I now turn to a part of this paper that focuses on a section of Texas history. After the Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848, the United States government recognized that the conquered Mexican population of the Southwest was racially diverse. With the exception of New Mexico, most of the conquered population had been politically disenfranchised and were not given the full rights of citizens (e.g., voting, practicing law, running for office). With respect to the mission and ranchera Indians, government officials acknowledged that they were culturally part Mexican, and therefore should be distinguished from the nomadic Indians and be given some of the political rights of Mexicans.
Previously, mission and ranchera Indians had been declared Mexican citizens. Therefore, after the Mexican-American War, the United States Congress gave each territory and state the right to decide if the mission and ranchera Indians should be given a special status, thereby exempting them from the Indian Intercourse Act of 1834. The Act outlined the legal status of the Indians and stipulated that Indians must be placed in reservations or exterminated if they refused to be relocated. Since the Indians in Texas had been forced to leave or had been exterminated prior to the end of the Mexican-American War, the surviving mission and ranchera Indians no longer posed a political threat. In 1849, therefore, Texas passed liberal legislation with respect to mission and ranchera Indians and exempted them from the Indian Intercourse Act. In other words, if these types of Indians wanted to remain in Texas rather than relocating to the reservations, they were required to either prove that they were culturally Mexican or that they were in the process of becoming Mexican. Furthermore, the state government decreed that if mission Indians could document that they were culturally Mexican, their land claims would be validated by the United States government. The legal procedure that Indians had to follow was stipulated in the Texas State Supreme Court ruling McMullen v. Hodge and Others (1849). Former mission Indians would be able to retain titles to the properties they were granted under Spanish and Mexican property laws and be exempt from federal Indian legislation if they followed these procedures. To be eligible for such consideration, they had to prove that they or their ancestors: 1) were released by missionaries, 2) spoke Spanish, 3) passed a two-year secularization probationary period where they were observed to have practiced Mexican traditions, 4) had been Spanish subjects or practicing Mexican citizens (e.g., voted, ran for office, practiced the holy Catholic Sacraments), 5) obtained property alienation rights releasing their land from the tutelage of the church or government, and 6) had their land surveyed according to United States law.
Under McMullen v. Hodge and Others (1849), the state also ruled that in the case of the ranchera Indians, they would be allowed to live among non-Indians if they could prove that they had adopted a Mexican lifestyle. However, the ranchera Indians would not be given property rights, unless they could prove that their village had been formally incorporated into a Mexican township before the Mexican-American War
As a result of this legal process, many mission and ranchera Indians survived and were pressured to lead a Mexican cultural lifestyle. Furthermore, I would like to iterate that my research on mission and ranchera Indians is an example of how law and culture have been historically intertwined.
From Indians to Mexicans: Law and the Public Culture of the Mission and Ranchera Indians of the Southwest
By Martha Menchaca
University of Texas, Austin
Reposted by permission
Originally web published at the Julian Samora Research Institute
Martha Menchaca holds a Ph.D., a M.A., and B.A. in Cultural Anthropology. She is currently an Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Texas.
Previously, mission and ranchera Indians had been declared Mexican citizens. Therefore, after the Mexican-American War, the United States Congress gave each territory and state the right to decide if the mission and ranchera Indians should be given a special status, thereby exempting them from the Indian Intercourse Act of 1834. The Act outlined the legal status of the Indians and stipulated that Indians must be placed in reservations or exterminated if they refused to be relocated. Since the Indians in Texas had been forced to leave or had been exterminated prior to the end of the Mexican-American War, the surviving mission and ranchera Indians no longer posed a political threat. In 1849, therefore, Texas passed liberal legislation with respect to mission and ranchera Indians and exempted them from the Indian Intercourse Act. In other words, if these types of Indians wanted to remain in Texas rather than relocating to the reservations, they were required to either prove that they were culturally Mexican or that they were in the process of becoming Mexican. Furthermore, the state government decreed that if mission Indians could document that they were culturally Mexican, their land claims would be validated by the United States government. The legal procedure that Indians had to follow was stipulated in the Texas State Supreme Court ruling McMullen v. Hodge and Others (1849). Former mission Indians would be able to retain titles to the properties they were granted under Spanish and Mexican property laws and be exempt from federal Indian legislation if they followed these procedures. To be eligible for such consideration, they had to prove that they or their ancestors: 1) were released by missionaries, 2) spoke Spanish, 3) passed a two-year secularization probationary period where they were observed to have practiced Mexican traditions, 4) had been Spanish subjects or practicing Mexican citizens (e.g., voted, ran for office, practiced the holy Catholic Sacraments), 5) obtained property alienation rights releasing their land from the tutelage of the church or government, and 6) had their land surveyed according to United States law.
Under McMullen v. Hodge and Others (1849), the state also ruled that in the case of the ranchera Indians, they would be allowed to live among non-Indians if they could prove that they had adopted a Mexican lifestyle. However, the ranchera Indians would not be given property rights, unless they could prove that their village had been formally incorporated into a Mexican township before the Mexican-American War
As a result of this legal process, many mission and ranchera Indians survived and were pressured to lead a Mexican cultural lifestyle. Furthermore, I would like to iterate that my research on mission and ranchera Indians is an example of how law and culture have been historically intertwined.
From Indians to Mexicans: Law and the Public Culture of the Mission and Ranchera Indians of the Southwest
By Martha Menchaca
University of Texas, Austin
Reposted by permission
Originally web published at the Julian Samora Research Institute
Martha Menchaca holds a Ph.D., a M.A., and B.A. in Cultural Anthropology. She is currently an Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Texas.
