THE INCONSISTENCIES OF THE 'PRACTICAL' AND 'THEORETICAL' ASPECTS OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT'S POLICY TOWARD INDIANS ARE DEPICTED BY A HYPOTHETICAL CONVERSATION AND BY NUMEROUS QUOTATIONS FROM TESIMONY OF INDIAN AGENTS, INDIANS THEMSELVES, AND OTHERS KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE STATE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS IN 1882. THE INJUSTICES, BROKEN TREATIES, UNFULFILLED PROMISES OF LAND AND FOOD PROVISIONS, THE FORCED RESETTLEMENTS, MASS KILLINGS, STARVATION, LACK OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, AND CONTINUED UNWARRANTED STEALING OF INDIAN LANDS AND FOOD SUPPLIES BY WHITES ARE ALL DETAILED TO PROVE ONE POINT: THAT INDIANS SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS LEGAL PERSONS BEFORE THE LAW, HELD INDIVIDUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CRIMES COMMITTED (RATHER THAN PUNISHING THE ENTIRE TRIBE), AND BE AFFORDED THE LAW'S PROTECTION AS ARE ALL OTHER HUMAN BEINGS IN THE UNITED STATES. THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VIOLENT AND UNJUST RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDIANS AND WHITES IN THE U.S. AND IN THE HARMONY FOUND IN CANADA IS SHOWN TO BE A RESULT OF THE LEGAL PRIVILEGES DENIED INDIANS IN CANADA. THE ARTICLE OFFERS A CRITIQUE OF A PROPOSAL TO ELEVATE THE STATUS OF THE INDIANS BY HELPING THEM TO ENJOY WORK AS A 'PROFITABLE AND ATTRACTIVE' OCCUPATION, PROVIDING THEM WITH EDUCATION, AND ENDOWING INDIANS WITH LANDS IN SEVERALTY GRANTING 160 ACRES OF LAND TO EACH ADULT MALE INDIAN. THE CRITIQUE STATES THAT, ALTHOUGH ALL OF THESE GOALS ARE COMMENDABLE, THEY CANNOT POSSIBLY BE IMPLEMENTED IN A MEANINGFUL WAY AS LONG AS INDIANS ARE NOT CONSIDERED LEGAL PERSONS UNDER THE LAW. THE ARTICLES CONCUDES THAT, WHEN THE INDIANS' POSSESSIONS ARE SECURE, THEY WILL GLADLY WORK BECAUSE THEY WILL BE ASSURED OF KEEPING THE BENEFITS OF THEIR LABORS; WHEN INDIANS KNOW THEY ARE RESPECTED AS HUMAN BEINGS THEY WILL WANT AN EDUCATION; AND WHEN INDIANS KNOW THEY ARE TRULY PROTECTED UNDER THE LAW, THE GRANTING OF SEVERALTY WILL HAVE MEANING. ALL QUOTATIONS ARE REFERENCED. (PG)