As I read Treuer's book, Atlas of Indians Nations, I became intrigued by the tribes of the Northeast. I wanted to learn much as I can but the native’s location and the relationship with the European and American settlers. It’s known that the island of Manhattan was sold to the settlers, but what about the other areas? I’ve traveled to towns on Long Island, New York and it was interesting to learn that some downs in still hold their tribal names. Towns such as Massapequa, Setauket, Manhasset, and Montauk. I’ve even lived in a neighborhood in Brooklyn, NY called Canarsie, which was named after the Canarsie tribe. According to Access Genealogy, the last of the Canarsie tribe died in 1800. It wasn’t clear if they had locations in Brooklyn also, but the tribe was known to have locations on Long Island, NY. We learned in Treuer’s Atlas of Indians Nations, the majority of New York tribes spoke the Iroquoian language. Known tribe such as Cayuga, Mohawk, Oneida, Shinnecock, and Sen...
Professor,
ReplyDeleteI cannot figure out how to post a new article, so I have copied and pasted what I wrote below.
Aside from the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Fugitive Slave Acts, and the Patriot Act, in my opinion, the most egregious law ever passed by the US Government was the Dawes Act. Passed in 1887, the laws was thought to be the last step in “assimilation”, which really meant the eradication of Indian identity. The law empowered the president to break up the reservations and their communal land ownership into individual parcels and distribute those parcels out to individual Indians.
The effect of this law was that once those individuals got this land, they sold much of it off to Americans. This decreased the social cohesion among Indians and undermined efforts to preserve traditional cultures and ways of life. The goal of this Act was the obliteration of Indian ways and the freeing of lands for westward expansion. In addition to being immoral due to the fact that it violated our promises to Indians to give them lands and leave them alone after all of the terrible things we did to them during Indian Removal, this law was in my opinion unconstitutional for three reasons. First, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the authority to make treaties with Indian Nations. Second, this law violated the Fifth Amendment, which provides that no person shall be deprived of property without due process. Even if one were to view the tribe as a corporate body, their property could not be taken without due process, and a presidential proclamation does not meet that standard. Finally, we do not have jurisdiction over Indians. This law was a blunt statement that the United States does not acknowledge the sovereignty of Indians.
Can anyone tell me what they think are the biggest legal problems posed by Native Americans today in their dealings with the federal or state governments?
Dawes General Allotment Act. Web. .