This is an essay about Indian claims for the return of historically stolen lands, written from the perspective of a "Western" academic moral philosopher. I want to try to outline points of agreement and disagreement between Indian and Western moral conceptions and to seek common ground on which land claims can be more clearly evaluated and justified to both sides. To foreshadow my conclusions, I will argue that Indian nations seem morally entitled to the return of a significant land base and that there are good reasons for the United States to re-open consideration of Indian claims on a more serious and pluralistic basis than is now occurring or than occurred during the late Indian Claims Commission. On the other hand, the United States seems morally prohibited from transferring lands held by individual non-Indians in most circumstances. Or at any rate, that is what I will argue--the test of the argument's effectiveness, as always, is whether it actually proves convincing to those who read it.