THOMAS) FRENCH POLICY TOWARD THE INDIANS 545 



no instance is known where such permissiou has ever been ref'nseil or withheld. 

 These sales w(^re passed before the Coniuiandaut (if the District, and were always 

 good and valid, without any order from the Commandant.' 



It appears that Governor O'Keilly ordained that no grant for land in 

 Opelou.sas, Attacapas, or Natchitoches conld exceed one league square. 

 It seems that this ordinance was to have a retroactive effect. Hence, 

 purchases which had been made from Indians were reduced to this 

 amount, but the surplusage, instead ot reverting to the Indians, became 

 a part of the royal domain. 



Finally, we quote the following from the commissioners' report, as 

 bearing ou the point now under discussion: 



If it should lie asked, what evidence exists of the law of prescription operating to 

 tlie extinction of the Indian title to lands in Louisiana, it might bo replied, that the 

 evidence is to be found in the various acts of the Spanish Government, in relation to 

 the Indians, evincing that the Government recog.iized no title in them, independently 

 of that derived from the crown, a mere right of occupancy at the will of the Govern- 

 ment; else why was the sanction of the Government necessary to all sah's passed by 

 Indians, which may be clearly established by a recurrence to written documents, and 

 1lie testimony of Messrs. Trudeau, De Blanc, and Laypard? and why was it not neces- 

 sary to liave such sanction of the sales made liy other subjects of the Spanish Gov- 

 ernment? The force and etl'ect of prescription, in abolishing the Indian title to lauds 

 in Louisiana, is further established by the Indians permitting themselves to be 

 removed from place to place by Governmental authority. By their condescending, 

 in some cases, to ask permission of the (Government to sell their lands, and, when 

 tliat permission was not solicited, assenting to the insertion of a clause in the deeds 

 of sale, expressly admitting that their sales could be of no validity without the ratifi- 

 cation of the (iovernment.- 



THE FRENCH I'OLICY 



A somewhat thorough examination of the documents and histories 

 relating to French dominion in Canada and Louisiana fails to reveal 

 any settled or regularly defined jiolicy in regard to the extinguishment 

 of the Indian title to land. Nevertheless, it is fair to assume that 

 there was some policy in their proceedings in this respect, but it does 

 not apjiear to have been set forth by legal enactments or clearly made 

 known by ordinances. It seems, in truth, to have been a question 

 kept in the background in their dealings with Indians, and brought to 

 the front only in their contests with other i)owers in regard to territory. 

 It would seem, although not clearly announced as a theory or policy, 

 that it was assumed, when a nation or tribe agreed to come under 

 French dominion, that this agreement carried with it the title to their 

 lands. 



In the letters pntent given by Louis XV to tlie " Western Company" 

 in August 1717, the following rights and privileges arc granted: ' 



Sec. V. With a view to give the said Western Company the means of forming a 

 firm establishment, and enable her to execute all the speculations she may under- 

 take, we have given, granted, and conceded, do give, grant, and concede to her, by 



' Laws, XJ. S. Treaties, etc., respecting Public Lauds, vol. n (1836), app.. p. 222*. 



2 Ibid., p. 224-. 



' B. F. French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, pt. 3, 1851, pp. 60, 51. 



