Американские индейцы 
resulted, with no vocational training to relieve them of dependence upon
land. The strategy also failed in that ownership of land did not effect
an automatic acculturation in those Indians who received individual
parcels. Through scattering of individuals and families, moreover, social
cohesiveness tended to break down. The result was a weakening of native
institutions and cultural practices with nothing offered in substitution.
What was intended as transition proved to be a blind alley. The Indian
population had been dwindling through the decades after the mid-19th
century. The California Indians alone, it was estimated, dropped from
100,000 in 1853 to not more than 30,000 in 1864 and 19,000 in 1906.
Cholera in the central Plains in 1849 struck the Pawnee. As late as 1870-
71 an epidemic of smallpox brought disaster to the Blackfeet, Assiniboin,
and Cree. These events gave currency to the concept of the Indian as "the
vanishing American." The decision of 1871 to discontinue treaty making
and the passage of the Allotment Act of 1887 were both founded in the
belief that the Indians would not survive, and hence it did not much
matter whether their views were sought in advance of legislation or
whether lands were provided for coming generations. When it became
obvious after about 1920 that the Indians, whose numbers had remained
static for several years, were surely increasing, the United States was
without a policy for advancing the interests of a living people.
20th-century reforms of U.S. policy
A survey in 1926 brought into clear focus the failings of the previous
40 years. The investigators found most Indians "extremely poor," in bad
health, without education, and lacking adjustment to the dominant culture
around them. Under the impetus of these findings and other pressures for
reform, Congress adopted the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, which
contemplated an orderly decrease of federal control and a concomitant
increase of Indian self-government and responsibility. The essentials of
the new law were as follows: (1) allotment of tribal lands was prohibited
in the future, but tribes might assign use rights to individuals; (2) so-
called surplus lands not pre-empted by homesteaders might be returned to
the tribes; (3) tribes might adopt written constitutions and charters of
incorporation embodying their continuing inherent powers to manage internal
affairs; and (4) funds were authorized for the establishment of a revolving
credit program, for land purchases, for educational assistance, and for
aiding the tribes in forming organizations. Moreover, the act could be
rejected on any reservation by referendum.
The response to the 1934 act was indicative of the Indians' ability to
rise above adversity. About 160 tribes, bands, and Alaska villages adopted
written constitutions, some of which combined traditional practices with
modern parliamentary methods. The revolving credit fund helped Indians
build up their herds and improve their economic position in other ways.
Borrowers from the fund were tribal corporations, credit associations, and
cooperatives that loaned to individual Indians and to group enterprises on
a multimillion-dollar scale. Educational and health services were also
improved through federal aid.
Originally, the United States exercised no guardianship over the
person of the Indian; after 1871, when internal tribal matters became the
subject of national legislation, the number and variety of regulatory
measures multiplied rapidly. In the same year that the Indian
Reorganization Act was passed, Congress significantly repealed 12 statutes
that had made it possible to hold Indians virtual prisoners on their
reservations. Indians were then able to come and go as freely as all other
persons. The Snyder Act of 1924, extending citizenship to all Indians born
in the United States, opened the door to full participation. But few
Indians took advantage of the law, and because of their lack of interest a
number of states excluded Indians from the franchise. Organization of
tribal governments following the Reorganization Act, however, seemed to
awaken an interest in civic affairs beyond tribal boundaries, and when
Indians asked for the franchise, they were generally able to secure it
eventually, though not until 1948 in Arizona and New Mexico, after lengthy
court action.
The federal courts consistently upheld the treaties made with Indian
tribes and also held that property may not be taken from Indians, whether
or not a treaty exists, "except in fair trade." The latter contention was
offered by the Hualapai Indians against the Santa Fe Railway. The company
was required by the courts in 1944 to relinquish about 500,000 acres it
thought had been granted to it by the U.S. The lands had been occupied
since prehistory by the Indians, without benefit of treaty recognition, and
the Supreme Court held that, if the occupancy could be proved, as it
subsequently was, the Indians were entitled to have their lands restored.
In 1950 the Ute Indians were awarded a judgment against the United States
of $31,750,000 for lands taken without adequate compensation. A special
Indian Claims Commission, created by act of Congress on August 13, 1946,
received many petitions for land claims against the United States and
awarded, for example, about $14,789,000 to the Cherokee nation, $10,242,000
to the Crow tribe, $3,650,000 to the Snake-Paiute of Oregon, $3,000,000 to
the Nez Perce, and $12,300,000 to the Seminole. The period from the early
1950s to the 1970s was one of increasing federal attempts to establish new
policies regarding the Indians, and it was also a period in which Indians
themselves became increasingly vocal in their quest for an equal measure of
human rights and the correction of past wrongs. The first major shift in
policy came in 1954, when the Department of the Interior began terminating
federal control over those Indians and reservations deemed able to look
after their own affairs. From 1954 to 1960, support to 61 tribes and other
Indian groups was ended by the withdrawal of federal services or trust
supervision. The results, however, were unhappy. Some extremely
impoverished Indian groups lost many acres of land to private exploitation
of their land and water resources. Indians in certain states became subject
exclusively to state laws that were less liberal or sympathetic than
federal laws. Finally the protests of Indians, anthropologists, and others
became so insistent that the program was decelerated in 1960. In 1961 a
trained anthropologist was sworn in as commissioner of Indian Affairs, the
first anthropologist ever to hold that position. Federal aid expanded
greatly, and in the ensuing decade Indians were brought into various
federal programs for equal economic opportunity. Indian unemployment
remained severe, however.
American Indians came more and more into public attention in the late
20th century as they sought (along with other minorities) to achieve a
better life. Following the example set by black civil-rights activists of
the 1960s, Indian groups drew attention to their cause through mass
demonstrations and protests. Perhaps the most publicized of these actions
were the 19-month seizure (1970-71) of Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay
(California) by members of the militant American Indian Movement (AIM) and
the February 1973 occupation of a settlement at the Oglala Sioux Pine Ridge
(South Dakota) reservation; the latter incident was the second conflict to
occur at Wounded Knee. Representing an attempt to gain a more traditional
political power base was the establishment in 1971 of the National Tribal
Chairman's Association, which eventually grew to include more than 100
tribes.
Indian leaders also expanded their sphere of influence into the
courts; fishing, mineral, forest, casino gambling, and other rights
involving tribal lands became the subject of litigation by the Puyallup
(Washington state), the Northern Cheyenne (Montana), and the Penobscot and
the Passamaquoddy (Maine), among others. Although control of economic
resources was the focus of most such cases, some groups sought to regain
sovereignty over ancient tribal lands of primarily ceremonial and religious
significance.
facts about American Indians today
Source: Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior
Who is an Indian?
No single federal or tribal criterion establishes a person's identity as
an Indian. Tribal membership is determined by the enrollment criteria of
the tribe from which Indian blood may be derived, and this varies with each
tribe. Generally, if linkage to an identified tribal member is far removed,
one would not qualify for membership.
To be eligible for Bureau of Indian Affairs services, an Indian must (1)
be a member of a tribe recognized by the federal government, (2) be of one-
half or more Indian blood of tribes indigenous to the United States; or (3)
must, for some purposes, be of one-fourth or more Indian ancestry. By
legislative and administrative decision, the Aleuts, Eskimos and Indians of
Alaska are eligible for BIA services. Most of the BIA's services and
programs, however, are limited to Indians living on or near Indian
reservations.
The Bureau of the Census counts anyone an Indian who declares himself or
herself to be an Indian. In 1990 the Census figures showed there were
1,959,234 American Indians and Alaska Natives living in the United States
(1,878,285 American Indians, 57,152 Eskimos, and 23,797 Aleuts). This is a
37.9 percent increase over the 1980 recorded total of 1,420,000. The
increase is attributed to improved census taking and more self-
identification during the 1990 count.
Why are Indians sometimes referred to as Native Americans?
The term, “Native American,” came into usage in the 1960s to denote the
groups served by the Bureau of Indian Affairs: American Indians and Alaska
Natives (Indians, Eskimos and Aleuts of Alaska). Later the term also
included Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders in some federal programs.
It, therefore, came into disfavor among some Indian groups. The preferred
term is American Indian. The Eskimos and Aleuts in Alaska are two
culturally distinct groups and are sensitive about being included under the
“Indian” designation. They prefer “Alaska Native.”
How does one trace Indian ancestry and become a member of a tribe?
The first step in tracing Indian ancestry is basic genealogical research
if one does not already have specific family information and documents that
identify tribal ties. Some information to obtain is: names of ancestors;
dates of birth; marriages and death; places where they lived; brothers and
sisters, if any; and, most importantly, tribal affiliations. Among family
documents to check are Bibles, wills, and other such papers. The next step
is to determine whether one's ancestors are on an official tribal roll or
census by contacting the tribe.
What is a federally recognized tribe?
There are more than 550 federally recognized tribes in the United States,
including 223 village groups in Alaska. “Federally recognized” means these
tribes and groups have a special, legal relationship with the U.S.
government. This relationship is referred to as a government-to-government
relationship.
A number of Indian tribes and groups in the U.S. do not have a federally
recognized status, although some are state-recognized. This means they have
no relations with the BIA or the programs it operates. A special program of
the BIA, however, works with those groups seeking federal recognition
status. Of the 150 petitions for federal recognition received by the BIA
since 1978, 12 have received acknowledgment through the BIA process, two
groups had their status clarified by the Department of the Interior through
other means, and seven were restored or recognized by Congress.
Reservations.
In the U.S. there are only two kinds of reserved lands that are well-
known: military and Indian. An Indian reservation is land reserved for a
tribe when it relinquished its other land areas to the U.S. through
treaties. More recently, Congressional acts, Executive Orders, and
administrative acts have created reservations. Today some reservations have
non-Indian residents and land owners.
There are approximately 275 Indian land areas in the U.S. administered
as Indian reservations (reservations, pueblos, rancherias, communities,
etc.). The largest is the Navajo Reservation of some 16 million acres of
land in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. Many of the smaller reservations are
less than 1,000 acres with the smallest less than 100 acres. On each
reservation, the local governing authority is the tribal government.
Approximately 56.2 million acres of land are held in trust by the
United States for various Indian tribes and individuals. Much of this is
reservation land; however, not all reservation land is trust land. On
behalf of the United States, the Secretary of the Interior serves as
trustee for such lands with many routine trustee responsibilities delegated
to BIA officials.
The states in which reservations are located have limited powers over
them, and only as provided by federal law. On some reservations, however, a
high percentage of the land is owned and occupied by non-Indians. Some 140
reservations have entirely tribally owned land.
Taxes.
Indians pay the same taxes as other citizens with the following
exceptions: federal income taxes are not levied on income from trust lands
held for them by the United States; state income taxes are not paid on
income earned on an Indian reservation; state sales taxes are not paid by
Indians on transactions made on an Indian reservation; and local property
taxes are not paid on reservation or trust land.
Laws.
As U.S. citizens, Indians are generally subject to federal, state, and
local laws. On Indian reservations, however, only federal and tribal laws
apply to members of the tribe unless the Congress provides otherwise. In
federal law, the Assimilative Crimes Act makes any violation of state
criminal law a federal offense on reservations. Most tribes now maintain
tribal court systems and facilities to detain tribal members convicted of
certain offenses within the boundaries of the reservation.
Language and Population
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
|
