How did the u.s. government change its policy toward native american land during the 1850s?

As the United States grew in population, the federal government sought to displace Native Americans to increase room for western expansion. The policy goals of the era focused on removing Native Americans from Indian Country and moving them west beyond the Mississippi River. Congress codified this policy officially in 1830 with the passage of the Indian Removal Act. Application of the act displaced thousands of Native Americans from their homes. The most infamous displacement was that of the Cherokee whose march west resulted in the death of over four thousand tribal members. This death march is commonly referred to as the Trail of Tears. 

Congress' actions would not have been possible without the assistance of the judiciary. Between 1823 and 1832, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, established several legal doctrines that have impacted federal Indian law well into the Twenty-First Century. The three main cases decided by the Marshall Court ultimately came to be known as the Marshall Trilogy. The cases decided by the court over this nine year period ultimately divested Indians from land ownership and made them mere occupiers of the land in which they inhabited; confirmed the federal government to be the sole body capable of legislating over Indians; and established the Indian canons of construction to help courts interpret treaty rights and other legislative instruments pertaining to Native Americans. 

Notable Supreme Court Cases:

• Johnson v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. 543 (1823) - This case decided that Native Americans did not have legal right to convey the land which they inhabited. Through the Discovery Doctrine, the Court determined that European "discovery" of new land gave the discovering nation title against other European powers and the right to acquire title to the land from the indigenous peoples who lived there. This decision reduced Native Americans' right to their ancestral lands to a mere right of occupancy often referred to as a "aboriginal title."
• Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. 1 (1831) - This case clarified whether states could regulate Indian activity. Prior to the decision, the State of Georgia attempted to regulate the Cherokee Nation through its various counties. Upon hearing the case, the Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation was a "foreign state" under Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. As a result, the Court found that the federal government had sole jurisdiction in the realm of regulating Native Americans. However, in doing so, the Court determined that tribes were "domestic dependent nations" and in a unique trustee relationship with the United States which prevented them free truly realizing self-determination. 
• Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832) - This case resolved the ambiguities around which the federal government and states interpreted treaties with Native Americans. One year after Cherokee Nation, the Court reaffirmed the quasi-sovereign rights of tribes and further acknowledge the lack of power that states held over them. This case also established the Indian canons of construction, which recognized that many treaties were created in bad faith and were often carried out contrary to the agreed upon terms. According to the Court, (1) treaties with Native American tribes should be construed in favor of Native Americans' understanding of the terms, (2) ambiguities should also be interpreted to reflect the Native Americans' understanding of the treaty, and (3) tribes should retain their rights unless the treaty specifically states otherwise. 

Selected Library Resources:

• Mark Charles, Unsettling Truths: The Ongoing, Dehumanizing Legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery (2019), eBook
• Robert J. Miller, Discovering Indigenous Lands: The Doctrine of Discovery in the English Colonies (2010), KD5041 .D57 2010
• Steven T. Newcomb, Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrine of Christian Discovery (2008), eBook
• Blake A. Watson, Buying America from the Indians: Johnson v. McIntosh and the History of Native Land Rights (2012), KF228.J644 W38 2012

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

America's policies towards native Americans has been filled with broken promises and lies. It seems clear that for a good portion of our history the following words clearly did not apply to the native American: "All men are created free and equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights and that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

1787 - The Northwest Ordinance - The ordinance stated that Indians were to be treated with the "utmost good faith" and specified that "their lands and property shall never be taken away from them without their consent." As settlers pushed forward into occupied Indian territory, however, they received military protection. As governor of Indiana William Henry Harrison threatened, bribed and purposely intoxicated Indians. He was opposed by Tecumseh who began to organize an Indian Confederation. In 1811 and 1812 Harrison fought and defeated Tecumseh at the battle of Tippecanoe.

1819 - The purchase of Florida - For years Indians had fled south to Florida to escape American authorities. There the Spanish were powerless to control the Indians where a new tribe was formed called the Seminoles. The Seminoles, comprised of both native Americans and escaped slaves began to raid American settlements and then escape back into Spanish territory. In 1818 Andrew Jackson led a raid on Florida, captured two Spanish forts and crushed the Seminoles. Fearing the loss of their territory without compensation the Spanish sold Florida to the United States whereupon the Seminoles were swiftly moved to a reservation in central Florida.

1828 - Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia - In 1828 the Cherokee, a "civilized" tribe who had lived in peace working as farmers, building houses and roads found gold on their land. As a result white settlers moved in and the State of Georgia claimed jurisdiction over the Cherokee. The Cherokee sued claiming they were independent from Georgia. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee. The victory was short lived, however, as President Andrew Jackson in response to the Courts decision is reputed to have said, "John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it." Instead the federal government removed the Indians to Oklahoma.

1830 - Indian Removal Act - This act authorized the President to negotiate treaties and remove the remaining Eastern Indians to lands west of the Mississippi. Under Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, federal agents again used threats, bribes and liquor to secure Indian consent to one sided treaties. The federal government removed thousands of Indians, some in chains, on a trip marked by hunger, disease and death. This became known as the "trail of tears." By the late 1840's almost all native Americans had been moved to lands west of the Mississippi.

1877 - President Rutherford B. Hayes in a message to Congress said, "Many, if not most of our Indian wars have had their origin in broken promises and acts of injustice on our part." In 1881 Helen Hunt Jackson further helped awaken white Americans to their shameful treatment of the Indians through her book A Century of Dishonor.

1860 - 1890's - Plains Indians Wars - During this period Americans and plains Indians clashed as Americans attempted to force Indians onto reservations. The battles are highlighted by the Battle of Little Bighorn, where Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer and his regiment of 250 where all killed by approximately 4500 Sioux and Cheyenne warriors and the battle at Wounded Knee where thousands of Cheyenne men, women and children were slaughtered by the American Calvary. Wounded Knee represented the end of any real armed resistance on the part of the Native American.

1887 - The Dawes Act - The act provided for the following:

1. Each Indian family head be allotted a 160 acre farm out of reservation lands.

2. Each new land owner who abandoned tribal practices and adopted the "habits of civilized life" would be granted American citizenship.

3. "Surplus" reservation lands would be made available to sell to white settlers.

The Dawes Act, while well intentioned, did not benefit the Indians. The lands they were assigned were poor and the concept of "Americanization" led to a destruction of Indian culture and the destruction of the traditional status of Indian women in tribal life. Finally, as a result of the "surplus" land provision the Indians lost 90 million out of 140 acres of reservation land.

1924 - Snyder Indian Citizenship Act - Granted American citizenship to all Indians born in the United States. This applied to about 1/3 of the Indian populations as the others had already applied for citizenship.

1934 - Wheeler-Howard Indian Reorganization Act - This act provided the following:

1. Ended land allotments and returned unsold lands to the Indians.

2. Authorized tribes to form corporations and launch businesses.

3. Provided for elected tribal councils with significant powers. This represented a reversal from previous policy and the restoration of tribal power.

1953 - Termination Policy - This was a new sharply different policy that ended the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and all of the programs that went with it. It divided tribal property among the tribes members thus subjecting them to taxation. It also curtailed tribal self government and relocated many Indians to the cities where jobs were available. The Termination policy also ended federal responsibility and social services - education, health and welfare, to the Indians.

1970 - President Richard Milhouse Nixon recommends self determination for Indians. Indian tribes were once again brought under federal funding with the promise that federal control would be lessened.

1974 - Iroquois Nation vs. The State of New York - Claiming they have been using certain lands since 1805 Indians sue and win in federal court. The federal government is forced to be responsive to their treaty claims.

1980's - Several Indian nations, most notably in Connecticut and New York, sue to gain autonomy (independence) on tribal reservation land. Indians win these cases paving the way for the creation of gambling operations on reservation land. Today there are casinos on several reservations providing millions of dollars of income for those tribes. Back To Syllabus

How did the US government change its policy toward Native American land?

How did the US government change its policy toward Native American land during the 1850s quizlet?

How the US government's policy toward American Indians changed between the early 1800s and the 1850s What caused this change?

How did the US government change its policy toward Native American land during the 1950's?