891 allowed Indians who were handicapped, elderly, or underage to lease their allotments. By 1900, a clause was added allowing Indians to lease land on the grounds of "inability." Federal agents authorized these leases and were given substantial discretion in determining the inability of Indians to manage their allotments. Widespread abuse of this system occurred. Land scandals involving federal agents, real estate investors, farmers, and local officials were common.
The land allotment program of the Dawes Act was a total failure in terms of improving conditions for Native Americans. Prior to passage of the Act, Indians owned over 155 million acres of land in the United States; by 1900, their holdings had shrunk to roughly 78 million acres (Parman, 1994, p. 9). A substantial portion of Indian land was unsuitable for farming, thereby reducing the chances of success for allotment. In addition, federal agents often assigned land for allotment based on white cultural standards, making it of little value for Indians who hoped to maintain their communal way of life. Despite the drawbacks of severalty, the federal government proceeded with the same idealistic mindset: "The severalty philosophy remained unchallenged and would dictate the direction of Indian policy during the first two decades of the twentieth century" (p. 10).
According to Deloria, Jr. (1985), the beginning of the twentieth century witnessed a significant shift in federal government policy toward resolving the "Indian problem" (p. 247). The opinions of social scientists had a profound effect on this philosophical shift. By the early 1900s, American intellectuals began to doubt whether Indians possessed the capacity to assimilate into white society. If assimilation occurred at all, it would proceed slowly and problematically. Some experts even predicted the imminent extinction of the Native American race. The more optimistic social scientists advocated lo...