Native American Policy

V

Reservation Period

The removal policy opened up much Native American land in the East for white settlement, but American expansion did not stop at the Mississippi River. Between 1830 and 1860, the United States doubled the amount of territory under its control with the addition of the Oregon country, California, Texas, and the borderlands of southern New Mexico and Arizona that were part of the Gadsden Purchase. These new territorial acquisitions coincided with the arrival of European and Asian immigrants who hoped to join the flood of Americans heading to the American West. The discovery of gold in California in 1849 (see Gold Rush of 1849) and the promise of land for cultivation and settlement presented attractive opportunities for those willing to journey westward.

The stream of migrants brought trouble to the highly diverse groups of Native Americans who already occupied these western lands. These newcomers not only traveled through Native Americans’ lands but also began to use the land for mining and agriculture, disrupting traditional Native American ways of life. To the peoples of the Northern Plains (see Native Americans: The Plains), for example, white settlement meant losing the buffalo herds they relied on for food and other needs; many soon faced starvation. Many native peoples had no immunity to smallpox, cholera, and even some of the more common illnesses, such as influenza, that the settlers brought with them. Some peoples, such as the Mandan in North Dakota, lost large percentages of their population to these diseases.

With so many people moving into the West, the government turned to a policy of restricting Native Americans to reservations, which were generally small areas of land within the group’s territory. This land was to be reserved exclusively for their use. These reservations (see Native American Reservations) kept native peoples separate from whites, thus reducing the potential for conflict. They were also supposed to provide the native peoples with sufficient land to develop new skills in agriculture and livestock management, skills considered necessary for 'civilized' life. Since the government recognized Native Americans as semi-independent nations who retained the right to occupy their lands, it established the reservations by formal treaties. These treaties specified boundaries and established payment for lands that the tribes were asked to relinquish. In 1849 Congress transferred the Bureau of Indian Affairs from the War Department to a new agency, the Department of the Interior. The bureau’s responsibility to administer the government’s Native American policies remained the same.

One of the first of these treaties was the Treaty of Fort Laramie negotiated in 1851 (see Fort Laramie National Historic Site). The Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Crow, Assiniboine, Gros Ventre, Mandan, and Arikara who signed this document agreed to end hostilities among themselves and to accept specified reservations. In exchange, the government offered protection from attacks by white settlers and a yearly payment that would include money as well as food, household goods, livestock, and tools for agriculture. Similar treaties were made with other tribal groups throughout the West over the next two decades.

---

---

These agreements had many problems. Frequently the treaties did not take into account the cultural practices of the native peoples, and often the Native Americans did not fully understand what they were signing or the government misrepresented the conditions to them. A large number of treaties were never ratified by the United States Senate, leaving the status of certain Native American lands in question. In addition, the government agencies responsible for administering these agreements were plagued by corruption and mismanagement, and many treaty provisions were never carried out.

The Native American peoples in the West were frequently dissatisfied with the treaty process and resented the settlers’ continued demands for land. As they sought to protect their lands and to ensure their survival, more than 1000 skirmishes and battles erupted throughout the West between 1861 and 1891 (see Indian Wars). The government responded with costly military campaigns in an attempt to force Native Americans onto reservations and end the hostilities.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs attempted to eliminate corruption among the agents who administered policy on the reservations. As part of this effort, the bureau appointed Christian missionaries to supervisory positions on some reservations. Previously, many agents had been selected in return for political favors. All too often, these politically appointed agents used their position to enrich themselves. They secured government contracts to purchase goods or food promised to the tribes in their treaties and then sold these supplies to outsiders and kept the profits. The missionaries carried out government policies, but they also tried to Christianize native peoples and encouraged them to give up many of their own cultural practices.

Native American opposition continued, especially among Plains groups such as the Sioux or Lakota, who saw their way of life threatened. Some turned to new religions, such as the Ghost Dance (see Native American Religions: Ghost Dance) that promised a return to the old ways, but the government also found these movements threatening. In December 1890 the U.S. Cavalry killed as many as 350 followers of the Sioux leader Sitting Bull because they had practiced the Ghost Dance. After this confrontation near Wounded Knee, South Dakota, the Native American wars effectively came to an end.

VI

Allotment Period

Since its beginnings, the United States government had treated Native Americans as sovereign peoples and used treaties as the legal basis for most of its relationships with them. Between 1778 and 1871, Congress had approved more than 370 treaties with Native American groups, while hundreds more were negotiated but never approved.

This policy changed after the Civil War. Reformers who were concerned about the plight of Native Americans and industrialists who wanted their land and resources decided that assimilating native peoples into American society was a preferable policy. In 1871 the federal government enacted a law stating that the United States would no longer treat Native American tribal groups as independent nations. This legislation signaled a fundamental shift in the government’s relationship with Native Americans. Congress would no longer regard tribal groups as nations outside of its jurisdictional control, but rather as wards of the federal government.

By making the native peoples wards of the government, Congress believed it would be better able to promote their assimilation into the cultural mainstream of white America. Corporate interests intent on developing the West and eastern reformers critical of the government’s past policies toward Native Americans all believed that assimilation was the most effective resolution to what they called the “Indian problem.” The new policy would bring Native Americans one step closer to the end of their tribal identity and the beginning of their existence as individuals under the control of the United States government.

The government’s policies of assimilation extended into all areas of Native American life—economic, political, cultural, and spiritual. For example, government regulations that remained in force until the 1930s sought to destroy the essence of Native American culture by forbidding the practice of traditional spiritual ceremonies. Reservation agents used such tactics as withholding rations and goods to encourage attendance at Christian churches. With government support, some of these churches established day schools and boarding schools where children were taught English and forbidden to speak their native tongues. Government or church-appointed superintendents settled disputes and dictated political and economic decisions, assuming roles that had formerly been filled by tribal leaders. The Major Crimes Act, enacted in 1885, gave the United States government criminal jurisdiction over native peoples who committed any of seven major crimes, including murder and burglary. Agents on more than two-thirds of the reservations established courts to enforce federal regulations that, in many cases, outlawed traditional cultural and spiritual practices.

In 1887 Congress passed the centerpiece of the assimilation program, the General Allotment Act, also known as the Dawes Act. The objective of this legislation was to “civilize” Native Americans by teaching them to become farmers and ranchers. Congress wanted to break up the reservations, which were communally owned, and give individual Native Americans their own plots of land. Heads of households received about 30 to 60 hectares (80 to 160 acres), depending on the suitability of the land for agriculture and ranching; their wives and children, as well as unmarried adults, received smaller plots, usually 20 to 30 hectares (40 to 80 acres).

The allotment process was not accepted willingly by most native peoples. For many, the land was the spiritual and cultural center of their lives. To treat the land as an economic commodity undermined their sense of identity and their values. The division of reservations into small parcels led to a rapid reduction in the amount of land owned by Native Americans. Within 30 years, tribes had lost two-thirds of the territory they had controlled in 1887. The government sold most of the land remaining after the allotment process to white settlers. Over the years, individual Native American landowners were often forced to sell their allotments to pay bills or to feed their families.

For the next several decades Native Americans lived under a policy that outlawed their traditional means of existence, yet failed to provide adequate resources to support educational, health, and economic programs necessary for a new life. In 1924 Congress extended American citizenship to all Native Americans, although by this time nearly two-thirds of native peoples were already citizens, including those who served in the United States military during World War I (1914-1918). The right of American citizenship did not replace Native American tribal membership, nor did it necessarily free native peoples from their position as wards of the government. Citizenship also did not offer significant improvement in living standards, and reformers continued to find fault with the government’s policy toward Native Americans. Many of their criticisms were confirmed by the Merriam Report, an independent study commissioned to review the administration of Native American affairs. The report, published in 1928, described the loss of tribal lands through the allotment process, the poor health and educational levels of Native Americans, and the lack of control native people had over their own lives.

VII

Indian Reorganization Period

In 1932 President Franklin Roosevelt appointed John Collier as commissioner of Indian Affairs. Collier, an outspoken critic of the Bureau of Indian Affairs during the allotment period, was both knowledgeable and respectful of Native American culture. As commissioner he was committed to reversing the government’s previous policies that were hostile to traditional Native American cultural practices. He also wanted to improve the health and welfare of Native Americans.

Collier immediately went to work to improve economic conditions among Native Americans. He brought to the reservations many of Roosevelt’s New Deal programs, which were designed to counteract the economic problems of the Great Depression. In some cases, he established separate agencies, such as the Indian Civilian Conservation Corps, to employ Native Americans on conservation projects, and the Indian Arts and Crafts Board to promote sales of goods made by Native Americans. He also worked to withdraw all federal regulations forbidding the practice of Indian religious ceremonies and to end the sale of allotted lands.

Collier’s most wide-ranging effort was to return political, cultural, and economic authority to the tribes. He sought to accomplish this goal with the Indian Reorganization Act (see Native Americans: 20th-Century U.S. Policies). Collier’s original draft of the legislation proposed some revolutionary new measures for self-government and the revival of tribal control over Native American lands. The bill faced strong opposition from some lawmakers as well as a few Native American groups, and it was heavily amended before Congress finally passed it in 1934. In its final form, the Indian Reorganization Act established a process through which native peoples could adopt a constitution and establish tribal councils. It was designed to give Native Americans greater control over the political, social, and economic policies that affected their lives.

VIII

Termination Period

Interest in Native American culture and traditions flourished during the era of the Indian Reorganization Act, but this attention was short-lived. Victory in World War II gave Americans a new pride in mainstream American culture and ideals. Native Americans had shown their patriotism by volunteering for military service in record numbers, but the postwar emphasis on the superiority of the mainstream way of life translated into another change in the government’s attitudes toward Native Americans. Congress no longer supported policies encouraging a renewal of tribal culture and communities. In fact, Congress passed a series of bills designed to return to the policy of assimilation and to integrate Native Americans into the broader society as rapidly as possible.

The 1946 Indian Claims Commission Act served as a forerunner of this change in policy. The act was designed to resolve Native American land claims against the government and to ensure that no future claims would be filed. The Indian Claims Commission Act provided native peoples the opportunity to sue the federal government over the illegal transfer of tribal lands and to make other claims under the terms of the treaties that the government had negotiated with native groups. Several hundred petitions were filed, overwhelming the commission. Although tribes ultimately received more than $800 million in compensation for their losses, the settlements were not as high as some groups expected. More importantly, the act did not provide for the return of Native American lands. The commission’s original purpose of correcting past wrongs was overshadowed by the perception that it represented a step toward assimilation and the withdrawal of federal responsibility for Native American groups.

During the 1950s and early 1960s, Congress passed a number of additional bills designed to terminate the government’s relationship with Native Americans. House Concurrent Resolution 108 stated that the government would pursue a policy to end Native Americans’ status as wards of the government. Native peoples would become “subject to the same laws and entitled to the same privileges and responsibilities” as other United States citizens. Between 1954 and 1962 the federal government terminated its responsibility for services and benefits to at least 109 tribes, bands, and communities.

Responsibility for these groups was terminated based on an evaluation of the extent of the group’s adoption of white culture and its economic condition. Congress made the final determination of which groups to terminate, and the secretary of the interior set up the timetable for federal control to end. Their reservation lands were sold or allotted, and members of terminated tribes were no longer eligible for housing, health, education, and community development programs designed to help native people.

Another important piece of the government’s termination policy was Public Law 280, passed in 1953. This bill, passed without the consent of the tribes, transferred almost all civil and criminal jurisdiction over reservation lands in California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin from the federal government to the states. During the 1950s, the Bureau of Indian Affairs also helped to establish a relocation program, which attempted to integrate Native Americans more fully by moving many from their rural reservations to large urban areas.

IX

Self-Determination Period

By the mid-1960s the climate of opinion began to change again. The civil rights movement, which prompted federal legislation to fight poverty and to promote equal rights, highlighted the needs of minority groups in the United States. Moreover, the protests in the 1960s showed how both nonviolent and violent public marches and demonstrations could focus attention on problems in American society. In 1968 several young Native American men formed the American Indian Movement (AIM). This group protested the government’s treatment of Native Americans and sought to protect their rights as they were spelled out in treaties. The movement soon attracted a significant following, especially among Native American youth. AIM promoted a variety of demonstrations for Native American rights that included sit-ins, building takeovers, and marches at sites around the country. Some of their most highly publicized activities included an attempt to establish Native American claims to Alcatraz by the occupation of that island from 1969 to 1971. In 1973 a protest over government policy took place at the battle site of Wounded Knee. It resulted in a 71-day siege and two deaths. These militant actions brought the plight of Native Americans before the American public and Congress.

In 1975 Congress responded to intense tribal lobbying efforts and the publicity generated by AIM. It passed the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, which helped Native American groups to assume control over many of the federal programs supervised by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Other important laws, such as the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, gave Native Americans control over the adoption and foster care of Native American children.

Since 1975 Congress has generally followed a policy of allowing Native American groups to govern themselves. Despite continued budget cuts and insufficient funding, Native American peoples have increasingly taken control of the management of their schools, housing programs, health programs, economic ventures, and lands. In the last two decades of the 20th century, Native Americans also gained experience in presenting their opinions to Congress and in the federal courts. While not always successful, they won many landmark cases protecting their fishing, treaty, and land rights and expanding their sovereignty over issues of both economic and cultural significance. See also Native Americans of North America: Self-Determination.

Despite some improvement in the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans, conflicts over federal policy persist. Some tribes have charged the Bureau of Indian Affairs with mismanagement of Native American lands and waste of millions of dollars in trust funds. Government efforts to slash the federal budget have decreased the amount of funds allotted to Native American programs. Tribal people continue to have their religious rights denied. Social problems associated with alcohol use, including crimes and family violence, have risen steadily. While a number of tribes have started lucrative gambling casinos on tribal lands, others have failed to establish viable businesses or to provide sufficient employment opportunities for people on the reservations. In recent years the Supreme Court of the United States has denied tribes important governing powers over nonmembers within their reservation boundaries, making the enforcement of tribal law difficult. Other Native Americans are fighting to gain the government’s recognition of their tribal status in order to qualify for federal services and benefits.

At the heart of many of these conflicts between native peoples and the federal government is the issue of sovereignty, or the right of Native Americans to govern themselves. Increasing assertions of sovereignty have included, for example, attempts by Native Americans to exercise and manage hunting and fishing rights, to tax non-Native American users of reservation land, or to impose separate standards for environmental control of natural resources. These efforts have caused some backlash in Congress as well as local communities and resulted in attempts by nonnative peoples to limit new sources of tribal power.

In a March 1999 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of eight bands of Chippewa to hunt and fish without state regulation on lands ceded to the United States in an 1837 treaty. The Mille Lacs Chippewa filed the suit challenging Minnesota’s authority to impose hunting and fishing restrictions on tribal members. The ruling denied Minnesota’s claim that its admission as a state superceded earlier treaty provisions. Whether this decision signals new federal and legal support for tribal sovereignty remains unclear. What is clear is that the efforts of Native Americans to protect their lands as well as their rights to self-government, to religious identity and practices, and to inherent sovereignty at all levels will remain at the heart of Indian life in the 21st century just as it has in the last three centuries.