The 1825 Treaty with the Arikara Tribe, a pivotal document in the early interactions between the United States government and the Indigenous peoples of the Great Plains, was formalized on July 18, 1825, at an Arikara village. This treaty, born out of a desire to quell hostilities and establish peaceful trade relations, represents a significant moment in the complex history of westward expansion and the evolving relationship between the United States and Native American nations. It primarily aimed to regulate trade with the Arikara, particularly concerning the distribution of firearms, a critical aspect of power and survival on the frontier.
Context: The Seeds of Conflict
The backdrop to the treaty was a period of escalating tensions. The Arikara, also known as the Ricara, were a semi-sedentary people residing in villages along the Missouri River in present-day North Dakota. They were skilled agriculturalists and traders, acting as intermediaries between other tribes further west and the burgeoning settlements and trading posts along the river. However, interactions with American traders and settlers were not always harmonious. Disputes over trade practices, land encroachment, and cultural misunderstandings frequently led to friction and, at times, violence. An "unprovoked hostility," as the treaty itself states, had erupted, prompting the need for formal negotiations to restore peace.
The Commissioners and Their Mandate
Representing the United States government were Brigadier General Henry Atkinson, a seasoned military officer, and Major Benjamin O’Fallon, an experienced Indian Agent. These commissioners were specifically appointed and commissioned by the President of the United States to negotiate with Indian tribes beyond the Mississippi River. Their primary objective was to establish peace and friendly relations, while simultaneously asserting U.S. sovereignty and regulating trade. The Arikara, on the other hand, were represented by a delegation of their chiefs and warriors, individuals vested with the authority to speak and act on behalf of their tribe.
Key Provisions of the Treaty: A Framework for Coexistence (and Control)
The 1825 Treaty with the Arikara Tribe comprised several articles, each addressing specific aspects of the relationship between the two parties. These articles, when ratified by the President and the Senate, were intended to be legally binding on both the United States and the Arikara people.
-
Article 1: Peace and Intercourse: This article established a foundation of peace and friendly interaction. It declared that a "firm and lasting peace" would exist between the United States and the Arikara, and that "friendly intercourse" would commence immediately. This was a symbolic gesture, intended to signal a new era of cooperation.
-
Article 2: Acknowledging U.S. Supremacy: This was perhaps the most controversial and consequential article. The Arikara, in this article, "admitted" that they resided within the territorial limits of the United States, acknowledged U.S. supremacy, and claimed U.S. protection. Crucially, they also conceded the right of the United States to regulate all trade and intercourse with them. This article effectively placed the Arikara under the legal and political authority of the United States, a position that would have far-reaching implications for their future.
-
Article 3: U.S. Protection and Benevolence: In return for the Arikara’s acknowledgment of U.S. authority, the United States agreed to "receive the Ricara tribe of Indians into their friendship, and under their protection." The treaty further promised to extend "such benefits and acts of kindness as may be convenient and seem just and proper to the President of the United States." This article, while seemingly benevolent, was vague and open to interpretation, allowing the U.S. government considerable latitude in determining the nature and extent of its obligations to the Arikara.
-
Article 4: Regulating Trade and Access: This article established a framework for controlled trade. All trade and intercourse with the Arikara were to be conducted at locations designated by the President of the United States through his agents. Furthermore, only American citizens authorized by the United States were permitted to trade or interact with the tribe. This provision aimed to eliminate unauthorized traders and maintain U.S. control over the economic relationship with the Arikara.
-
Article 5: Licensing Traders and Protecting Them: Recognizing the need for the Arikara to access goods, the United States agreed to license traders to interact with the tribe, subject to "mild and equitable regulations." In exchange, the Arikara pledged to protect the persons and property of these traders while they remained within their territory. This article also stipulated that the Arikara would apprehend and deliver any unauthorized foreigners or individuals engaged in trade to U.S. authorities. They also agreed to provide safe passage to authorized U.S. personnel and protect U.S. agents residing among them.
-
Article 6: Addressing Misconduct and Seeking Redress: To prevent individual misconduct from disrupting the peace, the treaty outlined a process for addressing grievances. It prohibited private revenge or retaliation for injuries and instead mandated that complaints be directed to U.S. Indian agents. The Arikara chiefs were obligated to deliver any individuals accused of wrongdoing to U.S. authorities for punishment under U.S. law. Reciprocally, the treaty stipulated that crimes against Arikara individuals would be investigated and punished in the same manner as crimes against white citizens. This article also addressed the issue of stolen property, requiring the Arikara to recover stolen goods and return them to their owners. The United States, in turn, guaranteed indemnification for stolen property, provided that the theft could be proven and the property could not be recovered. Finally, the Arikara agreed to surrender any white men residing among them upon the request of the President or U.S. agents.
-
Article 7: Restricting Arms Sales: This article prohibited the Arikara from supplying guns, ammunition, or other implements of war to any tribes or nations not in amity with the United States. This provision was a crucial element of the treaty, reflecting the U.S. government’s desire to control the flow of arms in the region and prevent potential conflicts between tribes.
Signatures and Witnesses: A Formal Agreement
The treaty was formally signed on July 18, 1825, at the Arikara village. The document bears the signatures and seals of Brigadier General Henry Atkinson, Major Benjamin O’Fallon, and a number of Arikara chiefs and warriors. The Arikara signatories marked the document with their individual marks, alongside their names, many of which reflect a connection to the natural world and the tribe’s values. The signing was witnessed by a large contingent of U.S. military officers, government officials, and interpreters, lending further weight to the agreement.
The Legacy of the 1825 Treaty: A Complex and Contested History
The 1825 Treaty with the Arikara Tribe was intended to establish a framework for peaceful coexistence and regulated trade between the United States and the Arikara people. However, like many treaties of this era, its implementation was fraught with challenges and inconsistencies. The treaty’s legacy is complex and contested, reflecting the broader history of U.S.-Native American relations.
While the treaty initially brought a period of relative peace, the influx of settlers, the expansion of U.S. military presence, and the increasing pressure on land and resources ultimately undermined the agreement’s objectives. The Arikara, like other tribes, faced increasing pressure to cede land, assimilate into American society, and abandon their traditional way of life. The treaty’s promises of protection and benevolence were often unfulfilled, and the Arikara were subjected to policies that undermined their sovereignty and autonomy.
In conclusion, the 1825 Treaty with the Arikara Tribe stands as a significant historical document, offering insights into the early interactions between the United States and the Native American nations of the Great Plains. It reflects the U.S. government’s desire to assert its authority, regulate trade, and maintain peace, but also reveals the inherent inequalities and challenges that characterized the treaty-making process. Its legacy continues to be debated and reinterpreted, underscoring the enduring importance of understanding the complexities of U.S.-Native American relations.
