Abstract

America has expanded in size during the past several centuries as a result of the accession of numerous territories. The annexation of areas with indigenous populations has caused issues for such populations, more particularly, in the American border regions, where arbitrary boundaries have divided indigenous populations. Where certain groups formerly freely engaged with one another, today are divided and occasionally subject to criminal prosecution for upholding long-standing customs. Canadian policies changed as local motives replaced British ones. Subsequently, policies changed based on their interactions with the US. Although northern leaders considered the tribes as partners in trade and the military in 1800, American authorities perceived them as foes. Treaties negotiated by both countries became more lopsided over the years. Despite the frequent acts of violence in the US, as the century went on, the contrasts diminished, and towards its conclusion, the two nations faced disastrous outcomes This paper falls into a broader scope and claims that throughout most of the 19th century, the governments of the United States and Canada pursued identical objectives with their policies concerning indigenous peoples. They hoped to eliminate the original peoples' distinct identity by assimilating them into the two communities in addition to obtaining the resources and the land from the native populations. Despite their rules appearing to be almost identical and their general similarities, Canadian and American officials typically adopted distinct implementation strategies for their regulations. The research paper delves into analyses of historic legal precedents (from nineteenth to the twentieth century) to address the aforementioned concerns. Further, the research examines the present status of the legal-political issues comparably.

Keywords