Summary

Portrait of Tom C. Clark Tom C. Clark Hatahley v. United States — Opinion of the Court

While some Indian families from the reservation come into the area to graze their livestock, petitioners claim to have always lived there the year round. They are herdsmen and for generations they have grazed their livestock on this land. They are a simple and primitive people. Their living is derived entirely from their animals, from the little corn they are able to grow in family plots, and the wild game and pine nuts that the land itself affords. The District Court found that horses, as petitioners' beasts of burden and only means of transportation, were essential to their existence.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Tom C. Clark Tom C. Clark Hatahley v. United States — Opinion of the Court

Trips to reach the pine nuts areas often require trips by horse for 150 miles, and to reach sites of certain ceremonies and other functions among the Navajo people often require plaintiffs and their families to travel on their horses for 150 miles. Seventy-five mile trips are required in their hunting expeditions which can only be done on horses. That the same use is made of burros as of horses by plaintiffs and the burro is held in the same esteem by them as are horses.'↑ The suit by the United States was dismissed by the District Court, 93 F.Supp.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature