28 



DICTIONARY OP INDIANS. 



Tecumseh. — Continued. 



superior civilization by which Euro- 

 pean powers claimed dominion, and 

 artfully advanced the theory of the 

 coinmunal right of the tribes to the en- 

 tire country. He admitted that the 

 title of a given tribe within the limits 

 was perfect and perpetual as to other 

 tribes, but held that this did not con- 

 fer upon the tribe the right to sell to 

 others not Indians, this right belong- 

 ing alone to the whole body. As this 

 was followed up by a plea to the tribes 

 to cease war between themselves, and 

 break off from indulgence in intoxi- 

 cating drinks, we have evidence of 

 a mind with great comprehensive 

 powers. See Mooney in Fovirteenth 

 Rep. Bur. Eth., 681-691. (c.T.) 



Treaties. — The political status of the 

 Indians residing within the territorial 

 limits of the United States has been 

 changed in one important respect by 

 official action. From the formation 

 of the Government to March 3, 187 1, 

 the relations with the Indians were 

 determined by treaties made with 

 their tribal atithorities; but by act 

 of Congress of the date named the 

 legal fiction of recognizing the tribes 

 as independent nations with which 

 the United States could enter into 

 solemn treaties was finally set aside 

 after it had continued for nearly a 

 century. The effect of this act was 

 to bring under the immediate control 

 of Congress the relations of the Gov- 

 ernment with the Indians and to re- 

 duce to simple agreements what had 

 before been accomplished by treaties 

 as with a foreign power. Why the 

 Government, although claiming com- 

 plete sovereignty over the territor}' 

 and inhabitants within its domain, 

 adopted the method of dealing with 

 the Indians through treaties, which 

 in the trvie legal sense of the term can 

 only be entered into by independent 

 sovereignties, may briefly be stated: 



The first step of the Government in 

 determining its policy toward the 

 Indians, whether expressed or im- 

 plied, was to decide as to the nature 

 of their territorial rights, this being 

 the chief factor in their relations with 

 the whites. This decision is distinctly 

 stated by the United States Supreme 

 Court in the case of Johnson and 

 Graham's lessee vs. Mcintosh (8 

 Wheaton, 453 et seq.), as follows: 

 "It has never been contended that 

 the Indian title amounted to noth- 

 ing. Their right of possession has 

 never been questioned. The claim of 

 the Government extends to the com- 



plete, ultimate title, charged with the 

 right of possession, and to the exclu- 

 sive power of acquiring this right." 

 The next step was to determine the 

 branch of the Government to carry 

 out this policy. By the 9th of the 

 Articles of Confederation it was de- 

 clared that "the United States in 

 Congress assembled have the sole and 

 exclusive right and power of regu- 

 lating the trade, and managing all 

 affairs with the Indians not members 

 of any of the states." It is clear, 

 therefore, that while acting under the 

 Articles of Confederation the right of 

 managing relations with the Indians 

 resided in Congress alone. In the 

 formation of the Constitution this is 

 briefly expressed under the powers of 

 the legislative department, as fol- 

 lows: "To regulate commerce with 

 foreign nations and ainong the sev- 

 eral states, and with the Indian 

 tribes." 



It is apparent, frorn the use of the 

 term "tribes," that the framers of the 

 Constitution had in contemplation 

 the method of dealing with the In- 

 dians as tribes through treaties. This 

 is clearly shown by the act of March 

 I, 1793, in which it is stated that no 

 purchase or grant of lands shall be of 

 any validity "unless the same be 

 made by a treaty or convention en- 

 tered into pursviant to the Constitu- 

 tion." This action of Congress neces- 

 sarily placed the initiatory steps in 

 dealing with the Indians under the 

 jurisdiction of the President as the 

 treaty-making power, subject to con- 

 firmation by the Senate. 



The colonies and also the mother 

 country had treated with the Indians 

 as "nations," their chiefs or sachems 

 often being designated as "kings," — 

 and this idea, being retained by the 

 founders of our Government, was in- 

 grafted into their policy. It must be 

 remembered that the colonies then 

 were weak, and that the Indian tribes 

 were comparatively strong and cap- 

 able of requiring recognition of equal- 

 ity. Notwithstanding the evident 

 anomaly of such course, the growth 

 in numbers and strength of the 

 whites, and the diminishing power of 

 the natives, this implied equality was 

 recognized in the dealings between 

 the two until the act of March 3, 187 1 . 

 During all this time Indian titles to 

 lands were extinguished only vmder 

 the treaty-making clause of the Con- 

 stitution; and these treaties, thoiigh 

 the tribe may have been reduced to a 

 small band, were usually clothed in 

 the same stately verbiage as the most 



