A Duty to Protect and Respect: Seneca Opposition to Incorporation during the Removal Period

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 21-40
Author(s):  
Claudia Bettina Haake

When pressured to remove after the 1830 Indian Removal Act, some from among the Seneca appealed to the federal government to prevent displacement. In these letters and petitions, their authors periodically invoked the notion of protection, an instrument of cross-cultural diplomatic encounters of the previous century. Seneca authors sought to defend their tribe against settler takeover by invoking two different kinds of protection, external and internal. They further drew upon a civil right, petitioning, although originally it had been a method of exclusion from full political rights, and rejected the legal incorporation forced upon American Indians through the “domestic dependent nations” ruling.

Author(s):  
Alex Ruck Keene ◽  
QC Alison Scott Butler

Canada is a federation composed of ten provinces, including Nova Scotia (‘NS’), and three territories. The common law applies in Canada, with the exception of the province of Quebec, which uses a civil law system. There is a federal government; as a province, NS also exercises constitutional powers in its own right. Federal legislation includes provisions relating to adults within the scope of this work. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also guarantees certain political rights to Canadians and civil rights to everyone in Canada, and contains rights that impact upon capacity law.


1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adamantia Pollis

The main focus of this paper is to propose a research agenda for human rights scholars which may lead to a genuine universal notion of human rights. A brief survey of three dichotomies that characterise the human rights field is followed by a probing of the presuppositions, in particular communalism, embedded in the Western notion of individual civil and political rights and the sphere of personal autonomy in communal cultures. Such an investigation, in conjunction with a cross-cultural dialogue and massive socioeconomic changes, can lead to a reconstructed formulation of human rights which integrates elements from the diverse notions extant today. This in turn can facilitate accountability of all States to an agreed upon doctrine of human rights.


1981 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glennelle Halpin ◽  
Gerald Halpin ◽  
Thomas Whiddon

Compared in this study were the locus of control and self-esteem of American Indians ( n = 97) and whites ( n = 128). Contrary to previous research and theory, the two groups did not differ in locus of control as measured by the Intellectual Achievement Responsibility Questionnaire. However, they did differ in self-esteem as measured by the Coopersmith Self-esteem Inventory. The whites reported a significantly more positive view of the self than did the Indians.


Author(s):  
Kathleen Brown-Pérez

The concept of destroying Indigenous peoples in America has often meant physical eradication. However, as time passed and genocide became less politically correct, economical, or convenient, federal policies were put in place to “destroy” by means other than physical destruction. This essay asserts that these policies had one goal: assimilation. Assimilation was to be the means by which the federal government would control American Indians by eliminating distinct cultures and heritages.


Anthropology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Killsback

Federal Indian law (FIL), also known as American Indian law, is the body of doctrine that regulates the political relationship between American Indian and Alaska Native governments and the federal government. FIL is best understood as the development of this “government-to-government” relationship, which intersects with other bodies of law like constitutional law, criminal law, and environmental law. FIL is comprised of legal doctrines, statutes, judicial decisions, treaties, and executive orders, all of which have direct influences on the rights and sovereignty of Indian tribes. In the United States there are 573 federally recognized tribes that are subject to the rights and privileges, as well as the consequences, of FIL. These federally recognized tribes are the third sovereign authority in the United States—the other two are states and the federal government—that retain inherent rights and that exercise and enjoy sovereignty and self-governance on their own lands. The historical development of FIL in the United States constitutes an important starting point in understanding the special relationship between Indian tribes and the federal government. The origins of FIL lay in three US Supreme Court cases known as the “Marshall trilogy,” after Chief Justice John Marshall, the presiding chief justice of Johnson v. McIntosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). At that time, the primary questions centered on the sovereign rights of Indian tribes, that is, whether Indians have dominion over themselves and their lands. Throughout the development of FIL, until today, questions of Indian tribal sovereignty—or Indigenous nation sovereignty—remained contentious as Indians continued to fight for treaty rights, autonomy, and self-determination. FIL can be described as a series of wins and losses for American Indians in their fight for sovereign rights. In the end, however, the study of FIL is equally the study of how the United States was able to legally subjugate America’s indigenous peoples and acquire their lands. FIL is basically the study of America’s justification for Native America’s colonization and the genocide perpetrated against American Indians. The literature on FIL or American Indian law is vast, but the most valuable resources are authored by and for attorneys and for students of law. Although the disciplines of Native American and Indigenous studies encompass facets of American Indian and Indigenous peoples’ lives, scholarship in FIL has proven to be beneficial. The resources cited in this article represent some of the widely used texts that provide a solid foundation for studies in FIL.


Author(s):  
Claire van Overdijk ◽  
Barb Martini

Canada is a federation composed of ten provinces, including Alberta, and three territories. The common law applies in Canada, with the exception of the province of Quebec, which uses a civil law system. While there is a Federal Government, Alberta, as a province, also exercises constitutional powers in its own right. Federal legislation includes provisions relating to adults within the scope of this work. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also guarantees certain political rights to Canadians and civil rights to everyone in Canada, and contains rights that impact upon capacity law.


2007 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 53-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANGELA GONZALES ◽  
JUDY KERTÉSZ ◽  
GABRIELLE TAYAC

Although research on the history of the eugenics movement in the United States is legion, its impact on state policies that identified and defined American Indians has yet to be fully addressed. The exhibit, Our Lives: Contemporary Life and Identities (ongoing until September 21, 2014) at the National Museum of the American Indian provides a provocative vehicle for examining how eugenics-informed public policy during the first quarter of the twentieth century served to “remove” from official records Native peoples throughout the Southeast. One century after Indian Removal of the antebellum era, Native peoples in the American Southeast provide an important but often overlooked example of how racial policies, this time rooted in eugenics, effected a documentary erasure of Native peoples and communities.


Author(s):  
Sean Teuton

‘From artifact to intellectual’ describes the nineteenth-century Indian Wars and the numerous Native American autobiographies that provide a glimpse into indigenous patterns of living, ways of knowing, and verbal art. These autobiographies also deliver a powerful counter-narrative of US entitlement to indigenous lands during Indian removal. In an era of reform, from around 1890 to 1934, Native and non-Native activists sought legislation to “uplift” the Indian, though reformers’ goals often conflicted. Natives and whites actively collaborated through the Society of American Indians (SAI) to influence federal Indian policy. The SAI helped save Native American writers for the twentieth century, scattering the cultural seeds for later Native literary flourishing.


1961 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 238-242
Author(s):  
Gordon Macgregor

Within the society of the United States there are dual avenues of adjustment for American Indians. Both avenues have led and will continue to lead 1) toward complete assimilation outside the reservation, and 2) toward growth of Indian communities on reservation lands. In the latter adjustment, Indians can preserve their identity and determine their own destiny. But if this adjustment is to be socially and psychologically sound as well as economically viable, it will require wiser outside guidance than heretofore has been available, and a new relationship between the federal government and the Indians.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document