The 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) represents a significant, though ultimately unrealized, attempt to establish peaceful relations between the United States government and three prominent Native American tribes of the Upper Missouri River region. Signed on July 27, 1866, at Fort Berthold in the Dakota Territory, this agreement aimed to solidify peace, define territorial boundaries, and establish a framework for the coexistence of the Arikara, Gros Ventres (also known as the Hidatsa), and Mandan tribes with the expanding United States. Despite the detailed stipulations and the formal signatures of both government representatives and tribal leaders, the treaty was never ratified by the United States Senate, rendering its provisions legally unenforceable.
This article will delve into the context surrounding the creation of the 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan), examining its key provisions, the perspectives of the parties involved, and the reasons behind its eventual failure. Understanding this treaty offers valuable insights into the complex and often fraught relationship between the United States and Native American tribes during the westward expansion era.
Historical Context: The Upper Missouri and Tribal Relations
The mid-19th century was a period of immense change and upheaval for the Native American tribes inhabiting the Great Plains. The westward expansion of the United States, fueled by the promise of land, resources, and opportunity, increasingly encroached upon traditional tribal territories. The Upper Missouri River region, home to the Arikara, Gros Ventres, and Mandan, was no exception.
These three tribes, historically distinct yet closely associated, shared a history of agriculture, trade, and intermarriage. They maintained settled villages along the Missouri River and relied on a combination of farming, hunting, and gathering for sustenance. However, their traditional way of life was threatened by the increasing presence of white settlers, traders, and military personnel. Competition for resources, the spread of diseases like smallpox, and the disruption of traditional hunting grounds placed immense pressure on these tribes.
Prior to 1866, these tribes had already experienced significant interactions, both positive and negative, with the United States government. Earlier treaties and agreements had sought to establish peace and define trade relations, but these were often undermined by misunderstandings, broken promises, and the relentless push of westward expansion. The 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) was thus an attempt to address the growing tensions and create a more stable framework for future relations.
The Treaty Commissioners and Tribal Representatives
The treaty negotiations were conducted by a commission appointed by the United States government, led by Newton Edmunds, the governor and ex-officio superintendent of Indian affairs for the Dakota Territory. The commission also included Major General S. R. Curtis, Orrin Guernsey, and Henry W. Reed. These men were tasked with representing the interests of the United States and securing an agreement that would facilitate westward expansion while ostensibly protecting the rights of the Native American tribes.
Representing the Arikara tribe were several chiefs and headmen, including White Shield, Iron Bear, The Son of the Star (or Rushing Bear), and The Black Trail. The Gros Ventres were represented by Crow Breast and Poor Wolf, among others, while the Mandan delegation included The Red Cow, The Running Eagle, and The Big Turtle. These tribal leaders faced the difficult task of balancing the need for peace and security with the preservation of their cultural identity, land rights, and way of life.
Key Provisions of the Unratified Treaty
The 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) outlined a series of articles designed to establish a framework for peaceful coexistence. While these provisions were never legally enacted due to the lack of Senate ratification, they offer valuable insight into the intentions of the negotiators and the issues at stake:
-
Article 1: Perpetual Peace: This article declared a commitment to "perpetual peace, friendship, and amity" between the United States and the Arikaree Indians (later extended to include the Gros Ventres and Mandan). This aspirational goal reflected the desire to end hostilities and establish a foundation for future cooperation.
-
Article 2: Peaceful Relations: The Arikaree tribe pledged to maintain peaceful relations with the whites, abstain from hostilities against each other, and cultivate goodwill among themselves and other friendly tribes. This article aimed to promote stability and prevent intertribal conflicts that could disrupt the expansion of the United States.
-
Article 3: Rights of Way: The tribes granted the United States the right to construct roads, highways, and telegraphs through their country, promising to prevent any interference with these projects. This provision facilitated the expansion of infrastructure and communication networks across the Great Plains.
-
Article 4: Restrictions on Settlement and Land Alienation: This article restricted white settlement on tribal lands to those employed by the United States or licensed traders, and it prohibited the tribes from selling or disposing of their land to anyone except the United States. This was intended to protect tribal land from unauthorized encroachment.
-
Article 5: Acknowledgment of Dependence and Obedience to Laws: The Aricara tribe acknowledged their dependence on the United States and their obligation to obey its laws, including those made by Congress for their governance. They also pledged to assist in enforcing these laws and to maintain friendly relations with US citizens. This article underscored the assertion of US sovereignty over the tribes.
-
Article 6: Prohibition of Intemperance: The treaty addressed the issue of alcohol abuse, with the Aricara tribe agreeing to prevent the introduction and use of spirituous liquors among their people. Violators would forfeit their claim to government annuities.
-
Article 7: Annuities and Provisions: In exchange for the agreements made by the tribes, the United States promised to expend $10,000 annually for twenty years, to be used for goods, provisions, agricultural implements, education, and healthcare. This provision was intended to provide economic support and promote the "civilization" of the tribes.
-
Articles 8 and 9: Violations and Debts: These articles addressed the consequences of treaty violations and the protection of annuities from individual debts. They allowed the United States to withhold annuities in case of violations and stipulated that annuities could not be used to pay individual debts.
-
Article 10 and 11: Obligation and Amendments: The treaty would become binding upon the United States upon ratification by the President and Senate. The Senate could amend the treaty without requiring further approval from the tribal leaders, as long as the changes did not "materially chang[e] the nature or obligation of the same."
The Addendum: Gros Ventres and Mandan Inclusion, and Land Cession
The addendum to the 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) extended the provisions of the treaty to include the Gros Ventres and Mandan tribes, who had long been associated with the Arikarees. In addition, the addendum included a significant land cession to the United States, granting them rights to a tract of land along the Missouri River for the purpose of establishing stage lines, settlements, and other infrastructure to support commerce and travel. This land was strategically located near the confluence of the Snake River and the Missouri River.
In return for the inclusion of the Gros Ventres and Mandan and the land cession, the United States promised to pay $5,000 annually to each tribe in goods. A portion of these annuities could be used for agricultural and mechanical purposes. Furthermore, the principal chiefs and soldier chiefs of both tribes were to receive annual payments.
Why the Treaty Failed: Non-Ratification
Despite the detailed negotiations and the formal signatures of the treaty commissioners and tribal leaders, the 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) was never ratified by the United States Senate. The reasons for this failure are complex and multifaceted, reflecting the political climate of the time and the shifting priorities of the US government.
Several factors likely contributed to the Senate’s inaction. The post-Civil War era was marked by political instability and competing demands on the federal government’s resources. The focus on Reconstruction in the South, coupled with ongoing conflicts with other Native American tribes on the Great Plains, may have diminished the Senate’s interest in ratifying this particular treaty.
Additionally, the treaty’s provisions regarding annuities and land rights may have been viewed as too generous by some members of the Senate, who were increasingly skeptical of the government’s treaty-making obligations with Native American tribes. The growing sentiment in favor of assimilation and the allotment of tribal lands may have also undermined support for the treaty.
Legacy and Impact
The non-ratification of the 1866 Fort Berthold Treaty (Arikara, Gros Ventres and Mandan) had significant consequences for the Arikara, Gros Ventres, and Mandan tribes. Although the treaty’s provisions were never legally binding, its failure contributed to the erosion of tribal sovereignty, the loss of land, and the disruption of traditional ways of life.
Despite its failure, the treaty remains a significant historical document. It provides valuable insights into the perspectives of both the United States government and the Native American tribes during a critical period of westward expansion. It also serves as a reminder of the broken promises and unfulfilled obligations that have characterized the relationship between the United States and Native American tribes throughout history. The treaty and addendum offer details about the leadership within the tribes during this period.
