Review – MHS DW Website (4 of 7)

 Minnesota Historical Society (MHS)
U.S./Dakota War of 1862 Website
http://usdakotawar.org/
4 – Treaties
http://usdakotawar.org/history/treaties
Reviewed on January 26, 2014 

Items of Interest 

General Comments

  • Incorrect – By selection of incorrect statements from the interviews, MHS wants people to think the Dakota have been in the Minnesota area for thousands and thousands of years. This cannot be proven.
  • People may have entered present day Minnesota as early as 12,000 years ago.  The earliest human remains found, Brown’s Valley Man, are about 9,000 years old. We don’t know how many battles have been fought for this land.
  • When the Dakota Indians migrated, they killed members of other tribes and took their land. Traditional Dakota warfare was genocidal in nature. It didn’t matter if the victim was a man, woman or child. All were considered enemies.
  • Rather than kill Dakota people and take their land, the U.S. wrote treaties. These treaties provided many benefits to the Dakota people. Yes, there were many negative aspects of these treaties. MHS focuses on these negative aspects. The negative aspects need to be balanced with the many positive aspects.
  • Unbalanced and Disrespectful – The “Broken Promises” video is by far the worst feature on this website. It should be removed and all copies of it destroyed. It has no useful purpose. See my review below.
  • Incorrect – Sadly, there are many incorrect statements in MHS’s interpretation of the treaties. This doesn’t look good for MHS. MHS should set higher standards. 

Most Objectionable Statements 

Video – Treaties 

Treaties…resulted in the Dakota people losing large portions of land.
—Incorrect – They did not lose their land. Dakota leaders chose to sell their land.

It was a bogus document that allowed the federal government to legally steal Indian land.
—Incorrect – Show proof for these opinions.

A series of treaties…led to their eventual removal from the land that became Minnesota…
—Incorrect – Not all of the Dakota were removed from Minnesota.
—Incorrect – Treaties did not cause their removal. Most of them were removed as a result of the Dakota War where hostile Dakota killed more than 650 white men, women and children.

The government never intended to pay us the full amount; they would pay us interest for 50 years.
—Incorrect – The terms of the 1851 treaties stated that the principal would be invested and interest at the rate of 5% would be paid to the Dakota for 50 years. The total interest paid would exceed the principal by 150%. There was no deception. 

They actually never paid for it; never paid a cent for all the vast territory.
—Absolutely Incorrect

By 1862, the Dakota lost most of their land in Minnesota through treaties…
—Incorrect – They did not lose their land. Dakota leaders chose to sell their land.

The U.S. needs to honor those treaties and do what they need to do in order to do justice to all of the Native American tribes in the U.S.
—Incorrect – These Dakota treaties are not still valid.
—Incorrect – In the 1970s, the U.S. paid Dakota descendants for annuities and land taken in 1863.

The treaties are the consciousness of this continent.
—What does this mean?

Does it really matter if they signed those treaties or not? In Washington, they already had the idea that they were going to exterminate the natives to the west. So does it really even matter?
—Incorrect – Show proof for this opinion.

End-of-Video

Everything that they used to get them to sign treaties, I think was illegal in a lot of ways…
—Incorrect – Show proof for this opinion.
—Unbalanced – The Dakota Indians killed members of other tribes and took this land. 

Treaties are agreements negotiated between two sovereign nations. A sovereign nation is one that has the right to govern itself.
—While the Dakota nation was a sovereign nation, they were only as sovereign as the U.S. permitted them to be.

From 1778 to 1871, the United States negotiated treaties with various Indian tribes to support westward expansion. These treaties were agreements whereby Indian nations would exchange their rights to hunt and to live on parcels of land for trade goods, yearly cash payments, and the right to remain on part of their homelands.
—Incorrect – The Dakota received much more than this.
—Incorrect – The Dakota were not confined to their reservations.

These treaties, which were almost wholly dishonored by the U.S. government, helped set the stage for U.S. government actions such as the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Indian nations who resisted treaty attempts found themselves facing forced removal further westward to “Indian Territories.
—Incorrect – Show proof that the Dakota treaties were “almost wholly dishonored by the U.S.”
—Incorrect – Dakota were not removed until after they went to war with the U.S.

Broken Promises Video
—See “Broken Promises” below.

Treaty Interactive
—See “Minnesota Treaty Interactive” below.

Beginning in 1805, Indian nations in the area that became Minnesota made concessions of land for specific uses by the U.S. government through treaties. In exchange, they received money, goods, and various promises.
—Incorrect – They received much more than money and goods.
—Disrespectful – “various promises” suggests that promises were not kept. Show proof.

…In 1862, the U.S. government provided incentives for newcomers to move onto the land through the Homestead Act.
—Following Dakota Treaties of 1837 and 1851, settlers began moving on the ceded lands. 

What’s in a Treaty?

 In 1851 the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of the Dakota signed the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, which, along with the subsequent Treaty of Mendota with the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute bands, ceded to the United States most of southern and central Minnesota. At Traverse des Sioux, the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of the Dakota ceded 21 million acres for $1,665,000, or about 7.5 cents an acre. Of that amount, $275,000 was set aside to pay debts claimed by traders and to relocate the Dakota. Another $30,000 was allocated to establish schools and to prepare the new reservation for the Dakota. The U.S. government kept more than 80 percent of the money ($1,360,000), with the Dakota receiving only the interest on the amount, at 5 percent for 50 years.
—Incorrect – Here it is 21 million acres. In the “Broken Promises” video, it is 35 million acres. Which is correct?
—Incorrect – This also included parts of present day Iowa, South Dakota and North Dakota.
—Incorrect – Thomas Hughes estimated a total of 35 million acres ceded by both 1851 Treaties. The total acres that were sold were never accurately determined. See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol. 1, page 287.
—Incorrect – In both 1851 treaties, Dakota gave up their claims to the same land. Both treaties paid for the same land. We do not know how many acres were sold. Therefore, we cannot say how much was paid per acre.
—Incorrect – The $275,000 included one year’s subsistence for their people.
—Extremely incorrect – Regarding the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, Thomas Hughes wrote, “The trader’s claims, according to statements later made by Governor Ramsey under oath, totaled $431,753.78, but this sum was later scaled down by a committee of traders…to bring them within the amount limited in the treaty, finally left at $210,000.” See Hughes, Old Traverse des Sioux, page 99.
—Unbalanced – This interest payment was 5% yearly – an accumulation of 250% over 50 years. Has MHS ever determined what the 1851-1900 interest rates were? Perhaps this was a very good rate? If only the principal had been paid all at once, they would have spent it in a short time.

The terms of the Mendota treaty were similar, though with even smaller payments. The treaties of 1851 also called for setting up reservations on both the north and south sides of the Minnesota River. But when the treaties came before the U.S. Senate, the reservations were eliminated, leaving the Dakota with no place to live. Congress required that the Dakota approve this change before it would appropriate cash or goods, both desperately needed. President Millard Fillmore agreed that the Dakota could live on the land previously set aside for reservations, but only until it was needed for white settlement.
—The payments were smaller because there were fewer Dakota in these bands.
—Each treaty set up a reservation that included land on both sides of the river. These 2 reservations adjoined each other. 

Minnesota Treaties

 Minneapolis and St. Paul are located on land ceded in 1805.
—Incorrect – Part of Minneapolis and St. Paul are located on land ceded in 1805.

[Map – Small map of Minnesota with unreadable text on it]
—Clicking on this map takes the visitor to the “Minnesota Treaty Interactive.” See “Minnesota Treaty Interactive” below.

[What follows appears mainly to be is a list of treaties. It is not identified.]

 In 1805 the Dakota ceded 100,000 acres of land at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers.
—Is this correct – 100,000 acres?
—Incorrect – Land was also ceded at the mouth of the St. Croix River.

Of the seven Indian leaders present at the negotiations, only two signed the treaty.
—Is this correct – were seven Indian leaders present?

The U.S. Senate approved the treaty, agreeing to pay only $2,000 for the land.
—Unbalanced – If the Dakota were unhappy with this treaty, they would have prevented Fort Snelling from being built here.

1825: The U.S. government arranged the Prairie du Chien treaty between the Dakota and Ojibwe, as well as the Menominee, Ho-Chunk, Sac and Fox, Iowa, Potawatomi, and Ottawa tribes. The treaty set the boundaries of tribal land. After that, it was simpler for the government to negotiate with the Indians for the purchase of their lands.
—Incorrect – The 1825 Treaty was a “peace treaty.” It was hoped that establishing land boundaries would stop intertribal warfare. These boundaries and peace did not last very long. 

1837: Later that year, a group of Dakota leaders was brought to Washington, D.C., having been told that they would be negotiating the settlement of their southern boundary. Instead, they were pressured into ceding all their land east of the Mississippi. The land was valued at $1,600,000, but the U.S. government agreed to pay far less.
—Incorrect – According to Anderson, Kinsmen of Another Kind, and Diedrich, Little Crow, the Dakota leaders knew they were going to Washington to sell land.
—It makes no difference whether they were pressured or not. They agreed to sell their land. They were starving.
—Incorrect – According to Anderson, the $1,600,000 valuation came from Dousman, head of a fur company. The more the Dakota were paid, the more they would spend it with the fur traders. The U.S. agreed to pay $1,000,000.

1851: …Pressured by traders and threatened with military force, the Dakota were forced to cede nearly all their land in Minnesota and eastern Dakota in the 1851 treaties of Traverse des Sioux and Mendota. At Traverse des Sioux, the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of the Dakota ceded 21 million acres for $1,665,000, or about 7.5 cents an acre. Of that amount, $275,000 was set aside to pay debts claimed by traders and to relocate the Dakota. Another $30,000 was allocated to establish schools and to prepare the new reservation for the Dakota. The U.S. government kept more than 80 percent of the money ($1,360,000), with only the interest on the amount–at 5 percent for 50 years–paid to the Dakota. The terms of the Mendota treaty with the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute bands of the Dakota were similar, except that those payments were even smaller.
—Incorrect – It makes no difference if they were pressured and threatened. Dakota leaders chose to sign the treaties. The Sisseton and Wahpeton were starving.
—Incorrect – The 1851 Treaties also included land in present day Iowa.
—Incorrect – Here it is 21 million acres. In the “Broken Promises” video, it is 35 million acres. Which is correct?
—Incorrect – Thomas Hughes estimated a total of 35 million acres ceded by both 1851 Treaties. The total acres that were sold were never accurately determined. See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol. 1, page 287.
—Incorrect – In both 1851 treaties, Dakota gave up their claims to the same land. Both treaties paid for the same land. We do not know how many acres were sold. Therefore, we cannot say how much was paid per acre.
—Incorrect – The $275,000 also included one year’s subsistence for their people.
—Extremely incorrect – Regarding the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, Thomas Hughes wrote, “The trader’s claims, according to statements later made by Governor Ramsey under oath, totaled $431,753.78, but this sum was later scaled down by a committee of traders…to bring them within the amount limited in the treaty, finally left at $210,000.” See Hughes, Old Traverse des Sioux, page 99.
—Incorrect – The total payment to the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute was smaller because they had fewer people.

The treaties of 1851 also called for setting up reservations on both the north and south sides of the Minnesota River.
—One treaty set up the Lower Reservation. One treaty set up the Upper Reservation. Each reservation included land on both sides of the river. These 2 reservations adjoined each other.

1858:  A month after Minnesota became a state, a group of Dakota traveled to Washington, D.C., to discuss their reservation. The Dakota were pressured to cede the lands on the north side of the Minnesota River. They received 30 cents per acre, estimated to be only about 5 percent of the land’s value. When the funds were finally distributed in 1860, most of the $266,880 promised went to pay debts claimed by traders.
—Incorrect – It makes no difference if they were pressured. Dakota leaders chose to sign the treaties.
—Incorrect – According to the 1851 Treaties, they did not own their reservations.
—Unbalanced – The Dakota were paid twice for the parts of their reservations on the north side of the river – once in the 1851 treaties and again in the 1858 treaties.
 —Incorrect – The parts of their reservations on the north side of the river were never surveyed. They were paid twice for this land. It cannot be determined how much they were paid per acre.
—Incorrect – Most of the Lower Dakota Treaty money went to pay their traders. Most of the Upper Dakota Treaty money did not.

By 1858 the Dakota had only a small strip of land in Minnesota. Without access to the land upon which they had hunted for generations, they had to rely on treaty payments for their survival. The inadequate money and goods often arrived late. By summer 1862, most of the Dakota were starving–one of the causes of the U.S.-Dakota War, which lasted six weeks. Nearly 400 Dakota men were tried by a military commission, and 303 were sentenced to death. President Lincoln pardoned many, but 38 Dakota men were hanged in Mankato. The remaining Dakota were sent to prison in Iowa or to reservations at Crow Creek in what is now South Dakota, and at Santee in Nebraska Territory.
—Incorrect – At a combined total of 20 by about 150 miles, this was hardly a “small area of land.”
—Incorrect – Every year up to 1862, they continued to leave their reservations to hunt.
—Incorrect – The Dakota farmers also relied on their produce and extra distributions of food.
—Incorrect – Prove that the money and goods often arrived late.
—Incorrect – Most of the Dakota were not starving. Indian Agent Galbraith issued food to the Upper Dakota and to the Lower Dakota farmers.
—Unbalanced – Where is the explanation of why they were being tried? Hostile Dakota killed more than 650 white men, women and children.
—Incorrect – Not all Dakota were removed from the state.
—Incorrect – Those who were removed were sent to prison in Iowa or to the Crow Creek Reservation in present day South Dakota.

In 1863 the Dakota were forced to give up all their remaining land in Minnesota, and the U.S. government canceled all treaties made with them.
—Unbalanced – In the 1970s, Dakota descendants were paid for their land and annuities taken in 1863. 

The Traders’ Paper

Treaties stipulated that the Dakota receive their payment in a combination of cash, annuities (in the form of goods, cash, and services), and repayment of debts to traders. Sometimes, traders took this opportunity to claim debts owed to them by Dakota who had bought goods on credit. After Wahpeton and Sisseton leaders signed the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux in 1851, they were ushered to another document, which some later said they were tricked into signing. The Traders’ Paper, as the document is known, turned over about a third of the Dakotas’ cash payments to a group of traders, including Henry Sibley and his associates, to satisfy years of debts allegedly accumulated in the fur trade.
—Incorrect – The treaties of 1851 did not stipulate repayment of debts to traders. This was supposed to be prohibited. This is why the Traders’ Paper was used.
—Incorrect – What does “cash payments” mean? If it is cash in pocket, the $210,000 paid to the traders was much more than a third. If it was total cash payments over 50 years, it was much less than a third.
—Incorrect – It is implied that the Dakota did not know they were signing the Traders’ Paper. William Folwell wrote, “Brown, Dousman, and Riggs told of councils which were held between the Indians and the traders for the purpose of discussing and arranging a settlement of their accounts.” See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol. 1, page 284.

“[A]nd and being desireous to pay to our traders and half breeds the sums of money which we acknowledge to be justly due to them, do hereby obligate and bind ourselves, as the authorized representatives of the aforesaid Bands, to pay to these individuals hereinafter designated, the sums of money set opposite to their respective names, so soon as the same shall be paid us in accordance with the Fourth Article of the Treaty aforesaid.”
Source: “Treaty with the Sioux—Sisseton and Wahpeton Bands, 1851,” Jul. 23, 1851, 10 Stats. 949, found in Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, vol. ii, ed. Charles J. Kappler (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904).
—Incorrect – I checked this source. I cannot find this text in the 1851 Treaty with the Sisseton and Wahpeton. 

Broken Promises

[Video] – Broken Promises
http://usdakotawar.org/history/treaties/broken-promises

In 1805, you meet a white soldier for the first time.
—Incorrect – The Dakota met white soldiers as early as 1695 and at various times in the 1700s. Dakota joined the British during the Revolutionary War. 

[Pike says] We’re offering $2,000 and some useful things that will make your life easier.
—Is this correct?

Pike’s offer may seem helpful but the idea of someone owning land goes against everything Dakota people believe.
—Incorrect – The Dakota did not believe the individual could own land. But the Dakota certainly did claim and defend their land against others. If they did not own the land, they would have permitted Fort Ridgely to be built without wanting payment for this land.

Should you exchange the land for some money and goods?

Yes: Two of the five leaders in your group agree with you and sign an agreement known as a treaty….
No: Three of the five leaders in you group agree with you but the other two sign an agreement known as a treaty…
—It is implied that this treaty was not valid because only 2 leaders signed it. When the U.S. soldiers arrived in 1819 to build Fort Snelling, if the Dakota felt the treaty was wrong, they would have prevented Fort Snelling from being built.

[1851] The U.S. government has created Minnesota Territory and settlers are swarming onto the land.
—Incorrect – Settlers were not “swarming” onto the land until the land was ceded to the U.S. by treaties.

[Quote of Little Crow] – “See!  The white men are like the locusts when they fly so thick the whole sky is a snowstorm! Count your fingers all day long and the white man will come faster than you can count.”
—Incorrect- This quote by Little Crow was made 11 years later in 1862.
—Incorrect – Sentences are missing from the middle of this quote.
—Incorrect – “…the white man will come faster…” should be “…white men with guns in their hands will come faster…” See Anderson/Woolworth, Through Dakota Eyes.

More and more [setters] keep coming. Animals you depend on are disappearing from the woods and the prairies and your people are getting hungry.
—Incorrect – Henry Sibley wrote that by the mid 1830s, there was a noticeable decline in the fur bearing animals. The Dakota over-hunted their animals to obtain fur trade products.
—Incorrect – The settlers were not permitted to hunt on Indian land. However, the Indians continued to hunt on ceded land and competed with the settlers for the available game.

[1851]
Ramsey offers up a treaty that describes what you will receive for your land.
Will you sign this treaty?
—Incorrect – There were 2 treaties in 1851. The video continues with the Traverse des Sioux treaty and ignores the Mendota treaty.
—Incorrect – The U.S. offered the treaty. Ramsey was representing the U.S.

No or Can’t Read it:
Luke Lea: “Suppose your great father, the President, wanted your lands and did not want a treaty for your good. He could come with a hundred thousand men and drive you off to the Rocky Mountains.”
—Incorrect – Lea’s statement was made during the treaty negotiations at Mendota.

Yes:
Stephen Riggs calls you over to another table. He tells you to sign another paper.
—This was the Traders’ Paper, an agreement to use treaty money to pay debts owed to the traders.
—Incorrect – Riggs did not call all of the Dakota leaders over to sign the Traders’ Paper. Riggs said he directed several leaders to sign the Traders’ Paper. See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol.1, page 282.
—Incorrect – It is implied that the Dakota did not know they were signing the Traders’ Paper. William Folwell wrote, “Brown, Dousman, and Riggs told of councils which were held between the Indians and the traders for the purpose of discussing and arranging a settlement of their accounts.” See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol. 1, page 284.

In exchange for most of their land – about 35 millions acres – the Dakota are promised three million dollars and a small area of land along the Minnesota River reserved for Dakota people only. But the money is really an annual payment to be paid over fifty years. And the Dakota are really only to receive the interest.
—Incorrect – Previous to this paragraph, the discussion was about the 1851 Traverse des Sioux treaty. Now, the discussion switches to both 1851 treaties without warning.
—Incorrect – The Mdewakanton, Wahpekute, Sisseton and Wahpeton were paid $3,075,000.
—Incorrect – Under “What’s in a Treaty?” above, it states that 21 million acres were sold.
—Incorrect – Thomas Hughes estimated a total of 35 million acres ceded by both 1851 Treaties. However, the exact number of acres has never been accurately determined. See Folwell, A History of Minnesota, vol. 1, page 287.
—Incorrect – At a combined total of 20 by about 150 miles, this was hardly a “small area of land.”
—Incorrect – The U.S. paid more than just interest.
—Unbalanced – This interest payment was 5% yearly – an accumulation of 250% over 50 years. Has MHS ever determined what the 1851-1900 interest rates were? Perhaps this was a very good rate? If only the principal had been paid all at once, they would have spent it in a short time.

And remember that other document you signed? It wasn’t a copy of the treaty but rather something drafted by fur traders who claim you owe them $431,735.
—Incorrect – This statement refers to the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux only.
—Extremely incorrect – Regarding the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, Thomas Hughes wrote, “The trader’s claims, according to statements later made by Governor Ramsey under oath, totaled $431,753.78, but this sum was later scaled down by a committee of traders…to bring them within the amount limited in the treaty, finally left at $210,000.” See Hughes, Old Traverse des Sioux, page 99.

Now it is 1858 and the U.S. government has called you and other Dakota leaders to Washington, D.C. to sign another treaty. Will you sign this treaty?
—Incorrect – There were 2 treaties in 1858.

No: You can’t go home unless you sign. Now will you sign this treaty?
Yes: You lost half your land plus the treaty stipulates that you have to send your children to a mission school and learn to plow and raise farm animals like white people. In essence, give up and change everything you are and have been. Will you change your way of life?
—Incorrect – They were not being held hostage.
—Incorrect – The 1851 treaties did not give them ownership of their reservations. They could not lose what they did not own.
—Unbalanced – They were paid for their reservations in the 1851 treaties. In the 1858 treaties, they were paid a 2nd time for the parts of their reservations on the north side of the river. This was very generous of the U.S.
—Incorrect – How could they lose what they did not own? They continued to hunt on the north side of the river.
—Incorrect – Where does the treaty say they must send their children to schools?
—Incorrect – Where does the treaty say they must give up their way of life?
—Absolutely Incorrect – They did not have to “give up and change everything.” This is a gross exaggeration.

No: If you refuse your food and supplies will be cut off. Will you change your way of life?
Yes: You are given more supplies and are told to work at farming to sustain yourself. But you and your relatives are just scraping by.
—Incorrect – Where does it say their food and supplies would be cut off?
—Incorrect – They chose to be farmers or hunters. The farmers continued to hunt.
—Incorrect – The farmers and better hunters were not just scraping by. 

Now it’s the summer of 1862. The promised payments are two months late.
—Incorrect – According to the 1851 treaties, the payments were due July 1. In 1862, the payments arrived less than 7 weeks late.

[Painting]
In August 1862, four Dakota hunters kill five settlers…
—Incorrect – This painting is not about Acton Township; it is “Attack on New Ulm” by Anton Gag.

For six weeks, the Dakota wage a bloody war. Scores of people on both sides are killed. Homesteads and towns are destroyed. Eventually the Dakota are defeated by the U.S Army troops. Many innocent Dakota are marched to an internment camp at Fort Snelling. More than 300 die there.
—Unbalanced – Failure to say how many were killed on each side leaves the visitor to think the deaths were balanced. More than 650 whites were killed and about 145 Dakota were killed.
—Incorrect – The hostile Dakota were defeated by the U.S. Army allied with the friendly Dakota.
—Incorrect – Official records stated that 130 died at Fort Snelling.

Hundreds of Dakota warriors are brought to trial, and more than 300 are convicted and condemned to death. President Abraham Lincoln commutes the sentences of most of the warriors, but thirty-eight men are sent to their deaths by hanging in Mankato in December, 1862 – the largest mass execution in U.S. history.
—Incorrect – The exact number convicted and condemned to death was 303. Stating “more than 300” suggests the number was much higher.
—Incorrect – This was the largest simultaneous mass execution in U.S. history.
—Unbalanced – this was the largest mass-murder of white civilians by Indians in U.S. history.

[Painting of Indians on the march being guarded by soldiers]
This is cited in the MHS “Minnesota River Valley Tour” as “Captured prisoners.” 1868, Kansas Historical Society
—I cannot find this painting on the Kansas Historical Society website.
—Incorrect – This does not represent either Dakota march in 1862. There are too many errors. I suspect this is a march of another Indian group. 

All treaties are revoked and the Dakota are forced out of Minnesota. Little Crow, who had escaped at the end of the war, is pursued by bounty hunters, and in 1863, is shot and killed near Hutchinson, Minnesota. As he died, the fallen leader is cradled by his 13-year-old son. His killer is awarded a $500 bounty by the State of Minnesota.
—Incorrect – The treaties were abrogated because the hostile Dakota violated the 1858 Treaties and went to war.
—Unbalanced – In the 1970s, Dakota descendants were paid for land and annuities taken.
—Incorrect – Not all of the Dakota were forced out of Minnesota.
—Incorrect – Bounties were not being offered when Chief Little Crow was killed. Bounty hunters were not pursuing him.
—Unbalanced – The Dakota also offered bounties for white scalps during the Dakota War of 1862.
—Unbalanced – Where are the graphic details of whites killed by Indians?

End-of-Video 

Minnesota Treaty Interactive

 Starting in 1805, the United States negotiated treaties with Minnesota’s indigenous peoples. Explore each treaty and see how changing boundaries reflect the influx of settlers and displacement of the Dakota, Ojibwe, and Ho-Chunk. 
—Incorrect – I do not see a map nor do a see any message that my software will not permit me to see this map.

Sources Cited
—Incorrect – Be careful with these sources. They contain incorrect and incomplete information.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s