In its 1903 decision in the case

of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United

States Supreme Court rejected the

Line efforts of three Native American tribes

(5) to prevent the opening of tribal lands

to non-Indian settlement without tribal

consent. In his study of the Lone

Wolf case, Blue Clark properly

emphasizes the Court’s assertion

(10) of a virtually unlimited unilateral power

of Congress (the House of Represen-

tatives and the Senate) over Native

American affairs. But he fails to note

the decision’s more far-reaching

(15) impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the

federal government totally abandoned

negotiation and execution of formal

written agreements with Indian tribes

as a prerequisite for the implemen-

(20) tation of federal Indian policy. Many

commentators believe that this change

had already occurred in 1871 when—

following a dispute between the

House and the Senate over which

(25) chamber should enjoy primacy in

Indian affairs—Congress abolished

the making of treaties with Native

American tribes. But in reality the

federal government continued to nego-

(30) tiate formal tribal agreements past

the turn of the century, treating these

documents not as treaties with sover-

eign nations requiring ratification by the

Senate but simply as legislation to be

(35) passed by both houses of Congress.

The Lone Wolf decision ended this

era of formal negotiation and finally

did away with what had increasingly

become the empty formality of obtain-

ing tribal consent.

Q15:

According to the passage, which of the following resulted from the Lone Wolf decision?

1. The Supreme Court took on a greater role in Native American affairs.

2. Native American tribes lost their legal standing as sovereign nations in their dealings with the federal government, but their ownership of tribal lands was confirmed.

3. The federal government no longer needed to conclude a formal agreement with a Native American tribe in order to carry out policy decisions that affected the tribe.

4. The federal government began to appropriate tribal lands for distribution to non-Indian settlers.

5. Native American tribes were no longer able to challenge congressional actions by appealing to the Supreme Court.

文章贴得有问题，没法阅读阿

赫赫，重发一遍：

In its 1903 decision in the case

of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, the United

States Supreme Court rejected the

Line efforts of three Native American tribes

(5) to prevent the opening of tribal lands

to non-Indian settlement without tribal

consent. In his study of the Lone

Wolf case, Blue Clark properly

emphasizes the Court’s assertion

(10) of a virtually unlimited unilateral power

of Congress (the House of Represen-

tatives and the Senate) over Native

American affairs. But he fails to note

the decision’s more far-reaching

(15) impact: shortly after Lone Wolf, the

federal government totally abandoned

negotiation and execution of formal

written agreements with Indian tribes

as a prerequisite for the implemen-

(20) tation of federal Indian policy. Many

commentators believe that this change

had already occurred in 1871 when—

following a dispute between the

House and the Senate over which

(25) chamber should enjoy primacy in

Indian affairs—Congress abolished

the making of treaties with Native

American tribes. But in reality the

federal government continued to nego-

(30) tiate formal tribal agreements past

the turn of the century, treating these

documents not as treaties with sover-

eign nations requiring ratification by the

Senate but simply as legislation to be

(35) passed by both houses of Congress.

The Lone Wolf decision ended this

era of formal negotiation and finally

did away with what had increasingly

become the empty formality of obtain-

ing tribal consent.

我也同意选c