Reviewing the on-line material, I noticed the title
-- 19th Century Indian Relations with the United States. There is a lot of information regarding
policies that were enacted by the United States government to “act in good
faith in its negotiations with sovereign Indian nations” (American Indian
Issues).
Three
distinct policies were set up to deal with the Indians.
- The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 defined the manner in which the United States government would deal with the Indian nations. Section 14, Article 3 of the Ordinance proclaimed, "The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from time to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship with them."
- The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8) declares that "The Congress shall have the power to regulate Commerce with foreign nations and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes." The Constitution thereby specified that there were three governmental entities within the United States with forms of sovereignty - Indian tribes, state governments, and the federal government.
- The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1790 placed nearly all interaction between Indians and non-Indians under federal - not state - control - including buying and selling of Indian land. It also established the new boundaries of Indian Country, protected Indian lands against non-Indian aggression, subjected trading with Indians to federal regulation, and stipulated that injuries against Indians by non-Indians was a federal crime. The conduct of Indians among themselves while in Indian country was left entirely to the tribes(American Indian Issues)
The intent to act in the best interest
of the Tribes was there, however as the United States grew more land was needed
for the white settlers, and these policies were overlooked. Treaties -- legal agreements between the US
government and the Indian nations -- were used to obtain the land from the
Indians. In exchange the government “promised to provide protection, benefits,
and rights to the American Indian peoples in exchange for some or all of their
land. (American Indian Issues).” Supreme
Court decisions only complicated matters when they tried to interpret the
treaties when disagreements occurred. One
Supreme Court ruling was that tribes have inherent sovereign rights, while the
other stated that tribes only had the sovereign rights that congress gives
them. As the white population increased
and demanded more room, the federal government stepped into and created four
policies to obtain further Indian land: removal, reservations, allotment and
assimilation, and elimination.
The creation of the Indian Removal Act
of 1830 by then President Andrew Jackson gave the President the authority to
remove the tribes from their lands, by force if necessary.
Reservations were created to confine
the Natives geographical area. The
thought was that this would cause the Natives to assimilate and become
civilized.
Allotment and Assimilation plans were
to civilize the Natives by removing them from their communal land, thereby
removing them from their culture. It was
believed that this along with reeducation would in turn lead to a civilized
Native.
Any resistance by the Natives was
thought to be an act of war, and thereby the use of military action against
them was warranted, leading to resistors being eliminated.
After all these policies and attempts
to civilize or outright eliminate the Natives, “the cultural and spiritual
heritage of many Indian nations survived” and therefore helped to revitalize
some Indian Nations.
Citations:
American Indian Issues: An
Introductory and curricular guide for educators, 19th Century Indian relations with the United States,
retrieved from http://americanindiantah.com/history/nar_19thcenturyrelations.html
Hi Mike,
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate that the United States government really made it impossible for any genuine trust to be established between it and the various Native American groups. It seems that every treaty they made in the beginning was broken sooner than later, to obtain more land.
I was a little surprised at how closely the Canadian government's actions toward Native Americans were to those of the U.S., such as the law like the U.S. Dawes Act for allotment of Native American land, or the other laws involving land claims and reservations (Sutton 36).
Sutton, Mark Q. An Introduction to Native North America. 4th ed. New York: Pearson, 2012. Print.
Hi Melisa,
DeleteThere were similarities in the treatment of Natives between the governments of the Unite States and Canada. Although I do remember reading in Sutton (although I can not find it to cite it) that originally the Canadian government was not as tough on the Natives, and that was attributed to the Natives residing in a relatively small area and not in the areas of interest of the Canadian people.
How do you feel about the underhanded way that the government treated the Native Americans? They basically said, trust us and we will work with you and when it became inconvenient to them laws were made in order to detain (aka arrest or imprison) and remove them from their lands which in some cases led to the "Trail of Tears". It disgusts me some to know that human beings were treated this way.
ReplyDeleteHi Marie,
DeleteThe government making and signing treaties only to break or out right ignore them, created high tensions between the Natives and the government. From these tensions, instances like the protest at Wounded Knee develop. It seems like most issues can be worked out if both parties are on the same sheet of music, although this appears to be rarely the case.
Very good discussions everyone! Michael...I think you did an excellent job research the information and responding to your classmates. Your research and interest in the ways that US and Canadian laws intersected native cultural practices is well grounded.Good work!
ReplyDelete