Enter a name, company, place or keywords to search across this item. Then click "Search" (or hit Enter).
A Case Study of a Northern California Indian Tribe - Cultural Change to 1860 (1977) (109 pages)
Go to the Archive Home
Go to Thumbnail View of this Item
Go to Single Page View of this Item
Download the Page Image
Copy the Page Text to the Clipboard
Don't highlight the search terms on the Image
Show the Page Image
Show the Image Page Text
Reset View and Center Image
Zoom Out
Zoom In
Rotate Left
Rotate Right
Toggle Full Page View
Flip Image Horizontally
More Information About this Image
Get a Citation for Page or Image - Copy to the Clipboard
Go to the Previous Page (or Left Arrow key)
Go to the Next Page (or Right Arrow key)
Page: of 109
the public lands in the State.
Resolved, That the policy so long and steadily pursued by the
General Government, of removing the wild Indians beyond the jurisdiction of State, is conceived in wisdom and dictated by humanity,
and is productive of tranquility and happiness to the whole country;
and that no other can with safety be adopted within this State.
Resolved, That our Senators be instructed, and our Representatives
requested, to use their best endeavors to produce the adoption, by
the Federal Government, of the course, towards the Indians of this
State, that has been pursued in other States for the lst quarter of
a century.
The House of the Assembly of the California State Legislature adopted the
resolutions of the Special Committee on Indian Affairs of the California State Senate
and condemned the treaties of 1851-1852. The Assembly Speaker summarized his antireservation views.
The reservations are not at all adapted to the wants and necessities of the Indian tribes of this country. For ages they have been
in the habit of wandering with unrestricted freedom along the margin
of the various streams, and over the hunting grounds in this country.
The march of mind and energy of civilization has driven the red man
from his wigwam and his hunting grounds, and the farmer has leveled
many of his acorn trees to the earth. He no longer finds the boundless and unrestricted privileges to which he has been accustomed.131
By the spring of 1852, California politicians in Washington, D.C. were responding to petitions and letters of complaint by California voters, Representative McCorkle
of California strongly opposed ratification of the treaties of 1851-1852.
The reservations....which they (Mckee, Barbour and Wozencraft) have
set apart for different tribes of Indians, comprise, in some cases,
the most valuable agricultural and mineral land in the State.On
top of this was the fact that the commissioners, with an original
appropriation of $25,000.00 and an additional appropriation of
$25,000.00 by the Deficiency Act of February 1851 had managed to
spend $716,394.00.
Senator Weller of California also rejected ratification of the treaties of 1851-1852.
We who represent the State of California are compelled, from a
sense of duty, to vote for the rejection of the treaties, because
we know that it would be utterly impossible for the general government to retain these Indians in undisturbed possession of these
reservations. They (Mckee, Barbour and Wozencraft) knew that
those reservations included mineral lands and that, just as soon
as it became more profitable to dig upon the reservation than
elsewhere, the white man would go there, and that the whole
army of the United States could not expel the intruders. 155
29