Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T21:34:00.860Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Challenging Boundaries and Belongings: “Mixed Blood” Allotment Disputes at the Turn of the Twentieth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2009

Lauren Basson
Affiliation:
Kreitman Post-Doctoral Fellow in the Department of Politics and Government Ben Gurion University in Beer Sheva, Israel
Joel S. Migdal
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In 1890, Jane Waldron, a woman of American Indian and European descent, asserted that as an Indian head of family, she was eligible for a full allotment of land that had previously formed part of the Great Sioux Reservation. Her claim initiated a local, legal dispute that quickly escalated into a national debate about land allotment policies conducted at the highest levels of the U.S. government. Black Tomahawk, a “full blood” Indian, contested Waldron's claim. His lawyer argued that Waldron was not an Indian but a white woman, on the basis of the common law of paternal descent. In the initial decision in the case, the Secretary of the Interior accepted the latter position and ruled that Waldron was not an Indian and, therefore, ineligible for an allotment. This decision met with immediate opposition because it implied that thousands of indigenous people of American Indian and European descent, commonly referred to as “mixed bloods,” who had signed Indian treaties with the U.S. government, were not Indians either and, therefore, may not have been eligible signatories. The Secretary's decision thus had the potential to threaten the validity of many treaties concluded with Indian tribes, and it never achieved the status of legal precedent.

In 1905, fifteen years after the dispute began, a district court judge in South Dakota reversed the initial decision and asserted that Waldron was an Indian and, therefore, was eligible for the contested allotment.

Type
Chapter
Information
Boundaries and Belonging
States and Societies in the Struggle to Shape Identities and Local Practices
, pp. 151 - 176
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×