< PREVIOUS ] [ 1988 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
It is curious that President Reagan was in Moscow, discussing treaties with the Soviet leadership, when he began talking, however incoherently, about American Indian policy.
Thanks to President Reagan's sometime ideological cronies -- Sen. Jesse Helms in particular -- we know that signing treaties with the USSR is a waste of time. According to America's right-wing lobby, the Soviet Union has never abided by a treaty. The USA, of course, is always as good as its word. America stands behind its treaty obligations.
Just notice how the Cheyenne and Arapaho have prospered with the rich farmlands of northeastern Colorado, which the United States guaranteed to them in perpetuity under the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851.
The treaty did allow palefaces to build roads and military posts, but not cities. In Denver's early days, Little Raven, an Arapaho chief, often visited the settlement to buy cigars. He would remind the miners that, as soon as they had found their fill of the useless yellow metal, he would appreciate it greatly if they would depart from that land which belonged, by solemn treaty, to his people.
Since we know that the United States always observes its treaties, we can marvel at how the Arapaho quit hauling their tepees to Cherry Creek and started building skyscrapers. It is also a comfort that they offer hamburgers and steaks now in their restaurants, instead of the traditional puppy stew.
But that isn't quite right. In the Fort Wise Treaty of
1861, the Cheyenne and Arapaho did give up the site of
Denver. But they were guaranteed, in perpetuity,
barren land between Sand Creek and the Arkansas River.
America keeps its treaties, so they must still be there --
those whose ancestors survived the Sand Creek Massacre,
anyway.
You might not have noticed it, but every time you visit the Western Slope, you're trespassing on Ute land. Just check the Conejos Treaty of 1863, negotiated by Chief Ouray and Territorial Gov. John Evans, among others. Every acre of Colorado west of the Divide was guaranteed to the Utes, forever and ever.
Forever lasted until 1868, when the Utes were induced to
sign a new perpetual agreement that assured them of 16
million acres. Ouray observed that The agreement an
Indian makes to a United States treaty is like the
agreement a buffalo makes with his hunters.
Nonetheless, the United States government assured the Utes
that the treaty would be enforced -- if miners trespassed
upon Indian land, the Army would expel them.
Our history books must have somehow neglected to mention anything about soldiers evicting prospectors from the San Juans during the silver excitement in 1874. It must have happened, because we know the United States always abides by its treaties. Silverton, Telluride and Lake City are all just figments of your imagination.
That agreement, like those President Reagan pondered in
Moscow, was with Communists. At least William B. Vickers, a
Colorado politician of 1877, noted that the Utes are
actual, practical Communists.
He concluded that The
Utes must go,
treaty or no treaty.
There is one school of thought which points out that the
United States really has kept its Indian treaties. Most of
the agreements contained phrases like as long as the sky
is blue and the rivers flow.
Look at Denver's sky,
consider what Two Forks could do to East Slope and West --
and you'll see why those treaties might logically be
considered invalid.
That also might be stretching things. The point is, if I were in Moscow, and I wanted to emphasize how the United States is a fine moral nation that always kept its word, I wouldn't mention Indians. Somebody might think you were speaking with a forked tongue.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1988 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >