MANY NATIONS IN ONE
A HISTORY OF FEDERAL INDIAN POLICY
September 1993
Published by
Montana Legislative Council
Montana Legislative Council
State Capitol, Room 138
Helena, Montana 59620
(406) 444-3064
FAX: (406) 444-3036
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
University Rankings
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Our save-the-student-ebooks!
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
A History of Federal Indian Policy - Essay - Indian literature, Essays (high school) of Indian Literature
When Christopher Columbus arrived in America in 1492, he was met by approximately 1 million inhabitants whose ancestors had arrived here over 30,000 years before.1 They spoke over 200 different languages, practiced their own religions, and operated their own governmental systems.
Typology: Essays (high school)
2010/2011
1 / 30
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Related documents
Partial preview of the text
Download A History of Federal Indian Policy - Essay - Indian literature and more Essays (high school) Indian Literature in PDF only on Docsity!
MANY NATIONS IN ONE
A HISTORY OF FEDERAL INDIAN POLICY
September 1993
Published by
Montana Legislative Council
Montana Legislative Council State Capitol, Room 138 Helena, Montana 59620 (406) 444- FAX: (406) 444-
MANY NATIONS IN ONE
A History of Federal Indian Policy
Prepared by Connie F. Erickson, Staff Researcher Montana Legislative Council September 1993
INTRODUCTION
When Christopher Columbus arrived in America in 1492, he was met by approximately 1 million inhabitants whose ancestors had arrived here over 30,000 years before.^1 They spoke over 200 different languages, practiced their own religions, and operated their own governmental systems. They were organized into over 400 independent nations, ranging f r o m s m a l l n o m a d i c b a n d s t o f a i r l y l a r g e t r i b a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , e a c h controlling its own territory. As Europeans began flocking to the shores of America, the Indians assisted them by sharing their food as well as their agricultural techniques. They taught these new arrivals how to build canoes, follow trails, and use herbal medicines. In return, the Indians a c q u i r e d h o r s e s a n d r i f l e s. T h e E u r o p e a n s , h o w e v e r , a l s o b r o u g h t something else with them to this new world: disease, especially smallpox, cholera, measles, and respiratory infections. The Indians had no immunity to these diseases, and thousands died. More deaths were caused by the westward expansion of the new nation of the United States, and by the end of the 19th century, the Indian population numbered less than half a million.^2
terminate tribes. Today the policy is one of tribal self-determination, but given the history of the past 200 years, there is no guarantee that this policy will persist.
The purpose of this report is to trace the development of federal Indian policy in an attempt to understand the current status of Indians and Indian tribes in the United States. Understanding the shifts in federal policy w i l l h e l p e x p l a i n t r i b a l s k e p t i c i s m o f s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l p o l i c y a n d programs. It will also help in understanding why Indian law is so complex and often confusing.
CHAPTER ONE
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN EQUALS
Colonial Times to 1820
When the Spanish conquistadors moved across Mexico and into what is now the southwestern United States, they encountered numerous Indian tribes whose lands they desired. Spanish law, however, forbade these conquerors from simply taking the land. Consent of the Indians was required before Indian lands could be legally acquired. This principle was based on three assumptions:
- both parties to a treaty were sovereign powers;
- Indian tribes had some form of transferable title to the land they possessed; and
- a c q u i s i t i o n o f I n d i a n l a n d s w a s s o l e l y a m a t t e r f o r a government.^4
Although the subsequent actions of the conquistadors and many Spanish government administrators contrasted sharply with the notion of Indian consent, those actions were in violation of existing Spanish law.^5 T h e principle of Indian consent before land acquisition was adopted by the British and ultimately by the Americans.
T h e B r i t i s h i n N o r t h A m e r i c a d e a l t w i t h t h e I n d i a n t r i b e s a s f o r e i g n sovereign nations. Part of the reason for this was to seek the support of the Indian tribes in the British confrontations with the French, especially
During this treaty making period, certain principles were developed that have continued to influence federal Indian policy to this day: Indian tribes are considered to be governments: the United States exercises broad powers over Indian affairs; matters affecting tribal self-government are generally reserved to the tribes; states have very limited jurisdiction in Indian country; the United States has a special trust obligation to Indians; and treaties and statutes must be construed to favor Indians.^8
As long as the United States remained confined to 13 states on the e a s t e r n s e a b o a r d , r e l a t i o n s w i t h I n d i a n t r i b e s r e m a i n e d r e l a t i v e l y peaceful. However, by 1800, the demand for territorial expansion, caused b y t h e n e w n a t i o n ' s r a p i d g r o w t h , i n c r e a s e d a n d I n d i a n t r i b e s w e r e increasingly viewed as barriers to national growth and development.
CHAPTER TWO
MOVEMENT TO THE RESERVATIONS
1820 to 1871
The end of the War of 1812 brought a new sense of security to the young U n i t e d S t a t e s. N o l o n g e r d i d t h e n a t i o n f e a r f o r e i g n i n t e r f e r e n c e , especially from Great Britain; it was now free to concentrate on internal affairs, namely westward expansion. However, expansion accelerated the friction between Indians and non-Indians as non-Indian demands for more land became more acute. In response to these demands, the federal government began negotiating treaties of cession with the tribes, but the tribes resisted the demand to cede lands by treaty. The solution for the federal government was to remove the Indians from their homelands to lands west of the Mississippi River.
In 1830, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act; removal now became a formal federal policy and the primary concern of treaty making. The act allowed President Andrew Jackson to "negotiate: with the eastern tribes for an exchange of their lands for land west of the Mississippi. Although the removal was termed voluntary, tribes were actually coerced into exchanging their lands.^9 During this period, over 15 tribes were removed from their homelands.^10
The area to which the tribes were removed was the vast, unsettled American West. Here they joined the large number of Plains Indians whose culture was centered on hunting. The resettlement of Indians from the East resulted in their occupying vast areas of land. To non-Indians, this
rations, thus beginning a cycle of almost total dependence on the federal government for survival.
The Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 created two reservations in Montana for the Blackfeet and the Crow tribes. A second Fort Laramie Treaty 4 years later added the Sioux, the Assiniboine, and the Gros Ventres to the Blackfeet Reservation. In 1888, the Blackfeet Reservation was split into three separate reservations by congressional order. These reservations were the Blackfeet, Fort Belknap, and Fort Peck. The Hell Gate Treaty of 1855 created the Flathead Reservation in northwestern Montana. The Northern Cheyenne Reservation was created by executive order in 1884. Rocky Boy's Reservation was established by congressional act in 1916.
CHAPTER THREE
THE END OF TREATY MAKING
1871 to 1887
Beginning with the first settlements in New England in the 17th century, Indian policy dependent upon treaty negotiations was based on the recognition of the strength and military importance of Indian tribes, especially in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. After the latter war, as the immediacy of the threat of foreign invasion diminished, critics of treaty making called for its abolition, arguing that Indian tribes were not independent nations possessing rights of sovereignty--they were subjects of the United States, and Congress has as much right to legislate for the Indians as for the people in the territories.^12 Therefore, critics concluded, Indian affairs should be dealt with through general legislation. H o w e v e r , o f f i c i a l p o l i c y c o n t i n u e d t o r e c o g n i z e t r i b e s a s s o v e r e i g n entities worthy of respect as autonomous governmental bodies.
After the Civil War, government officials increasingly adopted the belief that Indian tribes could no longer be regarded as sovereign nations. Instead, Indians "should be regarded as wards of the government, entitled to its fostering care and protection."^13 Humanitarians also called for an end to treaty making, viewing it as a protection of tribal culture that was a barrier to assimilation of the Indian into American society. For some government officials, however, abolishing treaty making was viewed as a p u n i s h m e n t f o r t h o s e I n d i a n t r i b e s t h a t a l l i e d t h e m s e l v e s w i t h t h e Confederacy during the Civil War.^14
With the end of the treatymaking period came a new shift in Indian policy. As more and more Americans poured into the Great Plains, geographically isolating Indians was no longer possible, even on reservations. Therefore, assimilation became the watchword of the new federal Indian policy.
CHAPTER FOUR
ALLOTMENT AND ASSIMILATION
1887 to 1928
The confinement of Indians to reservations, with the accompanying dependence on government largesse, resulted in a situation of hopeless poverty. This poverty spurred critics of federal Indian policy to call for reforms not only to alleviate the poverty but to also create a new role for Indians in American society. Moreover, the idea of large tracts of land being excluded from white settlement bred resentment among many non- Indians.
Indian poverty and non-Indians' desire for land spurred the development of a new federal Indian policy: assimilation. The components of this policy were allotment, education, and citizenship. Each component was designed to force Indians to assimilate into white society by breaking up tribal g o v e r n m e n t s , w h i c h w e r e v i e w e d a s o b s t a c l e s t o t h e c u l t u r a l a n d economic development of Indians.
Within the context of Indian policy, allotment meant the assignment of reservation land to individual Indians. It was believed that allotment would promote an agricultural lifestyle among Indians while opening up more land for white settlement. As early as 1633, Indian lands had been allotted. Early treaties reserved some lands for ownership by individual Indians or families. Tribal ownership (communal) of lands was sometimes converted into ownership with title held by individual tribal members. These early attempts failed as allotted land quickly passed from Indian
taxes or were sold to satisfy debts or to acquire money to survive. From the passage of the Dawes Act to 1934 when allotment ended, 90 million acres of Indian land were lost. Twenty-seven million acres passed from Indian allottees to non-Indians through sale; an additional 60 million acres were ceded outright or sold to non-Indians as surplus lands.^20 A l l o t m e n t r e s u l t e d i n s e p a r a t i n g I n d i a n s f r o m t h e i r l a n d w i t h o u t accomplishing the benign purposes intended by its supporters.
Allotment occurred on six of Montana's Indian reservations. However, with the exception of the Crow Reservation, the lands were not allotted until after 1900. Surplus lands on the Fort Peck and Flathead Reservations were opened up to non-Indian settlement: the remaining reservations were not opened. However, some allotted land on the Crow and Blackfeet Reservation did eventually pass into non-Indian ownership. Land was never allotted on the Rocky Boy's Reservation.
I n a d d i t i o n t o a l l o t t i n g I n d i a n l a n d s , t h e D a w e s A c t a l s o c o n f e r r e d citizenship on Indians receiving allotments and on Indians living apart f r o m t h e i r t r i b e s a n d a d o p t i n g " h a b i t s o f c i v i l i z e d l i f e. " I n 1 9 2 4 , citizenship was extended to all Indians born within the United States as a reward for participating in World War I. Citizenship did not alter the s t a t u s o f I n d i a n s a s w a r d s o f t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t o r a s t r i b a l members. Indians were also made citizens of the state in which they resided. However, many states continued to deny Indians the right to vote because they were not taxed and they were under the guardianship of the federal government.
The education of Indian youth in the non-Indian culture was also seen as an important tool in the assimilation process. It was believed that if
Indian children would adopt non-Indian ways, then within a generation, assimilation would be completed. The first Indian schools supported by t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t w e r e m i s s i o n s c h o o l s o p e r a t e d b y v a r i o u s religious denominations. In the 1870s, the government began operating off-reservation boarding schools in the belief that removal from tribal influences would speed the assimilation process. That philosophy changed by the turn of the century to one of "bringing civilization" to the Indians through on-reservation day schools. By 1917, the federal government c o n c l u d e d t h a t p u b l i c s c h o o l s o f f e r e d t h e b e s t o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t h e assimilation of Indian children. However, many public schools refused to admit Indian children because their parents did not pay taxes to support the schools. The federal government agreed to pay tuition to allow Indian children to attend public schools.
T h e w h o l e I n d i a n e d u c a t i o n s y s t e m , f r o m m i s s i o n s c h o o l s t o p u b l i c schools, facilitated the loss of the traditional native lifestyle and did irreparable damage to Indian culture. Indian children were taught that their culture, the culture of their parents and grandparents, was inferior. As a result, tribal traditions and languages were lost for many, many years.
Although federal Indian policy would continue to take various twists and turns over the next 40 years, assimilation would remain a dominant theme. America as a melting pot of cultures is a strong image, and many people believe that Indian culture should be blended into the mixture.
Johnson-O'Malley Act of 1934 allowed the Secretary of the Interior, using federal funds and federal facilities, to contract with states to provide a full range of Services to Indians. Services included education, health care, social welfare, and agricultural assistance. Later, contractual a r r a n g e m e n t s w e r e e x t e n d e d t o p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s , corporations, and agencies and political subdivisions of the states.
The culmination of this change in federal policy was the passage in 1934 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), also known as the Wheeler-Howard Act. The purpose of the IRA was to encourage economic development, s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n , c u l t u r a l p l u r a l i t y , a n d a r e v i v a l o f t r i b a l i s m. Although eventual assimilation was still considered the goal of Indian policy, the IRA was to provide a mechanism for tribes as governmental units to interact with and adapt to modern society, rather than force assimilation of individual Indians. The IRA was based on the assumption that tribes should be in existence and that their land base should be protected. A major objective of the IRA was to restrict the pervasive f e d e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o w e r b u t t o c o n t i n u e f e d e r a l s u p e r v i s o r y authority.
The IRA ended the practice of allotment and indefinitely extended the trust period for those allotments still in trust. The IRA, however, did not s p e c i f i c a l l y r e p e a l t h e G e n e r a l A l l o t m e n t A c t. S u r p l u s l a n d s o n a reservation that had remained unsold were restored to tribal ownership; additional lands were also acquired for tribes. These additional lands either became new reservations or were attached to existing reservations.
The IRA authorized tribes to adopt constitutions and bylaws and to organize as federally chartered, self-governing corporations, subject to tribal ratification. The constitutions and charters were also subject to approval by the Secretary of the Interior. Tribes were free to choose whether or not they wished to organize under the IRA. A revolving fund of $10 million was established to make loans to incorporated tribes.
The IRA also established an employment preference for Indians within the BIA. This gave Indians some influence in at least administering federal I n d i a n p o l i c y , a l t h o u g h t h e i r r o l e i n f o r m u l a t i n g p o l i c y w a s s t i l l negligible.
Implementation of the IRA resulted in some very tangible benefits for Indian tribes. It halted the further rapid erosion of the tribal land base. Federal funds were spent for on-reservation health facilities, roads, irrigation systems, housing, and schools. The IRA's success in encouraging t r i b a l s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t w a s m o r e l i m i t e d. T h e m o d e l c o n s t i t u t i o n suggested by the federal authorities was based on an Anglo-American m o d e l o f g o v e r n m e n t t h a t w a s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e traditional methods of tribal government. In addition, Congress made the mistake of regarding Indians as a single homogenous group; the model constitution did not take into consideration differing tribal needs and conditions. Despite all of this, the majority of the tribes elected to organize under the IRA. For these tribes, it offered stability, a revival of t r i b a l g o v e r n m e n t , t r i b a l l a w a n d o r d e r , a n d a n i m p r o v e d e c o n o m i c position.