In Worcester v Georgia (1832) the Supreme Court ruled:

States could not make laws ruling over Native tribes as only the Federal government had authority over the Natives.

Right on! Give the BNAT exam to get a 100% scholarship for BYJUS courses

The Cherokee were not an independent and sovereign nation.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

The Treaty of New Echota was unconstitutional.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Ministers were barred from coming on tribal land to proselytize.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

The Federal government could not mediate disputes between Native tribes.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Open in App

Solution

The correct option is A States could not make laws ruling over Native tribes as only the Federal government had authority over the Natives.
Marshall and his court ruled in favor of Samuel Worcester, maintaining that state governments did not have the power to enforce a law within a land that was not within the jurisdiction of that state. Marshall also identified Indian Territories as sovereign entities and that the rights of the tribes were to remain free from the authority of state governments.

Suggest Corrections

Similar questions

Q. The conference held between the U.S. government and the Plains tribes of Native Americans in 1851 resulted in which of the following?

Q. Assertion (A): The state of Georgia in America did not criticise the British government.

Reason (R): The state was fighting Native Americans and thus, relied heavily on British military supplies.

Q. Which of the following were flaws with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1896?
I. It was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
II. Its terms were not well-defined. and businesses were able to easily evade prosecution.
III. It was used against farming collective groups and labor unions. which was clearly not its intent.
IV. The government simply was not interested in enforcing anti-trust laws in the Gilded Age.

Q. The formation of the Iroquois League of the Native tribes of upper New York in the late 1500s was most significant in that it:

Q. At the end of the nineteenth century, a rising interest in Native American customs and an increasing desire to understand Native American culture prompted ethnologists to begin recording the life stories of Native American. Ethnologists had a distinct reason for wanting to hear the stories: they were after linguistic or anthropological data that would supplement their own field observations, and they believed that the personal stories, even of a single individual, could increase their understanding of the cultures that they had been observing from without. In addition, many ethnologists at the turn of the century believed that Native American manners and customs were rapidly disappearing, and that it was important to preserve for posterity as much information as could be adequately recorded before the cultures disappeared forever.
There were, however, arguments against this method as a way of acquiring accurate and complete information. Franz Boas, for example, described autobiographies as being “of limited value, and useful chiefly for the study of the perversion of truth by memory,” while Paul Radin contended that investigators rarely spent enough time with the tribes they were observing, and inevitably derived results too tinged by the investigator’s own emotional tone to be reliable.
Even more importantly, as these life stories moved from the traditional oral mode to recorded written form, much was inevitably lost. Editors often decided what elements were significant to the field research on a given tribe. Native Americans recognized that the essence of their lives could not be communicated in English and that events that they thought significant were often deemed unimportant by their interviewers. Indeed, the very act of telling their stories could force Native American narrators to distort their cultures, as taboos had to be broken to speak the names of dead relatives crucial to their family stories. Despite all of this, autobiography remains a useful tool for ethnological research: such personal reminiscences and impressions, incomplete as they may be, are likely to throw more light on the working of the mind and emotions than any amount of speculation from an ethnologist or ethnological theorist from another culture.
Q. Which of the following is most similar to the actions of nineteenth-century ethnologists in their editing of the life stories of Native Americans?

Join BYJU'S Learning Program