Indian Claims Commission Final Report August 13, 1946 September 30, 1978
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
._ National Indian Law Library //\;" )United States Indian Claims Commi~ Basem~nt. - Indian Claims ~ NILL No. Commlsslon Room - for photc August 13, 1946 September 30, 1978 United States Indian Claims Commission Final Report August 13, 1946 September 30, 1978 Commissioners: Jerome K. Kuykendali, Chairman John T. Vance Richard W. Yarborough Margaret H. Pierce Brantley Blue f t I I I i j I I i Members of the Indian Claims Commission ! Edgar E. Witt (D-Texas) Apr. 10, 1947 - June 30, 1960 Appointed Chief Commissioner Apr. 10, 1947 William M. Holt (R-Nebraska) Apr. 10, 1947 - June 30, 1968 Louis J. O'MaIT (D-Wyoming) Apr. 10, 1947 - July 31, 1959 Arthur V. Watkins (R-Utah) Aug. 1.5, 1959 - Sep. 30, 1967 Appointed Chief Commissioner July I, 1960 T. Harold Scott (D-Colorado) July I, 1960 - June 30, 1968 John T. Vance (D-Montana) Dec. 19, 1967 - Sep. 30, 1978 Appointed Chairman Mar. 19, 1968 Jerome K. Kuykendall (R-Virginia) Dec. 19, 1967 - Sep. 30, 1978 Appointed Chairman June II, 1969 Richard W. Yarborough (D-Texas) Dec. 28, 1967 - Sep. 30, 1978 Margaret H. Pierce (R-Wash., D.C.) Oct. 16, 1968 - Sep. 30, 1978 Theodore R. McKeldin (R-Maryland) Nov. 21, 1968 - May I, 1969 (Interim Appointment) Brantley BIue (R-Tennessee) May 2, 1969 - Sep. 30, 1978 Preface This is the Final Report of the Indian Claims Commission. Reports have been issued annually since 1968, but these were for the purpose of showing yearly progress. The Final Report is intended to give an expanded picture ofthe Commis sion and its work. In a document limited in extent, a good deal ofmaterial has had to be ignored or condensed. The intent is to explore briefly the scope ofthe problems of Indian claims. To do so we have included a concise history ofthe Commission. It briefly traces the origin of the Indian claims against the United States Govern ment and the attempt to resolve them in the Federal Courts; discusses the legisla tive history of the Indian Claims Commission Act; and surveys the growth and work of the Commission from its inception in August 1946 to its termination in September 1978. It is offered as an expanded chronology of legislative and admin istrative actions and avoids so far as possible discussion of the substance of the Commission's decisions. It does not represent the opinion of the Commission or any Commissioner. The Commission was a facet in the century and a halfold process ofIndian claims litigation. It did not create the claims but, in the more than 500 dockets that it decided, it succeeded in mitigating many of the problems which arose as a result ofsettlement and westward expansion in this country. Hopefully, interested parties will be enlightened with respect to the enormity of the task which faced the Com mission from its inception. To this end, in addition to the historical survey, we have included an alphabetical index and a docket number index to the 617 dockets filed before the Commission. Also, we present a map which delineates the adjudicated land areas of the various Indian tribes. This map is the result of the labor of Commissioner Richard W. Yarborough and is further explained in the Commissioner's own preface to the map. We wish to thank those who have applied their time and effort to this work. Dr. Harvey D. Rosenthal wrote the historical survey from his larger study of the sub ject. Ms. Gail Reizenstein and Mr. John B. Yellott, Jr., law clerks, helped Mr. Donald Hyde compile the two indexes. Ms. Mary Ann Glenn, Ms. Jane Otto, and Ms. Judy Femi worked long on the typing and proofing ofthe index and the history. Lastly, appreciation should be especially expressed to the Chief Counsel of the Commission, Mr. Harry E. Webb, Jr., the man who sponsored and made it a reality. iii Table of Contents Page List of Commissioners . _ Preface _. ... .._._______ ii Historical Survey .______________ 1 Alphabetical Index of Indian Claims Commission Cases Through September 1, 1978 .__ 23 Addendum ..... ._____________________________ 107 Index of Indian Claims by Docket Number . .. 113 Fiscal Year Totals of Dockets Completed and Awards ._____ 125 Preface to Map ... .________ 127 Introduction .__ 127 Map Area Index . .. 131 Alphabetical Tribal Index _. .. ._______ 139 Citator, Court of Claims to Federal Reporter .... 141 Map "Indian Land Areas Judicially Established" ---------------------... - pO::1et v Historical Survey Indian Grievances, the Government, and nearly 100 dealt with boundaries between Indian the Court ofClaims, 1831-1946 and white lands primarily. 2 These treaties and other Government agreements embodied 720 land ces The bases of the Indian claims against the Ameri sions from 1784 to 1894. can Government were rooted in what has been By the 1890's, the contest for America was over referred to as the "largest real estate transaction and its possession signed, sealed, and delivered. in history." As the Indian's possessions receded, his But, though the white man was contented with his claim surfaced. This element of American history record in these dealings, the Indian was not. One flowered in the period from the close of the Civil Western historian has noted that "it would be diffi War to the First World War and the "wrongs com cult, indeed, to find a land cession made by the mitted, or at least initiated by our public servants in Indians entirely oftheir own volition."3 The Ameri that period give rise to most of the claims that we can right to buy always superseded the Indian right are trying to redress today." 1 not to sell. The white man's superior power allowed Historical precedent and national policy called for this policy, and pro forma use of the treaty con the United States to acquire this land by the legal formed to his Anglo-Saxon tradition and concern for forum of treaty-making and legislation rather than the law. For the Indian the legality of it all was of the simpler method of conquest and confiscation. little comfort. The separate Indian tribes were considered as It was this precise legalistic tradition that necessi sovereign nations during the treaty-making period tated the treaty process, but at the same time har and in 370 treaties they negotiated away nearly two bored the seeds of future redress for inequities in billion acres of North America, leaving themselves that procedure. Treaties are contracts, and for the 140 million acres at the end of that period in 1868. land acquired monies and goods were paid or prom (The last treaty was made and ratified in 1868, but ised. The consequences of this powerful European the process was not formally ended until 1871 , after respect for property are still with us. Thus, the which Congressional and Executive "agreements" United States, through formal treaty or agreement continued the procedure.) with the Indian tribes, purchased 95 percent of its Politically, morally, culturally, legally, and public domain for an alleged $800 million. 4 This philosophically, America had all the tools and ration figure and the treaties mitigate the myth ofrude con alizations it needed to remove the human blocks to quest and dispossession. Jefferson observed two her manifest destiny. In his first annual message to centuries ago that the lands of this country were Congress in 1817, President James Monroe said: not taken from the Indians by conquest as is 'so "The earth was given to mankind to support the generally supposed. "I find in our historians and greatest numbers of which it is capable, and no tribe records, repeated proofs ofpurchase, which cover a or people have a right to withhold from the wants considerable part of the lower country; and many of others more than is necessary for their own sup more would doubtless be found on further search. port and comfort." The frontiersmen had sounded The upper country, we know, has been acquired this theme for two centuries, and Monroe, in the altogether by purchase made in the most unexcep tradition of Jefferson, was not remiss in sounding tional form."5 Thus the treaties were made and it again for the nineteenth century. The period of obligations incurred by the United States Govern greatest westward expansion, 1815 to 1860, saw 260 ment. The fact that these obligations were often not treaties signed., Two hundred and thirty of all the treaties between 1789 and 1868 involved Indian 'federal Indian Lay, (New York: Association on American Indian Allairs. 1966). 163 3Walter Hart Blumenthal. American Indian Dispossessed:' Fraud in Land Cessions lands, 76 called for removal and resettlement, and forced upon the Tribes (Philadelphia: GS MacManus Co. 1955).43 4Cohen. L.egal Conscience, 69 IFeti.x S Cohen, The l.egal Conscience (New Haven: Yale Uni ... ersity Press" 19(0) ~Thomas Jefferson. "'Notes on the State of Virginia 1781··85" reprinted in Saul K ~65 Padover. The Complere Jefferson (New York: Duell Sloan & Pearce. 194~), 6~3 1. 'j wholly met did not negate the law of the land. What Indian nation or tribe. ,. 8 This provi sion kept the past the white man chose to forget, the Indian chose to alive for the Indian claimant and enabled him to 1 remember; and bided his time. When the fever of persevere in his quest for judicial recognition of his conquest subsided, that same legal conscience that treaty-based land claims" necessitated the treaties was used to enforce them. With determination, and with the aid of sympa The first important attempt of an Indian tribe to thetic white allies, the Indian made some legal test the theory of the white law in the courts rather advances.