Bookmark this page or copy and paste URL to Email message

Royal Marks Papers 1848-1983

MSS-87

Biographical Note

Royal Donald Marks, attorney and tribal advocate, was born the son of Barnett Ellis and Freeda Lewis Marks on January 15, 1909. He has three children: J. Ellis; Royal Donald, Jr; and Mary Jeanne. He graduated from the University of Southern California in 1932 with a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration. Upon the death of his brother in 1936, Royal moved to Phoenix to join his father Barnett E. Marks in the practice of law. He was admitted to the Arizona State Bar in 1940 and became a partner in the firm of Marks & Marks.

Barnett Marks, while serving as Assistant United States District Attorney in 1928, worked on the landmark United States (Hualapai Tribe) vs. Santa Fe Railroad aboriginal land rights case. In 1946 Marks & Marks was retained by the tribe as counsel in this case before the United States Supreme Court and brought it to a successful conclusion.

The firm of Marks and Marks was also employed by the Hualapai Tribe to act as counsel in its case before the Indian Claims Commission. They successfully settled the claims of the Hualapai, Havasupai, and Chemehuevi Tribes and assisted the Hualapai Tribal Council in developing a plan for claims funds use that became a model used by other successful claimant tribes.

In 1949 the Marks' became associated with Felix Cohen, an authority on Indian law and the author of a handbook on the subject. Cohen acted as associate counsel with Marks and Marks on behalf of the Haulapai Tribe. Marks and Marks acted as Cohens' associate counsel on behalf of the San Carlos Apache Tribe until his death in 1953.

During the following nineteen years as the San Carlos tribe's General Counsel, Royal Marks achieved restoration of surface and subsurface rights in a 250,000 acre parcel known as "the Mineral Strip". He also aided in the establishment of a tribal housing authority, a development corporation, and the first industrial park on an Indian reservation.

Finally, as general counsel to various tribes, Marks and his partners settled cases that won Social Security Benefit rights for Arizona Indians, assisted in revisions of tribal constitutions and law codes, negotiated mineral exploration permits and mining leases, and settled several other land claims.

Marks' firm belonged to the Joint Efforts Group, an affiliation of attorneys retained by Indian tribes to represent them in Claims Commission actions. Members shared research on common questions in order to reduce their clients' costs. The Washington, D.C. member was Strasser, Spiegelberg, Fried, Frank, and Kampelman. This firm functioned as the group's, and Marks and Marks', ear in Washington, providing insights into federal activities in the area of Indian affairs.

Royal Marks was a member of the Arizona State Bar Association and Chairman of its Committee on Indian Law from 1957 to 1961.

Scope and Content Note

The Royal Marks Papers contain correspondence, legal papers, printed matter, and holographic notes. Although the collection ranges from 1848 to 1983, the bulk of the papers concern Marks' career as an Indian rights attorney from 1946 to 1977. The papers have been divided into six series: Papago Tribe, Salt River Community, Hualapai and Havasupai Tribes, San Carlos Apache Tribe, Indians (general subjects), and Personal Papers.

Series I: Papago Tribe, 1848-1979, includes correspondence, briefs of two cases, and general subject files. The bulk of the material in Sub-Series A: Correspondence is letters exchanged with attorneys of Strasser, Spiegelberg, Fried, Frank and Kampelman, Marks and Marks' Washington, D.C. associate, or with members of the Indian Claims Commission. These letters often concern the extensive delays which were ordered before claims cases were heard or settled. A letter from Arthur Lazarus, Marks' usual contact in Strasser and Spiegelberg, suggests that a Congressional investigation might be launched into the cause of these delays (19 November 1955). Two others, (22 August 1963 and 26 August 1963) outline the issues of the Papago claim case. A letter from Royal Marks to Papago Tribal Chairman Enos J. Francisco (17 August 1959) reveals the existence of a Yavapai Apache counterclaim to the same land. All of the above letters are in Box 1, Folder 2.

Sub-Series B: Docket #345 and Sub-Series C: Docket #102 contain briefs filed with Indian Claims Commission concerning two land claims cases in which the Papago Tribe sought successfully to obtain compensation for lands removed from their reservations after the original treaties had been signed and ratified.

Sub-Series D: Subject Files includes a number of interesting items. In Box 9, Folder 3, the letter to Marks from Robert R. Nathan (of Robert R. Nathan and Associates, a consulting firm) of 25 October 1968 discusses the methods of land valuation which used by Don Myers and Frank Kleinman in arriving at the settlement. Box 9, Folder 5 contains several statements of elderly Indians that were used to establish the customary locations of boundaries before records were kept. Finally, the letter from Marks to Strasser and Spiegelberg partner Walter J. Fried (14 March 1950) and the Joint Efforts Agreement in Box 10, Folder 1 reveal the nature and purpose, and the participation scheme, of that affiliation.

Series II: Salt River Community, 1859-1974, is composed of correspondence, clippings, and ephemeral publications. Box 10, Folder 12 contains correspondence concerning Marks' participation in Civil Rights Commission hearings. Pro forma agreements concerning the operations of that reservation and a land dispute with the Salt River Water Users Association are located in Box 12, Folder 8. Box 13, Folder 6 houses the annual reports of the Southwest Indian Alcoholism Council.

Series III: Hualapai and Havasupai Tribes, 1880-1980, is composed of briefs, correspondence, and documents. Sub-Series A: Federal Power Commission in re: Arizona Power Authority Project No. 2248 contains filings concerning a Colorado River development project in which the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and the Navajo Tribe intervened on behalf of the respondent.

Sub-Series B: Subject files contains correspondence and Tribal Council documents relating to Hualapai administration and economic development. The Arizona Department of Game and Fish report estimating the impact of the proposed Bridge and Marble Canyon Dams on wildlife is in Box 14, Folder 5. Folder 6 contains the Hualapai tribe's agreement with the Arizona Power Authority concerning Bridge Canyon Dam. In his introduction to a speech by Royal Marks, housed in Box 18, Folder 10, the Dallas Quasula of the Hualapai Tribal Council assesses Marks' value to the tribe through his years as General Counsel.

Box 20 contains Series IV: San Carlos Apache Tribe, 1940-1971. These items are letters and reports describing the physical and economic development of the tribe's reservation. Selected correspondence in Folder 1 discusses litigation over livestock grazing leases.

Series V: Indians, 1951-1982, includes correspondence, federal and tribal documents, clippings, and ephemeral publications divided into a number of subject oriented subseries. These materials address Marks' general interest in Indian affairs and his activities not specifically relating to the tribes he served as General Counsel. Memos in this series from Strasser and Spiegelberg, along with correspondence between their partners and Royal Marks, provide insight into Indian regulation, both in Washington and in tribal councils.

Box 21, Folder 3 of Sub-Series A: Correspondence contains a bill regarding tribal control of tribal funds. In Box 21, Folder 8 Memorandum 78 20 (23 June 1978) expounds the rules for formal recognition of tribes.

In Sub-Series B: Tribal Government, Sub-Sub-Series i: Self Determination and Extradition (Box 22, Folder 1), a letter from Marks to Arthur Lazarus discusses the issue of extradition of accused offenders from tribal jurisdictions. The letter to Marks from Interior Department Field Solicitor William J. Truswell (10 April 1958) concerns the decision in Ex Parte Morgan 20 Fed. 298 (1883) on such a case. Attached to the letter Hualapai Chairman Jacob Honga received from tribal Business Manager James H. Hayes (25 February 1958) is a draft resolution on this issue for circulation among Council members. An article by Felix Cohen responding to court decisions on Indian wardship is in Box 22, Folder 4. Folder 5 contains a draft resolution, for consideration by tribal councils, regarding federal regulations for conducting tribal elections, and the accompanying letter from Assistant Interior Secretary Harry R. Arden to Congressman Wayne Aspinall explains their objections.

In Sub-Series B: Tribal Government, Sub-Sub-Series ii: Regulation (Box 22, Folder 8), a memo of 18 June 1969 describes regulations concerning the issuance of grazing permits. Another in Folder 10, dated 28 April 1969, discusses the formation of tribal business corporations.

Sub-Series B: Tribal Government, Sub-Sub-Series iii: Taxation includes items addressing the issue of whether or not Indian reservations qualify as local governments in the context of participation in federal shared revenues (Box 23, Folder 7).

In Sub-Series B: Tribal Government, Sub-Sub-Series iv: Miscellaneous Subjects, a letter in Box 23, Folder 12, from Arthur Lazarus to Royal Marks (13 December 1968), summarizes a debate over state jurisdiction on Indian reservations.

Sub-Series C: Economic Development holds a letter, from Lazarus to Marks, in Box 25, Folder 14 (9 September 1971) addressing Emergency Employment Act funding allocations. A Strasser and Spiegelberg memorandum in Box 26, Folder 6, issued on 14 May 1969, announces expanded Indian credit programs. A letter by Royal Marks to Arizona Senator Paul Fannin (4 September 1969) challenges governmental perceptions of priorities in Indian assistance needs in Box 26, Folder 1.

In Sub-Series D: Education, Box 26, Folder 8 contains a Strasser and Spiegelberg memo of 16 June 1971 on Indian education. Committee hearing notes from 31 October 1975 are in Box 26, Folder 9, and Minority Staff memoranda of the United States Senate subcommittee on Indian Education are housed in Folder 10.

Box 27, Folder 6 of Sub-Series E: Litigation houses a letter on Indian Trust Counsel authority (2 September 1970).

Memoranda concerning Claims Commission business in Sub-Series G: Land Claims include two, of 12 April 1956 and 22 February 1956, on claims amounts (Box 28, Folder 3) and another of 22 September 1956 on procedures (Box 29, Folder 1). In addition, the 1956 Yakima vs. United States opinion on market valuations is in Box 28, Folder 2.

Series VI: Personal Papers, 1969-1983, contains letters and documents concerning Marks' legal partnerships and his membership in the University of Southern California Alumni Association. His 1977 speech to the alumni on "The Place of Our American Indians in Modern Society" is in Box 32, Folder 5.

Arrangement

Restrictions

Access Restrictions

Culturally sensitive Native American images located in this collection are restricted and cannot be made available to patrons in accordance with the Protocols for Native American Archival Materials.

To view this collection, make an appointment at least five business days prior to your visit by contacting Ask an Archivist or calling (480) 965-4932. Appointments in the Wurzburger Reading Room at Hayden Library (rm. 138) on the Tempe campus are available Monday through Friday. Check the ASU Library Hours page for current availability.

Copyright

Arizona State University does not own the copyright to this collection. We recognize that it is incumbent upon the researcher to procure permission to publish information from this collection from the owner of the copyright.

Access Terms

Administrative Information

Preferred Citation

[Identification of item], Royal Marks Papers, MSS-87, Arizona State University Library.

Provenance

The Royal Marks Papers were received from Mr. Marks in two accessions in 1988 (Accession #1988-00120 and #1988-00122).

Container List