Court case
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock
Congress could open Kiowa and Comanche reservation land without the three-fourths consent the 1867 Medicine Lodge Treaty required.
- Citation
- 187 U.S. 553 (1903)
- Court
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Year
- 1903
- Nations
- Kiowa, Comanche, Apache (Plains Apache)
- Treaty at issue
- Medicine Lodge Treaty of 1867
- Effect on land rights
- eroded
What happened
By the Medicine Lodge treaty of 1867, the Kiowa and Comanche Indians, later joined by the Apaches, held a reservation in common in what became Oklahoma. Article 12 said that no treaty ceding any part of it would be valid against the Indians unless signed by at least three fourths of all the adult male Indians occupying it.
On October 6, 1892, 456 male adult members of the confederated tribes signed an agreement with three commissioners of the United States about the reservation. The Indian agent certified that there were 562 male adults in the three tribes. Congress later passed the act of June 6, 1900 to carry out the agreement, allot land to tribal members and open surplus lands to settlement.
On June 6, 1901, Lone Wolf, suing for himself and for all members of the Kiowa, Comanche and Apache tribes, filed a bill in equity in Washington. It charged that the agreement had not been signed by three fourths of the adult males, and that Congress had made changes without submitting them to the Indians.
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' decision against Lone Wolf. It said "Congress has always exercised plenary authority over the tribal relations of the Indians" and that the power is political, "not subject to be controlled by the judicial department." The Court said a moral obligation rested on Congress to act in good faith, but it would presume Congress acted in perfect good faith, and the courts could not inquire into its motives.
Good to know. The 456-of-562 signature figures come from the statement of the case; the Court did not itself decide whether three-fourths had signed.
Summarized with AI assistance from 4 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error
What the sources say, and how this was checked
Well supported by the sources below.
Congress has always exercised plenary authority over the tribal relations of the Indians
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)at least three fourths of all the adult male Indians occupying the same
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)this court will presume that Congress acted in perfect good faith
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)a bill was filed on the equity side of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, wherein Lone Wolf
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)
Research notes. The phrase 'not subject to be controlled by the judicial department' is from the opinion body; the headnote prints a variant ('not subject to be controlled by the courts'). Menominee Tribe v. United States (1968) was in the old text but is not mentioned in this opinion; the link was removed. The 456-of-562 figures are from the statement of the case; the opinion text I read did not itself decide whether three fourths had signed. I read the syllabus, statement of the case and the core reasoning, not every page.
Who is doing the work
This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:
- Comanche Nation, Oklahoma
- Kiowa Tribe
- Apache Tribe of Oklahoma
- Fort Sill Apache Tribe
- Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico
- Lipan Apache Tribe of Texas
- Mescalero Apache Tribe
- San Carlos Apache Tribe
Native legal and land defense, nationally
- Native American Rights Fund (NARF) Native-led Litigation and legal advocacy for tribal sovereignty, treaty rights, land and resources Give on their site Website
- NDN Collective (LANDBACK Campaign) Native-led LANDBACK campaign (launched 2020; Mount Rushmore closure and return of Black Hills public lands), Indigenous… Give on their site Website
- Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) Native-led Land recovery and control by tribes and individual Indian landowners Website
- Decolonizing Wealth Project (Indigenous Earth Fund; California Tribal Land Return) Native-led Reparative philanthropy Give on their site Website
Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.
Connections
Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.
Doctrine applied 4
Nations named 4
- Apachesuggested
- Comanchesuggested
- Kiowasuggested
- Plains Apache (Kiowa-Apache)suggested
Decided a dispute over 3
- Fort Laramie 1868 and the Black Hills: abrogation by the Act of Feb. 28, 18771874suggested
- The General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887 and the loss of the communal land base1887suggested
- Medicine Lodge (1867) and Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903): allotment without the promised three-fourths consent1892suggested
Concerns the instrument 2
Policy era 1
- Allotment and Assimilation1887suggested
Limited by 1
- United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians1980suggested
Sources
- supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/187/553/legal text copy
The record’s fields
- Holding
- Congress has plenary power over tribal relations; a treaty requirement of three-fourths adult-male consent did not bar Congress from opening the Kiowa-Comanche-Apache reservation to allotment and sale by statute. The Court called the matter political and non-justiciable.
- Kind
- Court case
- Confidence
- High