Skip to main content

John Heo v. Robert H. Milroy. Answer

 

Territory of Washington}
County of Thurston} ss.

In the District Court of the 2nd Judicial District of Washington Territory holding terms at Olympia.

In the matter of the application of John Heo for a writ of Habeas Corpus.

Comes now the above named John Heo in his own proper person and for answer to the return made by the respondent R. H. Milroy he alleges as follows,

He admits that he is an Indian, but denies that the respondent has any right to restrain him of his liberty by virtue of his authority as an Indian Agent

Denies that any treaty was ever made between the Chehalis Indians and the United States

He further shows that he was born in the County of Thurston Washington Territory, and that he is now about thirty five years of age.

That his father belonged to the Chehalis   tribe and that his mother belonged to the Squawmish[?] tribe. That his father and mother died some twenty five years ago and that previous to their death they severed their tribal relations and removed to the farm of Col. Sidney Ford in Thurston County and that thereafter, they adopted the habits and followed the pursuits of civilized life.

That neither his father or his mother ever lived on any Indian reservation or ever received or accepted any amenities from the Government

That after the death of his father and mother, he was taken into the family of Col Sidney Ford and that he continued to live in said family as a member thereof, for the period of fifteen years and until the death of said Col Ford.

That from the time of leaving the Ford family, he has been constantly living with the whites engaged in the pursuits of civilized life. That he has at no time lived with any tribe of Indians and that he has at no time   acknowledged himself a member of any Indian tribe.

That some ten years since he filed in the office of the Supt. of Indian Affairs a declaration under oath formerly abandoning all tribal relations for the purpose of entering land.

That he now proposes as soon as he can accummulate sufficient means to avoid himself of the provisions of the act of congress (by which Indians may enter Homestead of one hundred and sixty acres of land) entitled an act making appropriations to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for fiscal years ending June 30th 1875 and prior years and for other purposes approved March 3rd 1875

That while employed upon a farm from which employment he expects to realize sufficient means to carry out his aforesaid intentions of aquiring a homestead under the said act of Congress, he was arrested and placed in Irons by the respondent

 

And the said John Heo hereby excepts to the sufficiency of the return made by the respondent because the same is insufficient to justify his arrest and imprisonment

Wherefore he prays that he may go hence and without delay

John P. Judson Attorney for Petitioner

Citation

Katrina Jagodinsky, Cory Young, Andrew Varsanyi, Laura Weakly, Karin Dalziel, William Dewey, Erin Chambers, Greg Tunink. “John Heo v. Robert H. Milroy. Answer.” Petitioning for Freedom: Habeas Corpus in the American West, 1812-1924, University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Accessed November 24, 2024. https://petitioningforfreedom.unl.edu/documents/item/hc.case.wa.0112.006

Back to top