Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights
All treaties and agreements

Great Lakes / Old NorthwestTreaty

Treaty of St. Peters (1837) with the Chippewa

The 1837 Treaty of St. Peters ceded Chippewa land but guaranteed hunting, fishing and rice gathering, rights the Supreme Court upheld in 1999.

Signed
July 29, 1837
Senate
Ratified
Land given up
about 14 million acres
Promises
1 of 1 broken or only partly kept
The land in this treaty’s record. Open on the map

What happened

On July 29, 1837, Henry Dodge, Governor of Wisconsin Territory and commissioner for the United States, signed a treaty at St. Peters, at the meeting of the St. Peters and Mississippi rivers. The other party was the Chippewa nation, through its chiefs and headmen. In Article 1 they ceded a tract of country described by boundaries, running from the junction of the Crow Wing and Mississippi rivers across to the Chippewa and Wisconsin river country. The treaty states no acreage.

In Article 2 the United States agreed to pay annually for twenty years $9,500 in money and $19,000 in goods, with sums for blacksmiths, farmers, provisions and tobacco. Article 5 guaranteed to the Indians "the privilege of hunting, fishing, and gathering the wild rice" on the ceded lands, rivers and lakes, during the pleasure of the President.

The Supreme Court records what followed. In an 1850 Executive Order, President Taylor ordered the Chippewa's removal from the ceded territory and revoked those rights. The Court noted that the 1837 treaty made no mention of removal. In Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (decided March 24, 1999), it held that the 1850 order was ineffective and that the Chippewa retain the rights the treaty guaranteed. The treaty was proclaimed on June 15, 1838.

What was promised, and what happened

  • Partly kept

    Chippewa guaranteed the privilege of hunting, fishing and gathering wild rice on the ceded lands, during the pleasure of the President. (Art. 5)

    The Chippewa retain the usufructuary rights guaranteed to them by the 1837 Treaty. law.cornell.edu

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.

  1. The privilege of hunting, fishing, and gathering the wild rice, upon the lands, the rivers and the lakes included in the territory ceded, is guarantiedTreaty with the Chippewa, 1837 (OSU Tribal Treaties Database)
  2. The Chippewa retain the usufructuary rights guaranteed to them by the 1837 Treaty.Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, 526 U.S. 172 (1999) (Cornell LII)
  3. The Treaty made no mention of removal, and the issue was not discussed during Treaty negotiations.Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, 526 U.S. 172 (1999) (Cornell LII)
  4. the Chippewa nation of Indians, by their chiefs and headmenTreaty with the Chippewa, 7 Stat. 536 (govinfo)

Research notes. The treaty states no acreage. The Supreme Court's 1999 decision also deals with an 1855 treaty and Minnesota's statehood, which are not described here. The cited sources do not describe other events after 1850.

What the treaty did to the land

About 14 million acres given up. Each shape is a numbered area in the federal government’s 1899 record of land cessions.

What happened next

Everything the record holds about this land and this treaty, in order: what earlier agreements said, what this one did, and what the United States, the courts and the nations did afterwards.

  1. 1837

    This treaty

    About 14 million acres ceded to the United States by the Chippewa

    The 1837 Treaty of St. Peters ceded Chippewa land but guaranteed hunting, fishing and rice gathering, rights the Supreme Court upheld in 1999.

  2. 1850

    Promise broken

    Sandy Lake (1850): removal order and annuity relocation in breach of Ojibwe treaties

    In 1850 an executive order and a payment moved to Sandy Lake left thousands of Ojibwe stranded in winter; about 400 died, MNopedia says.

  3. 1850

    Promise broken

    Mille Lacs (1999): Minnesota's denial of 1837 hunting, fishing and gathering rights

    Minnesota said an 1850 order, an 1855 treaty and statehood ended Ojibwe treaty rights to harvest; the Supreme Court disagreed in 1999.

  4. 1970

    Promise broken

    Voigt decision (1983): Wisconsin's denial of 1837/1842 treaty rights

    In 1983 a federal appeals court held that Ojibwe bands kept 1837 hunting and fishing rights in Wisconsin; protests followed.

  5. 1999

    In court

    Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians

    The Chippewa kept their 1837 Treaty hunting and fishing rights; an 1850 order, the 1855 Treaty and Minnesota statehood did not end them.

  6. 2019

    In court

    Herrera v. Wyoming

    The Crow Tribe's 1868 treaty hunting right survived Wyoming statehood, and Bighorn National Forest is not categorically 'occupied'.

The law behind it

The legal ideas behind the decisions, and related records without a date. Court cases and laws with a date are in what happened next, above.

  • Legal doctrine

    abrogation

    Abrogation is Congress overriding a treaty: Lone Wolf (1903) allowed it, but modern courts require clear evidence Congress chose to break the treaty.

  • Legal doctrine

    canons of construction

    Courts read ambiguous treaties in favor of tribes and as the Indians would have understood them, rules the Supreme Court has repeated for more than a century.

  • Legal doctrine

    reserved rights

    Treaties are 'a grant of right from' tribes, not to them: reserved hunting and fishing rights survived cessions, statehood and even termination.

  • Legal doctrine

    treaty fishing rights

    Treaties that reserved fishing rights have been read as rights the tribes kept, not gifts: Winans (1905), Fishing Vessel (1979) and Mille Lacs (1999).

  • Legal doctrine

    statehood

    The Court once said a state's admission ended a tribe's treaty hunting right; Mille Lacs (1999) and Herrera (2019) rejected that reasoning.

Who is doing the work today

The nations connected to this treaty come first, then groups returning land and defending treaty rights. Support goes directly to them.

This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:

Working with these nations

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Sources

  1. digitreaties.org/treaties/treaty/68144559reference work
Research notes

Basis for the 1999 Supreme Court decision Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band, 526 U.S. 172 (1999).

Shapes are approximate and are not legal descriptions of land, title or jurisdiction.