16-83
Montana Attorney General Opinion 16-83
Length: 359 wordsOfficial source
Cite as 16 Mont. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 83
Opinion No. 83.
Indians-Deaf and Blind School.
HELD.
1. Part breed Indians, if
otherwise eligible, may claim admit-
tance to the Montana State School
for the Deaf and Blind on the same
basis as white children.
April 19, 1935.
Mr. Howard Griffin
President, Montana State School for
the Deaf and the Blind
Boulder, Montana
I have your letter of April 6, in
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
79
which you have asked for the opin-
ion of this office upon the following
questions, which we shall answer in
the order you have presented them:
"1. We have a few part breed In-
dians in our institution from the
Flathead Indian Reservation.
The
Superintendent of that Reservation
has always contended that since the
fathers of these part breed Indians
were white men and citizens of the
United States and bona fide resi-
dents of Montana, these children
were not wards and were entitled to
admission to the institution on an
equal basis with other children of
non-Indian mixture. I contend that
these children are government wards
and as such the Federal Government
should reimburse the institution for
their maintenance while here, the
amount to be paid to be determined
by my Board. The Reservation has
always paid for the clothing and in-
cidental expenses of these children.
These children also receive money
from Indian lands, the same as pure
bred Indians. Is my contention cor-
rect ?"
It is our OpInIOn that as long as
these children are otherwise eligible,
they may claim admission to the Mon-
tana State School for the Deaf and
the Blind on the same basis as white
children. (Section 17 of the Enabling
Act; Section I, Article X, and Sec-
tions I, 6, 7, 11 and 12, Article XI
of the Constitution of the State of
Montana; Sections 1456 to 1483, in-
clusive, R. C. M. 1921; U. S. ex reI.
Young v. Imoda, 4 Mont. 38, 1 Pac.
721; Piper v. Big Pine School District,
193 Cal. 664, 226 Pac. 926; State ex
reI. Henderson v. Dawson County, 87
Mont. 122, 286 Pac. 125; Grant v.
Michaels, 94 Mont. 452, 23 Pac. (2d)
266.)