A half dozen centuries ago the Catholic Church (shortly after Columbus discovered America) rustled up a Doctrine of Discovery that basically said newly discovered lands could be taken if uninhabited or if the inhabitants were not Christian. This doctrine was eagerly pursued by the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch as they explored and discovered new (to Europeans) lands. Germany wasn't a nation until the mid 1800's so they got a late start at colonization. Africa was the only unclaimed area, so they planted their flag in Namibia of all places.
Interestingly the Discovery Doctrine has never been rescinded, and here in Canada indigenous groups are calling for King Charles to do so as one of his earliest actions. Personally I think it would be a meaningless action and not worth the ink to do so. The question I continue to ask myself is how far back in history do we go to apologize or restate things that nowadays we see as wrong? Should Italy apologize for their genocidal destruction of Carthage? Should the Greeks apologize to Turkey for Troy?. What is the statute of limitations on history?
Our ancestors did a lot of nasty things. We took land that belonged to others, just as the Romans and every other civilization had done. (Nowadays it's the Russians who are pursuing land they don't own.). We enjoyed the benefits of slavery. But what people seem to overlook the good things they did. In Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar, Marc Antony says "The evil in man lives on. The good is often interred with their bones." Folks, we live in a democracy, a form of governance given to us by English royalty. What greater good could they possibly have created?
For centuries British royalty has provided enlightened governance over conquered peoples and lands. The Treaty of Paris was signed in 1763, after the Seven Years War, where Engliand won control of all of France's North American possessions. They guaranteed the people could live as they always had lived, with their existing civil legal system. At the same time King George 3 said the following about indigenous people.
"And We do further declare it to be Our Royal Will and Pleasure, for the present as aforesaid, to reserve under Our Sovereignty, Protection, and Dominion, for the Use of the said Indians, all the Lands and Territories not included within the Limits of Our said Three New Governments, or within the Limits of the Territory granted to the Hudson's Bay Company, as also all the Lands and Territories lying to the Westward of the Sources of the Rivers which fall into the Sea from the West and North West, as aforesaid; and We do hereby strictly forbid, on Pain of Our Displeasure, all Our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved, without Our especial Leave and Licence for that Purpose first obtained.And We do further strictly enjoin and require all Persons whatever, who have either wilfully or inadvertently seated themselves upon any Lands within the Countries above described, or upon any other Lands, which, not having been ceded to, or purchased by Us, are still reserved to the said Indians as aforesaid, forthwith to remove themselves from such Settlements.And whereas great Frauds and Abuses have been committed in the purchasing Lands of the Indians, to the great Prejudice of Our Interests, and to the great Dissatisfaction of the said Indians; in order therefore to prevent such Irregularities for the future, and to the End that the Indians may be convinced of Our Justice, and determined Resolution to remove all reasonable Cause of Discontent, We do, with the Advice of Our Privy Council, strictly enjoin and require, that no private Person do presume to make any Purchase from the said Indians of any Lands reserved to the said Indians, within those Parts of Our Colonies where We have thought proper to allow Settlement; but that if, at any Time, any of the said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, that same shall be purchased only for Us, in Our Name, at some publick Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians to be held for that Purpose by the Governor or Commander in Chief of Our Colonies respectively, within which they shall lie: and in case they shall lie within the Limits of any Proprietary Government, they shall be purchased only for the Use and in the Name of such Proprietaries, conformable to such Directions and Instructions as We or they shall think proper to give for that Purpose: And We do, by the Advice of Our Privy Council, declare and enjoin, that the Trade with the said Indians shall be free and open to all our Subjects whatever; provided that every Person, who may incline to trade with the said Indians, do take out a Licence for carrying on such Trade from the Governor or Commander in Chief of any of Our Colonies respectively, where such Person shall reside; and also give Security to observe such Regulations as We shall at any Time think fit, by Ourselves or by Our Commissaries to be appointed for this Purpose, to direct and appoint for the Benefit of the said Trade; And We do hereby authorize, enjoin, and require the Governors and Commanders in Chief of all Our Colonies respectively, as well Those under Our immediate Government as those under the Government and Direction of Proprietaries, to grant such Licences without Fee or Reward, taking especial Care to insert therein a Condition, that such Licence shall be void, and the Security forfeited, in Case the Person, to whom the same is granted, shall refuse or neglect to observe such Regulations as We shall think proper to prescribe as aforesaid."
Seems clear that the King wanted to ensure Indian lands were reserved for Indians (and European settlers kept out) unless the Crown purchased them by agreement. So who then is responsible for the land theft? Well it occurred AFTER the USA and Canada became independent nations. If anyone should be held responsible, and remember folks that it's all history, all water under the bridge. But if anyone should be held responsible....it's our governments, not the Queen of England.
