Talk:Treaty of Traverse des Sioux

Removal of uncompleted fragment of long-festering edit
In a series of three edits in a ten-minute period, beginning with this one an IP-account colleague added credible content to the accompanying article, but clearly saved an uncompleted addition in mid-syllable. Some colleagues have since poked at it a bit without ever actually molding a meaningful sentence out of it. It appears the IP has not returned to the topic, and i now excise from the article the portion that i have bolded in the following content, that has gone nearly 4 years without making any sense:
 * As the US had promised increased annuity payments in exchange for more land cessions, Chief Red Iron said, "the white settlers started Sioux leaders went to Washington, D.C. in 1858 to sign another pair of treaties; these ceded the reservation north of the Minnesota River. --Jerzy•t 05:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Treaty of Traverse des Sioux. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/history/mncultures/sleepyeye.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Issue
The article fails to provide the Nicollet map used by the United States to delineate the tribal lands being ceded. That map was produced for the War Department and published by the U.S. Senate. The article fails to inform that the map caused problems with the Yankton band who were not present. The treaty sold land the Yankton claimed. The treaty used the Big Sioux/Tchankasndata River as the Yankton border when the Yankton claimed all the land between the river and the Pipestone quarry in Minnesota. The Yankton claim necessitated the Yankton Treaty of April 1858 in order that Minnesota be "claim free" for Statehood in May 1858. The very first sentence of the Yankton Treaty addresses the Yankton claims stemming from the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux. The Yankton refused to sign without the provision of a reservation at the Pipestone that they were granted. Mcb133aco (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Where are you getting the information about the Yankton band? Cielquiparle (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposed Rewrite of section on "Trader's Paper"
I cannot find a source that precisely matches the article's description of the way the treaty signers were also tricked into singing the "Trader's Paper." Therefore, unless someone can point out a source that matches this description, I propose that the section be rewritten. TH1980 (talk) 02:41, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Below is a draft of a proposed rewrite, penned by me:

'''The Sioux also resented the separate "trader's paper" that was included in the treaty. Traders' papers were documents that contained the names of traders, included in the aforesaid claims, who were due fees from previous trades. The trader's paper for the treaty ensured that the cash annuity, to be paid the Sioux for fifty years, went directly to the traders instead for several years. Further claims that were subsequently added ultimately ensured the tribe recieved no money from the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux.' (Source: Andrist, Ralph, The Long Death: The Last Days of the Plains Indian'' University of Oklahoma Press, 1964 Pages 18, 29-30) TH1980 (talk) 00:28, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I could fine-tune the article using a book listed in the "Further Reading" section, Minnesota: A History, not Andrist's.TH1980 (talk) 02:35, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi everyone. I ultimately decided to use both The Long Death and Minnesota: A History as guides for the revision and published it. I could not locate a source that specifically said $450,000 was claimed by the "trader's paper", but Andrist's book indicates a tidy sum was claimed by the traders at the tribe's expense.TH1980 (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you guys are looking.
 * Hope this helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * P.S. Incidentally, the traders paper "never even had sums attached to it". Joseph R. Brown filled the amounts later. (Anderson, p.28) Much like the Treaty of St. Peters that left the land's value blank. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * P.S. Incidentally, the traders paper "never even had sums attached to it". Joseph R. Brown filled the amounts later. (Anderson, p.28) Much like the Treaty of St. Peters that left the land's value blank. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * P.S. Incidentally, the traders paper "never even had sums attached to it". Joseph R. Brown filled the amounts later. (Anderson, p.28) Much like the Treaty of St. Peters that left the land's value blank. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)