ing their pompons claims to it, or of enforcing those claims by the sword, and by the adoption of principles adapted to the condition of a people with whom it was impossible to mix, and who could not be governed as a distinct society, or of remaining in their neighborhood, and exposing themselves and their families to the perpetual hazard of being massacred. Frequent and bloody wars, in which the whites were not always the aggressors, unavoidably ensued. European policy, numbers, and skill prevailed. As the white population advanced, that of the Indians necessarily receded. The country in the immediate neighborhood of agriculturists became unfit for them. The game fled into thicker and more unbroken forests, and the Indians followed. The soil, to which the Crown originally claimed title, being no longer occupied by its ancient inhabitants, was parceled out according to the will of the sovereign power, and taken possession of by persons who claimed immediately from the Crown, or mediately through its grantees or deputies. That law which regulates and ought to regulate in general, the relations between the conqueror and conquered, was incapable of application to a people under such circumstances. The resort to some new and different rule, better adapted to the actual state of things, was unavoidable. Every rule which can be suggested will be found to be attended with great difficulty. However extravagant the pretension of converting the discovery of an inhabited country into conquest may appear, if the principle has been asserted in the first instance and afterward sustained; if a country has been acquired and held under it; if property of the great mass of the community originates in it, it becomes the law of the land, and cannot be questioned. So, too, with respect to the concomitant principle that the Indian inhabitants are to be considered merely as occupants, to be protected, indeed, while in peace, in the possession of their lands, but to be deemed incapable of transferring the absolute title to others. However this restriction may be opposed to natural right and to the usages of civilized nations, yet, if it be indispen sable to that system under which the country has been settled, and be adapted to the actual condition of the two people, it may, perhaps, be supported by reason, and certainly cannot be rejected by courts of justice. (See also Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87; Mitchell v. U. S., 9 Peters, 711; Clark v. Smith, 13 Peters, 195; Latimer v. Poteet, 14 Peters, 4; Jackson v. Porter, 1 Paine, 457; Blair v. Pathkiller, 5 Yerger, 230; Vanhorn v. Dorrance, 2 Dallas, 304; Choteau v. Molony, 16 Howard, 203; Godfrey v. Beardsley, 2 McLean, 413.) The court confined itself to the discussion of questions essential to a statement of the actual law governing the relations of the Indian tribes. It assumes the concrete fact that the General Government holds the right of eminent domain as well as the title to the soil in the public lands, subject, however, to the right of occupancy by the Indians, and that "the Indian inhabitants are considered merely as occupants, to be protected while in peace in the possession of their lands, but incapable of transferring an absolute title to others." The Constitution of the United States gives to Congress the "power to dispose of and to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory, or other property, belonging to the United States." The "territory" or soil, here classed with other property, may be disposed of under rules and regulations prescribed by the legislative authority. The question now arises whether Indian occupancy is an indefeasible right, or whether it is merely a privilege which the Government may withdraw when the interests of civilization or the pressure of immigration may demand it. According to the above rulings in the case of Johnson v. McIntosh, the General Government has the right to terminate the occupancy of the Indians by “conquest or purchase." Does this involve the right of forcibly dispossessing them of that occupancy? Very large portions of the public domain have been acquired by peaceable purchase; other portions have been acquired by conquest, various tribes having been successively subjugated, and, as the price of peace, they were compelled to part with a portion of their hunting-grounds and move upon reservations. INDIAN HOMESTEADS. The fifteenth and sixteenth sections of the act of March 3, 1875, extend the benefits of the homestead act of May 20, 1862, and the acts amendatory thereof (now embodied INDIAN RESERVATIONS. in sections 2290, 2291, 2292, and 2295 to 2302, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes) to If no objection appears, the register and receiver will then permit him to enter the tract desired according to existing regulations, so far as applicable, under the homestead law, the register writing across the face of the application the words "Indian homestead-act of March 3, 1875"; they will note the entry on their records and make returns thereof to the General Land Office, with which they will send the affidavits submitted. It will be observed that the provisions of the eighth section of the act of May 20, 1862 (section 2301 of the Revised Statutes), which admits of the commuting of homestead to cash entries, do not apply to this class of homesteads. All lands obtained under the above act are exempt from liability for debts contracted prior to the issuing of patent therefor. When Indians become citizens of the United States they are entitled to the benefits of all the settlement and other land laws, as are other citizens. Homesteads of all classes are returned upon monthly abstracts by registers and receivers, and the class or kind noted in "Remarks." No list or statement of the number of entries made under the above act can be (at this time) obtained, but the total number of entries made under it in all States and Territories will not exceed 100 to June 30, 1880. There have been several acts passed relating to settlements by Indians upon the public lands, such as the acts of June 10, 1872, and May 23, 1876, which were for the Indians of the tribes known as Ottowas and Chippewas of Michigan. These were allowed to make entries of lands of former Indian reservations of Michigan. Probably some 500 or more of such entries have been made and perfected. (See Statutes at Large and Revised Statutes.) PROCEDURE IN MAKING AN INDIAN RESERVATION. The method of making an Indian reservation is by an Executive order withdrawing certain lands from sale or entry and setting them apart for the use and occupancy of the Indians, such reservation previously having been selected by officers acting under the direction of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs or that of the Secretary of the Interior, and recommended by the Secretary of the Interior to the President. The Executive order is sent to the Office of Indian Affairs, and copy thereof is furnished by that office to the General Land Office, upon receipt of which the reservation is noted upon the land office records and local land officers are furnished with copy of the order and are directed to protect the reservation from interference; after this the Indians are gathered up and placed upon the reservation. PROCEDURE IN ABOLISHING AN INDIAN RESERVATION. When such reservation is no longer required, and the President is so informed by the Secretary of the Interior, an Executive order is issued restoring the lands to the public domain, and the order being received by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, copy thereof is furnished to the General Land Office, where it is noted and information is communicated to the United States land officers, after which the lands are disposed of as other public lands. Indian reservations existing by virtue of treaty stipulations are usually abolished in the manner following: An agreement is entered into between the chiefs and headmen of the Indians, and agents or commissioners appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, with or without authority of Congress, for that purpose; such agreement is submitted to Congress for acceptance and ratification, and provides for the relinquishment, for valuable considerations, of a part or the whole of the lands claimed by the Indians either under treaty stipulations or otherwise. By a clause in the Indian appropriation act approved March 3, 1871 (16 Stat., p. 566), it is declared that no Indian nation or tribe within the territory of the United States shall thereafter be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe, or power with whom the United States may contract by treaty, hence, since that time mere agreements have been entered into, subject to ratification by Congress and the President, such agreements being sometimes entered into under authority of a prior act of Congress, and sometimes, as in the case of the last Ute agreement, agreed upon and then submitted to Congress. In a case like the last mentioned, the agreement, as ratified by Congress, still remains to be ratified by a certain proportion of the Indians affected by such agreement, before it becomes valid. NUMBER AND LOCATION OF RESERVATIONS. The total number of Indian reservations in the United States, June 30, 1880, was 147, two-thirds of the area of which will eventually be restored to the public domain for sale and disposition, after purchase of occupancy title from the Indians, and setting aside portions of the same to be held by the Indians in severalty or otherwise, as may be ordered by Congress. These reservations contain 154,436,362 acres, with an estimated population of 255,938, or about 603.41 acres to each Indian, and are situated in the following States and Territories: Location and names of reservations, together with area and population, to June 30, 1880. |