库斯湾印第安人在“征服者的法庭”

IF 0.4 4区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1525/phr.2022.91.4.463
Gray H. Whaley
{"title":"库斯湾印第安人在“征服者的法庭”","authors":"Gray H. Whaley","doi":"10.1525/phr.2022.91.4.463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is based on two American Indian cases that arose from aboriginal title claims to coastal Oregon in the U.S. Court of Claims, Coos Bay (1938) and Alcea (1946), both subsequently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The cases set important precedents in judicial Indian law on the eve of the Indian Claims Commission. Coos Bay and Alcea also caused the creation of two distinct tribes of Coos Bay Indians: the Coos tribe included in the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw (Coos Bay); and the Coos tribe included in the Coquille Indian Tribe (Alcea). The latter were the only Coos Indian plaintiffs eligible to join the Alcea victory after the Coos Bay loss in the Supreme Court. The division caused considerable enmity between the two tribes, an unfortunate result, which this article attempts to alleviate by examining the reasons behind the split.","PeriodicalId":45312,"journal":{"name":"PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coos Bay Indians in the “Courts of the Conqueror”\",\"authors\":\"Gray H. Whaley\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/phr.2022.91.4.463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is based on two American Indian cases that arose from aboriginal title claims to coastal Oregon in the U.S. Court of Claims, Coos Bay (1938) and Alcea (1946), both subsequently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The cases set important precedents in judicial Indian law on the eve of the Indian Claims Commission. Coos Bay and Alcea also caused the creation of two distinct tribes of Coos Bay Indians: the Coos tribe included in the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw (Coos Bay); and the Coos tribe included in the Coquille Indian Tribe (Alcea). The latter were the only Coos Indian plaintiffs eligible to join the Alcea victory after the Coos Bay loss in the Supreme Court. The division caused considerable enmity between the two tribes, an unfortunate result, which this article attempts to alleviate by examining the reasons behind the split.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/phr.2022.91.4.463\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PACIFIC HISTORICAL REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/phr.2022.91.4.463","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文基于两起美国印第安人的案件,这两起案件起因于美国索赔法院对俄勒冈沿海地区的土著所有权要求,库斯湾(1938年)和阿尔恰(1946年),这两起案件随后都得到了美国最高法院的支持。在印度索赔委员会成立前夕,这些案件在印度司法法上树立了重要的先例。库斯湾和阿尔恰也导致了库斯湾印第安人的两个不同部落的产生:库斯部落包括在库斯联盟部落,下乌姆普夸和苏斯劳(库斯湾);和库斯部落包括在Coquille印第安部落(Alcea)。后者是库斯湾案在最高法院败诉后,唯一有资格参与阿尔恰案胜利的库斯印第安原告。这一分裂在两个部落之间造成了相当大的敌意,这是一个不幸的结果,本文试图通过研究分裂背后的原因来缓解这种敌意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Coos Bay Indians in the “Courts of the Conqueror”
This article is based on two American Indian cases that arose from aboriginal title claims to coastal Oregon in the U.S. Court of Claims, Coos Bay (1938) and Alcea (1946), both subsequently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The cases set important precedents in judicial Indian law on the eve of the Indian Claims Commission. Coos Bay and Alcea also caused the creation of two distinct tribes of Coos Bay Indians: the Coos tribe included in the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw (Coos Bay); and the Coos tribe included in the Coquille Indian Tribe (Alcea). The latter were the only Coos Indian plaintiffs eligible to join the Alcea victory after the Coos Bay loss in the Supreme Court. The division caused considerable enmity between the two tribes, an unfortunate result, which this article attempts to alleviate by examining the reasons behind the split.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: For over 70 years, the Pacific Historical Review has accurately and adeptly covered the history of American expansion to the Pacific and beyond, as well as the post-frontier developments of the 20th-century American West. Recent articles have discussed: •Japanese American Internment •The Establishment of Zion and Bryce National Parks in Utah •Mexican Americans, Testing, and School Policy 1920-1940 •Irish Immigrant Settlements in Nineteenth-Century California and Australia •American Imperialism in Oceania •Native American Labor in the Early Twentieth Century •U.S.-Philippines Relations •Pacific Railroad and Westward Expansion before 1945
期刊最新文献
Effects of non-stationary blur on texture biomarkers of bone using Ultra-High Resolution CT. The Rise and Spread of the Hong Men Chee Kung Tong in the Cantonese Pacific and Beyond Review: Cabotajes Novohispanos: Espacios y contactos marítimos en torno a la Nueva España, by Guadalupe Pinzón Ríos Review: A Place at the Nayarit: How a Mexican Restaurant Nourished a Community, by Natalia Molina Review: Trading Freedom: How Trade with China Defined Early America, by Dael A. Norwood
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1