Lone Wolf of the Kiowa Tribe opposed allotment and was the plaintiff in a key U.S. Supreme Court case. Photo from Smithsonian Institution
The federal-tribal trust relationship hasn't changed much since the Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, a U.S. Supreme Court case that brought about the concept of plenary power over Indian Country, observes Steve Russell, a member of the Cherokee Nation:
The primary fiction that props up the legal house of cards that is federal Indian control law is that tribal governments are in “a state of tutelage.” We are supposed to be learning from the United States of America how to do economics and how to do politics and, until we do, the U.S. is justified in making decisions on our behalf with which we disagree. One of the most horrendous of those decisions was when Ethan Hitchcock, Secretary of the Interior, followed the instructions of his government to allot the Kiowa Reservation, in violation of the treaty rights of the Kiowa Nation and over the objection of Lone Wolf, Kiowa Principal Chief. Secretary Hitchcock has gotten a bad rap from history essentially because he did not resign. Lost in the flap over the Supreme Court case, Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, is the fact that Ethan Hitchcock argued for the Kiowas as best he could within the government. Hitchcock predicted, correctly, that allotment of the Kiowa Reservation would be economic disaster for the Kiowa. He argued that the land was not suitable for farming and the Kiowa were not being allowed to retain enough land to keep livestock. Lone Wolf felt the same, but he had to sue Hitchcock to litigate the issue and so Hitchcock appears to be much more of a villain than he was in fact.Get the Story:
Steve Russell: The Untrustworthy Feds Teach Natives About Trust (Indian Country Today 10/26)
Join the Conversation
