Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights
All treaties and agreements

PlainsTreaty

Treaty of Medicine Lodge (Kiowa and Comanche), 1867

The 1867 Medicine Lodge treaty set a Kiowa and Comanche reservation; the Supreme Court later held Congress could override its three-fourths consent rule.

Signed
October 21, 1867
Senate
Ratified July 25, 1868
Land given up
about 43 million acres
Land set aside for the nations
about 103,000 acres
Promises
1 of 1 broken or only partly kept
The land in this treaty’s record. Open on the map

What happened

On October 21, 1867, at the council camp on Medicine Lodge Creek in Kansas, seven U.S. commissioners signed a treaty with the confederated Kiowa and Comanche. They included Nathaniel G. Taylor, William S. Harney and John B. Sanborn. Article 1 said war between the parties "shall forever cease." Article 2 set apart a district between the Washita and Red rivers for the tribes' "absolute and undisturbed use and occupation."

In Article 11 the tribes agreed to relinquish "all right to occupy permanently the territory outside of their reservation." They kept the right to hunt south of the Arkansas River "so long as the buffalo may range thereon." They also agreed to withdraw opposition to the railroad being built on the Smoky Hill River.

Article 12 said no cession of reservation land would be valid unless signed by at least three-fourths of the adult male Indians occupying it. In Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (decided January 5, 1903) the Supreme Court said the Indians claimed their assent to a later agreement had been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentations and that three-fourths had not signed. The Court held that Article 12 could not "materially limit and qualify the controlling authority of Congress." It called Congress's authority over tribal relations "plenary."

The Oklahoma Historical Society says white buffalo hunters moving onto the Texas Panhandle contributed to the anger that led to the Red River War of 1874-75.

What was promised, and what happened

  • Broken

    No cession of reservation land valid unless signed by three-fourths of adult male Indians occupying it. (Art. 12)

    cannot be adjudged to materially limit and qualify the controlling authority of Congress tile.loc.gov

Good to know. The fraud described by the Court was the tribes' allegation, not a court finding.

Summarized with AI assistance from 5 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. unless executed and signed by at least three-fourths of all the adult male Indians occupying the sameTribal Treaties Database (Oklahoma State University): Treaty with the Kiowa and Comanche, 1867 (Medicine Lodge)
  2. they will relinquish all right to occupy permanently the territory outside of their reservationTribal Treaties Database (Oklahoma State University): Treaty with the Kiowa and Comanche, 1867 (Medicine Lodge)
  3. it was claimed by the Indians that their assent had been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentations of its terms by the interpretersLone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (Library of Congress)
  4. cannot be adjudged to materially limit and qualify the controlling authority of CongressLone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (Library of Congress)
  5. the movement of white buffalo hunters onto the plains of the Texas PanhandleOklahoma Historical Society, Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History: Red River War (1874-1875)

Research notes. The claim of fraud is the Indians' claim as the Court described it, not a court finding. The cited sources give no acreage.

What the treaty did to the land

About 43 million acres given up. about 103,000 acres recognized, kept or set aside for the nations. 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. 1865

    Land kept

    About 43 million acres set aside as a reservation for the Comanche and Kiowa

    By Kiowa and Comanche at Little Arkansas River, Kansas (1865)

    area 511

  2. 1867

    This treaty

    Part of the land ceded by the Comanche and Kiowa. About 2.9 million acres ceded to the United States by the Comanche and Kiowa. About 2.9 million acres named in the record. About 103,000 acres set aside as a reservation for the Comanche

    The 1867 Medicine Lodge treaty set a Kiowa and Comanche reservation; the Supreme Court later held Congress could override its three-fourths consent rule.

  3. 1868

    This treaty

    Ratified by the Senate

  4. 1887

    Related history

    General Allotment (Dawes) Act

    The 1887 Dawes Act let the President divide reservations into individual allotments and buy the leftover land for settlers.

  5. 1887

    Related history

    The General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887 and the loss of the communal land base

    The 1887 General Allotment Act broke reservations into individual plots and opened the rest to settlers, shrinking the Indian land base.

  6. 1892

    Promise broken

    Medicine Lodge (1867) and Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903): allotment without the promised three-fourths consent

    The 1867 treaty required three-fourths approval for land cessions; the Secretary reported fewer signed, and the Court let Congress act anyway.

  7. 1903

    In court

    Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock

    Congress could open Kiowa and Comanche reservation land without the three-fourths consent the 1867 Medicine Lodge Treaty required.

  8. 1980

    In court

    United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians

    In 1980 the Supreme Court held the 1877 Act took the Black Hills from the Sioux Nation, requiring just compensation with interest.

  9. 2012

    Related history

    Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations

    Interior's Land Buy-Back Program bought fractional land interests from willing owners and placed nearly 3 million acres in tribal trust.

  10. 2020

    Related history

    McGirt v. Oklahoma

    Land promised to the Creek Nation by treaty remains a reservation, so Oklahoma could not prosecute a tribal member there.

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

    allotment

    Allotment divided tribal reservations into individual parcels under the 1887 Dawes Act and opened the unallotted remainder to purchase.

  • Legal doctrine

    plenary power

    Congress claims 'plenary' power over Indian affairs, upheld since Kagama and Lone Wolf; Justice Thomas has questioned it, and the Brackeen Court said it has borders.

  • Legal doctrine

    trust doctrine

    The 1831 'ward and guardian' description became a trust relationship that courts enforce for damages mainly where a statute or regulation creates the duty.

  • Legal doctrine

    claims

    The 1946 Indian Claims Commission let tribes press land and treaty claims against the United States for money, as in the Sioux case.

  • Legal doctrine

    recognized title

    Where Congress by treaty or statute recognized that Indians would hold land permanently, taking it requires compensation, as in the Sioux Nation case.

  • Legal doctrine

    takings

    Native land held by treaty must be paid for if taken (Sioux Nation, 1980), but unrecognized 'Indian title' is not compensable (Tee-Hit-Ton, 1955).

  • 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

    criminal jurisdiction

    Who may prosecute a crime in Indian country depends on who the offender and victim are and where it happened.

  • Legal doctrine

    diminishment

    Only Congress can shrink a reservation, and courts require a clear statement; Solem, Hagen and Parker show how that test works.

  • Legal doctrine

    disestablishment

    Disestablishment means Congress ended a reservation entirely; courts require clear intent from Congress, and McGirt (2020) held the Creek Reservation was never disestablished.

  • Legal doctrine

    indian country

    Federal law defines 'Indian country' as reservations, dependent Indian communities and Indian allotments; the definition decides which government's laws apply.

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:

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/179022743reference work
Research notes

Proclaimed 1868-08-25. Wikipedia (pointer): tribes never ratified by the required three-fourths adult male vote. Undermined by Jerome Agreement and Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903). Ratification detail: 1868-07-25 (Senate)

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