Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights

Violation

Western Shoshone: Treaty of Ruby Valley (1863) and the ICC payment the Nation refuses

Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.

The 1863 Ruby Valley treaty has no land-cession article; a later Claims Commission award was held to count as payment for Western Shoshone title.

Treaty
Treaty of Ruby Valley, 18 Stat. 689
Nations
Western Shoshone (Newe)
When
1951-2006
Land affected
Aboriginal-title claim to about 24-26 million acres (the treaty territory is about 40,000 sq mi per Wikipedia).
Acreage
about 24 million acres (ICC award basis); about 40,000 sq mi claimed territory

What happened

The Treaty of Ruby Valley was signed on October 1, 1863, and proclaimed on October 21, 1869. Its title is "Peace and Friendship." In it the Western Bands of the Shoshone agreed to stop attacks on emigrants, mail and telegraph lines. Article 2 said routes of travel through their country "shall be forever free." Article 4 let the country be explored for gold and silver and used for mining and farming settlements. Article 5 lists the boundaries the bands claimed. Article 7 promised $5,000 a year for twenty years as compensation for lost game. The treaty text has no article that cedes land.

A 1994 statement to a United Nations working group by the Western Shoshone National Council, posted by the Center for World Indigenous Studies, says "the treaty is still today in full force and effect." That is the Council's argument, not a court finding.

Later the United States took a different path. The Indian Claims Commission decided that Western Shoshone aboriginal title had been extinguished in the late 19th century and awarded more than $26 million, according to the Supreme Court. The award was placed in a Treasury trust account. The Court says no distribution plan has been made because of the Tribe's refusal to cooperate. In United States v. Dann (1985), the Court held that "once the money was deposited into the trust account, payment was effected," which closed the claim under the Claims Commission Act. The case began when the United States sued Tribe members for grazing livestock on 5,120 acres without a permit. The Court did not decide their individual aboriginal-title claim.

Good to know. The Ruby Valley treaty has no article ceding land, and the Western Shoshone National Council says it remains in force; the Court instead held that a claims award counted as payment.

Summarized with AI assistance from 3 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

Supported by the sources below; some details rest on one source.

  1. The several routes of travel through the Shoshonee country, now or hereafter used by white men, shall be forever freeTreaty with the Western Shoshoni, 1863 (Ruby Valley), 18 Stat. 689, Tribal Treaties Database
  2. Once the money was deposited into the trust account, payment was effected.United States v. Dann, 470 U.S. 39 (1985), Cornell LII
  3. the treaty is still today in full force and effectWestern Shoshone statement to the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations, 1994 (CWIS)

Research notes. Whether the Ruby Valley treaty ceded any land is read from the treaty text opened here (no cession article); the Western Shoshone National Council argues the treaty remains in force. The $26 million figure and the 'late 19th century' finding are the Supreme Court's description of the Commission. The 2004 distribution act, later litigation, the CERD 2006 finding and acreage figures were not confirmed and are omitted. The Western Shoshone National Council and Nation sources should be confirmed for the Nation's own view.

Treaty or agreementShapes from the 1899 federal record: approximate, not legal boundaries.

Who is doing the work

This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:

Land return and Native-led work nearby

Native legal and land defense, nationally

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

Connections

These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Located in 4

Taken to court in 1

Nations named 1

Policy era 1

Concerns the instrument 1

Sources

  1. archives.gov/research/native-americans/indian-claims-commissionprimary record
  2. supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/470/39/legal text copy
  3. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Ruby_Valleypointer
The record’s fields
What happened
Western Shoshone: Treaty of Ruby Valley (1863) and the ICC payment the Nation refuses -- Signed Oct. 1, 1863 by Governors Nye and Doty and twelve chiefs, the treaty (18 Stat. 689-692) granted access, passage and resource rights; it did not cede land. A 1951 claim (ICC Docket 326-K) alleged loss of aboriginal title; the Commission treated the land as extinguished by encroachment and awarded money; Congress appropriated $26 million for 24 million acres in 1979. Tribes refused the payment. In United States v. Dann (Feb. 20, 1985, unanimous) the Court held 'payment' under the ICC Act occurred when funds were placed in a Treasury trust account for the Tribe, so the claim was final; it did not decide whether title was actually extinguished. A Western Shoshone National Council quiet-title suit was dismissed Jan. 17, 2006. On Mar. 10, 2006 the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination cited credible information that Western Shoshone land rights were being denied.
Legal aftermath
The payment fund remains unaccepted by many; a 2004 distribution act was opposed by seven of nine tribal councils (figures vary between $145M and $160M in sources).
Kind
Violation
Confidence
Medium
Nation review
Not yet reviewed by this nation
Notes
  • Some details are disputed

Correct this record