Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hostage

The inhabitants noted were those holding title and deeds.

There were no such inhabitants in Nevada

The lands in question are and always have been government lands

All this is moot because Bundy has no deed and no title beyond his 150 acres.


125 posted on 04/11/2014 10:50:29 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]


To: bert

Yours is not a cogent argument before a court. The inhabitants had rights of water and grazing that the treaty recognized. Look at Articles VIII and IX of the treaty.

I don’t think the feds can present a winning argument in court. It’s not a cakewalk for them by any means.


131 posted on 04/11/2014 11:01:07 AM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson