4.1 Treaty-Making Process and Historical Context
5 min read•july 31, 2024
Treaty-making between the U.S. and Native American tribes was a complex process rooted in colonial practices and international law. It spanned from the late 18th century to 1871, resulting in over 370 ratified treaties that shaped and land rights.
The U.S. sought land for expansion and peaceful relations, while tribes aimed to protect their lands and ways of life. Power dynamics shifted over time, with early treaties being more equitable and later ones favoring the U.S. as its military strength and population grew.
Treaty-Making Context and Motivations
Historical Origins and Evolution
Top images from around the web for Historical Origins and Evolution
File:Treaty of Penn with Indians by Benjamin West.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Penn Treaty Park - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
File:'Penn's Treaty -with the Indians-', oil on canvas painting by Edward Hicks, 1830-35 ... View original
Is this image relevant?
File:Treaty of Penn with Indians by Benjamin West.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Penn Treaty Park - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Historical Origins and Evolution
File:Treaty of Penn with Indians by Benjamin West.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Penn Treaty Park - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
File:'Penn's Treaty -with the Indians-', oil on canvas painting by Edward Hicks, 1830-35 ... View original
Is this image relevant?
File:Treaty of Penn with Indians by Benjamin West.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Penn Treaty Park - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Treaty-making with Native American tribes emerged from European colonial practices recognized tribal sovereignty
- Rooted in international law principles
- Acknowledged tribes as distinct political entities
- U.S. treaty-making spanned from late 18th century to 1871
- Congress ended practice through Indian Appropriations Act
- Over 370 treaties ratified during this period
- Doctrine of discovery provided legal justification for U.S. land claims
- Articulated in (1823)
- Gave European nations rights to Native lands upon "discovery"
- Influenced treaty negotiations by limiting tribal land rights
Government Motivations and Tribal Perspectives
- U.S. government motivated by multiple factors
- Land acquisition for westward expansion ()
- Establishment of peaceful relations with tribes
- Resource access (fur trade, mineral rights)
- Native American tribes entered treaties for various reasons
- Protection from rival tribes ( against Apache)
- Access to trade goods (guns, textiles)
- Attempts to preserve lands and ways of life (reservation system)
- Cultural and linguistic barriers led to misunderstandings
- Different concepts of land ownership (communal vs. individual)
- Varying interpretations of treaty terms (hunting and fishing rights)
Power Dynamics and Changing Relationships
- Balance of power shifted over time
- Early treaties more equitable (, 1778)
- Later treaties increasingly favorable to U.S. (, 1868)
- Factors influencing power dynamics
- U.S. military strength (defeat of tribes in various conflicts)
- Expanding U.S. population (increased pressure on tribal lands)
- Technological advancements (firearms, transportation)
- Impact on treaty terms and enforcement
- Increasingly restrictive conditions for tribes
- Reduced tribal bargaining power over time
Treaty Implications for Tribes and Government
Legal Status and Obligations
- Treaties considered "supreme law of the land" under U.S. Constitution
- Article VI, Clause 2 establishes treaty supremacy
- Creates binding obligations for federal government
- doctrine established through treaties
- Obligates federal government to protect tribal resources
- Requires government to act in best interests of tribes
- Extends to areas like education, healthcare, and economic development
- Treaties defined boundaries of tribal lands
- Established reservation system ()
- Significant implications for tribal sovereignty and jurisdiction
Sovereignty and Governance
- Tribal sovereignty recognized in treaties
- Allows tribes to govern themselves within U.S. federal framework
- Includes powers of taxation, law enforcement, and court systems
- Treaties often limited tribal authority in certain areas
- Restrictions on foreign relations (no independent alliances)
- Limitations on land alienation without federal consent
- Concept of "" reinforced unequal relationship
- Defined in (1831)
- Placed tribes under federal protection but limited full sovereignty
Legal Challenges and Interpretation
- Treaty rights subject to numerous legal challenges
- Fishing rights disputes (, 1974)
- Land claim cases (, 1980)
- Supreme Court decisions shaped federal Indian law
- (1832) affirmed tribal sovereignty
- (1903) allowed Congress to abrogate treaties
- Ongoing debates over and enforcement
- Questions of reserved rights (water rights, hunting, fishing)
- Issues of tribal jurisdiction over non-members on reservation lands
Power Dynamics in Treaty-Making
Negotiation Imbalances
- U.S. government often held superior negotiating position
- Military strength (threat of force or retaliation)
- Economic resources (ability to withhold trade or rations)
- Expanding population (increased pressure on tribal lands)
- Many treaties negotiated under duress or threat of violence
- (1835) signed by unauthorized Cherokee faction
- (1855) negotiated after military defeat
- Language and cultural barriers led to misunderstandings
- Concepts of land ownership often misinterpreted
- Long-term implications of treaties not fully explained
Treaty Violations and Enforcement
- U.S. government frequently violated or unilaterally changed treaty terms
- Broken promises on reservation boundaries ()
- Failure to provide promised goods and services
- Power imbalance in treaty enforcement
- Limited recourse for tribes to address violations
- U.S. courts often favored government interpretation
- Selection of tribal representatives sometimes manipulated
- U.S. officials favored amenable leaders (Treaty of New Echota)
- Traditional leadership structures sometimes ignored
Cultural Impositions
- Treaties often imposed Western concepts on tribes
- Individual land ownership (, 1887)
- Centralized governance structures
- Disregard for traditional tribal systems and beliefs
- Communal land use practices
- Spiritual connections to specific lands
- Forced cultural changes through treaty terms
- Mandatory Western education for children
- Restrictions on religious practices (Ghost Dance)
Treaties and Native American Sovereignty
Foundational Treaties
- Treaty of Fort Stanwix (1784)
- One of first post-Revolutionary War treaties
- Set precedent for U.S.-tribal relations
- Involved land cessions from Iroquois Confederacy
- Treaty of Hopewell (1785-86)
- Series of treaties with southern tribes
- Established peace and defined boundaries
- Recognized tribal self-governance within defined territories
Land Cession and Reservation Treaties
- Treaty of Fort Laramie (1851)
- Defined territories for several Plains tribes
- Established concept of reservations
- Attempted to reduce inter-tribal conflicts
- Treaty of Medicine Lodge (1867)
- Confined Southern Plains tribes to reservations
- Initiated transition from nomadic to agricultural lifestyles
- Promised federal support for this transition
- Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868)
- Established Great Sioux Reservation
- Recognized Lakota claims to Black Hills
- Set stage for future conflicts (Black Hills War)
Treaties with Ongoing Legal Implications
- Stevens Treaties (1854-1855)
- Negotiated in Pacific Northwest
- Guaranteed fishing rights to tribes
- Subject of ongoing legal disputes (United States v. Washington)
- (1848)
- Not directly with Native tribes, but impacted indigenous peoples
- Affected land rights in newly acquired southwestern territories
- Led to complex legal status for Pueblo Indians
- Treaty of New Echota (1835)
- Led to forced removal of Cherokee Nation
- Resulted in Trail of Tears
- Continues to impact Cherokee governance and identity
Key Terms to Review (32)
Black Hills: The Black Hills is a mountain range in South Dakota and Wyoming, sacred to the Lakota Sioux people and historically significant due to its rich resources and cultural heritage. The area became a focal point of conflict following the discovery of gold in 1874, leading to broken treaties and a series of legal disputes that have continued into modern times, highlighting the complex history of treaty-making and Native American political activism.
Blackfeet Treaty: The Blackfeet Treaty, formally known as the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1851), was an agreement between the United States government and the Blackfeet Nation that aimed to define territorial boundaries and establish peace. This treaty was part of a larger pattern of treaty-making during westward expansion, highlighting the often inequitable negotiations and the changing relationships between Native American tribes and the U.S. government.
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia: Cherokee Nation v. Georgia was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1831 that addressed the status of Native American tribes in relation to the federal government. The case arose when the Cherokee Nation sought an injunction against the state of Georgia to prevent the enforcement of state laws that violated treaties and threatened their sovereignty. The ruling highlighted the complexities of the relationship between Native American nations and the United States, particularly regarding legal recognition and the treaty-making process.
Chief Joseph: Chief Joseph was the leader of the Nez Perce tribe who is best known for his resistance against the United States government's attempts to forcibly remove his people from their ancestral lands in the 1870s. His eloquence and commitment to peace during this conflict have made him a symbol of Native American resistance and resilience in the face of treaty violations and government oppression.
Colonialism: Colonialism is a practice where one nation establishes control over another, often through conquest, exploitation, and settlement. This power dynamic has significant implications on indigenous cultures, economies, and social structures, influencing various aspects of life such as governance, land ownership, and identity. The effects of colonialism can still be seen today in the ongoing struggles for sovereignty and cultural preservation among indigenous peoples.
Comanche-U.S. Alliance: The Comanche-U.S. Alliance refers to the strategic partnership that developed between the Comanche tribe and the United States government during the 19th century, particularly in response to mutual threats from rival Native American tribes and encroaching settlers. This alliance was characterized by treaties that aimed to establish peace, secure territorial rights, and promote trade, while also reflecting the complexities of power dynamics and cultural exchanges in the broader context of U.S. expansion westward.
Dawes Act: The Dawes Act, enacted in 1887, aimed to assimilate Native Americans into American society by allotting individual plots of land to families while eliminating communal tribal landholdings. This act not only reduced the land held by tribes but also sought to transform Native Americans into independent farmers, reflecting the broader policies of the U.S. government towards Indigenous peoples during this era.
Domestic Dependent Nations: Domestic dependent nations refer to the status of Native American tribes in the United States, recognizing them as sovereign entities that exist within the framework of federal authority. This term highlights the unique legal relationship between tribal governments and the federal government, where tribes maintain certain self-governing powers while being subject to federal law. This relationship is crucial in understanding the treaty-making process and the implications of landmark Supreme Court cases that have shaped tribal sovereignty and governance.
Ely S. Parker: Ely S. Parker was a prominent Seneca leader and the first Native American to hold the position of Commissioner of Indian Affairs in the United States, serving from 1869 to 1870. His leadership and advocacy played a crucial role in the treaty-making process during a transformative period in American history, particularly regarding Native American rights and policies.
Federal Recognition: Federal recognition is the official acknowledgment by the U.S. government that a Native American tribe has a distinct political status and is entitled to certain rights and benefits. This recognition is crucial because it determines the tribe's sovereignty, eligibility for federal assistance, and ability to govern itself, as well as its legal status in relation to both state and federal law.
Forced Relocation: Forced relocation refers to the involuntary movement of individuals or communities from their ancestral lands, often implemented by governmental authorities or colonial powers. This practice has been a significant aspect of Native American history, particularly in relation to treaties and policies that led to the removal of Indigenous peoples from their territories, fundamentally altering their social, cultural, and economic structures.
Great Sioux Reservation: The Great Sioux Reservation was a large tract of land designated for the Sioux Nation by the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. This reservation was established in response to the U.S. government's attempts to control the territory of the Great Plains and was intended to ensure the Sioux people's rights to their ancestral lands. Over time, however, the U.S. government violated the treaty, leading to significant loss of land and resources for the Sioux people, which illustrates the broader complexities of the treaty-making process in U.S. history.
Indian Removal Act: The Indian Removal Act was a law passed by the U.S. Congress in 1830 that authorized the federal government to remove Native American tribes from their ancestral lands in the southeastern United States to designated 'Indian Territory' west of the Mississippi River. This act is significant as it laid the groundwork for the forced relocation of thousands of Native Americans, leading to events such as the Trail of Tears and continuing impacts on tribal sovereignty and land rights.
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act: The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, enacted in 1975, empowers Native American tribes to take control of their own education and social services by allowing them to enter into contracts with the federal government. This act marks a significant shift towards self-governance and reflects the recognition of tribal sovereignty, enabling tribes to tailor programs to better meet their unique cultural and community needs.
Johnson v. M'Intosh: Johnson v. M'Intosh is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case from 1823 that established the principle that private citizens could not purchase land directly from Native American tribes, as the federal government held the exclusive right to negotiate land transactions. This case reflects the broader themes of European doctrines of discovery and conquest, the trust doctrine, and the impact of foundational legal decisions on Native American sovereignty and rights.
Land cession: Land cession refers to the formal relinquishment of land by one party to another, typically through treaties or agreements. This process was often seen in the context of Native American tribes ceding their ancestral lands to the United States government, leading to significant changes in land ownership and sovereignty. The implications of land cession are profound, as it often reflects power dynamics, colonialism, and the struggle for Indigenous rights and recognition.
Land treaty: A land treaty is a formal agreement between two or more parties that outlines the terms of land ownership, rights, and responsibilities, often involving Native American tribes and the U.S. government. These treaties were typically used to facilitate the transfer of land from Indigenous peoples to settlers and were often negotiated under coercive circumstances, reflecting the complex dynamics of power and sovereignty during colonization.
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock: Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case from 1903 that addressed the authority of Congress over Native American treaties and their enforcement. The case arose when a Native American tribe challenged the U.S. government’s ability to unilaterally modify treaties, arguing that the government had violated their rights under the Treaty of 1867. This case established the precedent that Congress holds significant power to alter treaties without consent from Native tribes, highlighting the imbalanced relationship between the federal government and Native nations.
Louisiana Purchase: The Louisiana Purchase was a monumental land acquisition made by the United States in 1803, where the U.S. acquired approximately 827,000 square miles of territory from France. This purchase effectively doubled the size of the nation and opened up vast tracts of land for settlement and exploration, playing a crucial role in America's westward expansion and its geopolitical strategy.
Manifest Destiny: Manifest Destiny is a 19th-century doctrine that held the belief that the expansion of the United States across the American continent was both justified and inevitable. This idea was fueled by a sense of American exceptionalism and the belief that it was the nation's divine right to expand its territory. Manifest Destiny played a significant role in shaping U.S. policy, particularly in relation to Native American lands and the treaty-making process.
Peace Treaty: A peace treaty is a formal agreement between conflicting parties to end hostilities and establish peace, often outlining terms for resolution and future relations. These treaties can have significant implications for political boundaries, resource distribution, and the rights of involved parties. The process of creating a peace treaty is usually complex and influenced by historical context, power dynamics, and the needs of those involved.
Treaty interpretation: Treaty interpretation refers to the process of determining the meaning and legal implications of treaties, particularly those involving Native American tribes and the federal government. This process is essential for understanding how treaties are applied in practice, as ambiguities can lead to differing interpretations that impact rights, sovereignty, and obligations. The interpretation of treaties is influenced by historical context and prevailing legal doctrines, especially in the wake of European conquest and colonization.
Treaty of Fort Laramie: The Treaty of Fort Laramie, signed in 1851, was an agreement between the United States government and several Native American tribes to establish boundaries for tribal territories and ensure peace between them and settlers. This treaty is crucial in understanding the historical relationships between Native nations and the U.S. government, including issues of sovereignty, recognition, and treaty rights that continue to impact Native communities today.
Treaty of Fort Pitt: The Treaty of Fort Pitt, signed in 1778, was an agreement between the United States and the Delaware Nation, marking the first formal treaty between the new American government and a Native American tribe. This treaty was significant because it established a military alliance against British forces during the American Revolutionary War, recognizing the Delaware as allies and promising protection for their lands.
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was a pivotal agreement signed in 1848 that ended the Mexican-American War, resulting in significant territorial gains for the United States. This treaty not only shaped the borders of present-day U.S. territories but also had profound implications for Native American communities and their sovereignty, especially as it related to land rights and governance.
Treaty of New Echota: The Treaty of New Echota was a controversial agreement signed in 1835 between the United States government and a small faction of the Cherokee Nation, which ceded all Cherokee lands east of the Mississippi River in exchange for compensation and land in Indian Territory. This treaty is significant as it set the stage for the forced removal of the Cherokee people, known as the Trail of Tears, highlighting the broader themes of U.S. treaty-making processes and historical contexts involving Native American tribes during the 19th century.
Tribal sovereignty: Tribal sovereignty refers to the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves and make decisions regarding their own affairs, free from outside interference. This concept is rooted in the recognition of tribes as distinct political entities with their own laws, governance systems, and cultural practices, which is crucial in understanding their legal rights and responsibilities within the broader framework of U.S. law.
Trust responsibility: Trust responsibility refers to the legal and ethical obligation of the federal government to protect the interests, lands, resources, and rights of Native American tribes. This duty has historical roots and continues to influence various aspects of the relationship between tribes and the federal government, ensuring that the government's actions align with the promises made in treaties and statutes.
United States Constitution: The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States, establishing the framework for the government and the rights of the citizens. It was drafted in 1787 and outlines the structure of the federal government, including the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, while also addressing the relationship between states and the federal government. Its provisions laid the groundwork for treaty-making processes and influenced how treaties are negotiated, ratified, and implemented within the context of U.S. law.
United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians: United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1980, where the Court ruled that the United States government owed compensation to the Sioux Nation for the illegal taking of their Black Hills territory following the 1876 gold rush. This case highlights significant issues around treaty rights, land dispossession, and the federal government's obligations to Native American tribes.
United States v. Washington: United States v. Washington is a landmark court case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1974 that clarified the scope of treaty rights for Native American tribes, specifically concerning fishing rights in Washington state. The ruling reinforced the idea that treaties signed with tribes are to be honored, thereby highlighting the legal obligations of states and federal entities toward Native American sovereignty and treaty rights.
Worcester v. Georgia: Worcester v. Georgia was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1832 that determined the state of Georgia could not impose its laws within the boundaries of the Cherokee Nation, highlighting the federal government's authority in matters involving Native American tribes. This case underscored the legal complexities of treaty-making and the historical context surrounding Native American sovereignty, which remains significant in understanding contemporary legal relations and responsibilities between the federal government and tribal nations.