Summary

Portrait of William Howard Taft William Howard Taft Work v. United States (261 U.S. 352…

No bond is required of the parents as would be in case of a guardian to whom the income is to be paid in the absence of parents, and it was the evident purpose of Congress, in view of the then comparatively small amount of the probable income, to allow it when there was a family to go into the family funds for the support of the family and of the minors as part of the family.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William Howard Taft William Howard Taft Work v. United States (261 U.S. 352…

It was income from the use of the mineral resources of the land. Of course, it involved a consumption and reduction of the mineral value of the land, but so does a royalty. This is an inevitable characteristic of income from the product of the mine. What was intended to be distributed to the members of the tribe was the income from the mineral deposits in their lands, and the bonus was part of that. Doubtless Congress had in mind regular annual or quarterly equal payments when it used the word 'royalties,' and did not anticipate such large down payments.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature