery of substantial
trespass damages, estimated at approximately $25 billion.

Massachusetts

A group asserting that it is the Mashpee Tribe has brought
suit in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts claiming
over 15,000 acres in the towns of Mashpee and Sandwich.
On January 6, 1978, a jury in that case determined that the
plaintiff was not an Indian tribe at certain key dates in
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and that the

In many of the claims, the question whether the claimant group is, in fact, a tribe has not yet been resolved. Accordingly, any reference in this memorandum to a particular tribe should not be taken as an admission that the claimant group is, in fact, a

-10

plaintiff is not now an Indian tribe.

Accordingly, the
court is expected to dismiss the case shortly. The plaintiff
has indicated that it will appeal this decision if,

as expected, the judge issues an order dismissing the
case. In addition, claims have also been raised to land
in Gay Head and Chappaquiddick on Martha's Vineyard.

New York

Three lawsuits have been filed by the Oneida Nation of
New York against Oneida and Madison Counties and a number
of owners of land adjoining the present Oneida Reservation.
The total impact of these claims could reach as much as
100,000 acres.

In addition, the Department of Justice has indicated that
it is prepared to file suits on behalf of the Oneida
Nation (200,000 acres), the Cayuga Tribe (62,000 acres)
and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (10,500 acres) involving
land in the northern and western parts of New York.

Finally, on March 3, 1978, the Oneida Nation filed suit
against the State of New York, the New York State
Thruway Authority and other state agencies that own or
possess land in a 50 mile wide tract (embracing approxi-
mately six million acres) stretching from Pennsylvania
to the Canadian border. The suit, which is based in part
on land transfers made by the tribe prior to the adoption
of the Constitution in 1789, seeks the return of land
owned by the state or any state agency in the claims area,
potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, and
an accounting for all tolls ever collected by the Thruway
Authority for passage over land in the claims area.

Rhode Island

A group asserting that it is the Narrangansett Tribe has brought suit to recover approximately 3,200 acres of land in Charlestown and may have a claim to virtually all of the land (36.3 square miles) in the town of Charlestown.

South Carolina

The Department of the Interior has requested the Department of Justice to file suit on behalf of the Catawba Tribe to approximately 144,000 acres surrounding the town of Rock

-11

In addition to claims that have already been filed

against landowners and claims on which the Department of

Justice has indicated that it is prepared to bring suit, there

have been reports of additional possible claims in New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee, Vermont and Virginia.

It is impossible to determine what other areas may be subject to 1/ suits in the future.

C.

In those areas where lawsuits against land-
owners have been instituted, the economic
and social consequences have been severe.

The full social and economic impact of the Indian claims under the Nonintercourse Act has yet to be felt, in major part because suits against individual landowners have not yet been filed by the Department of Justice on those claims that involve the largest land areas and the greatest amount of damages (for example, the claims in Maine, New York, and South Carolina). Nevertheless, the disruption and dislocation caused in those areas of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New York were relatively small claims are already being litigated demonstrates clearly the catastrophic

For example, it has recently been announced that the Sioux Tribe intends to institute litigation involving the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming and Nebraska. Little information is available at the present time about this claim, such as whether it is bottomed on an alleged violation of the Nonintercourse Act, or whether it will be directed solely against the federal government or will seek the recovery of land from private landowners. Washington Post, September 3, 1977, at A12.

-12

economic and social problems that lie ahead if the larger claims are litigated. In areas, such as Mashpee, Massachusetts, where Nonintercourse Act claims are now being litigated, sales of homes and other land transactions have been brought to a virtual halt because of the cloud that has been placed on titles to the land within the claims areas. (This cloud on titles and the accompanying economic and social dislocations will continue, notwithstanding the jury verdict` that the landowners have won, so long as the case remains in the courts on appeal which could be several more years.)

Mortgage loans have become virtually impossible to obtain because of the fears of lenders that any loan they make may not be secured by a valid first lien on the mortgaged property or that any mortgage on property subject to an Indian claim will not be readily marketable in the secondary mortgage .market.

The security and alienability of real property that has been owned by families and individuals for years if not decades, have been destroyed. Families whose single largest assets are their houses have been unable to sell their houses despite the need to do so, or, if able to sell at all, have been forced to sell at prices substantially below what would otherwise be market values. Moreover, the costs of defending against the claims have caused immense hardship for the defendants involved.

-13

The impact on communities has, likewise, been

severe. In Mashpee, Massachusetts, for example, many

property owners have responded to the decline in marketability of their titles by refusing to pay their real property taxes, or, in the alternative, by seeking abatements of the tax due to reflect the decline in property values caused by the Indian claims. Other landowners have been unable to pay their taxes because of the economic hardship caused by the suit. The first annual tax collection after the Mashpee suit was instituted in August, 1976, was down 25 percent. Moreover, by precluding any further development of land in the town, the law suit has severely damaged the economic base of the community and, by limiting the growth of the town's real property tax base, threatened the stability of the town's finances.

The adverse social impact caused by these claims has also been severe. The threat to individuals and local businesses caused by the litigation, the potential loss of property, and the possible imposition of sizeable trespass damage judgments, together with the problems and uncertainties the claims have caused for local governments, have created

a most unfortunate climate of apprehension and distrust between the defendant landowners and the Indian plaintiffs who live in the community.