Seneca Evidence Doesn’t Add Up

VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The Seneca Nation’s aboriginal title to the Niagara Islands, if in fact the Senecas ever held such title, was extinguished prior to New York’s purported purchase of the Islands in 1815. In 1764, pursuant to treaty, Great Britain extinguished any claim of Seneca title to the Islands, thereby securing fee simple absolute title to the Islands for itself. Upon the American Revolution. Britain’s fee simple absolute title passed to the State of New York. Furthermore, pursuant to the 1784 Treaty of Fort Stanwix, the United States again extinguished any claim of title the Senecas may have had to the Niagara Islands. Under the Articles of Confederation and the law of Indian land tenure, once the Senecas’ title was extinguished, New York, as the holder of the right of preemption, obtained fee simple absolute title to the Islands (assuming of course that New York did not already possess such title as a result of the 1764 treaties).
The 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua did not divest New York of its title to the Islands because such purpose was not shown in the Treaty with such certainty as to put it beyond reasonable question. Moreover, even if the Treaty could be interpreted to have included the Islands as land to which the United States was recognizing Seneca title, New York was not divested of its title to the Islands because just compensation was never paid by the United States to New York as required under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Thus, the Court finds that the purported conveyance of the Niagara Islands to New York in 1815 did not constitute a violation of the Nonintercourse Act because at the time of the conveyance, the Islands were not tribal land protected by the Act. Accordingly, the Court: (1) denies plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment; and (2) grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to enter judgment in favor of the defendants and to take all steps necessary to close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED

The evidence that I found in Sir William Johnson’s notes took me two weeks of vigorous reading and cross referencing with historical accounts. The Grand Island land claim case lasted nine years. In those nine years, not once did the lawyers representing SNI make mention of the fact that the Chiefs signing the Treaty of 1764 were hostages. At first, perhaps in my own arrogance, I believed that I found evidence which was overlooked by the SNI legal team. Then I began looking further into the courtroom proceedings, and the Senecas’ own portrayal of the case. The first thing that is off to me is that SNI only tried to claim Grand Island. As a result of the August 1764 Treaty, the islands of the Niagara River are a package bundle. One island cannot be obtained without all of the islands being obtained. So why did SNI only attempt to claim Grand Island? The fact that the entire case hinged on the August Treaty of 1764 means that the SNI legal team should have collected and reviewed all evidence pertaining to this particular treaty. The best evidence for this treaty were Sir William Johnson’s notes, which were cited in court, but the fact that the Chiefs were hostages was never mentioned. The fact that there are two treaties of Niagara of 1764, both identical except for the fact that the August of 1764 treaty includes the addition of the islands, was only briefly touched upon in the trial when the defense quoted the treaty directly.

In a nine year long case, how could key evidence not be brought up? Unless, as former Congressman John LaFalce puts it, the Grand Island land claim case was a manuever that was (successfully) used to obtain the gaming compact between NYS and SNI. As I see it, SNI withheld key evidence, pulling their knockout punch in order to obtain the gaming compact.

Was this political dishonesty performed by the Senecas? Not really. SNI (Seneca Nation of Indians) is a corporate subsidiary of New York State. When LaFalce says ““To be sure, a certain number, in my judgment, did see an opportunity for gambling,” and “this group did bring a lawsuit in 1993″ he is right on the money. The Seneca Party, a political party that is notorious for buying election votes with money and drugs, seems to be at the heart of this scheme. They were in power in 2002 during the Grand Island case ruling and during the signing of the gaming compact, and they are still currently in power.

They are not alone, however. In order for this whole thing to work, there must have been players on the New York State side of things. That is information for a future article. The persons involved in this scheme on the Seneca end of things were clearly individuals looking for personal gain, and nothing more. It is hard to fathom for many that any Native of Turtle Island would exchange an opportunity to claim land for financial gain, however history has revealed many “Uncle Tomahawks” who had no problem selling out their own tribes for profit.